Database Users

A Question For Everyone Here

Why have you chosen the Galaxy or why will you be choosing the Galaxy rather than the Evo? Is the better screen tech your primary reason?
I ask this after being an Evo owner over the past month and now currently testing (playing with) the iPhone 4. I loved the Evo but my unit was defective and so I'm considering getting a new one at the end of July (hoping new batches ship out then) or one of the SGS versions; Verizon, At&t and then T-Mobile in that order is what I'm in favor of as far as which SGS.

AshMa said:
Why have you chosen the Galaxy or why will you be choosing the Galaxy rather than the Evo? Is the better screen tech your primary reason?
I ask this after being an Evo owner over the past month and now currently testing (playing with) the iPhone 4. I loved the Evo but my unit was defective and so I'm considering getting a new one at the end of July (hoping new batches ship out then) or one of the SGS versions; Verizon, At&t and then T-Mobile in that order is what I'm in favor of as far as which SGS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Evo 3D power sux, SGS is better eot.

I can't use the EVO 4G because I'm in the UK and we don't have any CDMA networks. Otherwise, I would rather have the EVO 4G for its screen - the Galaxy S' has better contrast, but it has a PenTile matrix, meaning it doesn't have the full complement of the three RGB subpixels per pixel (it only has two), with consequences for sharpness.
For me, it's a decision between the Desire and the Galaxy S, both of which have AMOLED screens, so I can't avoid PenTile. The Galaxy S' screen is definitely better than the Desire's, though, and it also has a better GPU (and, it seems, CPU) and a proper multi-touch digitiser that doesn't get easily confused.

Mithent said:
I can't use the EVO 4G because I'm in the UK and we don't have any CDMA networks. Otherwise, I would rather have the EVO 4G for its screen - the Galaxy S' has better contrast, but it has a PenTile matrix, meaning it doesn't have the full complement of the three RGB subpixels per pixel (it only has two), with consequences for sharpness.
For me, it's a decision between the Desire and the Galaxy S, both of which have AMOLED screens, so I can't avoid PenTile. The Galaxy S' screen is definitely better than the Desire's, though, and it also has a better GPU (and, it seems, CPU) and a proper multi-touch digitiser that doesn't get easily confused.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for your input guys! Since you mention the screens, how about the Evo only having 16bit 65K color?

I have yet to choose a new phone but I dumped the EVO after two weeks for three reasons. The 30fps cap, the purple tint, and most importantly the screen only displays 65k colors.
These three were together made me take the phone back.

Supermighty said:
I have yet to choose a new phone but I dumped the EVO after two weeks for three reasons. The 30fps cap, the purple tint, and most importantly the screen only displays 65k colors.
These three were together made me take the phone back.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All a bit confusing about the Evo now that I look into it bit. Take a look at this post claiming that it's not 16bit: http://androidforums.com/htc-evo-4g...-million-both-phones-199-a-3.html#post1091681
I'm waiting to have my launch day Evo returned to Radio Shack (manager is trying to get me in past the 30 day mark with his Sprint rep). I thought the screen was beautiful and just had issues with the screen raising and a few others build issues.
I need to touch the Galaxy before I know for sure. The Droid X could have been good but the large bump on the back and that ugly 80's camera flash remind me of how ugly I thought the first Droid keyboard was. I'm sure we have a lot of slick devices coming out later this year but it's already a tough call for what to have right now.......

AshMa said:
... The Droid X could have been good but the large bump on the back and that ugly 80's camera flash remind me of how ugly I thought the first Droid keyboard was.......
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep, I don't understand how Moto can keep making such butt-ugly phones. Between the ugly Moto design and the ugly Verizon branding, the Droid X is a phone only a true nerd can love

I had a google nexus, which hardware-wise is pretty simillar to the evo.
The snapdragon processor is pretty good, but samsung's hummingbird is better (and is produced at 45nm, less power consumption)
The real tie-breaker for me was the GPU.
The Adreno200 in the snapdragon SOC is pretty weak, if i need to put it in proportions, the SGX540 in the Galaxy S is around 3 times stronger, possibly even a bit more.
Screen- while the evo's screen is sharper (on paper), 65k colors and low contrast ratio wipe that advantage completely. The difference is just too big.
Now the most important point- the evo is a real battery -hogging monster, it can barely last for a day and a half in very moderate use, while the SGS can probably last for twice the time under the same use.
I'm not too a fan of dragging around chargers and backup batteries, don't know about you.
I'd turn my eyes over to the droid X, better hardware (TI OMAP 1GHZ+SGX530>Qualcomm Snapdragon, any day), better battery time, probably a better camera as well. Motorla made a nice comeback.
I'd make the prime options the Epic 4G or Droid X.

