Database Info

My first impression... coming from an sprint HTC EVO

A few first impressions.. coming from a Sprint Evo 4g.. for others in the same position considering switching over.
First.. the amoled screen is not too impressive.. at least compared to the evo's screen.. YES the contrast is a little better but the pixel density is not even close to as good.. if your holding the phone any closer than 8 or so inches from your eyes.. which I do normally.. you can definitely see pixels .. and it's kinda ridiculous only because all the online reviews and forums touting the display as being just about the best out there.
Aside from the display the phone OWNS the EVO.. at least in my opinion. I'm in Eugene Oregon and Sprints WImax/4g is available here but is not quick.. my speedtest scores with the evo were never above 4mbps and usually under 2mbps... with the Galaxy 4g my speedtest scores are almost never under 4mbps.. and sitting in my home I usually range from at least 5mpbs or better.. my fastest score was 12mbps.. THATS INSANE. One thing I never hear discussed in reviews is Latency/Ping ... I think this adds to the snappyness of cruising the internet or other applications that use an internet connection on a phone... and the TMOBILE Kicks every other carrier's 4g butts in this regard.. the ping/latency ranges between 60-100 on my galaxy 4g vs. 200 or higher on the evo/Sprints 4g. THe ping on Tmobiles 4g is just about the same as my Comcast cable .. that's awesome.
The phone iteslf hardware wise at this point seems to have better battery life and seems to be faster in general opening programs and multitasking than on my Evo.. and I even had custom firmware focused on speed and battery life to improve this.
Hopefully after owning the phone for the 14 days I still feel the same. One thing Sprint has at least in my area is damn good coverage.... My only issue with it was I really thought the 4g was disappointing and the phone was a bit bulky and battery life was usually pretty bad.

haha... my thoughts exacly. well put!

OG Galaxy s2 or Skyrocket?

Should I return my OG galaxy s2 that I just got about a week ago for the skyrocket? I heard the OG Galaxys2 is still faster because3 of the Exynos processor. Need some advice on which phone is faster/better.

I think there is already like 4 other threads about this haha. I think it really boils down to whether you have LTE in your area or not. I have LTE where I live and made the switch, LTE is so fast that it was well worth the switch. The Exynos vs Snapdragon debate is a little played out and doesn't make as big of a difference in the phone as many are making it out to be, my Skyrocket is just as fast in real life day to day usage. Should we assume you are thinking of returning your OG GSII before your 30 day window of opportunity? Are you expecting to get LTE soon?

jbsg02 said:
I think there is already like 4 other threads about this haha. I think it really boils down to whether you have LTE in your area or not. I have LTE where I live and made the switch, LTE is so fast that it was well worth the switch. The Exynos vs Snapdragon debate is a little played out and doesn't make as big of a difference in the phone as many are making it out to be, my Skyrocket is just as fast in real life day to day usage. Should we assume you are thinking of returning your OG GSII before your 30 day window of opportunity? Are you expecting to get LTE soon?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im within the 30 days yes. I live in Toledo, Oh so I have no clue when we would get LTE coverage in my area.

Without LTE I would have stuck with my original GSII, I like the 4.3" screen a little better

Everyone will say that it depends on the person and their needs/wants. But then again, you are posting in Skyrocket forum...
I returned my $200 SGS2 and walked out with 2 Skyrockets for $300. One for me and the wife. If there wasnt that deal, I would probably stick with the SGS2. Both almost the same size, might as well get a bigger screen.
As for speed, they're both still fast. A hairline in bench marks didnt bother me. Resolutions still decent- some people exagerate about its low quality. Heck, I'm a graphic designer and photographer, I'm good with the resolution. Phone is usually a foot away from my face anyhow. Also, I'm not really much a gamer, but I do love my tower defense games (Sentinel 3 is awesome with a bigger screen).
My opinion, SGS2 has better screen quality, better 3D graphics, (insanely better? no. but technically better). Skyrocket has weird issue with their screens in dim lighting with neutral grays (doesnt bother me, I not at dim or looking at neutral grays). Some encounter problems, some look for it. Would I go back to SGS2 if it was the same price? No.
Why Skyrocket (for me): Bigger screen, faster internet speed. Use internet more than anything, play games where a bigger screen would be nicer.

