Related
Hi All
I currently have (HAD: to give it away) a Motorola RAZR i with Intel Inside.
I love the phone, its fast, i like that i has NFC and i like that it has a slot for MicroSD.
I understand that the NFC and the MicroSD is not available on the Moto G.
However i like the fact that the Moto G will have KitKat.
I bought the Razr i for 130 pounds, now i can not buy it again for that price, i only find it for 200.
So my option is buy a Moto G or spend 50 more and buy the RAZRi again.
Cant make my mind up Help?
Thanks
Xiao
I never had a Razr i so I can't help compare them.
But do you have a chance to somehow test the moto g (friend, in a store?). I think that wouls be the best for you to experience which phone you prefer.
Generally to say, I love the battery life, speed, everything about the moto g (also have a n4 and n5). The camera is okay.
And I don't need more than 16gb at all so I don't care about the lack of sdcard slot.
creambyemute said:
I never had a Razr i so I can't help compare them.
But do you have a chance to somehow test the moto g (friend, in a store?). I think that wouls be the best for you to experience which phone you prefer.
Generally to say, I love the battery life, speed, everything about the moto g (also have a n4 and n5). The camera is okay.
And I don't need more than 16gb at all so I don't care about the lack of sdcard slot.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I must agree, love Moto G smoothness, love that motorla support for this phone, love that battery and I also don't need SD slot.
I had Razr (not Razr i) and it was little laggy. And that battery there, I hate it. The good thing is I bought one year old Razr for 140€ and 6 months later I traded it to almost new Moto G (that costs 199€) so I wins with Moto G
One thing I miss is camera. Yes, it doesn't make the best pictures, but it does take some pictures when you need and thats okay.
Moto G will learn you that even the small things can do big miracles
Had (have) the RARZi and bought Moto G just for curiosity, I never switched RZi on again besides for some camera comparisons, in which MG won massively in low light.
Performance wise it is black and white: The Intel Atom is very snappy, databases (SMS) open up slightly faster on RZi than on MG, but the overall performance goes to MG. Battery runtime is about the same, 2-3 days is easy.
Personally I like the AMOLED of RZi, but I got used to LCD in 2 days and now I really enjoy that fabulous display on MG. Brighter, sharper, sunlight readable. WIFI and GPS works hands down better on MG.
In palm of the hand the RZi is edgy and sharp, MG soft and smooth, I like that. Never missed the SD card (I hated it on RZi, because I always searched my files on the wrong place, internal, external, blah), same for NFC - I don't use it. Sound quality is Motorola like very good on both phones.
If I must buy a new phone right now: Moto G, no doubt.
That is my subjective opinion but I hope this helps.
Thanks shaftenberg
Think I am gonna switch to razr I. I love amoled screens . I miss NFC and need a decent camera for daylight shots. Moto G one just doesn't cut it for me. Great phone though
Sent from my XT1032 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
The Razr i is also like what 2 years old?
Did it even get JB, it is old tech now really, my wife had one, it was alright, but I'd go moto G personally.
I have a Razr i and i really loved it since the first day of use, but, I will switch from it to Moto G this next week.
I checked this phone on some stores and friends, the speed is amazing. Fantastic speed, no lags, LCD is really nice and I think it is much better than my Razr's amoled (question of personal opinion).
So, I would go for Moto G.
Sent from my XT916 using xda app-developers app
I loved the RAZR i, I had one 1 year ago and it was fast, unfortunately it lacked dev support and its stuck with Android 4.1.2, but it was a great phone, the lags were very rare, just... it lacked the Moto Love...
joel_sinbad said:
I loved the RAZR i, I had one 1 year ago and it was fast, unfortunately it lacked dev support and its stuck with Android 4.1.2, but it was a great phone, the lags were very rare, just... it lacked the Moto Love...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks everyone
I bought the Moto G 16GB today.
Have you guys noticed that nothing has been done about the G camera's excess noise reduction? It smudges a lot of the detail that should be there but isn't.
I have a feeling that the Aptina AR0543 CMOS sensor can take significant more detailed pictures but Motorola saw it and thought: "hmmm this camera is too good and it will make the Moto G too much of a good deal compared to the X" so they added some ridiculous software noise reduction to make pictures look worse and thus make consumers think "hmmm if I want a good camera I should spend the extra money and get the X"
I know some people will think this is unlikely, but there's no good reason why the noise reduction is so high on the Moto G's camera and considering that the Moto G is the saving grace for Motorola while the X hasn't really sold that well, they should just give up and make the Moto G's camera even better by getting rid of the noise reduction and tuning the colors so they keep selling more and more Moto G's.
