Yeah it's a Mac fanboy site and even they can't make it sound less shady, like Sofi said. Definitely it shouldn't have happened.
Technology Android
- Thread starter THEV1LL4N
- Start date
Now this went MUCH too far:
http://www.lovefortech.com/2011/09/03/apple-made-samsung-remove-galaxy-tab-7-7-from-ifa/
I wonder what the heck does this one violate? It's totally different than the previous Tab and Ipad2. And while the 10.1 could've bear similarities this one is really much different. A totally different size, shape and form factor. Even the bezel is different (slimmer). On a side note it's an awesome little device. Super Amoled Plus, Samsung's own dual core unit, 7mm thickness, yeah.
http://www.lovefortech.com/2011/09/03/apple-made-samsung-remove-galaxy-tab-7-7-from-ifa/
I wonder what the heck does this one violate? It's totally different than the previous Tab and Ipad2. And while the 10.1 could've bear similarities this one is really much different. A totally different size, shape and form factor. Even the bezel is different (slimmer). On a side note it's an awesome little device. Super Amoled Plus, Samsung's own dual core unit, 7mm thickness, yeah.
On a side note I have a confession to make (3 posts in a row, yeah!).
I have just took advantage of a pretty decent deal on my soon-to-be Android - the Sony Ericsson Xperia Arc. Someone has bought it, used it for 3 times and decided that he doesn't really dig touchscreen phones, lol. So I'm meeting him by Monday or so to check it out and if all is fine it'll be my new phone. I was also considering the Samsung Galaxy S2 since it's a great phone too but it's almost 50% more expensive and I don't really think that I need that extra power that it offers at the moment, especially since I was primarily after a good camera, battery life, bigger screen and slim and lightweight form factor and it all comes with the Arc, plus a great design, it lays in my hand very well for a phone with a 4,2 inch screen.
I'll let you guys know once I get it.
I have just took advantage of a pretty decent deal on my soon-to-be Android - the Sony Ericsson Xperia Arc. Someone has bought it, used it for 3 times and decided that he doesn't really dig touchscreen phones, lol. So I'm meeting him by Monday or so to check it out and if all is fine it'll be my new phone. I was also considering the Samsung Galaxy S2 since it's a great phone too but it's almost 50% more expensive and I don't really think that I need that extra power that it offers at the moment, especially since I was primarily after a good camera, battery life, bigger screen and slim and lightweight form factor and it all comes with the Arc, plus a great design, it lays in my hand very well for a phone with a 4,2 inch screen.
I'll let you guys know once I get it.
I'm still in Poland, next Sunday I'll be in Canada. I got it for a bit cheaper than I would get it for in Canada, plus warranty. For some reason these phones are about as expensive there, probably because they arrived there late.
Okay so I already have my new Xperia Arc!
Let's start with the fact that I have mixed feelings about the phone itself. The screen is big but the Reality Display is VERY overrated. It's great when looking at it from a fixed position (perhaps Super Amoled-ish good at some aspects like colors, and it feels sharper) but the viewing angles are terrible. Just tilt the phone by a few degrees off and everything starts sucking. If you stare at it from a wider angle you will see greyish-crap that will make you cry inside that you've just paid almost 500$ for that. Probably even an Iphone 3g screen comparison would make Sony go home crying in this field. Bravia Engine? Seriously? First use a reasonable LCD panel, Sony. To sum it up the screen feels like they achieved miracles.. with a 10 year old LCD. imho beats Iphone 4's display when looking directly though. So very mixed feelings here.
The camera is awesome, on par with average modern point and shoot devices but images aren't as sharp as on Xperia X10. The colors, noise levels, contrast, low-light shots etc are amazing for a phone though.
The phone is slim and really very lightweight - I was wondering if it had a battery inserted the first time I had it in my hand and it's the only =>4 inch phone that lies really great in my below average-sized hand.. but it feels plasticky and is a fingerprint magnet. At least the dark version.
