Ultimate Death Match: iPhone Versus RAZR

by Chris Seibold Jan 17, 2007

As much as Steve was pushing the iPhone as a competitor for smart phones, and Steve was pitching that concept harder than a head high Nolan Ryan fastball, the truth is that the iPhone is only going to take on smart phones as a side project, the iPhone’s real target is the Motorola RAZR. Why the RAZR? Because at one time the RAZR was cool, the RAZR was status and the RAZR was hip.

Forgive a momentary tangent: your car, your phone, your computer do most definitely not make you cool or hip. You can’t spend your way to hipness. Well, unless you spend money on tattoos, leather jackets and smoking.

Back to the point, the market that Apple is really after isn’t the smart phone market, it is the people who need to be cool market, the people who bought the first cell phone, then bought the first startacs and then bought the first RAZRs. In other words, the iPhone is aimed squarely at those with disposable income who must be cool.

The objection at this point is obvious: if the iPhone is really aimed at those who believe that status comes with a price tag why did Steve spend so much time comparing the iPhone to smart phones? The answer is not obvious at first but it is simple: to justify the price. Smart phones are the most expensive cell phones on the market, if Steve had thrown the iPhone up against a $29.00 RAZR and revealed the $499 price tag the iPhone would have seemed wildly overpriced even factoring in the price of a nano, a cell phone and a camera.

That notion seems ludicrous right? Everyone who saw the keynote saw what the iPhone can do, comparing it to a RAZR is unadulterated lunacy, right? Before dismissing the argument out of hand let’s have an old fashioned bake off. This time instead of comparing Adobe Photoshop filters across platforms, we’ll compare the capabilities of the iPhone to the capabilities of the RAZR. A little spec sheet throw down so to speak.

                                                                                                     
FeatureiPhoneRAZR
Text messages··
Camera2 Mpx1.3 Mpx
.mp3··
video··
contacts··
calendar··
battery lifeblowssucks
Internet browserSafariWAP
gameswidgets·
bluetooth··
WiFi·
.mp3··
Screen size·
Physical keyboardnopekinda
Memory4GBWho Cares
Price$499basically free

The list is carefully chosen to show that, under the best of circumstances, the RAZR can perform the lion’s share of the iPhone’s functions. The fact that the RAZR is, on paper, almost a match for the iPhone noted it is time for a little reality.

The RAZR is a pretty horrible device when push comes to shove. As a phone it is nice, the clamshell design wraps about the head with a certain anatomical precision but that is where the usefulness ends. Want to send a text message with your RAZR? Good freaking luck, there is a reason that text messengers write messages in the easiest way decipherable and it has more to do with the limitations of the keyboards than stupidity of the U5ER5. Want to listen to .mp3s? Entirely possible in theory but in reality (particularly if you use the vile Verizon) it is a lot harder than it should be. Battery life? Pathetic. The user interface? Ah ahahaha, right up there with instruction manuals written in English by native mandarin speakers with a single semester of English.

It’s true, it’s true as a device for anything other than calling and looking cool the RAZR sucks. So the actual bar for the iPhone to surpass is now set. The iPhone doesn’t have to be a better choice for the corporate world than the Blackberry, it just has to be a better phone than the RAZR.

Now here’s the rub, the iPhone will be worse than the RAZR. First, we have to consider the primary use of the device: calling. The RAZR wins this challenge hands down. Where the iPhone has a melted bar of soap form factor the RAZR enjoys the clear advantage with the clamshell design. Where the iPhone must be ogled to place a call, RAZR owners can dial by feel. Finally, RAZR owners can go for pink, iPhone wannabes can opt for, well, iPhone black.

That, most would agree, is the end of the RAZR’s advantages. The iPhone will be easier to use for everything else. Text messages? iPhone wins. Digital audio player? iPhone. Internet browsing? iPhone. Watching videos? iPhone. The list continues and aside from calling, there is not a single place the iPhone loses out to the RAZR.

The iPhone ‘wins’ are impressive but the overall effect is negative. People use their RAZR for calls and that is about it. That won’t be the case for the iPhone. With internet browsing that actually works, with a video player that is almost watchable, with an iPod inside there will be no barrier to taking full advantage of the iPhone’s capabilities. Taking advantage of capabilities is another way of saying sucking down the iPhone’s battery life and running up the cell bill. The five hour battery life people never worried about with the RAZR will become a major impediment with the iPhone. Users who just wanted a phone will soon find themselves surfing the internet and paying for data with the iPhone. When users mentally compare the iPhone to their previous phone, the previous will seem simpler and less troublesome.

