[BlitzSix]

I know that they idea is that they appeal to different budgets, the Curve being on the lower end, and the Bold being the flagship device.

But In this case IMO there aren't really enough differences to justify the two models....they are all very minor.

Let's see... Curve's camera is little better, and it's a tad smaller. The Bold has a bit better processor and has 3G. That's it, and honestly these are such small differences it's funny to even compare them. I know there are other differences, but they're all minor and would not sway the person to buy one device over the other.

Then we get to price, they're both 599.99 from Rogers to buy outright, the Bold is 199.99 and the Curve is 179.99. Yes, the Bold was more when it came out (for like a month) due to all the hype, so they were milking it, but really the price is similar. I highly doubt that at this time anyone would buy the Curve over the Bold due to the $20 difference. The phones are both in the same market (full qwerty keyboard smartphone) so they really aren't appealing to any audience more with the Curve or Bold like they are with the Pearl flip and Storm... it's the same group of people.

So.......why doesn't RIM just combine the devices? Make the Bold a little smaller (but please keep that amazing keyboard), give it the better camera and sell that. I seriously think that they would boost their sales as it would indeed be the perfect device. Right now Bold is lacking the form factor and camera, and Curve is lacking 3G. If they combine both then more people would jump ship from other smartphones (HTC, etc). It would be cheaper for them to produce since they will mass produce this new prototype, so maybe they will pass some of the savings onto the customers which would make the phone even more appealing to others.

Thoughts?

[NJBlackBerry]

You should ask the carriers this question.

[CO_BBTechie]

Because Almond Joy's got nuts.... Mounds don't....

Market share, shelf space....

It's like Twix and Peanut Butter Twix. Almost identical but just a couple things different.

[coldconfession13]

Wirelessly posted

9300 is the 3g curve that's rumored

[Holz]

i wonder the same thing. i could understand if one didn't have a camera (which seems like a much bigger difference), but it just seems like a waste of money to produce such similar devices.

[SteveO86]

Might be the amount of hardware they have to put in such a small space, the Curve is one of the smallest BlackBerries with a full qwerty keyboard.

Small sacrifices, no 3G for a better camera/more memory/smallerrm factor.

[fonejunkie]

Originally Posted by SteveO86

Might be the amount of hardware they have to put in such a small space, the Curve is one of the smallest BlackBerries with a full qwerty keyboard.

Small sacrifices, no 3G for a better camera/more memory/smallerrm factor.

... or because it's an evolutionary product line... that's how technology evolves... first the basic model, then a new model with more/new features... then a new model with more/new features... and so on... eventually the curve will be replaced by another device... then the bold will be... then both of the 'new' models will be replaced by newer models...

[rpjohs]

They keep you wanting more. If they gave you everything you wanted in one device, why would you want to buy another one?

[BlitzSix]

Originally Posted by CO_BBTechie

Because Almond Joy's got nuts.... Mounds don't....

Market share, shelf space....

It's like Twix and Peanut Butter Twix. Almost identical but just a couple things different.

Well I'm not going to go into detail about your food examples but it's completely different heh.

Market share... How does having two of almost the same devices at the same price give them more market share ? If there was a combined device liek I said, they wouldn't really lose any customers at all, and would potentially gain many. For example, if the Bold was a tad smaller and had a better camera, would someone NOT buy it because of that? Nope. And If the Curve had 3G and a better processor and more memory, would someone NOT buy it because of that? Again no, since either scenario make the devices better. They could, however, GAIN market share since I'm sure there are people out there who aren't buying the Curve due to lack of 3G, and don't like the Bold because the camera it has isn't good enough, or because it's too big. So if they made something which takes away all those negatives, they would increase their market share.

Shelf space, it not really a big deal, and either way this is not how you gain shelf space. You gain it by making DIFFERENT products, which RIM is doing with the Storm to appeal to the touchscreen crowd, but the Bold/Curve thing just doesn't make sense to me.

Originally Posted by fonejunkie

... or because it's an evolutionary product line... that's how technology evolves... first the basic model, then a new model with more/new features... then a new model with more/new features... and so on... eventually the curve will be replaced by another device... then the bold will be... then both of the 'new' models will be replaced by newer models...

I don't see how this is relevant to the topic at hand? You're just saying that they will keep making newer devices, which no one is arguing. What I'm saying that instead of having two products which are almost the same and which sell for the same price they could combine it into one, which would generate more revenue. And then they can evolve THAT product and make newer versions of it.

Originally Posted by rpjohs

They keep you wanting more. If they gave you everything you wanted in one device, why would you want to buy another one?

This is true, but honestly, they already gave what most people wanted in one device with the Bold. 3G, Wifi, camera, great screen, more memory, faster processor, amazing keyboard and a new OS. The only thing the Curve has is that it's a tad smaller and lacks 3G, so I'm saying that if they make the Bold a little smaller, the new prototype will do even better.

