Cellular Phone Forum / Manufacturers / Motorola / December 2006
The Insanity Of The Razr V3C
|
|
Thread rating:  |
ShutterMan - 26 Dec 2006 07:08 GMT I'm new to this stuff, and frankly I don't care much about any of it. A phone is a phone. But let me tell you... when you spend (too much) money on a stupid phone for someone as a gift, and that phone has a camera on it, AND it has a USB connector, it kinda makes sense that you could plug that damn thing in, and download your pictures. HELL NO, YOU CANT.
FIRST, you have to BUY some crap software called Motorola Phone Tools. IMAGINE buying a digital camera or MP3 player __AND THEN__ having to turn around and buy software to use it.
THEN... you get to bang your head against the wall because this crap software application STILL wont let you download your own pictures.
WHY? Because a "V"ery big carrier decided "gee, Thats a stupid thing to do with a camera phone. Let's force them to send their pictures across our network instead! Let's force them to BUY our ring tones... Lets force them to BUY our java games or whatever the hell."
DO NOT BUY THIS PHONE. And if you do, you have one of three choices - hack the damn thing (because, thats EXACTLY what you want to do with an expensive gift...) OR live with their strong arm b/s. The last option, the one I prefer, is take it back to where you got it, tell them its defective, and get your money back. Be sure to tell them that the retard store clerk told you explicitly that you would be able to download your own pictures, which is a good definition of DEFECTIVE.
I DO NOT subscribe to getting services illegally, like internet and whatnot, but when you cant plug a cable into your own phone to get your own pictures, there's something seriously wrong. I'm obviously pretty upset by all this - that something so simple turns out to be more insanity than I care to get involved in. Thats the last phone I *ever* buy from Motorola.
dold@90.usenet.us.com - 26 Dec 2006 11:01 GMT > WHY? Because a "V"ery big carrier decided "gee, Thats a stupid thing
> Thats the last phone I *ever* buy from Motorola. Why blame Motorola? Isn't it the "V" company that is causing your problem? Is that not true of any phone branded by "V"?
My Cingular Motorola V551 transfers pictures via Bluetooth with the driver that came with the Bluetooth adapter.
 Signature --- Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5
ShutterMan - 26 Dec 2006 18:04 GMT No, you can't quite blame the V company or any of the carriers. The reason is simple - Motorola lets them do it. If the software could not be modified to begin with, then V wouldn't be able to do it. Think of it this way.... imagine if Sears added a "disable the freezer" *feature* to their refrigerators. The outlet store uses this "feature" to force you to buy an external freezer. Do you blame the outlet store, or the manufacturer?
> > WHY? Because a "V"ery big carrier decided "gee, Thats a stupid thing > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > --- > Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5 dold@90.usenet.us.com - 26 Dec 2006 18:24 GMT > No, you can't quite blame the V company or any of the carriers. The > reason is simple - Motorola lets them do it. If the software could not be [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > to buy an external freezer. Do you blame the outlet store, or the > manufacturer? I would blame the outlet store. Manufacturers build what retailers buy. There are many variants of what seems to be a similar product available at different national retailers, not just cellphones.
The only place I blame Motorola in all of this is that they seem to have decided that a poor quality software peddler in Paris is the best source of the software for synchronization. The retailers don't seem interested in applying pressure for that feature that isn't used by many folks.
But MPT in its cantankerous state is still better than the free Nokia sync software that I used in the past.
 Signature --- Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5
Randall Ainsworth - 26 Dec 2006 21:33 GMT > The only place I blame Motorola in all of this is that they seem to have > decided that a poor quality software peddler in Paris is the best source of > the software for synchronization. The retailers don't seem interested in > applying pressure for that feature that isn't used by many folks. You're the loser for using Windows. The Mac & Bluetooth require no special software to talk to the phone (assuming it's not crippled by your carrier).
Flying ~W~ - 26 Dec 2006 23:19 GMT >> The only place I blame Motorola in all of this is that they seem to have >> decided that a poor quality software peddler in Paris is the best source of [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >special software to talk to the phone (assuming it's not crippled by >your carrier). We're talking phones here. If you don't want the help fix the problem keep your thoughts to yourself.
~W~ ====================== Fly high, fly straight, and fly FAST!!!
dold@90.usenet.us.com - 27 Dec 2006 00:52 GMT > > The only place I blame Motorola in all of this is that they seem to > > have decided that a poor quality software peddler in Paris is the best > > source of the software for synchronization. The retailers don't seem > > interested in applying pressure for that feature that isn't used by > > many folks.
> You're the loser for using Windows. The Mac & Bluetooth require no > special software to talk to the phone (assuming it's not crippled by your > carrier). I'm not sure what you mean by "talk" in this context.
How fully featured is the Mac software? I can transfer photos and address book contacts with Windows Bluetooth drivers, but I can't sync with MS Outlook, which I suppose you are also unable to do on a Mac.
