Technology Android

[masta247]

http://www.engadget.com/2012/11/02/nexus-4-review/

http://www.slashgear.com/nexus-4-review-02255292/

http://reviews.cnet.com/lg-nexus-4/

http://techcrunch.com/2012/11/02/nexus-4-review-not-exactly-perfect-but-close-enough-for-me/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/9651268/Google-Nexus-4-review.html

The telegraph article is bullshit though. The guy criticizes the design, lack of gimmicks and claims the audio and camera are inferior to HTC One series:
"And nor, for that matter, does it offer the advanced audio and photography of the HTC or the clever things that keep the SIII’s display on so long as you’re looking at it"

It's obviously not true. Camera on HTC One X is inferior to the Nexus 4 camera and audio chip on One X is also below par. Gimmicks he mentioned is basically bloatware that most of us want to get rid of to get Vanilla Android, which the Nexus 4 has.

The reviews also mostly give this phone shit for lack of LTE and I really hate it. I hope Google doesn't listen or else the next Nexus will have all those little gimmicks covered and will cost 3 times as much.

I'll wait for the GSMArena review that should be out soon. They always perform really a lot of tests to provide with raw data and give really unbiased opinions based on those, instead of making a judgement and ending with a star ratings based on random things like LTE.

To sum it up, however - the phone looks really neat. People give it some shit for lacking LTE, SD card slot and some people also hate on its design (some love it), because it looks like the Galaxy Nexus and the back cover is flat and made of glass.

edit: Yeah, so far the best review came from engadget. Flipmo already linked it, it's this one:
http://www.engadget.com/2012/11/02/nexus-4-review/


It's an in-depth review and they went on to really actually compare things. They even compared the camera with SGS3 and came to the conclusion that it's about as good. Which means hands down better than HTC, contrary to what the telegraph dude said. No doubt, it's the Ip5/Xperia Arc camera chip tweaked by Google.

The surprising thing is the speed though. Perhaps the test units are at fault, or beta software built but the performance in tests seems to be significantly lower than dual core Krait for some reason. I'll be curious to read a review of the final product.

 

[masta247]

On our Polish Samsung's R&D job website (Samsung has its R&D department in Poland and we make software for all Samsung's devices here) there's a line that states:
"We've sold over 20 million SGS3s. Now we're working on something even better. Come join us."
I'm sure it's an outdated statement, since a couple of days ago they already claimed that they sold 30 million Galaxy S3s but anyway they're working on "something better".

Also there's : "Do you like working with gadgets that a popular agent will play with in the NEXT part of his movie?"

That's a direct translation, at least. It appears that a Samsung device is going to be in the next Bond movie.

 

[masta247]

http://blog.gsmarena.com/idc-report...012-android-gains-momentum-at-apples-expense/

A little surprising that Amazon sells as many tablets as Asus does. Asus have the better 7 incher + quite a lot of decent 10 inch tablets and most importantly they sell them worldwide as opposed to US and UK only.

Interesting to see how Apple took a dive. They lost 15% of the market share during the last few months only! Samsung now has almost 20% of the tablet market.

 

[dilla]

Anyone else take shitty pictures with photosphere? They look even shittier on a computer screen. Looks like Michael J. Fox sat on a spinning chair and took a picture of the room.

 

[masta247]

Anyone else take shitty pictures with photosphere? They look even shittier on a computer screen. Looks like Michael J. Fox sat on a spinning chair and took a picture of the room.

Yeeeah, I expected it to be significantly better. BUT, if you take pictures outdoors (landscapes especially) they are quite good. Perhaps the app will get updated though and it'll get cooler or something.

 

[THEV1LL4N]

I dont know what to make of these articles. Would probably be best waiting a few days after the release instead of pre-ordering it.