There will always be newer technology, people will always want even more space, even better cameras, even faster itnernet than 3G, even better OS etc which is what the future models will have. IMO you don't succeed by crippling your phones to be worse so you can make a better one later. You make an amazing phone and then make that even better as technology improves.

[murjahn7]

Introducing..........the Blackberry Cold

[fonejunkie]

Originally Posted by BlitzSix

I don't see how this is relevant to the topic at hand? You're just saying that they will keep making newer devices, which no one is arguing. What I'm saying that instead of having two products which are almost the same and which sell for the same price they could combine it into one, which would generate more revenue. And then they can evolve THAT product and make newer versions of it.

My point was that the curve is older (~15-18 months), the Bold is new. RIM will make (and the service providers will sell) its replacement... the features are different, and, to some point evolutionary... but they are different devices.

[kjjb0204]

I'm willing to bet there are users out there that want the smaller form factor of the Curve and don't necessarily need 3G, especially if email is primarily what they are using it for. There are other users that demand 3G and don't mind the bigger Bold. I see a market for both.

[takeshi]

Originally Posted by BlitzSix

I know that they idea is that they appeal to different budgets, the Curve being on the lower end, and the Bold being the flagship device.

But In this case IMO there aren't really enough differences to justify the two models....they are all very minor.

I see what you're saying but I you're stuck in your own perspective and that you're totally missing something very important. The Curve is significantly older. It's a full generation older as it doesn't have 3G, the faster processor, increased device memory, etc etc.

You could pick any point in time and ask why a manufacturer didn't combine model X and model Y. The problem is that these products evolve over time. The Curve and the Bold weren't combined because the Bold wasn't even developed when the Curve was released.

Why weren't the 8700 and 8300 combined? There really aren't that many differences. They're both EDGE devices. The screens are the same resolution. Sure, the 8300 has a camera but that's minor, right?

What about the 7290 and the 8700? All they did was add EDGE, make a slightly better screen and change the shape of the housing.

How about the 7230 and the 7290? I mean, they were even more the same. The 7290 had a slightly better screen and bluetooth...

Or the 7230 and the 6230? They just added color to end up with the 7230, right?

We could go on and on and on like this with pretty much any product line.

Funny thing is that countless people couldn't wait for the Curve and they also couldn't wait for the Bold until they were each respectively released (and I clearly recall anticipation for other models as well). More choices for the consumer are always better regardless of whether you "get" certain choices or not.

If you don't see a significant difference between 2 models and have no other selection criteria to apply then get the cheaper one. Easy.

Originally Posted by BlitzSix

Market share... How does having two of almost the same devices at the same price give them more market share ?

Pretty much the same way there can be thousands of PC makers and PC's can have the majority of the market share. How does more choice reduce market share?? More options mean a better range of fitting options for consumers. You seem to claim that selling more "one size fits all" items somehow improves market share?

Originally Posted by BlitzSix

For example, if the Bold was a tad smaller and had a better camera, would someone NOT buy it because of that?

Do you really think RIM chose the size of the Bold and then added features? Wouldn't it make more sense for its size to be dictated by its features?

Originally Posted by BlitzSix

And If the Curve had 3G and a better processor and more memory, would someone NOT buy it because of that?

No but the Curve wouldn't have been released long ago if it had 3G, a better processor and more memory. How would RIM (or any company) put future technology into a device released years ago? I think more manufacturers would do this if it was possible...

Originally Posted by BlitzSix

So if they made something which takes away all those negatives, they would increase their market share.

Um. Yes. We're not going to disagree that if you can make a perfect product then it will sell well. You're using hindsight which wasn't available to RIM when developing either product.

Originally Posted by BlitzSix

IMO you don't succeed by crippling your phones to be worse so you can make a better one later.

How did RIM "cripple" any of their devices? Since when did "cripple" mean "doesn't include undeveloped technology"?

Again, I think the big point that you're missing is that the Curve is an older model. There's always newer an better tech down the road no matter when you choose to buy something.

Originally Posted by BlitzSix

Then we get to price, they're both 599.99 from Rogers to buy outright, the Bold is 199.99 and the Curve is 179.99.

Price is set by the carrier. My Curve was $99 out the door 9 months ago. Discussing price as if it's up to RIM seems pointless IMO.

[Magnum]

Originally Posted by CO_BBTechie

It's like Twix and Peanut Butter Twix. Almost identical but just a couple things different.

I love Peanut Butter twix, but man are they hard to come-by these days! Mmmmm, peanut butter twix, now that's a flagship candy-bar!!!

