When will Sprint get Motorola?

Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:

>> I do not know why, but it is evident that Sprint has no love lost for
>> Motorola. Same appeared to be true of Nokia.
>>
>
> Considering that there is a cult following for the #1 and #2 manufacturers of
> cellular phones, that is likely a bad business decision.

I agree wholeheartedly. Sprint IS making a stupid decision by not
capitalizing on Motorola's current chic.

All I can tell you is, the anti-Moto propaganda among their staff is
rampant. I had one guy tell me that Motorola "simply work terribly on
CDMA systems" and that none of the Motorola phones Spritn has tested
would work reliably on the network. To which I responded "that's most
likely a problem with Sprint's network then, considering that the E815
and RAZR V3c/m work great on Verizon and Alltel." He had no response
for me.


> I know my Daughter
> is in love with her friends Cingular Razr ... and she has said she would be
> more than happy with a Verizon Razr V3m. I am not sure that I can afford her,
> but that is what she is saying so I am sure other parents hear the same thing.

Yeah, sadly, Sprint thinks that with a little corporate espionage and
having Samsung's copycat skills under their wing, they can come with an
imitation and that'll be just fine.

Don't get me wrong. The Samsung A900 is a fine phone. But it's still
not a RAZR.

Heck, I hear Samsung makes great imitation luxury cars, too:

http://www.carfolio.com/specificatio...=77847&Samsung

Even so, it's no BMW.


--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

---

› See More: When will Sprint get Motorola?

Mij Adyaw wrote:
> Sprint has the Blade Samsung A900 phone and from what I understand, it has
> more features and better looks than the Razr.


Actually, no, the V3m is better.

And while the A900 is a decent phone, Sprint could have jsut as easily
gone to Motorola and gotten the RAZR. How hard could that have been?

And then there's the Katana. What an embarrassment! No wonder sanyo is
in financial trouble. They used to make great phones, and now they have
yet to make a single EVDO model. It's like their R&D department is
still stuck in 2001. What happened?

--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

Sanyo has really pissed me off. I am done with them! On the positive side,
at least the Katana has Bluetooth. That is a big accomplishment for Sanyo.

"Isaiah Beard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Mij Adyaw wrote:
>> Sprint has the Blade Samsung A900 phone and from what I understand, it
>> has more features and better looks than the Razr.
>
>
> Actually, no, the V3m is better.
>
> And while the A900 is a decent phone, Sprint could have jsut as easily
> gone to Motorola and gotten the RAZR. How hard could that have been?
>
> And then there's the Katana. What an embarrassment! No wonder sanyo is
> in financial trouble. They used to make great phones, and now they have
> yet to make a single EVDO model. It's like their R&D department is still
> stuck in 2001. What happened?
>
> --
> E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
> Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

Joshua Putnam wrote:
> In article <ozqyg.16696$Nv.3048@fed1read10>, [email protected]
> says...
>> I would like for Sprint to start offering
>> Motorola Phones simply because of the exceptional RF performance. Folks say
>> that Sanyo has good RF performance, however, it doesn't compare to Motorola.
>
> Interesting thread. When I shop for phones on the Sprint web site in my
> area, they *do* carry Motorola (and Nokia). Not a huge selection, but
> they do carry them.

Try "barely at all."

The Nokia selection has always been one, sometimes 2 phones at a time in
the lineup, and they have always been the base model with a minimal
feature set. Arguably, Nokia hasn't committed much to CDMA and that's
probably why Sprint hasn't felt a need to commit much back. In fact,
Nokia last I heard is pulling away from CDMA altogether. Nokia's lack
of committment has mainly stemmed from its battles with Qualcomm.

Personally, I say good riddance to Nokia. They make great toys that all
the teenie boppers like to have as throw away phones, but make very
little of substance these days.

And yes, Sprint carries many Motorola phones, but almost entirely on the
iDEN side. And with good reason: Motorola unilaterally developed iDEN,
meaning Sprint has no choice in the matter, really. But Sprint's
official commitment to iDEN is slated to end in 2010.

On the CDMA side, Sprint offers exactly one (1) Motorola phone. And
again, it's nothing to write home about. Aside from the "M" on the
faceplate, there is no differentiation at all in features or even
general apperance from teh basic-level Sanyos and Samsungs. Why this,
when Sprint could have gotten the RAZR, or at least an e815? If
anything, the bottom-of-the-barrel c290 might be there simply to keep
Motorola happy, since they are the sole supplier of iDEN handsets.

