Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Mobile Devices & Gadgets' started by basslover1, Oct 22, 2012.
Most recent battery run down on my GNex:
Not enough information. Without knowing the screen time and your cellular signal strength and if you were on WiFi, it doesn't tell us much. I can get 6 hours of screen time on WiFi.
I detailed that some time before, this is my usage pattern Mon-Fri. WiFi, quite a few calls, email's and texts, some app and browser usage, few youtube clips, sometimes even a quick game. All syncs are on. I didn't have wifi access for 2 days, someone changed the password, didn't run tests those days but battery did drop more, by pm 5 on both days I had 10-15% less than with wifi coverage.
Ultimately the specifics don't matter if they represent genuine usage.
Point is I didn't photoshop this nor did I take the phone off the charger friday morning with posting a favorable result as agenda, it just reflects my normal usage pattern. I have no scientific data to point to when I say my usage should resemble that of the average urban American but I do perceive my pattern to coincide with many others.
Could I kill the battery before 5pm? Definitely but I would have to be trying hard to do while slacking because I wouldn't be able to complete work if I had to keep the phone active long enough to do so.
Ok what's the point of all this? You're trying to show us that your Galaxy Nexus battery life is wonderful, but on average, for most people it isn't good. If in objective tests all new generation phones like the One X, SGS3, Nexus 4 all outperform the Galaxy Nexus, then guess what? It means the GNex isn't very good. But here's the good news: you're going to have even more amazing battery life. It's all relative, and that's what I've been pointing out. Battery life's jumped enormously since the Droid 1 to the SGS1 phones to GNex til today.
Google confirmed opening orders on the 13th with devices shipping that day. Uuughhh .. i bet i'll have the worst luck trying to get it.
I will try at midnight and 3am est
The fact that Apple can means there's a way. Apple doesn't put up with bullshit. Google doesn't have to either. Your excuses seem to make Google seem a weakling.
So? Apple devices don't have Verizon junkware.
It is impossible, but what about AT&T? You can make LTE devices compatible with AT&T.
The reason AT&T allows devices onto their networks is because they are a GSM provider. You stick a SIM card in and it works. So unless they want to move to a whitelist style, that's the nature of GSM networks.
LG can make an LTE compatible Nexus 4 with AT&T bands. Like I said before, what does adding LTE bands have to do with making it a carrier launch? It's the same case with 3G bands. Just because LG made it AT&T 3G compatible with 850/1900 capabilities does it mean that they had to do a carrier launch?
There's no almight AT&T overseer that will automatically make the phone a carrier phone just because Google or LG decide to add an LTE chip that's compatible iwth AT&T's frequencies.
Ok, if HSPA works as well as it does on AT&T as it should on paper, it's not a problem. A lot of times I can get sustained speeds of 3mbps easily, with speed peaking 10mbps. However, latency is an issue. I find that it also takes a while for the downloads to actually begin. Even something as simple as a foursquare checkin takes like 15 seconds. On Verizon LTE it's almost instantaneous. Same with AT&T LTE. LTE is not really about raw bandwidth for me--it's more about capacity. You see how Anand's battery tests show LTE lasting much longer? Because especially in more crowded places my phone is constantly trying to download at slow speeds with HSPA. It can't even finish a Facebook sync to pull the recent changes. That's very battery draining. Yes if capacity wasn't an issue and I got even 1mbps continuously, then it wouldn't be an issue. LTE helps alleviate this problem.
Also AT&T is not a hero for using worldwide standards for LTE. 700mhz is not a worldwide standard. If they wanted to they should've used Band 1, which is what Europe and Asia are using.
I agree. I hate the carriers. I don't believe in carrier launches.
I've said this before, the only reason apple can play hardball with the carriers is cause the iphone sells as much as it does. Does you not remember that the iPhone used to be an AT&T exclusive? Verizon and Sprint probably didn't care about it, just like they don't care about the Nexus line until it sold like crazy.
Similar thing with Samsung and the Galaxy S3 hardware.
Google can't, they don't sell enough phones for Sprint and Verizon to care what they say.
Have you listened to what Brian said about LTE on the Nexus 4 in the last AT podcast? If you haven't, I suggest you do.
Google does not make it's own hardware nor does it sell millions of it so it doesn't have the leverage. Look at VZW's GNex for proof Google doesn't have leverage. Launch date pushed around to move their bestsellers first, phone was VZW branded, subsidized and updates had to go through Verizon before they were approved and aired. Fact is, Microsoft and Apple get their way, for whatever reason, others do not.
Why would LG want to make a Nexus 4 with AT&T's LTE that sells for $299 if their own Optimus G is trying to sell on the same network for $499?