[rambo47]

Product evolution is the CENTRAL REASON behind the two devices. The Curve was RIM's foray into the consumer space, along with the Pearl. It was an experiment at first, seeing if there was as much consumer demand for a non-enterprise focused device as research suggested. When you've got the hottest selling enterprise handset in human history, you certainly don't just start making consumer-oriented changes! You listen to your customer base. As business users began asking for more media-centric features to be added to their devices the Blackberry evolved into what we have today: The Blackberry Bold. But there are still plenty of users that simply cannot use a Bold. Restrictions (government, secure civilian) mean many users cannot have a camera or media card. For them there is still the 8700 model. Some folks place a huge premium on small size. For them the Pearl with SureType is better than a full QWERTY model. Within the QWERTY user group there are preferences for different size devices and different style keyboards. The idea of "one size fits all" is a clear loser for such a diverse user base. This isn't the iPhone we're talking about here!

The beer companies and soda companies learned this lesson about multiple brands long ago: every brand that hits the shelves will have at least some market share. Having many different products will give you a larger overall percentage of the market than only one or two "super products". Consumers love choice and will find the brand that best fits their tastes. Coca Cola has a dozen different products on the shelves for soda. They sell much more than if they only offered Coke, Diet Coke, and Cherry Coke.

[kjjb0204]

Another reason is that there are GSM and CDMA carriers in the US and to combine the Bold and Curve would mean it would have to carry both, which is going to be pretty tough to fit both chipsets, a sim slot, gps receiver, wifi antenna and everything else into a small curve housing.

[BlitzSix]

Originally Posted by fonejunkie

My point was that the curve is older (~15-18 months), the Bold is new. RIM will make (and the service providers will sell) its replacement... the features are different, and, to some point evolutionary... but they are different devices.

Sorry if I was unclear, I'm talking about the new Curve 8900.

Originally Posted by takeshi

I see what you're saying but I you're stuck in your own perspective and that you're totally missing something very important. The Curve is significantly older. It's a full generation older as it doesn't have 3G, the faster processor, increased device memory, etc etc.

You could pick any point in time and ask why a manufacturer didn't combine model X and model Y. The problem is that these products evolve over time. The Curve and the Bold weren't combined because the Bold wasn't even developed when the Curve was released.
Why weren't the 8700 and 8300 combined? There really aren't that many differences. They're both EDGE devices. The screens are the same resolution. Sure, the 8300 has a camera but that's minor, right?
What about the 7290 and the 8700? All they did was add EDGE, make a slightly better screen and change the shape of the housing.
How about the 7230 and the 7290? I mean, they were even more the same. The 7290 had a slightly better screen and bluetooth...
Or the 7230 and the 6230? They just added color to end up with the 7230, right?
We could go on and on and on like this with pretty much any product line.
Funny thing is that countless people couldn't wait for the Curve and they also couldn't wait for the Bold until they were each respectively released (and I clearly recall anticipation for other models as well). More choices for the consumer are always better regardless of whether you "get" certain choices or not.
If you don't see a significant difference between 2 models and have no other selection criteria to apply then get the cheaper one. Easy.
Pretty much the same way there can be thousands of PC makers and PC's can have the majority of the market share. How does more choice reduce market share?? More options mean a better range of fitting options for consumers. You seem to claim that selling more "one size fits all" items somehow improves market share?
Do you really think RIM chose the size of the Bold and then added features? Wouldn't it make more sense for its size to be dictated by its features?
No but the Curve wouldn't have been released long ago if it had 3G, a better processor and more memory. How would RIM (or any company) put future technology into a device released years ago? I think more manufacturers would do this if it was possible...
Um. Yes. We're not going to disagree that if you can make a perfect product then it will sell well. You're using hindsight which wasn't available to RIM when developing either product.
How did RIM "cripple" any of their devices? Since when did "cripple" mean "doesn't include undeveloped technology"?
Again, I think the big point that you're missing is that the Curve is an older model. There's always newer an better tech down the road no matter when you choose to buy something.
Price is set by the carrier. My Curve was $99 out the door 9 months ago. Discussing price as if it's up to RIM seems pointless IMO.

Again I apologize for not being clear but Ixxx8217;m talking about the new Curve. IMO, most of those examples that you listed were pretty big changes from one to the other.
I understand RIM didnxxx8217;t choose for the Bold to be that big, but Ixxx8217;m saying instead of spending time and money doing research and development for the 8900 which is almost the same device, if they just worked on the Bold a little more they would make it a tad smaller and give it the better camera and youxxx8217;re set.
Ixxx8217;m definitely not saying that we should have less choice, Ixxx8217;m very much for choice in the marketplace but this just doesnxxx8217;t make sense to me. When you shop for anything else there are things that are better and more expensive, cheaper and a bit worse, etc. Here you have two devices which have practically identical features, at the same price, but some things that compromise each other. It doesnxxx8217;t add up. When you buy a BMW 328 vs an M3 you buy it because one is cheaper but slower, the other one is better and more expensive. BMW doesnxxx8217;t make them the same price, and make the M3 faster than the 328 but give it crappier brakes, while putting the good ones on the 328. It just doesnxxx8217;t make sense.

