Review: Motorola Q
Top message: Best accurate review to date- The "Q" gets a F by jcson777
Replying to: Re: Best accurate review to date- The "Q" gets a F by Briansnj
US purposely behind in cellular market
The previous post brings up an important note: the majority of other countries around the world are way ahead of the US in cell phone technology and service. This is on purpose, and Motorola plays right into it all.
A painful example: the unfortunate post-war Iraqis were forced to adopt a CDMA network to fleece the pockets of US companies -- think about it, if the US really cared, it would turn the Iraqi GSM network back on so they could use their phones again. But no, can't have that. They have to buy new (US) phones, and US contractors get to build a new cell phone network for $$$.
Despite all the claims of CDMA being better technology than GSM, why do so many users and other technical reviews differ? Lets face it, GSM is better.
Consider inches vs. the metric system -- its a business, and an obsolete standard that stays around because the country is now entrenched. US companies dominate the market and refuse to compete with overseas producers, so they are never going to convert to the metric system.
But in the cell phone market, they couldn't keep the GSM network from infiltrating the US, and now it has Verizon on the ropes.
Verizon bought the rights to the Motorola Q and halted/delayed the GSM version. America gets a crap phone (OK sorry, it has some nice bells and whistles) but as the comments pour in it becomes clear that the Q doesn't rise to the occasion.
Perhaps Nokia is laughing as it quietly rolls out its E61, which already seems to be much more advanced than the Q. And yes, I'll take a little bit thicker phone that actually works. And yes, its GSM...
A painful example: the unfortunate post-war Iraqis were forced to adopt a CDMA network to fleece the pockets of US companies -- think about it, if the US really cared, it would turn the Iraqi GSM network back on so they could use their phones again. But no, can't have that. They have to buy new (US) phones, and US contractors get to build a new cell phone network for $$$.
Despite all the claims of CDMA being better technology than GSM, why do so many users and other technical reviews differ? Lets face it, GSM is better.
Consider inches vs. the metric system -- its a business, and an obsolete standard that stays around because the country is now entrenched. US companies dominate the market and refuse to compete with overseas producers, so they are never going to convert to the metric system.
But in the cell phone market, they couldn't keep the GSM network from infiltrating the US, and now it has Verizon on the ropes.
Verizon bought the rights to the Motorola Q and halted/delayed the GSM version. America gets a crap phone (OK sorry, it has some nice bells and whistles) but as the comments pour in it becomes clear that the Q doesn't rise to the occasion.
Perhaps Nokia is laughing as it quietly rolls out its E61, which already seems to be much more advanced than the Q. And yes, I'll take a little bit thicker phone that actually works. And yes, its GSM...
Replies
