Go Back   Android Forums > Android Phones > Motorola Triumph

test: Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old June 16th, 2011, 05:49 PM   #1 (permalink)
Member
Thread Author (OP)
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 209
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 7
Thanked 23 Times in 16 Posts
Default Bad News, the Triumph may be a rebadged low quality Huawei

As you can see in this thread as well. http://androidforums.com/motorola-triumph/355638-moto-triumph-thailand.html

Supposedly according to a thread I was reading on a VM forum:

Triumph looks exactly like Huawei (X6?)
Motorola doesnt make any 4.1" phones
Motorola doesnt make any qualcom CPU phones (perhaps some old ones but nothing up to date)
Specs match perfectly.

A lot of people say well that Huawei is a GSM so it can possibly be Triumph, but it doesn't take a genius to know changing the radio in a phone model is a common occurrence and easily done.

Also from what I read that Huawei has a reputation for poor quality, slow and laggy, etc. I've also noticed in some Triumph videos it seems laggy, and I think at least one preview mentioned it too.

Bottom line I think it's pretty certain this is a rebadged Huawei. All is not lost, perhaps Motorola will insist on enough quality control that it's still a decent phone, but I'm definitely waiting on many reviews/user opinions before jumping in now.

Also I heard a rumor on that same board that a "real" Motorola phone will be coming to VM eventually, perhaps in Q1 2012. So if this is junk, likely better phones will come eventually.

Advertisements
shark974 is offline  
Reply With Quote
sponsored links
Old June 16th, 2011, 05:53 PM   #2 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
RoboMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,194
 
Device(s): Htc Vivid, LG Nitro HD, Epic 4g, HTC Evo 4G, LG Optimus V
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 138
Thanked 115 Times in 89 Posts
Default

Thanks.
I'm still getting it.
__________________
I'm sooo over rooting.
RoboMonkey is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 16th, 2011, 10:15 PM   #3 (permalink)
kc3
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: US
Posts: 129
 
Device(s): Motorola Atrix running CM7
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 5
Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts
Default

idk if I quiet believe that, I mean it's been pretty reputable sources showing the Motorola Triumph, honestly it's a very typical look so I can imagine multiple phones looking similar. lol unless Motorola purchased this idk. Plus if you look at a picture of a Triumph and this phone there are differences, only similarity with the style is the basic shape. Though specs are similar.
kc3 is offline  
Last edited by kc3; June 16th, 2011 at 10:21 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old June 16th, 2011, 10:27 PM   #4 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: VA
Gender: Male
Posts: 224
 
Device(s): Nexus S 4G, Galaxy S3
Carrier: Ting

Thanks: 14
Thanked 75 Times in 45 Posts
Default

The phone has Motorola on the front, it's a Motorola phone.
'Nuff said.
Skratte is online now  
Reply With Quote
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Skratte For This Useful Post:
compulady5 (June 24th, 2011), fredrick1213 (June 26th, 2011), furioussun (June 24th, 2011), gerbetta33 (June 20th, 2011), JWhipple (August 12th, 2011), MTdude (June 25th, 2012), rk_pr0t0c0l (July 29th, 2011)
Old June 17th, 2011, 12:59 AM   #5 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 54
 
Device(s): HTC One V
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 5
Thanked 10 Times in 6 Posts
Default

It is very common for large manufacturers to do this like what Motorola and Huawei are doing.

One very good example is Foxconn, who actually makes the iPad for Apple.

Just because Huawei 'makes' the Triumphant does not automagically make it a bad phone.

I would at least wait until the reviews come out, once the phone is 'in the wild'.
OverBoard is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 17th, 2011, 07:54 AM   #6 (permalink)
Member
 
android_kitty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: northwest
Gender: Female
Posts: 150
 
Device(s): LG Optimus F3; Virgin Mobile Samsung Galaxy S5; *Coming Soon-Boost or Virgin*
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 57
Thanked 27 Times in 24 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OverBoard View Post
It is very common for large manufacturers to do this like what Motorola and Huawei are doing.

One very good example is Foxconn, who actually makes the iPad for Apple.

Just because Huawei 'makes' the Triumphant does not automagically make it a bad phone.