The poster was asking about USB. What can you do on a Mac with the phone and a USB cable?
You mention the possibility that the phone can still be crippled by the carrier. What can a stock Mac do with a Verizon-crippled phone?
 Signature --- Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5
ShutterMan - 27 Dec 2006 15:58 GMT Ah well.. didnt realize this would turn into a flame, but that goes to show you people's blind loyalty. The manufacturer made a phone, and they allow carriers to modify the phone to disable features on it. That's simply retarded. Whats next, "V" and others suing BitPim authors and such for DMCA violations?
Anyway, Im out. Thanks to those who can vaguely understand where Im coming from. I didnt want to get caught up in this whole mess to begin with - I bought a phone for someone, logically thinking they could download their own photos taken with a camera built into the phone. But thanks to Motorola's ingenious foresight, they can't.
Thank God Motorola didnt add a "feature" to disable the "5" key on the phone...Carriers could have had a field day with THAT.
SMS - 27 Dec 2006 18:43 GMT > No, you can't quite blame the V company or any of the carriers. The > reason is simple - Motorola lets them do it. If the software could not [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > to force you to buy an external freezer. Do you blame the outlet store, > or the manufacturer? Motorola doesn't have the cojones to stand up to the carriers when they want Motorola to de-content the handsets. But it's Verizon's decision to sell defeatured handsets. The only thing that would stop Verizon from doing this is if another carrier used the Verizon decontenting in its advertising, because almost no one even knows that Verizon is doing this.
Somehow I don't think that the other carriers will be willing to tell people that they don't have to sign up for a multimedia package in order to get photos off their phone. OTOH, the revenue from photo sending has proved to be a huge disappointment to the carriers. The cameras are so poor that few people want to waste money on sending photos. Any revenue is from people that don't bother to cancel their unused multimedia packages.
I wish that Consumer Reports had included something about the handset decontenting in its recent article on cellular.
Jeb Hoge - 28 Dec 2006 14:55 GMT > Somehow I don't think that the other carriers will be willing to tell > people that they don't have to sign up for a multimedia package in order > to get photos off their phone. OTOH, the revenue from photo sending has > proved to be a huge disappointment to the carriers. The cameras are so > poor that few people want to waste money on sending photos. Not to mention that a lot of phones also allow photo storage on removeable memory cards. I've sent a few photos from my E815, but transferred many more off of it by the MicroSD card and a card reader.
But then again, most people aren't that smart of shoppers when it comes to this stuff. I definitely think a smaller carrier could score some points by comparing what their uncrippled phones can do against VZW's offerings.
Flying ~W~ - 26 Dec 2006 23:16 GMT >Why blame Motorola? Isn't it the "V" company that is causing your problem? >Is that not true of any phone branded by "V"? I assume you are referring to Verizon. They do, in fact limit their phones in ways to make them incompatible with MPT. It says so right on the web page AND the package for MPT.
That's an issue with the branding of the phone and can be rectified by hacking the phone's codeplug.
The V3c Razr is a superior phone considering the junk that's on the street these days. Can't blame the manufacturer for the software that the vendor puts in the phone......
You can however make modifications to make it do what you want.....
~W~ ====================== Fly high, fly straight, and fly FAST!!!
Ðave - 26 Dec 2006 12:18 GMT If your Very Big Carrier likes Yellow and "short races" you just need to update the MPT software (for free) to the latest version. As of last week version 4.3.6 is available through the update service.
| I'm new to this stuff, and frankly I don't care much about any of it. | A phone is a phone. But let me tell you... when you spend (too much) [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] | insanity than I care to get involved in. Thats the last phone I *ever* | buy from Motorola. Sir Harden Thicke - 26 Dec 2006 13:04 GMT > I'm new to this stuff, and frankly I don't care much about any of it. > A phone is a phone. But let me tell you... when you spend (too much) > money on a stupid phone for someone as a gift, and that phone has a > camera on it, AND it has a USB connector, it kinda makes sense that you > could plug that damn thing in, and download your pictures. HELL NO, > YOU CANT. Download BitPim for free.Download the BVRP USB drivers for free.
 Signature Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker, June 2004
COOSN-266-06-25794
ShutterMan - 26 Dec 2006 18:06 GMT Indeed. The open source community is the last saving grace often times. It seems that the OS community realize just how silly this whole thing is to begin with. I most definitely applaud their efforts.
> > I'm new to this stuff, and frankly I don't care much about any of it. > > A phone is a phone. But let me tell you... when you spend (too much) [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > COOSN-266-06-25794 cellular@motorola.net - 26 Dec 2006 18:06 GMT >I'm new to this stuff, and frankly I don't care much about any of it. >A phone is a phone. But let me tell you... when you spend (too much) [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >IMAGINE buying a digital camera or MP3 player __AND THEN__ having to >turn around and buy software to use it. Don't blame Motorola, you entered into a contract with a service provider known for limiting free actions on their supplied handsets. If you wanted to have more functionality, than just "A phone is a phone" then you should have checked out your requirements before entering into a V contract.
