What I don't understand is at the start of the year we had the big show down of the GS4 vs the HTC One. People were going spec crazy to even the fact that the GS4 must be better because it has DDR3 or the HTC One screen must be better because the PPI is 480 (my phone says 480) to the GS4s 441. We even had people complain that the GS4 was a pentile screen and it didn't look as sharp as the HTC One and that OLED fades over time and if you have a static image on for too long, you'll see burn in. I can confirm the screen burn with OLEDs, the phones I've had in the past with OLED screens always get it.
However suddenly when it comes to Nokia they seem to get away with selling you dated hardware. It's 720p, the PPI is 334 and it's a PENTILE OLED screen...... they even put this tinted black glass over the front to try and hide the future screen burn. Somehow Nokia get away with it and people don't care, where it comes to everyone else however, they'll get scrutinized and people will say it's **** straight away.
Not only that but you're getting a dated S4 dual core and an Adreno 225 which is 2/3 years old at this point. What Nokia are basically doing is selling you last years hardware at $300 on contract! I could accept the argument that Windows Phone doesn't need better hardware or whatever, though nor does Android. My Galaxy S2 never had any lag or weird issues at the time it was released, it was one of the fastest phones out there. It's easy to look back at it now and say it was a PoS, that's because the software has evolved to the point it's showing its age. My point is, I'm not going to buy a phone that is crazy expensive, to get dated hardware that is now so cheap that Nokia must be making a mint.
I keep seeing this argument of how Android is laggy and requires 1000 cores to run properly. It's just not the case, I have a HTC One and Android runs perfectly smooth, no stutter and nothing has pushed it in terms of gaming and the browser is mega fast. If I put the HTC One next to a Windows phone in a store and compare them, I'm not seeing Android lag at all. In fact what I do see is the browser on the HTC One is way faster and it boots up a hell of a lot faster and the animation on the scroll is smoother, where it looks like it is dropping frames on the Windows Phone.
Windows Phone is smooth on the whole yeah, however it's a myth to me that Android is a laggy pos that requires a super computer to run well. I look at my usage on my HTC One and what does it say? 2 cores in use, 2 cores on idle and it's clocked at 1.1ghrz. So in reality Android doesn't need 4 cores to run well, those cores are only used from moment to moment when the cpu requires it. The same with memory, my phone is using 768mb ram right now, it doesn't need 2gb of ram, though I'm guessing a chunk of that is for the GPU as well, when it comes to memory, more is always better as it allows games to use larger texture files and what not. So I just don't get why you'd spend more money for less, I don't find that acceptable, yeah if the price was cheaper then it would be fine but... it isn't.
Battery life as well for the 1020 is meant to be horrible if you actually use the thing you buy it for, the camera. It's only 2000MaH and you cannot replace it and from my experience with the 808, you really need to replace that battery if you're taking lots of shots. If an Android device got that poor battery life, people would be going crazy, yet it's another thing that because it's Nokia... let them get away with it. I get 1-2 days out of my HTC One, it's only like 300MaH more than the Nokia 1020 and the 920, it's proof again for me that Android doesn't drain battery life mad, it's how you use it. You have freedom on Android to use the device how you life, I'm sure if you have 6 pages of widgets and you have every app open from under the sun in the background, you will drain battery. I'm just glad I have the freedom to do that and with true multitasking, not just a saved state.
I have to come onto form factor as well, again if an Android phone was as big as a 920 or a 1020 then people would be going crazy, even if it was an iPhone. Every review says the 920 is giant and hard to fit into your pocket and every review says the 1020 is horrible to hold because they put the camera bump too low down. Why do they get a free pass from that? People hated how the HTC One rocked about on a flat surface but no one seems to care that the 1020 is even worse.
Windows Phone lacks apps, it's a restrictive OS where you have to wait for Microsoft to do everything for you. It's basically a worse IOS with a different look, both pride themselves on being smooth but where Windows Phone lacks functionality, people give it a free ride because it looks different. I see so much hate on IOS because of Apple and how it's a closed OS, yet the same people do not care it's the same for Windows Phone. If Microsoft made it open like the desktop, I'd be so happy, however I hate having to wait years for them to do something, when a custom rom would have already done it on Android. Yet in every argument, the good points of Android never come up, it's always these unfounded arguments of how poorly it runs. I just think do your research, if you're going to buy a PoS phone that runs Android, then that's your own fault, you can find those cheap good for nothing phones on any platform.
At the end of the day though the 920 had a mediocre over saturated camera where the images were far too soft. I remember a website doing a blind comparison and funnily enough the iPhone 5 was everyone's favourite because Apple just get the software so right. The 1020's focus is obviously the camera and technically it beats everything but the 808, which lets be honest isn't really a smart phone as it runs Symbian. I've owned an 808, I've compared pictures to the 1020 and the 808 looks much better, especially in full resolution mode. I had to sell the 808 because I couldn't stand being on Symbian any longer and a camera doesn't make a phone, I can buy a separate camera and I have. I have a go pro 3 for my Motorcycle and I have a DSLR for shooting pictures I actually care how they turn out... obviously a DSLR beats even the 808 and 1020.
Again though I think the 1020s camera is flawed, it doesn't have a dedicated image processor, so images take so long to save. At the same time I could have taken 20 images on the HTC One or GS4 and for every day use they look just as good when you upload them to facebook or whatever people do. I think people are trying to treat the 1020 as some professional camera and forgetting about the rest of the phone. If you want a professional camera, there are much better options and you don't get locked into a 2 year contract paying $300 upfront. I do not feel that it's a good quick point of shoot like most other smart phones out there, just simply because it does take a long time to save images. Obviously the image quality is better, I've had first hand experience, however the images are over saturated like mad, judging by the 920, Nokia will not fix this. The images are over sharpened, you can not go down to ISO 50 and there is no ND filter for direct sunlight shots. So I don't see any advanced in this camera over say the 808 or a dedicated camera, I cannot see why it's hyped so much. The end result is too much grain and noise in the picture, especially if you use Nokia's automatic settings which just increase the ISO even in the daylight to 200... no wonder why there is so much noise. Realistically I want to be putting it to 50... yet I can't?
I think there is far too much hype for the phone that doesn't really do anything really well, the OIS could have been much better and the mic performance is lacking. I'm not sure if it's their software controlling the mics or if it's crap hardware. However it sounds like it's only recording in mono or it's really muffled or something, maybe Windows Phone doesn't support stereo recording?
You get these crazy rabid Nokia fanbois now just going crazy if there is any criticism and it's really weird. You don't get this from Android because people aren't tied to an OEM, people generally just go for the best handset that is released at that moment in time.
slannmage said:
What I don't understand is at the start of the year we had the big show down of the GS4 vs the HTC One. People were going spec crazy to even the fact that the GS4 must be better because it has DDR3 or the HTC One screen must be better because the PPI is 480 (my phone says 480) to the GS4s 441. We even had people complain that the GS4 was a pentile screen and it didn't look as sharp as the HTC One and that OLED fades over time and if you have a static image on for too long, you'll see burn in. I can confirm the screen burn with OLEDs, the phones I've had in the past with OLED screens always get it.
However suddenly when it comes to Nokia they seem to get away with selling you dated hardware. It's 720p, the PPI is 334 and it's a PENTILE OLED screen...... they even put this tinted black glass over the front to try and hide the future screen burn. Somehow Nokia get away with it and people don't care, where it comes to everyone else however, they'll get scrutinized and people will say it's **** straight away.
Not only that but you're getting a dated S4 dual core and an Adreno 225 which is 2/3 years old at this point. What Nokia are basically doing is selling you last years hardware at $300 on contract! I could accept the argument that Windows Phone doesn't need better hardware or whatever, though nor does Android. My Galaxy S2 never had any lag or weird issues at the time it was released, it was one of the fastest phones out there. It's easy to look back at it now and say it was a PoS, that's because the software has evolved to the point it's showing its age. My point is, I'm not going to buy a phone that is crazy expensive, to get dated hardware that is now so cheap that Nokia must be making a mint.
I keep seeing this argument of how Android is laggy and requires 1000 cores to run properly. It's just not the case, I have a HTC One and Android runs perfectly smooth, no stutter and nothing has pushed it in terms of gaming and the browser is mega fast. If I put the HTC One next to a Windows phone in a store and compare them, I'm not seeing Android lag at all. In fact what I do see is the browser on the HTC One is way faster and it boots up a hell of a lot faster and the animation on the scroll is smoother, where it looks like it is dropping frames on the Windows Phone.