I would at least wait until the reviews come out, once the phone is 'in the wild'.
i hope phandroid gets one soon so we can see a real review!
android_kitty is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 17th, 2011, 10:09 AM   #7 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 21
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

As its mentioned above, the factory that makes the phone is usually not the company that designs it. And the design of the radio system is huge if they switch from a Huawei GSM design to a Motorola CDMA. Motorola designs some of the best in the industry.
syadasti is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 17th, 2011, 07:01 PM   #8 (permalink)
Member
Thread Author (OP)
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 209
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 7
Thanked 23 Times in 16 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OverBoard View Post
It is very common for large manufacturers to do this like what Motorola and Huawei are doing.
.
DUH

If it's basically the same phone though thats not good.
shark974 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 17th, 2011, 07:02 PM   #9 (permalink)
Member
Thread Author (OP)
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 209
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 7
Thanked 23 Times in 16 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by syadasti View Post
As its mentioned above, the factory that makes the phone is usually not the company that designs it.
DUH

This looks like a Hauwei phone though, with a motorola name on it.
shark974 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 17th, 2011, 08:15 PM   #10 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 21
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shark974 View Post
DUH

This looks like a Hauwei phone though, with a motorola name on it.
Its not the same as I said - newer revision, different chipset, and different radio system. Someone pieced it together and it was easy to find with Google:

Quote:
this is not the same as the models available in asia. the asian models operate on the gsm network. the msm8655 qualcomm snapdragon processor found in the motorola triumph exclusively supports 800/1900 CDMA. the processor found in the asian models is the QSD8255 from qualcomm. the motorola triumph, the huawei ascend x and whatever tmobile is going to call it are the updated western release of the huawei x6 which was released in asia some four months ago. all of the bugs have been worked out since then. notably, the not-true multi-touch was a firmware bug fixed in froyo 2.2.3. btw virgin is shipping the triumph with 2.2.3.
syadasti is offline  
Last edited by syadasti; June 17th, 2011 at 08:18 PM.
Reply With Quote
sponsored links
Old June 18th, 2011, 09:55 AM   #11 (permalink)
kc3
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: US
Posts: 129
 
Device(s): Motorola Atrix running CM7
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 5
Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts
Default

I say so as long as the price reflects the quality be it high quality or low, who cares? :-) working with another company could be to lower the price
kc3 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 18th, 2011, 02:11 PM   #12 (permalink)
Member
 
ScottColbert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 164
 
Device(s): Moto G Nexus 7
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 11
Thanked 40 Times in 25 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shark974 View Post
DUH

This looks like a Hauwei phone though, with a motorola name on it.
What it looks like and what it is are not the same thing. Simply because you think its Hauwei based on some article doesn't make it so, esp. when there's lots of other info debunking that.
ScottColbert is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 18th, 2011, 03:41 PM   #13 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Remington, MD
Posts: 76
 
Device(s): LG Optimus V
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 9
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
Default

Don't believe FUD.
MrTweaker is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 24th, 2011, 05:30 AM   #14 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Gmash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: neither Here nor There
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,698
 
Device(s): Samsung Galaxy S3, Huawei Mercury (stock/rooted), Huawei Ascend (CM7 2.3.5 @710mhz)
Carrier: Cricket

Thanks: 2,247
Thanked 1,524 Times in 1,166 Posts
Default

Ok. The Huawei x6 is NOT a low quality phone. Btw, Huawei has been making products for Motorola and putting their name on it for years. Huawei is one of the biggest tech companies in the world, but until recently they have made products for other companies and things like professional network equipment. Yes, their first few phones have been low end devices, but they are fantastic value for the money. Phones like the x6/Ascend x and the upcoming Huawei Glory (google it) are high end devices for good prices, and if you don't want to buy the Triumph because it may be a re-branded x6 then stick with the overpriced POS phones virgin is selling now.
Look up some youtube videos of the Huawei ideos x6/u9000. It's a really nice phone. p.s. Gingerbread is already out for it in the other parts of the world-soon for the U.S. Ascend x.
__________________
"Machete don't text"
Gmash is online now  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Gmash For This Useful Post:
furioussun (June 24th, 2011)
Old June 25th, 2011, 01:20 AM   #15 (permalink)
Member
Thread Author (OP)
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 209
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 7
Thanked 23 Times in 16 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottColbert View Post
What it looks like and what it is are not the same thing. Simply because you think its Hauwei based on some article doesn't make it so, esp. when there's lots of other info debunking that.

There's no info debunking it.

Just because it has a different radio (GSM vs CDMA etc) means nothing. Are you familiar with the Samsung Galaxy S? The SAME PHONE is on every major carrier. It's called the Captivate on ATT with a GSM radio, it's called the Fascinate, the Vibrant, and the Epic 4G on the other carriers. The Epic 4 G even has a slide out keyboard. These all have minor variations and different radios but they're all the SAME PHONE at heart.