Even the ic502 which is slated to come out later this year looks pretty
dismal: no EVDO data support and barely an external LCD screen (looks to
be black and white). The only thing is has going for it is "dual-mode"
iden and CDMA support, but even that is limited: iDEN support is
dispatch only, and CDMA is telco-only.

But note: still no RAZR in our future. No FONE either, nor the SLVR L7c
nor KRZR K1m. These are all phones that will sell at a huge premium
when released. BUt evidently Sprint wants no part in it.

Gee, if I didn't know better, I'd say Sprint is giving lip service to
the Motorola partnership, but really just wants these phones to flop.

--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
> Mij Adyaw <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Sprint has the Blade Samsung A900 phone and from what I understand, it has
>> more features and better looks than the Razr.
>>
>
> Have you held that phone yet? It has a very cheap feel and I am not all that
> fond of the form factor as implmented by Samsung. Motorola used metal, which
> gives a sturdy feel lacking in the Blade.

Thom, have YOU actually held the Blade? I have. It doesn't feel cheap
at all.

And guess what? I've even DROPPED my A900 on a concrete sidewalk.
Guess what I found out then? The phone's made of metal!

I will credit Samsung with making an excellent copycat phone. They did
a wonderful job. Even so, I do think Sprint should've just carried the
RAZR. That too, is a sturdy design.



--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

David G. Imber wrote:

> I can't dispute that, but the key point is "for years".The
> Nokia 6185 was a huge seller for Sprint and it was an absolute
> stalwart.

At first, yes. But the 6185 did eventually reveal is many ugly design
flaws, which soon led to the realization that Nokia's idea of making
their own CDMA chips instead of licensing designs from Qualcomm was a
bad move.

The 6185 looked and sounded all right, but it never did well with simple
operations like a PRL update. You could not OTA update this phone even
though Nokia promised that you could, and many times the handset would
fry when hooked up via cable to try and get it to take an update. Bugs
were rampant in the firmware. And although Nokia claimed the 6185 could
support data, results were iffy at best.


> It had everything one needed around 2000-01. I seem to
> recall that there was a bad batch - so bad that they were recalled or
> something.

Try MANY batches. In fact, I'd venture to say that the majority of the
phones had one defect or another. A 6185 user who kept his or her phone
for awhile was either lucky to get a decent one, or simply put up with
its defects.

> This is just sketchy, but I seem to remember as well that
> the issue of quality control was at the root of Sprint's problems with
> Nokia. It was costing them too much money. But I had a perfect 6185.

You were one of the few lucky ones then.

> Amazing signal and sound, and it was very much in demand (I was able
> to get a good price for it) well past its prime. I'm sure there are
> many out there who remember this phone with great fondness.

Ah yes, Saturday drives out to the Sprint store for yet another warranty
replacement. Those ARE fond memories.


--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

David G. Imber wrote:

>> Nokia CDMA phones were utter horsecrap for years. Verizon stopped selling
>> Nokia for a while too.
>
> I can't dispute that, but the key point is "for years".

Yes, it is. The finally shaped up, but they've never cared about the CDMA
market. They've announced that they're going to discontinue their CDMA
partnership with Sanyo and, I believe, they're only going to market a few
CDMA models here.

--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek ** Java/VB/VC/PHP/Perl ** Linux/*BSD/Windows
Apple Valley, California PGP:0xE3AE35ED

It's all fun and games until someone starts a bonfire in the living room.

Michael Arends <[email protected]> wrote:
> Sorry I have to ring the bull**** bell. I have a Blade, and I have been
> VERY happy with it. It doesn't feel flimsy at ALL. and Samsung uses
> metal too. Mine feels VERY sturdy. And the form factor is WAY nicer than
> a razr.
>

No bull**** bell. I was in a Sprint store testing phones before I decided on
the Samsung A920. I ended up returning that phone because it didn't want to
roam when it should have [and my old Sanyo 7400 did] and thus it wasn't much
use to me as I work in some marginal signal areas where roaming onto Verizon,
among others is essential to be able to receive important calls [yes, the
phone was on Automatic for roaming]. I considered the A900 for about 30
seconds .. features were alright, but the phone just does not feel sturdy. I
stand by that assessment as my opinion. You are entitled to your own, but
there is no "bull****" involved.