Windows Phone is smooth on the whole yeah, however it's a myth to me that Android is a laggy pos that requires a super computer to run well. I look at my usage on my HTC One and what does it say? 2 cores in use, 2 cores on idle and it's clocked at 1.1ghrz. So in reality Android doesn't need 4 cores to run well, those cores are only used from moment to moment when the cpu requires it. The same with memory, my phone is using 768mb ram right now, it doesn't need 2gb of ram, though I'm guessing a chunk of that is for the GPU as well, when it comes to memory, more is always better as it allows games to use larger texture files and what not. So I just don't get why you'd spend more money for less, I don't find that acceptable, yeah if the price was cheaper then it would be fine but... it isn't.
Battery life as well for the 1020 is meant to be horrible if you actually use the thing you buy it for, the camera. It's only 2000MaH and you cannot replace it and from my experience with the 808, you really need to replace that battery if you're taking lots of shots. If an Android device got that poor battery life, people would be going crazy, yet it's another thing that because it's Nokia... let them get away with it. I get 1-2 days out of my HTC One, it's only like 300MaH more than the Nokia 1020 and the 920, it's proof again for me that Android doesn't drain battery life mad, it's how you use it. You have freedom on Android to use the device how you life, I'm sure if you have 6 pages of widgets and you have every app open from under the sun in the background, you will drain battery. I'm just glad I have the freedom to do that and with true multitasking, not just a saved state.
I have to come onto form factor as well, again if an Android phone was as big as a 920 or a 1020 then people would be going crazy, even if it was an iPhone. Every review says the 920 is giant and hard to fit into your pocket and every review says the 1020 is horrible to hold because they put the camera bump too low down. Why do they get a free pass from that? People hated how the HTC One rocked about on a flat surface but no one seems to care that the 1020 is even worse.
Windows Phone lacks apps, it's a restrictive OS where you have to wait for Microsoft to do everything for you. It's basically a worse IOS with a different look, both pride themselves on being smooth but where Windows Phone lacks functionality, people give it a free ride because it looks different. I see so much hate on IOS because of Apple and how it's a closed OS, yet the same people do not care it's the same for Windows Phone. If Microsoft made it open like the desktop, I'd be so happy, however I hate having to wait years for them to do something, when a custom rom would have already done it on Android. Yet in every argument, the good points of Android never come up, it's always these unfounded arguments of how poorly it runs. I just think do your research, if you're going to buy a PoS phone that runs Android, then that's your own fault, you can find those cheap good for nothing phones on any platform.
At the end of the day though the 920 had a mediocre over saturated camera where the images were far too soft. I remember a website doing a blind comparison and funnily enough the iPhone 5 was everyone's favourite because Apple just get the software so right. The 1020's focus is obviously the camera and technically it beats everything but the 808, which lets be honest isn't really a smart phone as it runs Symbian. I've owned an 808, I've compared pictures to the 1020 and the 808 looks much better, especially in full resolution mode. I had to sell the 808 because I couldn't stand being on Symbian any longer and a camera doesn't make a phone, I can buy a separate camera and I have. I have a go pro 3 for my Motorcycle and I have a DSLR for shooting pictures I actually care how they turn out... obviously a DSLR beats even the 808 and 1020.
Again though I think the 1020s camera is flawed, it doesn't have a dedicated image processor, so images take so long to save. At the same time I could have taken 20 images on the HTC One or GS4 and for every day use they look just as good when you upload them to facebook or whatever people do. I think people are trying to treat the 1020 as some professional camera and forgetting about the rest of the phone. If you want a professional camera, there are much better options and you don't get locked into a 2 year contract paying $300 upfront. I do not feel that it's a good quick point of shoot like most other smart phones out there, just simply because it does take a long time to save images. Obviously the image quality is better, I've had first hand experience, however the images are over saturated like mad, judging by the 920, Nokia will not fix this. The images are over sharpened, you can not go down to ISO 50 and there is no ND filter for direct sunlight shots. So I don't see any advanced in this camera over say the 808 or a dedicated camera, I cannot see why it's hyped so much. The end result is too much grain and noise in the picture, especially if you use Nokia's automatic settings which just increase the ISO even in the daylight to 200... no wonder why there is so much noise. Realistically I want to be putting it to 50... yet I can't?
I think there is far too much hype for the phone that doesn't really do anything really well, the OIS could have been much better and the mic performance is lacking. I'm not sure if it's their software controlling the mics or if it's crap hardware. However it sounds like it's only recording in mono or it's really muffled or something, maybe Windows Phone doesn't support stereo recording?
You get these crazy rabid Nokia fanbois now just going crazy if there is any criticism and it's really weird. You don't get this from Android because people aren't tied to an OEM, people generally just go for the best handset that is released at that moment in time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The hype is for the camera. It is much better than anything out there. There are dozens of reviews for this phone already. They have regurgitated the same things you have listed. No one in the mainstream tech media is trying to distort the truth. Just because searching Lumia 1020 on Google turns up a million hits from MyNokiaBlog and WPCentral and WMPoweruser, the domain names should already make it obvious. These are fansites and propaganda sites with almost zero traffic. Just because you see them often on Google or twitter doesn't mean everyone is gushing over the Lumia 1020 and ignoring or justifying all its failings. No one has this phone and no one is buying this phone. The Lumia 1020 forum at WPCentral is almost dead and this forum is practically dead. This is the internet. It should be pretty obvious that it only takes one or two people posting incessantly to make it feel like a legion.
Lol people call me a troll when I post long rants about the Lumia 1020. But this is a real troll rant. Blowing up little flaws and non-issues, or spinning misinformation. It's like an aggregate or everything bad that has been ever said about this phone, true or false, for the sake of piling it on instead of real concern. I actually care about the Pureview tech, so I complain alot. I think you're just bored.
Nothing I said was false.
All true things no doubt. But if you value having a truly great camera in your pocket, then the shortcomings are able to be quite easily overlooked.
The only things lasting more than two years in your phone are your pictures - why not get the best ones possible so you can have good mementos?
Sent from my RM-877_nam_att_205 using Tapatalk
Wow... you really need to get back on your medications dude. Maybe get outside more.
LagunaCid said:
All true things no doubt. But if you value having a truly great camera in your pocket, then the shortcomings are able to be quite easily overlooked.
The only things lasting more than two years in your phone are your pictures - why not get the best ones possible so you can have good mementos?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly. During his techno-babble rant against the 1020 (or is it the 920? or WP in general? )... the one spec that the OP forgot to mention ... the one that is most salient to why the 1020 is getting hype... the one that everyone is talking about... the fact that it has a 41MB camera. Oops, must have forgotten that one. I'll say it again, FORTY ONE MEGABYTE camera. That is not a leap in phone technology and innovation, it is a freakin rocket launch. That absolutely crushes all existing smart phones, beats most point-and-shoots, and even produces better photos than some entry level DSLRs. None of the other specs matter if the OS runs smooth (save maybe the screen argument... although you blew that too. Ive had a 920 since it came out and there is no sign of fading or burn-in at all, and never will be during its useful life). Number of cores... GHZ processor... blah... blah... blah... none of that matters if the user experience is excellent, which it is and you even admitted:
Windows Phone is smooth on the whole yeah
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Having quad core this or over-clocked that does a WP user no good because unlike android, it doesn't need it to run properly. That is stuff that android users haggle about. But the one things that your phone won't ever do... ever... with all it's technical superiority and all... is take 41-freakin-MB photo
You know what really grinds my gears with Nokia? Battery. Can they at least ball up and put something that actually lasts? 2000mAh is n.o.t.h.i.n.g. for smartphone these days, especially phone with CPU/data active OS like WP. Got 920 and then swapped it for 925 (work phones), and i really really don't talk that often or use it, and i couldn't even last a day without shutting things down. Sad.