The info "syadasti" googled, is likely correct too.

Another clue is this phone is 299 off contract. Motorola's, Samsung's, HTC etc run at least 449-649 for a phone with similar specs as this off contract.

I get the feeling this thread is a bunch of little kids, thrilled to see a cool looking phone on their prepaid service, and not wanting to hear anything bad about it. Which is fine too a point.

The point is this is a rebadged Huawei, period. I have a feeling it might fit the needs of kids on a prepaid service just fine, but I also suspect it will have some quality issues compared to a "true" high end phone such as a Motorola, Samsung, etc.

Personally I will wait for a lot of reviews and user impressions before I would consider this phone. But then again, I'm a 36 year old man looking to maybe cut a cell phone bill down, not a kid.
shark974 is offline  
Last edited by shark974; June 25th, 2011 at 01:32 AM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to shark974 For This Useful Post:
Gmash (June 25th, 2011)
Old June 25th, 2011, 02:08 AM   #16 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Tyler, Texas
Posts: 265
 
Device(s): I lost count
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 34
Thanked 79 Times in 51 Posts
Default

Lol! quality material from a prepaid service? My optimus v no different than any evo or any OTHER phone on the market now far as build quality. For 300 dollars what do you except??? My problem with this phone is that MOTOROLA and ENCRYPTED locked bootloader. Things have to happen before i drop the cash:

' No encrypted locked bootloader(if it locked bootloader adb fastboot oem unlock take cares of that)
' Motorola release it sources more openly
' And some Devs take notice to this phone (CM7 and MIUI anybody???)

If this can be achieved on the triumph(cross fingers it will) Then Virgin has me for 300!

No matter how you look at it. Spec wise what phone can you get prepaid(and contract in some cases) with the specs it has and pay 25,40,60 a month? Not trying to clown on you, but mostly for the prepaid you gotta lose something to gain more. If you were to ask me a year ago if this kind of phone would come out on Virgin Mobile? I would laugh and called you a fool. Now Att, verizon, need to come with better prepaid plans cause Virgin about to get alot of folks on their company with this phone.
903Tex is offline  
Last edited by 903Tex; June 25th, 2011 at 02:17 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old June 25th, 2011, 04:50 AM   #17 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Gmash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: neither Here nor There
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,698
 
Device(s): Samsung Galaxy S3, Huawei Mercury (stock/rooted), Huawei Ascend (CM7 2.3.5 @710mhz)
Carrier: Cricket

Thanks: 2,247
Thanked 1,524 Times in 1,166 Posts
Default

I don't think the bootloader will be encrypted on this phone. I have no inside information or anything, it's just my guess. For one thing, Moto has said they will stop encrypting them, and are already unlocking the Atrix. Also, it just doesn't seem to make sense to put vanilla Android on it then lock it down. Again, just my feeling.
I know some devs will definitely want to work on this phone. (assuming it's not encrypted of course). The guys at prepaidandroids.org are already checking it out.
Gmash is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old June 25th, 2011, 04:51 AM   #18 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Gmash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: neither Here nor There
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,698
 
Device(s): Samsung Galaxy S3, Huawei Mercury (stock/rooted), Huawei Ascend (CM7 2.3.5 @710mhz)
Carrier: Cricket

Thanks: 2,247
Thanked 1,524 Times in 1,166 Posts
Default

sorry. Double posted somehow
Gmash is online now  
Last edited by Gmash; June 25th, 2011 at 05:00 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old June 25th, 2011, 07:39 AM   #19 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Remington, MD
Posts: 76
 
Device(s): LG Optimus V
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 9
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shark974 View Post
There's no info debunking it.

....

I get the feeling this thread is a bunch of little kids, thrilled to see a cool looking phone on their prepaid service, and not wanting to hear anything bad about it. Which is fine too a point.

...

Personally I will wait for a lot of reviews and user impressions before I would consider this phone. But then again, I'm a 36 year old man looking to maybe cut a cell phone bill down, not a kid.
I have a son who is 29 and I was well into my 20's when he was born... I lon't mind spending money on the phone, but I refuse to waste money on an expensive plan that just burns money month after month. That's why I never bought an Iphone. This will do me fine.