If I had the opportunity, I would probably get the Skyrocket. The larger screen is magnificent. While the exynos variant gets better development support, the real world differences between the two are likely negligible. Most people I've seen say that there isn't much difference, others say they notice. Initially, I made the decision to keep my original GS2. A short time after my 30 day window passed, I kind of regretted it. Either one will be an excellent choice. I just want the larger screen. I may buy it outright just for the heck of it.

I had the S2 and exchanged it for the SR being as I was in my 30 return window.
I like the phone much better. The extra screen size for me is a plus, I don't notice the pixelation other people talk about.
For what I do with the phone I don't notice the difference in processors. I really think a lot of people put too much stock in the benchmarks just to say their phone is faster that your's. Faster benchmarks mean nothing to 90+% of phone users being as most people never probably use a fraction of the processor speed anyway.
My only issue is that although I live in an LTE area, I am on the fringe of the LTE coverage and often it will hover on lower bars of reception on LTE where as HSPA would give me full bars. You would think I would get a bit better reception with LTE being as it is a lower freq with better building penetration.
I really wish there was a way to turn off the LTE radio and stick with HSPA if I wanted to. When I am in a deep LTE coverage area it is fine, but where I live at I would prefer to keep it on HSPA to maintain a better signal and battery life. I am not into rooting, and I am sure when the ability to turn off LTE comes out it will probably be for custom ROMs.
I know it is a contridiction to want an LTE device and want to run it on HSPA, but until they convert a few more towers in my fringe area, HSPA is fine. Also at home I am always on my WiFi.
One thing I did notice, which is wierd. SMS and MMS send much faster on LTE than on HSPA. I can actually notice how much faster it is.
But I did want to be a bit more future proof and have the latest phone. Of course I can't remember keeping a phone over a year anyway. I am sure there will be a Galaxy S 3 out by the time LTE starts getting built out a bit more.

I'd do the exchange you get a bigger screen and more CPU power. I'm not in an lte area and haven't noticed any difference still get great speeds.. I did the exchange your talking about

Thanks for all the help. I think im gonna keep the OG galaxy2 just because I have no idea when I will have LTE

much more dev support on og sgsII

I had the original Galaxy S2 but took it back because of some dead pixels and Mini USB port was very loose and was causing disconnect with the slightest movement. I loved the original Galaxy S2 my only complaints about it would be the battery life, loose mini USB connection (bad design I feel) and it was too thin for me. I don’t have the biggest hands in the world but the phone was not comfortable to me in the hands.
I did see all the comments about how the skyrocket would not be beneficial unless you were in a LTE network and also since the proc in the GS2 seems to be outperforming the proc in the skyrocket it didn’t make since to purchase it in addition to that it had a worse battery life.
I don’t do a lot of gaming so the proc was not a huge concern to me and even though LTE is not available in my area they explained it still connected faster on the networks. I tested the both phones at att and at my house. The GS2 connected on average at a 1.2 Mbps while the skyrocket on average was 3.2 Mbps. It was nearly doubled. So even though you may not have LTE in your area you will still see some benefits with LTE technology. However my battery life was even worse on the skyrocket. This is because I am downloading files via torrent on both phones when testing them.
I rooted my phone removed all the crap At&t loaded and also removed some auto starts up applications. Now my phone works very well. Out of box I though it was slow compared the GS2. Now it seems to be working fine and performance wise I cannot tell the difference.
Quadrant scores were very close to the same. Out of box my score on the GS2 was on average 2900 with the sky rocket it was 2500. After freeing up some memory and disabling LTE by connecting to wifi vs LTE to upload my info my scores were anywhere from 34426 to 3633!
Those of you with Skyrocket phones I am curious to know what your quadrent scores are. Here is how I improved my scores and tested between none LTE and LTE connection. I downloaded root uninstaller and removed all the crap Att installed and then downloaded start up manager and ran only a few apps. After a clean reboot I then connected to wifi opended task manager and exited all programs and cleared ram before each test. Ran quadrent 5 times and wrote down my scores (3573, 3429, 3633, 3459, 3426) on wifi. Disconnected wifi and let LTE connect. Cleared ram and cleared programs again then ran the tests on LTE my scores were (3075,2045, 2312, 3104, 2287).
My question to all the developers is can LTE be taking up a lot of the proc speed during benchmark test and this is why people are claiming the SG2 is outperforming the proc in the skyrocket? Also can anyone develop a toggle to turn off LTE? I think this will free up the unnecessary stress on the proc for those who don’t have LTE networks in their area and also increase battery life.
So fare I am happy with the Skyrocket. What I liked is the not so thin rounded back that feels a lot better in the hands while holding in landscape mode. Performance wise I did not notice any difference between the two phones (after tweaking). Battery life the GS2 was better. Connection speed on the skyrocket was nearly doubled even though LTE not available in my area. The screen was noticeably bigger at a first glance compared to the GS2. The mini usb connection is a lot more secure and is not wobbly on the skyrocket, even the displays at the store had a wobbly loose connection. Viewing angle was better on the Skyrocket and it did not have the blueish tint when viewing at a angle like the GS2 did. I go through At&t and the GS2 did not come with a headset, the skyrocket came with a headset as well as a smaller power adapter similar to the square iphone power adapter. I hope this helps those of you trying to decide if you want to buy the GS2 or the Skyrocket. Let me know if you have any questions.

