The higher number is always better, eh? You're the kind of consumer that companies just love...
Yes, that's why the EVO 4G also wins on weight on size. Those need to be green, too, because if it's bigger and heavier you're less likely to loss it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by r6danl
The HTC EVO 4G DOES have 802.11n and an 8MP camera on the back. I have 802.11n activated on my EVO right now. Update your chart. I also get over 24 hours on a single charge with nominal to heavy use.
Is that a hack or did it get v2.2 with 802.11n enabled? According to Engadget, which slams the iPhone 4 for such things as having a MicroSIM (as if that worse than MiniSIM) and gives Symbian a top grade for the AMOLED (laugh!), the EVO 4G only has 802.11b/g and notes the HTC HD 2 can get 802.11n with a hack.
The Shapdragon SoC is NOT a Cortex A8 design. It's similar to it, but it's NOT a real Cortex A8 CPU core. In fact, its CPU performance is somewhere between an ARM11 core and a Cortex A8 clock for clock.
In other words, at 1Ghz, the Cortex A8 in the iPhone 4 is faster than the 1Ghz Snapdragon.
Also, the PowerVR graphics core in the A4 is WAY more powerful than the super OLD ATI graphics chip in the Snapdragon SoC.
Uh, the EVO has an 8MP rear camera, not a 5MP rear camera. The EVO wins in that category.
No phone wins in that category, they all have crappy sensors and lenses.
One ponders if the 8MP sensor of the EVO is physically bigger than the 5MP sensor of the iPhone 4 and if so is it only by the same proportions in which case it isn't better, it's the same.
One also ponders if the glass and focus apparatus in the EVO is better than the iPhone 4 which would have a greater impact on quality than more MP.
One also ponders the processor attached to the sensor, for example the Canon 5D2 has a much better sensor even though it has less pixels than some as such noise is significantly reduced.
I don't know if any of us are qualified to comment on if the camera in the EVO is better than the iPhone 4. A dumb ass marketing spec isn't the determination.
Interesting study. I charged mine to full yesterday afternoon and haven't touched a charger since. Did some 4G this morning, and have had Wi-Fi on all day and syncing. Still have 40% battery left right now. But to each their own.
I would like to see the iPhone get pushed like these other "battery tests" of the Evo. That is, Push e-mail for 2 accounts (I have GMail and Exchange), full brightness, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, Etc. I have a feeling that's where a lot of these "horrible battery life" stories come from. I would like to see the iPhone pushed in the same way for a fair comparison. Unfortunately you won't be able to compare the 4G vs. 3G. Not sure if anyone can pin-down the power draw comparison between the screen sizes as well.
You may have missed it, but the reviewers turned off all of the common features, and simply left the phone in standby, and still only got 14.5 hours. One reviewer left twitter, and some other app and tried the same test and got 6 hours. Screen brightness wouldn't have much to do with such use cases. Bluetooth could, but unless they were actively using the connection, the drain should have been greatly reduced as it is on my iPhone. I get 3+ days of standby on my phone, and about 3.5 hours of actual usage. This is common usage for me (browsing, playing an occasional game, texting, and checking e-mail throughout the day).
Most reviews for HTC will all mention the poor battery life of the EVO. The folks who claim 24+ hours between charges are very few and far between, when the vast majority find it to be more along the lines of 6-12 hours total time (including standby). I'd suggest you follow the links from the reviewers comments linked in the article below. It has some very interesting feedback (including the user comments) as well as a variety of use cases. I suspect the multi-tasking, touted as such a must-have for that phone is a major contributor given the OS is the biggest drain on the battery, not the wireless radios, bluetooth, etc (excluding 4G which can kill it in as little as an hour or two by some reviewers).
The Shapdragon SoC is NOT a Cortex A8 design. It's similar to it, but it's NOT a real Cortex A8 CPU core. In fact, its CPU performance is somewhere between an ARM11 core and a Cortex A8 clock for clock.
In other words, at 1Ghz, the Cortex A8 in the iPhone 4 is faster than the 1Ghz Snapdragon.
Also, the PowerVR graphics core in the A4 is WAY more powerful than the super OLD ATI graphics chip in the Snapdragon SoC.
Adi
I've never heard of either of these things. Do you have any good links to share that breaks it down?
PS: Note that the iPad's A4 is 1GHz, while Apple has simply marketed the iPhone 4's SoC as A4, stating no clockspeed. While I think it's actually 1GHz I also think they have likely underclocked it to save power.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cy_starkman
One ponders if the 8MP sensor of the EVO is physically bigger than the 5MP sensor of the iPhone 4 and if so is it only by the same proportions in which case it isn't better, it's the same.
From my post above...
Speaking of... Jobs mentioned the Phone 4 as having larger pixels at 1.75μm (compared to the EVO 4G's 1.1μm pixels) to grab more photons and a back-illuminated sensor (which the EVO 4G also has) for low light photos.
