Related
So, if the iphone had microsoft exchange sync and wasn't tied exclusively to one carrier, would you choose it over the Kaiser?
no period no
Its not tied to one carrier anymore when you unlock it. I use both, and it depends on what I'm doing to decide when I switch my SIM from one to another. There are things the Tilt can't touch on the iPhone, and vice versa.
nope, too many other reasons why. instead of saying "if the iphone had this and that" why not just say "if the kaiser had multitouch and sensors"? i mean those are the only features it doesnt have, not worth trying to add more features too the iphone.
Oh hell no.
The iphone is garbage. It can't send/ receive mms messages (without using a 3rd party email account and forwarding)... and it does not have 3g capabilities.
lets not forget that you cant get to the battery with out voiding the waranty if nothing else we have definitly got them there
I love my tilt
I'm think of getting an iphone to mess around with it. I current on Att with data connect plan for data. Do i have to upgrade the data to some kind of special plans for iphone?
i have a tilt and i love it, the only thing that i would say that i like about the iphone is the touch capabilities... thats about it.
you know, besides the video part, the screen res. and the multi-touch screen, Everything else on the Kaiser beats the iPhone.
i stand correct:
if i want a phone for looks and to wow people cuz i have an iphone...yes i would get it...
but if i want a phone for its functionality...no...never will i get the iphone...
in reality...i would probably never get the iphone...especially since i already got my tytn II
Hokay, to (hopefully) end this endless iPhone VS Kaiser debate, let me post this (warning, lots of letters):
1. EDGE-only, and limited Wi-Fi: Cingular's rapidly rolling out HSDPA across the country, with other carriers (T-Mobile with UMTS, Sprint and Verizon with EV-DO Revision A, and Sprint with WiMAX, for example) making similar high-speed data services infrastructure investments. Yet the Apple iPhone only handles comparatively archaic and slow EDGE, which will hobble Apple's hype of it as a 'breakthrough Internet communications device'. Hold this particular thought until you read my later comments on the product's profit margin, keeping in mind estimates that bumping the iPhone from EDGE to HSDPA would have only cost Apple around $20 more. Yes, the unit also offers Wi-Fi (b/g), but you won't be able to access it via your Cingular plan; get ready to also pay Boingo or another provider if you want a pervasive 802.11 experience. And as much as Zune got clobbered for its incomplete to-date Wi-Fi implementation, the Apple iPhone's no better. No wireless iTunes sync with a computer? No direct downloads from the iTunes Store? C'mon
2. No removeable battery: Long-time readers know this is a frequent sore point of mine. Manufacturers claim that by going with a completely enclosed battery they can make their systems thinner, smaller, lighter and otherwise more aesthetically pleasing than they'd otherwise be. To date, this has pretty much been BS; at end-of-day, economy-of-scale factors still motivate companies to go with off-the-shelf batteries instead of custom units. And by burying a limited-life battery within its widget, Apple's built in a guaranteed replacement requirement....one that under normal usage will conveniently occur prior to the end of the required two-year service contract with Cingular.
3. High price, and high profit margin: $500-600 for the phone. Plus a roughly $100-month voice-plus-data service plan, with two-year minimum duration. 'Nuff said on price. Regarding margin, it's interesting to see Apple engaging in Microsoft-like pre-announcement hype of late. Last summer, the company unveiled the iTV, an under-development product re-unveiled two weeks ago as Apple TV and still not shipping for another month-plus. And the Apple iPhone won't be shipping until at least the end of June....plenty of time for dissenting voices such as mine to creep into the public consciousness, along with iSuppli's recent analysis that the Apple iPhone will cultivate a roughly 50% bill-of-materials profit margin for the company. Yes, other expenses (marketing, manufacturing, sales, etc) aren't included in the analysis, but they're insignificant when amortized over the number of iPhones that Apple aspires to sell. And most consumers won't comprehend that these other costs are not included; they'll just see 50% margin and think greed.
4. Carrier- and application-lock: Apple and Cingular must have missed the late November 2006 memo wherein the Library of Congress approved a copyright exemption (more from Ars Technica and MAKE) that allows DMCA circumvention for "cell phone firmware that ties a phone to a specific wireless network". I have mobile service through T-Mobile, so I'm not an iPhone candidate unless I'm a "bad guy" (in Cingular terminology) who figures out how to unlock the device by myself. And Jobs' explanation for the Apple-gated (thereby potentially excluding Office file viewers, for example, and VoIP) iPhone application allowance, that "Cingular doesn’t want to see their West Coast network go down because some application messed up," is equally laughable, not to mention technically indefensible. In reality, it's nothing more than an unfriendly-to-consumer but lucrative-to-company extension of the FairPlay DRM lock-to-Apple strategy.
5. Large size: I think Pocket PC Phones are too bulky, both to stow in my pocket and to hold up to my face. I'm also not a fan of wired or wireless headsets, and I therefore prefer the Smartphone approach. But Maury, and plenty of other folks, find the larger iPhone-like form factor and headset approach palatable. So this is admittedly a personal-taste nit.
