Does the Blackberry Torch shine a light on potential N8 coverage?

Time has moved on from the specs being the overriding factor. Yes, they still play a significant role but the user experience is what counts IMO. I quite like what Android is doing, Iphone is really good at giving users a wonderful user experience but Symbian IN ITS CURRENT form is pure and utter crap!! Should be interesting to see what the N8 brings to the table, should it 'flow' and be near or on par with the aforementioned OSs then there might be a light at the end of the tunnel.

As for Blackberry, and I own the 9700, it has nothing interesting to offer aside from its renowned email approach. I don't see anything special on BBs. The Storm editions sucked big time and I wonder how the new OS version will be like. Screen shots or video clips of it tell half the story.

@Dups! As an ex Symbian user that changed to Android, I can tell you that it is not a huge step from current Symbian to Android. I'm not very impressed with Android, version 2.1 anyway. I was expecting a lot more from all the hype I read. Disappointed. If Symbian^3 isn't at least as good a UI as you can get on Android then nobody has been trying very hard.

I really hope that Nokia will not follow that dead-end battle with Android and iPhone. Just please calm down with all the criticism, I really want stable new Symbian OS rather than unsuccessful copy of high-end devices. More middle-end devices! not only touch devices. I'm really looking forward for new version of E71 with QT and improved UI. Hope next year.

Steve certainly eluded to this in the article and it is worth highlighting that the numbers game, be it megahertz or megapixels, is often a marketing attempt by a possibly inferior product to bring on the mega-hurt to their competitors by tossing up a smokescreen around their weaknesses.

Let me preface it that I'm one of those multiple device users, with an N97, BB9700 and an iPad 3G/WiFi.

My BB upgrade patterns often are driven by a broken trackball as often, RIM's new devices are, IMO, incremental and cosmetic. I should point out that the cosmetics can be decent as going through four generations of RIM products, there have been tangible feel and quality improvements.

In addition, my BB needs are very specific, it's there to serve a specific purpose, so my demands on it from a personal standpoint are irrelevant.

Many of the new improvements that RIM has deployed to try to recapture or win new "casual user" market share is starting to interfere with what I use it for, similar to how pushing the smartphone envelope has made phones less practical as plain phones, this direction makes me feel that RIM is diluting its own strengths to climb a perceived goal.

That brings me to my peeve on mobile phone development in the last few years. The mad race to make the top smart phone seems to be moving the function of a smart"phone" further and further away from a phone.

Perhaps users feel they don't need a mobile phone any more in the presence of new and ubiquitous messaging and social services, perhaps we never even needed it in the first place.

For me, I miss a smartphone that can just do its namesake right, be a phone first and foremost and put some smarts around the phone feature.

I'm seriously considering taking my N95 out of retirement to be my phone again.

I am really so tired of hearing about all the bullshit from the american tech bloggers and so-called experts telling me how crappy the Symbian UI supposedly is. The truth is that it is a _little_ less of a looker compared to iPhone or Android and a _little_ more clumsy, but THAT'S IT!

I have used a N97 for a year now, and since firmware 2.0 it has been one of the most functional and swiss-army-knife-like devices I have EVER had, and I mean EVER! Way more than e.g. a Hero (comparing to last years devices, the N97 is old now) or iPhone in my opinion.

I have also owned several Blackberry's and let me just tell you directly - the Blackberry UI and things like the browser are _nothing_ like S60 5th Edition. S60 5th has always been light-years ahead of Blackberry - hands down!

Symbian^3 in the N8 looks like it has gotten just the amount of refresh it needs - primarily speed and interaction simplification, which is exactly what was needed, nothing more.

Blackberry on the other hand was in need of more substantial update, if you ask me. Looks like ver. 6 of the Blackberry OS addresses a lot of the previous problems, which is good. But I don't think I will ever fall in love with BB...but yeah ver. 6 definitely looks a lot better, no doubt.

The new Blackberry looks okay. RIM are in a difficult position, their OS is far worse than their competitors but most of their customers are quite conservative and would not welcome a radical overhaul. The Torch is a reasonable step forward given the constraints RIM face.

Now on the other hand Nokia users are crying out for an improved OS and UI and willing to give Nokia the freedom to go in and change things to improve the OS. I was initially quite sceptical of Symbian^3 but the more Youtube videos I've watched the better it looks. It's not a radical overhaul, we'll have to wait for Symbian^4 for that, but Nokia does appear to have removed many of the rough edges, simplified the UI where appropriate, and built a phone that appears to be very snappy.