The CPU and GPU aren't lacking anything. Everything is smooth, no lags or slowdowns whatsoever and I'm yet to see a moment that would make me want more processing power (minus poorly optimized apps like Timescape). Actually it has a power reserve since it almost never clocks at 1ghz. The UI is good, no need to download custom launchers since the Sony one seems to work best. Smooth, intuitive and with nice but simple animations. Perhaps too much blue, but I can live with that.
See, I just think that overall reviews of the phone were TOO positive and they confused me a bit. The phone is good but I wouldn't rate it as great as most of the reviews that I've seen in some aspects. I'm pretty sure that heavy marketing helped with all those display test videos etc. That's why I was disappointed about some things, especially the screen and build quality since while it indeed looks well for the price I wouldn't say so about overall feel of its quality. It's not bad, it's just average.
Another suprise for me is that.. Samsung creates overall better phones, if not the best at the moment. Despite the fact that I own a Sony's widely-praised flagship now. There are a lot of Sony/HTC fanboys sticking to these brands, thinking that their quality is better, still regarding Samsung as one of those inferior phone manufacturers but it's simply not true anymore. The roles seem to have changed. Coming from an older and much cheaper Samsung it felt like I was downgrading with a lot of aspects - especially the screen, battery life and overall build quality which was very surprising to me. Arc's build quality resembles the first Galaxy S but I think that even the Galaxy S was a tad more solid. Plus it had a Gorilla Glass screen which is awesome, and it's a change that made me miss my Samsung again.
Now if Arc had an AMOLED screen (or at least IPS LCD) plus a gorilla glass screen and an aluminium frame..well that would be close to perfect.
Don't get me wrong, I'm really enjoying the Arc and I do recommend the phone but I think that I expected a bit more in some areas. From Sony and their flagship that they were so confident in. Certainly amazing reviews didn't help.
Oh, I have to say it - I was really surprised about how Android evolved over the few months that I was missing it. Maps were finally updated here with Navigation and it's so fun it made me love the phone again, despite my initial discontent with Arc's viewing angles. I've never seen Android running that smooth and fancy, and apps being so much cooler than when I last tried. I was impressed.
Let's start with the fact that I have mixed feelings about the phone itself. The screen is big but the Reality Display is VERY overrated. It's great when looking at it from a fixed position (perhaps Super Amoled-ish good at some aspects like colors, and it feels sharper) but the viewing angles are terrible. Just tilt the phone by a few degrees off and everything starts sucking. If you stare at it from a wider angle you will see greyish-crap that will make you cry inside that you've just paid almost 500$ for that. Probably even an Iphone 3g screen comparison would make Sony go home crying in this field. Bravia Engine? Seriously? First use a reasonable LCD panel, Sony. To sum it up the screen feels like they achieved miracles.. with a 10 year old LCD. imho beats Iphone 4's display when looking directly though. So very mixed feelings here.
The camera is awesome, on par with average modern point and shoot devices but images aren't as sharp as on Xperia X10. The colors, noise levels, contrast, low-light shots etc are amazing for a phone though.
The phone is slim and really very lightweight - I was wondering if it had a battery inserted the first time I had it in my hand and it's the only =>4 inch phone that lies really great in my below average-sized hand.. but it feels plasticky and is a fingerprint magnet. At least the dark version.
The CPU and GPU aren't lacking anything. Everything is smooth, no lags or slowdowns whatsoever and I'm yet to see a moment that would make me want more processing power (minus poorly optimized apps like Timescape). Actually it has a power reserve since it almost never clocks at 1ghz. The UI is good, no need to download custom launchers since the Sony one seems to work best. Smooth, intuitive and with nice but simple animations. Perhaps too much blue, but I can live with that.
See, I just think that overall reviews of the phone were TOO positive and they confused me a bit. The phone is good but I wouldn't rate it as great as most of the reviews that I've seen in some aspects. I'm pretty sure that heavy marketing helped with all those display test videos etc. That's why I was disappointed about some things, especially the screen and build quality since while it indeed looks well for the price I wouldn't say so about overall feel of its quality. It's not bad, it's just average.
