Mossberg Solution: Iphone vs. BlackBerry

Image via CrunchBase

• By KATHERINE BOEHRET

The old adage that the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence can be extended to our technology cravings. Even the person holding the shiniest new gadget can't help but eye a neighbor who has a different device and wonder, "What does that do that mine doesn't?"

Thoughts like these are especially prevalent when it comes to the devoted owners of BlackBerrys and iPhones. All too often, the people carrying these smart phones are curious about what one device has that the other lacks. This week, I'm going to save you the trouble and outline some of the personal usage ups and downs to each device.

Because I regularly use both gadgets and am accustomed to their different features, I have included fresh observations from five people who recently switched from BlackBerrys to iPhones. At my request, these people kept track of their impressions, noting the things they missed on their BlackBerrys along with things they preferred on the iPhones. This column isn't meant to promote one device over the other; rather, it is a summary of some people's sentiments, combined with my own observations in hopes of enlightening readers. I inevitably left out some differences.

The most outstanding observation from my switch group in favor of the iPhone was an appreciation for its applications, or apps.

They used things like driving directions for the first time because these apps looked and worked better on the iPhone than on the BlackBerry. And they went through a downloading frenzy during which time they found all sorts of apps for the iPhone, such as games, entertainment and those that enhanced business-travel productivity. "Browsing for games. Probably should leave the office now," said one person's notes.

Though Research in Motion's BlackBerrys also run apps (including some of the same ones as for the iPhone), BlackBerry's App World offers only a little better than 2,000 apps. Apple's App Store boasts more than 65,000. A shortcut to the App Store ships preloaded on iPhones. BlackBerry App World is preloaded or virtually preloaded by carriers at their discretion, so a shortcut to App World may not be visible.

My switchers were frustrated by the iPhone's battery life and complained of running low on battery. One person said, "I need to charge my iPhone a couple of times throughout the day which can be inconvenient, especially when traveling. With my BlackBerry I just charged it while I slept and it was good to go for the day."

Granted, these people were all using the iPhone 3GS and had previously used various models of BlackBerrys that ran on slower networks and had smaller screens—two features that require less battery. Still, worrying about running out of juice is a hassle. One person said his iPhone's weak battery was a tribute to the fact that he used it more often and for more things than he did the BlackBerry.

The most obvious difference between iPhones and BlackBerrys are the keyboards. The iPhone uses an on-screen keyboard, while the BlackBerry (except the touch-screen Storm model) uses a tactile QWERTY keyboard. As expected, the switchers had trouble using the iPhone keyboard—especially for the first few days. But after about a week, most people in the group had adjusted well to the on-screen keys and the iPhone's auto-correct feature that fixes mistakes as long as you keep typing rather than stopping to fix an error. One person said, "I was a skeptic, and didn't think the typing would work for me at all, but it actually hasn't been too bad."

Another said typing can be a real challenge at first, but that this could be overcome with a bit of practice.

Several people said they were still able to use their thumbs for iPhone typing as they did on the BlackBerry, though most preferred turning the screen horizontally to do this with slightly larger keys. Some said that they weren't typing quite as fast as with the BlackBerry's QWERTY keys but that they weren't too far off.

The BlackBerry keyboard's static position below its screen means all letters, numbers and symbols must come solely from pressing those keys; this is done by pressing ALT or Shift keys for numbers and symbols. Some switchers noted that pressing a button to change the iPhone's on-screen keyboard from letters to capital letters or numbers took a bit longer than on the BlackBerry.

My switchers were ecstatic about using the iPhone's Safari Web browser. They enthusiastically said searching, browsing and reading were all made much better and more visually pleasing compared with their experiences on the BlackBerry browser.

If you are a BlackBerry user, you know that all received and sent emails are listed on the same screen. The iPhone behaves more like a computer, storing sent emails in a special folder you must back up to open. This takes a little while to get used to.

Some switchers said they wished the iPhone had something like BlackBerry Messenger, the always-on messaging system that works to allow communication between all BlackBerrys.

The iPhone automatically changes its time when you enter a new time zone. BlackBerrys remain set to their home time zone for time stamping all emails with that time—unless you change the time in settings.

RIM prides itself on being able to run multiple applications at once; the iPhone allows this with its own preloaded programs like Mail and Safari, but not with other apps.

One switcher, for example, was frustrated that Pandora, a radio-like app that plays music according to user likes and dislikes, turned off when he opened Mail to read emails while listening to songs.

The BlackBerry's AC adaptor takes up two power outlet spots, while the small, square iPhone plug occupies only one outlet, making it more versatile and able to charge in more locations.

The iPhone only works on one cellular service: AT&T. The BlackBerry is available from Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile, Sprint and other carriers. My group used T-Mobile before changing to the iPhone's AT&T service.

There will always be something on someone else's device that looks more appealing than the one in your hand.

But the experience of using apps on the iPhone—and the huge selection of apps in the App Store—significantly enhance Apple's device.

RIM is continually improving its own store, but it needs to move quickly to keep its loyal users contented.

—Edited by
Walter S. Mossberg—Email:
mossbergsolution@wsj.com

Flush With Cash and Fearing Tighter Rules, Major Carriers Shun Broadband Stimulus

By Cecilia Kang
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, August 14, 2009

The Obama administration made a national priority of spreading high-speed Internet access to every American home and offered stimulus money to help companies pay for it, but the biggest network operators are staying away from the program.

