Develop Bugs

f*k the specs...give us a product that actually works

[begin rant]
I am so tired of specs right now because the more you know the more you sink in to the mud-hole. Give me something that I can "touch", "see" & "feel" as better.
Eg.
My current 2 of 3 phones:
1. iphone 3g has 412Mhz processor.
2. Pure has 528Mhz processor
3. iphone 3g has 2 Megapixel camera
4. Pure has 5 Megapixel camera
But does it run faster or take better pictures? NO
For picture quality comparison of the 3g vs pure, See here
Note: my 3rd phone is the iphone 3GS.
So F*k the specs.
[end of rant]

Hei, easy tiger
Why do you rant about Pure vs iPhone here? Take it somewhere else ...j/k.
You are right, at the end, it is not the hardware spec, but "user experience".
That is (user experience) what Microsoft currently is trying to bring with their new product, WP7S.
You know, it is a "new" product. It does not even exist yet (purchaseable).
Still a lot of questions unanswered (which you will have some more clues after MIX10).
So, take it easy
Btw, about "that actually works" ... that's really depend on the user, the person who use the device.
Some users want to have full access to the device, OS, hardware, hack this, hack that, fully-super-duper-multitasking, bunch of sensors.
Some users just want to use the phone as it is ... enough with web browser, play youtube, facebook, twitter and email.
Some users just want to use the phone ... you know, for calling someone else
Like my wife, she is using Touch Dual. Why? Because she hates touch phone! Yupe, she hates iPhone, and all "latest" Windows Mobile devices.
She likes to use the phone for ... calling me and her friends, playing Solitaire (that's all) and occasionally using the TomTom 6 for navigation.
My other friend bought HTC Touch Diamond 2 and she does not have any clue. She "asked" why I have to re-charge the battery every afternoon?
I looked into her phone and I saw bunch of apps running in the background: Contact, Fring, ActiveSync, SMS ...
I told her, you must close those! She again asked "Why? Cant they close them self automatically?"
I said "Sometimes, no" ... and I could not continue. I told her husband to put custom ROM ... bla bla (of course they cant do it!).
For my wife, the HTC Touch Dual "does works", big time.
For my friend, the HTC Touch Diamond 2 "does not work" (They are now thinking to switch to iPhone).
Although HTC Touch Dual is way less spec wise!

Since I had a Touch HD and done lots of comparison shots to the iPhone 3G, I am sure the Pure's camera is actually quite a bit better.
The Pure is certainly not faster, though, and definitely less fluid. The MHz count of the Pure's processor is misleading, as it is really quite slow. Plus, Windows Mobile doesn't have nice animations and fluid physics - it has ugly screen redrawing (though it's actually not slower than iPhone OS, but a lot less fluid).
Anyway,
specs do matter. The problem is, you never get to know all the specs. The MHz and Mpixel numbers simply aren't ebough to say whether a processor is fast or a camera chip is good.
There are lots of other factors involved. But they won't tell you the "performace per clock" numbers or the "light sensitivity" and size of the camera sensor.
So, it's not that specs don't matter, it's just that you don't get to know the numbers that actually do matter. What can you do? Well, I know it's hard, but you actually have to inform yourself as much as you can, so that reading spec sheets will give you the knowledge you need before buying a device.
And you have to try for yourself. And I know it's hard, often you don't get the possibility to try a handset without buying it, and reviews usually don't give enough information, especially if you care about "small features" that usually don't get talked about in reviews.
So, keep cool
Specs can be misleading, but only because regular people don't look behind the raw numbers and have no clue about what really counts. But that doesn't mean phone makers should take away the spec sheets... some users do know what really counts, and spec sheets help them a lot to make their desicion.
Actually, they're helpful more often than not, e.g. I know Snapdragon, Cortex and ARMv7 mean "faaaast". Regular people may not know that, but it won't hurt them to read "Snapdragon" on the spec sheet either. Because in the end, they'll always have to try the phones for themselves (or at least try to get enough info from reviews).
How do you think companies can give you something to "touch", "see" & "feel"? Free try&buy devices? Not going to happen. Spec sheets give at least some hints, since there's no better alternative. And if you do your homework, they will be quite helpful
Calm down... nothing to rant about here

Thanks for the warm note my friend.....
I am a spec guy myself, but I feel as if I was cheated/scammed this time, partly because I am not a mobile device person, and definitely was not aware of this crazy MSM and ARM differences. Now I know....ha ha
Now as far as the camera goes, I know quite a bit as I am in it for a few years now, enough to say that megapixels are just the tip of the iceberg. Higher megapixel within the same sensor family is better, but then there are chips that provide better pictures at the same or less megapixels. i.e. CMOS vs. CCD . On top of that, there is the lens and the processing engine to add on to it.
The camera software in the Pure is not very good. I will tell you that. It takes quite some time for it to find the right white balance under room lighted conditions. The iphone is pretty good/better at that.

The camera software in the Pure is not very good. I will tell you that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know. It's quite bad, actually. That's what I hated about my Touch HD. But nevertheless, my HD took much better pictures than the iPhone 3G (in most cases, at least). I'm sure that's also the case with the Pure.
When it comes to cellphone cameras, however, spec sheets are mostly useless.
They never tell you about anything other than the Mpixel number - which of course means nothing (though I wouldn't want to have less than 5).
The camera is very important to me. Reviews are mostly useless, because they never make direct comparisons under the same conditions. I end up buying several phones, comparing the cameras, and then selling them again... crazy, but that's all I can do
The HD2's camera is actually the first smartphone camera I would be satisfied with - if I could make the flash not overexpose everything that's less than 3m away

seed_al said:
I know. It's quite bad, actually. That's what I hated about my Touch HD. But nevertheless, my HD took much better pictures than the iPhone 3G (in most cases, at least). I'm sure that's also the case with the Pure.
When it comes to cellphone cameras, however, spec sheets are mostly useless.
They never tell you about anything other than the Mpixel number - which of course means nothing (though I wouldn't want to have less than 5).
The camera is very important to me. Reviews are mostly useless, because they never make direct comparisons under the same conditions. I end up buying several phones, comparing the cameras, and then selling them again... crazy, but that's all I can do
The HD2's camera is actually the first smartphone camera I would be satisfied with - if I could make the flash not overexpose everything that's less than 3m away
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Flash overexpose - now if only they would provide TTL flash intensity control. Goodness....
2M vs 5M
My LG-VU actually took much better pictures than the iphone 3G and Pure. The only problem was that you would not realize that until you transferred it to your PC, courtesy of the crappy resistive plasticky screen.
I still have it. Maybe I will use it as a camera only

Cameras... bleh. All smartphone cameras are awful.
But I do have to agree here: Even though one phone may have a snapdragon processor, and the iPhone may have a 412mhz processor, the iPhone navigates so much faster.
Of course, I know the reason for this, but it certainly does make me hope that Microsoft sorts this out with WP7S.
(Though, never, EVER, would I buy anything that supports Apple...)
EDIT: Also, I've had lots of people say that my Touch Pro's screen was "less sensitive/accurate than iPod/iPhone's". Even though I've tried to explain it, the average user just doesn't get it.