Another suprise for me is that.. Samsung creates overall better phones, if not the best at the moment. Despite the fact that I own a Sony's widely-praised flagship now. There are a lot of Sony/HTC fanboys sticking to these brands, thinking that their quality is better, still regarding Samsung as one of those inferior phone manufacturers but it's simply not true anymore. The roles seem to have changed. Coming from an older and much cheaper Samsung it felt like I was downgrading with a lot of aspects - especially the screen, battery life and overall build quality which was very surprising to me. Arc's build quality resembles the first Galaxy S but I think that even the Galaxy S was a tad more solid. Plus it had a Gorilla Glass screen which is awesome, and it's a change that made me miss my Samsung again.
Now if Arc had an AMOLED screen (or at least IPS LCD) plus a gorilla glass screen and an aluminium frame..well that would be close to perfect.
Don't get me wrong, I'm really enjoying the Arc and I do recommend the phone but I think that I expected a bit more in some areas. From Sony and their flagship that they were so confident in. Certainly amazing reviews didn't help.
Oh, I have to say it - I was really surprised about how Android evolved over the few months that I was missing it. Maps were finally updated here with Navigation and it's so fun it made me love the phone again, despite my initial discontent with Arc's viewing angles. I've never seen Android running that smooth and fancy, and apps being so much cooler than when I last tried. I was impressed.
Thanks for the hands-on review.
In other news...
HTC Amaze 4G gets snapped with the lights on, confirms 1.5GHz dual-core CPU
The only images we've seen of the upcoming HTC Ruby Amaze 4G, the high-powered smartphone inbound for T-Mobile, have left us eager for more substance; few pictures show the phone powered on, and even those offer no visual evidence of its rockin' specs. Our thirst for more info about the beast has been slightly more quenched, as Droid Sans snapped some pics of the prototype proudly displayed at a public gathering. From what we can tell by the snapshots, the device's "about" screen confirms the presence of a 1.5GHz dual-core CPU, 1GB of RAM, a 4.3-inch qHD display and an 8MP rear camera (2MP front) with dual-LED flash. The source tells us that it will come shipped with HTC Sense 3.5 running atop Gingerbread, so don't let these photos -- showing off stock Android -- get your hopes up so fast. All in all, though, it looks like the Samsung Galaxy S II may have a fierce battle on its hands for the title of T-Mobile's Next Top (smartphone) Model.
In other news...
HTC Amaze 4G gets snapped with the lights on, confirms 1.5GHz dual-core CPU
By Brad Molen 
posted Sep 5th 2011 12:53PM
posted Sep 5th 2011 12:53PM
Take out the "to woo iPhone users" part and it's kinda true. There's this emphasis on screen size. Like a horsepower race. That's not all that matters. It seems that 4"+ is the new norm, but 5"+ like the one Samsung phone has is kinda lame. Or was it HTC?
Either way, I think this shifts the focus of users to forget build quality, OS version, and other features and just focus on screen size. A bit like the whole camera megapixel thing. How people (myself included) thought 8 MP was always better than 5MP.
Clearly that isn't the case and I think screen size is heading that way.
Either way, I think this shifts the focus of users to forget build quality, OS version, and other features and just focus on screen size. A bit like the whole camera megapixel thing. How people (myself included) thought 8 MP was always better than 5MP.
Clearly that isn't the case and I think screen size is heading that way.
I can agree with that. But the point gets lost when he talks about the iphone as if it is the king of phones. I can afford any phone I want, yet I don't choose the iphone. If I thought it was the best, and money is no object why wouldn't I.
I do want a 4 inch screen though. I would probably buy 4.5. But I would not go any higher. That's what my tablet is for....
I also don't watch TV or movies on my phone, and don't intend to.
I agree with the screen size thing to some extent but I can't stand how annoying these guys on Mac sites are. Like Pittsey said.
