On Tue, 05 Dec 2006 00:44:55 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote in <45753185$0$82594$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:

>Dave wrote:
>> Yes, but even $1 per phone adds up. Now you know why they did it. Just
>> donb't buy a Motorola phone.
>
>They didn't save $1 per phone, he made that number up, as well as
>admitting that he has no idea how much they saved, if anything.

That's actually based on experience in electronic manufacturing.

>In reality, Motorola chose to ship a charger with a smaller physical
>size. Most people charge their phones overnight, and the 375mA rate of
>charge is fine, and lengthens battery life. With cellular, people like
>small, even when there are trade-offs.

In fact quite a few people have been unhappy about the lackluster
performance of Motorola chargers. The difference in size is too small
to matter (and could easily be reduced to zero), and the low charging
rate actually serves to decrease battery life, especially through
insufficient/partial charging.

>Not buying a Motorola phone may be acceptable for GSM, but for CDMA,
>there are some very good reasons to select Motorola over other brands.

In fact Motorola makes some very good and very successful CDMA phones;
e.g., V325i, RAZR V3m, KRZR K1m.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>