Entering the World of Smartphones

[Guest boo]

he's got one

[kcinsu]

This is true, but the upcoming versions I mentioned both supposedly will have SD cards which the current models don't. It's worth waiting for I think.

 

Good to hear you like the s3. It looks great, but the build quality seems cheap to me. The htc on the other hand is awesome. I like their design style. I really like the idea of no frills android on the nexus, but I want a solid built phone, and Samsung isn't known for that.

[kokoon]

OG desire user here, running CM9 (ICS). I'm waiting for the next nexus to come out, to see if it's on GS3 level.

- I haven't ruled out the OneX completely, but the locked bootloader is just wrong. Also, no microsd.

- GS3 would prolly get my money right now, but I really don't want another RGBG matrix. Also, looks-wise seems very poor to me, compared to OneX.

- Nexus if it had a card slot I would get it.

 

I'm never ever using any other flavor than stock android, from 4.0 ICS on there's absolutely no reason for it. That's why I want to support Nexus product. If they botch it up again (pentile, no sd slot), I'll just get something else and load it with CM10. Fuck you HTC and your locked bootloader.

 

I does worry me a fair bit - google seems to really mean it with the cloud storage and services, all the recent nexus devices lack card slots and there even aren't 64GB models...

[chenGOD]

i dunno where you get the idea that Samsung phones are not built solidly but speaking from personal experience I've had three Samsung phones and all have withstood a reasonable amount of abuse.

and yes the s3 is a work of art.

[kokoon]

I'm not saying they aren't built well, I meant to say I don't find them pretty. OneX is beautiful.

[chenGOD]

Sorry that was directed at Kcinsu.

[Guest Iain C]

if you're going to get an Android handset, I would personally recommend a Nexus device - no update bullshit.

 

This. Galaxy Nexus is still the best phone you can buy, don't believe the S3/HTC One hype.

[eugene]

having never used a smartphone how big of an issue is this OS updating ?

 

judging by the benchmarks s3 is literally two times more powerful than nexus, it has better camera, better battery and an sd slot.

http://www.phonearena.com/reviews/Samsung-Galaxy-S-III-vs-Samsung-Galaxy-Nexus_id3040

[Guest Al Hounos]

yeah, c'mon guys the nexus is the best phone out there only if you are an android nerd who lives for the bleeding-edge updates and hackability.

hardware-wise, the S2 (and of course the S3 and OneX) are simply better phones.

[Guest Al Hounos]

oh, forgot why i opened this thread:

it was to say, "Fuck Apple!" I hope those cunts make a 7" ipad or a 5" iphone so samsung can sue them back. also, i can't wait to see how many 'innovations' in the iphone 5 are lifted from android phones.

 

the best analogy for this whole mess is automobiles. if the same patent nonsense applied back then, Mercedes would be the only car company, since they'd hold the patent on 4-wheeled vehicles powered by an internal combustion engine.

[goDel]

The analogy should be that manufacturer X makes product Y with parts from manufacturer Z. Where manufacturer Z is in fact a market leader in making those parts, by a huge margin. Next manufacturer Z thinks "Hey, I can do that as well! Let's build/sell product Y ourselves. Plus, we can control the prices of product Y of our competitors! $$$$$$ profit!".

 

The funny thing is Samsung cries about innovation, but if Samsung would have it their way, there hardly wouldn't be any competitors. They're controlling a huge part of the parts-market. Don't forget Apple is still dependent on Samsung for making parts for their products.

 

It's easy to attack Apple for this patent-issue, but don't forget there are more sides to this story.

[luke viia]

Just wanted to quote this for great wtflol and justice:

 

motherfuckers.

There will be appeals - and a (strong?) chance that this jury's verdicts will not stand.

http://www.groklaw.n...012082510525390

 

by the way: if anyone has a free day and several cups of coffee, go through groklaw for some amazing coverage of the case.

 

I didn't spend a whole day with it, but just 15 minutes on that groklaw link ought to point out how flippant and ridiculous this ruling (/jury) was.

