sooper_verge12

Re-purpose the SGS3’s menu key for multi-task? :)

Regarding the camera, since the Camera app is essentially the same as that on the Galaxy Nexus because of ICS, what do you think has remedied the better photos compared to the GNex, aside from the sensor? It’s still an instant, lagless shutter right? So, what’s better would you say, other than the sensor?

You didn’t go into much detail about it, but why do you consider the Home button to be an advantage? In addition, you said the Menu key was a benefit. What would you say about it in light of Google’s push to see developers remove that button? In relation to that, which do you consider a better implementation: a dedicated menu button or HTC’s Sense 4 on-screen menu button?

Vlad, I had my reservations about the review after your editorial piece, but you came through with a well-thought out and balanced evaluation of the device, considering its competition. An 8.5 is a fair review for what some might consider a solid 9. But you justified it well and it was a good, informative read. Master-class effort!

Hmm, Sense UI with the over-aggressive background app killing and even worse update record than Samsung because Sense continues to be bloated? The One X that, as great as it looks, requires the user to still fudge through that cruddy UI? The one that’s locked up unless you put it through a 12-step program, where one typo will brick your device compared to a Samsung, which has got the CM guy working for them? Never mind the performance superlatives that Vlad noted about the SGS3. I’m content with my GNex, but if I was shopping a new device, I’d be all over the SGS3 in a heartbeat. The One X is a paperweight in 6 months… a beautiful paperweight mind you.

Okay, maybe they don’t “corner” the market, but they make up a quarter of the market share in STB and lead in cable STB revenue. Motorola is the STB of choice for Comcast and Verizon. Seems like a good deal to me for Google.

I don’t know what the other Android OEMs are worried about. Their bastardized (read: skinned) versions of Android don’t help Google’s cause (read: fragmentation). If we can just get one OEM that’s committed to stock experience, it doesn’t change the landscape all that much besides offering another value proposition to customers. This is exciting. Android on all Moto devices, running stock and clean. Android on set-top boxes, making Google TV a reality in EVERY home, since Motorola essentially corners the market on cable boxes.

Bye, bye, Instagram.

It had so much potential because it was John Malkovich. But inevitably, it fell short. Wait… Is THAT rain?!

They’ll care when Facebook needs to show investors how it’s making money because right now, how is Facebook making money? Ads. I read an article the other day about someone wanting to visit a friend’s page to see pictures of said friend’s wedding. Instead of being able to enjoy the moments captured in the photos, there were ads for divorce lawyers popping up next to the photos. What a way to ruin an experience! Count on more of that happening as FB attempts to bring in revenue.

Agree. The evidence is in apps that are/were blowing up like Instagram (which FB felt fearful enough to acquire), but even Tumblr. Surveys show that people get on and linger longer on sites like Tumblr. Mobile presence is huge these days. Obama wants all the federal sites to update their content for smartphones and tablets. It doesn’t help that Facebook’s app sucks on Android, which recently showed to occupy almost 60% of the market space. Facebook understands they need to get into mobile, but through what avenue isn’t entirely clear at the moment.

Apple on the web?! LOL. There’s nothing social about Apple. Ping?! Is Ping still being used? You’re forgetting the fatal flaw with Apple is that their closed ecosystem artificially limits the growth potential. This is going to be increasingly the problem for Facebook as it creates its own shielded environment. Sure, there are third-party features e.g. Spotify. But you have to be a member of Facebook to even join nowadays. So, if you’re not on Facebook, you’re not on Spotify. If you’re not on Apple, you’re not on Ping or whatever.

The beauty of G+ is that it’s CROSS-PLATFORM. I can initiate a hangout from a PC, an Android device, a Macbook or an iOS device. I don’t need a locally installed app on my desktop, all I need is access to the internet. Power comes from access. Facebook and Apple are artificially limiting access by virtue of their business practice.

It’s easy to call it a novelty feature if, 1) you’re not using it yourself, 2) not on Google+ sufficiently to see its implementation, and 3) a combination of both. Hangouts is becoming much more than just a video chat service, embedded in a social network. While you can use such a feature in a Skype or FaceTime fashion, what G+ users (particularly, organizations) are using Hangouts for is to touch base with their friends (or followers) in ways that would have otherwise been text driven. It’s immensely interactive in a way that only video can be. So, you have organizations like the White House, the New York Times, Disney et al that are using Hangouts with regularity to involve their fans. Think it’s still a novelty? Facebook feels the heat, as they just acquired ooVoo to bring video chat to its platform. What we’re seeing is that people want to be social again, but not through just status updates. Video is the future; hanging out remotely is the middle between being really social (physically hanging out) and really anti-social (keeping up with each other through status updates). I think it’s immensely powerful that Hangouts even gives users the platform to broadcast themselves to the world. Will all that content be A+ material? Likely not, but then again, it doesn’t have to be. It just has to be available. And for G+, it’s available right now.