Even though one phone may have a snapdragon processor, and the iPhone may have a 412mhz processor, the iPhone navigates so much faster.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No way
It's not going to beat a Snapdragon phone.
The iPhone 3G isn't that fast, actually. It's barely faster than the QCOM MSM phones, but of course much more smooth/fluid (and that despite it has 100MHz less).
Smartphone cameras? Yes, they're not good. But I'm not going to buy a dumbphone because of the camera.

Jaxbot said:
Even though one phone may have a snapdragon processor, and the iPhone may have a 412mhz processor, the iPhone navigates so much faster.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You won't say that once you gets your hands on a HD2 (with or without custom rom I might add). It's probably the 1st (and last) HTC WinMo 6.5 phone with enough grunt to power thru practically anything. The only reason why an iPhone might feel faster is because it presents you with a flashy animation before actually loading up the app. WM phones don't do this.
Jaxbot said:
EDIT: Also, I've had lots of people say that my Touch Pro's screen was "less sensitive/accurate than iPod/iPhone's"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Used to have a Touch HD and preferred resistive touchscreens. Several months with a HD2 changed my mind I do think resistive touchscreens are actually more accurate though, I can touch-type way faster on my HD than I can on the HD2. But that could just be a Wm 6.5 limitation.

Ok. here's the deal. CCD sensors are more noisy and most HTC camera probably use CCD sensor given the noise in low light pictures.
after researching a bit, I found out that the iphone uses CMOS sensors which actually produce a smoother, less noisy picture. No wonder.....my eyes can see the difference.
fyi...Canon uses CMOS sensors across it's line of decent to high end digital cameras, a big reason why it leads the market.
update: i also just found out that the HD2 uses a CMOS sensor too. no wonder u hd2 owners love the picture quality of the hd2.

seed_al said:
No way
It's not going to beat a Snapdragon phone.
The iPhone 3G isn't that fast, actually. It's barely faster than the QCOM MSM phones, but of course much more smooth/fluid (and that despite it has 100MHz less).
Smartphone cameras? Yes, they're not good. But I'm not going to buy a dumbphone because of the camera.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not referring to the speed, I'm referring to the navigatability (and how "fluid" it is).
Of course, I always laugh when I see the animations on someone's iPhone, because it really does make it seem like the app loads faster than it does (Hint to Microsoft?).

chiks19018 said:
Ok. here's the deal. CCD sensors are more noisy and most HTC camera probably use CCD sensor given the noise in low light pictures.
after researching a bit, I found out that the iphone uses CMOS sensors which actually produce a smoother, less noisy picture. No wonder.....my eyes can see the difference.
fyi...Canon uses CMOS sensors across it's line of decent to high end digital cameras, a big reason why it leads the market.
update: i also just found out that the HD2 uses a CMOS sensor too. no wonder u hd2 owners love the picture quality of the hd2.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then check again.
CCD was always superior to CMOS and probably will be for a long time(that is why they use it in science).
Almost all mobile phones(there are only few that use CCD - mostly in japan) today use CMOS sensors because they're cheaper.
Basically mobile phones are mostly using 1/3.2" sensors if not smaller and at that size CCD would offer better picture quality and low light sensitivity but would be bigger so the phone would be bigger that is why ODM's are using CMOS sensors.
More expensive CMOS sensors are used in DSLR's but show me just one P&S camera that uses CMOS.
So both HTC(all HTC's) and iphone use CMOS sensors but probably from different manufacturers hence the difference in quality and noise level.
So once and for all. For mobile use CCD would be better but it is bigger and not as cheap as CMOS sensor. In high end DSLR market it is not so clear that is why both CCD and CMOS sensors are used.

I am back to fk the specs....
It appears that at this time, there is no clear defining line between CCD and CMOS. both are very competitive, both offering it's own advantages, strengths and weaknesses.
CMOS is the future
Canon making CMOS for compact cameras
Turns out that Canon surprised everyone with its amazing CMOS
technology. Imagine that surprise that its CMOS sensor has a much
better noise performance than any known CCDs. Even Phil Askey said
the image was "silky smooth" - some wondered, "it looks too smooth,
some details must have been removed" but a closer examination found
no evidence.
Link
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

chiks19018 said:
I am back to fk the specs....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
haha

chiks19018 said:
I am back to fk the specs....
It appears that at this time, there is no clear defining line between CCD and CMOS. both are very competitive, both offering it's own advantages, strengths and weaknesses.
CMOS is the future
Canon making CMOS for compact cameras
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I never said CMOS was worse for DSLR. On the contrary I admitted that today both CMOS and CCD fair well in DSLR's. Considering the size of the sensor low light sensitivity seems to be equal between the two.
What I meant is that for small sizes CCD is best(almost all point&shoot cameras) and mobile phones where unfortunately manufacturers decide to use cheaper CMOS sensors - remember that there are better CMOS used in high end cameras and cheap ones used in mobile phones and PC cameras. Unfortunately we get cheap sensors in our mobile phones.

I think he reason why they are making the spec's high is because they want everything to touch and feel better. So why f*** the specs? I'm pretty sure that's going to be important. You put a 538mhz proc in a WP7 it's probably not going to want to move.

Wishmaster89 said:
I never said CMOS was worse for DSLR. On the contrary I admitted that today both CMOS and CCD fair well in DSLR's. Considering the size of the sensor low light sensitivity seems to be equal between the two.
What I meant is that for small sizes CCD is best(almost all point&shoot cameras) and mobile phones where unfortunately manufacturers decide to use cheaper CMOS sensors - remember that there are better CMOS used in high end cameras and cheap ones used in mobile phones and PC cameras. Unfortunately we get cheap sensors in our mobile phones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
chill man, I am not arguing with you, nor I am putting you down. In fact I liked your post. made me do some more research!

The specs that the phone companies provide are like a girl saying she wears DD bra size.
When you take it off you realize that it was padded on a B size

OMG I just solved the flash exposure issue with a new driver from HTC!!
Wow that feels good! What a great camera phone I have now!!
Sorry, guys, for being OT, but I'm so happy^^

*LOL* ..... Thanks for that! I got a good laugh
chiks19018 said:
The specs that the phone companies provide are like a girl saying she wears DD bra size.
When you take it off you realize that it was padded on a B size
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

AMOLED: Black wallpaper = Battery saved?