[chenGOD]

The analogy should be that manufacturer X makes product Y with parts from manufacturer Z. Where manufacturer Z is in fact a market leader in making those parts, by a huge margin. Next manufacturer Z thinks "Hey, I can do that as well!' Lets build/sell product Y ourselves. Plus, we can control the prices of product Y of our competitors! $$$$$$ profit!".

 

The funny thing is Samsung cries about innovation, but if Samsung would have it their way, there hardly wouldn't be any competitors. They're controlling a huge part of the parts-market. Don't forget Apple is still dependent on Samsung for making parts for their products.

 

It's easy to attack Apple for this patent-issue, but don't forget there are more sides to this story.

 

What the fuck, were you drunk when you wrote this tripe goDel? Samsung has been making cell phones since the 90s.

Note again - Apple refuses to pay for FRAND patents, negotiations have been ongoing since 2010.

 

How do you reach the conclusion that if Samsung had their way, there would be hardly any competitors? Do you see them being aggressively litigious?

 

Even if this verdict is upheld (which again, I don't think it will be) I think Apple comes out the loser in this - they will lose a lot of public goodwill.

[mcbpete]

having never used a smartphone how big of an issue is this OS updating ?

It's certainly not an issue for the S3 - even if you've got a phone company that's kindly took it onto themselves to remove the update menu item (ahem, looking at you Orange). You simply download the Samsung Kies software from the Samsung website (also used for backing up contacts/photos etc.), connect your phone to your 'puter and if there's an update you just hit the update button. Easy !

[goDel]

What the fuck, were you drunk when you wrote this tripe goDel? Samsung has been making cell phones since the 90s.

Note again - Apple refuses to pay for FRAND patents, negotiations have been ongoing since 2010.

 

How do you reach the conclusion that if Samsung had their way, there would be hardly any competitors? Do you see them being aggressively litigious?

 

Even if this verdict is upheld (which again, I don't think it will be) I think Apple comes out the loser in this - they will lose a lot of public goodwill.

 

There's a difference between the cellphones they've been making and the iphone basterd childs with a touchscreen.

 

Who makes all these touchscreens? Don't you think it's odd that despite of all the crap between Apple and Samsung, Apple is still dependent on Samsung? Surely that does ring a bell or two about Samsungs position in the world of touchscreen devices?

 

Not sure about what these FRAND patents are. But the ease with which you defend Samsung wrt Apple says enough. How about those UMTS patents Samsung said Apple should pay? O wait, Samsung gave the rights to Intel for them to legally sell their parts everyone ....like Apple for instance.

 

Let's be clear here: this was a ridiculous patent case. And the crap works in both directions. Apple is crap. Samsung is just as much crap. Regardless on who won. Isn't it obvious there's a bit of politics involved here as well? Apple won in the US, and Samsung won in Korea. Wow, who would have thought.

 

O wait, here's some Frand. Talking about politics.

 

The South Korea ruling stands out because the judges broke with courts in other countries that have heard the companies' dispute by ruling that patents Samsung contributed to create industry standards can be used as leverage in cases involving nonstandards patents that companies don't have to share.

 

Under the rules of an industry standards-setting body, electronics makers whose patents are in technology standards must license them to other companies in a fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory manner, a concept known in intellectual-property circles as Frand.

 

Such patents are typically given a low monetary value by electronics companies in order to increase the affordability and appeal of the technical standard, and the likelihood of widespread adoption. But since the start of its litigation with Apple in April last year, Samsung has argued in courts around the world that its standards-related patents are undervalued.

 

The South Korea court became the first to side with Samsung in the argument and, in its ruling, said that Apple's efforts to reach an agreement with Samsung on its standards patents appeared to be motivated by the two companies' legal fight rather than acknowledging the validity of Samsung's technology and rights.

 

"It seems that Apple has sought to avoid Samsung's application for an injunction against Apple's infringement of the standard Frand patents, rather than engaging in a sincere negotiation for the determination of royalty rates based on the rational evaluation and verification of the standard patents in this case," the court said.