Anyway most 'huge display' phones are up to 4,3(europe)-4,5(america). The 5+ 'phone' is not a phone, it's Samsung Note which is not a phone per se, it's a Note, or a small tablet. It's something like Dell Streak, which wasn't ever marketed as a phone, more as a tablet. It's not aimed at everyone, it's aimed at a niche.
Personally I have a 4,2 inch display in my current phone and it really feels so much better than 3,5 inch, which feels small now. It's like with TVs these days. Feels weird how you could use that super small ones back in the days. However more than 4,5 really isn't comfortable and manufacturers realize that by.. releasing 4 inch to 4,5 inch phones which is a combination of huge screen and pocket-friendly size (these phones are usually slim). The notion that 'consumers hate that' is an annoying lie, because huge screen is indeed what consumers want, and that's why these phones sell that well.
Still a perfect phone for me would have a screen of about 4 inches, perhaps a tad more and a slim bezel around the screen combined with a slim and light form factor. The screen should be of good quality and preferably come with a bit higher resolution. I think that'd be optimal for me and I believe that's what Apple will aim at too, realizing that it's what most people would like.
Anyway most 'huge display' phones are up to 4,3(europe)-4,5(america). The 5+ 'phone' is not a phone, it's Samsung Note which is not a phone per se, it's a Note, or a small tablet. It's something like Dell Streak, which wasn't ever marketed as a phone, more as a tablet. It's not aimed at everyone, it's aimed at a niche.
Personally I have a 4,2 inch display in my current phone and it really feels so much better than 3,5 inch, which feels small now. It's like with TVs these days. Feels weird how you could use that super small ones back in the days. However more than 4,5 really isn't comfortable and manufacturers realize that by.. releasing 4 inch to 4,5 inch phones which is a combination of huge screen and pocket-friendly size (these phones are usually slim). The notion that 'consumers hate that' is an annoying lie, because huge screen is indeed what consumers want, and that's why these phones sell that well.
Still a perfect phone for me would have a screen of about 4 inches, perhaps a tad more and a slim bezel around the screen combined with a slim and light form factor. The screen should be of good quality and preferably come with a bit higher resolution. I think that'd be optimal for me and I believe that's what Apple will aim at too, realizing that it's what most people would like.
Nvidia CEO confirms quad-core Android tablets coming this year
By Daniel Bader on September 8, 2011 at 12:27pm in Mobile News
The year is almost over, but there is apparently plenty of time left for Nvidia to release its first quad-core mobile chips, based on ARM technology. President and CEO Jen-Hsun Huang said that, in order to get a leg up on its main competitor Qualcomm, the graphics company will release a quad-core mobile System-on-a-Chip, or SoC, before the end of the calendar year.
Code-named Kal-El, the successor to the prolific Tegra 2 chip, which powers over 70% of Android tablets and 50% of high-end smartphones, will not only be significantly faster, but also bring many of the ARM instruction sets such a NEON that are currently missing from the dual-core Tegra 2.
Huang said that by 2015 the mobile division at Nvidia will be worth more than its dedicated GPU divison, currently worth $4.5 billion. Their goal is to ship 1 billion mobile processors by then, too, an ambitious goal considering as of 2011 they have only produced around 100 million chips.
Earlier this year the GPU giant acquired mobile baseband company Icera, whose technology will be integrated into future Nvidia chips starting next year. The inclusion will allow for them to rely less on separate component manufacturers when developing mobile processors, ultimately lowering costs and increasing profits. This will be necessary to reach their goal of a $20 billion mobile chip business by 2015.
As for the quad-core chips, it’s unlikely we’ll see any of them in smartphones by the end of this year; initial yields will be low, with heat and power consumption being the major hurdle to overcome in the production process.
Source: Forbes Online
Via: Phandroid
By Daniel Bader on September 8, 2011 at 12:27pm in Mobile News
The year is almost over, but there is apparently plenty of time left for Nvidia to release its first quad-core mobile chips, based on ARM technology. President and CEO Jen-Hsun Huang said that, in order to get a leg up on its main competitor Qualcomm, the graphics company will release a quad-core mobile System-on-a-Chip, or SoC, before the end of the calendar year.
