I would be so pissed if I bought an s2 for $329 a week ago.
I think the s2 is better in some regards, but I find it odd that the sale is only on the white model, and only until tomorrow.
Device(s): HTC Amaze 4g (Unlocked), HTC EVO V 4g, Lg optimus V (retired)
Carrier: T-mobile
Thanks: 184
Thanked 127 Times in 115 Posts
Re: Samsung s2 better than evo v ???
Yes but the biggest problem is the lack of development for the Virgin mobile galaxy s2. Hopefully soon more developers will purchase and start hacking for them.
I would be so pissed if I bought an s2 for $329 a week ago.
I think the s2 is better in some regards, but I find it odd that the sale is only on the white model, and only until tomorrow.
I know me tooo I would also be pissed off if I ordered one for 329..I actually ordered it for today cuz I did want the s2 and I saved up $100 LOL from its original price $329 ......$230.99 isn't bad and I would of order it in white any ways...i remember when evo v came out first day n i paid $300!!
Yes but the biggest problem is the lack of development for the Virgin mobile galaxy s2. Hopefully soon more developers will purchase and start hacking for them.
I think as of right now developers won't buy this phone cuz of the price but as soon as price goes down they will get it .
The Virgin Mobile site is only showing it for $279.00 this morning for the white model. I guess I missed the opportunity. It's only $50 off now. Is the Samsung really a better or faster phone than the EVO V 4G?
The Virgin Mobile site is only showing it for $279.00 this morning for the white model. I guess I missed the opportunity. It's only $50 off now. Is the Samsung really a better or faster phone than the EVO V 4G?
Seems like it was a one day sale. Now, as you said, it's $50 off, which is good for several weeks (sometime in March). On paper, the processors are the same (dual core 1.2GHz). The screen is a tad larger, and is AMOLED, but the qHD screen of the EVO is sharper (higher resolution). The Samsung also comes with more memory. Luckily for the S2, the battery is removable else it wouldn't even be a consideration for many. I also like that Swype is included with the stock S2, not so with the EVO.
If 3D means nothing to you, the 8MP camera of the S2 is likely better than the 5MP camera of the EVO.
I can't speak of any other differences as I lack hands-on experience with the S2. When I made my decision, the EVO was less than half the price of the S2. If they were the same price, or within $25, I could have gotten it instead. Even at the $230 price it was for a day, I couldn't justify the extra cost. My whole plan for switching to VM was to save money.
The phones don't perform a lot differently, so it really comes down to things like the camera or screen size/resolution. I would be happy with a S2 had I started with it, but it's not an upgrade. One thing I can say is that on the S2 camera, the color green is way over saturated. If you have an EVO, best to hold on to it until at least May or until the next VM Flagship phones are announced. I would hate to pay several hundred dollars for an S2 and have the S3 or EVO LTE drop a few months later.
Thanks for the info. I just have about 10 days left before I have to keep the EVO V 4G and I was curious about the differences. I only paid $149.00 for the EVO and I couldn't justify the price difference or decide if it was an upgrade or just a close equivalent.
I'm good with the EVO V 4G for now. It's alot faster than the Triumpth that I had previously.
Device(s): boost/lg marquee/htc evo design/samsung s2... vm evo v
Carrier: Not Provided
Thanks: 67
Thanked 92 Times in 85 Posts
i have both phones my s2 is boost. they are both good pieces of hardware i love the feel of the evo in my hand a good solid feel. both phones are great performers the cameras are not a selling point for me. both take good pics to me. either one is a good choice. there is a lot of development for the s2 already done. dont limit yourself to vm development
The camera of the s2 wasn't a selling point to me ether in fact it was the size of the screen. I remember when evo v came out I bought it because of the 3D n 4g , but honestly I would hardly even use 3D, I do get 4g in my area so that was the only big user difference from my previous phone (triumph). I mean I hate to leave my evo but I do want a big screen phone with good performance.. oh and I also bought it cuz of the one day sale for $230 I thought it was good time to buy it...