MacGuy2006 said:
the Droid X is a phone only a true nerd can love
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Right!!!! When Moto made the Razor they got it all right in the looks dept.....now they keep bringing us boring/ugly styling one after another.
Pika007 said:
I had a google nexus, which hardware-wise is pretty simillar to the evo.
The snapdragon processor is pretty good, but samsung's hummingbird is better (and is produced at 45nm, less power consumption)
The real tie-breaker for me was the GPU.
The Adreno200 in the snapdragon SOC is pretty weak, if i need to put it in proportions, the SGX540 in the Galaxy S is around 3 times stronger, possibly even a bit more.
Screen- while the evo's screen is sharper (on paper), 65k colors and low contrast ratio wipe that advantage completely. The difference is just too big.
Now the most important point- the evo is a real battery -hogging monster, it can barely last for a day and a half in very moderate use, while the SGS can probably last for twice the time under the same use.
I'm not too a fan of dragging around chargers and backup batteries, don't know about you.
I'd turn my eyes over to the droid X, better hardware (TI OMAP 1GHZ+SGX530>Qualcomm Snapdragon, any day), better battery time, probably a better camera as well. Motorla made a nice comeback.
I'd make the prime options the Epic 4G or Droid X.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I see your points seem valid to me. But personally I think the Epic is too thick with the keyboard (plus Swype is all the typing speed I need in my pocket). If the Epic came without the keyboard and if the screen really is that great; I'd be down to deciding between it and the iPhone because Sprint service with the Evo for me has been wonderful unlike this stupid At&t on the iPhone.
We all seem to get so focused on the specs that may not matter all that much? I mean these are phones and not desktops of say 15 years ago when we would research the heck out of a purchase because we knew we were going to keep it for at least 2, 3 or more years........
Anyhow, I really just don't see the bad in the Evo display I have and it's right here being matched up to my iPhone 4. I'm going to do something that no tech blogs ever seem to do. I'm going to load up both these phones, with the exact same high res images and then see how they look to me. Wish I could test the Galaxy along with these two phones, but I will have returned the Evo by the time I get my hands on a galaxy........

Because im not on sprint
And even if i were still on sprint i wouldnt take evo because of the poor battery life as well as the inferior screen quality.

Why are we focused on specs?
We want games to work on our newly-bought super-high-end phone. That's all.
At first there were the HTC devices with a qualcomm MSM7XXX. OK cpu, weak gpu.
Then came along the droid/milestone. ok cpu, ok+ gpu.
Then the wave of snapdragon devices- Very strong cpu, weak gpu.
We all waited for a balanced solution that will let us have a strong cpu and gpu, with android.
Untill the galaxy S, Droid X and Milestone XT720 come along, the iphone was the only balanced device.
About the displays- it's not that the evo display is bad. It's just that both the samsung and the galaxy s are way better. The first time i loaded a high-res video to my galaxy s side by side with my brother's milestone (which is regarded as a device with a very good screen by itself), my mind was blown. The difference is as clear as day.
I can say this with confidence-
Sharpness is overrated. We are talking about 3-4" screens here, not home 50" displays. As soon as 640X360 resolution over 3.5" was passed, the matter started to become pretty ridiculous. You need a 10X magnification to actually see pixels, i doubt your eyes have that.
On the other hand, be it a 1000" screen or a 1" screen, the difference in contrast/colors in general is always visible.
It might not be the "sharpest" screen around, but it is clearly the display with best colors around.
For someone who uses his phone as a media player a lot, this was VERY important to me.

BuddyLee said:
Because im not on sprint
And even if i were still on sprint i wouldnt take evo because of the poor battery life as well as the inferior screen quality.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's what I forgot in my last post; are you guys saying that the SGS has much better battery life than the Evo??? From all the comments on the thread here about first thoughts, it seems that folks aren't doing any better.
On the Evo board, I see all the same types of comments and the same range as I do here. Some Evo owners say they can't make it a day and some say they can make it a day and a half and even 3 days, after make half a dozen changes to the device. I know what my Evo battery life has been like and it's not anywhere near as good as this iPhone I'm trying out or even as good as my HD2 was. So I do have a feeling that I'll try the Galaxy and come right back to this board, asking about how to get better battery life.

I just love this device the screen is awesome!!
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App

Pika007 said:
Why are we focused on specs?
We want games to work on our newly-bought super-high-end phone. That's all.
At first there were the HTC devices with a qualcomm MSM7XXX. OK cpu, weak gpu.
Then came along the droid/milestone. ok cpu, ok+ gpu.
Then the wave of snapdragon devices- Very strong cpu, weak gpu.
We all waited for a balanced solution that will let us have a strong cpu and gpu, with android.
Untill the galaxy S, Droid X and Milestone XT720 come along, the iphone was the only balanced device.
About the displays- it's not that the evo display is bad. It's just that both the samsung and the galaxy s are way better. The first time i loaded a high-res video to my galaxy s side by side with my brother's milestone (which is regarded as a device with a very good screen by itself), my mind was blown. The difference is as clear as day.
I can say this with confidence-
Sharpness is overrated. We are talking about 3-4" screens here, not home 50" displays. As soon as 640X360 resolution over 3.5" was passed, the matter started to become pretty ridiculous. You need a 10X magnification to actually see pixels, i doubt your eyes have that.
On the other hand, be it a 1000" screen or a 1" screen, the difference in contrast/colors in general is always visible.
It might not be the "sharpest" screen around, but it is clearly the display with best colors around.
For someone who uses his phone as a media player a lot, this was VERY important to me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I see where you're coming from! I love games and I tried NOVA on the iPhone 4 two days ago and I was blown away. But I'm just not into gaming on phones and without real controls even if I had the time to play games as often as I'd like to, it just doesn't appeal to me much.
My HD2 came with transformers and I loaded it onto the Evo's sd card. I am a filmmaker and all I can say is that it looked and played perfectly on the Evo. I've heard people say that they watched films on the Evo with terrible results and all I have to say is that any device needs to have the right video format type and bitrate for a specific device (the right encoding app and settings makes all the difference).
I have no doubt the the SGS display is one of the very best if not the very best (it or the iPhone display). BTW' You might want to take a look at this smartphone display review: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2365915,00.asp
I had not thought of it until I started reading about it here. I'm talking about text not being as clear on the SGS screens. Again, I guess I won't know what these comments are about, until I get to try this phone myself. Some folks say it's a big deal and then others say it's not. Also I guess that has something to do with the "screen door" effect of the SGS display tech?
I guess what I meant about specs was that if any phone can do everything you want it to today and do it well, then that's about all that matters. rather than seeking out the best specs for some type of future proofing that just doesn't make much sense in regards to how quickly phone tech is advancing and how xda folks like us, are going to keep upgrading sooner rather than later. An Example would be people who worry about a phone not having 4G LTE radios now, even though by the time the towers are all in place, those same people, will be moving on to a new phone.

