03-18-2014 11:39 AM
Dear BB smartphone antenna developers,
I want to point to the fact that the lowest SAR (specific absorption rate) values for mobile phones have been reached by Samsung over approximately the last 6 years. Samsung Galaxy models have extremly low values of about < 0.4 W/kg. A detailed list of phone models and SAR values can be found on the German website http://handywerte.de/index.php.
Samsung Galaxy phones show a very good voice quality despite the fact that they "irradiate less". Hence, I wonder why Blackberry does not aim at low SAR values, either? There is a great selling potential for Blackberry as there are many customers who chose a phone with regard to the SAR value - and nowadays chose Samsung.
Despite the fact that there is no scientific study that indicates a harmful effect of cell phone radiation on human health, Blackberry could sell much more phones with lower SAR values - threre are still many people out there paying attention to the SAR value.
With kind regards
Solved! Go to Solution.
03-20-2014 08:00 AM
To claim that lower SAR values would equate higher sales is false, in my opinion.
I've been involved with smartphones for years and have spoken with many people about them and not once in that time has anyone brought up SAR values. Whether it's related to health or to performance of the phone, the subject has never been brought up.
I appreciate you sharing your opinion but I have to disagree with you on it. There are so many other variables that would affect sales before SAR values. Cheers.
03-20-2014 01:47 PM
you are right, of course, that low SAR values are not the only reason to buy a phone, and, thus, do not automatically equate higher sales rates.
Whether you have found people who are interested in SAR values or not, depends on the target audiance you are talking to: For instance, if you support business customers who have to ensure security and stabilitiy in the communication systems of their company, then the phantastic characteristics of blackberry phones and services (for which I love blackberry, by the way) is the main focus.
However, I am an electrical engineer and have worked in the field of electromagnetic compatibility (EMC). When working with EMC, after some time I had to face a citizen's initiative regarding cell phone radiation. I was surprised and realized that there actually are people who think about a possibly harmful effect of cell phone radiation on human health.
As I said, I am an electrical engineer, and there is till today NO scientific proof for any harmful effect of cell phone radiation. But let us look on it from a BB economic selling point of view: There are different reasons for people to buy a cell phone: a good OS, brilliant display, good camera, long lasting battery, comfortable keyboard, stylish body, big memory, brilliant loudspeakers, etc. ... If there are people out there, who wish a low SAR, then let me tell you that there is NOTHING that can be easier achieved than a lower SAR!
For instance, to improve the camera significantly, you will have to use better lenses, a better sensor and maybe the software will have to be adjusted for a better image signal processing (noise suppression). This means significant effort for BlackBerry. As an EMC engineer I can tell you that the effort for changing the SAR is negligible - it requires only slight changes in the antenna design. So, if the effort is practically zero, why not do it?
What is my motivation? I love BlackBerry devices and just want BB to be successful again. It is sad to see that blackberry had so much problems in the past. E.g. I myself think that opening the door for Android in the OS 10 is absolutely necessary and will help to get back customers.
Hence, my post about the SAR was just to suggest how BlackBerry can even better fulfill some specific customer wishes. If the effort in changing the antenna design is practically zero, if there are practically no costs for the changes, and the voice quality can still be excellent (as shown by Samsung's Galaxy devices), then why not reduce the SAR?