I suspect the phone will be advertised initially with a discount, will sell out quickly, then be re-priced $50 higher, following the pattern of the Optimus V.
MrTweaker is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 25th, 2011, 12:54 PM   #20 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 280
 
Device(s): HTC Evo V 4G, Samsung Galaxy Tab 7.0 plus, Viewsonic gTablet, Nook Color, Archos A43IT, Archos A32IT
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 4
Thanked 30 Times in 19 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OverBoard View Post
It is very common for large manufacturers to do this like what Motorola and Huawei are doing.

One very good example is Foxconn, who actually makes the iPad for Apple.

Just because Huawei 'makes' the Triumphant does not automagically make it a bad phone.

I would at least wait until the reviews come out, once the phone is 'in the wild'.
Nope, not the same at all. Aple does ALL of the development and engineering work and THEN they utilize various OEMs to actually manufacture their devices. Why? Simple. They don't have to go through the trouble and expense of maintaining their own manufacturing facilities. As a matter of FACT a LARGE number of "big" companies do this nowadays, and in some cases they actually do use products designed by an OEM(ODM in this case) and re-badge it. It's how Clevo/Sager/etc. work.

Also, I truly believe that Motorola would NEVER re-badge a third party phone when they have their own mobile division already. It just doesn't make any sense financially or otherwise.
cutterjohn is offline  
Reply With Quote
sponsored links
Old June 25th, 2011, 01:09 PM   #21 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 66
 
Device(s): LG Esteem
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 37
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

What I see that no one has mentioned yet........ Has anyone thought that maybe, just maybe, retailers of those "on contract" phones sell them for 400 and up because there's a mark up or perhaps those phone manufacturers have a set price they're "restricted" to selling phones outright for?
compulady5 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 25th, 2011, 01:19 PM   #22 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 21
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutterjohn View Post
Nope, not the same at all. Aple does ALL of the development and engineering work and THEN they utilize various OEMs to actually manufacture their devices. Why? Simple. They don't have to go through the trouble and expense of maintaining their own manufacturing facilities. As a matter of FACT a LARGE number of "big" companies do this nowadays, and in some cases they actually do use products designed by an OEM(ODM in this case) and re-badge it. It's how Clevo/Sager/etc. work.
The Iphone 4 uses a Samsung processor rebadged as an A4 - its been this way from the beginning for Apple and only changed slightly with them buying the other company (Intrinsity) that helped in designing their processors. Even the current A5 in the iPad 2 was designed mostly with Samsung's expertise - not Apple's. Think different, think again.

Samsung Wave features iPhone 4's A4 Processor

http://www.ubmtechinsights.com/uploadedFiles/Apple%20A4%20vs%20SEC%20S5PC110A01.pdf

http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=cpu&id=a40000&c=samsung-intrinsity_apple_a4_s5pc110a01

Its pretty funny that Apple is trying to sue Samsung when they are the people behind the processors that run their devices - without Samsung they'd be nothing.
syadasti is offline  
Last edited by syadasti; June 25th, 2011 at 01:33 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to syadasti For This Useful Post:
Gmash (June 25th, 2011)
Old June 25th, 2011, 02:06 PM   #23 (permalink)
Member
 
soundping's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Southern Indiana
Posts: 127
 
Device(s): Samsung Note 3 (SM-N9005)
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 29
Thanked 21 Times in 15 Posts
Default

@ syadasti

Apple looks like a rabid dog attacking everybody around them.
soundping is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 25th, 2011, 02:21 PM   #24 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 21
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by soundping View Post
@ syadasti

Apple looks like a rabid dog attacking everybody around them.
Hopefully it backfires on Apple's Samsung suit too. Nokia won against them - now Apple has to pay them for ripping off Nokia innovation.

Another bonus for Nokia is that their factories aren't secret slave camps where the workers frequently commit suicide.

YouTube - ‪The Nokia N97 being assembled at the factory‬‏
syadasti is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 25th, 2011, 07:19 PM   #25 (permalink)
kc3
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: US
Posts: 129
 
Device(s): Motorola Atrix running CM7
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 5
Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts
Default

I think the assumption that this thread is full of little kids is a load of crap, I'm not older but I'm 23, young but not a little kid. I just don't believe there is any real justification to say that it's this other phone, just because one company made a cheap phone with good specs does it mean another company can't? And to be honest, who cares as long as the price reflects this?
kc3 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 25th, 2011, 09:54 PM   #26 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Tyler, Texas
Posts: 265
 
Device(s): I lost count
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 34
Thanked 79 Times in 51 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kc3 View Post
I think the assumption that this thread is full of little kids is a load of crap, I'm not older but I'm 23, young but not a little kid. I just don't believe there is any real justification to say that it's this other phone, just because one company made a cheap phone with good specs does it mean another company can't? And to be honest, who cares as long as the price reflects this?