6. No tactile keypad: Time and time again, touchscreen-only user interfaces with 'floating keypads' have been panned by potential customers and have therefore been unsuccessful in the market aside from in narrow market niches. Will this time be different? I'm skeptical.
7. Low-res camera: An only-2 Mpixel camera? On a $500-$600 phone? C'mon
8.No expansion slot: The operating system (which may or may not be OS X as Jobs touted during his 'reality distortion field' keynote), gobbles up 500 MBytes' worth of the 4 or 8 GBytes of flash memory built into the phone. Installed applications consume even more, and let's not forget those all-important music tracks and video clips. Run out of memory? Too bad, buy a bigger-capacity phone. There's no memory card expansion capability for you.
9. Insufficient between-charge operating time: Apple's documentation claims up to 5 hours when talking on the phone, playing back videos or browsing the Internet. I believe 5 hours of talk time, which is in and of itself low compared to competitors products. And I 'may' believe 5 hours of video playback time, given that the unit is flash memory-based and given the track record of the company's firmware upgrade-based improvements here on the first- and second-generation video-capable iPods. But I don't buy it for a second with Internet-based functions, EDGE- and particularly Wi-Fi-based. Anyone else who regularly manages email, fires up a web browser, or does another Net-centric function on a device with a small battery will, I think, agree with my stance here. And, revisiting my earlier embedded-battery point, realize that Apple's operating life prognostications assume a brand new battery.
10. Unoriginality: Admittedly, this may be my most controversial argument. Go back and look at any of my past Pocket PC and Smartphone writeups. Look at any of the devices now available from carriers. Now realize that many of them are now selling for free-to-sub-$100, subsidized under the exact same contract terms as Apple's $500-600 iPhone. Windows Mobile-based devices, as well as products based on Palm, Symbian and alternative operating systems, have for years been doing what Apple's promising its iPhone will do in....around six months from now. Phone? Check. Audio playback? Check. Video playback? Check. Internet access? Check. Wi-Fi? Check. 3G data? Check-plus. Bluetooth? Check. Camera? Check. GPS? Check-plus. I could go on (but I won't). Some folks are even claiming that Apple blatantly stole from an LG phone design. Granted, Apple may have advanced the state of the art to some degree, in some areas, in an evolutionary manner, by virtue of its large touchscreen and other factors. But is the Apple iPhone revolutionary? That's quite a stretch.
Taken from http://www.edn.com/blog/400000040/post/1100006510.html
Take it or leave it, I did not write it, nor do I agree with everything there. It's just a good write-up that deserves to be read be people who choose between the two.
There's been LOTS of bashing Kaiser... and way too much iPhone lovin' - but that's just my observation.
guys, when the sdk iphone 16gb comes out(and it is coming out within the next 2 months), its going to DESTROY the kaiser tytn 2 and all other HTC products currently offered. seriously think about it now.....
well i could personally careless about the new iphone...i text quite a bit and i've previously owned phones with no keyboard...and its a pain in the bottom to me at least...and the tytnII suites my needs...whether it should perform better..lets not go there here as we've already said many times in other threads...whether i will get the iphone or not? probably not...it looks good and all the interface..but doesnt suit my needs...but am i 100% satisifed with the tytnII...no...but who here can say they have been 100% satisfied with there phone and thinks its the number one and nothing else can compare? theres gonna be pros and cons to everyphone...its just picking the phone that has the most pros to each user...but i will look into the new SE xperia when more info is available
The Iphone is too apple-specific for my tastes. I like having the option of using cooked ROMs, napster for music, and loads of third-party applications on my tilt. Extended life batteries and a QWERTY keyboard are great. I also like the fact that I have pretty much unlimited storage, since I can switch out as many microSD cards as I want. I work with a guy that has an Iphone, and with the exception of watching videos, my tilt kicks his Iphone's butt.
Both phones have their strong points, but the Kaiser has a lot more of them than the Iphone does.
DarkDvr said:
Hokay, to (hopefully) end this endless iPhone VS Kaiser debate, let me post this (warning, lots of letters):
1. EDGE-only, and limited Wi-Fi: Cingular's rapidly rolling out HSDPA across the country, with other carriers (T-Mobile with UMTS, Sprint and Verizon with EV-DO Revision A, and Sprint with WiMAX, for example) making similar high-speed data services infrastructure investments. Yet the Apple iPhone only handles comparatively archaic and slow EDGE, which will hobble Apple's hype of it as a 'breakthrough Internet communications device'. Hold this particular thought until you read my later comments on the product's profit margin, keeping in mind estimates that bumping the iPhone from EDGE to HSDPA would have only cost Apple around $20 more. Yes, the unit also offers Wi-Fi (b/g), but you won't be able to access it via your Cingular plan; get ready to also pay Boingo or another provider if you want a pervasive 802.11 experience. And as much as Zune got clobbered for its incomplete to-date Wi-Fi implementation, the Apple iPhone's no better. No wireless iTunes sync with a computer? No direct downloads from the iTunes Store? C'mon
You can have direct downloads from the iTunes store
8.No expansion slot: The operating system (which may or may not be OS X as Jobs touted during his 'reality distortion field' keynote), gobbles up 500 MBytes' worth of the 4 or 8 GBytes of flash memory built into the phone. Installed applications consume even more, and let's not forget those all-important music tracks and video clips. Run out of memory? Too bad, buy a bigger-capacity phone. There's no memory card expansion capability for you.
