Related
I know that WP7 isn't finished yet. But personally WP7 should get, soon a high-end device. Like the HD2 was for WM.
Almost a majority of new phones now have x GB of internal memory, 1 GHZ processor etc.
In my opinion HD7 series, LG, Samsung Omnia 7, they are based on technology which is already out there.
When will we see the a phone for WP7? Which was like the HD2 was for WM?
Never. Microsoft has strict uniformity rules and restrictions that each OEM must follow. All the phones will be almost the same just different screen sizes, cameras, etc.
vetvito said:
Never. Microsoft has strict uniformity rules and restrictions that each OEM must follow. All the phones will be almost the same just different screen sizes, cameras, etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Steve Balmer, thats stupid.
How is that stupid? It means whatever WP7 phone you buy will perform great out of the box. It will run all the WP7 apps/games as well as the next phone. It means you can buy the phone that's right for you without having to pay attention to the, often, small-print telling you if it's running Android 1.6 on a 600MHz chip with hardly any memory or if it's a real powerhouse.
I think he more means a phone that is better than the minimum specs. 1.5ghz cpu etc
ahhh yes because all the current WP just use the minimum specs....not the more recommend ones (whatever those might be, if they even exist) so while yes the current crop use the minimum requirements there shouldn't be nothing major holding OEMs from bumping up the specs a little
If I am even gonna consider af WP7 phone. I want a WP7 phone with a processor faster than 1 ghz and good graphics and a Amoled screen and a camera better than 5 megaxiels.
Euroman28 said:
If I am even gonna consider af WP7 phone. I want a WP7 phone with a processor faster than 1 ghz and good graphics and a Amoled screen and a camera better than 5 megaxiels.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why you want faster processor? It won't give any benefits at the moment. Omnia7 is the best
rcrawford611 said:
ahhh yes because all the current WP just use the minimum specs....not the more recommend ones (whatever those might be, if they even exist) so while yes the current crop use the minimum requirements there shouldn't be nothing major holding OEMs from bumping up the specs a little
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Windows Phone 7 only has support for the Qualcomm QSD8x50 chipset at the moment. That's it. What has caused the confusion here is the slides at Mix10 saying "minimum spec". We can only assume that means WP7 will support faster chipsets in the future - ie. WP7.5 or WP8.
So yes, there is something holding back the OEMs - there is no OS support.
Euroman28 said:
If I am even gonna consider af WP7 phone. I want a WP7 phone with a processor faster than 1 ghz and good graphics and a Amoled screen and a camera better than 5 megaxiels.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why do you want a faster processor? Have you handled a WP7 device? Do you realize it's much faster and smoother than any Android phone on the market? Adding a faster CPU will not make it recognize your taps any quicker - it is already instant.
Microsoft have to add the driver for the soc before a manufacturer can release the phone. That is why all phones currently released have the same mobile cpu.
It has been rumored that the next update will include more drivers for more qualcomm SOCs... I want to see a driver for the Tegra 2.
vetvito said:
Never. Microsoft has strict uniformity rules and restrictions that each OEM must follow. All the phones will be almost the same just different screen sizes, cameras, etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its a minimum spec, not a required one.
barryallott said:
It has been rumored that the next update will include more drivers for more qualcomm SOCs... I want to see a driver for the Tegra 2.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have a feeling they will be sticking with Qualcomm. I'd imagine that more variations in types of SoC make hardware optimization that much more difficult.
Samsung's not going to let that sit on themselves on mid- or longterm. Microsoft will have to let them use the Hummingbird and Orion at some point. Seeing how they have a rather large foothold in the WP7 market, it's a huge risk to force them to continue to unnecessarily use a competitor's components.
You won't see any phones that are head and shoulders above the rest anytime soon. With "NoDo" they have at least support for additional Qualcomm chipsets which probably means they support the QSD8650 for CDMA, MSM8255 and MSM8655 for the Adreno 205 GPU's. If they also added support for a dual core Scorpion, that would be a huge plus for some powerful devices later but I wouldn't get my hopes up too high yet but I can't be too sure.
In terms of Cameras, the sensor has to be at least 5MP, it could be higher like the HTC 7 Mozart which I believe has a 8MP camera.
With internal storage, it has to be at least 8GB but can be higher like the DVP which comes in 8GB and 16GB versions. This in my opinion should be changed to a minimum 16GB but it's probably for cost reasons.
RAM also has a requirement of 256MB which I think should be a minimum 512MB like the Samsung or HTC devices.