Nexus 4 Teardown Hints LG May Have Cut Corners
http://www.autoomobile.com/news/lg-nexus-4-specs-teardown/1007062/




Home > Nexus 4 Battery Life Tested, Early Results Show Less Than Impressive Results

Nexus 4 Battery Life Tested, Early Results Show Less Than Impressive Results
http://www.tmonews.com/2012/11/nexu...ly-results-show-less-than-impressive-results/​

 

[THEV1LL4N]

This article makes some really good points too Google releasing a high-end phone for a low price, mid-range specialists not improving the experience, and about android's partners being blown out of the water.

edit: Forgot to paste the link...

http://www.knowyourmobile.com/featu...nges_everything_within_the_android_space.html

 

[masta247]

^^ Here comes a flawless response:

Hi
I'm pretty sure LG knows what they are doing, and the article just doesn't make much sense.

Comments in the article about the Bolted in battery

This phone is not suppose to have an end user replaceable battery, so any criticism about the robustness of design relating to having to change the battery many times is just silly. The battery is lithium polymer and will last longer than other standard lithium types, and for most people the phone will be replaced long before they notice any reduction in battery capacity.

Spring antenna connections

This is a pretty standard way of doing things these days for antennas. The article comments about loss of tension and snapped plastic tabs, well the tabs may only get snapped if the battery is replaced by someone who isn't sure what they are doing, and I'll repeat what I said above, the phone isn't designed to have a user replaceable battery. As for the back warping, they've overlooked the fact that glued across the back is a sheet of glass, so any warping will crack the glass long before problems with signals are seen.

Lack of impact zones

I doubt any phone has impact zones built in, there simply isn't the room to waste space doing this, and lets face it, any drop bad enough to dislodge the internal components will have likely shattered the screen, especially given the trend for edge to edge glass. If any phone is dropped it either survives or breaks depending on how lucky or unlucky you are.

Tape used instead of structure and shielding

This doesn't make any sense at all. The phone doesn't require servicing and isn't design to be maintained by the end user so what does it matter what is used inside the phone? Tape is used all the time in devices, mostly it is simply used during manufacture to secure wires to aid construction.

As for tape on the battery, that tape has nothing to do with the battery, it is simply holding in place the co-ax antenna connection wire to ensure it doesn't float free and get trapped during assembly. The battery itself is held in place by adhesive tape underneath it and by the fact it is sandwiched in by the back cover.

Perhaps if this phone was designed by NASA to be used in a space mission where a replacement would be difficult to obtain, then yes we would expect all the components to be easily serviceable, but then it would be 5 times the size and 10 times the cost of this phone, and no one would want it!

The whole article is just silly. LG will have spent a shed load of money on R&D and testing, Google will have done the same as their name is attached to it, and then someone thinks they can tell LG how to do it better from looking at a few pictures?

Regards

 

[masta247]

Plus, the battery and performance tests are performed on beta software that isn't fully functional 4.2! It's annoying that the review sites don't mention that. The performance tests point to performance lower than the performance of dual core Krait devices running ICS (like HTC One S or Sony Xperia T, or the US version of SGS3). Since this has 4 Krait cores at 1,5ghz (which is like two HTC One S phones) it's bound to be faster unless someone screwed up something big time, which I'm pretty sure did not happen and things are going to change a lot in the retail units.
I'm looking forward to the tests. And even after that the results are going to definitely improve after the first bunch of software updates, like it always happens.

In the above battery tests, however, the battery life of the Beta Nexus 4 scores 6 hours and 27 minutes, which is as much as the SGS3 after several upgrades and retail JellyBean. On ICS the battery on SGS3 was a little short of 5 hours in the same test, and most review sites claim the SGS3 battery life is one of the best you can get on huge-screened smartphone.
The important thing to bear in mind is that the International version of SGS3 has no LTE as well and the US version has a dual core Krait chip - Nexus 4 comes with twice as many of the same thing and the same sized battery.

And some review sites have more dignity and are like this:

Matias Duarte did say, and i quote "the hardware and software for this are not final. That's not how we roll around here." Check the Verge's interview. We will certainly have to wait to see the final release unit.