 

The court described some of the negotiations but didn't reveal a specific monetary amount.

 

Samsung issued a statement that said it welcomed the court's ruling. A spokesman declined to answer further questions about its specifics. A spokesman for Apple couldn't be reached.

 

In announcing the ruling, Judge Bae Jun-Hyun said the court recognized that its position was different from a Dutch court that last October was one of the first to act in the Samsung-Apple dispute.

 

"In the Netherlands, the same argument [by Samsung] was rejected as abuse of its patent right," Mr. Bae said. "But each country has a different legal system and standard." The court noted a difference about the negotiations Samsung and Apple have conducted in South Korea over Samsung's patents compared with other countries.

"In disputes regarding patent infringement in Japan, the Netherlands and other nations, Apple deposited estimated royalty rates, or expressed its intention to do so, based on the hypothetical acknowledgment of the validity of Samsung's patents and its infringement of them," the court said. "It hasn't taken similar measures in South Korea."

 

Analysts said the ruling gives South Korean electronics makers with large patent portfolios the power to seek bigger royalty payments from smaller companies and foreign competitors seeking access to the Korean market.

Jeong Woo-sung, a patent attorney in Seoul who isn't involved in the case, said it may block innovation in South Korea.

 

Please keep on sucking that big Samsung C*ck.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444358404577609154169601924.html

[Guest Iain C]

yeah, c'mon guys the nexus is the best phone out there only if you are an android nerd who lives for the bleeding-edge updates and hackability.

hardware-wise, the S2 (and of course the S3 and OneX) are simply better phones.

 

That's not true, and when I'm sober tomorrow I'll explain why

[chenGOD]

What the fuck, were you drunk when you wrote this tripe goDel? Samsung has been making cell phones since the 90s.

Note again - Apple refuses to pay for FRAND patents, negotiations have been ongoing since 2010.

 

How do you reach the conclusion that if Samsung had their way, there would be hardly any competitors? Do you see them being aggressively litigious?

 

Even if this verdict is upheld (which again, I don't think it will be) I think Apple comes out the loser in this - they will lose a lot of public goodwill.

 

There's a difference between the cellphones they've been making and the iphone basterd childs with a touchscreen.

 

Who makes all these touchscreens? Don't you think it's odd that despite of all the crap between Apple and Samsung, Apple is still dependent on Samsung? Surely that does ring a bell or two about Samsungs position in the world of touchscreen devices?

 

Not sure about what these FRAND patents are. But the ease with which you defend Samsung wrt Apple says enough. How about those UMTS patents Samsung said Apple should pay? O wait, Samsung gave the rights to Intel for them to legally sell their parts everyone ....like Apple for instance.

 

Let's be clear here: this was a ridiculous patent case. And the crap works in both directions. Apple is crap. Samsung is just as much crap. Regardless on who won. Isn't it obvious there's a bit of politics involved here as well? Apple won in the US, and Samsung won in Korea. Wow, who would have thought.

 

O wait, here's some Frand. Talking about politics.

 

The South Korea ruling stands out because the judges broke with courts in other countries that have heard the companies' dispute by ruling that patents Samsung contributed to create industry standards can be used as leverage in cases involving nonstandards patents that companies don't have to share.

 

Under the rules of an industry standards-setting body, electronics makers whose patents are in technology standards must license them to other companies in a fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory manner, a concept known in intellectual-property circles as Frand.

 

Such patents are typically given a low monetary value by electronics companies in order to increase the affordability and appeal of the technical standard, and the likelihood of widespread adoption. But since the start of its litigation with Apple in April last year, Samsung has argued in courts around the world that its standards-related patents are undervalued.

 

The South Korea court became the first to side with Samsung in the argument and, in its ruling, said that Apple's efforts to reach an agreement with Samsung on its standards patents appeared to be motivated by the two companies' legal fight rather than acknowledging the validity of Samsung's technology and rights.

