Breaking news: real-life, comparative HTC Diamond 2 shots!

While at Microsoft’s stand at MWC the just-announced Diamond 2 was behind glass and couldn’t be used, at HTC’s booth anyone could give them a test ride. In the following, I post my first thoughts of the device.

First and foremost, I just don’t like it. It’s just too thick and has an outdated hardware. In the era of 1 GHz CPUs (where the faster clock also means FAR better performance – see my real-world benchmarks of the 1GHz Toshi TG01 HERE), I find it just lame to announce a device with a 528 MHz, oldish, not very capable CPU.

As I’ve mentioned several times, the lack of competition has definitely made HTC lazy and refusing to invent revolutionary stuff. If HTC was just one manufacturer of the many, this wouldn’t be a problem. But, given that HTC is the leading one and Windows Mobile’s future largely depends on the generic acceptance of HTC’s models, not inventing any more is a serious mistake. In addition, they don’t seem to even fix bugs and errors plaguing a lot (if not all) their devices; see for example the infamous touchscreen CPU usage bug causing major problems on all non-Xscale platforms.

I consider their latest-and-greatest model, the Diamond 2, equally uninteresting and unimaginative. I, who have an iPhone 3G, may get the Nokia N97 (which turned out to be much better in real life – I’ve played with it quite a bit at MWC – than I previously thought) and will surely get the Toshi TG01 if it’s not as bug-ridden as Toshi’s earlier QWERTY sliders, the G900/G910, the Diamond 2 is a huge, thick and slow device that simply doesn’t have anything I would happily pay for.

Let’s see some (also comparative – with the BlackBerry 8800 and the iPhone 3G) pictures I’ve taken at MWC. As you can see, the Diamond 2 is pretty large and is much thicker than the iPhone. If it was a power device with the latest and greatest technology, I could easily forget this. But for a phone with a pretty mediocre CPU, there is just no excuse.







The device reported on low memory after a while…:




Interestingly, the list of running programs didn’t have any seemingly offending entry (and the total program memory was still over 35 Mbytes – of the 288 free):

 

Wow, M ... there goes any real consideration of the Diamond for me.

I've long been aware of the 528MHz thing ... I was sorta holding onto the hope that real performance would be fortified by an awesomely specialized chipset. But the thing seemingly can hardly endure being poked at for half a day without presenting typical WM complaints ("You need to soft-reset before I crash")?

I suppose this might still be acceptable if this is intended to compete against the low- and mid-spec devices ... or more concisely: it's not expensive. Based on your report, I also wouldn't consider buying one - unless it was somewhere around the $150 price range.

I think you've just managed to succinctly describe exactly why traditional PDAs are now an almost entirely abandoned niche. A little bit of "inventing" would've gone a long way to keeping PDAs shoulder to shoulder with tablets, MIDs, and UMPCs. Alas, I feel a disturbing, unpleasant, almost fearful sensation deep in my gut - I believe that our friend HTC has been a little bit too successful of late and is now retiring towards the same bureaucratic senescence to which other inertial entities like HP, Microsoft, and IBM have also succumbed. Corporate dinosaurs don't innovate. It's the hungry little mammals that are forced to be cunning if they want to prosper.

Ah, there is "one" thing running that's not listed: Windows. I think that disposing of a trivial 35MB is no challenge at all for such a robust multitasking piece of bloat.

 

There's one little thing you two are not taking into consideration here: consumer ignorance.

if 90% of all SPs on the market use a 500mhz chipset, the average consumer, or even most business customers, will accept it and "make do" with it. While they may want more if what they have works, then they're content. (I've met people still using 500mhz desktops every day with no complaints! ignorance and "acceptable performance" (and in many cases price) play a MAJOR role)

Also, as to price, dont forget these phones will be subsidized by a carrier and wont cost nearly the price of an unbranded, unlocked model. After rebates the Touch Pro is $250 right now (whereas unlocked it's around $500-$700)

handhelds are at the same place laptops were some years back, until the last few years you could NOT get a laptop over 3.0ghz unless you sold your first-born and both legs to pay for it (and then it was 3.5ghz...)) Something, perhaps the TG01, will come along and outpace the competition for miles and they will scramble to catch up and put out new devices with the new chipsets. Until then, we might as well accept 500mhz as standard, unless we want to pay a life-long mortgage on it.

EDIT:
btw: what's the estimated release date for the TG01 and with which carrier? I'd swear Ed posted it somewhere but I cant find it int he news section...

 

I think your ending edit-question manages to touch upon the most compelling fact in your argument, Ash.