What do you think?
yes this is true.. even my good old galaxy apollo's 3.1MP shooter is far better than Moto G's. camera is the worst thing happened to Moto G.
Sent from my XT1033 using Tapatalk
Yes. See this. Moto X had the same problem with the noise reduction.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7353/moto-x-update-dramatically-improves-camera-quality
Either Motorola doesn't know yet(post on their forums about it a lot so they know) OR they're not updating it on purpose so the Moto X camera looks better.
Yeah, I think they overcompensated with the noise reduction, that should be a post-effect. My beef is with the white balance, it's noticeably blue. They're all software issues and I can't see how that could have been missed. All the hardware is there for a decent picture.
Subject also discussed here:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2567260
I wonder if just a bomb tickin to explode with an update (as waht they did with the X)
Maybe they update it once the competing phones comes out
eastdata said:
Yeah, I think they overcompensated with the noise reduction, that should be a post-effect. My beef is with the white balance, it's noticeably blue. They're all software issues and I can't see how that could have been missed. All the hardware is there for a decent picture.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly. I don't see how somebody at Motorola can look at a sample image and thought that is acceptable for production unless they wanted it to be that way. Every Moto G seems to look like a oil painting when zoomed at 100% and they have to know by now but for some reason they haven't even acknowledged it despite this phone being one of the best phones of 2013 and every single publication and user online saying the camera is the single flaw in this phone.
If they never deliver a firmware update, it's got to be intentional. Hopefully I'm wrong and they are just dragging their feet since its not a very profitable device.
CADude said:
Exactly. I don't see how somebody at Motorola can look at a sample image and thought that is acceptable for production unless they wanted it to be that way. Every Moto G seem to look like a oil painting when zoomed at 100% and they have to know by now but for some reason they haven't even acknowledged it despite this phone being one of the best phones of 2013 and every single publication and user online saying the camera is the single flaw in this phone.
If they never deliver a firmware update, its got to be intentional. Hopefully I'm wrong and they are just dragging their feet since its not a very profitable device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha conspiracy theory!.... Let's flood them with emails?
Sent from my XT1033 using Tapatalk
CADude said:
Exactly. I don't see how somebody at Motorola can look at a sample image and thought that is acceptable for production unless they wanted it to be that way. Every Moto G seem to look like a oil painting when zoomed at 100% and they have to know by now but for some reason they haven't even acknowledged it despite this phone being one of the best phones of 2013 and every single publication and user online saying the camera is the single flaw in this phone.
If they never deliver a firmware update, its got to be intentional. Hopefully I'm wrong and they are just dragging their feet since its not a very profitable device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hope that it's an oversight on Moto's part. I mean the sale to Lenova was somewhat hushed and timed just after release--they probably wanted to make sure it had a market presence to allay any misgivings in the acquisition. In that sense they may have pushed for release and not vetted the software as they may otherwise have done. There have been issues with the camera app itself.
jaspreet997 said:
Haha conspiracy theory!.... Let's flood them with emails?
Sent from my XT1033 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hopefully people have already been doing that along with posting on their forum.
I am suspecting this as well.
The MSM8226 processor is supposed to be 1.4 GHz but in our Moto G it is underclocked to 1.2GHz.
5MP camera is good enough to take 1080p video, but for moto g the maximum is only 720p.
It could be the same for picture quality, they try to distinct their flagship and their budget phone by making Moto G looks worst.
Did you already find an open thread about this topic on Motorola forum?
x92 said:
I am suspecting this as well.
The MSM8226 processor is supposed to be 1.4 GHz but in our Moto G it is underclocked to 1.2GHz.
5MP camera is good enough to take 1080p video, but for moto g the maximum is only 720p.
It could be the same for picture quality, they try to distinct their flagship and their budget phone by making Moto G looks worst.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What's the point of having it clocked to 1.4 when 1.2 is already smooth as butter? It will just waste battery life.
What's the point of having it record 1080p videos when it only has a 720p screen? It will just waste memory.
I think you guys should start thinking about this logically before assuming moto is out to purposely make the moto g terrible. Optimizations of battery life and file size are important, especially on a phone that has a non removable battery and no SD card slot.
Sent from my XT1034 using Tapatalk
Too many movies! Come on..
x92 said:
I am suspecting this as well.
The MSM8226 processor is supposed to be 1.4 GHz but in our Moto G it is underclocked to 1.2GHz.