Found this very interesting article on gsmarena about an upcoming tablet by Viewsonic... I never thought it was possible but dual booting Windows 7 and Android 2.2+ ? What does this mean for our Gtab? your thoughts?
http://blog.gsmarena.com/viewsonic-unveils-dual-sim-v350-phone-and-dual-boot-viewpad-10pro/
**I hope that our Gtab would live on even after all these radical tablet advances for 2011.
Intel CPU. For Android, it must be compiled for that CPU I assume - but since so many apps are ARM-based it might limit its usefulness.
atom cpu = crap battery life for this type of device. About the same as a netbook, 3.5 hrs or so compared to 10+ hrs of ARM based tegra2 in gtabs. Plus win7 on an atom performance would probably be pretty low. Not worth it.
s14tam said:
atom cpu = crap battery life for this type of device. About the same as a netbook, 3.5 hrs or so compared to 10+ hrs of ARM based tegra2 in gtabs. Plus win7 on an atom performance would probably be pretty low. Not worth it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
this i agree on... kinda funny how, in the article, viewsonic stated that the battery life will "last at least 6 hours"... with day-to-day use that might translate to about 3-4 hours tops just hope that Gtab support by viewsonic (however little it may be) won't be discontinued just cuz they have a new toy to market now...
Inclined to also agree but must say that the atom cpu on my HP2140 netbook running win7 Pro isn't the slowest turtle in the race. Extended battery gives me about 5-6 hrs. Wouldn't expect that life on a tab though.
Recently, I've been doing some testing of Android X86, and their FAQ mentions that some Apps may work, while others, that use native ARM code, won't. I know that that's probably pretty obvious, but it seems like VS should caution potential users about that, or they'll get a bunch of unhappy users when they can't run all Android Alps.
Jim
Nah this isnt a run of the mill Atom. Its the one they made after Moorestown to fight these ARM tabs. Oak trail is an SOC much like Tegra. Its supposed to have super low TDP and pull off ARM like battery life. Since desktop apps tend to be more demanding, this remains to be seen.
I don't think they said it will have full market ability stock anyways so people can't really complain if it can't run all apps.
Also, doubt any x86 proc can match an ARM chip in battery even if it is a SOC. Viewsonics page even seems to confirm this as it says it is rated for 4hrs.
At work, we're starting to talk with Microsoft about ARM versions of Windows. I've tossed my name into the hat as a developer. I suspect I won't be able to use my G-Tablet but will forced to get some other Windows ARM device.
So far Microsoft is keeping things fairly quiet on the ARM front. I expect to find out more in the next several months.
Sent from my G-Tablet running Vega-Nb5.1
Unlike the first Viewpad 10 you don't have to reboot to switch between Android and Windows. Here's a video:
http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/14/viewsonic-viewpad-10pro-hands-on/
I thought one of the main disadvantages of WP7 has been inferior hardware.
For the original release Microsoft only supported the old snapdragon CPU with 1Ghz and Adreno 200.
Now for Mango, they did obviously update their support
for 8X55 and 7X30.
None of those are actually dualcore SoC's.
How are they going to keep up with Android if they continue offering inferior hardware specs? Or did I miss something?
I wish they do relase one which does. but they dont need dual core for the os so why burden the battery
"inferior hardware"
wow really?
dude, 1ghz, on a phone, thats everything else but inferior
it may be the truth that andoid is goin to need dual cores to give users a good looking and fluid experience, but windows phone is not.
no matter what handset you get, its working faaaast. no lags, no hickups, almost no loading times (and with mango its getting better)
so why would windows phone need it ?
However I would really like to have dual core phone,jut like to think that I have one of the fastest phones. But its true windows os is so smooth it wont make a perfermonce differnece, only thing that can help is using NAND memory instead of SD. Howver I want a better GPU so we can play faster games with good FPS and better quality, not saying that the quality is poor atm its great but it can always improve.
webwalk® said:
"inferior hardware"
wow really?
dude, 1ghz, on a phone, thats everything else but inferior
it may be the truth that andoid is goin to need dual cores to give users a good looking and fluid experience, but windows phone is not.
no matter what handset you get, its working faaaast. no lags, no hickups, almost no loading times (and with mango its getting better)
so why would windows phone need it ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you wholeheartedly, but the problem is it's not about "why would WP need it".
The average consumer, who is used to buying PCs based on their specs, will look at an Android phone and a WP and compare them. If they don't know the difference between the two OS then they'll be looking at the specs.
What do you think they're going to choose..?