There is a 16GB version out now. Still 15.5gb free.
Oh - and in the UK on o2, we get unlimited free access to The Cloud's Hotspots, which seem to be pretty widespread. IE in McDonalds and so forth.
Taken from http://www.edn.com/blog/400000040/post/1100006510.html
Take it or leave it, I did not write it, nor do I agree with everything there. It's just a good write-up that deserves to be read be people who choose between the two.
There's been LOTS of bashing Kaiser... and way too much iPhone lovin' - but that's just my observation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have one and those are the only two points I wanted to contend, but I can quite plainly see the downfalls of the iPhone and I love mine anyway. My comments in bold
I'm sure I would love the Kaiser if I had one too.
wsmith79 said:
guys, when the sdk iphone 16gb comes out(and it is coming out within the next 2 months), its going to DESTROY the kaiser tytn 2 and all other HTC products currently offered. seriously think about it now.....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Once the iPhone gets 3G, GPS, and maybe a better keyboard, what reason is there to use an HTC or other smartphones besides lower price?
OSX mobile is only going to get better; it has solid, mature foundations - unlike Linux or PalmOS; and hopefully it opens itself to 3rd party apps properly. Who doesn't want a device that's a company's near #1 priority?
there are only 2 things holding me back from actually getting the iPhone....
1.GPS - iPhone needs needs NEEDS GPS...with the processing power it has, it can support a kick ass GPS software.
2. Copy/Paste - yes, it bugs the **** out of me. I copy paste numbers to SMS on my Kaiser all the time...how can a $600 phone not have Copy/Paste, its so ****ing crazy...i can go on and on about this...
I would have one tomorrow if they included the following features:
1. GPS - fully functional, not some data intensive half-ass'd attempt.
2. 3G/HSDPA - Edge is just not fast enough!
3. MS Exchange server functionality
4. Media Messaging
5. A properly functioning touch screen keyboard
When the iPhone rumors were abounding, I would have definitely taken it over any other phone. When the reality hit, I wasn't all that excited anymore.
The fact is that the iPhone is the future of phones. EVERYONE is playing catch up trying to match its slick interface. Can Windows Mobile even hold a candle to the iPhone when it comes to usability? Hell no. WM is slow, often annoying, doesn't even allow you to close things, and has a lot more problems on the usability side (not to say it sucks, it just had problems - ya know?)
Things are looking better and better every day. Application development seems to have taken off and the iPhone looks more and more attractive all the time. But you have to realize it is in its infancy. Windows Mobile took a little while to get going - people didn't have the choice of 10,000 apps, cooked ROMS, etc. all on day one. So it is with the iPhone.
In my mind, the iPhone is like a baby superhero and Windows Mobile is like the adult average guy. Like, it's obvious who is going to win in the end. Microsoft will need to make some major changes to Windows Mobile if they want to compete in the future marketplace. Otherwise people will start taking them about as seriously as Palm OS.
So - to answer the question: Would i choose an iPhone today? No.
Would I buy an iPhone in six month (or when it has xyz features?): Probably, but we'll have to see what else (Windows Mobile, Android, etc.) has come along by then.
I won't go on record like others in this thread and say "never" because ... well, that's really stupid.
"Why, I'll never buy anything other than a Ma' Bell rotary telephone!"
I will buy iPhone for sure .... only if it runs Windows Mobile
But .... When?
Good speaking to you all
Has anyone wondered if all the technology in the world will regress? Of course it is improving a lot now but if you think about it...
When the fossil fuels finish, there will be no energy to make or run high tech devices, no electric cars or fossil-based cars, no power to run TVs or your everday household equipment, etc.
Energy from solar panels and windmills will simply not be able to cope with the electrical demand which is why people will stop using more high tech equipment and eventually regress..
And with the growing technology at the moment things need more power... like the PS3 or updated graphics cards...
quite frankly I think we have screwed ourselves, we will eventually go back to an old lifestyle like the 1960s... only the richest will be able to afford fuel to run their cars, the rest of people will use horses... industrial work will quickly slow down and agricultural farming will rise sharply.
With barely any power (and at the moment no way to safely make enough renewable energy to cope), the prices will soar significantly and people will simply not be able to pay for it.
If technology these days is progressing a lot then why have we still not found a safe renewable source of energy that can be used to replace fossil fuels?
Places like the middle east who posses most of the fuel will probably stop wanting to sell fossil fuels to the America, Britain and other more economically developed countries. They will, as any other country would, want to save it for themselves. This will make the price for each barrel soar significantly
In a couple of decades I predict we are going to reach our peak, after that we will regress.
Has anyone else thought about this? I mean it is a known problem that we are going run out of fossil fuels and so far the whole world in concentrating on saving the planet from carbon emmissions and not whats going to happen to the people!
New energy sources will be used/created. After all, relying on stuff burning is a bit backwards.