Exactly! If you feel like this phone is to "cheap" Then why are you even on virgin mobile services(if you are) in the first place? Get a contract and be happy paying for the 75 and over for a cell phone plan. Lets just hope this phone is dev friendly thats all i care about now.
903Tex is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 26th, 2011, 01:59 PM   #27 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 280
 
Device(s): HTC Evo V 4G, Samsung Galaxy Tab 7.0 plus, Viewsonic gTablet, Nook Color, Archos A43IT, Archos A32IT
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 4
Thanked 30 Times in 19 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by compulady5 View Post
What I see that no one has mentioned yet........ Has anyone thought that maybe, just maybe, retailers of those "on contract" phones sell them for 400 and up because there's a mark up or perhaps those phone manufacturers have a set price they're "restricted" to selling phones outright for?
There's a HUGE markup so that they can make you think that you're getting a "deal" when you get a top-of-the-line phone for c. $200 or so along with their onerous 2y contract and extra fees...

It's why I run FAR AWAY from tablets when they say that they'll be 3/4G as I just know that the price is going to be HIGH so that the cell carriers can pull the same gimmick...
cutterjohn is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 26th, 2011, 02:08 PM   #28 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 280
 
Device(s): HTC Evo V 4G, Samsung Galaxy Tab 7.0 plus, Viewsonic gTablet, Nook Color, Archos A43IT, Archos A32IT
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 4
Thanked 30 Times in 19 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by syadasti View Post
The Iphone 4 uses a Samsung processor rebadged as an A4 - its been this way from the beginning for Apple and only changed slightly with them buying the other company (Intrinsity) that helped in designing their processors. Even the current A5 in the iPad 2 was designed mostly with Samsung's expertise - not Apple's. Think different, think again.

Samsung Wave features iPhone 4's A4 Processor

http://www.ubmtechinsights.com/uploadedFiles/Apple%20A4%20vs%20SEC%20S5PC110A01.pdf

Samsung-Intrinsity Apple A4 (S5PC110A01) - CPUlist | PDAdb.net - Comprehensive Database of Smartphone, PDA, PDA Phone, PNA, netbook & Mobile Device Specifications

Its pretty funny that Apple is trying to sue Samsung when they are the people behind the processors that run their devices - without Samsung they'd be nothing.
d'oh I hate to make two posts in a row, but I'd like to the quote to be intact...

iPhone is the very last one that will use anyone else's SoC, which is why they bought those two design companies the other year and all the new ARM based devices are using an Apple design, well a tweaking internally of what they've licensed from ARM. You're the very first person that I've ever seen attempt to assert that their new SoC is really just a Samsung, and IIRC all Samsung is doing on the SoC now is fabbing it for them.

As to the various suits yeah, it's kind of funn Apple suing Samsung mobile division when they're so reliant on their electronics division for manufacturing so many of their components, etc.

Anyways, I stopped drinking the koolaid long ago and haven't touched an Apple product in about 7 or 8y now and saved a bundle of money. They really got me when a) they didn't let you strip down power macs so much any longer and b) made their mobile device batteries non-easily user replaceable plus their lies wrt support gaming, i.e. letting M$ swipe Bungie, etc.

At this point I really feel that Apple is just coasting, but that they might continue along so long as Jobs is around, but I'm betting once he's gone they're going back to their usual tank, uptick, tank, etc. cycle, and suing even more companies for cash inflow.
cutterjohn is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 26th, 2011, 03:47 PM   #29 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 21
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutterjohn View Post
d'oh I hate to make two posts in a row, but I'd like to the quote to be intact...

iPhone is the very last one that will use anyone else's SoC, which is why they bought those two design companies the other year and all the new ARM based devices are using an Apple design, well a tweaking internally of what they've licensed from ARM. You're the very first person that I've ever seen attempt to assert that their new SoC is really just a Samsung, and IIRC all Samsung is doing on the SoC now is fabbing it for them.

As to the various suits yeah, it's kind of funn Apple suing Samsung mobile division when they're so reliant on their electronics division for manufacturing so many of their components, etc.
If you think that a company can design and manufacture a new generation of chip in less than one year (the first A5 application, the iPad 2 was announced on March 2, 2011 and had already been in production since it was selling them by mid March), you are severely mistaken (The deal closed in Late March 2010 and was announced on April 27 2010 - Apple did not have any of Intrinsity employees on payroll according to the SEC filing until April 2010).