I am an amateur photographer, I had the lumia 1020 phone since release and I haven't looked back. In matter of fact I stopped using my galaxy note II completely. Alot of people say megapixels are over rated but 41mp has been really helpful to me, I can crop out like 5 individual pictures out of 1 shot without losing quality.
smuook said:
Exactly. During his techno-babble rant against the 1020 (or is it the 920? or WP in general? )... the one spec that the OP forgot to mention ... the one that is most salient to why the 1020 is getting hype... the one that everyone is talking about... the fact that it has a 41MB camera. Oops, must have forgotten that one. I'll say it again, FORTY ONE MEGABYTE camera. That is not a leap in phone technology and innovation, it is a freakin rocket launch. That absolutely crushes all existing smart phones, beats most point-and-shoots, and even produces better photos than some entry level DSLRs. None of the other specs matter if the OS runs smooth (save maybe the screen argument... although you blew that too. Ive had a 920 since it came out and there is no sign of fading or burn-in at all, and never will be during its useful life). Number of cores... GHZ processor... blah... blah... blah... none of that matters if the user experience is excellent, which it is and you even admitted:
Having quad core this or over-clocked that does a WP user no good because unlike android, it doesn't need it to run properly. That is stuff that android users haggle about. But the one things that your phone won't ever do... ever... with all it's technical superiority and all... is take 41-freakin-MB photo
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You mean 41 Mega Pixel photos? 41 MP not MB. I can make most cameras take a 41MB picture but it doesnt mean its going to look good. Its an innovation for its packaged size as in for its ability to be designed into a relatively thin form factor. In fact the full 41 MP, photos are not as good as its down sampled 5MP version. The hardware on the 1020 is solid only the camera is bleeding edge. My problem with WP is not the hardware or the UI its the app ecosystem. The lack of the apps I absolutely need keeps me from getting one. I had a 920 last year for a week and the lack of my most used apps was just too much. I waited and those apps still arent on WP. I will continue to wait till WP has the apps I need before I buy another one.
Related
I dropped Nokia after being soured by their N97 fiasco. Used Android exclusively since then, but for the most part, hardware was crap - sure processors were blazing fast but cameras sucked, such simple features as FM transmitter weren't available and the most important thing - battery life was horrible (sorry, coming from the other brand, getting 16 hours of battery life is horrible). So I decided to give Nokia N8 a chance... sure, the latest iteration of Symbian does feel outdated, but not too bad, I don't have 2342343 fart apps and finding apps is a pain. Now the good stuff - I get 2.5 days where with Android I'd get less than 24 hours, camera is superb, build quality is awesome (all aluminum), reception is WAY better than on any HTC/Samsung mobile that I had, actually useful features, phone is very snappy.
So the question begs... Why, why can't Android (which is the superior OS at this time) can't get such a battery life? Why do manufacturers insist on putting so-so cameras in their handsets? Why use all plastic in the construction? Why.. why..
Sad to say, but I'm way more satisfied with a device running a somewhat outdated OS.
And where exactly are you purchasing these Android brand cell phones?
What brand? The HTCs and Samsungs? Well, one came from Ebay, few came from the carriers. See, I didn't specify any specific models because every single ones that I used lacked in few important things, such as battery life. Either way, let's hope Android survives its retarded fragmentation and becomes just as stable (but not as stale) as Symbian has.
herzzreh said:
I dropped Nokia after being soured by their N97 fiasco. Used Android exclusively since then, but for the most part, hardware was crap - sure processors were blazing fast but cameras sucked, such simple features as FM transmitter weren't available and the most important thing - battery life was horrible (sorry, coming from the other brand, getting 16 hours of battery life is horrible). So I decided to give Nokia N8 a chance... sure, the latest iteration of Symbian does feel outdated, but not too bad, I don't have 2342343 fart apps and finding apps is a pain. Now the good stuff - I get 2.5 days where with Android I'd get less than 24 hours, camera is superb, build quality is awesome (all aluminum), reception is WAY better than on any HTC/Samsung mobile that I had, actually useful features, phone is very snappy.
So the question begs... Why, why can't Android (which is the superior OS at this time) can't get such a battery life? Why do manufacturers insist on putting so-so cameras in their handsets? Why use all plastic in the construction? Why.. why..
Sad to say, but I'm way more satisfied with a device running a somewhat outdated OS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You should consider WP7. Nokia is doing some hardware with WP7 in mind. They currently have the Lumia 800 (N9) and the Lumia 710. There isn't anything better than WP7 in my experience. It's even better than iOS. The battery life isn't too good right now, but Nokia's hardware may have that resolved.
Give WP7 a nod and check it out.
herzzreh said:
I dropped Nokia after being soured by their N97 fiasco. Used Android exclusively since then, but for the most part, hardware was crap - sure processors were blazing fast but cameras sucked, such simple features as FM transmitter weren't available and the most important thing - battery life was horrible (sorry, coming from the other brand, getting 16 hours of battery life is horrible). So I decided to give Nokia N8 a chance... sure, the latest iteration of Symbian does feel outdated, but not too bad, I don't have 2342343 fart apps and finding apps is a pain. Now the good stuff - I get 2.5 days where with Android I'd get less than 24 hours, camera is superb, build quality is awesome (all aluminum), reception is WAY better than on any HTC/Samsung mobile that I had, actually useful features, phone is very snappy.
So the question begs... Why, why can't Android (which is the superior OS at this time) can't get such a battery life? Why do manufacturers insist on putting so-so cameras in their handsets? Why use all plastic in the construction? Why.. why..
Sad to say, but I'm way more satisfied with a device running a somewhat outdated OS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My camera is great. And as much as I use my phone...a day is pretty good for battery life..my. phone is a beast..
sent...ah whatever its on there now..
Well no OS is perfect, but all are satisfactory. Battery life is more or less due to Android inefficiency at handling resources. Camera, well that depends on the maunfacturers. To be honest, we all don't need or atleast I don't even need a N8 camera on my phone. I'm not the best photographer or do I expect to be, hence why my average 8MP is good enough for me. Nor do I always want to zoom into a photo to see the little details I captured. I like it exactly 8"x11".
Kailkti said:
Well no OS is perfect, but all are satisfactory. Battery life is more or less due to Android inefficiency at handling resources. Camera, well that depends on the maunfacturers. To be honest, we all don't need or atleast I don't even need a N8 camera on my phone. I'm not the best photographer or do I expect to be, hence why my average 8MP is good enough for me. Nor do I always want to zoom into a photo to see the little details I captured. I like it exactly 8"x11".
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's perfectly understandable. This was more of personal rant for me - I'm kinda pissed that what I think is a superior OS doesn't do it for me, nothing more.
P.S. I disagree that all are satisfactory... Symbian S60v5 was something truly out of a horror movie.
Well I can't really say for symbian since I have never extensively used it. But judging from what I read about symbian, I will retract my statement of all are satisfactory.
I have to say, although Im an avid Android user, I feel its unfinished and lacks the polish both WP7 and iOS have. Whether ICS attempts to rectify this I'm not sure yet. The only thing thats stopping jump onto WP7 is lack of lastest gen hardware.
Give my a 720p with a dual-core proccessor and I'll be first in line!
I think the deal with battery life isn't always the battery or OS, but WHAT the phone can do and how often you use it. My old N95 8gb which I LOVED and hung onto for many years (and claimed a high price when recycled), that thing had many functions and that battery could last for hours or days, things like GPS/Maps (with the 3G loading more map squares as you move). The only time my Nexus S hasn't lasted a day unexpectedly was when I found the Facebook chat talking away in the background !! (quickly removed after that incident) I like the battery monitor graph so I can identify if there's a specific battery hog, but otherwise I always think if your phone is awesome and has many apps then the battery won't last long because you'll want to use it all the time. I imagine blackberry's last for a long time because they don't do anything fun afaik. :3
Also I find my OS very good ("pure Android"), and it gets frequent updates.
khsbenny said:
I have to say, although Im an avid Android user, I feel its unfinished and lacks the polish both WP7 and iOS have. Whether ICS attempts to rectify this I'm not sure yet. The only thing thats stopping jump onto WP7 is lack of lastest gen hardware.
Give my a 720p with a dual-core proccessor and I'll be first in line!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mine looks and feels very polished.
Android is Linux. Ubuntu doesn't look good out of the box, you gotta tinker with it to get it just right.
Sent from my Incredible 2 using xda premium
lowandbehold said:
And where exactly are you purchasing these Android brand cell phones?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
everywhere..
and I think we must consider iPhone now..