But why not use fossil fuels until they run out? What would be the point in leaving it all underground when it has such a valuable use, and is no use left alone?
We already have engines running on non fossil fuels, bio-diesel, soar, alcohol, hydrogen... which will all get cheaper and more efficient.
Infant technologies always cost more, until reliability, economies of scale, popularity, problem solving etc are long past. Compare air travel today to 100 years past, this same example is also good for supposing that we can't even imagine what future technologies will be.
I am not worrying about anything.
Thanks for your reply
Most means of energy being created these days is based on fossil fuels being burned from the start. For example, nuclear powerstations start off with fossil fuels.
The fossil fuels are the quickest way to get energy. You mine it and burn it without having to go through too complicated procedures, and you produce a lot of energy. When this runs out, prices for energy will rocket sky high because it will take longer to produce more energy using other methods. This will then mean that less people will be buying games consoles, computers, etc. Most of the electrical industry will slow down which plays a big part in business as most goods these days are electrical.
Even with new energy methods, it is just not going to be able to cope with the demand.
Now this might sound cruel but I am not worried at all. In fact if anything I want technology to regress because then this would mean that we will learn to control our lives without depending on something, and life will be a lot less stressful. Ever heard someone say 'the good old days?' well it seems that they might be back in the form of a new era.
But who knows, I might just be going through a phase and am wanting to blame something for my stressful life!
prank1 said:
Thanks for your reply
Most means of energy being created these days is based on fossil fuels being burned from the start. For example, nuclear powerstations start off with fossil fuels.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Things change, using my previous example, first heavier than air flight 1903, first space flight 1957, first manned space flight 1961 (OK so space flight's not cheap but it goes to show the advance of technology). Another good example would be cars or even better (considering this site and you signature) - Moore's law!
The fossil fuels are the quickest way to get energy. You mine it and burn it without having to go through too complicated procedures, and you produce a lot of energy. When this runs out, prices for energy will rocket sky high because it will take longer to produce more energy using other methods.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And therefore other sources of energy will become more cost effective. When is the average estimate (no one can prove anything here) for when fossil fuels will run out? Because I am confident that solar panels (for example) covering large areas (Sahara) would be very cheap (even allowing for losses during transportation). And when these technologies become a 'must, requirement, necessity' rather than a 'lets pander to the green, tree-hugging, sandal-wearing, it's-good-advertising' stereotype, companies will focus more on them, research will advance quicker, costs will drop sooner, co-operation between them etc, will force them to drop the then cheapest option, and make a new cheapest option. The current advert for the Toyota Prius in the UK is basically saying 'we built it 10 years ago, before it was fashionable!' nothing about it's capabilities. (And why doesn't anyone make a Diesel hybrid? that's a genuine question)
This will then mean that less people will be buying games consoles, computers, etc. Most of the electrical industry will slow down which plays a big part in business as most goods these days are electrical.
Even with new energy methods, it is just not going to be able to cope with the demand.
Now this might sound cruel but I am not worried at all. In fact if anything I want technology to regress because then this would mean that we will learn to control our lives without depending on something, and life will be a lot less stressful. Ever heard someone say 'the good old days?' well it seems that they might be back in the form of a new era.
But who knows, I might just be going through a phase and am wanting to blame something for my stressful life!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
bbobeckyj is on the right path. We aren't being forced to find reliable alternatives yet. When more companies convert or explore more efficient ways to create new energies more consumers will use them, creating less of a need to charge significant large prices. (Economies of Scale). Producers will focus on more sales and a lower profit margin to make it more affordable for everyone to convernt. Not to mention government subsidies to help with the conversion process.
prank1 said:
The fossil fuels are the quickest way to get energy. You mine it and burn it without having to go through too complicated procedures, and you produce a lot of energy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I forgot to mention.
Arguably that whole sentence is incorrect!
Take that argument to its logical conclusion and simplified - A wind turbine (t) on your roof vs a Diesel generator (g)
Some things are similar. You have to buy both, prefabricated. You must install both. (t-3 points/g-3points)
Some things are dissimilar. You only have to buy fuel for one (t0/g1). You have to maintain/service one a lot more frequently (t0/g1). You have to (get someone else, and pay them to do so) dig raw fuel out of the ground(t0/g1), transport it(t0/g1), refine it(t0/g1), transport it(t0/g1), store it(t0/g1), burn it (t0/g1)(requiring outside input - you), handle the waste products(t0/g1), pay tax(t0/g1)... and then use the electricity it generates
Not so quick, not uncomplicated
I make that t3/g13 in this admittedly one sided polemic
modern coal powerplants dont work like your avarage bbq grill so it's nowhere that simple
it's made into coal dust and blown at the fire by machinery
and yeah a mill can drive a turbine which is what the gas explosion also drives so it's more simple with wind if you wanna get down and dirty
but agreed that solar power is a bit complex but then as are nuke plants
diesel engines can run on pilfer oil with if one add some filters (may smell a bit of a deepfrier though)
some does it and it runs as long on the liter and is co2 neutral
some farmer here wanted to grow his own fuel but to use what one grew oneself
the here here required him to reg himself as an oil company for it to be legal pretty silly
I've never been one to buy into the cancer causing aspect of mobile phones, but after recently seeing the City of San Francisco pass a law requiring cell phones show there radiation output it got me thinking .