The device is not marketed by HTC. 99% of us won't got shopping at HTC's site. We'll head off to our local cellular kiosk and see what's there, at pretty much whatever prices they want to charge. The more enlightened will pick their device before they pick their carrier; but it still really boils down to a lot less choice than they'd accept if they knew better. Agreed, the mighty mediocre will appear quite appealing indeed in comparison to the other low-spec trash that's sitting next to it on the shelf. People will pay $300 for it and be happy because they got the "best" device they could see.

I really don't know if I can blame the carriers for abusing the market, or blame the market for being so blissfully ignorant that they're begging for the abuse.

Hey, given this sucker's bulk ... maybe it's just a very SOLID device. Y'know: the sort that can bounce down the stairway or fall out of your moving car and just keep on ticking with nary a scratch?

 

I cant complain about my current phone, the SPH-a900 has been abused (accidentally) a LOT and it keeps on working like a champ. it's big, it's clunky, but it's also VERY solid (it also as a very large screen for a dumbphone, my 2nd favorite feature after "dissable modem NAI" )

I cant tell you how many people I see with either Blackberry Bold(?) or iPhones. These are the "best" avalible and those marketed as the best. I've seen few, if any, Moguls, and NONE of the Touch family...

I'm keeping an eye on the 01 because I expect to be forced to move to another carrier soon, since Sprint has ended their SERO promotion, it's only a matter of time before they tell me I have to change plans, which will cost $70/month if I have a smartphone and $50 if I dont... much as I hate it, I may end up on ATT if their rates beat $70/month for unlimited high-speed Data...

 

Thanks, Ed! If it's GSM, we can all guess it's probably going to be ATT in the USA since T-mo is using a non-standard band for HSDPA. (though the G1 broke that rule, so...)

 

Yeah, I'm still using my ancient Samsung phone ... like the Motorola before it, like the Touch afterwards, like several PDAs, it has suffered innumerable falls and accidents. It's a bit scratched up. The smaller screen on the front/top is smashed (and not worth the cost of replacing). Still works like a charm, and still gets stronger, better, clearer signal than the others did when they worked. Sure looks ugly, though.

(Yes, it's even outlasted a RhinoSkin-covered iPAQ. And it doesn't even have a screen-protector.)

I've handled iPhones and Berries before, and - I could be wrong - but I was immediately struck by the impression that none of them would survive the vigourous sorts of abuse that my devices tend to be exposed to.

 

Two things that come to mind:

1. I think the thickness comparison is a bit deceptive. The 3G iPhone has a tapered back, but if you look closely and them back-to-back in the photo, at the thickest point, the iPhone looks basically the same.

2. Someone mentioned that 'enlightened' people would pick their device first. A nice thought, but in reality the carrier's performance usually informs what devices one can reasonably consider. Everything has a trade-off, but carrier coverage, customer service, transmission technology, etc. all affect one's choices.

 

Aha, about the "enlightened people" ... what I meant is that some people do a little research on all the devices that appeal to them, then, after picking the one they want, they simply choose from a short list of those carriers who happen to offer it.

Yes, this is what iPhone marketing was all about, at least initially. If you wanted the device you had to sign on with AT&T - on their terms, of course - and that was your *only* option. This sort of restriction still occurs, partly because each carrier works off only one of several kinds of network infrastructure, but also in great part because they pick which devices you'll be "allowed" to use, and at what prices.

Everything is a tradeoff - you said it yourself, you know the facts. Most people - the so-called "normobs" see iPhone ads, they see pretty toys on the store shelves, they see an attractive price tag and believe that - so long as they're suspicious enough to avoid "hidden" costs and contractual traps - the little plaques give them all the information they need to choose the "very best" most kickass device that's available. It's truly sad that most of them completely believe what they see while hardly taking the effort to even see what they can see by just looking around the corner, especially when a "smart" sales vulture charismatically confides that - perhaps after some considerable personal effort on your behalf - a money-saving "special deal" or "exception" can be made. Nobody ever said corporations and salespeople have to play fair, so I wonder why so many people always assume it as fact after seeing a TV commercial or hearing just a few soothing words from a smiling face?

Has this happened to me? Nope. (Just in case you hadn't noticed, I'm a bit of a fiercely independent cynic who doesn't believe anything until it's confirmed elsewhere.) I'm not particularly concerned about different payg options. But if I was picking a device - and a contract - and monthly bills - intended to serve me for a year or three then I think it's at least worth the effort to visit the stores and websites of several carriers. A few hours out of one afternoon -vs- possibly hundreds of dollars and incalculable frustration. Maybe I'd find they're all about equal; but at least I wouldn't get ripped off.

About the i3G thickness ... don't forget that the device packs immensely more powerful hardware than "equally" bulky the HTC product it's being measured up against. I'm not an iPhone proponent by any measure, but I think I'll have to agree with M about this particular HTC being a bit of sour lemon.