While these specific features for camera phone sensors were demoed from Micron Technologies back in 2007, Jobs played it up to appear as if the iPhone 4 was the first to have these features. That's fine, because the other handset vendors had long since dropped the ball by only marketing the number of pixels to consumers and now that the biggest competition is moving to the smaller pixel size it was a prime opportunity for Apple.
1.75μm is 59% larger pixles than 1.1μm, yet 8Mpx is 60% larger than 5Mpx so this is just marketing without actually being a bigger active-pixel sensor.
Ha...I would only expect a super unbiased comparison on APPLEinsider.
Why isn't AT&T red in the comparison sheet?
The display really comes down to do you want large or small? Not a "red" or "green".
No "Green" for the EVO having a removable battery, HDMI out, and FM radio?
DISCLAIMER: I owned the iPhone 3G for a year as well as the 3GS for 11 months. I think I can form a valid opinion between the two. And no, the battery on an Evo does not last two hours.
who wants a FM radio? i mean come on. next youll be wanting VCR output. i have no idea what id do with HDMI output. transferring videos to cell phone is something you never see any one do. hooking your phone up to a tv? completely useless, when have you or any one else came across a moment when you said, damn if only i could hook my phone up to a tv. all i can say once the newness wears off the EVO and you get tired of the buggy ness and patch work of android... you'll be back, they always come back
who wants a FM radio? i mean come on. next youll be wanting VCR output. i have no idea what id do with HDMI output. transferring videos to cell phone is something you never see any one do. hooking your phone up to a tv? completely useless, when have you or any one else came across a moment when you said, damn if only i could hook my phone up to a tv. all i can say once the newness wears off the EVO and you get tired of the buggy ness and patch work of android... you'll be back, they always come back
I have to agree there. With thousands of tunes on the device, and free services like Pandora, FM radio just seems...quaint. I haven't listened to a radio in years. I just don't see any value. I never understood the attempts to include the on MP3 players either. Ah well, to each his own.
As to the video out, I could see limited use cases, if you take into account the video recording capabilities. The article mentions it is only Video out though. I take it the HDMI connector doesn't support audio? I suspect that may be a mistake in the article. I agree it's a limited use feature though, as most will just sync the video back to their PC. I actually transfer a large number of movies to my phone as I watch them when I travel, but I have no use for piping the video out. It's more of a time waster when I'm on a plane for instance and the in-flight movie sucks
The chart seems to have left out the whole 4G v. 3G thing. Sure it's not as big a difference as advertised, but according to reviews, it's a big difference nonetheless. Seems to be a pretty obvious "unique feature" to me.
quite useless outside of this few towns in the states, iPhone sold globally, not in a niche market.
Conversely, one can dismiss all of the value of iPhone 4 if using it means, for example, being tied to a single carrier in the US that provides unusable coverage for the user where they live. In such a scenario, picking a far inferior feature phone would be better if the goal were to actually place phone calls.
Daniel -
Amen brother. I'll second the motion that AT&T be put in red on the chart, BTW. As long as Apple leaves the Verizon hole open, Android will continue to gain on the iPhone, no matter how good the hardware is. I switched to the Incredible in spite of how much I wanted the iPhone 4 after having been an original and then 3G iPhone user. I like making calls on my fancy new phone too, not just carrying around a 10 oz paperweight. Looking forward to your upcoming comparison of the service providers in this series.
quite useless outside of this few towns in the states, iPhone sold globally, not in a niche market.
Look at the "Carrier" section of the chart. Orange and Softbank aren't on there. This is a US-focused article. 4G is niche? I wonder if you'll be saying that in June 2011 when the next iPhone comes out.
Let's face it, the timing of this article is biased. I mean to compare Android with the newest iPhone in the month they launch and you expect what? If you compare 3GS with newest Android handsets four months ago, more things would turn to Android favors.
That said I wouldn't buy Android just for features and specs alone, and neither would I buy iPhone just for that. I would buy iPhone knowing Apple will take good care both in hardware and software aspects which should result in more satisfying product as a whole.
When Android has better touchscreen than iPhone and more and better software to choose from then we talk. Removable battery? FM radio? what a laugh!
Let's face it, the timing of this article is biased. I mean to compare Android with the newest iPhone in the month they launch and you expect what? If you compare 3GS with newest Android handsets four months ago, more things would turn to Android favors.
Well, all but the original Droid came out in the past couple months.
Ha...I would only expect a super unbiased comparison on APPLEinsider.
Why isn't AT&T red in the comparison sheet?
The display really comes down to do you want large or small? Not a "red" or "green".
No "Green" for the EVO having a removable battery, HDMI out, and FM radio?
DISCLAIMER: I owned the iPhone 3G for a year as well as the 3GS for 11 months. I think I can form a valid opinion between the two. And no, the battery on an Evo does not last two hours.