I agree, Nokia is just superb in overall quality. Samsung focuses on great screens, HTC caters to gimmicks and openness and is pretty much favored largely by members here because they push the openness... Horrid build quality though. Nokia is just superb in quality. I'm so glad that they now utilize an OS that can keep up.
herzzreh said:
I dropped Nokia after being soured by their N97 fiasco. Used Android exclusively since then, but for the most part, hardware was crap - sure processors were blazing fast but cameras sucked, such simple features as FM transmitter weren't available and the most important thing - battery life was horrible (sorry, coming from the other brand, getting 16 hours of battery life is horrible). So I decided to give Nokia N8 a chance... sure, the latest iteration of Symbian does feel outdated, but not too bad, I don't have 2342343 fart apps and finding apps is a pain. Now the good stuff - I get 2.5 days where with Android I'd get less than 24 hours, camera is superb, build quality is awesome (all aluminum), reception is WAY better than on any HTC/Samsung mobile that I had, actually useful features, phone is very snappy.
So the question begs... Why, why can't Android (which is the superior OS at this time) can't get such a battery life? Why do manufacturers insist on putting so-so cameras in their handsets? Why use all plastic in the construction? Why.. why..
Sad to say, but I'm way more satisfied with a device running a somewhat outdated OS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hmmm.. the camera on my evo 3D works amazingly. it is exceptional in my opinion. just because the the default "auto settings" aren't amazing, doesn't make it terrible. adjust the exposure, sharpness (all available in settings) bam, amazing pictures.
i'm not quite sure why the battery life is so bad on most android phones? the only thing i can think of (theory obviously, but logical) is that a lot of the top end android phones like mine for example have big processors and bigger screens... that display CHEWS through my battery life like you would not believe. it is rarely less than 50 percent of the battery consumption.
needless to say, another thing i enjoy about android is the fact that there are always expandable battery options. the one in my phone is currently the 4,000 mah from seido... i charge my phone once a week.
i have said it once, and again, i will never own a smartphone that cannot be rooted/jailbroken... there is too much spying going on from carriers and phone companies. they know what apps you use, how often you use them, and when you uninstall them. if you think i am making this up, you are a fool. they do this to market to you every time you log into the app store/market so they know what to throw at you - things you like...
i personally like to have all of that stuff NOT on my phone. for me, android provides freedom to choose what i put on my phone and who gets to see it... not the other way around. plus all of the customization that comes with android platforms. i would take a dream machine phone to move me in a different direction.
either way, here is a screen shot of my last battery cycle, this a modest example as there was very heavy use this past weekend. usually i charge it on a monday and it lasts till saturday/sunday...
oh and cool story bro
EDIT*** oh and z33, i totally agree with you about build quality. the build quality on the evo 3D seems rugged and archaic. i wish it was a little more "sexy" looking. i just love the utter performance of the thing. it is astounding the things this phone is capable of.
i think of it like.... apple products and a select few of other phones are like ferraris to me... and my phone is like a 67 camaro with a chevy big block and blower.... doesn't look to nice, but eats up anything in performance.
the lumia 800 is said to get over 27 hours heavy usage on 1450 mh, and that's immensely heavy use. I'll be testing this once I have it in my possession but it's another testament to Nokia optimization.
that would be expected out of a single core phone with a 3.7 inch low resolution display. not surprising.
and i shouldn't say low resolution, i guess the appropriate observation would be "lower" resolution than many others out there. most are pushing HD pixels.... 800x480 or whatever it is, is pretty bare minimum by today's standards. but on a smaller screen i suppose it will still look pretty slick and sharp.
z33dev33l said:
the lumia 800 is said to get over 27 hours heavy usage on 1450 mh, and that's immensely heavy use. I'll be testing this once I have it in my possession but it's another testament to Nokia optimization.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No matter what the build quality...it is just straight ugly. There is nothing sexy whatsoever about that phone. And the colors? It looks like it is made for a teenage girl. Also, you already admitted to the fact that they use second rate hardware...
khsbenny said:
I have to say, although Im an avid Android user, I feel its unfinished and lacks the polish both WP7 and iOS have. Whether ICS attempts to rectify this I'm not sure yet. The only thing thats stopping jump onto WP7 is lack of lastest gen hardware.
Give my a 720p with a dual-core proccessor and I'll be first in line!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The apps are atrocious, I have been using an HD7 for about a week and I am quite reaady to switch back. Moving to a Nexus One by the end of the week.
i tried the n9 yesterday, and i must say that the UI i far ahead of both android and ios. however, it has almost no apps compared to android/ios, and it is probably going to stay that way since nokia has dropped meamo.
lowandbehold said:
No matter what the build quality...it is just straight ugly. There is nothing sexy whatsoever about that phone. And the colors? It looks like it is made for a teenage girl. Also, you already admitted to the fact that they use second rate hardware...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I admitted that they often use outdated processors. Please stop attempting to troll, you're not particularly good at it.
So I made this video to put an end to this nonsense myth about lagging propegated by people who have no idea at all what they're talking about.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPqXwerQZps
As can be seen the S2 is the only device which performs smoothly on all fronts. The menu is smooth, webbrowser is smooth and gaming is smooth.
The iPhone 4 has problems loading taxing sites and clearly does lag in a very annoying way. I can also point to several situations where the iPhone 4 clearly lags in a very annoying way. Didn't have games on there but gaming is good as we all know very well.
WP7 has a smooth menu and everything looks nice. Does lag in the browser but it's not as annoying as the iPhone 4. Altho the main menu is smooth some apps do lag horribly, like the Xbox Live app. Gaming is horrible on this device altho I hear it's better on the Lumia 800.
All devices are Wifi N but the S2 is the only one who achieves good rates. The LG is the phone with the worst download rate and the iPhone 4 comes in second.
I know both youtube and 9gag have mobile sites which work better but I picked these sites off the top of my head as a showcase. There are enough sites out there which do not have a mobile site and are taxing to load.
So in conclusion, S2 Android is the best and doesn't lag, iPhone 4 doesn't lag usually but when it does it is the worst. Also there are several case in which the phone starts lagging so bad that it feels as if the phone has crashed.
WP7 has mediocre lag, the lag is there but workable.
All phones have been hard reset, I was in the process of reinstalling my S2 when the idea occurred to me. This is why the S2 has some apps on it and both the iPhone 4 and LG are stock and fresh.
Discuss...
Why not test the iPhone 4s?
moonmang said:
Why not test the iPhone 4s?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't have one here rightnow but I can say that it's webbrowser is more or less the same.
The only real improvement the 4S has to offer on the lag front is the following. If you have a lots of menu pages (8 pages is best for demonstration but it starts at 5), you go to the end of your menu and then press home. You'll see that on the 4 it clearly starts to lag and on the 4S this doesn't happen.
I wanted to film this too but it would take too much effort to fill the menu with apps right now, maybe later. I think the point has been made and as you can see the iPhone isn't the holy grail of lagfreeness some might have you believe.
Zee, where you at bro? I'm waiting for you to debunk this guys whole arguement, because anything you don't experience, absolutely can't be possible. Right?
Sent from my HTC PH39100 using xda premium
slapshot30 said:
Zee, where you at bro? I'm waiting for you to debunk this guys whole arguement, because anything you don't experience, absolutely can't be possible. Right?
Sent from my HTC PH39100 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know who this Zee is but I'd welcome his input. I made this thread to open up discussion not to start a flame war. The video it self isn't perfect and open for criticism but I didn't make it to be perfect. I made it just to show there is lag in Apple.
GIR said:
I don't know who this Zee is but I'd welcome his input. I made this thread to open up discussion not to start a flame war. The video it self isn't perfect and open for criticism but I didn't make it to be perfect. I made it just to show there is lag in Apple.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You welcome Zee's output but you don't want to start a flame war?You obviously don't know what you're talking about.
Anyway,talking about what 1gb of RAM can be used for...
I did a vid last night to show lag free ui using screencast but not uploaded it anywhere yet, even capturing video and superimposing a visual pointer to show where and when touches happened on screen in realtime I was able to swipe through screens and folders etc with no lag.
In fact it was so quick you barely see the pointer on screen where I touched screen to initiate action but still people say it lags.
Only lag I notice is opening or installing apps on stock gb rom.