See above, why would they kill their own Optimus G. I could reason that if the Nexus 4 was subsidized by Google but it clearly isn't.
I don't care if some people simply don't get it. Nexus 4, besides being a developer phone, is also a big fat middle finger to the US carriers and it a statement that a high end phone can cost $300, half the cost of most halo phones.
I do see a possible problem on the horizon. There is little incentive for OEM's to make future Nexus devices and sell them as cheap as Google does. If Google continues to push this price range, they will have to get creative to allow OEM's some room to sell their own stuff otherwise they will have to subsidize. Maybe find their own foxconn to rent.
I think LG was eager to be a Nexus parther, I wonder if HTC really wanted to make one. Curious to see who get's picked for the next one. If it's Samsung or HTC, all is good in the OHA world. Not really worried though, others have proven they can make great devices too.
Brian already noted that the Nexus 4 has the WRT1605L radio transceiver which should make at least designing a European LTE device a breeze. The only reason I can see an LTE version not existing is to protect LG by encouraging sales of the Optimus G.
Sent from my RM-820_nam_att_100 using Board Express
A good review from android central. I wanted to highlight this particular section:
wow... how times change... sounds like Apple fans defense of Iphone 4s when Android fans made fun of it's lack of LTE and glass back.
Anyone else have the same problems with an under construction LTE network as mentioned in the article (as opposed to general non LTE data coverage)? I don't have LTE, but my friends phone seemed pretty reliable in regards to LTE.
I would disagree with his LTE argument. Maybe he has some problems where he is, but AT&T has deployed LTE in just about every major city in the country. Yes, they're still expanding, but that shouldn't discount the millions that already have access. And I've use Verizon and AT&T and don't have a problem with LTE coverage on either.
But, I do agree that LTE isn't really necessary in AT&T and TMobile. Thier HSPA networks are quite sufficient for the majority of people.
The GNex was Verizon's first Nexus device (I believe Google sold the One for verizon, bit i dont think Verizon themselves actually sold it) and, as I suspected, left a very bad taste on Google's mouth and rightfully so. I might still keep an eye peeled for a Sprint verizon though.
As for the glass back, I feel it's a non issue for most people. It seems to be as easily replaceable as the iPhone 4/4S back if it breaks.
But yes, it is kind of funny to see some sites defend the Nexus 4 the same way Apple sites defended the iPhone 4S. At least the AT&T LTE argument was a lot more true a year ago.
i look at it like this. if this phone was released through ATT or Verizon, you bet your @ss it should have LTE...
I don't care for the back glass. I think it just adds weight.. and too iphoney for me, but i'll hold out judgment till I get it in my hands.
one thing I like about my gn was I had a case on the phone. (Like a barely there that works with a clip holster)... and the the phone being so thin, it still didn't seem bulky. Not sure about the n4. I am sure it will be durable enough not to need a case, but I liked the functionality of the holster.
The other thing is that the Nexus 4 isn't just going to be used until the end of 2012. People usually keep their phones 1-3 years. The state of LTE in under serviced areas will change dramatically during that time period. And of course, in large cities, LTE support is often already good. I suspect this is one major reason Google chose to price it as the did. I believe it may be somewhat subsidized, but even if it isn't and it is "just" being sold at cost, it's priced so that we will ignore its glaring lack of LTE. And for me, that pricing has worked. If the phone were $599, I'd be looking elsewhere.
OTOH, I like the back glass on my iPhone 4. It resists wear way better than the aluminum on the iPhone 5, and I think it also looks better. Partially because of the back glass I really like the aesthetics of the Nexus 4, although I do also appreciate the potential for breakage.
Anyhoo, today is the day for the software update to the the Nexus 4. Will it solve some of the issues like battery life and throttling? I'm not optimistic, but here's hoping nonetheless.
I'm guessing that LTE licensing probably adds quite a bit of cost and they wanted to keep the unsubsidized price at $299.
Are you all keeping in mind this phone is a couple hundred bucks cheaper than any new alternative ?
The battery life issue though is problematic. Better battery life is more important than cpu power, but I guess its harder to achieve, particularly on Android ? What is it about Android that takes so much power ?
It should be noted the LG Optimus G includes power/performance optimization settings that the Nexus 4 lacks. LG realized the battery life issues exist and added software settings to compensate, but Google so far has chosen not to implement something similar.
Sorry but your logic is simply stupid, then same could be said about turning off wifi, GPS... It is just a settings! There is no need for a bug/bad design conspiracy for giving the end user an option to better manage their hardware. Not everyone has the Apple ego, not everyone thinks they know what the end user wants.
And for the end, please point me to a LG statement acknowledging this or at least a review pointing this out.