I don't recall any Android phone selling 600,000 just on pre-order that we know of. I think Apple's sales for the iphone speak for themselves as far as competition. I don't think Apple even has to have better features, it is still gonna crash servers and break the internet every time a new iphone is released. When an HTC or Palm does that, then I'll think there might be some competition.
Comments
The higher number is always better, eh? You're the kind of consumer that companies just love...
Yes, that's why the EVO 4G also wins on weight on size. Those need to be green, too, because if it's bigger and heavier you're less likely to loss it.
The HTC EVO 4G DOES have 802.11n and an 8MP camera on the back. I have 802.11n activated on my EVO right now. Update your chart. I also get over 24 hours on a single charge with nominal to heavy use.
Is that a hack or did it get v2.2 with 802.11n enabled? According to Engadget, which slams the iPhone 4 for such things as having a MicroSIM (as if that worse than MiniSIM) and gives Symbian a top grade for the AMOLED (laugh!), the EVO 4G only has 802.11b/g and notes the HTC HD 2 can get 802.11n with a hack.
The Shapdragon SoC is NOT a Cortex A8 design. It's similar to it, but it's NOT a real Cortex A8 CPU core. In fact, its CPU performance is somewhere between an ARM11 core and a Cortex A8 clock for clock.
In other words, at 1Ghz, the Cortex A8 in the iPhone 4 is faster than the 1Ghz Snapdragon.
Also, the PowerVR graphics core in the A4 is WAY more powerful than the super OLD ATI graphics chip in the Snapdragon SoC.
Adi
Uh, the EVO has an 8MP rear camera, not a 5MP rear camera. The EVO wins in that category.
No phone wins in that category, they all have crappy sensors and lenses.
One ponders if the 8MP sensor of the EVO is physically bigger than the 5MP sensor of the iPhone 4 and if so is it only by the same proportions in which case it isn't better, it's the same.
One also ponders if the glass and focus apparatus in the EVO is better than the iPhone 4 which would have a greater impact on quality than more MP.
One also ponders the processor attached to the sensor, for example the Canon 5D2 has a much better sensor even though it has less pixels than some as such noise is significantly reduced.
I don't know if any of us are qualified to comment on if the camera in the EVO is better than the iPhone 4. A dumb ass marketing spec isn't the determination.
Interesting study. I charged mine to full yesterday afternoon and haven't touched a charger since. Did some 4G this morning, and have had Wi-Fi on all day and syncing. Still have 40% battery left right now. But to each their own.
I would like to see the iPhone get pushed like these other "battery tests" of the Evo. That is, Push e-mail for 2 accounts (I have GMail and Exchange), full brightness, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, Etc. I have a feeling that's where a lot of these "horrible battery life" stories come from. I would like to see the iPhone pushed in the same way for a fair comparison. Unfortunately you won't be able to compare the 4G vs. 3G. Not sure if anyone can pin-down the power draw comparison between the screen sizes as well.
You may have missed it, but the reviewers turned off all of the common features, and simply left the phone in standby, and still only got 14.5 hours. One reviewer left twitter, and some other app and tried the same test and got 6 hours. Screen brightness wouldn't have much to do with such use cases. Bluetooth could, but unless they were actively using the connection, the drain should have been greatly reduced as it is on my iPhone. I get 3+ days of standby on my phone, and about 3.5 hours of actual usage. This is common usage for me (browsing, playing an occasional game, texting, and checking e-mail throughout the day).
Most reviews for HTC will all mention the poor battery life of the EVO. The folks who claim 24+ hours between charges are very few and far between, when the vast majority find it to be more along the lines of 6-12 hours total time (including standby). I'd suggest you follow the links from the reviewers comments linked in the article below. It has some very interesting feedback (including the user comments) as well as a variety of use cases. I suspect the multi-tasking, touted as such a must-have for that phone is a major contributor given the OS is the biggest drain on the battery, not the wireless radios, bluetooth, etc (excluding 4G which can kill it in as little as an hour or two by some reviewers).
http://www.switched.com/2010/06/04/s...npage_engadget
Come on guys, i was expecting more from you !
The Shapdragon SoC is NOT a Cortex A8 design. It's similar to it, but it's NOT a real Cortex A8 CPU core. In fact, its CPU performance is somewhere between an ARM11 core and a Cortex A8 clock for clock.
In other words, at 1Ghz, the Cortex A8 in the iPhone 4 is faster than the 1Ghz Snapdragon.
Also, the PowerVR graphics core in the A4 is WAY more powerful than the super OLD ATI graphics chip in the Snapdragon SoC.
Adi
I've never heard of either of these things. Do you have any good links to share that breaks it down?
