Since Palm introduced the Centro at a $100 price point, there's been a significant price drop in similarly targeted Windows Mobile smartphones. We won't speculate whether Microsoft has taken matters into own hands and decreased its licensing fees for this kind of phones, or if carriers are hungry for more data plan customers. It's regardless nice to see a more healthy pricing policy across the market on such mid-range devices nowadays.
A side-by-side comparison of the contenders' specifications can be found here. All three of them features high-speed networking by means of either HSDPA or EV-DO, but we've also put together a comparison between four QWERTY smartphones with EDGE networking (and Wi-Fi on some) that can be found here.
High-speed smartphone battle:
| Samsung BlackJack II |
| Full review » Scoreboard » Features » Gallery » |
 The Samsung BlackJack II is no doubt an improvement over it's predecessor, but some of the so-called improvements don't actually make things better. The scroll wheel was so poor that we wished to return to the clickwheel days of yore. GPS was a nice addition, but was a little pokey finding us. The larger screen and improved battery life are great improvements, but we're always hoping a new generation will be smaller and thinner than the old, not the other way around. In all, it's a solid smartphone, with the same issues that most Windows Mobile 6 smartphones have, mostly in Web browsing and multimedia. Is it better than the first BlackJack? Sure, but maybe not so much better. If you don't need GPS, now might be the time to find a bargain on the original. Release: November 2007. Price: $50.
Pros: Improves upon the original BlackJack with GPS, a larger screen, more memory. Good battery life. Call management and scheduling are great on Windows Mobile 6.
Cons: Scroll wheel stymied us at every turn. Advanced multimedia services aren't so great, lapped by competitors. Time to ditch the proprietary cables.
| Poor |
Mediocre |
67%
GOOD |
Very good |
Excellent |
|
|
| Palm Centro |
| Full review » Scoreboard » Features » Gallery » |
 The Palm Centro is the right device for Palm right now. It's a happy little Palm device, priced very competitively, that will bring a new audience to business smartphones and perhaps even reinvigorate the brand just a bit. The phone offers enough features for the price to foster good will, perhaps as long as half way until the next Palm OS update is due. Then, we'll swear we'll start to get tired of the Palm OS. We'll need something new, and this time, there isn't an antenna to cut off. Until then, anyone in the market for a Treo should seriously consider the Centro. If your fingers can handle the smaller keys, it's definitely the one to choose. Release: October 2007. Price: $180.
Pros: Great value. Small size. Screen maintains high resolution of Palm Treo. Runs full Palm OS, can use many existing Palm OS program. Fast networking on Sprint's EV-DO
Cons: Tiny keys. Small screen. Aging Palm OS in dire need of cosmetic update. Scheduling app could use an update. Lacks features and apps of a multimedia smartphone.
| Poor |
Mediocre |
61%
GOOD |
Very good |
Excellent |
|
|
| Motorola Q9c |
| Full review » Scoreboard » Features » Gallery » |
 Much like its predecessor, Sprint's Q9c makes improvements to their version of a device released earlier by its competitors. If you're a seasoned Windows Mobile Standard user (read: no touchscreen), then there is a very good chance you will be pleased with the Q9c; it has improved upon many of the things that were wrong with the original Q as well as the first incarnations of the Q9. While we dislike what the extended battery does to its profile, almost as much as we detest the horribly outdated scrollwheel, The Q9c is a solid smartphone that does many things right. And if you're a heavy phone-as-tethered modem user, look no further. Release: November 2007. Price: $250.
Pros: Simple tethered modem access, excellent e-mail client, great call quality
Cons: Only comes with extended battery, outdated scroll wheel, no dedicated camera button
| Poor |
Mediocre |
64%
GOOD |
Very good |
Excellent |
|
|
|
_pt00.jpg)
_pt00.jpg)
_pt00.jpg)
_pt00.jpg)
|
Archive