I saw zee mentioned, surprised he hasn't commented yet as usually android lag is something he comments on. He has wp7 and android and says that android has lots of lag where wp7 is flawlessly smooth. Be interesting to see his take as he has used all phone systems whereas I haven't so can only speak from experience of android but to me the ui doesn't lag.
Dave
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk
Don't forget S II has Dual-Core CPU and the others has Single-core.
mathburn said:
Don't forget S II has Dual-Core CPU and the others has Single-core.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
WP does not even support dual core cpu yet.
When people says that iphone doesn't lag they mostly mean that it has 60fps buttersmooth interface without any dropped frames most of the time (In my opinion incorrect use of the word lag though).
It is physically impossible to show such smoothness on a 30fps hard compressed youtube video that isn't captured in sync with phone screen refresh rate.
I find my SGS2 pretty smooth most of the time, so I'm not defending iPhone (in fact I dislilke iPhone...), but your video is not enough to visualize the smoothness of the phones.
mathburn said:
Don't forget S II has Dual-Core CPU and the others has Single-core.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Iphone 4S has dual core as well.
Dave
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk
The test isn't perfect but it's fine i guess. Honestly tho the comparison is a bit ubalanced imho: you compared the fastest android device on the market (i know how good it is, i owned one for 5 months) with possibly one of the slowest and oldest WP7 devices, and ofc the iPhone4 is as well a piece of history nowadays. To be fair you should have compared similar hardware: the LG phone you have there has the same hardware (cpu+gpu) as the HTC Desire, but compared to it the Desire feels like a sluggish piece of **** (not talking out of my ass, i've been using one for over a year), even if you tweak it and OC it like hell. Anyway there's no denying that right now even with the latest hardware WP7 sucks badly in terms of gaming, and the few games we have are insanely overpriced. Android has good hardware and good games, and many free ones look way batter than most "top" WP7 games; not that i really care tho, i'm not a heavy gamer and therefore this doesn't bother me much. Anyway in terms of usability WP7 is a pretty sweet spot between Android and iOS imho: it's, refreshing and new, pleasant to use out of the box and you don't have to spend 600€ nor hack the phone in order to have a smooth and consistent experience.
To each their own i guess...
vnvman said:
The test isn't perfect but it's fine i guess. Honestly tho the comparison is a bit ubalanced imho: you compared the fastest android device on the market (i know how good it is, i owned one for 5 months) with possibly one of the slowest and oldest WP7 devices, and ofc the iPhone4 is as well a piece of history nowadays. To be fair you should have compared similar hardware: the LG phone you have there has the same hardware (cpu+gpu) as the HTC Desire, but compared to it the Desire feels like a sluggish piece of **** (not talking out of my ass, i've been using one for over a year), even if you tweak it and OC it like hell. Anyway there's no denying that right now even with the latest hardware WP7 sucks badly in terms of gaming, and the few games we have are insanely overpriced. Android has good hardware and good games, and many free ones look way batter than most "top" WP7 games; not that i really care tho, i'm not a heavy gamer and therefore this doesn't bother me much. Anyway in terms of usability WP7 is a pretty sweet spot between Android and iOS imho: it's, refreshing and new, pleasant to use out of the box and you don't have to spend 600€ nor hack the phone in order to have a smooth and consistent experience.
To each their own i guess...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He may have compared the fastest android phone on the market, but the simple fact of the matter is that the GSII has outsold any other android device by far (over 15 million). I still believe more people have an Iphone 4 and not a 4s, and is there a such thing as a popular WP7 device? So either way he is comparing the top sellers of each OS.
lowandbehold said:
He may have compared the fastest android phone on the market, but the simple fact of the matter is that the GSII has outsold any other android device by far (over 15 million). I still believe more people have an Iphone 4 and not a 4s, and is there a such thing as a popular WP7 device? So either way he is comparing the top sellers of each OS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sure but is this little LG phone the top selling WP7 device? I hope not.
I still think that the simple fact that most people have a specific phone doesn't make it the best one. If it was so then the Galaxy 5 aka i5500 would be an amazing phone compared to the Titan, but last time i checked it was a cheap low end Android and sucked balls. Ok sorry, just kidding.
Anyway call me weird, but i still think that a fair comparison is the one between devices with at least comparable specs (or at least price tags), rather than the one between those with comparable sold units. I know there isn't such a thing as a dual-core WP7 device, but there's quite a big difference between a Snapdragon [email protected] and a Snapdragon [email protected], believe me.
vnvman said:
Sure but is this little LG phone the top selling WP7 device? I hope not.
I still think that the simple fact that most people have a specific phone doesn't make it the best one. If it was so then the Galaxy 5 aka i5500 would be an amazing phone compared to the Titan, but last time i checked it was a cheap low end Android and sucked balls. Ok sorry, just kidding.
Anyway call me weird, but i still think that a fair comparison is the one between devices with at least comparable specs (or at least price tags), rather than the one between those with comparable sold units. I know there isn't such a thing as a dual-core WP7 device, but there's quite a big difference between a Snapdragon [email protected] and a Snapdragon [email protected], believe me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So to even out the comparison he should be using and android device that is a year and a half old?
I'm actually surprised at the lack of attention this thread is getting, seeing as there have been quite extensive (and usually unproductive) discussions on this subject I was expecting people to flock to this thread.
The iPhone 4 / 4S is irrelevant IMO. The iPhone 4S has only been released recently and isn't mainstream yet. Past discussions have always concerned the 4 for one and the 4S does nothing to solve the issues I've demonstrated.
As for the question: "Why these phones", these are the ones I had in the shop at the time. I'll see if I can update or add when I have other devices.
As for my credentials, I own several repair shops (yes actual physical shops not somebody who works at home). I pride myself in being able to repair just about any phone with any issue unless it has water damage. I have most popular phones in stock and I also deal in used phones. Thus I have easy access to all the phones and I also get to play with all of them.
GIR said:
I'm actually surprised at the lack of attention this thread is getting, seeing as there have been quite extensive (and usually unproductive) discussions on this subject I was expecting people to flock to this thread.
The iPhone 4 / 4S is irrelevant IMO. The iPhone 4S has only been released recently and isn't mainstream yet. Past discussions have always concerned the 4 for one and the 4S does nothing to solve the issues I've demonstrated.
As for the question: "Why these phones", these are the ones I had in the shop at the time. I'll see if I can update or add when I have other devices.
As for my credentials, I own several repair shops (yes actual physical shops not somebody who works at home). I pride myself in being able to repair just about any phone with any issue unless it has water damage. I have most popular phones in stock and I also deal in used phones. Thus I have easy access to all the phones and I also get to play with all of them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh it will get attention, trust me...the trolls are still asleep!
lowandbehold said:
So to even out the comparison he should be using and android device that is a year and a half old?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not really, picking a "high end" one like the Titan or the Lumia should be fair enough imo. I have this Omnia W here which should behave fine enough (despite being a mid range phone it still packs the latest gen WP7 SOC) but unfortunately I sold my GS2 a couple weeks ago because I was low on cash, so I can't make a decent comparison myself.
vnvman said:
Not really, picking a "high end" one like the Titan or the Lumia should be fair enough imo. I have this Omnia W here which should behave fine enough (despite being a mid range phone it still packs the latest gen WP7 SOC) but unfortunately I sold my GS2 a couple weeks ago because I was low on cash, so I can't make a decent comparison myself.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've had a Lumia 800 here and to be honest it doesn't matter that much. Games are still jerky, the XBox Live app is the same and the browser is the same. When it comes to specs most WP7 devices aren't that much different from one and other. The Lumia 800 has better specs but that bit extra doesn't really make a big difference in the end.
GIR said:
I've had a Lumia 800 here and to be honest it doesn't matter that much. Games are still jerky, the XBox Live app is the same and the browser is the same. When it comes to specs most WP7 devices aren't that much different from one and other. The Lumia 800 has better specs but that bit extra doesn't really make a big difference in the end.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah I wasn't talking about games, we all know they suck on WP7. But as far as regular usage is concerned my Omnia W feels a lot snappier compared to the Omnia 7 I've had for a few months. Ofc there's no night and day difference, but they are different to be honest.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cAsprVPIRc
What do you think? Seeing what android does on 4 cores still doesn't make me miss android and it's poor responsiveness and lag. I'll stick with my Lumias. That said, the One X jumping onboard the polycarbonate train behind Nokia was not a bad move, it's certainly their best looking device to date and if Nokia wasn't around, a WP7 variant might be my next phone.