It typically takes AT LEAST a year develop a new processor - the A4 developed with Samsung took around 12 months and is a more simple design than the A5. Therefore its easy to say Apple had no role in the design of the A5 - its just not possible to design and get a product to market that fast. Apple claims that they did since they bought the company, but it was not Apple's work, it was wholly Intrinsity's. Apple uses baseless market speak like this all the time (they are notorious for calling units shipped to stores as sales to talk about product success even though they haven't necessarily been sold to end-users and they also like to clump all iDevices together in some press)

Its a fact that the A4 and A5 are both made by Samsung and Samsung had a large role in the collaboration with Intrinsity for both the A4 and the A5. Samsung's Orion/Exynos was launched prior to the A5 and shares much with it (it does use a different GPU, but neither company designed the GPU they use).

Exclusive: Apple A5 vs Samsung Exynos 4210 SoC Die Shot Comparison | ITProPortal.com

AnandTech - Going Out of Order: Samsung Announces Orion Cortex A9 SoC

Think different, think again - its the truth and Apple has never truly innovated if you actually follow the history of ideas they've touted over the years as their own.

Adding to how wrong shark is in this thread, I personally bought the Newton 120 when it came out and use horrors like Graffiti for input. What a waste of time and effort that purchase was.

Some good advice for Apple and especially Steve Jobs:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVZo1Jjfshw
syadasti is offline  
Last edited by syadasti; June 26th, 2011 at 06:03 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old June 27th, 2011, 12:58 PM   #30 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 280
 
Device(s): HTC Evo V 4G, Samsung Galaxy Tab 7.0 plus, Viewsonic gTablet, Nook Color, Archos A43IT, Archos A32IT
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 4
Thanked 30 Times in 19 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by syadasti View Post
If you think that a company can design and manufacture a new generation of chip in less than one year (the first A5 application, the iPad 2 was announced on March 2, 2011 and had already been in production since it was selling them by mid March), you are severely mistaken (The deal closed in Late March 2010 and was announced on April 27 2010 - Apple did not have any of Intrinsity employees on payroll according to the SEC filing until April 2010).

It typically takes AT LEAST a year develop a new processor - the A4 developed with Samsung took around 12 months and is a more simple design than the A5. Therefore its easy to say Apple had no role in the design of the A5 - its just not possible to design and get a product to market that fast. Apple claims that they did since they bought the company, but it was not Apple's work, it was wholly Intrinsity's. Apple uses baseless market speak like this all the time (they are notorious for calling units shipped to stores as sales to talk about product success even though they haven't necessarily been sold to end-users and they also like to clump all iDevices together in some press)

Its a fact that the A4 and A5 are both made by Samsung and Samsung had a large role in the collaboration with Intrinsity for both the A4 and the A5. Samsung's Orion/Exynos was launched prior to the A5 and shares much with it (it does use a different GPU, but neither company designed the GPU they use).

Exclusive: Apple A5 vs Samsung Exynos 4210 SoC Die Shot Comparison | ITProPortal.com

AnandTech - Going Out of Order: Samsung Announces Orion Cortex A9 SoC

Think different, think again - its the truth and Apple has never truly innovated if you actually follow the history of ideas they've touted over the years as their own.

Adding to how wrong shark is in this thread, I personally bought the Newton 120 when it came out and use horrors like Graffiti for input. What a waste of time and effort that purchase was.

Some good advice for Apple and especially Steve Jobs:

YouTube - ‪bill hicks on marketing‬‏
They didn't. They bought TWO fabless design houses that had ALREADY licensed ARM IP and had ALREADY been working with them, which is why they were purchased.

Oh, and BTW Samsung will shortly no longer even be fabbing the SoC that Apple will be using. A6 is slated for 28nm TSMC fabbing...

Better start bailing on your arguments, and while you're quoting second rate sites check out EE Times and other professional analyses of teh A4 & 5 design...
cutterjohn is offline  
Reply With Quote
sponsored links
Old June 27th, 2011, 01:16 PM   #31 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 21
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

P.A. Semi had nothing to do with the Samsung/A4 or A5 chip - it was all Samsung and Intrinsity and those sites I posted used the same UBM analysis that the EETimes did, so what is your point again?