 

"It seems that Apple has sought to avoid Samsung's application for an injunction against Apple's infringement of the standard Frand patents, rather than engaging in a sincere negotiation for the determination of royalty rates based on the rational evaluation and verification of the standard patents in this case," the court said.

 

The court described some of the negotiations but didn't reveal a specific monetary amount.

 

Samsung issued a statement that said it welcomed the court's ruling. A spokesman declined to answer further questions about its specifics. A spokesman for Apple couldn't be reached.

 

In announcing the ruling, Judge Bae Jun-Hyun said the court recognized that its position was different from a Dutch court that last October was one of the first to act in the Samsung-Apple dispute.

 

"In the Netherlands, the same argument [by Samsung] was rejected as abuse of its patent right," Mr. Bae said. "But each country has a different legal system and standard." The court noted a difference about the negotiations Samsung and Apple have conducted in South Korea over Samsung's patents compared with other countries.

"In disputes regarding patent infringement in Japan, the Netherlands and other nations, Apple deposited estimated royalty rates, or expressed its intention to do so, based on the hypothetical acknowledgment of the validity of Samsung's patents and its infringement of them," the court said. "It hasn't taken similar measures in South Korea."

 

Analysts said the ruling gives South Korean electronics makers with large patent portfolios the power to seek bigger royalty payments from smaller companies and foreign competitors seeking access to the Korean market.

Jeong Woo-sung, a patent attorney in Seoul who isn't involved in the case, said it may block innovation in South Korea.

 

Please keep on sucking that big Samsung C*ck.

http://online.wsj.co...4169601924.html

 

Please - I have been an apple user for a long ass time. Save the mudslinging for somewhere else. This is neither about Samsung nor Apple really they just happen to be the players (brand loyalty is fucking ridiculous). This is about how fucked up the patent system is, how fucked up this verdict is, and how Apple is losing a lot of goodwill.

 

Samsung won on two patent cases in korea and lost on the third.

 

With regards to Apple and FRAND - Apple offered to pay $0.0049/unit for each FRAND patent infringed. These are patents for actual inventions without which the cell phone could not exist. Yet Apple wanted Samsung to pay $24/unit for rounded corners.

http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20120726121512518

 

Apple have been riding free on Samsung and other companies R&D for years.

 

This is Samsung's touchscreen slider from early 2007:

http://www.techfresh.net/samsung-sgh-f520-dual-slider-phone/

Can't see the evolution towards later models?

 

Samsung manufacturing touchscreens has little bearing on this case - different arms of businesses do things which seem counterproductive all the time.

[Guest Iain C]

yeah, c'mon guys the nexus is the best phone out there only if you are an android nerd who lives for the bleeding-edge updates and hackability.

hardware-wise, the S2 (and of course the S3 and OneX) are simply better phones.

 

That's not true, and when I'm sober tomorrow I'll explain why

 

Ok, so as promised. Basically, the phone's specs on paper actually have little bearing on its usability. In truth, I don't even know what the specs of these phones are off hand. But I DO know my girlfriend has an S2, and it's very laggy and slow with an ugly interface and tonnes of bundled apps she never uses. Everything from the keyboard to the camera to the browser is just more awkward to use.

 

Yeah, she could root it and flash a pure stock rom. But she doesn't know how and shouldn't have to learn in order to have a smooth UI. And that's before you even get to the fact that it's only just got an ICS update, while I'm running Jelly Bean which is a much better OS in terms of polish and subjective smoothness.

 

Basically, carrier bloatware kills android phones, better hardware DOESN'T make a better user experience - and you don't have to be a nerd or a hacker to see it. I couldn't write a single line of code if I tried.

[Guest Iain C]

Also, benchmarks don't signify anything beyond your phone's ability to score highly on benchmarking tests. Zero relevance to real world use.