5MP camera is good enough to take 1080p video, but for moto g the maximum is only 720p.
It could be the same for picture quality, they try to distinct their flagship and their budget phone by making Moto G looks worst.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually its 1.6ghz and you can overclock it easily with the Faux Kernel.
I personally think the underclocking was done for battery life though.
pisherthefisher said:
What's the point of having it clocked to 1.4 when 1.2 is already smooth as butter? It will just waste battery life.
What's the point of having it record 1080p videos when it only has a 720p screen? It will just waste memory.
I think you guys should start thinking about this logically before assuming moto is out to purposely make the moto g terrible. Optimizations of battery life and file size are important, especially on a phone that has a non removable battery and no SD card slot.
Sent from my XT1034 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where is your evidence that processor clock at 0.2GHz slower will actually save much battery? how many percent?
It might be smooth for now but that doesn't mean it will be smooth after major android update in the future.
Really? do you mean that those phone out there that can take 1080p cannot shoot in 720p? there wasn't any option for that?
I didn't say Motorola try to make Moto G terrible, I'm just saying they try to distinct their flagship and non-flagship.
In fact, I think Moto G is a terrific product for under 200 US dollar but by looking at the capability of Moto G hardware, I wish it could be better.
Back to topic, what do you think Motorola is trying to "save" here by having excess noise reduction for the camera?
x92 said:
I am suspecting this as well.
The MSM8226 processor is supposed to be 1.4 GHz but in our Moto G it is underclocked to 1.2GHz.
5MP camera is good enough to take 1080p video, but for moto g the maximum is only 720p.
It could be the same for picture quality, they try to distinct their flagship and their budget phone by making Moto G looks worst.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're kind of taking us off topic here. Nobody has a problem with the SoC, and few people care about 1080p video since 720p is enough for most people and the screen is 720p anyway.
The image quality is the real problem here. Another issue is the fact that the video camera records at too low a bitrate.
CADude said:
You're kind of taking us off topic here. Nobody has a problem with the SoC, and few people care about 1080p video since 720p is enough for most people and the screen is 720p anyway.
The image quality is the real problem here. Another issue is the fact that the video camera records at too low a bitrate.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope, SoC and 1080p are examples that help bring out my point:
"It could be the same for picture quality, they try to distinct their flagship and their budget phone by making Moto G looks worst."
Well from what I known and seen Motorola camera have never been good on any of their smart phones that I used. But they get the job done.
Sent from my XT1032 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Feel free to share your doubts also with the Motorola team in the discussion we have opened on the support forum:
https://forums.motorola.com/posts/484ae2193b
zack.1988 said:
Feel free to share your doubts also with the Motorola team in the discussion we have opened on the support forum:
https://forums.motorola.com/posts/484ae2193b
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for opening that. The more people flood their forums, the better.
Anyone jumped from the Moto X 2014 to the S6?
If you have, what's your experience been like with the S6?
I'm after something with great build quality (very important to me), sleek looking, ok battery life (got a Moto Turbo Charger), good call quality, good speaker volume & fast lag free performance.
I ha e made the switch. It will meet all your needs. I noticed on my x of a odd almost hissing sound when on the phone which is not present on my s6.
The camera difference alone is worth it. I also don't see too much of a difference in speaker quality. And music sounds better through headphones than it did on my x
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using XDA Free mobile app
yea well,
I don't know how it seems not to be an issue for most people ... I have used the old Moto G (1. Gen, XT1032) for years and, now, decided to upgrade to the new and way more sophisticated G4 Plus (XT1642). I have to say I love the phone in pretty much all regards, but this one major drawback is just making me sad. It's not possible to listen to music on it anymore (using the audio jack) once you compare it to the good old Moto G.
The DAC quality just went as bad as cheap Samsung phones, in my opinion.
If there is anyone here with an old Moto G at home, just try it. Use the same source & headphones (e.g. Jaya the Cat - Blur). The difference is unbelievable. One enters into another (music) world listening on the Moto G. The G4 Plus just doesn't sound pleasant at all...
Consider getting a good pair of bluetooth headphones with aptx support.
You can turn the awful response to a GREAT sound using viper4android. You will need to root the phone, install TWRP and several zip files and do some configuration in order to make it work (installing drivers and enabling the dsp is not enough to make it process the audio). There is a guide to the installation process for our phones (make moto g4 plus viper4andoid scream or similar)
Spotify is a bad example, because the free version is highly compressed (lossy).