Take the improved UI, add a fastish CPU, plenty of RAM, a fantastic camera, excellent build quality, and a few new gizmos (such as HDMI out and USB OTG), then sell it at a very competitive price. At best the N8 will be widely heralded as a genuinely first-class smart-phone, at worst I would expect it to be generally agreed that it is the best Symbian phone yet. Either outcome is a step forward and to be welcomed.

I'm expecting the N8 to receive a lot of good press, and I'm no Symbian fanboy. 😊

I currently see the smart phone market about where the PC market was in the early '90s.The basics have been developed and now there is an arms race on who is faster ,has more extras etc.In the PC race it was a 286 with 512 ram,then came colour ,then came 640 ram then a meg of ram,then came 386 processors then 486 then pentuims and HD's started growing.All this happened very fast over a couple of years, people found the PC that was best for them and stopped upgrading every 6 months,the machines actually became powerful enough to be useful and not just a gadget.
Smart phone are in the same place,for all of their faults Apple started people thinking about the UI when they released the iphone.Now it's bigger screens,bigger storage,endless apps,I mean out of 250k apps how many are actually useful,and more but not always better things to do on the move.I think in maybe one or two generations of smart phone most will have leveled out,be powerful enough and easy enough to do what most people need on the move, and only the most dedicated gadget nut will always need the latest.

I think this is a rather apt comparison. Both RIM and Nokia have a base on which to rely on sales, and thus both can afford to take somewhat conservative decisions, which is what they have done. RIM doesn't rely on consumer sales as much as enterprise sales, and thus what they need to do is convince companies to stay with them rather than jump ship to iPhone and Android. Similarly, Nokia has an economies-of-scale advantage at the low end and has coasted on the strength of its low- and mid-range product lines.

That said, RIM and Nokia's strategies seem aimed more at preservation than growth. The Torch looks like just enough to keep pace with iPhone and Android, which is to say "maintain the same deficit" that they had before iOS 4 and Android 2.2 were released. Similarly, Symbian^3 looks to do the same.

Symbian's UI looks dated. While a lot of the clunkiness has been removed from Symbian^3 (e.g. the double taps, the nesting of menus), it still "looks" like a late 1990s/early 2000s OS. It is unlikely to get the "wow" factor since it doesn't really do anything new. Symbian^4 and MeeGo have more potential to "wow," but only if Nokia aims at besting iOS 5 and Android 3.0, and not simply besting iOS 4 and Android 2.2.

It's interesting that both RIM and Nokia started with strong operating systems well optimized for non-touch environments. Apple and Google started fresh with touch-oriented operating systems. Perhaps it is easier to start from scratch than adapt a non-touch OS, which may explain why Nokia got more buzz from Maemo/MeeGo.

@KPOM, you are absolutely right, to compete with Android/iOS UI, Nokia should create OS from scratch, not redesigning Symbian. Well, actually, saying honestly, there's no such think as creating mobile from the scratch. It's just impossible. Android is not actually an operating system, it uses linux as its kernel/core. It this term we could say that of course Nokia created new OS from scratch - Maemo, which is also not true, because it's based on linux as well. I'm a Symbian engineer for almost 10 years. Believe me or not, Symbian OS is the most advanced mobile operating system. Keep in mind - MOBILE. It doesn't mean that it's the best operating system, but it's really well designed for mobile computing. Probably no other OS will offer better power saving, good performance on slower processors, extremely modular architecture. This OS was really created by people who knew what the mobile computing ment. What most people criticise is UI. And they right, now Nokia must change it, but not to compete with Android or iOS, to create something which maybe should be an alternative to them. Nokia must remember that there are also some other objectives - stability, power consumption, supporting many communication protocols, reliability. Try not to think about mobile computing in terms of UI only.

RIM are as much a consumer phone as an Enterprise tool. Their Curve market and following amongst teenagers and students is massive. They are the aspirational device in this group.