Samsung, Intrinsity pump ARM to GHz rate

Updated: Samsung fabs Apple A5 processor

Apple did not have any significant role in the A4 and A5 - it was a collaboration between Samsung and Intrinsity. Why don't you find something from EEtimes that says otherwise, its your argument that is weak since all your got is personal assumptions, no articles.
syadasti is offline  
Last edited by syadasti; June 27th, 2011 at 01:19 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old June 28th, 2011, 12:49 PM   #32 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 280
 
Device(s): HTC Evo V 4G, Samsung Galaxy Tab 7.0 plus, Viewsonic gTablet, Nook Color, Archos A43IT, Archos A32IT
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 4
Thanked 30 Times in 19 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by syadasti View Post
P.A. Semi had nothing to do with the Samsung/A4 or A5 chip - it was all Samsung and Intrinsity and those sites I posted used the same UBM analysis that the EETimes did, so what is your point again?

Samsung, Intrinsity pump ARM to GHz rate

Updated: Samsung fabs Apple A5 processor

Apple did not have any significant role in the A4 and A5 - it was a collaboration between Samsung and Intrinsity. Why don't you find something from EEtimes that says otherwise, its your argument that is weak since all your got is personal assumptions, no articles.
I don't have to. You just did it for me with those two articles.

Neither one even so slightly hints at the design of the A4, A5, or A6 and furthermore just points out to you what I already told you: Samsung is FABBING the SoCs for Apple.

Bust this is my last comment on this subject as some people are just never happy unless they can find or manufacture a downside.
cutterjohn is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 28th, 2011, 01:00 PM   #33 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 21
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutterjohn View Post
I don't have to. You just did it for me with those two articles.

Neither one even so slightly hints at the design of the A4, A5, or A6 and furthermore just points out to you what I already told you: Samsung is FABBING the SoCs for Apple.
The A5 article got their data from UBM who also confirmed the A4 is the same as the S5PC110A01 - you didn't actually read the reports then, so quit wasting our time. UBM also noted the A5 features some Samsung technologies which enabled them to make the ID. Did you read the UBM reports, anyone can download them. UBM couldn't make it any clearer on the A4, its not an Apple design:

http://www.ubmtechinsights.com/uploadedFiles/Apple%20A4%20vs%20SEC%20S5PC110A01.pdf

Quote:
UBM Summary
Initial investigation revealed that the ARM core used
in the Apple A4 processor and the Samsung
S5PC110A1 processor are identical
• This furthers TechInsights’ earlier finding that the A4
processor was based on the ARM Cortex A8 core
with a minor correction:L2 Cache: 640KB -> 512KB

• TechInsights believes that the next Android based
smart phone from Samsung, Galaxy S, will use the
same applications processor, S5PC110A11
syadasti is offline  
Last edited by syadasti; June 28th, 2011 at 01:03 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old June 28th, 2011, 03:50 PM   #34 (permalink)
Member
 
Jayziac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 166
 
Device(s): Acer Liquid
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 4
Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts
Default

Most likely Motorola used their cellphone expertise, spec'd and put together a smartphone with 'off-the-shelf' components and backed it up with their name (quality control), at a relatively low cost so that VM could use. Notice Motorola's Blur isn't on the Triumph, nor is there gorilla glass, or other typical Motorola components. It's probably just the fastest, cheapest, route for them. Then Huawei or another manufacturer with good experience and can handle the volume order cranks them out. It's foolish to design and manufacturer every component that goes into a cellphone all by one company. Not even Apple does this with their products. So it probably is mostly made by Huawei, but that doesn't necessarily mean it'll be low quality.
Jayziac is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 28th, 2011, 05:12 PM   #35 (permalink)
New Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 10
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

has anyone bothered to REALLY compare the two phones? It's not hard at all.. Just download large front-on images of both phones from the internet (there are plenty of high res pictures of both phones to choose from) Load them on separate layers in photoshop or the free Paint.NET image editor. Make your top layer 75% transparent or so.. now start resizing the top image (while keeping aspect ratio!) so that the screen lines-up with the other device screen.

What will you see? (yes, I've done this). Some stuff lines up.. other things don't. For example, the first think you will notice is that the capacitive buttons are in a totally different order... not a big deal to change in the android build, sure... but certainly not a simple "rebranding". Second. the location of the speaker for the phone handset lines up pretty well (although the openings are different shapes). The front facing camera lines up pretty well also. However, the case of the Huawei is taller than the MOTO. Also, The microphone on the Huawei is placed lower than on the MOTO.