I am not sure why people use phones for music, it is not how real music should be listened. Get an external DAC and use only FLAC files.
However, I agree that a pair of GOOD Bluetooth headphones, with AptX support might be better, and only because Qualcomm included AptX support in their Snapdragon the MotoG4Plus has AptX. Today's Moto by Lenovo doesn't even know if their phones support AptX, last time they checked that on the MotoX and MotoG first gen, when Motorola cared about their brand:
https://www.aptx.com/products?field...d_product_brand_tid=2&field_aptx_type_tid=All
You can use an USB DAC with an OTG cable.
Yes, these would be the options...
Just sad, as I already have expensive Headphones and don't like to use an external DAC. I wonder, why the DAC of the Moto G so awesome sounds? You should really test it, it's an amazing difference...
Does anyone know by chance which DAC chip they built into this old Moto G?
d4fuQQ said:
yea well,
I don't know how it seems not to be an issue for most people ... I have used the old Moto G (1. Gen, XT1032) for years and, now, decided to upgrade to the new and way more sophisticated G4 Plus (XT1642). I have to say I love the phone in pretty much all regards, but this one major drawback is just making me sad. It's not possible to listen to music on it anymore (using the audio jack) once you compare it to the good old Moto G.
The DAC quality just went as bad as cheap Samsung phones, in my opinion.
If there is anyone here with an old Moto G at home, just try it. Use the same source & headphones (e.g. Jaya the Cat - Blur). The difference is unbelievable. One enters into another (music) world listening on the Moto G. The G4 Plus just doesn't sound pleasant at all...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What audio app are you using? I get the opposite when I use Google play music. I make sure it is downloaded before I play it. I have found it is nearly the same or a little better with the new G4. I have the regular G4. If you are using Pandora or Spotify they are not good for audio quality so I wouldn't assume they would be good baseline.
Make sure it's not downloaded to an SD. Has caused me issues when I did so I have to use internal storage. Latency issues.
Personally I use my ear pods from my old IPhone and it works good. Bluetooth never sounds right and any headphones that cost more than $10 aren't worth it to me. If your really concerned then I would recommend an iPod and not use your phone.
Try the nougat soak test once, there is a significant increase in audio quality..currently only Custom ROMs having the new audio quality are 7.1 ROMs by vache and shreps.
I'm using PowerAmp music player and I found it is great (my only option from a lot of players). So I bought it. I suggest you try that once. Moto G4 Plus is my first from the brand so IDK about previous generations. Also n7 Music player is also nice but it needs a lot of internal memory for album artwork. The inbuilt Audio Effects app sucks and it feels cheap. Coming from a Music phone (Xperia) to Moto is really disappointing. It's all Google and Lenovo now.
I have no issues on my moto g4 plus . I am quite particular about clear sound too . I have found it to be just nice . So far only tested it with online radio. Streaming for 94.3 Bangalore as well as Mumbai on 1cast.in .Sounds excellent . I connect the phone to my pre amp which is is also connected to an amplifier with the phono to rca cable . Of course it's like vintage audio stereo system with vintage speakers too . Sound is excellent . clear clear like a 192 Kbps feel but it might probably be 128kbps cause usually online radio stations give u that .
I even compared it with my IPhone 6s on the same stereo system . I did not find any noticeable difference maybe the iphone is 2% clearer but I don't notice it at all . .
I also have the moto g2 . Will compare that too since some people here say their old moto g seemed better regarding quality of output
In short I think the moto g4 plus has a good sound output . I wish I knew the specs like what sound card is in if it has 3dac or not like the iPhone 6s
Maybe your phone is damaged.
I compared my Moto g4 with a DVD-a player. Used the same file of a dsd track. Connected the phone to the amp via RCA. No difference.
As much as I like the S8, there are a few minor things that keep it from being great. Here's a quick mock up of what I think would have been the perfect S8:
{
"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"
}
Better fingerprint sensor location
Power/volume buttons on one side, no bixby
16:9 5.1" screen
Obviously it doesn't matter what any of us think, but imo it would be nice if someone (google) were to make something like this. Anyone agree?
You left off the front facing stereo speakers. See. ZTE Axon 7 for reference.