 

[masta247]

Anyways, this review at least states that this is not a final software release and Google clearly mentioned that a major, final 4.2 upgrade will come a few days before this phone hits the stores:
http://updates.gizmodo.com/post/34831233868/google-nexus-4-review-yes-you-want-this-phone-by

And here's a good Nexus 10 review:
http://techcrunch.com/2012/11/02/re...ablets-and-the-nexus-10-is-a-shining-example/

And a neat reply as of why Google Nexus 4 does not have LTE:

AT&T's fledgling LTE network runs on different frequencies than other LTE networks around the world, so Google would have to build a custom phone for just 77 markets in the US. Doing that without AT&T's financial assistance makes little sense.

And most of the world does not use LTE anyway (and those who do don't whine about lack of it on the Nexus 4).

 

[dilla]

WTF is LTE exactly? Sprint had WiMax, that flopped, now they do LTE with Sprint. It's not just a CDMA thing, since now AT&T has it. What the fuck is T-Mobile doing? HSPA?

 

[masta247]

LTE is a new fancy tech that is able to go even slightly faster than HSPA+. Realistically HSPA download is like 15-30 mbit/s in the US, while LTE goes like 30-40mbit/s. It REALLY depends on your location though, those numbers are for perfect locations for each network. As you can read here:
http://m.phonearena.com/news/Verizon-LTE-vs-T-Mobile-HSPA-vs-Sprint-WiMAX_id16416
In an average city T-mobile's HSPA+ will edge out At&t's LTE. Also, T-mo's HSPA+ coverage is significantly better than At&t's LTE going to be anytime soon.

I might be slightly biased in saying "who the fuck would need that" because I'm still rocking EDGE most of the times but yeah, I think it's unnecessary yet as 90% of the times you won't feel the difference as most servers cap lower and even average broadband speed in the US is slower than HSPA+ rates.

AT&T is the GSM network in the US that has it. T-mobile, not yet - they are staying with HSPA+ so far, probably planning to launch their LTE in the rather near feature because people there seem to complain (ooh At&t has it so I soo needz it lol) and realistically some crazy people are switching networks because of this.
The negative is that it drains battery even faster and only big cities have so-so coverage.
There are some other CDMA networks rocking it but I'm not familiar with those as I don't consider them real networks and the Nexus 4 won't work with them anyway

 

[ARon]

To make it simple, LTE (Long Term Evolution) is just mobile broadband technology with speeds capable of what the ITU( International Telecommunication Union) deems fast enough to be considered 4g(fourth generation) technology. I think the peak speed the ITU requires to be 4g is 100 mbps moving and 1 gig per second stationary, which neither LTE nor WiMax can actually achieve at this point. So really the ITU just says it's ok to call them 4g cus they will have the ability to reach those speeds eventually and pressure from marketing people

 

[dilla]

LTE is a new fancy tech that is able to go even slightly faster than HSPA+. Realistically HSPA download is like 15-30 mbit/s in the US, while LTE goes like 30-40mbit/s. It REALLY depends on your location though, those numbers are for perfect locations for each network. As you can read here:
http://m.phonearena.com/news/Verizon-LTE-vs-T-Mobile-HSPA-vs-Sprint-WiMAX_id16416
In an average city T-mobile's HSPA+ will edge out At&t's LTE. Also, T-mo's HSPA+ coverage is significantly better than At&t's LTE going to be anytime soon.

I might be slightly biased in saying "who the fuck would need that" because I'm still rocking EDGE most of the times but yeah, I think it's unnecessary yet as 90% of the times you won't feel the difference as most servers cap lower and even average broadband speed in the US is slower than HSPA+ rates.