I just came across to this forum thread:
http://androidforums.com/htc-desire/59486-amoled-black-wallpaper-battery-saved.html
This was also my question some times ago when I start checking HTC Desire.
Anyone can do this kind of experiment? Because if this true and have significant impact on battery level, it could be a really good way to get more juices. We know that HTC Desire battery live is not that amazing.
Benchmarking could be very simple like this:
Code:
1. Use bright wallpaper with a lot of white color and [B][COLOR="Blue"]set the brightness at maximum[/COLOR][/B]
2. [B][COLOR="Blue"]Set your phone to NOT turn-off screen automatically[/COLOR][/B]
3. Write down your battery level at start
4. Leave it turned-on for 1 hour or more and do nothing
5. Compare the battery level
You should get the battery level differences.
Then do it again with complete black background.
Or better, you can do this overnight. Just write down the start-time and battery level of the experiment and compare at the end.
We should be able to calculate the battery drain per minute!
PS: I will do this, but I have not received my HTC Desire yet

the following quote is from wikipedia
Power consumption
While an OLED will consume around 40% of the power of an LCD displaying an image which is primarily black, for the majority of images, it will consume 60–80% of the power of an LCD - however it can use over three times as much power to display an image with a white background[53] such as a document or website. This can lead to disappointing real-world battery life in mobile devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
and check the following chart (not from wikipeda, from other website)
{
"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"
}

And this is the complete presentation from Irkan post:
http://data.4dsystems.com.au/downloads/micro-OLED/Docs/4D_AMOLED_Presentation.pdf
See on page 17 for example (image attached).
I am really sure that using black background will have quite significant different on battery life. Note that this is the main reason on Microsoft Windows Phone 7, to use mainly black background.
Now, can anyone who already own HTC Desire do the "real-world" test that I suggested above?
We need to know how this power saving translated to more hour/minute battery power

since i got my phone i been using the carbon/black background but because its been only about 2 charges my battery hopefully isnt at its best yet but each time after a battery i will change the background for basic testing

cez10 said:
since i got my phone i been using the carbon/black background but because its been only about 2 charges my battery hopefully isnt at its best yet but each time after a battery i will change the background for basic testing
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your battery won't get better after more charges. It's at its best now and only degrade from now on. It's the chemistry of a lithium battery
Why would a black background give battery results over night when the screen is not being used, that's nonsense.
A black background only helps you a bit. Once you run an app or start browsing the effect is mostly gone.
It will help in some way for sure, especially when you use the home screen a lot. But it won't be earth shattering...
Still, the amoled screen should save power in most other situations as well when you look at the pic posted earlier.

RaptorRVL said:
Your battery won't get better after more charges. It's at its best now and only degrade from now on. It's the chemistry of a lithium battery
Why would a black background give battery results over night when the screen is not being used, that's nonsense.
A black background only helps you a bit. Once you run an app or start browsing the effect is mostly gone.
It will help in some way for sure, especially when you use the home screen a lot. But it won't be earth shattering...
Still, the amoled screen should save power in most other situations as well when you look at the pic posted earlier.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
does the battery require calibration(fully discharge) when you receive the phone?

I think HTC should immediately, AT LEAST give an option, to view all their Sense application in reverse colors (black background). If you note,
-People
-Messages
-Mail
-Calendar
-Photos...
-Adding to it the Android Market
They ALL use white backgrounds! And these are the applications mostly used.
It doesn't make sense they missed that.
All in all ... I still can't see the sense behind using AMOLED. It's really disappointing.

cez10 said:
does the battery require calibration(fully discharge) when you receive the phone?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, that could be yes. But that depends really. That would be the only reason why the battery might 'improve'. But, I would assume that the phone will only shut down when the battery reaches a certain voltage. Until that point the percentage just falls down fast, but stays about the same in the lower percentages.
So, it could be useful to fully charge the first time and then wait/use until the phone shuts down. Then fully charge and hope the device has a nice average to show reliable percentages

salahag said:
I think HTC should immediately, AT LEAST give an option, to view all their Sense application in reverse colors (black background). If you note,
-People
-Messages
-Mail
-Calendar
-Photos...
-Adding to it the Android Market
They ALL use white backgrounds! And these are the applications mostly used.
It doesn't make sense they missed that.
All in all ... I still can't see the sense behind using AMOLED. It's really disappointing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because on average the amoled will be much more efficient. And there are more things that influence battery life.
Besides that, most people like white backgrounds much more than black ones
Grey might be a nice option. I wonder it going to 80% from white will also save around 20% of power.

RaptorRVL said:
Well, that could be yes. But that depends really. That would be the only reason why the battery might 'improve'. But, I would assume that the phone will only shut down when the battery reaches a certain voltage. Until that point the percentage just falls down fast, but stays about the same in the lower percentages.
So, it could be useful to fully charge the first time and then wait/use until the phone shuts down. Then fully charge and hope the device has a nice average to show reliable percentages
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ok well so far i charged it with the phone off just after i received it for about 1.30h then bout 8h later I started charging while using it for a bit and then switched it off to continue charging 'overnight'. started using it heavily at 8 this morning (mainly wifi) and now its 4 and its on 37% so reckon will easily die before midnight so then can calibrate it over night

RaptorRVL said:
Because on average the amoled will be much more efficient. And there are more things that influence battery life.
Besides that, most people like white backgrounds much more than black ones
Grey might be a nice option. I wonder it going to 80% from white will also save around 20% of power.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree, it's a combination of things that we should optimize for best power durability. Yes I think gray is nice and should make a difference in power
But I disagree that it's more efficient on average, most applications have a white background, most websites have a white background, even if you use a dark wallpaper, it won't be there most of your time using the phone.
Also photos must have a relatively large black portion to use less power than LCDs.
I like the desire and was waiting for it for some time now, just disappointed. I'll wait for someone to make that background test and decide if I will buy it or probably buy it

salahag said:
I agree, it's a combination of things that we should optimize for best power durability. Yes I think gray is nice and should make a difference in power
But I disagree that it's more efficient on average, most applications have a white background, most websites have a white background, even if you use a dark wallpaper, it won't be there most of your time using the phone.
Also photos must have a relatively large black portion to use less power than LCDs.
I like the desire and was waiting for it for some time now, just disappointed. I'll wait for someone to make that background test and decide if I will buy it or probably buy it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you are making too much out of it.
Try to look at it from a different angle, all the text in those screens (usually black) save you energy! So the more text you get, the less energy it costs! A normal lcd always uses the same amount of energy.
Perhaps someone should measure the amount of 'black' being used in a text only e-mail (within the screen). And then you get a nice estimate of how much power the screen will actually use. Maybe I will do it when I find some time for it

In most cases (any other case than full white background) the AMOLED is better than TFT (more colorful, saves more power, ... etc).
so if the "white background power consumption" is an excuse for you to not get an AMOLED, than think again

irkan said:
In most cases (any other case than full white background) the AMOLED is better than TFT (more colorful, saves more power, ... etc).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm really not convinced that the Desire's AMOLED is better than TFT in any way. This is why not:
1) The longevity of these displays is questionable. From wikipedia: "AMOLED displays are prone to material degradation. However technology has been invented to circumvent this problem. Whether these mechanisms have been implemented in current applications of AMOLED displays is unknown, as are potential effects on power consumption."
2) Less accurate colour reproduction due to pixels being RRGBBG rather than the RGBRGB pattern on normal screens. The AMOLED RRGBBG pattern is used to try to avoid material degradation.
3) The Desire's 800*480 AMOLED screen does not have the same sharpness/resolution as a TFT 800*480 screen since any one pixel can not display the full range of colours (see 2). This is particularly noticeable with white text since it takes two pixels to display a white colour instead of one on a normal screen.
4) Power consumption in practice is not any better. This is proved by the fact that the HD2 has 35% more screen area powered by a 12% smaller battery, yet the battery life is at least comparable if not better.
5) Do you really want a display that makes you think twice about showing anything that's white because it'll drain the battery 3 times as fast? It would be like living in a house where you're scared to turn the lights on! Fine if you're a Goth and live in a dark world I suppose.
6) AMOLED is supposedly "more colourful" than TFT. I would suggest that "more colourful" = "less true to life". My HD2 colours are very accurate and I wouldn't want them any more colourful. Similarly I could turn the colour up on my TV to make it "more colourful" but I don't because it doesn't look right.
I love these "My thingy is better than you're thingy" debates - they can go on for ever without anyone changing their own opinion! Now if only I could get Android 2.1 with HTC Sense on my HD2...