Casey_boy said:
I agree with you wholeheartedly, but the problem is it's not about "why would WP need it".
The average consumer, who is used to buying PCs based on their specs, will look at an Android phone and a WP and compare them. If they don't know the difference between the two OS then they'll be looking at the specs.
What do you think they're going to choose..?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
to be frank, the average customer knows a superficial knowledge of cell phones...and many still market dumb phones as the approach for all user needs. Nokia has addressed the h/w issues ad nauseum, so it wouldn't surprise me if Nokia would be the first wp7 with a dual core. In fact, I would love to grab a Nokia phone...
i thought of your point too
its true the specs are taken in consideration
but currently im not aware of any device that stand out..
i think the average people would think
2x cores = 2x power needed = half the battery
battery is a major aspect
so still, why build a dual core if nothing is using it, besides the battery
like i said, android may be able to to make their os fast & fluid
but why cant they do it on the current specs
you simply dont need heavy processin unit on your mobile device, as long as you wont do heavy processin on the device. the phone wont need it, but the tablet does.
the average user is used to windows
the average user uses the phone for not much more then phone, text, surf, game.
last but not least, the price, i dont know much about dual core phones (do they already exists?) but double the cores, may raise the price by a lot.
this year we wont need no dual cores....
To be honest, I never really felt the need of such a powerful processor in a phone. What can you use it for apart from games with high graphics?
I'm sure opening office docs, web pages, utility apps, music...everything at once still won't slow down the processes. It's a phone guys. Not a desktop PC.
Many years ago, I had a 1.2 GHz CPU running windows XP, which in fact ran heavy programs without any lag. And today, our phones have 1GHz CPU running a phone OS and apps that hardly go above 50mb.
What's the need, seriously?
I don't care about dual core yet, but would like to see some higher end devices. All first gen releases were very generic.
Newer Gen CPU/GPU (dual core not necessary till things are coded for it)
High Quality Material/build
32GB or 64GB Internal ROM
Super AMOLED/next gen if avail
512MB RAM
Good Battery
Good Quality Optics (iPhone4 or better (like Nokia N8))
Thats all I want. Maybe a FFC just for ****s n' giggles, but thats not high on my priority list.
[email protected] said:
Now for Mango, they did obviously update their support
for 8X55 and 7X30.
None of those are actually dualcore SoC's.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well just like you said they have added support for new processors but neither of the new ones are dual core. We've heard rumors that ST-Ericsson will be supplying dual core chips for Nokia's Windows Phones but for now Qualcomm says they're the only WP7 manufacturer.
I don't doubt Windows Phone will see dual core support in the future. I have a feeling that Nokia won't be launching their Windows Phone alongside the others in September/October, but later in November or even December. That's when I think we'll see the first dual core Windows Phone. (Just speculation. No evidence for this.)
dtboos said:
I don't care about dual core yet, but would like to see some higher end devices. All first gen releases were very generic.
Newer Gen CPU/GPU (dual core not necessary till things are coded for it)
High Quality Material/build
32GB or 64GB Internal ROM
Super AMOLED/next gen if avail
512MB RAM
Good Battery
Good Quality Optics (iPhone4 or better (like Nokia N8))
Thats all I want. Maybe a FFC just for ****s n' giggles, but thats not high on my priority list.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well you just described Nokia N9 except for the screen ... only Sammy can put Super-AMOLED and the RAM is 768MB
PS. I though someone from Microsoft or Nokia I can't recall said that WP7 is already dual-core ready, so maybe it doesn't need new coding or I'm terribly wrong
kainy said:
Well you just described Nokia N9 except for the screen ... only Sammy can put Super-AMOLED and the RAM is 768MB
PS. I though someone from Microsoft or Nokia I can't recall said that WP7 is already dual-core ready, so maybe it doesn't need new coding or I'm terribly wrong
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Aye Why I know the phone I want is easily within reach. That would be more than powerful enough for the next couple years. This is also why I was excited about the Nokia deal because they have some excellent quality hardware & optics in some of their phones.
Android needs dual-core because the OS is so cluttered and filled with junk. WP7 phone have "inferior hardware" yet still run smoother than any Android phone would.
yea it should b strong
Hi all,
I wonder at buying a WP7 phone and have these two devices on mind. HTC Radar is twice as expensive as the second. But I saw the WP Bench benchmark that showed that Radar is about 35% more powerful, it scored above 80pts vs Mozart's 60pts. At this time it does not matter, but in few months for sure there will be more requiring games and applications which Mozart wolud not handle with. But this is only my opinion. Radar also has a larger battery that lasts I think a day longer without charging. I don't know what phones will be avaliable next year so I'm undecided whether I should buy Radar and use it longer or Mozart and wait for some newer phones.