Unregistered wrote:@KPOM, you are absolutely right, to compete with Android/iOS UI, Nokia should create OS from scratch, not redesigning Symbian. Well, actually, saying honestly, there's no such think as creating mobile from the scratch. It's just impossible. Android is not actually an operating system, it uses linux as its kernel/core. It this term we could say that of course Nokia created new OS from scratch - Maemo, which is also not true, because it's based on linux as well. I'm a Symbian engineer for almost 10 years. Believe me or not, Symbian OS is the most advanced mobile operating system. Keep in mind - MOBILE. It doesn't mean that it's the best operating system, but it's really well designed for mobile computing. Probably no other OS will offer better power saving, good performance on slower processors, extremely modular architecture. This OS was really created by people who knew what the mobile computing ment. What most people criticise is UI. And they right, now Nokia must change it, but not to compete with Android or iOS, to create something which maybe should be an alternative to them. Nokia must remember that there are also some other objectives - stability, power consumption, supporting many communication protocols, reliability. Try not to think about mobile computing in terms of UI only.

As a Symbian engineer for almost 10 years then, you will be aware that Symbian OS which is based on EPOC32 from Psion, has been using a UI called S60 that was added by Nokia?

And that there are other UI layers that have been used on phones, such as UIQ?

There is absolutely nothing wrong with Symbian as an underlying OS. A reworked Symbian UI augmented by Qt would seem to have some serious theoretical potential.

KPOM wrote:

Symbian's UI looks dated. While a lot of the clunkiness has been removed from Symbian^3 (e.g. the double taps, the nesting of menus), it still "looks" like a late 1990s/early 2000s OS. It is unlikely to get the "wow" factor since it doesn't really do anything new. .

What does Android do that is anything new? What exactly is special about its appearance that is not Blur/SenseUI etc ? Android looks not much difference, in fact to my eyes it looks more childish/toyish.

Have Symbian dropped the ability to theme in ^3 because S60 phones could be themed and look like however you want them to look.

Just because the U.S.A Prefer Android does not mean a thing,an Glad Nokia is moving on the Symbian software at Last,Symbian is so Simple to Use,thats why Nokia are still the Number Mobile Seller,Nokia have now realised they have to show Apple an Android that Symbian an Meego with never be Defeated an are really improving Symbian,an Symbian4 next year an Blackberry mobiles always to wide an screens to Small until they change there design of there mobiles they will never attract me at all

"That said, RIM and Nokia's strategies seem aimed more at preservation than growth. The Torch looks like just enough to keep pace with iPhone and Android, which is to say "maintain the same deficit" that they had before iOS 4 and Android 2.2 were released. Similarly, Symbian^3 looks to do the same.

Symbian's UI looks dated. While a lot of the clunkiness has been removed from Symbian^3 (e.g. the double taps, the nesting of menus), it still "looks" like a late 1990s/early 2000s OS. It is unlikely to get the "wow" factor since it doesn't really do anything new. Symbian^4 and MeeGo have more potential to "wow," but only if Nokia aims at besting iOS 5 and Android 3.0, and not simply besting iOS 4 and Android 2.2. "

-- Am I to understand that the Android 2.2 and iOS does something new compared to Symbian?

If that is the case, I strongly disagree. I am a developer for said platforms, and I can assure there is absolutely nothing new in Android 2.2 and iOS. Esspecially Android has been sub-par compared to Symbian, before it's 2.2 upgrade.
And using cosmetics as an argument for "doing something new" is just plain stupid.

Unregistered wrote:As a Symbian engineer for almost 10 years then, you will be aware that Symbian OS which is based on EPOC32 from Psion, has been using a UI called S60 that was added by Nokia?

Believe me, I'm aware that Symbian is based on EPOC32. It the same way as EPOC32 is in some little way based on EPOC16 (Sibo). Trust me, I was developing for this OS as well. But it's not really important, it's just a simplification. What I meant is that Symbian has a great potencial as a mobile operating system, mostly because from the beginning it was desiged, based on really important in mobile computing objectives. Sorry if anyone from Psion felt angry that I wrote that they hadn't invented Symbian 😊 Sure guys, it's your great work as well 😊 And the work of many contributors. So I totally agree, there is nothing wrong with Symbian as a core. There are some UI changes needed and that's it. And probably QT will be the answer. Will see.

Why is it that many posters believe the iPhone UI to be SOOOO much better than Symbian's/S60's?

Does the iPhone have an active standby screen? A today view? Widgets?

The iPhone UI is essentially as simple as it gets, regardless of the dimensions of the device in question (ie. iPad, iPod touch, iPhone , iPhone 3). It's a grid of icons, with some flashy sliding effects (woohoo!). Hardly ground-breaking or awe-inspiring, and debatably noth particularly effective or productive. Oh yes, and they've just added the ability to arrange icons in folders... sound familiar...?