Moandal said:
I'm really not convinced that the Desire's AMOLED is better than TFT in any way. This is why not:
1) The longevity of these displays is questionable. From wikipedia: "AMOLED displays are prone to material degradation. However technology has been invented to circumvent this problem. Whether these mechanisms have been implemented in current applications of AMOLED displays is unknown, as are potential effects on power consumption."
2) Less accurate colour reproduction due to pixels being RRGBBG rather than the RGBRGB pattern on normal screens. The AMOLED RRGBBG pattern is used to try to avoid material degradation.
3) The Desire's 800*480 AMOLED screen does not have the same sharpness/resolution as a TFT 800*480 screen since any one pixel can not display the full range of colours (see 2). This is particularly noticeable with white text since it takes two pixels to display a white colour instead of one on a normal screen.
4) Power consumption in practice is not any better. This is proved by the fact that the HD2 has 35% more screen area powered by a 12% smaller battery, yet the battery life is at least comparable if not better.
5) Do you really want a display that makes you think twice about showing anything that's white because it'll drain the battery 3 times as fast? It would be like living in a house where you're scared to turn the lights on! Fine if you're a Goth and live in a dark world I suppose.
6) AMOLED is supposedly "more colourful" than TFT. I would suggest that "more colourful" = "less true to life". My HD2 colours are very accurate and I wouldn't want them any more colourful. Similarly I could turn the colour up on my TV to make it "more colourful" but I don't because it doesn't look right.
I love these "My thingy is better than you're thingy" debates - they can go on for ever without anyone changing their own opinion! Now if only I could get Android 2.1 with HTC Sense on my HD2...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you only see the empty half of the cup, and even the other full half that really exists, you deny it.
if you are not convinced that that is your personal opinion, but you have to into consideration the studies that has been shown how AMOLED is more suitable than TFT in some applications (including mobile)
Since you copied wikipedia, i will copy from it and other places
advantages of AMOLED:
1. Thin and light-weight (this allow the mobile phone to be thiner and more compact, and more "MOBILE").
2. Lower power consumption (in almost all the cases but white). this is an advantage not a disadvantage. noone is forcing you to not use white bg, but if you dont use it you will save MORE than usual power, either ways IMO the battery life consumption is better than TFT (even if you used white occasionally, and normally). I highly doubt that anyone would use full pure white screens all the times.
3. better viewing angle, not a biggie, but its better than TFT viewing angle so its an advantage.
4. High color contrast ratio (Black is Black) and the other colors look better and sharper, that is the real "true to life" color, not like TFT where black and other colors are "washed out" (washed out is not true to life btw )
5. High Ambient Contrast Ratio, in fact AMOLED are suppose to look better in ALL conditions including under sun-light, however that feature has been crippled somehow by the manufacturers cuz they added a reflective layer on top of it (to better protect the screen i suppose, not sure). its still +1 for AMOLED in general.
6. Fast response time, the LEDs response faster and better to moving pictures , yes faster than the response time or TFT, AMOLED response <50uS, TFT response 3000~30000uS, so if you wanna see a movie and there is someone very speedy is racing, you will see it blurry in the TFT (and this is different than, CPU power. this is the response time of the display).
7. wide temperature operation, AMOLED can work from
-40 ~85C while TFT from -20 ~70C (I doubt that this will be useful, but hey its an advantage over TFT)
8. Significantly higher Colour Gamut, AMOLED looks brighter, sharper and more visually pleasing when tested under constant color gamut using gray levels
overall, nothing is perfect, .. but its advantages, outweighs its disadvantages

Of course using mostly black colors will not give you over night more battery life. I know that.
But at least it should give you "additional" juices compare to white or bright one.
How much additional? I don't know yet. That's why if someone could test it.
And yeah, we all know that not only the screen will influence battery life But, in this test is about to measure the screen ... so, if you want to test it, turn off all other services like WiFi/GPS/Data.
Or do you think this is silly test? Well, this just for fun and to test the theory
You know, even if it give additional 5% (from 10 hours battery life to 10 and 30 minutes, I would be happy!).
RaptorRVL said:
Your battery won't get better after more charges. It's at its best now and only degrade from now on. It's the chemistry of a lithium battery
Why would a black background give battery results over night when the screen is not being used, that's nonsense.
A black background only helps you a bit. Once you run an app or start browsing the effect is mostly gone.
It will help in some way for sure, especially when you use the home screen a lot. But it won't be earth shattering...
Still, the amoled screen should save power in most other situations as well when you look at the pic posted earlier.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

irkan said:
you only see the empty half of the cup, and even the other full half that really exists, you deny it.
if you are not convinced that that is your personal opinion, but you have to into consideration the studies that has been shown how AMOLED is more suitable than TFT in some applications (including mobile)
Since you copied wikipedia, i will copy from it and other places
advantages of AMOLED:
1. Thin and light-weight (this allow the mobile phone to be thiner and more compact, and more "MOBILE").
2. Lower power consumption (in almost all the cases but white). this is an advantage not a disadvantage. noone is forcing you to not use white bg, but if you dont use it you will save MORE than usual power, either ways IMO the battery life consumption is better than TFT (even if you used white occasionally, and normally). I highly doubt that anyone would use full pure white screens all the times.
3. better viewing angle, not a biggie, but its better than TFT viewing angle so its an advantage.
4. High color contrast ratio (Black is Black) and the other colors look better and sharper, that is the real "true to life" color, not like TFT where black and other colors are "washed out" (washed out is not true to life btw )
5. High Ambient Contrast Ratio, in fact AMOLED are suppose to look better in ALL conditions including under sun-light, however that feature has been crippled somehow by the manufacturers cuz they added a reflective layer on top of it (to better protect the screen i suppose, not sure). its still +1 for AMOLED in general.
6. Fast response time, the LEDs response faster and better to moving pictures , yes faster than the response time or TFT, AMOLED response <50uS, TFT response 3000~30000uS, so if you wanna see a movie and there is someone very speedy is racing, you will see it blurry in the TFT (and this is different than, CPU power. this is the response time of the display).
7. wide temperature operation, AMOLED can work from
-40 ~85C while TFT from -20 ~70C (I doubt that this will be useful, but hey its an advantage over TFT)
8. Significantly higher Colour Gamut, AMOLED looks brighter, sharper and more visually pleasing when tested under constant color gamut using gray levels
overall, nothing is perfect, .. but its advantages, outweighs its disadvantages
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In response to your "advantages":
1) If AMOLED allows the phone to be thinner and more compact, how come the HD2 is thinner than the Desire?
2) You haven't explained how the HD2 can run a 35% bigger screen with a 12% smaller battery if it's screen requires more power in real-life usage.
3) Fair enough.
4) You're talking about AMOLED displays in theory. I'm talking about the specific implementation on the Desire (and Nexus One). I don't have a Desire to compare side-by-side with the HD2. However Neowin.net do have an iPhone to compare it with, and it doesn't compare well. http://www.neowin.net/news/nexus-one039s-amoled-screen-only-uses-16-bit-color
5) "+1 for AMOLED in general" is irrelevant when we're talking about the Desire specificially. Both the Desire and the HD2 are poor, although given how poor the HD2 is, maybe the Desire does sneak a point on this one.
6) The image response on the HD2 is fast enough for any delay to be un-noticeable. Anything better than un-noticeable is still no better in practice. If you think it's noticeable on the HD2, give me a link to a review or article to back up your claims.
7) I stop operating below -20C and above +35C, never mind my phone, so this point is utterly irrelevant.
8) Same comment as 4) above.
You're grasping on to the theory of AMOLED displays in general. I'm talking about the Desire specifically and how it stands up in real life against other phones for important things like power usage and colour reproduction.