How much radiation does the N1 put out? How is that in comparison to other phones? Do smart phones put out higher amounts of radiation?
My biggest concern, and what got me thinking was the fact that until 6 mos. or so ago, I only had the phone near my head on the occasional phone call (duh).
But now I have a Nexus dock that I use as my alarm/bedside clock. This thing sits near my head 7-8 hrs every single night running bluetooth, etc.
Is there legitimate reason for concern?
I realize this should prolly go in the overall General thread, but I'm never up there and I'm mostly curious about the N1's radiation while using the desktop dock.
grb said:
I've never been one to buy into the cancer causing aspect of mobile phones, but after recently seeing the City of San Francisco pass a law requiring cell phones show there radiation output it got me thinking .
How much radiation does the N1 put out? How is that in comparison to other phones? Do smart phones put out higher amounts of radiation?
My biggest concern, and what got me thinking was the fact that until 6 mos. or so ago, I only had the phone near my head on the occasional phone call (duh).
But now I have a Nexus dock that I use as my alarm/bedside clock. This thing sits near my head 7-8 hrs every single night running bluetooth, etc.
Is there legitimate reason for concern?
I realize this should prolly go in the overall General thread, but I'm never up there and I'm mostly curious about the N1's radiation while using the desktop dock.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you're so worried. Move to a cave dude. Do you know how many "wireless" signals and radio transmissions there are in a city?
23548723958723985729837652983572 to be precise.
Why don't you get a Geiger Counter if you're that paranoid?
wait, every phone goes thru FCC testing and given a SAR's rating, and this info is available for every phone on the market. the nexus was rather low at around 0.7 if i remember. what is this radiation thing that san francisco is asking for? i thought it would be the same thing.
for more info on radiation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phone_radiation_and_health
list of highest radiation phones:
http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6602_7-5020357-1.html
FCC says SAR is 0.37 head / 0.74 Body W/Kg for 1gram on GSM.
international standards use 2grams which would make it max at 1.39. The US max is 1.6
geiger meter isnt going to help -_-
what is this radiation thing that san francisco is asking for?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/16/us/16cell.html
It's just simply a law that will require all retailers to display the amount of radiation each phone emits.
If you're so worried. Move to a cave dude. Do you know how many "wireless" signals and radio transmissions there are in a city?
23548723958723985729837652983572 to be precise.
Why don't you get a Geiger Counter if you're that paranoid?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Easy Tiger, I'm not paranoid, just asking a question that I'm sure others have more knowledge about than I do.
And thanks to flybyme's helpful cnet link I found this piece of information:
If you're concerned about limiting your SAR exposure, you can take a few easy steps beyond purchasing a handset with a low SAR. You can text instead placing a voice call, use a speakerphone whenever possible, and carry your phone at least one inch from your body. Some researchers also caution against using your phone in areas with poor coverage since phones emit more radiation when searching for a signal. Children, which have smaller and thinner skulls, should limit cell phone use, and all users, children and adults, should not sleep with an active phone next to their bedside or under their pillow.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
plus, dont mobile phones emit the msot radiation when you're in a call?otherwise, when its standby all its doing is jus in the bath of EM waves that we all are in...
Did you not read the study that stated phone radiation actuality reduces the chances of developing Alzheimer's?
http://arstechnica.com/science/news...tion-may-show-reduced-alzheimers-symptoms.ars
Look there's even a picture of the N1 there. Look on PubMed or something for a definitive study.
Antiskunk said:
Did you not read the study that stated phone radiation actuality reduces the chances of developing Alzheimer's?
http://arstechnica.com/science/news...tion-may-show-reduced-alzheimers-symptoms.ars
Look there's even a picture of the N1 there. Look on PubMed or something for a definitive study.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, and the fact that using a handphone also makes you smarter compared to those who don't use one.
Hi Inc S communiuty,
Just came through the petition raised by famous GSMArena.com for designing the Smaller devices (Around 4-4.3" Inch) with same powerful feature as their High End Devices. If you guys feels to support, Below is the link to sign it.
CLICK HERE FOR PETITION
Over the last few years, Android has taken the smartphone world by storm, climbing to the top spot in just about every major market out there. The Google platform offers a mix of features that can't be matched by any of its competitors and is offered on hardware so diverse that it has covered almost every conceivable market segment.
However, with recent trends in flagship droids, we feel there's a substantial group of users that is being ignored. As Android top dogs all choose huge screens for their high-end offerings, those looking to experience the most capable hardware in a mid-sized smartphones are left out in the dry. Despite the large number of companies committed to the Android cause, there's not a single manufacturer to come up with a handset to match the raw power and display brilliance of the Samsung Galaxy S4, HTC One or Sony Xperia Z in a shell that's as easy to pocket as, say, the Apple iPhone 5.
Now, that's not to say that Apple's approach is better than those of its Android counterparts or that large smartphones are in any way bad. The market performance of all those flagships speaks loud enough and there are a number of reasons why super capable hardware makes more sense on larger displays.