Geez, take a chill pill, and if you had been following this thread, you'd already know this.
Ars: Nexus 4—two-thirds of a great phone
Out and about town, the Nexus 4's battery life was stellar. After a full day's worth of use, which included standard tasks like checking e-mail, tweeting, and lots of Google Maps Navigation usage, the handset's 2100 mAh battery ended up at about 60 percent. In the morning, after about 7 hours had passed and the Nexus 4 sat all night doing push notifications on IMs and e-mails, the handset had 47 percent battery life left.
Next, we went ahead and streamed about an hour of Sherlock via Netflix at full brightness and volume (push notifications and everything else still engaged). The phone rapidly dropped down to about 17 percent battery life. To try and save some energy, we charged the phone for a bit, then tried watching the same Sherlock episode at half the brightness and volume, with 39 percent left on the battery meter. An hour later, the battery lost about a quarter of its power and the phone began alerting that it needed to be charged.
While the Nexus 4 doesn't have some of the nifty user configurable power saving options that the Optimus G offers (like an Eco mode that disables two of its cores), it did fine through a day of typical phone use.
But while the Nexus 4 is a solid handset, it's possible those quad-core innards are a little too powerful for its own good. The hard throttling under sustained load could lead to the phone chopping performance mode right when you need it most, and Google might be promising speeds it can't consistently deliver.
P.S. Brian from AnandTech couldn't get consistent full speed results from the phone unless he RAN IT IN A FREEZER. I'd say that's an issue.
If you're gonna ignore stuff like that (from two very well respected review sites I might add), you're basically hiding your head in the sand.
Don't buy it? Your posts suggest that Nexus4 has a ton of issues, iphone 4S/5, HTC 1X, 8X, Lumia 920 and Optimus G don't have those problems.
Not sure what you're on about. The Nexus 4 in previews DOES have significant issues, as indicated by both AnandTech and Ars. The Optimus G has custom performance settings to compensate. Hmmm... Curious. As for the HTC 1X, 8X, and Lumia 920, I don't think I've ever even posted about them. Well, the 920 maybe, just to say I'm not interested because it's running Windows Phone.
It's bizarre that people are so willing to keep their blinders on when these problems pop up in reviews. We can only hope that today's OS update can alleviate some of those issues with the Nexus 4.
Why are you switching to the Nexus now, I quoted your "BS" about the Optimus and asked you to back up your claims... And I am still waiting, running out of my chill pills. I like facts better then pills, so help me with that, be a nice kitty.
It's just an observation and suggestion to look at alternatives.
Maybe the update won't fix the issues. If you sum all your complaints about the phone from this thread, it's definitely not a good buy for you.
Feel free to ignore the previous post, which you seem to have done. Some of us prefer to make our purchases with our eyes open.
I'm not interested in any Android phone unless it's running stock Android. And as I mentioned, I won't get a Lumia because it's running Windows Phone. Maybe later when the OS and ecosystem are more mature.
The reason I'm considering the Nexus 4 is because of cost. Google has launched this phone with killer pricing. With such killer pricing, one can deal with lack of LTE, and possibly even potential battery life issues. The latter though depends on severity and consistency, etc.
The foolish part is to simply claim any issues don't exist, or else claim that somehow magically they'll just disappear today with the OS update. The informed buyer will watch the reviews and the user reports, and the results from the OS update, or at least will acknowledge the existing reports when s/he buys the phone instead of hiding his/her head in the sand.
Indeed, here is my overall assessment partially as already listed in this thread:
1) The $359 price is killer. It's so killer, I think it's subsidized, or at best sold at cost. However, as I've mentioned a thousand times to people (not saying you), this isn't actually a complaint, since I appreciate the killer pricing.
1) Bigger than I prefer at 4.7", but I can deal with that.
2) No LTE is a letdown, but for $359, I can deal with that.
3) Poor battery life. We'll have to see about that. I'm not completely sure what to make of this yet, but it's a huge concern. You'd have to be an idiot to say this is not a potential issue, given that numerous previewers have commented on this, and respected sites such as Ars and AnandTech have given an explanation as to why.
4) Good looking phone. I like the glass look, including the glass back. I don't consider this an issue at all, and would much rather have this design than the Samsung Galaxy S III which I consider ugly. I wouldn't buy the GS3 anyway, because I dislike the bloated OS skin, and because of the delayed OS updates.
eh, at 349 and on the tmo value plan I buy a new phone every year, if not sooner, and still end up saving money vs someone on a verizon contract.
edit: also, as bad as the battery life is, it's better than the gnex. so anyone that's happy with the gnex shoudl be fine with this. unfortunately a lot of people aren't happy with the gnex. i wouldn't be if I couldn't charge it at work.