PS: Note that the iPad's A4 is 1GHz, while Apple has simply marketed the iPhone 4's SoC as A4, stating no clockspeed. While I think it's actually 1GHz I also think they have likely underclocked it to save power.
One ponders if the 8MP sensor of the EVO is physically bigger than the 5MP sensor of the iPhone 4 and if so is it only by the same proportions in which case it isn't better, it's the same.
From my post above...
Ha...I would only expect a super unbiased comparison on APPLEinsider.
Why isn't AT&T red in the comparison sheet?
The display really comes down to do you want large or small? Not a "red" or "green".
No "Green" for the EVO having a removable battery, HDMI out, and FM radio?
DISCLAIMER: I owned the iPhone 3G for a year as well as the 3GS for 11 months. I think I can form a valid opinion between the two. And no, the battery on an Evo does not last two hours.
who wants a FM radio? i mean come on. next youll be wanting VCR output. i have no idea what id do with HDMI output. transferring videos to cell phone is something you never see any one do. hooking your phone up to a tv? completely useless, when have you or any one else came across a moment when you said, damn if only i could hook my phone up to a tv. all i can say once the newness wears off the EVO and you get tired of the buggy ness and patch work of android... you'll be back, they always come back
who wants a FM radio? i mean come on. next youll be wanting VCR output. i have no idea what id do with HDMI output. transferring videos to cell phone is something you never see any one do. hooking your phone up to a tv? completely useless, when have you or any one else came across a moment when you said, damn if only i could hook my phone up to a tv. all i can say once the newness wears off the EVO and you get tired of the buggy ness and patch work of android... you'll be back, they always come back
I have to agree there. With thousands of tunes on the device, and free services like Pandora, FM radio just seems...quaint. I haven't listened to a radio in years. I just don't see any value. I never understood the attempts to include the on MP3 players either. Ah well, to each his own.
As to the video out, I could see limited use cases, if you take into account the video recording capabilities. The article mentions it is only Video out though. I take it the HDMI connector doesn't support audio? I suspect that may be a mistake in the article. I agree it's a limited use feature though, as most will just sync the video back to their PC. I actually transfer a large number of movies to my phone as I watch them when I travel, but I have no use for piping the video out. It's more of a time waster when I'm on a plane for instance and the in-flight movie sucks
The chart seems to have left out the whole 4G v. 3G thing. Sure it's not as big a difference as advertised, but according to reviews, it's a big difference nonetheless. Seems to be a pretty obvious "unique feature" to me.
quite useless outside of this few towns in the states, iPhone sold globally, not in a niche market.
The HTC EVO has an 8 MP rear camera, not 5 MP.
And both cameras are run by a shitty OS with buggy camera software, so 'tis a moot point, really.
Conversely, one can dismiss all of the value of iPhone 4 if using it means, for example, being tied to a single carrier in the US that provides unusable coverage for the user where they live. In such a scenario, picking a far inferior feature phone would be better if the goal were to actually place phone calls.
Daniel -
Amen brother. I'll second the motion that AT&T be put in red on the chart, BTW. As long as Apple leaves the Verizon hole open, Android will continue to gain on the iPhone, no matter how good the hardware is. I switched to the Incredible in spite of how much I wanted the iPhone 4 after having been an original and then 3G iPhone user. I like making calls on my fancy new phone too, not just carrying around a 10 oz paperweight. Looking forward to your upcoming comparison of the service providers in this series.
quite useless outside of this few towns in the states, iPhone sold globally, not in a niche market.
Look at the "Carrier" section of the chart. Orange and Softbank aren't on there. This is a US-focused article. 4G is niche? I wonder if you'll be saying that in June 2011 when the next iPhone comes out.
The threads I read at PPCGeeks have people complaining that they were getting ONLY 30.
That said I wouldn't buy Android just for features and specs alone, and neither would I buy iPhone just for that. I would buy iPhone knowing Apple will take good care both in hardware and software aspects which should result in more satisfying product as a whole.
When Android has better touchscreen than iPhone and more and better software to choose from then we talk. Removable battery? FM radio? what a laugh!
I really like the chart; however, you said the iPhone 4 can capture 40fps (which would be awesome if true).
Let's face it, the timing of this article is biased. I mean to compare Android with the newest iPhone in the month they launch and you expect what? If you compare 3GS with newest Android handsets four months ago, more things would turn to Android favors.
Well, all but the original Droid came out in the past couple months.
Ha...I would only expect a super unbiased comparison on APPLEinsider.
Why isn't AT&T red in the comparison sheet?
The display really comes down to do you want large or small? Not a "red" or "green".
No "Green" for the EVO having a removable battery, HDMI out, and FM radio?
DISCLAIMER: I owned the iPhone 3G for a year as well as the 3GS for 11 months. I think I can form a valid opinion between the two. And no, the battery on an Evo does not last two hours.
Bravo. You haven't owned an iPhone 4G.