The camera of the s2 wasn't a selling point to me ether in fact it was the size of the screen. I remember when evo v came out I bought it because of the 3D n 4g , but honestly I would hardly even use 3D, I do get 4g in my area so that was the only big user difference from my previous phone (triumph). I mean I hate to leave my evo but I do want a big screen phone with good performance.. oh and I also bought it cuz of the one day sale for $230 I thought it was good time to buy it...
I posted the sale price down in the Virgin Mobile section. I was surprised no one commented on it. Lowest price it has been since they started selling it. I would of jumped on it had I recently not joined VM and got my EVO.
Device(s): HTC Amaze 4g (Unlocked), HTC EVO V 4g, Lg optimus V (retired)
Carrier: T-mobile
Thanks: 184
Thanked 127 Times in 115 Posts
Re: Samsung s2 better than evo v ???
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevindroid
i have both phones my s2 is boost. they are both good pieces of hardware i love the feel of the evo in my hand a good solid feel. both phones are great performers the cameras are not a selling point for me. both take good pics to me. either one is a good choice. there is a lot of development for the s2 already done. dont limit yourself to vm development
Well of course but they don't work properly at all (roms etc). The data and 4G breaks...
I assume good if you own an evo v. The galaxy s2 has a slightly larger screen (4.52 vs 4.3) and it has a lower resolution (800X480 vs 960X540). If the screens were the same size, it would be less noticeable though you could still see a difference. The s2 still has a really nice screen.
Edit
Does AMOLED have backlit black? If not, then the s2 likely produces a better black. Also, is it more energy efficient?
Last edited by Palmetto Fellow; January 20th, 2013 at 10:44 AM.
Does AMOLED have backlit black? If not, then the s2 likely produces a better black. Also, is it more energy efficient?
OLED screens do not have a backlight. They are basically thousands of tiny compounds that act like LEDs, so the pixels produce their own light. As a result, colors are not as washed out and blacks are truly black (because to show black, that part of the screen just turns off). Some people think they look over-saturated, which would just be personal preference I guess. I used to have a Zune HD with an OLED screen. It was low-res, but the colors were amazing.
Energy efficiency - Yes and no. The energy use of an OLED is totally dependent on what's on the screen. Mostly black images use a lot less power than an LCD, but mostly white images actually use a little more. Some people think this was one of the reasons behind the color scheme changes in Gingerbread, as the Nexus One and Nexus S both use OLED screens. So pick a dark wallpaper
More notes: OLED screens are subject to burn-in, more so than plasma. They also tend to wear out faster, and not evenly. The compound used to create blue light degrades faster than the others, so as an OLED screen ages, the color balance will go funny.
Oh, and if you're wondering, the "AM" in "AMOLED" stands for "Active Matrix." It basically refers to the way the pixels are arranged.
So: Pros are fantastic colors and potential battery savings. Cons are burn-in susceptibility and shorter life.
Speaking of screens and Samsung: This may be just me, but TouchWiz is even worse than HTC Sense. At least HTC Sense tries to make things look a little shiny. TouchWiz looks like a cartoon.
Only slightly related rant:
I hate how TV manufacturers are calling some TVs "LED TVs," because this implies that the screen is using LEDs - they aren't. The backlight on those TVs are LEDs, but the screen itself is still good-'ol LCD. They do produce a much better picture than older flat screens (which used fluorescent backlights), but they really should be called "LED-backlit LCD TV." But I guess that many acronyms in one place gave the marketing department a seizure.
I hate how TV manufacturers are calling some TVs "LED TVs," because this implies that the screen is using LEDs - they aren't. The backlight on those TVs are LEDs, but the screen itself is still good-'ol LCD. They do produce a much better picture than older flat screens (which used fluorescent backlights), but they really should be called "LED-backlit LCD TV." But I guess that many acronyms in one place gave the marketing department a seizure.
That's why they put "LED/LCD Combo" on the box now.
Device(s): HTC Evo V 4G,Triumph CM7 TG=Reloaded, Intercept UD6, HTC Wildfire S HBOOT Unlocked w/s-off
Carrier: Virgin Mobile
Thanks: 294
Thanked 730 Times in 541 Posts
Re: Samsung s2 better than evo v ???