Moandal said:
In response to your "advantages":
1) If AMOLED allows the phone to be thinner and more compact, how come the HD2 is thinner than the Desire?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Come on, you came up with this kind of question?
The hardware is DIFFERENT, do you think ALL AMOLED devices should be this thin or that thin?
Moandal said:
2) You haven't explained how the HD2 can run a 35% bigger screen with a 12% smaller battery if it's screen requires more power in real-life usage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Again, I don't think this would be an exact comparison. You simply cant, because the OS is different, the video driver is different, etc! Which one is more efficient? How do you measure real-life usage? The hardware is DIFFERENT.
You cant just factor the screen alone on this.
It would be meaningful if you come up with similar Android device that runs same level of OS but using LCD as the screen.
Moandal said:
You're grasping on to the theory of AMOLED displays in general. I'm talking about the Desire specifically and how it stands up in real life against other phones for important things like power usage and colour reproduction.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please, don't bring this to a discussion about HD2 vs Desire!!!
This thread is intended to find out if "black background" could SAVE MORE BATTERY LIFE on HTC Desire.
*begging* ... please don't stir this discussion out of context.

gogol said:
This thread is intended to find out if "black background" could SAVE MORE BATTERY LIFE on HTC Desire.[/B]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It does

Sure, but as I said, how big is the additional battery life saving?
If it is not that significant, then forget it.
10% would be nice ... Imagine average 10 hours battery life , +10% = 11 hours
Damn! I need my HTC Desire NOW!!
irkan said:
It does
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

The Best WP7 Phone Possible (2nd edition)

So I've done some basic research on phone components out there that could truly create an AMAZING WP7 phone, while still staying within realistic terms, and here's what I've come up with (I'm giving explanations for each aspect in parentheses):
The ultimate WP7 would be a 4.7in (Can still fit in your pocket comfortably, while giving you a perfect view of the 1080P definition of your screen) HTC Touch Pro 3 (because its predecessor truly is the best combination of practicality and entertainment) with a dual-core 1.5ghz snapdragon processor (It has a release date set for Q4 2010, but will probably be moved to Q1 2011), 1024mb RAM (It's very rare to find a phone with this spec, but it is by no means unrealistic), a fourth chassis spec for a physical gamepad along with the physical keyboard with tilt (the actual keyboard would slide down, and the game pad would appear on the left and right of the screen by separation of the landscape physical keyboard while it's not in a slide down position, with an analog stick on the left, and four action keys on the right (Definitely the most unrealistic part of this phone description )), a 12 megapixel camera (nothing new in a phone) with HD video, 64 GB of Micro SD enabled (...), and at least 6 hours of talk time along with 48 hours standby (with the dual-core of the snapdragon processor users can expect a significant reduction in battery consumption since the cores are independent of each other) all on the Windows Phone 7 UI.
It’s a mouthful, but it’s almost enough to bring tears to my eyes… lol not really, but just make the phone HTC, and significantly loosen your hardware requirements Microsoft
Do you guys have a different definition of what makes the ultimate WP7 phone?

4.7in!
Thats insain, the HD2 is considered large enough (if not slight too big) 4 would surfice
dual 1.5Ghz snap dragon? really, since smartphones are working away from multitasking due to instability issues its unlikely to make much of a difference, but will happily take the core reduction and lower power consumption! 1080p is an insainly high res as well, im sure it will look good as an advertising milestone but with such high DPI i think you'll find it hard to tell the difference between 720p and 1080p infact i believe you would need to have your device 6inchs from your eyes to see 1080p at standard DPI, to detect the differences when you take in to account the significantly higher DPI you would need to have the phone on the end of your nose, viewing angles would require the device to be nearer 10inchs. not that id turn it down but its not a big deal
what i want is a 45nm 1.5ghz snapdragon, ~4in display using 65k or 16m bit depth, no more than 8mp camera, (12 on such as small lens would be **** or at best no improvment) a propper graphics core with its drivers!
Ill stick with the gig of RAM but suggest an internal 64GB storage and a SD expansion, multiband support so i can make it work everywhere! 4G would be handy if networks ever upgrade, everything else can be the same as the HD2 because that is the king just now! oh, you can keep your keyboard but what would be cool is a docking station that projects a keyboard on to a table
as for the OS, well to be honest unless the Gods on here unlock WP7 ill keep my 6.5.5

blaiz123 said:
The ultimate WP7 would be a 4.7in (Can still fit in your pocket comfortably, while giving you a perfect view of the 1080P definition of your screen)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've held the Droid X in my hand and the biggest downside to that phone, I see, is the size. Its huge!
Also, 4.7 inches just to view 1080p? With many 32" TVs out there you can't tell the difference between 1080p and 720p. With that in mind, 720p HD resolution won't make more difference than an SD video so you can be sure that 1080p won't be anything more than a selling point.