People think of iOS as "better" because it is simple to use. Put it in front of someone who has never used it before, and pretty quickly that person will understand the basics. That isn't the case with any S60 or Symbian^1 device I have ever used. iOS also has the best browsing experience on a phone, apart from the lack of Flash.

Android is a bit rougher on the edges, but it bridges between iOS' simplicity and Symbian's flexibility. That's why I went from Symbian to Android rather than to iOS. Android is much more integrated than Symbian^1. UI goes beyond what the icons look like and what gestures work. If there is an address in a calendar entry (or browser or note) in Android, I can click on it and it will open up the Maps application. If I have two maps applications, it will ask me to select which one, and if I want to make it the default. It does this with other applications, as well. That's part of the UI. Android also handles embedded phone numbers better than Symbian^1.

Let's face it, for every one of us who pays attention to the UI there are loads of people who don't really care, just want to put a nice pic on the wallpaper and have a reliable phone. You're right Steve, Nokia need to play to their strengths, not try to play catch-up with the fancy-boys. They make the best phones (i.e. for making calls), they have some of the best cameras, and they are reliable. Sell on those things, not how good the screen is or how slick the UI is (especially when the thing spends most of it's time in your pocket being a phone).

@ILoveGadgets:

While I agree, that Nokia should play on their strengths, I do not agree that they shouldn't try to catch up on the points where they are weak.

While I have a Nokia N97 because of it's strengths like the camera, stable phone performance, flexible OS etc. I also like that fact that I can do "smartphone" stuff on it - it is quite useful you know? 😉

I see the N8 (and the other coming Symbian^3 devices) as a sensible way to catch up and get all the smart stuff more integrated and with better navigation and interface. This makes good sense to me, esspecially if the N8 still has all the good things from earlier Symbian devices AS WELL as the stuff that makes (some) Android devices desirable, which it looks like.

In essence to me, the N8 seems like the perfect allround device with virtually no compromises. That is a good thing, isn't it?

denial denial denial, this new bb will be a massive success whether you like it or not, android is now the most popular OS in america, the iphone has the tech media and the want factor and Nokia need a massive success to wipe away the memory of the disgusting mess that was the N97

EXACTLY KPOM!
I laugh at s60 users who brush off Android as simply a "glossy" UI with lots of apps, as it is WAY MORE THAN THAT. All it proves is that they are ignorant and havent touched an Android or used one extensively. Android is indeed a sort of bridge between iOS and Symbian. Love how I AS THE PURCHASER AND USER OF MY SMARTPHONE can decide which apps are default when opening certain files,links,details etc... Its MY SMARTPHONE and i can decide how it functions,customization is not just about themes and fonts s60users,get off that lame excuse,if you havent used an Android extensively then i suggest you keep quiet.
Its not about what new things Android can do over Symbians,its about HOW,HOW WELL AND THE USER EXPERIENCE and i can tell you now, Android whipes the floor in all 3. 😊

I left Palm Treo because their specs fell far behind and new models were not providing enough incentive to upgrade. I moved to N95 even though I was upset about not having full qwerty keyboard, but I started to appreciate having a god camera. I liked Palm Pre but spec was not particularly impressing (downgrade from N95)and GSM version was missing initially.

I like the BB Torch, especially the sliding down keyboard. It is going to be Treo like experience. It will be easy to operate it with one had. However all other specs are making me to to prefer N8.

I would had preferred even side sliding, but thankfully soft keyboards became better and hopefully I will adopt.

On topic, I think RIM will sell a bunch of these Torch models to their enterprise market clients, but it won't do much to stem the tide of regular consumers migrating to Android.

For the same amount of money, a Motorola Droid X or HTC Evo placed next to a Blackberry Torch = no contest. The Android phones will win every time.

Also, RIM is going to be threatened by the resurgent Microsoft at the end of the year with THEIR new offering, WP7, that will also be aimed at enterprise AND regular consumers. Long story short, the long term trend for RIM is a slowly creeping downward slope.

BTW, I would LOVE an E-Series device with this form factor, which is also sort of Palm Pre-ish.

Symbian 4 but preferably Meego touchscreen, with a slide out qwerty.

Get on this, Nokia.