AT&T is the GSM network in the US that has it. T-mobile, not yet - they are staying with HSPA+ so far, probably planning to launch their LTE in the rather near feature because people there seem to complain (ooh At&t has it so I soo needz it lol) and realistically some crazy people are switching networks because of this.
The negative is that it drains battery even faster and only big cities have so-so coverage.
There are some other CDMA networks rocking it but I'm not familiar with those as I don't consider them real networks and the Nexus 4 won't work with them anyway

Verizon and Sprint aren't "real" networks to you? They're CDMA.

Despite saying I would never get another CMDA phone after leaving the country, and Verizon, I went ahead and got back on Sprint because my parents did. Because my sister wanted the 4S back in April and my dad got it too. It was also the cheapest and the only unlimited plan anyway. But...AT&T was also more expensive, but I'm sure their coverage everywhere we are is better than Sprint's.

Oh well.

 

[ARon]

Sprint really does get a bad wrap. Yes their coverage isn't as good as Verizon or AT&T but if you're not in a remote area you have nothing to worry about. If anything everyone is the US should be praising them, they're "the last real nigga" alive being that their the only company that still does truly unlimited data. I hope they never go away

 

[dilla]

Yeah, it does get a bad wrap. I like them, save for the fact that they're CDMA. I always felt buying a phone outright and unlocking it for T-Mo or AT&T was the best bet since I could change phones easier and more frequently without losing too much money in the process. Still, I went with the CDMA GS3, as opposed to the international unlocked one and a monthly plan from T-Mo. If I have to go back out of the country for four more months, I don't have to deactivate shit; just switch SIMs and carry on.

Small problem, in that sense. I just wanted the flexibility of changing phones when I wanted the latest and greatest. Especially with the pricing of the Nexus 4, pricing would have been even smaller of an issue.

But no, unlimited data is great. Since leaving college I am around WiFi a lot more, yet still manage to use a GB of 3G, and then about 250MB of 4G when I realized it actually worked in my area about two weeks ago. I still would have been under the cap on Verizon, but to pay more....fuck it..... My mom and dad probably use 10 MB of data a month. On accident. Weather or email or something. My sister and I use the bulk of it, and even then we don't hit 4 GB, combined.

 

[S O F I]

bad rap, guys. bad rap.

 

[ARon]

I didn't even notice lol

 

[masta247]

Verizon and Sprint aren't "real" networks to you? They're CDMA.

Despite saying I would never get another CMDA phone after leaving the country, and Verizon, I went ahead and got back on Sprint because my parents did. Because my sister wanted the 4S back in April and my dad got it too. It was also the cheapest and the only unlimited plan anyway. But...AT&T was also more expensive, but I'm sure their coverage everywhere we are is better than Sprint's.

Oh well.

Well, I believe CDMA is an abomination First of all Verizon is an evil network, forcing manufacturers like Motorola to keep using their custom UI instead of vanilla Android and leading the bloatware movement.
Also, Verizon and Sprint are forcing manufacturers to make CDMA versions of their phones despite the fact that the rest of the world does not use that technology. The fact that so many people stick to those networks makes those US carriers ridiculously 'powerful' and for some reason entitles them to force their conditions on manufacturers. No wonder Google condemns that.

So yeah, also, basically the "real" GSM phones don't work with CDMA networks as well, so you can't buy an unlocked phone and make it work there. For example no Nexus 4 for CDMA.
Also, CDMA is only for people who don't travel at all as it basically doesn't work outside of the US (apart from a few countries).

I found out that in the US T-mobile appears to be the best network - technically, economically and ethically as well from what I can tell. At&t is also fine, but their prices is higher to accomodate their LTE network so comparing them both T-mobile seems to be better.

 

[dilla]

Google condemns Verizon for what? Starting the DROID line/moniker? I feel Android would be like Symbian if it weren't for any one carrier to endorse a line as much as Verizon endorsed Android in the US. Android would have been big in places that weren't as excited for the iPhone (pretty much where it was expensive and fewer could afford it) so basically everywhere but the US.

It was a catch-22 for Google, but push come to shove, Google better suck Verizon's dick.