Quote:
Originally Posted by tt C6
I hate Samsung's location for their power button. (right side)
HTC, Apple, Moto, etc puts it where it belongs: top of phone, preferrably right of top.
|
I actually like the power button on the side, it makes it mroe natural to turn the phone on and off.
TouchWiz right now is the best actually, unlike most other frameworks it actually makes improvements to the phone without lagging the phone out and adds on CPU optimization (Galaxy S runs faster with touchwiz framework then stock). A lot of the ICS features are already built into TouchWiz. Examples being: Hardware accelerated UI, Wifi Direct, USB Host and etc.
I also remember reading that stock ICS was created by Samsung and Google together hence ICS borrowing some of TouchWiz elements.
The rumor of TW bad spread back in the days of TW 1.0, and people keep on repeating it but TW 4.0 is pretty decent, have you actually tried it?
Quote:
|
Samsung has a poor history of updating software.
|
This one was spread back in the days when the released forgot the phones name but a very old phone back in the day on T-mobile and they had Android 1.5 and promised to update it to 2.0 but couldn't do it so they updated it to 1.6 and called it a day. A lot of the delays on the US Galaxy S also didn't help. Biggest issue is Carriers opted out of using Samsung's Kies software in fear people will use it to tether and get free software Samsung gives out (which carriers want to charge you for).
As far as updating goes,Samsung was first to update their phones to Gingerbread and first to upgrade their phones to ICS.(outside the USA). And while original Galaxy S is not getting ICS they are getting upgraded to a Gingerbread/ICS hybrid which includes a bunch of ICS features people want like Face unlock.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shellguy
I don't understand why Google keeps getting in to bed with Samsung when I feel that HTC is far better.
Will
|
Define better? Samsung always has the better hardware. Not to mention unlike HTC which got hardware blocked Samsung is more reliable. That said the reason is much more simpler.
Google for its Nexus brand rotates manufacturers and cpu suppliers so that everyone gets a chance. In the first one the one who got the chance was HTC and Qualcomm, the second one belongs to Samsung and Samsung(as phone manufacturer and as a processor maker). The 3rd one belonged to Samsung and TI (my guess the reason why Samsung got the contract here is because HTC does not make TI chips, Motorola was having issues with LTE and LG well I was actually expecting LG to make one but maybe LG declined? And I am sure the 720p curved Super AMOLED screens was too hard for google to pass up).
This is why the Exynoss which is superior to the TI OMAP did not show up in the Nexus Prime. Simply because it was TI's turn.
The next one who is making a Google device from the sounds of things is Asus with the 200$ tegra 3 tablet.