You’re overpaying now for the data you use (and don’t use). Guess what, the carriers want you to over pay MORE for what you use, in addition, to what you DON’T use. Don’t be fooled: Verizon is only instituting these “shared” plans to extract MORE money out of you. You may not use 4GB but I certainly do, which means everyone’s use case is different. No matter what use-case you fall into, they want to make sure they get as much money from you as possible. They don’t want plans that “suit your needs” perfectly. That’s why the current tiered plans are at such awkward cut-offs. 250mb? The next being 2GB? They want the overages. As more and more people go towards cloud-based computing, more streaming of media, this is the ONLY way carriers can cash in. “Actual use” doesn’t help them penalize you. Your plan fails to include a penalization clause. The problem for carriers with unlimited plans is that there’s no penalization.

0.95% increase. Unbelievable. Read into that what you will.

I don’t recall the Alliance promised anything in 6 months. They only guaranteed that a device would receive an update to the latest version within 18 months of its life. The blatant violation of this is that the X2 and D3 are not getting updates, having been released only 9-10 months ago. That being said, those devices have not even received one update. That’s a travesty.

What the heck is holding that watch? A monkey foot?

Surprised IF this happened? It’s ALREADY happening… as in, currently. Where do you think the “leaked” information came from? Apple. The person who said Jobs approved it, worked on the project and is “familiar” with it. That is, FROM APPLE. Already happening bro.

That’s what I said: People will see what they want to see. I don’t know how you’d make the mistake of picking up the wrong phone. One says LG on the front, the other says Samsung; ear pieces are totally different. On the back, the LG is some nasty textured plastic, never mind the dual cameras, while the Samsung has a glossy plastic bit and one camera. In addition, the LG and Samsung monikers are clearly on the device, respectively.

Either way, your article and even comments prove my point: We need to get away from these non-descript black rectangles. As Josh T said in the V-cast, the designs are lazy and boring. We’re currently living in a sad state of mobile design.

Negative.

Like I said, use the same components, you really only have two choices. Put the bump on the bottom, or put it on the top. Put it on the bottom, look like the GS2. Put it on the top, look like the RAZR. As for the band, look at it again. The LG has the band, the SGS2 is just the finish for the face. People will see what they want to see, but all I see is two black rectangles that look like every other black rectangle phone.

It’s not a rip off of the Samsung Galaxy S II. It’s a BLACK RECTANGLE. There’s only so many ways you can do a BLACK RECTANGLE. After the Samsung Galaxy S III launched, this is what people said they wanted, but here’s the case in point. You can only do so much in the design when the components are essentially the same.

And the marketing spin begins… “The new iPhone: Own the Last Thing Jobs Designed”

Those scrollable toggles were available on TouchWiz for a while, at least since their first Honeycomb build. Could be a Cyanogenmod homage, but the SGS3 isn’t the first to have ’em.

So happy to have left this evil, evil company.

You’re thinking like an Android. In iOS, iPad apps are structurally different than iPhone apps. iOS doesn’t have a fragments API nor is it able to differentiate between different screen sizes to adapt the app. So, you’d get an app that’s designed for a 9.7" display squeezed into a 4" display, with all the UI features of the iPad app intact. That would make for a HORRIBLE UX.

Apple WILL NOT fragment the platform. The new iPhone MUST retain the same resolution and aspect ratio. In a 4" form factor, the ppi is 288. Greater than the new iPad, less than the current iPhone. But even so, Apple will reason that since it’s a bigger display, you’ll hold it further away. Thus, it’ll retain it’s “retina” status.

Exactly and they don’t currently have production ready AMOLED displays.

Wrong. It will have the same 960×640 resolution in a 4" display. That’s already 288ppi. Apple will tell you to hold it further from your face because it is a larger screen. At 288ppi, it’s still retina if you hold it a couple more inches from your face.

You’re kidding right? You have long fingers and can’t reach across a 4.3" screen? You must have a different definition of “long”. I don’t have big hands, but I can reach my thumb across the GNex’s 4.65" screen to hit the opposite corners.

Even so, Apple will keep the 3:2 AR of the current iPhone and even the same resolution. It’ll have less pixel density, but Apple will tell you to hold it further away so that it’s still retina.

Agree with much of the above. It will be the same resolution and the same aspect ratio because Apple will not fragment their platform. It will have a lower pixel density but it will still be called retina. Just like the 264ppi on the new iPad, Apple will justify the retina claim by saying you’ll hold this device further from your face. Whatever distance necessary to claim it is retina.