JosipR said:
I just love this device the screen is awesome!!
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you having any speed issues and how is your battery life treating you? Also would you say text is as sharp as on other high-end devices?

We being non US does not have the EVO 4G to play with but I have been using a Desire for the last 2 months. The reason why I swapped to the SGS is mainly because of the multitouch screen issue with HTC. Typing with SGS is even better than the iphone which, love it or hate it, were the best in terms of virtual keyboard. However I am disappointed with the speed so far, especially with emails. Hopefully the next firmware address those issues.

veej said:
We being non US does not have the EVO 4G to play with but I have been using a Desire for the last 2 months. The reason why I swapped to the SGS is mainly because of the multitouch screen issue with HTC. Typing with SGS is even better than the iphone which, love it or hate it, were the best in terms of virtual keyboard. However I am disappointed with the speed so far, especially with emails. Hopefully the next firmware address those issues.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
After using the iPhone 4 keyboard a lot in the last few days I would have to say yes it is the best tap type touch keyboard. Something about it and I assume the screen tech, make it very good. But the hands down best touch keyboard is Swype hands down which is not on iOS yet. Also the HTC keyboard is also very nice on it's own but also having the voice button on the keyboard is really nice (not sure if the SGS has that as well).
Oh and thanks; I was forgetting about the fact that the rest of the world got the SGS first but no Evo. Sometimes we silly Americans behave as if we are the world.

Pika007 said:
It might not be the "sharpest" screen around, but it is clearly the display with best colors around.
For someone who uses his phone as a media player a lot, this was VERY important to me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's a matter of different priorities, yes: the great majority of what I do on my phone is read or write text, so having nice crisp text is important to me. I remember being amazed by how great the text looked on my first 640x480 PDA with ClearType. Conversely, I rarely watch video or look at photos on my phone.
The decision's pretty much taken out of my hands if I want a high-end Android phone in the UK. I would love the iPhone 4's display though.

S-AMOLED vs LCD comparison and observations

I just looked at the Vibrant today. I am trying out the Sprint EVO and have not made up my mind (have 3 more weeks to decide). I have been very curious with all the hubub surrounding this new screen. "brilliant" "incredible" "vibrant" etc are terms that all the review sites are throwing around.
Now that I have seen it, it is ture. The colors really pop. However, I am torn. On the one hand, S-AMOLED colors are very rich. It has better color saturation for video, and photos colors pop a bit more on the S-AMOLED vs the evo's LCD and the viewing angles are GREAT! There is almost no hazing effect when viewed from the side. WOW
On the other hand, even though both devices have 800x480 displays the text looks jagged on the Vibrant. Icons while very bright, do not look smooth. Very small text that is readable on the EVO is illegible on the Vibrant (for example viewing web pages zoomed all the way out). Pictures when viewed at the same zoom level look sharper and more detailed on the LCD screen. It appears that the actual resolution is less on the S-AMOLED than the TFT.
What is going on here? Why does it look this way. For me a large part of my phone is reading text, why does it appear more jagged and fuzzier? Does anyone have any insight?
Oh, and also the maximum brightness is lower on the Vibrant (not that I ever use max brightness) somehow whites look just a little dirty/grey in comparison to the EVO.
Anyone have any insight into this resolution issue?

after reading up on arstechnica.com i realized that this fuzzieness is due to the face that the S-AMOLED display is a pentile display and thus only has an addressable resolution of 392x653.
http:// arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2010/03/secrets-of-the-nexus-ones-screen-science-color-and-hacks.ars/
Remove the space between the Http:// and the link for the Ars Technica Article about pentile displays.
from the article:
"you could think about this display as taking the 480x800 input image and scaling it down to 392x653 image, using subpixel positioning to reduce the apparent blurriness as much as possible."
That explains why this is so much fuzzier when displaying text. Now to decide if the the color saturation is worth the reduced resolution....hmmm.

Yes I agree, PenTile is the only thing keeping AMOLED from being the best displays hands down. The worst thing you can do though is compare to screens side by side. You will always find something wrong with both, ignorance is bliss =P
I had time with the HTC Incredible which uses AMOLED and you get used to it, I do think its worth it. I did like being able to read text zoomed out all the way though on the EVO.
Its a trade off, but I honestly think whatever you pick you will get used to it after time.

i think for me, a mobile phone's performance comes down to display text quality (browsing ebook reading etc), web browsing, video, phone UI experience, and battery life. if you got used to the AMOLED on the incredible why did you give it up for the EVO?

All you need to do is go on a Vibrant, go to youtube, and watch the Tron Legacy trailer in HQ... or the Avatar that came with it and AMOLED will blow your mind...