As the Aug. 20 deadline nears to apply for $4.7 billion in broadband grants, AT&T, Verizon and Comcast are unlikely to go for the stimulus money, sources close to the companies said.

Their reasons are varied. All three say they are flush with cash, enough to upgrade and expand their broadband networks on their own. Some say taking money could draw unwanted scrutiny of business practices and compensation, as seen with automakers and banks that have taken government bailouts. And privately, some companies are griping about conditions attached to the money, including a net-neutrality rule that they say would prevent them from managing traffic on their networks in the way they want.

"We are concerned that some new mandates seem to go well beyond current laws and [Federal Communications Commission] rules, and may lead to the kind of continuing uncertainty and delay that is antithetical to the president's primary goals of economic stimulus and job creation," said Walter B. McCormick Jr., president of USTelecom, a trade group that represents telecoms including AT&T and Verizon.

Yet those firms might be the best positioned to achieve the goal of spreading Internet access to underserved areas, some experts say.

"If you want to get broadband out, you have to do it with [those] who brought you to the dance in the first place, and in this case it is the incumbent cable and telephone carriers who have 85 percent of lines in the country," said Robert Atkinson, president of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, a Washington tech policy think tank. "This is not basket weaving. This is really complex and intensive technical stuff that takes a fair amount of sophistication and scale to be able to do right and to continue to upgrade."

Obama has pushed for universal access to broadband since his presidential campaign, saying it would underpin the country's economic future. The stimulus funds target homes and businesses in the hinterlands that have largely been overlooked by broadband providers because of the hefty costs to lay down fiber-optic and other broadband pipes to small communities.

At the same time, the government has promised more scrutiny of industry practices that seem to limit consumer access to services, such as Comcast blocking the peer-to-peer file sharing service BitTorrent in 2007 and Apple's recent decision to block Google's voice service and the free Internet calling service Skype on the iPhone.

Those efforts have alarmed the major carriers. Specifically, some of the biggest firms fear that a clause in the stimulus plan that says recipients of the grants cannot "favor any lawful Internet applications and content over others" -- the concept known as net neutrality -- could lead to more rules down the road.

This condition goes beyond guidelines at the FCC that have been criticized by consumer advocacy groups as too vague. Carriers have pushed to keep current rules in place and see the condition on the stimulus grants as a potential precursor for additional rules at the FCC on how carriers can manage content over the Web.

The companies paint dire scenarios where new rules would lead to networks getting clogged with spam and too much video content, slowing down service for all users.

"It's not cost-effective for the big network operators to play in rural [markets] in the first place, and if they take federal money that comes with all these strings attached to it, they are opening themselves up to being regulated even further," said Roger Entner, head of communications research for Nielsen IAG.

McCormick said net-neutrality conditions on the grants are fuzzy and may give network operators pause before investing in long and expensive projects that could end up in a tangle of technical and legal hang-ups over how the firms oversee their networks.

"Clearly, it's causing potential applicants to reflect upon the uncertainties," McCormick said.

Verizon said it decided not to apply before conditions were announced. Comcast, which mainly serves urban and suburban areas, said it would also abstain. AT&T said that it likely would not apply but that it is open to partnership with state and local governments who win the grants.

Corporate officials have also said it would look bad for a company like AT&T or Comcast to come to the government with hat in hand when they are among the few companies in the economy flush with billions of dollars in cash reserves.

One official at a large network operator said on the condition of anonymity that once taken, government funds incite a "mob mentality" that could preclude sponsoring golf tournaments or giving executives bonuses, for fear of political backlash.

Some public advocates and analysts say the carriers never had a compelling reason to seek the grants.

"They weren't going to apply," said Ben Scott, head of policy at public advocacy group Free Press. "They are using this as an opportunity to grandstand against net neutrality."

Rebecca Arbogast, head of tech-policy research at Stifel Nicolaus, notes that the biggest carriers would be less inclined to deploy networks in rural areas because there is not enough demand to justify the ongoing financial investments. She said the companies should have expected stronger net-neutrality conditions because it was mandated by Congress in the stimulus act.

"With a few exceptions, the net-neutrality provisions were not a great departure from what I think was already out there and is consistent with the path that most recognize we were already headed down," Arbogast said.

The Commerce and Agriculture departments, which are handing out a total of $7.2 billion in broadband stimulus grants through 2011, say the plan to bring high-speed Internet to the hinterlands and urban poor can be accomplished without the big carriers. Companies like wireless broadband provider Clearwire and small cable and telecom operators may introduce more competition into the industry by using the funds to build networks that could compete with AT&T, Verizon and Comcast, analysts and government officials say.

"I think if the big carriers want to participate and play by the rules, great. If not, I'm not that concerned," said Mark Seifert, a senior adviser for the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, which is overseeing grants for the Commerce Department.

Seifert said the rules for broadband grants were not written to favor any size or kind of network operator. Further, the $7.2 billion is not intended to complete Obama's goal of spreading broadband to every home; rather, it is a "down payment" on a larger plan being crafted by the FCC, he said.