Same here, I pre ordered from RS and while I definitely would have preferred to spend $150 even if I had known in advance of the price drop I wouldn't have waited 6 months, the 6 months without the Triumph was definitely worth the extra money!
OB
Having the evo v n the s2 on my hands I did notice some difference between the two
* evo v screen has more resolution n looks more bright than s2. But s2 screen isnt bad ether cant complain about it.
* s2 is much lighter than evo v.
* camera is a big difference. s2 pictures look more sharp, well it is 8mp vs. 5mp
* battery life on S2 is way better than evo v.
* quadrant score: the S2 performed way faster than evo v. I do have my evo v rooted running cm10.1 overclocked to 1.5 and it still fell behind the line... In my opinion s2 performance is grater than evo v..
Evo v still a good phone tho
Last edited by marco562; January 28th, 2013 at 07:53 PM.
Device(s): Galaxy Note, Motorola Xoom, HTC Evo V 4g, Galaxy S3
Carrier: Virgin Mobile, T-Mobile
Thanks: 155
Thanked 117 Times in 91 Posts
The service for me would be the kicker. VM in my area is horrible, but Boost is nice, though I don't know why.
I'm still thinking about making a switch though because of the screen size and the camera. The lack of developement is a big turn off, as I have a great more respect for this phone since I rooted it.
But what I'm thinking about is waiting to see what happens with the S3 32gig version now that Verizon has said it is at the end of its life with them. That might be worth the wait.
The service for me would be the kicker. VM in my area is horrible, but Boost is nice, though I don't know why.
I'm still thinking about making a switch though because of the screen size and the camera. The lack of developement is a big turn off, as I have a great more respect for this phone since I rooted it.
But what I'm thinking about is waiting to see what happens with the S3 32gig version now that Verizon has said it is at the end of its life with them. That might be worth the wait.
Weird? How can Boost have better signal than VM when they are both using Sprint?
Device(s): Galaxy Note, Motorola Xoom, HTC Evo V 4g, Galaxy S3
Carrier: Virgin Mobile, T-Mobile
Thanks: 155
Thanked 117 Times in 91 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by EazySteve
Weird? How can Boost have better signal than VM when they are both using Sprint?
As I said, I don't understand myself. All I know us that Boost mobile customers (like my wife) have better service around here than VM.
Then again, I still don't understand why I live 6/10ths of a mile from the closet VM tower, and only have 2 bars of service outdoors, and practically none indoors. It's one of the reasons I am so against VM around here.
i have a evo v and my sister recently got a s2, i didnt play with it much i was not impressed with the responsiveness of her s2 and noticed a difference in the screen right away (the evo v seems sharper) over all in my snap judgement i dont think its worth the price difference at all
As I said, I don't understand myself. All I know us that Boost mobile customers (like my wife) have better service around here than VM.
Then again, I still don't understand why I live 6/10ths of a mile from the closet VM tower, and only have 2 bars of service outdoors, and practically none indoors. It's one of the reasons I am so against VM around here.
they both use sprints network, the difference is probably in the phones them selfs
Device(s): Galaxy Note, Motorola Xoom, HTC Evo V 4g, Galaxy S3
Carrier: Virgin Mobile, T-Mobile
Thanks: 155
Thanked 117 Times in 91 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by 7808
they both use sprints network, the difference is probably in the phones them selfs
Could very well be. All I know is when you come down my street, and see people standing outside talking on their phone, they are VM customers. But the Boost customers get nice coverage indoors.
I know they re the same on paper, but the reality in my area is that they are not. And when you call, VM says that coverage is excellent.
Go figure.
The HTC EVO V 4G is Virgin Mobile's first 4G WiMAX Android device. And if it looks familiar, it is because the phone is the same as the EVO 3D, but optimized for this network.
Release date is set for May 31st, 2012, for a price of $300 off-co... Read More
8Likes
Samsung s2 better than evo v ???