However, we firmly believe there is a huge number of people who would gladly trade screen estate for portability as long as that doesn't involve further compromises. As things currently stand, replacing your large Android flagship with a mid-size phone will mean you have to live with a chipset of less than half the processing power and a display with quality and density way below the high-end standard.
Here are what we believe will be the most important boxes that such a device needs to check.
Footprint and profile similar to Motorola RAZR i or Apple iPhone 5
A 4.2" display of at least 720p resolution (1080p would be an overkill on this size)
Top-of-the line chipset (Snapdragon 600, Exynos 5 Octa, Tegra 4)
Adequate camera
That's definitely not too much to ask as using current technology it's perfectly possible to create such a smartphone. We are certain that a large part of the reason why manufacturers haven't invested enough effort in the development of such smartphones is the false assumption that there's not enough demand for it.
That's why we've started an online petition, which we hope will help convince large Android OEMs to pay proper attention to the mid-size market segment. If you share our dream of seeing a properly powered mid-size Android smartphone with all the bangs and whistles of the aforementioned flagships, you can help our cause by following this link and signing our online petition.
If it gains traction, we'll make sure to share it with all our manufacturer contacts and draw as much attention to it as possible. Not even the best performing companies out there can afford to ignore requests singed by thousands of people, so you if you feel as strongly about this issue as we do, we urge you to make your voice heard!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
SOURCE:
http://www.gsmarena.com/help_us_make_a_change_sign_our_smartphone_petition_now-news-5891.php
There will be no tl;dr here so if you're not into long rants this may not be the topic for you.
Smart phone manufacturers think we're raccoons. Or idiots. Possibly both. Idiotic raccoons for the purpose of this rant. I liked it when Apple was the only company that made premium but dumb phones. I liked that they only gave users 1GB to 2GB of RAM, because what were they going to use it up on? But now, EVERYONE is doing it. They take whatever level of affordable hardware they can get away with and then wrap it in aluminum/glass and send it out touting refinement of the brand. The only thing they "refined" was their ability to market things that shouldn't even be sold. These phones are supposed to be built by ENGINEERING teams and engineers are supposed to innovate and solve problems. And there are plenty of problems with the cell phone that need to be addressed. A few examples:
Texting and driving:
How is safety with these devices not at the top of the list for these companies? People cannot help themselves when it comes to looking at their phones. I did a quick survey of 10 cars coming onto my campus and 4 out of 10 were texting near a crosswalk. 40% as a sample of the population on my campus who would rather look at their phone than look out for people walking or riding their bikes. I guess barreling down the road at 60 mph doesn't give people the thrill it used to so now we're adding the thrill of driving with one hand busy and not looking. What an exciting time to be a pedestrian. For the love of all that is holy in this world use the GPS technology in the phone to detect speeds over 20mph and lock the screen until it stops. And if you need your GPS for directions you open the app before you move and it replaces your lockscreen blocking usage of the rest of the phone. And before someone jumps in here yelling, "government overreach!" cool your jets, there is a reason seatbelts are not an optional feature in your car. The CDC reports that 9 people, per day in the U.S., die because of distracted driving SOURCE: http://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/distracted_driving/. I would bet that a few a of those deaths are people who aren't in the car at all, but walking somewhere and hit by someone who doesn't have the common courtesy to drive like their life, or other people's lives, depended on it.
Texting and walking:
If you do this you're probably going to be hit by the cars I mentioned above.
Thermal Throttling:
A genuine issue with modern smartphone processors. We are to the point where transistor traces are 14nm apart and yet our only method of heat dissipation is the wind. That's preposterous. Engineering majors are required to take thermodynamics and it's because heat is a real issue. But you're telling me that allowing heat to just be carried away passively is the best we can do in a several billion dollar industry? My laptop is 13mm thick and has an active fan when plugged in and a passive fan on battery power with 10 hour battery life pushing 1080P. Smartphone manufacturers just aren't doing it because it isn't sleek and sexy. And why do I think they should be cooled? This thing is supposed to replace every device in my living room and be near me 24 hours a day. Why is is that I get frame rate drops when I'm enjoying one of my favorite games? Oh yeah, it is because my processor decides that it gets too hot and stops running as fast as it was before. Oh, and that "advertised speed" you paid all that money for? Really only reaches its peak when you'e browsing the web or doing less intense activities. If any of our other serious electronics did that, we would throw them out. Your game consoles and desktop PC's run at full speed until they reach their thermal threshold and then shut off. They don't vary their speed in intensive tasks, they go hard until they can't go any further and they shut down. Hell if your microwave changed power settings while heating your dinner and you had to wait an extra 2 minutes to get your food you would have it replaced. In a world demanding more battery life, I demand better cooling and maintained top speeds for CPUs and GPUs while gaming.
