iPhone 3GS from AT&T. Free Shipping
- Average user rating: 2.5 stars out of 496 reviews Back to product review
- My rating: 0 stars
Full user review
-
144 out of 160 people found this review helpful
3.0 stars
"Not quite a PDA"
Pros: Thin, sleek
Cons: No Touchscreen, wider than a Treo
Summary: I have been eagerly awaiting the release of the Q as I thought it might serve me better due to the thin form. However none of the early reviews I read noted that there was no touchscreen. I am a physician and a PDA power user and have many medical applications that I rely on. There are several physicians at my hospital buzzing about the Q and running out to order one. I hope that they are aware that many of their Windows Mobile/PocketPC medical programs may not be as functional without a touchscreen and also consider that editing documents on the Q will not be easy if at all possible. They may want to think about this before purchasing. If motorola had included a touchscreen they would have had a wider market by including the PDA power users.
- 26 replies to this review
-
Are you kidding me? This is a very subjective post. Just because a smartphone device does not have a touch screen does not mean it's not a PDA. I actually bought the treo 700p and took it back after a few days because I hated trying to use the touch screen and keypad. The Moto Q is very simple and easier to use than the Treo 700p. It all boils down to personal preference.
-
and got an xv6700 instead
-
I am a medical professional as well, and found your opinion to be quite helpful. I was wondering - how in the world some of the medical applications would function?!
A touchscreen/stylus is almost a requirement.
Thanks for chiming in! -
There's no touchscreen? How is that a fault of the phone? A review, whether it be from a user or a CNET editor is supposed to review the phone as is, not per your expectations. You could have said 'it would have been nice for them to have a touchscreen,' but don't knock points off because it doesn't. Do some more research before you buy a phone next time.
-
Had the Q for three days now and each day I find more reasons to like it. Some of the things that make it so awesome are that it will run map4pda which will use google maps to help you find your way just like navigation. If you have the unlimited data plan, you can use PDAnet software to connect your computer or laptop to the internet at speeds that are faster than dial-up. I also found a way to play classic Nintendo games. The video capabilites are below average for most phones. The digital camera takes great pics during the day but night shots come out fuzzy. I wouldnt use the Q to substitute my digicam anyways. Another con is the startup time. It takes a good 45-60 seconds to boot up and the battery life is only soso. Oh yeah, windows media player does a fine job making it possible to listen to mp3's that sound great if you have headphones. Overall the OS is quirky and locks up sometimes but it makes up for it in its ability to operate the many programs out there for it. There is a lot of support on the web for making your Q the ultimate in available smartphone technology.
-
I owned a Q for about a week and then returned it. My battery lasted less than 24 hrs with light to moderate use. I was expecting typical battery life of 2-3 day as with a treo that my brother owns. What gives? I'm not going to carry my charger around with me and constantly recharge. My schedule is too hectic and sometimes I will go a day with out plugging in for recharge. When the battery life is lenghtened I will buy again. Other than this issue, I liked it once I got used to a "no touch screen" operation.
-
I never really got past trying to get e-mail set up. I don't have a company server backing me up - just a stand-alone Q. The POP3 never could be set up to "Send". After more than eight hours with Verizon and Earthlink tech support, no luck. The phone is now back at Earthlink.
-
So I think we can all agree that the Q is not a PDA. Also being a physician, I too am very interested in a machine that can be both things. While the Treo is a great machine it is rather bulky (not so sexy) and the image quality leaves much to be desired.
So when will Motorola or any company come out with a smartphone/pda that rivals the appeal of The Q? The other question is when will Window's based medical applications become more available? While I'm comfortable with the Palm OS platform, integrating evrything through Windows would be so much easier. Appreciate your comments. -
Why would you go out and buy it without trying it? Why would you not look at the specs? Windows Mobile Smartphone OS does not support touchscreen! And just about every review I've seen has stated that.
-
i was very disappointed. i waited and waited for this to come out thinking that i could actually find a "thin" version of a Treo.. but alas.. after having tried it for a week I was supremely disappointed. it lacks so many things not the least of which is as i am beginning to appreciate, the zillions of applications that are avaiable on the palm OS platform. it feels chintzy. it has a strange cheap feel to to it when touching the front controls. the fact that is has no touchscreen is weird. if i were moto and was serious about trying to launch a viable alternative to the Treo i definitely wouldn't have launched without a touchscreen for starters. anyway.. i brought the phone back to verizon and wound up with the new 700p. it will be near to impossible now to separate me from the palm after this experience. if anything it says to me that the pair to beat is rimm and palm with palm holding a rather healthy lead. ugh..
-
The Q is a smartphone:
(n) A generic name for voice centric mobile phones with information capability. -
I was going to buy the phone and my 700W is not a week old, but when I learned there is NO TOUCH SCREEN, NO EXTERIOR ANTENNA CONNECTION, and the WIFI is poor at best, I decided NOT to buy the "Q". I live in the Mtns. where the cell sites are few and far between, a booster and roof antenna is the only way to stay connected. Without the antenna connection the phone is no better than two tin cans and a string.
-
Having a touchscreen would have meant a thicker device and lower grade display.