All in all, Apple has made a lustworthy product, sure the iPhone doesn’t do anything new but making something easy to do (say “Hi” 128k Mac) can be revolutionary. That is also the iPhone’s undoing, Steve said calls were the “killer app” and then bundled four more killer apps on the phone. Apps people will use, apps that will drain the battery. If every application was equally unimportant, no big deal but when the battery is gone because an iPhone user has been browsing Apple Matters archives you can bet they’ll blame the phone and not themselves. Then the RAZR will look mighty sweet.

Comments

  • yup, how’d you guess beeble?

    oh yeah, i use a mac, dead giveaway

    Nathan had this to say on Jan 19, 2007 Posts: 219
  • oh yeah, i use a mac, dead giveaway

    I use a Mac and I’m not a designer.  How is that a dead give away?

    Again, I’m not the one who wanted to debate this.  Just because I think you’re pretentious and shallow, what do you care?

    Beeblebrox had this to say on Jan 19, 2007 Posts: 2220
  • I think if people are inspired by things to pursue aims and to raise their creative aspirations, that’s great. As to whether it is “better” to be inspired by one thing over another, a squiggle over a telephone for instance, well who’s foolhardy enough to say they can judge?

    ...oh.

    Benji had this to say on Jan 19, 2007 Posts: 927
  • I care because this is a public forum. If you cared, you would comment at a level I’m sure you are capable of.

    Instead, just like every other post you ignore the real points and gab on about some other unimportant and unrelated nit.

    Farewell again, I took some months off of this site and it seems like I need to again - truly amazing how one poster can ruin a good thing.

    Nathan had this to say on Jan 19, 2007 Posts: 219
  • As to whether it is “better” to be inspired by one thing over another, a squiggle over a telephone for instance, well who’s foolhardy enough to say they can judge?

    I don’t think it’s foolhardly necessarily to judge (and certainly hypocritical to say so given the opinions on this site), and I have already conceded that one is inspired by what one is inspired by.

    What I think of what Nathan in inspired by is beside the point, which is why I said it wasn’t worth debating.  There are fights worth fighting and this isn’t one of them.

    Beeblebrox had this to say on Jan 19, 2007 Posts: 2220
  • Instead, just like every other post you ignore the real points and gab on about some other unimportant and unrelated nit.

    I haven’t ignored anything.  I’ve addressed many other points regarding the iPhone in numerous threads.

    But your comment about ME was what I might think of your being inspired by a phone.  I agreed with you in a short comment and have tried ever since to leave it at that.  YOU keep bringing this back up, not me.  I’ve already stated repeatedly that what I think about what you are inspired by is and should be unimportant to you.

    Beeblebrox had this to say on Jan 19, 2007 Posts: 2220
  • Truly amazing how one poster can ruin a good thing.

    Uh yeah.  Here’s the comment that started it all:

    Some people, and Breeble is probably one of them, would think I’m insane to pay that much for the Nokia when it doesn’t do my laundry. They may even go so far as calling me shallow

    You drag my handle into this, I agree with you, you keep bringing it up when I (for once) and trying to end it, and now you’re going to blame ME because you can’t handle finishing what YOU started?

    Typical.

    Beeblebrox had this to say on Jan 19, 2007 Posts: 2220
  • Ummm… not to pick nits, but that photo is not of a RAZR, but rather a StarTac, a phone that is perhaps a decade older.  The StarTac is an interesting comparison as it was the first true pocket-sized flip phone.  But it certainly is NOT a RAZR.

    Chris Williams had this to say on Jan 21, 2007 Posts: 4
  • You drag my handle into this, I agree with you, you keep bringing it up—Beeblebrox

    err…

    <Some people, and Breeble is probably one of them, would think I’m insane to pay that much for the Nokia when it doesn’t do my laundry. They may even go so far as calling me shallow.</i>—Nathan

    Dude, if you’re inspired by a cell phone, then you’re right about what I’d say about that.—Beeblebrox

    Agreeing with Nathan that you think his position is stupid is hardly a claim to constructiveness.

    Benji had this to say on Jan 21, 2007 Posts: 927
  • I certainly make no claim to constructiveness.  But then neither was his original comment.  He was being snarky about me and I snarked back.  But of course I’m the one to blame for some reason.  Just like we can all call Windows users idiots, sheeple and drones without a single complaint, but I say the word “Mactard” and everyone runs to the moderators.

    The fake outrage at this site deserves an Oscar.

    Beeblebrox had this to say on Jan 21, 2007 Posts: 2220
  • More iPhone versus RARZ, this time from a design perspective:
    http://www.metropolismag.com/pov/?p=666

    arf_arf had this to say on Jun 02, 2008 Posts: 1
  • Page 3 of 3 pages  <  1 2 3
You need log in, or register, in order to comment