Thanks for answering
If you don't want to wait for a newer phone (a.k.a one of the Nokia Lumia series), then the radar is a good choice. It is faster than the Mozart like you said and will open and run apps a bit faster. Radar does have better graphics (adreno 200 in Mozart vs adreno 205 in Radar). Mozart has 64mb more ram, but that isn't too much a difference.
However, if you like photography, I think the Mozart's camera may be a bit better with more megapixels (although doesn't necessarily mean better) and xenon flash. The xenon flash is better than the Radar's LED for low light shots.
I own the Radar, but never the Mozart. I personally really like the Radar; it looks fly!
Hope this helps.
I personally have the mozart and have been asking myself as well wihich phone to purchase,
I decided to go with the mozart since it has a higher camera rating and the xenon flash, not only that, for its price its one of the most affordable windows phone but not compromising the quality
Hello,
I've been interested in Windows Phones lately, and looking at the Nokia Lumia 900. I see that it is 1.4 Ghz one core, and 512Mb ram. Isn't that a bit slow compared to the other phones around? Like Samsung Galaxy S2 which is 1.2Ghz dual core, and 1Gb ram. Or is it because the OS of Windows Phones isn't as demanding on speed as Android? I've been an Android user and would like to know some details on Windows Phones because they look like great phones. Judging by the reviews I've seen of Nokia Lumia 900 people seem to really like it, with no complaints about speed, so I'm just curious. What do you guys think of the Nokia Lumia in general? Also is there a Windows Phone coming out anytime soon? I don't want to buy the 900 and end up seeing a new one few weeks later. I'm also thinking about getting the Galaxy S3, I'm just stuck between a Windows Phone or Android, just need these few questions answered, and I'll be on my way. Thanks guys.
Papaniz said:
Hello,
I've been interested in Windows Phones lately, and looking at the Nokia Lumia 900. I see that it is 1.4 Ghz one core, and 512Mb ram. Isn't that a bit slow compared to the other phones around? Like Samsung Galaxy S2 which is 1.2Ghz dual core, and 1Gb ram. Or is it because the OS of Windows Phones isn't as demanding on speed as Android? I've been an Android user and would like to know some details on Windows Phones because they look like great phones. Judging by the reviews I've seen of Nokia Lumia 900 people seem to really like it, with no complaints about speed, so I'm just curious. What do you guys think of the Nokia Lumia in general? Also is there a Windows Phone coming out anytime soon? I don't want to buy the 900 and end up seeing a new one few weeks later. I'm also thinking about getting the Galaxy S3, I'm just stuck between a Windows Phone or Android, just need these few questions answered, and I'll be on my way. Thanks guys.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope, I'm running Tango on mine and it's lightning fast.
To answer your questions:
1. All current Windows Phones are very fast. 2nd generation devices like the Lumia 900 are faster than the 1st generation devices, but the additional speed is not currently needed (I have a 1st gen phone, which is already very, very responsive);
2. New devices are regularly coming out, but nothing better than the Lumia 900 is currently expected. There will certainly be cool devices coming out for Windows Phone 8, but little is known about them yet;
3. A Windows Phone update (codename Tango) is rumored for June. It should be available for all Windows Phones. Windows Phone 8 is rumored for the end of the year;
Android and Windows Phone have a very different philosophy:
* Android is great for people who enjoy fine-tune (pimping) their devices;
* Windows Phone is more for people who enjoy a smartphone that just works perfectly in 95% of the situations;
* There are still some features that some people find essential missing - I would suggest that you spend a little time reading this forum to see if they affect you or not.
Personally, I own an (old) iPhone, an Android Phone and an Samsung Omnia 7. I only use the Omnia 7 as it works perfectly for me.
Hope this helps,
Stephen
There are several ways that WP7 is better performing than Android. For example, the entire UI is rendered using the GPU. Android doesn't do this - it can't, there's no guarantee that each device will have a compatible GPU - so it uses the CPU. This is why dual-core Android phones have really smooth UI compared to single-core ones, but even though WP7 is currently only on single-core phones, a first-gen 1GHz CPU WP7 device has as slick a UI as the highest-end Android phones.