I actually like the tall screen and the finger print scanner... so no, I dont agree
stan54 said:
As much as I like the S8, there are a few minor things that keep it from being great. Here's a quick mock up of what I think would have been the perfect S8:
Better fingerprint sensor location
Power/volume buttons on one side, no bixby
16:9 5.1" screen
Obviously it doesn't matter what any of us think, but imo it would be nice if someone (google) were to make something like this. Anyone agree?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
right on man!:good:
I like how its been designed. People are reacting a bit over too much over the fingerprint sensor location... it aint all that bad positioning afterall.
nobody seams to understand why the finger print sensor is where it is....... the battery would have to be thinner or shorter... this location maximizes your battery size... so deal with it
I'm ok with the current design... but it's okay to dream...
dmcgrath009 said:
nobody seams to understand why the finger print sensor is where it is....... the battery would have to be thinner or shorter... this location maximizes your battery size... so deal with it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the placement of the finger print sensor was mainly because they failed to achieve what they originally wanted which was a fingerprint sensor on the front display. Rather than delay the launch, they put it in an area that made the most sense without having to redesign. It's not the ideal location, but it's not terrible either.
OP I like the design. Switching from the Nexus 6, the side buttons would be great. As for the aspect ratio, I'm starting to like the S8 being more narrow, makes it feel like the phone isn't quite as big as it is while still having a lot of screen real estate. Well done though, if that was the actual S8 I would definitely have gotten it as well.
Finger print location isn't bad. If you hold your hand out like you are using samsung pay its great positioning.
I think most are complaining because they are In the habit of where the scanner it. Need to accept and use the new location to form new habit.
I'm not so sure decreasing the 18.5:9 to 16:9 would make it go all the way down to a 5.1" screen. Maybe 5.4". But I wholeheartedly agree with all of this
Someone did something similar with the Pixel. I would've bought it if it looked like this.
ChazzMatt said:
You left off the front facing stereo speakers. See. ZTE Axon 7 for reference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Every thread you come in with that ZTE Axon 7 and stereo speakers. Let it die already.
STEREO SPEAKERS FOR THE WIN
ChazzMatt said:
You left off the front facing stereo speakers. See. ZTE Axon 7 for reference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Rado_vr6 said:
Every thread you come in with that ZTE Axon 7 and stereo speakers. Let it die already.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope. I will not. In fact reviewers agree with me. One of the complaint reviewers have had about the otherwise mostly excellent S8 is Samsung's puzzling decision for mono speaker. They own Harman Kardon!
https://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2017/04/22/samsung-galaxy-s8-review/#6425a0d73e5e
Cons: Badly positioned volume controls, idiotically positioned fingerprint sensor, pointless Bixby button and a meek mono speaker
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://mashable.com/2017/03/31/samsung-galaxy-s8-specs-compromise/
The phone only has a mono speaker
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.iretron.com/blog/posts/samsung-galaxy-s8-my-first-full-day/
I am disappointed that there are no stereo speakers,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And not only a complaint within a review, that's ACTUALLY the TITLE of an article...
http://www.androidauthority.com/samsung-stereo-speakers-761093/
Is Samsung ever going to put stereo speakers on a flagship?
Is Samsung ever going to put stereo speakers on a flagship?
But stereo speakers aren’t an under-utilized talisman for the vocal minority. Stereo speakers are the way we should hear audio from our smartphones. Heck, stereo is the way we should hear audio from any source. But Samsung’s continued resistance to putting stereo speakers on a flagship phone seems more ingrained than even the company’s love of bloatware.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I will continue to bring attention to such a design deficit. It's a great feature that even the Moto Nexus 6 also had. All top tier phones should have stereo speakers, especially if we are paying this much money.
It's just ZTE did it best and for least money, and most recently -- with a BMW-designed frame at that. Other manufacturers should follow that example. Google did it before and should do it AGAIN.
ChazzMatt said:
You left off the front facing stereo speakers. See. ZTE Axon 7 for reference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
IMO a single high quality front facing speaker that handles all the sound output of the phone is the best compromise. Phone speakers will never sound good so two mediocre speakers that take up valuable space won't sound better, just slightly louder - plus that leaves room for more battery capacity - and things like the headphone jack...
snick8467 said:
Finger print location isn't bad. If you hold your hand out like you are using samsung pay its great positioning.
I think most are complaining because they are In the habit of where the scanner it. Need to accept and use the new location to form new habit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most people are coming from older galaxies and iphones so they don't have a habit of using a rear sensor. They are complaining because it's in a horrible place and even with muscle memory you have to strain to reach it and avoid not smudging the camera. You can "accept it" - I'll keep my dignity, thanks.