[mcbpete]

Ok, so as promised. Basically, the phone's specs on paper actually have little bearing on its usability. In truth, I don't even know what the specs of these phones are off hand. But I DO know my girlfriend has an S2, and it's very laggy and slow with an ugly interface and tonnes of bundled apps she never uses. Everything from the keyboard to the camera to the browser is just more awkward to use.

 

Yeah, she could root it and flash a pure stock rom. But she doesn't know how and shouldn't have to learn in order to have a smooth UI. And that's before you even get to the fact that it's only just got an ICS update, while I'm running Jelly Bean which is a much better OS in terms of polish and subjective smoothness.

 

Basically, carrier bloatware kills android phones, better hardware DOESN'T make a better user experience - and you don't have to be a nerd or a hacker to see it. I couldn't write a single line of code if I tried.

Surely this is the fault of the phone network/carrier than of the phone - As you say if there was a stock rom on there it'd work fine. It's the open nature of the phone OS crossed with the horrible greed of the bigger phone companies that's the problem rather than the actual hardware.

[Guest Iain C]

Actually I should have been clearer. Most of the bloatware I'm talking about is the skinning/theming that comes with the phone as standard from the manufacturer rather than stuff the carriers add - so, HTC's Sense or Samsung's Touchwiz. On most phones you've got that stuff out of the box no matter what carrier you're with.

 

Stock Android is just way cleaner, faster and better-looking, but rooting and getting back to stock can be a real pain on a lot of phones. So while it's not a problem with the hardware per se, for average users who aren't comfortable with clearing that shit off, it might as well be.

[eugene]

Also, benchmarks don't signify anything beyond your phone's ability to score highly on benchmarking tests. Zero relevance to real world use.

 

that's just not true, benchmarks emulate processes that the typical applications are using. futuremark benchmarks for video cards, for example, are very indicative of the real gaming performance.

i have no problem with messing my phone to acquire optimal performance and looks, in fact im planning to do it when i get my s3 (unless something more l33t is out in the next ~two weeks).

[goDel]

Please - I have been an apple user for a long ass time. Save the mudslinging for somewhere else. This is neither about Samsung nor Apple really they just happen to be the players (brand loyalty is fucking ridiculous). This is about how fucked up the patent system is, how fucked up this verdict is, and how Apple is losing a lot of goodwill.

 

Samsung won on two patent cases in korea and lost on the third.

 

With regards to Apple and FRAND - Apple offered to pay $0.0049/unit for each FRAND patent infringed. These are patents for actual inventions without which the cell phone could not exist. Yet Apple wanted Samsung to pay $24/unit for rounded corners.

http://www.groklaw.n...120726121512518

 

Apple have been riding free on Samsung and other companies R&D for years.

 

This is Samsung's touchscreen slider from early 2007:

http://www.techfresh...l-slider-phone/

Can't see the evolution towards later models?

 

Samsung manufacturing touchscreens has little bearing on this case - different arms of businesses do things which seem counterproductive all the time.

 

Evolution towards later models? Yes, it looks like Samsung dropped all balls and went the iPhone way.

 

Seems like that phone never made it to the market. Pricing is unknown to this day, as far as I can google.

http://www.phonearen...SGH-F520_id1964

Should have been released around the same time as the iPhone? I think I can tell why it never made it to the market.

 

Can you tell me how Apple free rides on the rest of the market, btw? Is this still about the FRAND thing? How come you're so stuck up with that argument, even though various national courts denied Samsungs charges?

 

I don't think that $24 bucks went into the rectangle with round corners patent as can be seen on that site you've posted:

 

The Apple attorneys were blunt: "Android is designed to lead companies to imitate the iPhone product design and strategy," read the second slide in their presentation....

After the cordial but failed August 2010 meeting, attorneys from Apple and Samsung talked in a series of meetings both in South Korea, California and elsewhere in the United States. Apple's attorneys set to work putting a price tag on a royalty demand. By October 2010, they had concluded that Samsung should pay $24 per smartphone, and $32 per tablet. Based on Samsung's own estimation of its profits, Apple's royalty payments would effectively wipe out more than half of Samsung's margins on any phone priced less than $450.