With the Tango update, WP7 is optimized for a low memory footprint so it can run smoothly in devices with 256MB of RAM. The existing phones, with twice that much, use the extra RAM to keep more apps in the background so you can switch to them intantly, but even without Tango I can already usually have four or five backgrounded apps in RAM before the phone starts freeing them (by writing their state to flash and then killing the app). There's no need for a full gig yet, or soon from anything that I've seen.
WP7 is also a lot easier on the battery than Android. I can get 2-3 days, even with pretty substantial use (streaming music for hours, etc.). I get less if I play games like Civilization, but that's expected. This is better than most of friends with Android phones, even though their phones have larger battery capacities.
I have used Android for years now, and can safely say that WP7 outclasses many Android handsets in day-to-day speed and fluidity, thanks to the GPU rendering GDTD mentioned above.
Microsoft have taken a different direction with WP7 to Android - rather than throw as much power at it as they can, they tightly controlled the SoCs WP7 was built for, and reaped the benefits on what admittedly looks (on paper) like old hardware, in a similar way to what Apple do with iOS.
You will be pleasantly surprised with the performance of just about any handset. I've had a lot of time with a Dell Venue Pro built around the now 'ancient' MSM 8250 1GHz 65nm Snapdragon and 512MB RAM, and found it outperformed (to my eye) many of the Android phones I've been (un)lucky enough to play with
Windows Phone uses the resources better than all the other OS. thats a fact. the 1 Ghz and 512MB RAM is all you need. if you have luck and have 1.4Ghz on a Windows Phone its maybe better but not in that way that you see or feel it.
The illusion that other OS are spreading is that you need more than one core and bla bla, but remember the time where windows 95 or 98 runs on a 1Ghz procesor, with 256 or 512 MB RAM. Is a Mobile OS more complex than a PC OS, NO! so if windows 95 98 can run on that specs, Windows Phone OS can do it even faster and better because its bound to the hardware to use it intelligent.
Dinchy87 said:
The illusion that other OS are spreading is that you need more than one core and bla bla, but remember the time where windows 95 or 98 runs on a 1Ghz procesor, with 256 or 512 MB RAM. Is a Mobile OS more complex than a PC OS, NO! so if windows 95 98 can run on that specs, Windows Phone OS can do it even faster and better because its bound to the hardware to use it intelligent.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just wondering why you used Windows 9x in your comparsion I have an old laptop with 1Ghz processor and 512MB of RAM and it runs Windows XP, 7 and 8 just fine. Windows 8 Consumer Preview is the fastest of all those three OSes I have on it.
That's because MS got somwhat burned by Vista and has been shifting power from the CPU to the GPU even more these days. A lot easier today with onboard GPus being a lot better.
But yes all 3 systems have a different design philosophy.
Android is usually designed from top down. I.e. tuned to work best on potential future devices which are just a bit stronger. Which means you're almost pressured to get a stronger device.
Ios is designed for the current hardware first and foremost.
And wp7 is designed from bottom up. Which pretty muhc guarantees that the experience on all devices is the same.
jessenic said:
Just wondering why you used Windows 9x in your comparsion I have an old laptop with 1Ghz processor and 512MB of RAM and it runs Windows XP, 7 and 8 just fine. Windows 8 Consumer Preview is the fastest of all those three OSes I have on it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
does Windows 7 not need 1gb or RAM? but i use this as comparison because of the age to say that old hardware specs can use WP7 and be fast and smooth. there are no grapics like gradient, shine here and there, shadows, and so on that must be first rendered then stored. both uses to much power and resources. Metro is easy clean and fast because of the fact it has no shadows, gradients and so on...
Thanks for the great replies guys! I'll definitely stick around and do more research on this. Windows Phones are better than I thought they were. Very interested.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Reason? Read previous posts, users already told.
Papaniz said:
Thanks for the great replies guys! I'll definitely stick around and do more research on this. Windows Phones are better than I thought they were. Very interested.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
good that you listened to us and say that it is better than you thought that's enough for me and ig you buy a WP7 you will never regret it
Dinchy87 said:
good that you listened to us and say that it is better than you thought that's enough for me and ig you buy a WP7 you will never regret it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Of course, I always do research myself and get some help before ever judging an OS or phone in general. And going to stick around a little longer and do more research, but at this rate, I'm eyeing a WP7 judging by what I've learned and seen. These were great answers. Helped a lot.
lamborg said:
Reason? Read previous posts, users already told.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah I know. Like I said, these were great answers that I've noted because of the great info. But it never hurts to do more research, even if I have to buy the phone itself to try it out I will.