Syn Ack said:
I'm not so sure decreasing the 18.5:9 to 16:9 would make it go all the way down to a 5.1" screen. Maybe 5.4". But I wholeheartedly agree with all of this
Someone did something similar with the Pixel. I would've bought it if it looked like this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Damn that's a nice design - I actually like it more than my samsung concept and hope the pixel 2 is half as good. Only thing I don't like is the tall screen. Tall aspect ratios turn one handed phones into two handed ones without the benefits of an actually bigger screen.
I thought about the screen size and 5.1" is doable. The s8 is so tall that it's like an optical illusion making you think it's bigger than it is. In reality the s7 and s8 are the same width so imagine the s7 with the top and bottom bezels cut in half. Kind of like this:
Looks like a 2013 LG G2, doesn't it? That phone really was way ahead of its time...
I don't know why people need such speakers on a phone.
They sound ****ty nevertheless and won't be used for any music consumption unless you are one of those ghetto kids who has his cellphone on blast in public transport.
The speaker is simply there to make "rinring" in case someone calles and even this is disabled my most people because it's too intrusive compared to a vibration feedback.
Speakers need space to work and I can see better usage of that space instead of putting stereo speakers in a cellphone. Really you can't even fit some decent speakers in there because they need so much room. Ever seen a subwoofer? You won't but that thing in a cellphone because it's 95% empty space inside there.
Use some headphones or connect the phone to your living room system for gods sake
First I will agree with you, then I'll disagree with you.
HzMeister said:
Damn that's a nice design - I actually like it more than my samsung concept and hope the pixel 2 is half as good. Only thing I don't like is the tall screen. Tall aspect ratios turn one handed phones into two handed ones without the benefits of an actually bigger screen.
I thought about the screen size and 5.1" is doable. The s8 is so tall that it's like an optical illusion making you think it's bigger than it is. In reality the s7 and s8 are the same width so imagine the s7 with the top and bottom bezels cut in half. Kind of like this:
Looks like a 2013 LG G2, doesn't it? That phone really was way ahead of its time...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, the LG G2 was ahead of it's time. And I'll give you specific proof via Motorola laughable efforts during that same time...
The 2013 LG G2 was the first Android with 1080p and rear camera OIS, and why the LG Nexus 5 was based on the LG G2 instead of any Motorola designs that year, even though Google owned Motorola. Whenever I compare phones or critique phones, it's usually based on hardware specs. "Software" is more opinion based. I have my opinions on software, there are things I like, love or hate -- but hardware doesn't lie. At the time, Motorola was NOT a top tier hardware/design manufacturer.
* 2013
Within ONE week of each other Motorola and LG released their 2013 flagship phones (August 1 and August 7). Motorola released the 2013 Moto X and LG released the 2013 LG G2. The 2013 Moto X HARDWARE was an excellent clone of the 2012 LG Optimus G (G1)/LG Nexus 4: 4.7", 720p, 2GB RAM -- with not even Snapdragon 8XXX chipset. Both the 2012 LG and the 2013 Moto X used Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 Pro. Seriously, for HARDWARE SPECS they just copied LG's Nexus phone from the previous year. The 2012 LG actually had 768p resolution and 13MP camera vs. the 2013 Moto X 720p and 10MP camera.
But when you compare the specs of the two 2013 "flagship" phones to each other, the Motorola is clearly a mid-tier design.
2013 LG G2 vs 2013 Motorola Moto X
http://www.phonearena.com/phones/compare/LG-G2,Motorola-Moto-X/phones/7969,7885?ft=2
The 2013 LG G2 was cutting edge specs. 5.2" 1080p, Snapdragon 800, 2GB RAM, rear camera OIS. And the 2013 LG Nexus 5 was based on that design -- just a little smaller (4.95"), so it wouldn't be an exact clone. LG had run into problems with that the previous year, where the LG Nexus 4 was an almost exact copy of the LG Optimus G (G1). Why would people pay $600 or more for the LG Optimus when they could get the LG Nexus 4 for almost half the price through Google? So, for the 2013 LG Nexus 5, they tried to differentiate their flagship from the Nexus phone through display size.
* 2014
Then in 2014, the 2014 Moto X (gen2) was an excellent copy of the 2013 LG G2, but otherwise not exceptional specs. Yeah, Motorola did it again. Just copied LG's previous year flagship phone: 5.2", 1080p, 2GB RAM, only updating it with a slightly newer Snapdragon 801 chipset than LG had used, the Snapdragon 800. OK, it did have stereo speakers to improve on the LG G2...