Hello to all.
New Android user here, coming from Iphone 3GS. Finally was eligible for AT&T upgrade, and decided to go Android. Took advantage of the $99 Target deal for the Galaxy S2. I wanted to the skyrocket, but they didn't have it in the store yet. Told me to get the GS2 for now, learn Android in the meantime, and later on swap out for Skyrocket when available. I was afraid of losing my grandfathered unlimited data plan, so didn't want to order online. AT&T was too pricey for the Skyrocket ($249)
So, have the GS2 for now and trying to flatten the Android learning curve. But as I'm in my 30 day window, I am lurking here finding out how you guys like the Skyrocket.
My eyesight isn't getting any better (late 50's) so the bigger the screen the better, but don't want to be trying to put a tablet in my pocket.
Was a jailbreaker on the iphone, and consider myself an old hacker in pc world, so probably will be getting into rooting, and rom's eventually. For now just trying to learn Android without taking on too much at once. I hope the Skyrocket development will pick up like I see for the GS2. No hurry for now!
Don't have LTE in my area yet. But it seems like the Skyrocket does better on HSPA than the GS2. Little nervous reading that AT&T doesn't seem to honor the "unlimited" plans for LTE. And no way to turn it off on the Skyrocket. Maybe this will be possible in future ROMs?
After reading all your informative replies, I believe I am still leaning to swapping out the GS2 for the Skyrocket.
Nice to see that these forums are so active with so many helpful folks!
Nice to be here!!

Another one of these threads....
SGS2 is outdated now. Especially since LTE will be rolling out all over the place next year. My phone is OC'ed to 1.83mhz and I can tell you it is noticeably faster than my old s2. This phone is most likely to get ICS before any other at&t phone also. Out with the old, in with the new.
Skyrocket is superior
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using xda premium

Global Swag said:
Another one of these threads....
SGS2 is outdated now. Especially since LTE will be rolling out all over the place next year. My phone is OC'ed to 1.83mhz and I can tell you it is noticeably faster than my old s2. This phone is most likely to get ICS before any other at&t phone also. Out with the old, in with the new.
Skyrocket is superior
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ogs2 already has ICS.

Yes a buggy unofficial version

Global Swag said:
Yes a buggy unofficial version
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is true..
I will be keeping my SR... I had them side by side.. and the SR is a superior phone ... all my issues are solved...
I take back all my nasty comments!