 

Again, as I tried to drunkenly mention earlier: this is about a strategy where manufacturer Z makes product Y way cheaper because it can produce most/all the ingredients itself. This is about billion dollar deals between two companies which depend on eachother. I think Apple's strategy is pretty obvious, and so is Samsungs. To some that means less goodwill for Apple. To me, those people have no clue. Sorry.

 

http://www.reuters.c...E87Q06N20120827

 

A couple of nice to know facts:

- 26% of the component cost of an iPhone are from parts made by Samsung

- Samsung has around 70 percent global market share in mobile DRAMs

[Ego]

Evolution towards later models? Yes, it looks like Samsung dropped all balls and went the iPhone way.

 

Seems like that phone never made it to the market. Pricing is unknown to this day, as far as I can google.

http://www.phonearen...SGH-F520_id1964

Should have been released around the same time as the iPhone? I think I can tell why it never made it to the market.

 

The iPhone made full touchscreen phones hip, most of the other manufacturers followed suit. It's what the market wants. There is nothing wrong with that. This whole design patent nonsense is absurd for an object that's 90% screen and doesn't look remotely the same for the rest.

 

The Apple attorneys were blunt: "Android is designed to lead companies to imitate the iPhone product design and strategy"

 

I think it's very scary that saying something like this can be considered a valid argument. It seems very close to just saying "you're competing on our market, get the fuck out".

 

Again, as I tried to drunkenly mention earlier: this is about a strategy where manufacturer Z makes product Y way cheaper because it can produce most/all the ingredients itself. This is about billion dollar deals between two companies which depend on eachother. I think Apple's strategy is pretty obvious, and so is Samsungs. To some that means less goodwill for Apple. To me, those people have no clue. Sorry.

 

http://www.reuters.c...E87Q06N20120827

 

A couple of nice to know facts:

- 26% of the component cost of an iPhone are from parts made by Samsung

- Samsung has around 70 percent global market share in mobile DRAMs

I don't really understand your point. Samsung is big and powerfull and has too much control over the supply chain? How is this supposed to validate Apple's or Samsung's foul play? Maybe they should merge and have full control from chips to ebook sales, attacking everyone that tries to compete.

 

Or maybe we need to stop all these stiffling patent cases and hostile anti-competitive cunts and make the industry a bit more attractive to newcomers and small fish... I wouldn't want to compete with these guys...

[goDel]

Well, this whole patent nightmare between Samsung and Apple, to me looks like some negotiations gone out of hand. Negotiations about the prices of the parts Apple buys from Samsung. My guess is Samsung raised prices to levels Apple didn't feel the need to comply. Samsung obviously has a good feel on the margins on the iPhone and reasoned "Hey, we should ask more for our parts". Apple probably reasoned "O, no you don't. Our margins are no excuse for you to raise prices like that." Meanwhile, Samsung started to produce products similar in look/feel/functionality/whatnot on a big scale and getting more successful with those each new iteration. The negotiations and the ability of Samsung to create similar products way cheaper (they control the margins of their own models, and those of Apple - for at least 26% component costs!!) creates an explosive mixture. And would for any two companies in a similar position. This is in now way unique to Apple (although some of you love to believe that).

 

These companies have been negotiating and making deals since before 2007. And this is what it looks like when these negotiations get out of hand. It's not a coincidence that half of the courts they bring their cases to, first tell them to come to a deal with each other. Sometimes a marriage becomes a forced marriage. Apple can go nowhere. Samsung might lose a huge customer, but controls 70% of the DRAM market anyways. The whole rounded-rectangles patents argument is a smoke-mirrors type of thing. And that holds just as much for Apple as for Samsung. The whole "Apple losing goodwill" thing is pure wank. Yeah, for those who are clueless that's a thing. But that'd be roughly the same group of people hating on white iPod cords and iTunes. Coming out of a stinking soup of primordial sentiments and stuff.