Whereas, at the same time LG was introducing the 2014 LG G3 -- with 1440p, 3GB RAM, and laser-focused rear camera. LG was again moving to the next level of hardware specs while Motorola was looking to the past.
2014 LG G3 vs 2014 Motorola Moto X (gen2)
http://www.phonearena.com/phones/compare/LG-G3,Motorola-Moto-X-2014/phones/8347,8897?ft=2
But REALLY, you should be comparing the 2014 Moto X to the EXCELLENT 2013 LG G2! Motorola couldn't even make a copy as good as the LG G2! And they had a YEAR to copy and paste. For instance, Motorola put in a puny 2300 mAh battery, while LG had put in a 3000 mAh battery into the 2013 LG G2. Both 5.2", 1080p, 2GB RAM. What, is 3000 mAh too big?
2014 Moto X vs 2013 LG G2
http://www.phonearena.com/phones/compare/Motorola-Moto-X-2014,LG-G2/phones/8897,7969?ft=2
* LATE 2014
Only with the late 2014 5.95" Shamu (Moto Nexus 6) and 5.2" Quark (Droid Turbo, Moto Turbo, Moto Maxx) phones did Motorola finally join the ranks of top tier manufacturers like Samsung and LG. 1440p AMOLED, 3GB RAM, 64GB internal memory, turbo charging (Quick Charge 2.0), Qi wireless charging. The larger phone had stereo speakers and rear camera OIS, not sure why Motorola left them off the smaller phone. The smaller 5.2" Quark had 21MP camera and 3900 mAh battery. Yes, the SMALLER phone had a LARGER battery. Because Google always skimped on their Nexus batteries for some strange reason.
(I haven't updated the OS specs below, it's still on the the last versions when I used this comparison, but the hardware specs have not changed on the two phones.)
I bought THREE of the Moto Maxx XT1225 phones. It was basically the 5.2" version of the Moto Nexus 6.
How do you fit a 3900 mAh battery into a 5.2" display phone? Easy. You just put it in. See that's the FALLACY I am going to bash you on in the next point. There's ALWAYS ROOM for what you want to put into a phone. ALWAYS.
And I'll explain in my next point...
HzMeister said:
IMO a single high quality front facing speaker that handles all the sound output of the phone is the best compromise. Phone speakers will never sound good so two mediocre speakers that take up valuable space won't sound better, just slightly louder - plus that leaves room for more battery capacity - and things like the headphone jack...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1) Then why didn't Samsung put in a a single high quality front facing speaker? Instead they put in a bottom firing speaker. You don't even know the speaker Samsung has on their S8/S8+.
What you think is the "speaker" is the earpiece to listen to phone calls.
2) But, let's pretend Samsung did put in a "a single high quality front facing speaker".
Why would you use "a single high quality front facing speaker" but then inexplicably downgrade to " two mediocre speakers" for stereo? Oh, here's a solution! How about TWO of those " single high quality front facing speaker" -- that way you would have TWO high quality front facing stereo speakers! You already have them on hand, yes? (In your scenario.)
Glad to be of help! Wow, that was VERY hard to figure out.
Oh, and maybe you could buy a STEREO MANUFACTURER with expertise to help out your obviously incompetent engineers who you think would try to put in " two mediocre speakers" . Maybe Samsung should buy Harman Kardon? Oh, they already have! Again, glad to be of help!
Samsung's own press release of the ownership tranfer shows MOBILE as a reason to buy Harmon Kardon:
HzMeister said:
plus that leaves room for more battery capacity - and things like the headphone jack...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
MORE ROOM FALLACY
Oh, please. The "more room" fallacy. Let's put this to rest once and for all. It's the equivalent of politicians under investigation who resign to "spend more time with their families". That's not the real reason, it's just the only excuse they can come up with that sounds acceptable to people who don't know any better.
Apple said they ditched the iPhone headphone jack for "more" room. NO, they wanted to sell their massively expensive bluetooth wireless earbuds.
Motorola ditched the headphone jack last year for their 2014 5.5" Moto Z Force phone (June 2016), allegedly for the same reason "more room"...
Yet they included the headphone jack in their 2014 5.5" Moto Z Play (August 2016) released later in the same year. Oh, and GUESS WHAT? The Moto Z Play had a slightly larger battery (3510 mAh) than the Moto Z Force (3500 mAh). That's right -- the phone WITH the headset jack even has a bigger battery.
So, more room for WHAT? The dimensions are almost identical. I see .02 mm and .03mm difference -- that's HUNDREDTH OF MILLIMETERS -- for a larger battery AND a headset jack.