[Q] Infuse vs SGS2

First, I'd like to point out that I'm aware there are many threads here about this here at XDA alone, but this isn't a typical "phone vs phone" thread, so don't attack me about it being everywhere. I've seen a lot of people do this, but one thing that a lot of people don't ask about (that bothers me because these ARE phones...) is signal strength.
I've owned an Atrix 2 before, but it seemed to have a weak antenna and had relatively bad signal. Now, in my area, I don't really get good signal, BUT I recently flashed the newest Infuse modem to my Infuse and noticed that I had better signal (not good, but better). Thing is, it's making me wonder if my Infuse and Atrix 2 just had a weak antenna or a "weak" modem firmware for lack of a better term. In my room, previously, I could barely use up any data (like go on the market to download apps and use Facebook) and now I have almost no issues doing that whenever I want. CRAZY. One day, my phone's just sitting here racking up a relatively high bill for a phone when all it does for the most part is sit there on my night stand and now I can actually USE it and don't have problems while talking to others on the phone. In fact, I was close to leaving AT&T because of how bad things were, but after flashing this new modem, I'm honestly having second thoughts. You may be thinking, "Why not just buy an amplifier/repeater/micro cell?" Yeah, thing is, I kinda have bad signal almost everywhere I go, both with Atrix 2 AND Infuse - that is, I HAD bad signal with the Infuse until I flashed this new modem. I'd like to get more signal EVERYWHERE I go, not just at home.
On another note, I watched some Infuse vs SGS2 vids on YouTube and noticed that on each one (from different people), the SGS2 has roughly 2-3 bars more than the Infuse. Yes, bars can lie, but given that the SGS2 is a newer phone, you'd figure it'd have newer hardware, including a new antenna which generally means better signal strength.
Tl;dr: Does SGS2 really get better signal or should I just stick with my Infuse? I don't ask this in neither the SGS2 forums nor the Infuse forums because I figured that chances were, I'd get biased answers.
Little recap: I do NOT care about all their specs or anything. I just want to know which one would have better signal strength by default. Even then, I'd root the SGS2 and put in a "better" modem anyway and make that even better, but yeah...
Thanks!

There is no general answer to that question.
You will have to take both phones somewhere, try each one with your sim card and compare reception.

If you're using both 2G and 3G networks the S2 has a small advantage. It uses 850/900/1900/2100 of HSDPA compared to the Infuse's 850/1900/2100. So when you're in an area with only 900 HSDPA frequency you'll have signal if you have the S2 while no coverage if you have the Infuse. If you're always on 2G to save battery and bills then they are just the same, both works on gsm frequencies 850/900/1800/1900. Both have plastic builds so you won't have Signal issues similar to what you'll experience with other phones with metal parts interfering with the Antennae.
Here's a link from gsmarena so you can see for yourself the difference in signal reception. You can also check out their dedicated reviews to see if the reception is good, bad, or whatever. You'll also see the call quality if you're also interested in that.
http://www.gsmarena.com/compare.php3?idPhone1=3705&idPhone2=3621
I hope this helps!

That makes sense. That's the kind of reply I was looking for. Thanks!

FaintPuppet said:
That makes sense. That's the kind of reply I was looking for. Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Glad to be of help! I hope you don't get dissapointed with your purchase BTW, thanks for the "thanks"!! That was actually my first

