Sorry, for all the questions, I think this is my last one. I was looking at the Q since it is currently on sale for only $30. I noticed that on the sprint website, that if you compare the two phones it says that the Q does not have broadband, but if you select the Q and then look under the feature's listing, it lists Sprint Mobile Broadband as one of the features. Can anyone tell me if the Ace has faster Web/emal then the Q? That would be a big deal for me. Are there any other features lacking on the Q that makes the Ace worth $170 more, besides the coolness factor?
lol, keep the question's coming thats what WA is for But answering your question, i would pick the ace, just mainly because of it's Blackjack like form. But whats your current service provider? Also the ace is one of the newest phones, but thats just me.
If you''re talking about the first Moto Q, avoid it. The newer Q is much better (and EV-DO capable). The Ace is probably one of the better Samsung phones, since it mirrors the Blackjack so much. If it were me, I'd pick the Motorola, only because I will never buy another Samsung again. You may have already done this, but here's a great site for you to check out a comparison of the two models: Samsung Ace/Motorola Q Comparison from Phonescoop. This should answer your questions.
Thanks Mike. I was referring to the original Q. I only started to look at that phone because of the price point. According to the site that you provided, the two (Ace and and original Q) seem pretty evenly matched. I suspect that there are certain intangibles that make the Ace more appealing than the Q, but I am wondering if they are worth the $170 premium. Sprint CS confirmed that the website is mistaken, and that all three phones (old Q, new Q, and Ace) run on the same broadband network at the same speeds.
Wirelessly posted (Treo 750: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; IEMobile 7.6) UP.Link/6.3.1.17.06.3.1.17.0) Unlike Mike, I would not choose the Q just because it is a Motorola. Having had the Blacjack & being very happy with it, I would highly recommend the ACE. I don't know if it is of any importance to you but I believe the ACE is a dual technology device. It has Euroasian GSM 900/1800 as well as CDMA 850/1900, so you could travel overseas with it.
I have to admit, Charlyee, that I'm negating the Ace because it's a Samsung, which isn't really fair because they did well with the Blackjack. My experiences with Samsung have not been good, to the point that I'd rather not get one at all, even if it's the best phone on the market. And as for picking the Q, for me it's the lesser of two evils. I probably won't ever buy a Moto smartphone again. My experiences with the Q were not all that great. I'd rather go with HTC phones than either Samsung or Moto, but that's just me...
well heres my clincher........the thing I always hated about WM devices was that the software produced significant lag times.........and my experiences with Motorola have always been slow no matter the platform.........the Samsing ACE was the first device besides its Blackjack successors that handled Windows Mobile with little lag time