Stick with the Lumias you have up for trade in the "Wanting to sell" forum? It is understandable why you don't like Android...you just don't know what you are doing. It's like putting your average Joe behind the seat of a Formula 1 race car...he will never realize its true potential. But hey, you just want an automatic transmission that any old little lady can drive, right?
No, stick with the unlocked 900 I have. Still making statements without foundation I see.
i like , htc one
And how long will you stick with this phone when all rumors point towards all current WP7 devices not getting updated?
Two sources that are known for mocking wp7 and being wrong about it as opposed to those who say that at least the second Gen devices will and the Apollo tests on the lumia 900 and 610? Odds are in my favor, not that I won't pick up a new device then anyway.
htc one x is much better than nokia lumia
android winner!
op-war said:
htc one x is much better than nokia lumia
android winner!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It Depends
Honestly I don't really like the One X. Tegra is 100% marketing crap. it's ridiculous that you have to deal with a browser forced to suck due to the stupid companion core that doesn't let the quad core goodness kick in. To me the One S is a much better phone: it's more pocketable, it has a good S4 SOC doing its job flawlessly (and smoking Tegra pretty much everywhere). The One X is such a waste. Also, I really don't get why pretty much every OEM is pushing for making bigger and bigger screens month after month. Nowadays if you wanna have a phone with good internals you have to carry a ****ing tablet in your pocket, everything else is "mid range". Honestly the GS2 was already too big for me. I'm pretty sure at some point I'll be forced to use an iPhone because everything else will be too big for my pockets. I really hope that at least on WP I'll still be able to find some decently specced device with a 4" screen in the future, I really don't like where the market is heading. By the way, the 900 is way too big and heavy for my taste. I'm 174 cm tall and I wear relatively skinny jeans, I'd look like a moron carrying something like that around in a pocket, not to mention that I'll drop it make it look like crap it in a couple days. And no, I'm not gonna go out with some kind of waist pack like a douchebag. Sorry but a 4.3"+ inchers aren't gonna be mainstream, I can't see girls carrying around a 5" iPhone in the nearest future. Nerds will have to deal with it at some point, a phone is still a phone. Just my 2 cents.
Lumia 900 aint bad, it's just android is far better in terms of user control. It's understandable why you don't like android, it has a learning curve, but heck, once you start tweaking your phone, mastering it... god it's so much damn fun you'll do it just for the sake of tweaking it more and more. AND every tweak will make your phone faster and better than it is as a stock phone.
Android OS better , so HTC One is better .
I have both, but Lumia is going on sale. too limited for now IMO and seeing how good performance is on my X, i wont miss WP7 smoothness ATM. Also, my Lumia never gets close to the LTE speeds my X (and last phone, Vivid) get. My One X gets around 22-30mbps and lumia averages at 5-8mbps... No clue why. Lumia feels more solid though and like the weight of it
Im sure ill look at next gen WP8 phones from Nokia later on, but I rather have everything I need now rather than wait for something better having a somewhat limited feel with my phone
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
Zorigo said:
Lumia 900 aint bad, it's just android is far better in terms of user control. It's understandable why you don't like android, it has a learning curve, but heck, once you start tweaking your phone, mastering it... god it's so much damn fun you'll do it just for the sake of tweaking it more and more. AND every tweak will make your phone faster and better than it is as a stock phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
went through that phase, I was crack-flashing roms and kernels just to create the smoothest experience possible. Then, I tried wp7 and it was smoother than anything android could produce out of the box.
Half the guy mustache is missing. Lol.
Too bad the OS is hampering the Lumia camera back.
Sent from my Nexus S using Tapatalk 2
mido hamdy said:
Android OS better , so HTC One is better .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is debatable
mido hamdy said:
Android OS better , so HTC One is better .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Flawless logic is flawless
Sent from my Lumia 800 using XDA Windows Phone 7 App
The software/hardware conflict with the camera is sad, but not as bad as the conflict with every android phone and the general UI of it all. I'll take a camera that's a bit grainy in the dark over lag and instability any day.
Your opinion you're entitled to it, no matter how wrong you are.
Nice troll attempt though.
Sent from my Nexus S using Tapatalk 2
No troll attempt, it's very visible and even noted by the reviewer in HTC's knew favored phone.
vnvman said:
Honestly I don't really like the One X. Tegra is 100% marketing crap. it's ridiculous that you have to deal with a browser forced to suck due to the stupid companion core that doesn't let the quad core goodness kick in. To me the One S is a much better phone: it's more pocketable, it has a good S4 SOC doing its job flawlessly (and smoking Tegra pretty much everywhere). The One X is such a waste. Also, I really don't get why pretty much every OEM is pushing for making bigger and bigger screens month after month. Nowadays if you wanna have a phone with good internals you have to carry a ****ing tablet in your pocket, everything else is "mid range". Honestly the GS2 was already too big for me. I'm pretty sure at some point I'll be forced to use an iPhone because everything else will be too big for my pockets. I really hope that at least on WP I'll still be able to find some decently specced device with a 4" screen in the future, I really don't like where the market is heading. By the way, the 900 is way too big and heavy for my taste. I'm 174 cm tall and I wear relatively skinny jeans, I'd look like a moron carrying something like that around in a pocket, not to mention that I'll drop it make it look like crap it in a couple days. And no, I'm not gonna go out with some kind of waist pack like a douchebag. Sorry but a 4.3"+ inchers aren't gonna be mainstream, I can't see girls carrying around a 5" iPhone in the nearest future. Nerds will have to deal with it at some point, a phone is still a phone. Just my 2 cents.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey I love that everything looks way better on that 5" screen but l feel it looks ridiculous when you're holding it up to your ear while on a call. And a 3.5" screen is way too small to do anything other than make calls and sms. 4.3 is perfect for me. But it does look like 4.3+ is going mainstream now. And I thought girls wouldn't buy them either, but in the last few days I've seen 2 women holding Notes. So hey, no need to worry fellow nerds ;-)
Sent from my A500 using XDA
I think it's got a cute camera, but all around it just... sucks. The battery is even worse than my Nexus 5, and the phone is just ugly, especially in the front, in my opinion.
Actually I like the design much better than the M9, not too worried about the battery, and it seems HTC has finally overcome it's greatest flaw in its camera.
Wish it has a dual SIM function (it's important in SE Asia and developing countries) and waterproof.
Otherwise, it's pretty nice.
I just can't believe they are still plastering a fugly logo on the front taking up valuable screen real-estate. I'll never buy another HTC as long as they keep doing that. At the very least they got rid of the "hardware" buttons... except then they replaced it with a larger hardware button copying samsung and apple. The waste of space is just terrible. Nexus 6 has slightly more than half an inch in top/bottom bezeling combined while these things look like they are rocking 1.5 inches or more!
Not to mention it's looks like a sad copy attempt at newer samsung/iphone styles - hardly unique at all. I don't think the copy-cat ploy is going to work for the third guy doing it. I'd bet money that this is yet another flop.
http://www.xda-developers.com/the-a9-is-not-the-hero-htc-needs-nor-the-one-it-deserves/
Xenosis said:
I just can't believe they are still plastering a fugly logo on the front taking up valuable screen real-estate. I'll never buy another HTC as long as they keep doing that. At the very least they got rid of the "hardware" buttons... except then they replaced it with a larger hardware button copying samsung and apple. The waste of space is just terrible. Nexus 6 has slightly more than half an inch in top/bottom bezeling combined while these things look like they are rocking 1.5 inches or more!
Not to mention it's looks like a sad copy attempt at newer samsung/iphone styles - hardly unique at all. I don't think the copy-cat ploy is going to work for the third guy doing it. I'd bet money that this is yet another flop.
http://www.xda-developers.com/the-a9-is-not-the-hero-htc-needs-nor-the-one-it-deserves/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think the design is necessarily a bad thing. It may be emulating Apple, but it's still metal and it will appeal to quite a number of people, if not for the design then for the build quality alone. With that being said, the battery is most likely gonna drag the phone down, unless they can do what the Moto G is doing with their battery, which by the way is larger than the A9.
Also, I hope there are capacitative back and recent apps buttons to complement the physical home button. Otherwise, the home button kinda becomes redundant, even with a fingerprint scanner, because you have the full set of controls on the screen right above the home button.