Originally Posted by rambo47

Product evolution is the CENTRAL REASON behind the two devices. The Curve was RIM's foray into the consumer space, along with the Pearl. It was an experiment at first, seeing if there was as much consumer demand for a non-enterprise focused device as research suggested. When you've got the hottest selling enterprise handset in human history, you certainly don't just start making consumer-oriented changes! You listen to your customer base. As business users began asking for more media-centric features to be added to their devices the Blackberry evolved into what we have today: The Blackberry Bold. But there are still plenty of users that simply cannot use a Bold. Restrictions (government, secure civilian) mean many users cannot have a camera or media card. For them there is still the 8700 model. Some folks place a huge premium on small size. For them the Pearl with SureType is better than a full QWERTY model. Within the QWERTY user group there are preferences for different size devices and different style keyboards. The idea of "one size fits all" is a clear loser for such a diverse user base. This isn't the iPhone we're talking about here!

The beer companies and soda companies learned this lesson about multiple brands long ago: every brand that hits the shelves will have at least some market share. Having many different products will give you a larger overall percentage of the market than only one or two "super products". Consumers love choice and will find the brand that best fits their tastes. Coca Cola has a dozen different products on the shelves for soda. They sell much more than if they only offered Coke, Diet Coke, and Cherry Coke.

I am 100% in agreement with what youxxx8217;re saying with the first generation Curve. The 88XX was a business device, with no camera, but they 8830 had both gps and wifi so it was a flagship. The Curve was consumer oriented, with a camera etc, but you had to choose between gps and wifi (as far as I know, maybe the latest curves had both?). But that all makes perfect sense, they have the business device which they arenxxx8217;t messing with , and the device to try mass market to the average user.

But that is my whole argument. They got rid of those differences. The devices both have cameras, both gsp and wifi, both fast processor (bold slightly faster), both amazing screens and whatnot. Again bold has 3g, and curve is a bit smaller and thatxxx8217;s it. What Ixxx8217;m saying that is that at this point since really neither device is for the xxx8220;business crowdxxx8221; (Bold seems to be very media friendly, has cam, etc), they both really appeal to the same people and the differences have become so very subtle, why would they have developed these two devices separately? Then the bold wouldnxxx8217;t have the drawback (size/cam), neither would the javelin (no 3g), and bam, perfect device.

If they made the bold more business oriented with no camera or something, I wouldnxxx8217;t be arguing this. But now you have two products, at the same price, both of them having some negative features, which could have been easily eliminated if they combined themxxx8230;

Ixxx8217;m NOT saying they should make a one size fits all, choice is great, the pearl is great, the storm is great (although I wouldnxxx8217;t use either) but the Bold and Curve are not different enough for this! And this is NOT a matter of evolving technology as both devices were released just 2 months apart, and the "better technology" (bold) was released first...

All of RIM's previous models make obvious sense eitehr due to evolution or different markets (83xx vs 88xx), but not this time IMO.

Originally Posted by kjjb0204

Another reason is that there are GSM and CDMA carriers in the US and to combine the Bold and Curve would mean it would have to carry both, which is going to be pretty tough to fit both chipsets, a sim slot, gps receiver, wifi antenna and everything else into a small curve housing.

Sorry Ixxx8217;m not following here, donxxx8217;t they usually make sepearte devices for GSM and CDMA ?

[rambo47]

Early claims said the Curve with the GSM chipset could not fit the camera mechanism, WiFi gear, and GPS module all together. By the time the 8330 came out a year later there were new modules for all these features that could be shoe-horned into the Curve case together. Personally, I always figured it was a marketing thing by the carriers. It's the carriers who tell RIM what features they want or do not want. Since the carriers do all the support, they get pretty much what they want in terms of features.

[kjjb0204]

Originally Posted by BlitzSix

Sorry I’m not following here, don’t they usually make sepearte devices for GSM and CDMA ?

Yes, that's my point. One good reason why the Bold and Curve exist.

[kjjb0204]

Originally Posted by rambo47

Early claims said the Curve with the GSM chipset could not fit the camera mechanism, WiFi gear, and GPS module all together. By the time the 8330 came out a year later there were new modules for all these features that could be shoe-horned into the Curve case together. Personally, I always figured it was a marketing thing by the carriers. It's the carriers who tell RIM what features they want or do not want. Since the carriers do all the support, they get pretty much what they want in terms of features.

Don't forget that it would cost more to develop and manufacture all devices if they all had GSM and CDMA chips built in. More cost to the manufacturer = higher cost to consumers.