I love listening to these Symbian fanboys in denial. People vote with their wallets... If you haven't notice Android is making humongous headway. Can you say that about Symbian? Do you think spouting out in geeky phone forum will help? Most of your less geeky press will never mention a word about Symbian and all they hype sorrounds Android and iPhones. If there is mention of Symbian/Nokia it's usually negative press.

If you ask Joe public what is Symbian, the vast majority will say what the hell is that. Symbian figures are only respectable in the smartphone market because Nokia is selling low end cheap smartphones as dumbphones to your Joe public who just needs a phone to make calls and send texts.

I've been a Symbian user for the last decade but moved on. I was in denial too until I started using other phones I realised how clunky and complicated current Symbian UI is. Sometimes you just want things to work, not fiddling around with the inconsistencies, the clunky interface and customisation that is buried so deep that only someone techinical/geeky can work out how to do it. I can see why people move to Android and iPhone OS. Yes the current Symbian UI sucks so much... I hope the interface can be greatly improved and regain some confidence in the press.

Unregistered wrote:Symbian figures are only respectable in the smartphone market because Nokia is selling low end cheap smartphones as dumbphones to your Joe public who just needs a phone to make calls and send texts.

I could not agree more. The majority of Symbian devices sold are low-profit, low-end, cheap "smartphones as dumbphones". This is evident by the fact that the average selling price of Nokia's smartphones is steadily going down.

I don't see anything on the Symbian or Nokia roadmap which will turn this around.

whoever thinks symbian is difficult needs a brain. We can sit here talking in these forums all day as techies and how symbian is doomed etc while the millions of non techies out there snap up symbian smartphones.

Unregistered wrote:I love listening to these Symbian fanboys in denial. People vote with their wallets... If you haven't notice Android is making humongous headway. Can you say that about Symbian? Do you think spouting out in geeky phone forum will help? Most of your less geeky press will never mention a word about Symbian and all they hype sorrounds Android and iPhones. If there is mention of Symbian/Nokia it's usually negative press.

If you ask Joe public what is Symbian, the vast majority will say what the hell is that. Symbian figures are only respectable in the smartphone market because Nokia is selling low end cheap smartphones as dumbphones to your Joe public who just needs a phone to make calls and send texts.

I've been a Symbian user for the last decade but moved on. I was in denial too until I started using other phones I realised how clunky and complicated current Symbian UI is. Sometimes you just want things to work, not fiddling around with the inconsistencies, the clunky interface and customisation that is buried so deep that only someone techinical/geeky can work out how to do it. I can see why people move to Android and iPhone OS. Yes the current Symbian UI sucks so much... I hope the interface can be greatly improved and regain some confidence in the press.

You're right about Symbian itself not being known - people tend to just think of a Nokia phone. And its irritating that Android appears to be advertised heavily, whilst Symbian has never really been promoted to the public.

However, S^1 whilst clunky, is definitely *not* complicated. If you think its complicated, then thats possibly an issue with you, not the phone. Damn near everything on the 5230/5800/N97/etc is easy to use.

No geek factor required to use it, both my son and step-daughter (both under 10 years of age) have absolutely no problems at all with it.

Similarly, my ex wifes kids (18 and 20 years old) both chose Symbian phones - 5800 and Satio, and haven't ever found them difficult to use. And they're not exactly the cleverest people on the planet.

The only real elements of the S60 UI that suck are the icon design and the tap/double tap. The latter appears to have been resolved in S^3, and the former can easily be sorted with a theme.

I'm in the "Symbian user experience sucks" camp: I really don't understand why anyone thinks it's even close to the experience an iPhone or good Android device can offer. It simply isn't, sadly.

On the Blackberry - the issue here was the ham-fisted attempt to ape Apple's (irritating but effective because their hardware is superb) "revolutionary and magical" marketing language.

What most commentators have, so far, forgotten is that the blogs and tech news services don't drive sales. Operators and their stores do - that's why the (genuinely appalling at launch) N97 did so well: it was cheap and pushed hard because Nokia has superb point of sale relationships. Didn't help Nokia's margins but shifted a ton of units.

The BB will also move off shelves fast for the same reasons and the fact that the BB brand has an upscale cachet for the mass market thanks to its corporate heritage.

The phone is fine but it's definitely mid-range by 2010 standards: there's no harm in that (especially as the pricing-on-contract will be mid-range) but if you try to sell it as a revolutionary step forward (even if only in a small BB-centric context) and it's outshon by others, you are going to get criticism.