-
I am an MD also but fully understood from all the preliminary data/revews that there was no touch screen. Likewise this is a Windows Smarphone and NOT Windows Pocket PC so your choice for medical apps are basically non-existent as are mine. This is not a phone meant for anything other than e-mail, voice, text and some minimalist apps all of which it does superbly. Don't criticize the phone for apps it was never meant to run.
-
I am a business lawyer, and I agree with Plussier, that it is not a true PDA or smartphone without a touchscreen. There are just too many shortcuts and useful functions that no keyboard or navigation system can replace. This is the one big drawback for me to get the Motorola Q. Currently, I am not aware of any thin smartphone that truly has the PDA functions and data and telephony features. That is why I am still using the Kyocera QCP 6035 smartphone. The thing is a huge dinasour, but is brilliant in its simplicity and functionality. It is amazing that there is really nothing better on the market today.
-
touch screen is required for some but not for all. Blackberry has been proven to be one of the best 'smart' phone.
Only smart phone/PDA that has touch screen, that I know of, is MDA from t-mobile.
As a MDA owner myself, I can tell you first hand how UNHAPPY I AM with MDA.
all the bells and whistles in a small package sounds too good to be true? because it is not true.
If you must have touch screen PDA that is reliable then get a good PDA and a good cell phone seperately. That's a headache free way to achieve the productivity you want with PDA. -
This may not be a PDA to some, but Blackberry users should feel right at home. After reading some reviews not only on cnet, I have noticed a lot of people complaining that it does not have a touch screen. Yes, all PDAs I have ever used have touch screen, but do Smartphones? Not many. A lot of Smartphones like the RIM Blackberry do not have touch screen, but it did not take away from the Blackberry having one of the top ratings on cnet did it? When the Blackberry came out, did they specifically advertise that it did not have a touch screen? I?m not really sure, but I doubt it. Touch screens still seem to be something new to the world of Smartphones which seem more and more like PDAs everyday and not all of them have it yet. PDA users may not want to go over to the Motorola Q because of the lack of touch screen, but Blackberry users probably will. Although I agree that touch screen would be nice, I think this Smartphone still deserves a lot more credit as it is now Blackberry?s new competition. As for me, my only gripe is that Verizon had first dibs on it like they seem to with a lot of the really nice smartphones, but Verizon does not have service in my area. I think there should be more choices on service. Now if there were unlocked Palm Treo 700?s or Motorola Q?s I would be happy, but for now I will just have to stick with Blackberry.
-
This is unbelievable. Many may not need a touch screen, but most expect one. The review must be clear, there is NO TOUCH SCREEN. Thanks plussier for pointing this out.
-
I was eagerly waiting for the Q to arrive. I saw it as a lighter and slimmer version of my treo. I've had it for 2 days now and the lack of a touch screen makes screen management a real pain. As a phone with a decent camera its ok but its no PDA. I'm sending it back.
-
is a deal breaker.
-
No offense but you all say you were really excited for the Q, but did you read the description of it on Motorola's site or any site for that matter. If you noticed it stated that it was going to utilize a scroll wheel and be the first microsoft os pda/smartphone to utilize such a feature. This was done to compete with Blackberry and to take away from Blackberry's market share. Sorry about this not being a device for doctors, but I would say the majority of law firms and business's are using blackberrys and so this might be an attractive alternative to them.
Just surprised that you all claim to be doctor's but didn't seem to pick up on such an advertised detail. -
Thanks for the heads-up; I was considering this product as my PDA and phone replacement. I have been a Palm guy for years but the price of the other products have kept me on the fence. I was just about to jump ship; until I read your review and you mention that there is no touch screen. Hey What?s Up With That! I think Motorola has taken two steps backward on this one.
-
What were they thinking? How can you have a smart phone with out a touch screen? I think I'll hold out until the new ultra mobile PC gets a phone option. I've been playing with the new Samsung and it's the best PDA-like device I've ever seen.
-
I am also a new physician and was looking at the Q. But if you say that it can't run many of the programs b/c of no touch screen, then would the Samsung i730 Pocket PC phone be a better choice? It has a stylus/touch screen interface? Also, could you be more specific as to which medical programs do not work with the Q. Thanks!
-
I too am a physician. Without the touch screen, most of my medical programs are rendered useless. I'm glad I was able to find this out before switching to the Q. Guess I'll stick to my clunkier Cingular 8125...At least it's a full-functioning PDA. I'm baffled at why Motorola would make a PDA-phone for "Power" users without the inclusion of critical features...Bad product research & development.
-
Thanks for the review Dr. Plussier! I was about to buy one of these phones until I realized that it doesn't have the required touch screen for the CaseScribe wireless dictation/transcription service (http://www.casescribe.com) that many doctors, lawyers, dentists, vets, radiologists and other professionals are beginning to use. If Motorola wants to sell new SmartPhones to these professionals, then they need to release a full featured PDA SmartPhone similar to the Treo and others.
Motorola Q (Verizon Wireless):
%20user%20review%20and%20rating%20-%20CNET%20Reviews&srcUrl=http://reviews.cnet.com/smartphones/motorola-q-verizon-wireless/4864-6452_7-31473357-2.html){kind=small}