Using HTC 8 years now but couldn't find new model for me. Like the design but inside phone is not what you expecting from phones these days.
Just to hang for time that HTC makes serious phone I switched to OnePlus 2.
HTC A9
Very bad design, I think they need to change thier concept designer and CEO then they try to find another inspiration like One M7 & 8 and I think they will not be able to do that until they think out of Apple hater Box
bennaye said:
I don't think the design is necessarily a bad thing. It may be emulating Apple, but it's still metal and it will appeal to quite a number of people, if not for the design then for the build quality alone. With that being said, the battery is most likely gonna drag the phone down, unless they can do what the Moto G is doing with their battery, which by the way is larger than the A9.
Also, I hope there are capacitive back and recent apps buttons to complement the physical home button. Otherwise, the home button kinda becomes redundant, even with a fingerprint scanner, because you have the full set of controls on the screen right above the home button.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Bad? nah. Sad? I think so. Who needs more of the same thing? It's because they are failing that they decided to copy what they thought would be a safe bet. Personally I'm not even too bothered by the small battery as I pretty much always keep my phones around 50% and up as wherever I am there is usually a place to charge them. Fast charging will make that even more feasible. (Probably their logic)
In my opinion, the fingerprint scanner should be on the back of every phone, like many are already doing, not the front. Or even on the side makes more sense. It should be in a place that is easy to access with only one hand. The bottom of the front of the phone makes it so you have to support it with the other hand while swiping to do it comfortably.
My point is that any capacitive/hardware buttons that can be done in software are redundant and they are especially atrocious when taking up screen real estate. When done in software, the screen can be 1/3 inch to 1/2 inch larger.
When I got my One m7 way back, I thought it was awesome and compared to what was out there, it was. That is until other phones came out that were the same size but had smaller bezels, didn't waste space with a giant logo and capacitive buttons. A clear successor in design IMO.
Maybe it's just me but since everyone can do nice specs, a decision on a phone comes down to smaller things and for me, screen size/quality is one of the most important. The way the front of the phone looks is important, and how well utilized the space is is important. HTC has always done a horrible job utilizing space well so far as I've seen.
I hate it. The design is fine but why? Don't copy Apple just to get a few new users to switch. Stick with the M8 style design with some differences. Bezeless? The specs are not that great. They even removed boomsound wtf. (unless it is considered a mid range phone).
They need to spend some money and get ultra specs. They need a 4k screen, ultra boomsound speakers that are really loud with a pop out speaker like the old HTC Surround while keeping it a thin phone, Snapdragon 820 with 2 gh and 3-4 gigs of ram, a 25 ultra pixel rear camera with Nikon DLSR sensors to bring the ultimate in picture taking and making it the best camera phone ever even better than some stand alones, 6 ultra pixel front facing cam, 3500 MaH battery. Now if they did that, I'd buy that in a heart beat or are these features too unrealistic?
HTC needs to realize people care about what is written on the specs sheet next to the phone in a phone store. People see low numbers (even though the processor may optimize it to make the low numbers feel like higer for example battery MaH) they will go to another phone that has higher numbers on the specs sheet.
I just really hope they change their mind about their design philosophy to me its not a good change, but I applaud the hardware and the fact they have marshmellow running on it already
MsEvyLynch said:
I hate it. The design is fine but why? Don't copy Apple just to get a few new users to switch. Stick with the M8 style design with some differences. Bezeless? The specs are not that great. They even removed boomsound wtf. (unless it is considered a mid range phone).
They need to spend some money and get ultra specs. They need a 4k screen, ultra boomsound speakers that are really loud with a pop out speaker like the old HTC Surround while keeping it a thin phone, Snapdragon 820 with 2 gh and 3-4 gigs of ram, a 25 ultra pixel rear camera with Nikon DLSR sensors to bring the ultimate in picture taking and making it the best camera phone ever even better than some stand alones, 6 ultra pixel front facing cam, 3500 MaH battery. Now if they did that, I'd buy that in a heart beat or are these features too unrealistic?
HTC needs to realize people care about what is written on the specs sheet next to the phone in a phone store. People see low numbers (even though the processor may optimize it to make the low numbers feel like higer for example battery MaH) they will go to another phone that has higher numbers on the specs sheet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't agree with you on this, HTC hasn't copied from Apple. But it is other way round.
This is the design that HTC has pioneered and continued to evolve. There is a reason why iPhones and Samsung devices now look like they do, because HTC has a superior design. They always seem to fall short when it comes to specs and marketing.
Xenosis said:
My point is that any capacitive/hardware buttons that can be done in software are redundant and they are especially atrocious when taking up screen real estate. When done in software, the screen can be 1/3 inch to 1/2 inch larger.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My point was that since HTC already went with a physical home button at the front which doubles as a fingerprint scanner, they might as well include the other capacitive buttons. Having just one button on the front seems kinda pointless. But I do agree that the fingerprint sensor should be on the side or on the back.
MsEvyLynch said:
I hate it. The design is fine but why? Don't copy Apple just to get a few new users to switch. Stick with the M8 style design with some differences. Bezeless? The specs are not that great. They even removed boomsound wtf. (unless it is considered a mid range phone).
They need to spend some money and get ultra specs. They need a 4k screen, ultra boomsound speakers that are really loud with a pop out speaker like the old HTC Surround while keeping it a thin phone, Snapdragon 820 with 2 gh and 3-4 gigs of ram, a 25 ultra pixel rear camera with Nikon DLSR sensors to bring the ultimate in picture taking and making it the best camera phone ever even better than some stand alones, 6 ultra pixel front facing cam, 3500 MaH battery. Now if they did that, I'd buy that in a heart beat or are these features too unrealistic?
HTC needs to realize people care about what is written on the specs sheet next to the phone in a phone store. People see low numbers (even though the processor may optimize it to make the low numbers feel like higer for example battery MaH) they will go to another phone that has higher numbers on the specs sheet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dude, first of all, anything that has to do with Nikon sucks. Second of all, complaining like that just makes you look bad.
herzig.grant said:
Dude, first of all, anything that has to do with Nikon sucks. Second of all, complaining like that just makes you look bad.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not complaining, I'm just stating what HTC needs to do to get back where they need to be. Going this route is just making it worse for them.
Honestly I think it is a dumb a** phone and it seems like HTC is in self destruct mode
MsEvyLynch said:
I'm not complaining, I'm just stating what HTC needs to do to get back where they need to be. Going this route is just making it worse for them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah you have a point.
I've used HTC phones basically for almost every upgrade I had. I found their build and quality to always be top notch. What I liked about HTC is that you can almost always unlock the bootloader and go the custom rom route and the boomsound speakers. The One A9 ditched everything to try to get more people to like HTC. What I want is a HTC phone with top notch specs 5.1-5.5" screen, I could care less about finger print scanning but sure whynot, a nice shooter with OIS and a competitive price point and I think they should be able to get back. Sense skin on the HTC is what makes the experience unique.
nice especially the design though I'm not impressed with its built and other stuff. sticking with the N5 ndysf
Best thing about HTC these days is still Sense interface. Stock android, Samsung etc...OS/look/feel is garbage. I remember when I first got the Nexus, the one with the led trackball..years ago. I almost dumped that thing in 1 day until I found the ability to get an updated Rom with better apps/design and look/feel of the phone. HTC was a saving grace. Get rid of Blinkfeed, keep the clean/polished apps of Sense and interface...and put some real serious hardware in the phone.
Only good thing about this is going to be marshmellow/developers and the ability to have all carriers supported and unlocking out of the box in the US. Otherwise, from the forums, you can see how support of the M9 and later variants have decreased over the years.
Don't know. Maybe sell the M9 and try the A9...I don't do much with my phone, and the little I do, I really need a better polished interface that Apple/MS have done well for years versus the Android.
Shoot, been playing with Candy 5 on my M9 which is pretty close to Marshmellow and standard Android, what a piece of garbage interface/apps they still produce Google....pretty pathetic considering.
Unfortunately, I'm on Verizon for the next year...likely jump ship in 14 months and go back to something like ATT/Cricket and universal/GSM phones. Good thing my wife/kids have iPhones that will work on any network already. Just need to dump my VZW M9 and move on with my life...gheez. The mobile/cell phone business is really a joke with many manufacturers, such a cluster these days and so many options, most Android.