Papaniz said:
Hello,
I've been interested in Windows Phones lately, and looking at the Nokia Lumia 900. I see that it is 1.4 Ghz one core, and 512Mb ram. Isn't that a bit slow compared to the other phones around? Like Samsung Galaxy S2 which is 1.2Ghz dual core, and 1Gb ram. Or is it because the OS of Windows Phones isn't as demanding on speed as Android? I've been an Android user and would like to know some details on Windows Phones because they look like great phones. Judging by the reviews I've seen of Nokia Lumia 900 people seem to really like it, with no complaints about speed, so I'm just curious. What do you guys think of the Nokia Lumia in general? Also is there a Windows Phone coming out anytime soon? I don't want to buy the 900 and end up seeing a new one few weeks later. I'm also thinking about getting the Galaxy S3, I'm just stuck between a Windows Phone or Android, just need these few questions answered, and I'll be on my way. Thanks guys.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
nop.. WP is way lighter and hardware optimized than android..
From what i understand the reason why windows phone and iOS run so much smoother then android is the fact they drop priority of other process to ensure that the UI runs smoothly. So when most people talk about lag in android they are talking about UI lag, this is not to say that the application do not lag also because of inefficient or the stablity of the android code.
I personaly use windows phone and prior to that i was using android and i can say for sure that windows phone pretty much never lags. Microsoft has done a really good job, if only others would recognise this fact.
Papaniz said:
Thanks for the great replies guys! I'll definitely stick around and do more research on this. Windows Phones are better than I thought they were. Very interested.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
let me correct that for you
"Windows phones are better than I had been misled to believe"
leftspeaker2000 said:
From what i understand the reason why windows phone and iOS run so much smoother then android is the fact they drop priority of other process to ensure that the UI runs smoothly. So when most people talk about lag in android they are talking about UI lag, this is not to say that the application do not lag also because of inefficient or the stablity of the android code.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not completly true to be technical correct. WP7 has no true multitasking which is bad in some ways but is a great way to improve performance. Devs on WP7 can't ruin your experience with bad porgrammed apps consuming to much CPU time in the background (and that's the problem on android). Instead of just letting them do what they want, WP7 is able to optimize the background tasks resulting in almost no lag...
In addition, OEMs on Android are allowed to do whatever they want and well, we all know that they're not always careful developers...
dazza9075 said:
let me correct that for you
"Windows phones are better than I had been misled to believe"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha. Oh I've never been misled to believe anything. I've owned two iOS devices (Which I did not enjoy), and have been using Android for a while now, I love Android to be quite honest. The thing is I've never done research on WP7, well because I never gave it a shot, not because I "Hated" it for no apparent reason . They are really good phones, and amazing features such as the City Lens for Nokia. I'm still listening and noting down any other things users have to say as well as research of my own.
Papaniz said:
The thing is I've never done research on WP7, well because I never gave it a shot, not because I "Hated" it for no apparent reason .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then the force is strong with you! Most folk ive seen that have either not liked it or assumed they wont like it have been effected by the dark side, aka Android users on the internet with a chip on their shoulders
WP is Decent.
I am new to this site ,
I have to say 512 RAM and 1.4 Ghz Processor isn't bad at all to be honest.
Infact i think , for "normal" usage , 256 MB RAM is more than enough (again , this depends on OS u use)
I currently have 5800 xpress music phone (nokia) and an iPod Touch 4G , it has 256 MB RAM and like 800 Mhz Processor (same specs as iPad but iPhone 4 has 512 MB RAM and clockspeed less than iPad).
Yesterday i did HTML5 test on Galaxy s2 (my dad's) and my iPod Touch , 2.3 GB Vs iOS 5.1 , results were too good , ~320 on iPod Vs ~190 on galaxy s2.
(on 2 mbps connection Wi-fi)
So in real life , Optimized software always wins.
Single Core or Dual Core doesn't matter unless software is optimized.
Only concern i dont buy WP right now is because of very less STORAGE , that keeps bugging me whether to buy it or not.
512 MB RAM on WP (if i buy one) will be like heaven to me because On iPod multiple tab browsing works upto 3 tabs and they get flushed out frequently if i had more than 3 opened.
Even though galaxy s2 has like 1 GB RAM , on very HEAVY usage max. consumption on it is like ~700 MB RAM.(As we know android isn't as polished as WP/iOS) , Even HTML Pages render on iOS far better than WP or Android.
Anyway , i like WP to be simple one for day-to-day use but iPod still remains as a daily used device too.But not sure whether to wait for SD-slot support in future or buy now.(Confused)