Digital cameras and MP3 players require PC/Apple connectivity, hence software is included in the purchase price mainly a driver to allow the computer and device to connect. If you want more image/sound manipulation than the often included software allows then you have to fork out for it. If you want "free" included software with a mobile then buy a Nokia and see how shite their software is. You've paid for the software in the phone price, the MP3 player price etc. *but* you can't buy the item without in most cases *and* when you can, there's little price reduction.
Use the V3C for calls and a camera for picture then you can ignor MPT altogether and won't incur any additional service charges.
Randall Ainsworth - 26 Dec 2006 21:32 GMT It's not Motorola's fault that Verizon cripples their phones.
SMS - 27 Dec 2006 17:42 GMT > WHY? Because a "V"ery big carrier decided "gee, Thats a stupid thing > to do with a camera phone. Let's force them to send their pictures > across our network instead! Let's force them to BUY our ring tones... > Lets force them to BUY our java games or whatever the hell." Don't blame Motorola for the crap Verizon pulls. Actually do blame them, since they should tell the carriers to shove it when the carriers come to them with requests to de-feature the handsets. It hurts Motorola's reputation to de-feature phones.
> I DO NOT subscribe to getting services illegally, like internet and > whatnot, but when you cant plug a cable into your own phone to get your > own pictures, there's something seriously wrong. I'm obviously pretty > upset by all this - that something so simple turns out to be more > insanity than I care to get involved in. Thats the last phone I *ever* > buy from Motorola. I don't think that this type of thing is limited to Motorola. It's really Verizon's fault. I was upset too, then I corrected the problem and moved on. It takes only a few minutes to correct the problem, though of course only a fraction of a percent of users will know how to do the hacking. At least the Motorola handsets are popular enough that there are people willing to figure out the hacking, and post it for free.
The problem where I live is that if you want excellent coverage, you're forced to use Verizon. Cingular, Sprint, and T-Mobile have significantly poorer coverage, so you grin and bear it with Verizon, and hack the handsets. I found it amusing last week, to be roaming, with my Verizon/Motorola V325, onto Cingular's network out in the Florida Everglades. If I had had Cingular service, I couldn't have used Cingular's network, as the only network out there is AMPS, and Cingular sells no AMPS capable phones anymore. Of course I was paying 69¢ per minute for the privilege of roaming.
Whenever I see the Consumer Reports survey, in one sense I'm glad that I have the carrier that has the best coverage across the U.S., but I know that Verizon sees their significantly better network as an invitation to continue pulling stuff like the handset de-featuring.
I'd love to see an ad campaign by carriers that don't cripple the handsets, that attacked Verizon for doing so. It could be two Razrs side by side, with MPT up on the screen, and two users each trying to transfer a photo to their computer.
It would be nice if MPT were included with the phones, but that means that the carrier would be expected to support the application, and no way that any carrier would want to support a piece of crap like MPT. It decides whether to connect to your phone based on lunar tides, it's the most unstable modern application that I've seen.
dold@90.usenet.us.com - 27 Dec 2006 21:47 GMT > Don't blame Motorola for the crap Verizon pulls. Actually do blame them, > since they should tell the carriers to shove it when the carriers come > to them with requests to de-feature the handsets. It hurts Motorola's > reputation to de-feature phones. There is a minuscule percentage of the populace that realizes that this harm is being done to Motorola's reputation. I think that means that there is no perceptible harm to Motorola's reputation. Verizon customers probably accept the limitation and think no more of it.
> of course only a fraction of a percent of users will know how to do the > hacking. I use Bluetooth to connect to my Motorola, and don't have the USB cable required to do any hacking. It bugs me that I have half a dozen devices that all come with the standard min-USB cable in the box, but the one device that uses a goofy cable doesn't come with a cable in the box.
> It would be nice if MPT were included with the phones, but that means > that the carrier would be expected to support the application, and no > way that any carrier would want to support a piece of crap like MPT. It > decides whether to connect to your phone based on lunar tides, it's the > most unstable modern application that I've seen. MPT is a gigantic multi-media extravaganza. This thread reminded me that I haven't done a sync in a while, and there was a photo that I hadn't downloaded yet. I fired up MPT, it connected with no problem, and I did the synchronization. Then I used the Multi-Media studio to copy the one photo, which I normally would have done with OBEX, the default Bluetooth feature. OBEX presents me with something roughly resembling a single Windows folder. I locate my photo, open a Windows folder where I want the photo on my hard drive, and drag it over there. MPT wants to open a multi-pane adventure, complete with editing tools. Given that i can't start MPT without a phone attached, I am unlikely to fall in love with it as a graphic editing environment.
I don't know where it started, or how it became the only Motorola offering. It certainly is poorly written.
 Signature --- Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5
|
|
|