A few months ago I was in Sam's Club, and an AT&T salesman cornered me to try to sell me a new phone. I wasn't really all that interested; but my goddaughter was with me and wasn't done shopping yet, so I figured I'd let him pitch me.
He started talking about the camera on whatever phone he was pushing, and I interrupted him. "I don't care about the camera," I said. "What chipset does it have?"
Almost without skipping a beat, he started talking about the camera again. So I stopped him again and asked about something else, probably the battery capacity.
He picked up right where he left off talking about the amazing camera. I walked away.
More recently, I've been looking at phones to possibly (well, inevitably, eventually) replace a V20. On practically every manufacturer's site, at least three quarters of the page for any given phone is devoted to the camera and all the things it can do. Sometimes I can't even find the specs I'm looking for and have to search for them on Google. Sometimes it seems almost as if the manufacturers want to hide the specs -- except for the camera -- even when they're quite impressive.
I rarely use the camera on my phone. When I do, it's usually to take a picture of the serial number of something I'm looking for parts for, showing someone how much snow fell where I live, or some similarly boring or mundane thing. It's the absolute last thing I care about on a phone. But it seems to be the thing manufacturers spend the most time marketing.
Trying to find out how the audio quality on the earpiece is, on the other hand, is almost impossible -- at least on Web sites. One would think they'd upload a sound sample because it is, after all, a phone. How it sounds should count for something, no?
The last time I was in an AT&T store to pick up a SIM card, they tried to sell me a phone. That's okay. It's what they do; and at that time, I was actually interested in the V20 (which I eventually wound up buying, but from a distributor). I asked the salesman if he had one activated that I could listen to. He looked at me like I had two heads. I guess he never came across a customer who actually wanted to know what a phone sounded like. Am I the only one left who actually uses phones to make phone calls?
My process of searching for a new phone goes something like this:
1. Narrow down by processor, chipset, and RAM.
2. Narrow down by band support.
3. Find YouTube teardown videos to determine the difficulty of replacing the batteries in the remaining candidates, and eliminate the ones that seem designed to make it as hard as possible.
4. Search for comments about sound quality and battery life.
5. Start looking for the best deals.
I couldn't care less about the cameras because even the worst ones are good enough for what I use them for. Apparently that makes me unusual. It seems to me that most people are looking for a high-quality camera that has Internet access more so than a communication device.
Richard
You are not the only one who doesn't care about phone camera quality. I use mobile phones for gaming, so when I buy phone I first look for it's GPU. Strong GPUs like Adreno 30 series (330, 430, 530, 540 and 630) means in most casses that phones have good CPU. Most today tasks can be done with 4GB of RAM so does phone have 4, 6 or 8gb ram it's no so important for now.
Lilke Studio said:
You are not the only one who doesn't care about phone camera quality. I use mobile phones for gaming, so when I buy phone I first look for it's GPU. Strong GPUs like Adreno 30 series (330, 430, 530, 540 and 630) means in most casses that phones have good CPU. Most today tasks can be done with 4GB of RAM so does phone have 4, 6 or 8gb ram it's no so important for now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I tend to keep phones for a long time, so I lean toward bleeding edge hardware. But this obsession with camera quality is starting to get a little ridiculous. Unless people are blowing up the images to poster size, I think we got past the human eye's ability to see the difference quite a while ago.
Another thing I don't care about is whether the phone is waterproof. I'll take a removable battery over waterproofing any day. Also, considering that I own two GoPro cameras that I use underwater all the time, I think the excuse that a phone can't be waterproof and have a removable (or at least user-replaceable) battery is hogwash anyway.
GeekOnTheHill said:
I tend to keep phones for a long time, so I lean toward bleeding edge hardware. But this obsession with camera quality is starting to get a little ridiculous. Unless people are blowing up the images to poster size, I think we got past the human eye's ability to see the difference quite a while ago.
Another thing I don't care about is whether the phone is waterproof. I'll take a removable battery over waterproofing any day. Also, considering that I own two GoPro cameras that I use underwater all the time, I think the excuse that a phone can't be waterproof and have a removable (or at least user-replaceable) battery is hogwash anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you want good camera for big posters and images use DSLR or professional cameras like Sony, Cannon or Nikon for that. Phone cameras will never reach that level of quality because their objective is too small. For every other needs phone camera is just fine. You are right human eye can see differences only on big screens and on high zooms.
Lilke Studio said:
If you want good camera for big posters and images use DSLR or professional cameras like Sony, Cannon or Nikon for that. Phone cameras will never reach that level of quality because their objective is too small. For every other needs phone camera is just fine. You are right human eye can see differences only on big screens and on high zooms.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly.
Well I care about one good main camera. I don't care for multiple lens, portrait mode, wide angled and all those gimmicks. I think tech reviewers lost touch with reality and most regular people in the real world rarely use all those gimmick features. Having a manual mode is more important to me than the additional lens and gimmicks.
I agree with you OP. Processor, GPU, and RAM are the things most important to me when choosing a phone. That’s what makes a phone snappy and fast. The next are battery life and price. I think for the average buyer, pretty much every phone satisfies their basic need (browsing and running some apps like facebook). What makes them different is the camera, so manufacturers try to capitalize on that.
ramencoder said:
I agree with you OP. Processor, GPU, and RAM are the things most important to me when choosing a phone. That’s what makes a phone snappy and fast. The next are battery life and price. I think for the average buyer, pretty much every phone satisfies their basic need (browsing and running some apps like facebook). What makes them different is the camera, so manufacturers try to capitalize on that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree; and as much as I think the obsession with cameras is silly, at least it's one of the more-positive tactics manufacturers use to sell new phones to people who really don't need them.
Other than gamers, few average users will really notice much (if any) difference in the performance that the hardware improvements of the past few years make possible. If you're using your phone primarily for SMS, WhatsApp, and checking your Twitter and FecesBook feeds, there's little subjective difference between a four-year-old flagship phone and one built this morning.
Natural obsolescence is a function of how a device is used and the demands that newer software make on the device; and most of the software that average users use most simply isn't all that resource-intensive. Either of my V20's are subjectively as zippy today as they were the day I bought them, even on stock ROM with few mods other than uninstalling LG's and AT&T's useless crapware and disabling Google apps that I don't need, when running apps that most typical users use most.
So how to get users to replace phones that still do what they need them to do, and still do it quite well? Enhanced cameras and other gimmicks that may be useless in the real world, but still elicit an "Oh wow!" response, are at least an honest tactic. If people want to pay for useless gimmickry, more power to them. Personally, I'd prefer a cutting-edge processor and GPU, more RAM, and more complete band coverage, than a 108MP camera whose capabilities I'll NEVER make use of. But at least fancy cameras are honest, even if useless for most people.
The tactics that really turn me off -- to the point of swearing of a manufacturer altogether -- are those specifically designed to bring about obsolescence. Making batteries difficult to replace is the most obvious example. I always watch teardown videos before buying a phone, and the degree to which manufacturers are going to assure that average users can't replace their phones' batteries is infuriating to me.
Hiding the battery behind a bazillion cables and connectors is one thing. That makes replacement tedious, but not dangerous. Gluing the battery into the phone, on the other hand, can cause less-knowledgeable DIY-ers to lose their fingers, hands, or eyes if they don't know better than to try to pry the battery out of the phone without somehow loosening the glue.
To me, that's just unconscionable; and although I hope it never happens to anyone, if it does happen, I hope that person sues the living **** out of the phone's manufacturer, wins, and puts them out of business.
The manufacturers' arguments in favor of gluing the batteries in are nonsense. There is no functional reason to glue the battery in at all, much less that tenaciously. The argument that it will rattle otherwise is garbage. All the phones I've owned except one have had removable batteries. None of them rattled. I'm sitting here shaking a V20 as I type this. It doesn't rattle.
Planned obsolescence is bad enough. Planned obsolescence using methods that can maim people is despicable.
I think I can understand why manufacturers opted to use non-removable batteries. It allows them to reduce the phone's thickness (this was the trend when iphone 6 was released). It also allows them to make irregular-shaped batteries, like the one in iphone x, to make room for other components. Last is that it makes it easier for manufacturers to waterproof their device. Though, I agree with you that gluing the battery to the phone is overkill. A simple double-sided tape is enough.