I had the Evo for 3 weeks and if Sprint worked well in my area I would have kept it. I like it a bit better than the Vibrant, which I have now. The screen is not as bright and pretty but the smoothness of the text made up for it. I also liked how websites looked on the Evo more.
I'm still very happy with the Vibrant, but I would have stuck with the Evo if I didn't have so many dropped calls where I work and live.

Just imagine if the screen was 4.3 inches even though the screen size for this isn't to bug nor to small
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

The S-AMOLED in the Galaxy S is not pentile matrix. The Incredible doesnt use pentile matrix either. The N1 does use pentile matrix. I have seen a N1 beside an Incredible and the two are really different looking. Text on the Incredible is crisp and clear, on the N1 its fuzzy.
Edit: Sorry, I was wrong about the Galaxy S, it DOES use pentile matrix. What a ripoff, this has me seriously questioning whether to get the phone or not. The low text quality on the N1 ruined that phone for me. But I'm pretty sure I'm right about the Incredible, the text on it looks super sharp and crisp.

violinbf said:
i think for me, a mobile phone's performance comes down to display text quality (browsing ebook reading etc), web browsing, video, phone UI experience, and battery life. if you got used to the AMOLED on the incredible why did you give it up for the EVO?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I went to the EVO for the 4.3" screen vs 3.7. Like you said, text is better on LCD. Everything else is better on AMOLED, imo. So it comes down to what is most important to you.
derek4484 said:
The S-AMOLED in the Galaxy S is not pentile matrix. The Incredible doesnt use pentile matrix either. The N1 does use pentile matrix. I have seen a N1 beside an Incredible and the two are really different looking. Text on the Incredible is crisp and clear, on the N1 its fuzzy.
Edit: Sorry, I was wrong about the Galaxy S, it DOES use pentile matrix. What a ripoff, this has me seriously questioning whether to get the phone or not. The low text quality on the N1 ruined that phone for me. But I'm pretty sure I'm right about the Incredible, the text on it looks super sharp and crisp.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Samsung has used PenTile on every single AMOLED they have made.

I do love the 4.3 inch screen. 4.3" gives 15% larger viewing area than a 4" screen. This was very noticeable to me especially with typing on the keyboard and displaying web pages. Another plus is that viewing video's with the device on the table is more comfortable on the larger screen. The EVO is not too much larger than the Galaxy S.
The only thing that bugs me about the EVO is the processor/GPU and battery life.
It is hard to look at the GPU benchmarks and demonstrations for the new OMAP and Hummingbird and not think that the Snapdragon is a little behind the times. Not sure that I will game that much but I do want the power to run the new fancy Gingerbread UI nice and smooth. I wish i knew what kind of GPU processing power was necessary for Gingerbread because I will be trying to shoe horn that OS update on my device.
Obviously a 45nm processor will overclock better than a 65nm one and will get better battery life at stock speeds. I believe the power draw is ~500mw for the Snapdragon and ~350mw for the Hummingbird. That is significant power savings. Weirdly though the reports of the Vibrant's battery life are not that much better that the EVO. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Galaxy overclock to 2ghz just like the previous generation 65nm OMAP on the droid (stock 550mhz overclocks to 1ghz easily)
Pops_G did you keep your EVO or return it? Using a custom Kernel to defeat the FPS cap makes it a non issue now. If you did return it, do you have your eye on something else? One nice thing about Sprint is that you can upgrade your device at the subsidized price annually VS every 2 years so I only need to get to next July. Plus the plans are cheaper if you are crafty.

the point in s-amoled is reducing power consumption. less reflection, and brighter under heavy lighted areas (like outdoors)
power consumption is a large issue, when screen size is this big

violinbf said:
Pops_G did you keep your EVO or return it? Using a custom Kernel to defeat the FPS cap makes it a non issue now. If you did return it, do you have your eye on something else? One nice thing about Sprint is that you can upgrade your device at the subsidized price annually VS every 2 years so I only need to get to next July. Plus the plans are cheaper if you are crafty.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I returned the EVO and was planning on getting one of the Galaxy S phones, possible the Vibrant because T-Mobile is the only one with out of contract pricing. I am still undecided though, gaming is a big deal for me and the EVO was slow in 3D. Also I had one of the EVOs that they have not been able to fix the 30fps issue for, one of the early ones.
Cyanogen claims to have bluetooth HID and plans on getting HDMI out working full time. That would mean you could use your EVO as a console on your TV. Playing old SNES games and soon N64 games off your phone with a WiiMote is very tempting.
But over all I like the Galaxy S phones more. Just waiting till Sprint announces the Epic release date.

2.3 Announced, SDK Released

Video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jx3pdWBlZ34&feature=player_embedded
SDK:
http://developer.android.com/sdk/android-2.3.html
Here's hoping we get some ROM's soon!
Nexus S:
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/12/introducing-nexus-s-with-gingerbread.html
"Nexus S is the first smartphone to feature a 4” Contour Display designed to fit comfortably in the palm of your hand and along the side of your face. It also features a 1GHz Hummingbird processor, front and rear facing cameras, 16GB of internal memory, and NFC (near field communication) hardware that lets you read information from NFC tags..."
The phone is pretty much a Vibrant with a front camera and NFC. Hopefully we can get some drivers for the new BT, WIFI and GPS.

Now, we wait for Samsung to begin releasing source for the galaxy s platform, right?
Since 2.2 has gone so slow for the Vibrant, I wonder how long we'll have to wait.

Video of the advertisement for the NS:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxUXulxE5o0&feature=player_embedded#at=53
Look at the camera layout, same as the Galaxy S. I don't know. I have a feeling we're gonna have a good port.

^ I got that same good feeling.

^ I just feel that same tingling goodness for port. Can feel how TW, Eugene, and other devs are getting ready.

http://www.google.com/phone/compare/?phone=samsung-vibrant-a-galaxy-s-phone&phone=nexus-s
Comparison Chart.
It's the same damn phone, lol.
I hope getting the BT/WIFI/GPS to work isn't an issue. If we can get CM, Eugene or TW to get a stock GB port, I'd be in heaven.

I was just about to post the same link, ha
http://www.google.com/phone/compare/?phone=nexus-s&phone=samsung-vibrant-a-galaxy-s-phone

Great minds think alike. Speaking of great minds, I hope some of the devs are around to see this. Those guys move fast.
I'm pretty sure since CM likes Dev phones, once the NS goes on sale he will work on it and whatever he does with that is likely to get pushed to us.
Eugene is fast though, I'm sure he already built a ROM for it!

Wow to 2.3.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

Koush I know has already ordered one, per a tweet. Team douche may not be able to keep their hands off this samsung.

I notice on the tech specs it doesn't even record 720p video? I guess it'll be easily hackable to do it, but still...
If it's just a vibrant with a working GPS, FFC, and LED flash, I'm all over it lol.
Is the AMOLED screen the same? (As in... pentile RGBG matrix?) That's the only thing that would hold me back...ugh.

dinan said:
Is the AMOLED screen the same? (As in... pentile RGBG matrix?) That's the only thing that would hold me back...ugh.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
According to engadget it has a 4-inch WVGA display...

Does the S not have an sd card slot? Very.. Very odd.
,Alright time for samsung to release some freaking code.

The phone is quite a let down, but this is necessary. Google needs to use devices that have specs in the wild. Coding on a phone with a dual 1.2 GHz processor with next gen GPU and tons of RAM would only make for an OS that is expensive to build phones for, and an OS that cannot be easily backported to older/supported devices.
That being said, I'm not touching it. Too bad it's not Moto or HTC. Samsung is out, AFAIC.
Apple is about to refresh the iPad, so Android Tablet will face tough competition there.
With the release of WP7, and the patch coming up, Android phone manufacturers are going to start facing stiff competition from low-cost builders like Acer, etc. for the phones, especially since those phones do not require anything near the in-house developer work that Android phones need. They need to start standardizing the hardware better so that the end-user experience is better (update, etc.) and the the performance and developer experience can compare to that of WP7 and iOS.

dinan said:
I notice on the tech specs it doesn't even record 720p video? I guess it'll be easily hackable to do it, but still...
If it's just a vibrant with a working GPS, FFC, and LED flash, I'm all over it lol.
Is the AMOLED screen the same? (As in... pentile RGBG matrix?) That's the only thing that would hold me back...ugh.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't see anything wrong with the Vibrant's screen. Responsive, sexy, sleek.

Don't get me wrong, I like the Vibrant screen a lot. The ONLY gripe I have with it is the pentile matrix, which makes text look grainy/fuzzy compared to normal LCDs. It's not an AMOLED thing, it's their decision of RGBG instead of RGB for each pixel (technically RGBG is 2 pixels). The Nexus One has the same type of thing, but the screen is 3.7" so it's not as noticeable. On a 4" screen it's much more pronounced... I suggest you don't compare text to an iPhone or MT4G so you don't get annoyed when you see what I'm talking about =)
richiehd said:
I don't see anything wrong with the Vibrant's screen. Responsive, sexy, sleek.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

S doesn't have an SD. With built in Apps2SD, I guess they felt they didn't need it. 16GB is a lot of space.
::shrug::
I'm not getting the S. I was going to if it was dual core but there is no need to now. My Vibrant will morph into a Nexus S shortly...

dinan said:
Don't get me wrong, I like the Vibrant screen a lot. The ONLY gripe I have with it is the pentile matrix, which makes text look grainy/fuzzy compared to normal LCDs. It's not an AMOLED thing, it's their decision of RGBG instead of RGB for each pixel (technically RGBG is 2 pixels)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah, I only notice that once in a while. I have bad eyesight anyway!

2.3 focus is on games and multimedia. I can't wait to see the Apps and games!

here is the link to the nexus s...
http://www.google.com/nexus/#!/features
the phone is sexy but sucks i cant get it at tmobile stores. cause my upgrade isnt due till october of next year. i dont think best buy would let me upgrade early.

Sony screwed up the Xperia Z

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f31ojOyC7FA
Check out the video.
Lower benchmark score than the Galaxy S3 and battery drops from 97% to 93% in 5 minutes of use.
Not impressed Sony.

ssj_jaypee said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f31ojOyC7FA
Check out the video.
Lower benchmark score than the Galaxy S3 and battery drops from 97% to 93% in 5 minutes of use.
Not impressed Sony.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Isn't that a test unit though? Plus benchmarks don't really mean that much, it's the actual user experience which is important I think

fareeed said:
Isn't that a test unit though?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What would the difference be?
The phone is coming out next month. Production has started already.
I don't blame the hardware though. The S4 Pro is powerful.
Most likely Sony screwed up the software.....
Also battery needed to be bigger.
Why in the love of god didn't Sony follow Samsung and use a bigger battery like the Note 2? :crying:

ssj_jaypee said:
What would the difference be?
The phone is coming out next month. Production has started already.
I don't blame the hardware though. The S4 Pro is powerful.
Most likely Sony screwed up the software.....
Also battery needed to be bigger.
Why in the love of god didn't Sony follow Samsung and use a bigger battery like the Note 2? :crying:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I see what you mean, the actual production devices could ship with different software I don't know? I agree about the battery though we'll just have to wait for a full review I guess

Engadget got the ZL at 13,589

It's an S4 Pro with quad-core krait. Just like the Droid DNA and Nexus 4. Stop worrying about benchmarks, especially when it hasn't even been released. It will perform like every other S4 Pro phone, give or take a small margin.
The battery complaint is even more ridiculous. So many phones get updates on launch day fixing battery issues and they keep tweaking it with each update for months after release.
The biggest disappointment is the display. It looks exactly like a bigger version of the Xperia S/Ion/T with all the problems. Washed out look with poor viewing angles and contrast. Sony likes to turn up the brightness to mask the poor contrast. It's 2013. HTC doesn't even make displays and their SuperLCD IPS display is far and ahead the best. IPS displays on LG are also good as well as the one on the Lumia 920. Sony displays continue to disappoint.

katamari201 said:
It's an S4 Pro with quad-core krait. Just like the Droid DNA and Nexus 4. Stop worrying about benchmarks, especially when it hasn't even been released. It will perform like every other S4 Pro phone, give or take a small margin.
The battery complaint is even more ridiculous. So many phones get updates on launch day fixing battery issues and they keep tweaking it with each update for months after release.
The biggest disappointment is the display. It looks exactly like a bigger version of the Xperia S/Ion/T with all the problems. Washed out look with poor viewing angles and contrast. Sony likes to turn up the brightness to mask the poor contrast. It's 2013. HTC doesn't even make displays and their SuperLCD IPS display is far and ahead the best. IPS displays on LG are also good as well as the one on the Lumia 920. Sony displays continue to disappoint.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Ion has a pretty good display, dunno what you're talking about, many people agree with me. Probably one of the best out there.
I got the S which seems to have a pretty nice one as well, maybe almost the same as the Ion. The only washed out display that Sony produced this year on a high-end device is the one on the T. Over-saturated colors don't necessarily mean better displays.

The ION has the best display. Take a look at the thread in the Xperia T forums that compares the ION, T, and S in terms of display.

Nepythys said:
The Ion has a pretty good display, dunno what you're talking about, many people agree with me. Probably one of the best out there.
I got the S which seems to have a pretty nice one as well, maybe almost the same as the Ion. The only washed out display that Sony produced this year on a high-end device is the one on the T. Over-saturated colors don't necessarily mean better displays.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I never said anything about oversaturation being better. You are making assumptions that I prefer the blown out colors of AMOLED or the extra warmth of the SuperLCD. I mentioned the LG display looks better than the Sony one, and it is even LESS saturated than the Sony display. The point is Sony does not have a single IPS display on their phones. It is 100% agreed upon that IPS is the pinnacle of LCD technology and has been for years. Professional monitors from NEC, Dell, and HP use IPS panels. The colors and contrast do not shift when viewing off axis, and that is important for an even image, even when looking dead on. LG and HTC have been putting IPS displays on their phones for years now. Sony has no excuse. If you live in a bubble of Sony phones and never look at any other smartphone, I'm sure the display looks great. But there are plenty of reviews stating the obvious. The poor viewing angles are becoming increasingly unacceptable in a premium smartphone. The flaws are even more apparent on a small mobile display that you move around and use at different angles. It's not some nice monitor you prop in front of your desk and sit perfectly in front of.

Still way prettier and with far better UI than TouchWiz.

scores slower because of the Full HD screen

Final results are close to 20.000 in AnTuTu...
Sent from my LT26i using Tapatalk

its a prototype so definitely the software isnt optimized yet, wait for the final release and then start whining.

EL_BELLACO said:
scores slower because of the Full HD screen
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's probably the issue. This thing rendering everything in fullHD, the S3 does 720p only, so of course it will be "faster" in benchmarks.

guilhermedsx said:
That's probably the issue. This thing rendering everything in fullHD, the S3 does 720p only, so of course it will be "faster" in benchmarks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've seen droid DNA got 19k in antutu with that resolution..
Send from my stupid lt26i

Yeah, well the Z can score higher than that -- and with XDA here, it's bound to go higher than 22.000
I don't know what Sony's game is, but why the onscreen buttons? That only takes away from the display! For some reason, only the GNex looks good with those, maybe because it doesn't have any extra buttons?
Anyways, I still think the best buttons were on the HTC Desire. You couldn't miss those.

About what I expected and not low at all for a stock device. You have to keep in mind most of the top scores on Antutu are with custom kernels and roms. As for battery I am not worried about it as it has not really been a issue with the newer Sony stuff.

someone755 said:
Yeah, well the Z can score higher than that -- and with XDA here, it's bound to go higher than 22.000
I don't know what Sony's game is, but why the onscreen buttons? That only takes away from the display! For some reason, only the GNex looks good with those, maybe because it doesn't have any extra buttons?
Anyways, I still think the best buttons were on the HTC Desire. You couldn't miss those.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think it's better. When not needed, they will hide themselves and show the full screen.
Sent from my LT26i using Tapatalk

Felimenta97 said:
I think it's better. When not needed, they will hide themselves and show the full screen.
Sent from my LT26i using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed. And I'll be hiding the on screen buttons completely, and using gestures instead, meaning that I get the complete 5" !!
Very glad Sony did this, was waiting for someone to stop making redundant buttons.
Now if only they actually gave it a removable battery, then I'd be sold 100% (mostly talking about the ZL, I can understand the Z)

ssj_jaypee said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f31ojOyC7FA
Check out the video.
Lower benchmark score than the Galaxy S3 and battery drops from 97% to 93% in 5 minutes of use.
Not impressed Sony.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ummm I should point out the S3 gets around the 9000 range in Antutu and the Nexus 4 which runs the same processor as the Z gets around 16,000 which about in line with that benchmark so... wtf are you talking about. Also *GASP* a phone lose battery while doing intensive benchmarks I am soooo shocked. Obvious troll post.

Why I Love My Moto X

Why I love my Moto X even though I'm a spec lover.
1. Active Notifications - by far the best feature
2. Touchless Control - I'm using this more and more everyday.
3. Battery life
4. Small, compact and easy to hold.
5. X8 computing system. No lag whatsoever. Yes, smoother than my two other Snapdragon 600 phones.
6. Assembled in the US.
The phone is not perfect (camera, warm screen, 720 screen).
My other phones include S4 and LG Optimus Pro.
Sent from my XT1058 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app

I just bought the Moto Droid Maxx on Verizon. I've been using a GS4 and before that a Nexus 4.
I have to say, this phone is awesome. I'm loving active notifications, assist, and touchless control. They're changing the way that I use my phone.

martinezma99 said:
Why I love my Moto X even though I'm a spec lover.
1. Active Notifications - by far the best feature
2. Touchless Control - I'm using this more and more everyday.
3. Battery life
4. Small, compact and easy to hold.
5. X8 system. No lag whatsoever. Yes, smoother than my two other Snapdragon 600 phones.
6. Assembled in the US.
The phone is not perfect (camera, warm screen, 720 screen).
My other phones include S4 and LG Optimus Pro.
Sent from my XT1058 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
a 4.7inch screen with an RGB matrix display with ppi above 300.. there is no way you would notice a difference compared to 1080p unless the screen technology itself is different. the resolution makes no difference and it just seems like such a petty thing to complain about. youre saving battery life. its the same way people who dont understand android think this phone sucks because its not quad core. lol.. you save battery and gain speed with the dualcore. its a lot more efficient. things like this will make it a hard phone to sell to the folks who like to brag about useless specs (aka the s3/s4 groupies)
warm screen can be adjusted with color multipliers and gamma settings
camera i really hope it sucks because of software like the first few batches of the htc one and not hardware related

The only time you can see a difference on the screen is when comparing Moto X to a 1080 screen side by side. The 720 screen is very good but not the best. I understand the decision behind the 720. As for it being warm, yes it can be changed but not out of the box like other phones (Samsung). For now, I'm stock with default settings.
I love the Moto X and highly recommend it.
Sent from my XT1058 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app

DonDizzurp said:
a 4.7inch screen with an RGB matrix display with ppi above 300.. there is no way you would notice a difference compared to 1080p unless the screen technology itself is different. the resolution makes no difference and it just seems like such a petty thing to complain about. youre saving battery life. its the same way people who dont understand android think this phone sucks because its not quad core. lol.. you save battery and gain speed with the dualcore. its a lot more efficient. things like this will make it a hard phone to sell to the folks who like to brag about useless specs (aka the s3/s4 groupies)
warm screen can be adjusted with color multipliers and gamma settings
camera i really hope it sucks because of software like the first few batches of the htc one and not hardware related
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know people say that it's not noticeable. But it is. I have a Droid DNA 1080p. After using that, i can easily tell the difference. I even compared the same news article side by side. It's clearly more pleasurable to read on a 1080p screen than a 720p screen. That said, it could potentially be fixed with a font update as some of the font on the htc was thinner compared to the font on the moto x.

DonDizzurp said:
a 4.7inch screen with an RGB matrix display with ppi above 300.. there is no way you would notice a difference compared to 1080p unless the screen technology itself is different. the resolution makes no difference and it just seems like such a petty thing to complain about. youre saving battery life. its the same way people who dont understand android think this phone sucks because its not quad core. lol.. you save battery and gain speed with the dualcore. its a lot more efficient. things like this will make it a hard phone to sell to the folks who like to brag about useless specs (aka the s3/s4 groupies)
warm screen can be adjusted with color multipliers and gamma settings
camera i really hope it sucks because of software like the first few batches of the htc one and not hardware related
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You need to use a 1080p screen cause the difference is definitely noticeable. Put the HTC one next to the moto x and get ready to be blown away.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

I used the Moto X in an AT&T store next to my One and honestly I did not have any complaints.
Too many people way overreact to things especially to screen resolution, 720p is still overkill in my opinion.