I need help understanding how AT&T's HSPA+/3g towers work

K...
Well I had an Infuse (HSPA+) and as a lot of people have said, it has a weak antenna and I just sold it. I have a Nokia phone from T-Mobile (dumb phone; unlocked) and it pulls in such great signal. It's a 3g phone(?) though, but we all want/have 4g phones nowadays, right? (I know HSPA+ isn't real 4g, but I my point still stands) The Nokia was a Nokia N... something (can't remember... too lazy to look. ) and in some spots of my house, it easily pulls in five bars consistently and usually constantly stays on 3g while my Infuse was almost always on EDGE and even in some cases, GPRS. That's how bad it was. I'd get lucky to get three bars anywhere in my house with the Infuse, but with the Nokia, I can easily pull 3-5 bars. I know bars don't always mean everything, but with this phone, texts DO go through all the time (and quickly) and call quality is almost always perfect whereas the Infuse constantly dropped signal. The Nokia's kind of a 3g phone (I say that and there was a question mark early on in this post), but occasionally gets "3.5g" (which is most likely HSPA+). Normal 3g is HSUPA while enhanced (HSPA+) 3g is HSDPA. My question is can HSPA+ phones connect to AT&T's HSUPA towers? Or are the 3g towers all one tower? This sounds so basic even to me, but I'm just checking because I'm supposed to be getting a Galaxy S2 soon and I'm hoping its signal is almost (if not, the same) as good as the Nokia phone I'm using. And will I know if it's on HSUPA? The Nokia was usually on 3g, but occasionally said 3.5g and that must mean I don't have a lot of HSPA+ coverage in my area, right? AT&T's maps SAY I'm supposed to have a lot of HSPA+ coverage here though. I trust that the Galaxy S2 will have stronger signal strength?
Tl;dr: If I were to get a SGS2 or even a LG Thrill or Nitro (Definitely not getting them... they're just examples. No one has ever really said these LG phones have weak antennas along with the SGS2 save for wifi, but I don't really care about that.), would they get good HSPA+ signal like how the Nokia N- something gets good 3g signal or what? Not sure if this makes any sense still...
Other unimportant crap and thoughts to self: I used to think AT&T had horrible coverage (because I'd get lucky to get a decent signal with the Infuse), but after using this Nokia, it's the only reason I've convinced myself to get a different phone instead of switching to Verizon, which I KNOW is reliable. I was very impressed with the signal I was getting in the Nokia phone and was quick to decide to sell the Infuse and use the nokia as a temp until I get a SGS2. I saw some SGS2 vs Infuse vids and the SGS2 always had better signal. A lot of people have also said the Infuse had a weak antenna and the SGS2 was only weak on wifi, which I really don't care about at all. Definitely can't wait to get the SGS2 though.

Why is the S II superior to the Skyrocket? (Help a noob decide)

I've heard the regular S 2 with the smaller screen has a better processor and will run much better. But I've used my GF's Epic 4g Touch so much that I'm spoiled on having a big screen and a good processor (I believe that has the original samsung processor). The skyrocket has the 4.5 but snapdragon and the original has 4.27 screen and enoxys processor.
What would be better for gaming (up to PS1 and N64), and general web browsing without lag? Does the stock ICS update on the Skyrocket make it all laggy as I see from google searches? I want to keep either phone stock until they receive JB in November from Samsung.
I know the 4.27 screen isn't a huge difference but when my GF got the Epic 4g Touch I was sold on keyboard-less phones. I think its about 5% difference overall in screen size.
I have to pick either one of these phones to used with Straight Talk. Since you can't get 4G LTE (nor would I have much data to work with regardless) one of the main benefits of the Skyrocket is nullified. If I root and OC the Skyrocket to 1.7ghz would any lag be removed? Thanks for the help, its my first smartphone.

Although I'm a Skyrocket vet myself, this is in the completely wrong forum. You'll get much more help in the actual SR forum.
Stock ICS on my S3

Agreed. Moving to the Skyrocket section out of the ATT SGS3 section. Must have zigged, when you should have zagged.

If Straight Talk isn't going to LTE anytime soon (and I honestly don't know if they are), just get the S2. It'll probably be cheaper because it doesn't have LTE.

If anything, when I upgraded to ICS, my SR became faster, and it's only been better w/ custom roms.
The biggest advantages of the SR over the S2 is LTE, larger screen (though lower pixel density), and maybe larger battery (though larger screen might negate this advantage). If you're going to use Straight Talk, I would consider the T-Mo variant of the S2 as well. It's exactly the same as the SR, but has support for T-Mo's 42 Mbps HSPA+. You can probably use T-Mo's network on the SR, but it might take more work than you're willing to put in.
I've owned both the S2 and SR: the smaller screen was actually a plus for me because of the slight bump in pixel density, and the Exynos processor was indeed very fast (maybe SLIGHTLY faster than the Snapdragon S3). However, in everyday use, the difference is negligible. I went w/ the SR b/c of the faster network speed (which IS noticeable), and especially after debloating and using a custom rom, I have no complaints w/ the speed or battery life of the device.

My bad it was pretty early when I posted this. I actually meant to put this thread in the regular AT&T GS2 forum and made a similar thread so owners of each could tell me which one was better for what reason. I think there's now 2 threads about it here. I'm probably going with the Skyrocket anyway.
After it gets JB I will want to put a custom rom on it but I am a fan of Touchwiz. The pull down toggles are really awesome.