theomni said:
I've held the Droid X in my hand and the biggest downside to that phone, I see, is the size. Its huge!
Also, 4.7 inches just to view 1080p? With many 32" TVs out there you can't tell the difference between 1080p and 720p. With that in mind, 720p HD resolution won't make more difference than an SD video so you can be sure that 1080p won't be anything more than a selling point.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the important part would be how well it records... Also, if I don't have to do any converting so it plays on a given device then all the better - even if it's not really usable on the phone. I may hook the phone up to a friends TV while visiting. So, there is potential for use, even beyond a selling point.
dazza9075 said:
4.7in!
Thats insain, the HD2 is considered large enough (if not slight too big) 4 would surfice
dual 1.5Ghz snap dragon? really, since smartphones are working away from multitasking due to instability issues its unlikely to make much of a difference, but will happily take the core reduction and lower power consumption! 1080p is an insainly high res as well, im sure it will look good as an advertising milestone but with such high DPI i think you'll find it hard to tell the difference between 720p and 1080p infact i believe you would need to have your device 6inchs from your eyes to see 1080p at standard DPI, to detect the differences when you take in to account the significantly higher DPI you would need to have the phone on the end of your nose, viewing angles would require the device to be nearer 10inchs. not that id turn it down but its not a big deal
what i want is a 45nm 1.5ghz snapdragon, ~4in display using 65k or 16m bit depth, no more than 8mp camera, (12 on such as small lens would be **** or at best no improvment) a propper graphics core with its drivers!
Ill stick with the gig of RAM but suggest an internal 64GB storage and a SD expansion, multiband support so i can make it work everywhere! 4G would be handy if networks ever upgrade, everything else can be the same as the HD2 because that is the king just now! oh, you can keep your keyboard but what would be cool is a docking station that projects a keyboard on to a table
as for the OS, well to be honest unless the Gods on here unlock WP7 ill keep my 6.5.5
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
MS isn't allowing 3rd-party multi-tasking at this time, but will do it with stock parts of the OS - so even if there isn't support for other programs you'll still use it (but I'm willing to bet that there will be support at some time).
The ARM spec that the chip is based on includes the 4G component. You'll probably need a provider patch / software update, but it's in the 1.5 GHz dual core snapdragon.
The GPU is also in there, and although not as good as others I've read about, still is nothing to scoff at
For me though, the bigger the better when it comes to the screen. I'm looking for an all-in-one device that goes everywhere. If I need a better camera, I'll grab mine. A better video camera, I'll grab mine. A better portable computer, I'll grab mine. But my next phone will certainly be my GPS, Music Player, and of course, phone.
I also like the slide out keyboard, if for no other reason than no wasted screen real estate.

dazza9075 said:
what would be cool is a docking station that projects a keyboard on to a table
)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That would be a pretty sweet deal, but I think we're looking at at least 2020 for projection keyboards

blaiz123 said:
That would be a pretty sweet deal, but I think we're looking at at least 2020 for projection keyboards
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, there are projection keyboards out now and they've been around since the beginning of this decade. All though I'm not sure how good this technology is now.

theomni said:
Actually, there are projection keyboards out now and they've been around since the beginning of this decade. All though I'm not sure how good this technology is now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you serious? So you mean I can actually sit down with my computer and if I have the proper platform I could type on a projected keyboard that would disappear when I turned off the platform? Because that would be pretty amazing.

Yep, the keyboards that are outthere emit a light onto the surface and via infrared, "feels" your touch of the projected key just llike hitting an actual keyboard. Find online...

I'd like to have a 4" device with a landscape 5 row querty keyboard, a touch pro 3 but bigger then the current touch pro2 and thinner. As far as the internal go, I'd love to have high end but I'll settle with the base seeing how everythings going to be performanced based on that.

mapaz04 said:
Yep, the keyboards that are outthere emit a light onto the surface and via infrared, "feels" your touch of the projected key just llike hitting an actual keyboard. Find online...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Now that is very intresting...hmm i wonder how it feels not to have any key feedback, need to look in to that, i can see a bluetooth projector for computers and PDAs being hugely useful...asuming it works that is!

mapaz04 said:
Yep, the keyboards that are outthere emit a light onto the surface and via infrared, "feels" your touch of the projected key just llike hitting an actual keyboard. Find online...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, but I wouldn't want to buy into this technology until it evolves so that the user can also feel the touch of the keys of the projected keyboard. And I'm not talking about a simple vibration, I would actually want to feel as if I'm typing on a real keyboard. That type of technology will definitely not be available until at least 2018

Check out
the specs for the new HTC HD3, sounds perfect to me! Can't wait to get my hands on one...

registeredxdadevi said:
the specs for the new HTC HD3, sounds perfect to me! Can't wait to get my hands on one...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
anyone wanna pop the bubble?

Here
is the link
http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/article/351797/leaked_htc_hd3_smartphone_revealed/
Not sure how true it is, but sounds good to me...

registeredxdadevi said:
is the link
http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/article/351797/leaked_htc_hd3_smartphone_revealed/
Not sure how true it is, but sounds good to me...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Awwwwhhh, I thought it said DUAL-CORE 1.5 ghz processor, that almost made me want to buy the phone, even though it lacks a physical keyboard with tilt (Which is a MAJOR dealbreaker for me)
Besides what is up with all of these HTC HD promotions, how come there are no Touch Pro 3 announcements. HTC is being very narrowminded not promoting a phone that could actually distinguish itself from the iphone in terms of hardware (and I'm talking about more than just a bigger screen...)

I just
love the big screen, with the screen even bigger it's got my wallet! Just not sure about this new windows 7...hopefully we get to test it somehow before purchasing.

Kloc said:
I'd like to have a 4" device with a landscape 5 row querty keyboard, a touch pro 3 but bigger then the current touch pro2 and thinner. As far as the internal go, I'd love to have high end but I'll settle with the base seeing how everythings going to be performanced based on that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
2nd that
specs etc...don't care...wp7 should run smoothly on any device running wp7...
i'm being cpt. obvious

I'm a writer. I write about cell phones. I've used all of the WP7 phones. The best one is the Samsung Focus. That's my opinion. It has by far the best display. the right size screen and the best form factor. It's well made despite the rap that it's plastic. The plastic on this phone and the build quality are excellent. The HD7 is heavy. The start button is awkward and the display is pitiful. The HTC Surround is bulky, housing a speaker that virtually nobody uses. The LG Optimus is a nice phone, but it's heavy and small. The screen is narrow. The HTC Mozart is very nice. It's smaller and the display is nowhere near the Focus. It has a better camera than the others. This is my take. I've had several takes on all of them. The Focus wins.

ennx said:
I'm a writer. I write about cell phones. I've used all of the WP7 phones. The best one is the Samsung Focus. That's my opinion. It has by far the best display. the right size screen and the best form factor. It's well made despite the rap that it's plastic. The plastic on this phone and the build quality are excellent. The HD7 is heavy. The start button is awkward and the display is pitiful. The HTC Surround is bulky, housing a speaker that virtually nobody uses. The LG Optimus is a nice phone, but it's heavy and small. The screen is narrow. The HTC Mozart is very nice. It's smaller and the display is nowhere near the Focus. It has a better camera than the others. This is my take. I've had several takes on all of them. The Focus wins.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really, I don't find the HD7 heavy at all. Matter of fact, I would say a couple of inches more than the HD7 would make the perfect phone!

makoute said:
Really, I don't find the HD7 heavy at all. Matter of fact, I would say a couple of inches more than the HD7 would make the perfect phone!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree, I find the heft to be reassuring, not overly heavy. But I've also had the tp2 and hd2.

[Q] AT&T Best WP7: Surround, Focus, Quantum

Hi. I am sorry if somebody already asked this, but I couldn't find it.
Which one is the best AT&T WP7: Surround, Focus, Quantum?
I am almost sure Focus is the best option. Please shed some light here! Thanks!