Aesthetics:
While I never wanted an Apple phone I always respected that they decided to make an uncomplicated operating system, wrapped in a very professional package and served to the masses as "premium". What I don't understand is why innovation is being stymied in the name of "premium" feel? When people in this forum heard that the new Nexus 6P was going to have the Snapdragon 810 in it, they almost in unison said there was no way they would buy a phone with that processor. In fact, response was so bad that LG refused to put an 810 in any of their devices (bravo!). However, now that the 6P is out and it looks "premium" people are rescinding on their stance about how they won't buy one. It's like a phone being pretty is enough to forgive it for being partly broken on the inside. Now that I've written that, it seems like a deeper human issue, but back on topic we lamented as a community about how 2015 was the worst year for cell phones and that seems to be changing with those same people considering the 6P. And that isn't my only example. let's take the Galaxy Note 5/S6/6Edge+ (now with plus sign!) and pay attention to what they did in the marketing department. 3 phones, identical hardware, different cases. Identical hardware at astronomically more expensive prices because the screen is larger. But the processor in the S6, which came out early this year, is in a device that came out two months ago. How are consumers who have access to this information convinced that these devices are worth more of their money. Samsung just increased their profits because they didn't have to innovate, at all, and just pushed the same old board out with a high-end screen. Example 3!: LG G4 to the LG V10 is going to have the same processor as its predecessor. It is recycling hardware used within the same year by wrapping it in a different shell and calling it "premium." What makes me sad is that people are going to buy it. Probably thousands of people and probably some people who actually already have the G4. It boggles my mind that people see this happening and just jump on the train.
Software:
This is my last piece of rant and then I'm done. Being here I love Android; anyone that knows me knows that. I will defend it and what it stands for until it betrays me in the night and locks my sweet bootloader into oblivion while hiding its source code in the dark shadows of Google's labs. But let's get down to brass tacks: there is only one Android OS and that is pure Android on Nexus devices. If your manufacturer put their name somewhere inside your software you just landed at the mercy of not one, but two teams who decide if you can have access to an open source operating system update. How is it that people are just OK with buying phones that insist the consumer like what the manufacturer thinks is aesthetically pleasing? I thought the whole point of Android was to choose how your phone was supposed to behave yourself? Why is is that we bash Apple users for accepting whatever they are given whenever they can get it and we are stuck complaining about how Samsung/LG/HTC might never release their revisions of Android to our devices? Manufacturers paid for the hardware, they didn't pay a dime for the software other than what they pay their team to change it to their liking and then we are deprived of updates because it is too much work for the teams that they put in place themselves! How hard it is to just develop device trees and pass them to Google so that pure Android runs on everyone's devices? CM does it every new release and people who purchased software from for-profit manufacturers may never see Marshmallow. This is a real problem and I know that circumstances are different but Apple supports devices for an incredibly long time before dropping it from updates. The iPad 2 was released in 2011 and it is getting updates for iOS 9 the same time as everyone else. That is 4 years of support. And the Note 3/4 are one to two years old and almost two releases behind? Software updates should not be sold as a feature (especially not open source software), it is updated to protect consumers and their personal information from being compromised and misused through security patches and release fixes. And no, not everyone can ride the train forever, I get that. But a company dropping support because they didn't think their devices would last 5 years so they didn't hire the manpower to continue making releases sounds like a corporate issue, not a consumer issue. The only thing we can do is vote with our wallets. Oh, and case in point for updates for old devices: Google is dropping support for the Nexus 4 (2012) in Android 6.0 but maintaining security patch releases so people using that device are not left open to security vulnerabilities. If you needed a reason to support a manufacturer, it would be because they support you.
Rant over. I'm just tired of reading the same articles and comments on here, being disappointed by each subsequent phone release, let down by a huge lack of innovation by smartphone manufacturers, and let down by people who continue to be part of the trend and not fight it in some way. I'm also mad at people who text and drive--cut it out. If I had an answer to fix all of these things I would post them here, but I don't. There should be a way to change the status quo of the current hardware industry and push them to innovate as opposed to buying into their hardware subscriptions plans. Hopefully you know how much you pay a year to do all that Jump!ing and upgrading of those devices. We're tethered to a yearly fee and we just let it ride.
You don't have to leave your thoughts but I'm open to them. I'm open to your own personal rants about the topic. I'm open to ideas and solutions that haven't been presented and ways to fix things that we know are broken. This community is amazing for that because we have talented people here who aren't satisfied with the idea that what you get is what you are stuck with. They work hard and use their time to make something better. There has to be answers here and a way to fix the calamity that is the smart phone market. /rant
Nice rant. I am not developer but I am with you. Got a couple of rants my self. Me to brings apple as example to look at for tey updates and I would say reliability. Both of them matters to me because I don't root and tinker and I want my phone to work well an safe for a few a couple of years at least maybe 3-4 years. I know its xda dev page but the period I had iph6 in truly got to know what is reliable and consistent in respect. So if I pay £500 for a brand new phone I expect it to work accordingly or even £200 worth phone.
O am willing tonpay phone even more than I said but in return I want brilliance O was talking aboit just like buying iPhone.
I hate oersaturated screen tendency and in general pop out colour display trend but that come from my work because I retouch photos and work on calibrated monitor . first of all I prefer panelnto be natural then I can decide if I want it to be saturated or not. At least give that choose like sammy does , I think lg does but the screen still is from ideal. I envy those sharp panels that China OEMs mounting on the phones. Anyway nothing makes me more annoyed than temporarily trends. Give us an option to choose from!
Not much reading any review on here or articles looking at other tech websites it seems they simply making business out of t, yes they have to earn BUT don't take you reader for fool. It seems just because they have writing skills they can trick us into believe phone B is a an A class phone. Luckily many of us speak out fearlessly and with much furious and I liken a lot . there are people and a lot of them tech educated. Reviewers get easily tempted into era of electronic corruption and do what they asked to do. Trustworthy reviewer is the thing of the past-dinosour.
Just about it.... I think
nebulaoperator said:
Nice rant. I am not developer but I am with you. Got a couple of rants my self. Me to brings apple as example to look at for tey updates and I would say reliability. Both of them matters to me because I don't root and tinker and I want my phone to work well an safe for a few a couple of years at least maybe 3-4 years. I know its xda dev page but the period I had iph6 in truly got to know what is reliable and consistent in respect. So if I pay £500 for a brand new phone I expect it to work accordingly or even £200 worth phone.
O am willing tonpay phone even more than I said but in return I want brilliance O was talking aboit just like buying iPhone.
I hate oersaturated screen tendency and in general pop out colour display trend but that come from my work because I retouch photos and work on calibrated monitor . first of all I prefer panelnto be natural then I can decide if I want it to be saturated or not. At least give that choose like sammy does , I think lg does but the screen still is from ideal. I envy those sharp panels that China OEMs mounting on the phones. Anyway nothing makes me more annoyed than temporarily trends. Give us an option to choose from!
Not much reading any review on here or articles looking at other tech websites it seems they simply making business out of t, yes they have to earn BUT don't take you reader for fool. It seems just because they have writing skills they can trick us into believe phone B is a an A class phone. Luckily many of us speak out fearlessly and with much furious and I liken a lot . there are people and a lot of them tech educated. Reviewers get easily tempted into era of electronic corruption and do what they asked to do. Trustworthy reviewer is the thing of the past-dinosour.
Just about it.... I think
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think a lot of screen oversaturation stems from consumers responses to reviews and critic description of what the "perfect screen" is. Consumers will agree not based on personal opinion and then OEMs try to emulate the visuals that type of screen renders.
Or Samsung dictates everything since they are the majority seller of device screens.
Thanks for adding to, I appreciate knowing what about the industry bothers other people.
AlkaliV2 said:
I think a lot of screen oversaturation stems from consumers responses to reviews and critic description of what the "perfect screen" is. Consumers will agree not based on personal opinion and then OEMs try to emulate the visuals that type of screen renders.
Or Samsung dictates everything since they are the majority seller of device screens.
Thanks for adding to, I appreciate knowing what about the industry bothers other people.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes indeed. OEM's will push trends that appeal to the mass and mass wants and craves for an eye popping colour utterly unnatural and repelling to my eye.... and when they look at the same image on the computer monitor it suddenly lost all it it's magic and now they want to go back to their phone. My background is related to colour accurate calibrated monitor and this must be the reason I don't see amoled technology so appealing to me but again hundreds of millions of iphone users are perfectly satisfied and not only but happy.
If we take Android market we have bloggers, tech websites, youtube channels. media that are constantly praising that unnatural deviation in colour. Another myth is those magic amoled blacks! No they are not great they and in fact bad because there are no shadow gradient it's just a black blob while IPS panel can't have those perfect 0 pitch blacks but what it can do is gradient from the darkest shadow to the lighter shadow. Watch a film on your phone and pay attention to the dark scene you will know what I mean.
There were 2 ocassions in my life after going round and round in circles, chasing my perfect phone I heard hundred of times : oh this amoled screen is super, it has super accurate colours like never before and though I saw that super duper screen my self I could not help my self but to go again to shop and see if there was anything I missed in my judgment. All I wanted is to run basic mode on a S6 BUT whites on the basic mode looks dull and yellowish while in wider gammut mode it pops out like never before. I checked all the possible panels in the shop. S6 S6+ S6 edge S6 edge + . Yes I am purist and it is hard living for me. I think I am just wasting time in my life My point is your mind will most likely be brainwashed and you will buy perfect amoled screen.
Indeed Samsung will push anything that is related in visual agenda because everyone knows Samsung TV and they awesome. Easy to follow and trust trendy technology or product.
I am so happy Moto choose IPS panels this year because they look marvelous a little on the saturated side but nothing overblown like other OEM's.
I don't try to sell anything I said here to anyone if you prefer other panel that is your choice and I don't have a problem with it.
Battery life
While most manufactures claim weeks of operation the truth is often obscure and bent.
I like your rant.
And I agree with all of it.
Some companies will deny overheating and shove their source code 50 miles deep into their butt.
Some devices are so pretty but have horrible hardware other are so ugly but have brilliant hardware.
I'm so sick of people just blindly buying devices that are a total joke.\
On the note of displays.
It's all pointless unless we have hardware that can drive a 50000000000000000000000K display where 90% of the pixels are so small they could never be seen.
Rant mode OFF