--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1

Isaiah Beard <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Thom, have YOU actually held the Blade? I have. It doesn't feel cheap
> at all.
>

Indeed. I had a chance to look at it [hold it and work through the menus]
when I was evaluating phones prior to my [temporary] choice of the Samsung
A920.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1

Isaiah Beard <[email protected]> wrote:
> Mij Adyaw wrote:
>> Sprint has the Blade Samsung A900 phone and from what I understand, it has
>> more features and better looks than the Razr.
>
>
> Actually, no, the V3m is better.
>
> And while the A900 is a decent phone, Sprint could have jsut as easily
> gone to Motorola and gotten the RAZR. How hard could that have been?
>
> And then there's the Katana. What an embarrassment! No wonder sanyo is
> in financial trouble. They used to make great phones, and now they have
> yet to make a single EVDO model. It's like their R&D department is
> still stuck in 2001. What happened?
>

What? The Sanyo 7500 is EVDO.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1

Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
> So, when will Sprint start carrying motorola phones? They obviously have
> close contacts with them via Nextel (as IDEN is a motorola technology). I
> would like to see the newer model motorola phones available and not just a hit
> or miss low-end phone.
>
> It would be nice to see:
>
> Razor V3m
> KRZR K1m
> SLVR L7c
>
> and other current and upcoming phones. Why does every carrier but Sprint get
> this stuff?

I read that they are not getting the Razr until next year. In fact
Sprint's poor results are being partially blamed on their poor handset
selection. This is rather ironic, because a couple of years ago it was
Verizon with the poor selection of handsets.

OTOH, Sprint's lack of handsets has force them to introduce other
inducements, such as 7 pm off-peak, and "fair and flexible" which
Verizon and Cingular don't have, at least not at an extra charge.

SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I read that they are not getting the Razr until next year. In fact
> Sprint's poor results are being partially blamed on their poor handset
> selection. This is rather ironic, because a couple of years ago it was
> Verizon with the poor selection of handsets.
>

Where did you read that the RAZR would be coming next year? I would love to
read the article myself. In any event, I am not sure it is a case of better
late than never ... as Motorola will have moved past the RAZR by that point in
time.

> OTOH, Sprint's lack of handsets has force them to introduce other
> inducements, such as 7 pm off-peak, and "fair and flexible" which
> Verizon and Cingular don't have, at least not at an extra charge.
>

Their plans are alright ... but their inflexibility to allow a user to change
their plan without a contract renewal is a big turn off. That goes for all
relavent carriers. Charging a fee to change plans is one thing, but there is
no valid reason to force a contract renewal. In fact, if a customer brings
their own phone, there should be no contract at all, as there is no subsidy on
the part of the provider to pay down and they already charge an activation fee
to cover the customer service costs.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1

Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:

> Where did you read that the RAZR would be coming next year? I would love to
> read the article myself. In any event, I am not sure it is a case of better
> late than never ... as Motorola will have moved past the RAZR by that point in
> time.

http://tinyurl.com/nbxkn

Jerome Zelinske <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yes, the Sprint PCS network is not the same as the verizon network
> or the alltel network. For one, the Sprint PCS network is all PCS, and
> in the states where verizon's network is all PCS as well, I am sure
> there are other less obvious differences in implementation and
> software/hardware that bring the total experience to a different
> conclusion. Therefore motorola may need to do more in making phones
> that are tailored to Sprint PCS' network. Perhaps the motorola iden
> tie-in will help bring them together.

All current CDMA Motorola phones are dual-band and will not have issue with
either Ceullar or PCS; no problems with running on Verizon or Sprint PCS.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1

Can someone please tell me what is so great about the RAZR, its ok. It
seems like everyone has gotten the me too syndrome. Their battery life
is ok and the menu system is horrible. I trust that sprint has a valid
reason for not really dealing with Motorola and they will either bring
their models on or not. Makes no real difference to me. I am happy
with my Sanyo 8300 and will be upgrading sometime next year. It really
is not that serious.

And when it comes to NOKIA, their phones on CDMA have always sucked.
Good riddance.

SMS wrote:
> Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
> > So, when will Sprint start carrying motorola phones? They obviously have
> > close contacts with them via Nextel (as IDEN is a motorola technology). I
> > would like to see the newer model motorola phones available and not just a hit
> > or miss low-end phone.
> >
> > It would be nice to see:
> >
> > Razor V3m
> > KRZR K1m
> > SLVR L7c
> >
> > and other current and upcoming phones. Why does every carrier but Sprint get
> > this stuff?
>
> I read that they are not getting the Razr until next year. In fact
> Sprint's poor results are being partially blamed on their poor handset
> selection. This is rather ironic, because a couple of years ago it was
> Verizon with the poor selection of handsets.
>
> OTOH, Sprint's lack of handsets has force them to introduce other
> inducements, such as 7 pm off-peak, and "fair and flexible" which
> Verizon and Cingular don't have, at least not at an extra charge.