It all depends on what you want from a phone. The LG has a full keyboard, The Surround has a sliding speaker system and the Focus would be your average modern smart phone. Personally I chose the Focus because of the 4" amoled display and expandable storage.

Ren13B said:
Personally I chose the Focus because of the 4" amoled display and expandable storage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The same for me and its size.

If it's WP7, then none, at least right now.

harolds said:
If it's WP7, then none, at least right now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
if you're going to post something... at least answer his question. in your opinion it might not be worth buying, but for the many that have, the large majority are happy with it.

harolds said:
If it's WP7, then none, at least right now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I love my focus its OS makes the rest look old and dated.

falconeight said:
I love my focus its OS makes the rest look old and dated.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I totaly agree the focus is the way to go i have 40 gb storage and the os is so much smoother than the rest and the interface makes ios and android look very old. I compaired my focus to my sons iphione4 last night and the iphone 4 side by side was no comparrison from the apps, to the lock screen, intergration, to the homescreen. or even something as simple as answering or rejecting a call from the lockscreen... since people are always complaing about what should be in a os in these days being able to reject a call from lockscreen is one of the most basic and til this day ios still cannot do it... I never heard anyone complaining about this??

I bought the Surround. It was more of personal preference about the look and feel of the device. To me, the Surround looked and felt better.. i liked the soft touch back and the solid heavy feel, and really consider the speaker as just a bonus feature as it only adds 1mm of thickness compared to the identical HTC Trophy. The Focus' Super AMOLED screen was amazing, but I didnt like the glossy plastic look. Its all personal preference and what you are looking for in a phone.

I'd agree with Ren13B. If you need a work phone and plan to write 50+ emails (or you are a teenager and need to send 100+ texts) a day, LG would be a better buy for the keyboard.
If you need a better speakerphone or speakers and don't mind a little bulk, Surround is the one. Also, I have seen Surround going for less at Amazon and Newegg so that's another reason.
For everything else, Focus seems to be the best fit.

rexian said:
I'd agree with Ren13B. If you need a work phone and plan to write 50+ emails (or you are a teenager and need to send 100+ texts) a day, LG would be a better buy for the keyboard.
If you need a better speakerphone or speakers and don't mind a little bulk, Surround is the one. Also, I have seen Surround going for less at Amazon and Newegg so that's another reason.
For everything else, Focus seems to be the best fit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that would be a true statement if this was the keyboard of wimdows 6.5 or anything less than wp7 the on screen keyboard is simply unbleavable with its auto correct feature and a 4inch screen you can type as fast if not faster that any hw keyboard... it works that well...

Chose Focus due to memory expansion, screen, and size/quality.
It is interesting to note that, unlike iMapple, the WP7 seems to all have great reception. Have noticed the Samsung Focus has better cell reception than the HTC Fuze and various other HTC/Motorola phones from the past.

I went with the surround. NOTE: I did come from a Samsung Captivate
I went with the surround because:
-better build quality
-nice speaker
-kickstand is nice to have when watching netflix (lol)
-I like HTC over samsung
-Samsung focus felt too flimsy and cheap for me
-Samsung scared me after some of the issues of the captivate (im sure samsung and windows did a better job on the focus, this is just how i feel)
on the other hand though,
SAMOLED is nice, and I do miss, but at the same time the LCD of the Surround is good, but the main thing you are missing is not screen quality, but battery life. I havent had a chance to put my battery to the test, but im sure SAMOLED will trump the HTCs LCD.

The "best" on, of course, depends on what you want from your phone. Personally, I've been burned by lousy hardware from HTC and LG before (several times) and I'm a big Slingplayer user so the large screen, light weight and slim design of the Samsung Focus appealed to me. The other two have are stronger in other areas. Check the specs of each and/or go play with them at an AT&T and decide for yourself.

MarcMaiden said:
I went with the surround. NOTE: I did come from a Samsung Captivate
I went with the surround because:
-better build quality
-nice speaker
-kickstand is nice to have when watching netflix (lol)
-I like HTC over samsung
-Samsung focus felt too flimsy and cheap for me
-Samsung scared me after some of the issues of the captivate (im sure samsung and windows did a better job on the focus, this is just how i feel)
on the other hand though,
SAMOLED is nice, and I do miss, but at the same time the LCD of the Surround is good, but the main thing you are missing is not screen quality, but battery life. I havent had a chance to put my battery to the test, but im sure SAMOLED will trump the HTCs LCD.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Buyer's remorse no more, check out this page from anandtech:
anandtech.com/show/3982/windows-phone-7-review/28

rruffman said:
that would be a true statement if this was the keyboard of wimdows 6.5 or anything less than wp7 the on screen keyboard is simply unbleavable with its auto correct feature and a 4inch screen you can type as fast if not faster that any hw keyboard... it works that well...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know if the kb on the 4" Focus screen will make a significant difference or not, I can say I type faster hands down on my Fuze than my iPhone, which according to some have the best on-screen kb.
I have seen videos of people typing insanely fast on iPhone but I think they'd be even faster on a good h/w keyboard like Fuze.

Oranjoose said:
Buyer's remorse no more, check out this page from anandtech:
anandtech.com/show/3982/windows-phone-7-review/28
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For long sessions of browsing webpages with white background or emails, there is no doubt AMOLED screen of Focus will drain the battery faster. I wonder if there will be a way in future to change the background/foreground of the browser / email client inWP7.

What a boring Sunday, I'ma make a long post to kill time.