And Motorola now admits they LIED. Apple will never admit that, but Motorola is admitting that... because in the upcoming 2017 Moto Z2 Force -- GUESS WHAT? -- they are ADDING BACK the headset jack. Yes, after ditching the headset jack for their flagship phone in 2016, Motorola is bringing it back.
And I'm pretty sure it will also have the same standard components of most 2nd half 2017 flagship phone -- 1440p, Snapdragon 835, 64/128GB internal memory, 4/6GB RAM, microSD card, blah, blah, blah.
Manufacturers have included headphone jacks, larger batteries, whatever they want in past years. Headphone jacks have NOT grown in size.
Internal electronic components have only shrunk in size. RAM, internal storage, CPU chipsets get SMALLER each year.
If a manufacturer claims they are ditching headset jacks or microSD cards for "more room" they are LYING or their engineers are INCOMPETENT. In Apple's case they are lying.
Now, go back to my 2014 Moto XT1225. 5.2" 1440p AMOLED and a 3900 mAh battery. I own three of these phones. Was released as the Droid Turbo XT1254/Moto Turbo XT1225/Moto Maxx XT1225/Moto Maxx XT1250. All had 3900 mAh battery.
How did Motorola put a 3900 mAh battery into this 5.2" phone? They just did. At the time, they said people were worried about battery life and putting in a bigger battery was addressing that issue. Read that again. People are NOT demanding credit card thin phones. People want bigger batteries. So, it makes the phone a hair thicker. So what. It just makes it easier to hold in your hand!
Here's the difference between a 5.2" phone with a 3900 mAh battery and 5.2" phone with 2300 mAh battery. The only thing wrong with the 3900 mAh battery phone is Motorola should have lost the capacitive buttons on the Quark phones and instead included the front facing stereo speakers they put on the 2014 Moto X. I don't understand why they didn't do that.
5.2" 2014 Moto X with front-facing stereo speakers
When Motorola released the Quark phone end of 2014, especially with the loud PR of the Droid Turbo a lot of people were very ANGRY at Motorola. They had bought the "flagship" 2014 Moto X (which was mostly a copy of the 2013 LG G2, except for the addition of front facing stereo speakers) with only 2,300 mAh battery and then a few months later Motorola unleashes this BEAST?
(By the way, in spite of Verizon's PR LIES, this phone was NOT an exclusive for Verizon, it wasn't even exclusive in the U.S.! The U.S. Moto XT1250 has the same FCC ID, same radio bands as the Droid Turbo and runs on Verizon with a Verizon SIM card, just like a non-Verizon Moto Nexus 6. My Moto XT1225 has LTE bands 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 17 and I run them on AT&T.)
And remember these are 5.2" display phones. When you increase the size to larger displays -- even with current slimmed/zero bezels -- the additional battery thickness would be negligible. Plus, no one is demanding credit card thin phones. A little extra thickness is OK, and with extra thickness comes room for ANYTHING you wish to put in -- stereo speakers, larger battery, etc.
There's always MORE ROOM.
I see PLENTY of room on the Galaxy S8 for a BIGGER battery and HIGH QUALITY front-facing stereo speakers.
So nevermind the design or the engineering that went into the device. With a year design cycle you really think every little detail YOU care about will make it. Instead if complaining, why not use your nonexistent engineering skills to build a better device?
Omg stop with this stereo speaker nonsense. Unless you are a teenager who likes to bug people on public transports or places, or you're trying to party on your phone music, it's useless. If you are an audiophile you would have a- a nice sound system at home be it home cinema or just Sonos like system then you would have either Bose qc35, shure 846 or OPPO PM3 , or any other high end headphones. You just need to have a clear sound when it rings and loud enough for you to hear
Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
HzMeister said:
As much as I like the S8, there are a few minor things that keep it from being great. Here's a quick mock up of what I think would have been the perfect S8:
Better fingerprint sensor location
Power/volume buttons on one side, no bixby
16:9 5.1" screen
Obviously it doesn't matter what any of us think, but imo it would be nice if someone (google) were to make something like this. Anyone agree?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That render looks hideous to me. The S8 as it looks now is much better looking
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
barondebxl said:
That render looks hideous to me. The S8 as it looks now is much better looking
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess not everyone likes an easy to reach notifications tab or fingerprint sensor...
HzMeister said:
I guess not everyone likes an easy to reach notifications tab or fingerprint sensor...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You guessed right.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk