I'm sure that the development behing a galaxy is much bigger then the one behing my xperia, but as far as usability, stability and speed, bugs and design, not to mention the sometimes painfull or simply boring process of flashing them, those unofficial roms are not even close to the level of an official rom, even if it's made from samsung.
I'm still on 2.1 (official) because it provides the best android experience i can get on my phone. it has a 600mhz processor and 128mb of ram.
It's like comparing a "cooked" linux distro to ubuntu.. yes, you may customize more, have more things to toy with, comand line to do your nice sudos, but ubuntu is a totally different (polished) animal.
And it still falls well short.
(especially when you consider diferent launchers, icon packs, launcher themes as android apps. that's almost 1 third)
Apple's ecosystem (and apps.. not only on looks and functionality, but cocoa kills java and even html5) murders android. simple as that.
Considering how terribly outdated your phone is, I don't think you're in a position to make broad claims about the user experience on Android.
You mean rimshot. But it's inappropriate here, as most phones are sold new with 2.x.
No most phones are sold with 4.0.x right now. Most phones in consumers hands have 2.3 because of the awful update process. His phone is only running 2.1 and has 128 mb of RAM! Those are 2009 specs and software.
Blah de blah, whiney, whine. We know your position already; you don't have to post.
But… but Android phones are MUCH cheaper than the iPhone! iPhones are for snobby idiots!
So a million activations a day, most phones are sold with 4.x, and yet 4.x only has 4% penetration. How does that work?
I don't understand what balance has to do with my post.
Ice Cream Sandwich is on 23.7% of the active Android devices, and Jelly Bean is at 1.4%. 25.1% of all Android devices are at 4.x. Gingerbread is on 55.8% of active devices.
(especially when you consider diferent launchers, icon packs, launcher themes as android apps. that's almost 1 third)
Be more specific. When someone says "specifications", it is generally regarded by the industry as hardware specifications. How does the GS3 "fall short" in that regard?
So a million activations a day, most phones are sold with 4.x, and yet 4.x only has 4% penetration. How does that work?
Those figures are from the amount of users logging onto the Android developers website. That represents a fairly minor population and is most definitely not a reflection of what is going on in the general population.
Those figures are from the amount of users logging onto the Android developers website. That represents a fairly minor population and is most definitely not a reflection of what is going on in the general population.
So it's less in the real world, then, since these are developer figures and would be skewed higher?
Those figures are from the amount of users logging onto the Android developers website. That represents a fairly minor population and is most definitely not a reflection of what is going on in the general population.
I know you didn't quote me in your response, but if you're referring to my link then your statement is incorrect. The statistics from the page I linked are based on the number of users accessing the Google Play Store, so it gives a fairly accurate picture of the consumers, not the developers (though it includes developers too).
Wow! that 4.8" phone is comically large. And judging by the bottom row of icons you aren't gaining any real usability with that larger display for basic usage.
Something doesn't seem right with these two phones. If the bigger one is truly only 4.8" then the smaller one (I applied a ruler to my monitor) is only 3.6" or thereabouts. At that size those 5 icons on the bottom row are going to be hard to hit with a one-handed thumb.
If the smaller one is 4" then the bigger one would be well over 5".
The reason the specs are so relatively bad on this phone is pretty simple: Without the big battery that the big screens are there to camouflage, you just can't get decent battery life on one of these Android phones using the latest CPUs and high res displays. So, the only way to get decent battery life is to dumb down the phone. This pretty much validates the idea that the only reason Android devices evolved big screens was to hide the fact that the phone needed a huge battery to last a day, or at least more than a couple hours.
Something doesn't seem right with these two phones. If the bigger one is truly only 4.8" then the smaller one (I applied a ruler to my monitor) is only 3.6" or thereabouts. At that size those 5 icons on the bottom row are going to be hard to hit with a one-handed thumb.
If the smaller one is 4" then the bigger one would be well over 5".
AI's side-by-side is not to scale, as another poster mentioned. I believe it was intentionally done to be misleading since it appears someone at AI altered the original source image, linked here:
I've no idea why some writers feel the need to stoop to dishonesty. They don't do the forum members any favor by giving them faked images. I think we're all adult enough here to handle facts and judge for ourselves.
They're not going to make it as good as the flagship device. I mean what if it turns out people don't want these big ass phones? Samsung would never let allow that.
Comments
Considering how terribly outdated your phone is, I don't think you're in a position to make broad claims about the user experience on Android.