Code-named Kal-El, the successor to the prolific Tegra 2 chip, which powers over 70% of Android tablets and 50% of high-end smartphones, will not only be significantly faster, but also bring many of the ARM instruction sets such a NEON that are currently missing from the dual-core Tegra 2.
Huang said that by 2015 the mobile division at Nvidia will be worth more than its dedicated GPU divison, currently worth $4.5 billion. Their goal is to ship 1 billion mobile processors by then, too, an ambitious goal considering as of 2011 they have only produced around 100 million chips.
Earlier this year the GPU giant acquired mobile baseband company Icera, whose technology will be integrated into future Nvidia chips starting next year. The inclusion will allow for them to rely less on separate component manufacturers when developing mobile processors, ultimately lowering costs and increasing profits. This will be necessary to reach their goal of a $20 billion mobile chip business by 2015.
As for the quad-core chips, it’s unlikely we’ll see any of them in smartphones by the end of this year; initial yields will be low, with heat and power consumption being the major hurdle to overcome in the production process.
Source: Forbes Online
Via: Phandroid
i think that might be a step too far, too soon. most will overlook dual-core tablets if quad-cores are available. having said that, price will play a big part. i'm quite tempted to get a tablet, mainly for entertainment and travel purposes. so i'll be playing the waiting game...
On another hand once quad-cores are out single cores will seem very outdated. Same thing happened in the PC market. They are releasing quad cores so more people will at least go for dual cores.
Interesting thing is that all manufacturers are very aggressively trying to increse the price of an average smartphone.
Interesting thing is that all manufacturers are very aggressively trying to increse the price of an average smartphone.
$299 for a Droid Bionic is coonshit. There's no reason for this when high-end Android phones were no more than $199 for almost two years on Verizon. The Charge and the Bionic were the first two to ruin it. Maybe the Thunderbolt too. I dunno, but it's a recent development.
You can get around it by waiting a few weeks and finding a deal for it on Amazon or Wirefly. At least then it's $199 or less, or $249 with a ton of accessories and other extras.
You can get around it by waiting a few weeks and finding a deal for it on Amazon or Wirefly. At least then it's $199 or less, or $249 with a ton of accessories and other extras.
It's ALWAYS worth waiting 4-6 weeks after a launch. There's typically always a price drop. Even here when the phones are free, when the premium phones launch they try and charge £40 a month for them, but if you hold out for 4-6 weeks you can get them for £35/month... sometimes even £30. I always do that. The GS2 hit stores here in mid-May. I got mine at the end of June. In an 18 month contract, even if it's only a £5 drop that's still £90 you've saved.
Anyway Droid Bionic is a nice device no doubt but it took them too long to launch. At this point VZW customers that are smart are gonna hold out for the Prime. Which we should be seeing info about (and ICS) any day now, most likely.
Guys I want to interrupt the geek talk for one moment.
From what I can tell, this thread is the LARGEST thread in StreetHop/HitEmUp History.
From what I can tell, this thread is the LARGEST thread in StreetHop/HitEmUp History.
Donate
Back in the day, we used to recieve donations sent as cash in fake birthday cards! Those were the days! I still have some of them, actually.
Now we have crypto.
Ethereum/EVM: 0x9c70214f34ea949095308dca827380295b201e80
Bitcoin: bc1qa5twnqsqm8jxrcxm2z9w6gts7syha8gasqacww
Solana: 8xePHrFwsduS7xU4XNjp2FRArTD7RFzmCQsjBaetE2y8
Now we have crypto.
Ethereum/EVM: 0x9c70214f34ea949095308dca827380295b201e80
Bitcoin: bc1qa5twnqsqm8jxrcxm2z9w6gts7syha8gasqacww
Solana: 8xePHrFwsduS7xU4XNjp2FRArTD7RFzmCQsjBaetE2y8
Members online
No members online now.