I Am Marino said:
I used the Moto X in an AT&T store next to my One and honestly I did not have any complaints.
Too many people way overreact to things especially to screen resolution, 720p is still overkill in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nobody is saying that the moto X has a bad screen or that 720p isn't good, it is. But a 1080p is better, plain and simple.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

barondebxl said:
Nobody is saying that the moto X has a bad screen or that 720p isn't good, it is. But a 1080p is better, plain and simple.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Better technically, sure.
But a deal breaker, it shouldn't be, for the spec whores, this isn't your phone anyway.,

I Am Marino said:
Better technically, sure.
But a deal breaker, it shouldn't be, for the spec whores, this isn't your phone anyway.,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not a deal breaker at all. Some folks claim that you can't tell the difference between a 1080p vs 720p which is completely false.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

I Am Marino said:
Better technically, sure.
But a deal breaker, it shouldn't be, for the spec whores, this isn't your phone anyway.,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It has nothing do with spec whores. It has everything to do with please your eye sight. If I personally can see a difference between 720p and 1080p then yes, its going to bother me. If its correctable thought some font/sorcery then we got something.
And why wouldn't you want the most important item (the screen) to be satisfying. But to each to their own.

DammitCubs said:
And why wouldn't you want the most important item (the screen) to be satisfying. But to each to their own.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because at the end of the day, it's still a HD screen with a PPI over 300 which is the supposed maximum amount a normal eye can notice.
I don't buy most people who say "Well I can see the difference" Not to discredit those of you who really might be able to but most are dead lying and I'm sure of it.
But as you said, to each their own.

anaphora68 said:
I just bought the Moto Droid Maxx on Verizon. I've been using a GS4 and before that a Nexus 4.
I have to say, this phone is awesome. I'm loving active notifications, assist, and touchless control. They're changing the way that I use my phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd be really interested in hearing your thoughts on the Moto X vs the Moto Droid Maxx. From what I can gather, the Moto X has only three main benefits over the Maxx:
Moto maker customisation
Much better looking
A little bit cheaper
I'm not fussed about the customisation. It looking better and being a bit cheaper are nice but no way a deal breaker.
On the flip side, the Maxx as the following benefits:
Much bigger battery
Wireless charging
Larger screen (not that important for me)
In short, the benefits of the Moto X aren't that great for me. However, most of the benefits of the Maxx are massive bonuses for me.
With the main benefit of the Moto X being the customisation, I really don't know why people are choosing the Moto X over the Maxx especially with the following downsides to the customisation:
Not yet available
Will be carrier exclusive when it does start
Not all options will be available to start with (e.g. wood)
Some options will cost a premium (e.g. wood).
Moto Maxx just seems like the obvious choice.
Any thoughts or opinions?

Techno79 said:
Moto Maxx just seems like the obvious choice.
Any thoughts or opinions?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think your points are valid. To me the design is the deciding factor. The Droid phones look ugly to me and will be greasy finger print magnets (case free living for me). As long as I get a full day of battery from the X then that is all I need.

bp_ said:
I think your points are valid. To me the design is the deciding factor. The Droid phones look ugly to me and will be greasy finger print magnets (case free living for me). As long as I get a full day of battery from the X then that is all I need.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree. I'll grant the Maxx is not as big a fingerprint magnet as the Ultra, but I still find the Droid line to be boxy and butt ugly. Not something I'm interested in at all.

DammitCubs said:
I know people say that it's not noticeable. But it is. I have a Droid DNA 1080p. After using that, i can easily tell the difference. I even compared the same news article side by side. It's clearly more pleasurable to read on a 1080p screen than a 720p screen. That said, it could potentially be fixed with a font update as some of the font on the htc was thinner compared to the font on the moto x.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
barondebxl said:
You need to use a 1080p screen cause the difference is definitely noticeable. Put the HTC one next to the moto x and get ready to be blown away.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The HTC One uses an LCD screen. Like I mentioned in my post, 720 vs 1080 on such a small screen makes absolutely no difference if the technology is the same. If Motorola used the exact same screen technology but used a 1080 resolution instead, it would hardly be noticeable and by hardly I mean BARELY unless you're staring at the screen close up in a completely dark room.

DonDizzurp said:
The HTC One uses an LCD screen. Like I mentioned in my post, 720 vs 1080 on such a small screen makes absolutely no difference if the technology is the same. If Motorola used the exact same screen technology but used a 1080 resolution instead, it would hardly be noticeable and by hardly I mean BARELY unless you're staring at the screen close up in a completely dark room.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just compared it to a GS4. So that's Amoled vs Amoled.......yeah I can still tell. It's noticeable. I must have amazing eyes.
Pixel density is pixel density. And the magic number isn't 316 ppi, it's higher. Resolution is the same as a dead pixel, once you notice it's flaw. it's over.

I am looking right now at a Galaxy S3 306 PPI, and an HTC one .. ( Over 400 ), and whoever says the human eye can't distinguish the difference is downright blind, an idiot or has an agenda of some sort ..

Fatelord said:
I am looking right now at a Galaxy S3 306 PPI, and an HTC one .. ( Over 400 ), and whoever says the human eye can't distinguish the difference is downright blind, an idiot or has an agenda of some sort ..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Two completely different screen technologies. You are always going to notice the difference between an Amoled and an LCD, regardless of PPI count. Funny, most people mention PPI as if they've been counting it all their lives. Screens are personal preferences, and people have different eyesights and color sensitivities, so there's no right answer. Just accept that and move on.

Fatelord said:
I am looking right now at a Galaxy S3 306 PPI, and an HTC one .. ( Over 400 ), and whoever says the human eye can't distinguish the difference is downright blind, an idiot or has an agenda of some sort ..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They're just justifying things after the fact.
There is absolutely a difference. Granted, the X is better due to the lack of pentile, but I can still quite easily tell. It's not horrible in terms of pixel density, but the display isn't great by any other metric.