Jelly bean improves performance through the way that it's coded. It runs better than ICS on any handset regardless of processor power.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp
One thing is for certain however. They will declare it vastly superior to the iPhone 5
I don't doubt that there are some android fanboys out there that will think that, but do you think that there are whole forums that do too?
Anyway, it's no surprise that Samsung is unable to craft a 4 inch cellphone as fast as an iPhone.
Originally Posted by wakefinance
Considering how terribly outdated your phone is, I don't think you're in a position to make broad claims about the user experience on Android.
Sounds like a modern Android phone to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Sounds like a modern Android phone to me.
drumroll.
For that they say "yaRigNahRunt".
Originally Posted by koop
drumroll.
You mean rimshot. But it's inappropriate here, as most phones are sold new with 2.x.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
You mean rimshot. But it's inappropriate here, as most phones are sold new with 2.x.
No most phones are sold with 4.0.x right now. Most phones in consumers hands have 2.3 because of the awful update process. His phone is only running 2.1 and has 128 mb of RAM! Those are 2009 specs and software.
Are you always ...so...
..clumsy?
...or is it because you can?
Just musing.
Originally Posted by wakefinance
No most phones are sold with 4.0.x right now. Most phones in consumers hands have 2.3 because of the awful update process.
So a million activations a day, most phones are sold with 4.x, and yet 4.x only has 4% penetration. How does that work?
Originally Posted by Frac
Are you always ...so...
..clumsy?
...or is it because you can?
Just musing.
I don't understand what balance has to do with my post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
So a million activations a day, most phones are sold with 4.x, and yet 4.x only has 4% penetration. How does that work?
I don't understand what balance has to do with my post.
Ice Cream Sandwich is on 23.7% of the active Android devices, and Jelly Bean is at 1.4%. 25.1% of all Android devices are at 4.x. Gingerbread is on 55.8% of active devices.
http://developer.android.com/about/dashboards/index.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins
And it still falls well short.
(especially when you consider diferent launchers, icon packs, launcher themes as android apps. that's almost 1 third)
Be more specific. When someone says "specifications", it is generally regarded by the industry as hardware specifications. How does the GS3 "fall short" in that regard?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
So a million activations a day, most phones are sold with 4.x, and yet 4.x only has 4% penetration. How does that work?
Those figures are from the amount of users logging onto the Android developers website. That represents a fairly minor population and is most definitely not a reflection of what is going on in the general population.
Originally Posted by Galbi
Those figures are from the amount of users logging onto the Android developers website. That represents a fairly minor population and is most definitely not a reflection of what is going on in the general population.
So it's less in the real world, then, since these are developer figures and would be skewed higher?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi
Those figures are from the amount of users logging onto the Android developers website. That represents a fairly minor population and is most definitely not a reflection of what is going on in the general population.
I know you didn't quote me in your response, but if you're referring to my link then your statement is incorrect. The statistics from the page I linked are based on the number of users accessing the Google Play Store, so it gives a fairly accurate picture of the consumers, not the developers (though it includes developers too).
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Wow! that 4.8" phone is comically large. And judging by the bottom row of icons you aren't gaining any real usability with that larger display for basic usage.
Something doesn't seem right with these two phones. If the bigger one is truly only 4.8" then the smaller one (I applied a ruler to my monitor) is only 3.6" or thereabouts. At that size those 5 icons on the bottom row are going to be hard to hit with a one-handed thumb.
If the smaller one is 4" then the bigger one would be well over 5".
The reason the specs are so relatively bad on this phone is pretty simple: Without the big battery that the big screens are there to camouflage, you just can't get decent battery life on one of these Android phones using the latest CPUs and high res displays. So, the only way to get decent battery life is to dumb down the phone. This pretty much validates the idea that the only reason Android devices evolved big screens was to hide the fact that the phone needed a huge battery to last a day, or at least more than a couple hours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonshf
Something doesn't seem right with these two phones. If the bigger one is truly only 4.8" then the smaller one (I applied a ruler to my monitor) is only 3.6" or thereabouts. At that size those 5 icons on the bottom row are going to be hard to hit with a one-handed thumb.
If the smaller one is 4" then the bigger one would be well over 5".
AI's side-by-side is not to scale, as another poster mentioned. I believe it was intentionally done to be misleading since it appears someone at AI altered the original source image, linked here:
http://mobilegeeks.de/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Galaxy-S3-Mini-vs-Galaxy-S3.jpg
I've no idea why some writers feel the need to stoop to dishonesty. They don't do the forum members any favor by giving them faked images. I think we're all adult enough here to handle facts and judge for ourselves.