I'm gonna talk about my one week+ old HOX, and like always, I have a lot to say.
To start with, my last phone was the Omnia II, and it was a piece of ****. I had no idea someone was capable of producing something so stupid I'm just totally shocked I mostly used it as a regular phone+music player. It sucked mainly because of the WM6.5 OS, its just funny how someone could even sell such a thing and call it a smartphone. Firstly the performance sucks and it's obvious, nothing goes beyond 10fps in WM6.5, you'd be lucky to get over 5. The music player playlist scrolls at about 3fps, the keyboard has a half second to one second lag, the browser runs at about 0.8fps, it is a full featured browser but you can barely browse the most plain mobile sites. With performance like this, multitasking can kiss my ass, how about get any single task done right before you can multitask? That resistive touchscreen also sucked, I was stupid I didn't do enough research to know the difference. Why would you have a phone screen that is NOT covered with glass? Why? Ignoring the obvious hardness differences, it sucks when those reflections on my screen are distorted, I wanna see a perfect mirror reflection, I'm a perfectionist ok? And of course there are about three apps for WM. I know there are more but they look like windows 95 and has tiny ui elements designed for styluses so they don't count. And those ones that look like windows XP or with lame 3d themes, SPB shell or some ****, those don't count as well.
Look at iPhone! That's how it should be done, everything must be perfectly smooth period. If its not smooth it's not even worth mentioning I don't care how many features you have. iPhone 4 really kicked android in the ass with that retina display. I still don't get it, even today people are releasing phones with this "qHD" resolution, wtf? That's just laughable it's lower than a phone released two years ago! With a much smaller screen! Really? Who's gonna accept that? Sometimes they even call it their "flagship" product, gimme a break. 720p is the minimum period.
So just a few weeks ago I was struggling to decide between the iPhone 4s, HOX the S3, and Sony's yet to be released waterproof 1.5ghz dual core phone. I can't wait for the Sony because iPhone 5 is coming out by the time they release it so that's out of the question. I already have the iPad so I decided to try out an android phone, already got a taste of iOS. I picked the HOX and here is why.
The Galaxy S III isn't as good looking as the HOX to begein with. Maybe Samsung has been having too many problems with patents their design is severely compromised it looks like a really cheap phone but obviously with latest technologies like that screen and its thickness. That bottom part looks really bad it reminds me of a really ugly version of the Omnia II, it looks so 2006 if you unrest and what I mean. That top part also look really bad with those obvious holes for sensors and cameras, they should be hidden like on the HOX. The back side and the rim also look like a very cheep phone but thinner and bigger.
The galaxy s3 screen is also bigger I think, but with the same resolution which makes its bigger size a negative fetus because it's harder to use. Oh wait, in fact it's of a lower resolution because of that pentile ****, it only has 2/3 the number of sub pixels as the HOX. The amoled display is vibrant but that's not equivalent to good because it's too vibrant and the colors are inaccurate. Take a look at a professional display review of the s3 all three primaries are way off they are over saturated. White balance is non existent it's too blue and sometimes green it hurts my eyes. The amoled display is also far dimmer than the HOX, doesn't bother me much but it's also a down point.
The S3 is slightly faster and has a bigger battery. But the Sense UI also look better and no I'm not a fan of flashing ROMs anymore. Honestly I don't give a **** about performance as long as it's smooth I'm happy, and I don't play 3d games at all. I saw this review concluding the s3 has a mich much battery life, I don't know what to say about their stupidity, it must have been tough finding someone to do that video review with a straight face. They test battery life by playing a video that's basically a static image, on max screen brightness. Ok to start with, the HOX has a much brighter screen, in fact, 60% brighter if I remember correctly. So the HOX shouldn't be competing on max brightness. It should be on 60%. Secondly that S3 has a freakin amoled display how can you compare that with an LCD? That stupid video they use is mostly dark blue with a small rainbow so the total display output of an oled display displaying that image is probably less than 33%. So, we should have the HOX's screen brightness decreased by another 66% down to 20% max brightness to be fair. Or, we should have a video with realistic scenarios like full white google home pages. But of course, the s3 with a bigger battery and it's more advanced processor is probably better on battery life in any case, just not by THAT much.
But that battery life advantage doesn't nearly compare with the HOX's much better looking unibody and its solid feel. HOX's better camera quality and speed. HOX's studio quality display, I just wish that display is 10-bit, cuz sometimes you see banding. Beats Audio is mostly advertising but it's not a bad addition.
However, using the HOX for a week, I found a couple of problems with android phones. For example, they're never ashamed of releasing unfinished products are they? How come LWP pauses when I swipe between home screens? Wtf is that all about? Releasing a feature that's partly or completely useless? It's not too bothering on non-parallax and slow LWPs, but that's not the best part of having a LWP is it? That's a big one but there are also some small ones like the photo stack widget, it resets to the first picture all the time. I can't uninstall useless ****s like google+, showme, latitude, local, locations, navigation, car.... I mean do we not have enough navigation apps already? I don't even think you can uninstall the setup wizard. In iOS you can't uninstall newsstand or reminder but at least you can hide them in a folder and their icons look really good, much better than "show me" at least. The system also doesn't come with a file manager, I wonder how youre supposed to empty your download folder, do you just let it eat up all your storage? And oh, the three dots of death, not too bothering, but it just leaves you thinking if HTC even test their phone, might as well just not have any of the touch buttons so I can feel lest wasteful?
and honestly, I don't like android's multitask system, because you don't know what's running and what's not running. In iOS you always know nothing is running, you don't worry about battery life. But in android they could all be running for all I know, but sometimes I also want an app to run in the background. There should be a better way to manage that. Like having a multitask bar like iOS, have most apps go on save state, but you can allow certain apps to run a background process which could be independently managed from save state. So I don't have to either kill an app or let it eat my battery.
Overall, I'm still really satisfied with the device. It's generally as smooth as the iPhone, browser performance is on par with the iPad2 which is good enough. Audio performance is also good with my Etymotic Research MC-5. And the screen is just a treat sometimes I press the power button just to see the beautiful screen showing my wallpaper. And the unibody, it feels much better than the S3 glossy plastic.

thx for this objective review
all ur info r 100% spot on
enjoy the hox, upcoming update that we have it leaked will solve the 3dot menu and 90% if the bugs also boost performance by a good margin (real performance not benchs)
yea too bad HTC made a very big mistake
they worked so hard for such a great device and total reboot for them but then shot themselves in the foot by rushing it out as they were worried about the s3 but it really had the opposite effect many of the early new comer adopters jumped ship (1.26 was a disaster)
speaking of the s3 my employer shares all ur points and he is dying to switch it with the hox

starting from ICS you can disable system apps (not all but most of them, maps and google+ for sure for example, and they bother you... like they bother me, lol)
just dont update them and from application's settings tap "disable" and they'll disappear from launcher (i guess it just "chmod -r" the apk), you dont have to be rooted for that
i've picked mine yesterday, used and bought 06-29 but the owner wanted to try the S3 and payed it a good price... it's awesome, no wifi issues of yellowish screen.
so far i'm really entusiastic...

jacobgong said:
But of course, the s3 with a bigger battery and it's more advanced processor is probably better on battery life in any case, just not by THAT much.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great write up. And your bottom line conclusion's spot on. No phone is perfect. You compare the good against the bad against what's important to you and decide from there. No one's "wrong" in picking any of the phones you mentioned if it's "right" for them. After using the phone for a couple of months now there are some things that I'd like to see done differently and make me wonder what HTC was thinking. Then there's things that are so well done and seem so intuitive that they just make me smile. I just played a two hour and forty minute movie using HTC Watch via Media Link and not only did it work flawlessly in 720p, it only consumed 20% of my battery. The fact that a phone, any phone, can now do that is pretty amazing.
As for battery life. Exynos Quad is highly overrated; that or Teg3 is underrated. Comparing the One X to the SGS3 and adjusting for the differences in battery size, the One X actually performs better than the SGS3 in all but video playback where the darks of the content favor AMOLED. It's meaningless in real life because of the smaller fixed battery in the One X, but HTC, Nvidia, or both deserve a lot of credit for extracting that type of efficiency from a chip that's not exactly modern.
Enjoy your new phone...

But for some reason HTC decided you shouldn't be able to disable Google+ or show me, or setup wizard. While you can disable Facebook and YouTube.
Sent from my HTC One X using xda premium

jacobgong said:
But for some reason HTC decided you shouldn't be able to disable Google+ or show me, or setup wizard. While you can disable Facebook and YouTube.
Sent from my HTC One X using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Uninstall updates then you can disable.