Now, yes.. they are similar devices. However, There is another possible explanation for what's going on here.. Both devices use the same Qualcomm SOC (System On a Chip)... Which explains the very similar specs. Qualcomm (like all electronics manufacturers) doesn't just design a SOC and phone platform and throw it over the wall and say "good luck!" It is VERY common practice to issue what is called a "Reference Design". It is basically a fully executed product based on the Qualcomm components that gives designers a starting place. NVIDIA is a great example of this. they issue a new graphics chipset and a reference design to go with it. then 100s of small-time graphics card companies grab the reference design and build it AS-IS.. or maybe with some slight tweaks.

If I had to guess, that's what I think happened here. Both phones are based on the same SOC and Qualcomm reference design, so they will have nearly identical specs, and some commodity hardware. In some areas each company made some changes to suit what they wanted (location of the microphone, for example).

Just my $0.02.

Now, I should add a disclaimer... I very well could be 100% wrong... The motorola might just be a new housing wrapped around the EXACT same PCB and components found in the Huawei... But I don't think it's reasonable to ASSUME this is what happened simply because the two phones look KINDA the same.
armstrom is offline  
Last edited by armstrom; June 28th, 2011 at 05:14 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to armstrom For This Useful Post:
squallz506 (July 1st, 2011)
Old June 28th, 2011, 07:08 PM   #36 (permalink)
Member
 
soundping's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Southern Indiana
Posts: 127
 
Device(s): Samsung Note 3 (SM-N9005)
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 29
Thanked 21 Times in 15 Posts
Default

I don't care if it's regurgitated. I just want to use flash on websites.
soundping is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 28th, 2011, 08:58 PM   #37 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 21
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by armstrom View Post
If I had to guess, that's what I think happened here. Both phones are based on the same SOC and Qualcomm reference design, so they will have nearly identical specs, and some commodity hardware. In some areas each company made some changes to suit what they wanted (location of the microphone, for example).
Its not the same processor but the same SoC design:

Motorola Triumph uses MSM8655

Huawei X6 uses QSD8255

The Motorola also uses a newer revision of the reference design and has a different radio system to support that specific processor and CDMA networks. These are significant differences - even within the same revision, this difference can have a significant impact on performance and has in handsets in the past.
syadasti is offline  
Last edited by syadasti; June 28th, 2011 at 09:01 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2011, 07:34 AM   #38 (permalink)
New Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
Default

not sure whether its the same phone (with Huawei), but i found this image from an indonesian website:


It listed all the rebranded phone from Huawei U9000, including Motorola Triumph
mashu is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to mashu For This Useful Post:
Gmash (July 1st, 2011), squallz506 (July 1st, 2011)
Old June 30th, 2011, 10:15 AM   #39 (permalink)
Member
 
jntdroid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 250
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 10
Thanked 34 Times in 15 Posts
Default

can you link the site?
jntdroid is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2011, 11:14 PM   #40 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 24
 
Device(s): LG P999 running CM7 @1.55GHz
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 4
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default sorry i lied before

Quote:
Originally Posted by jntdroid View Post
can you link the site?
i hope you can read indonesian because google does a terrible job of translating it. Kaskus - The Largest Indonesian Community - View Single Post - [OFFICIAL LOUNGE] CSL Mi410 aka Mia (OEM by FOXCONN)

this page does have some good news. the oem is not huawei but foxconn the makers of ipod/iphone/ipad and so much more.
huawei apparently is doing the same thing motorola and all the other phone manufacturers are. the above user @armstrom was right the foxconn layout is called foxconn device code FB400.
also it appears there are already gingerbread custom and stock roms (2.3.4) out for the huawei x6's. and apparently multitouch is fixed in gingerbread.

@syadasti i want to apologize. i posted the information you quoted from google. im sure if you can dig up that review or news post or blog or whatever it was you would see my screenname squallz506 or dexter as those are the only ones i use. now listen here kiddies

the qsd8255 and the msm8655 are almost identical. first off the qsd8255 is known as the msm8255 in the western world. and all msm8x55 chips have the same core, the same clock speed (1ghz), the same tech 45nm, the same adreno 205 gpu, etc. both are second generation snapdragons. google it. the 8655 is cdma and supports ev-do rev. 0 and A, the 8255 is strictly gsm. that is the only difference! i was suprised by how many sites quoted my unauthenticated information so i had to set it straight.

i believe there is a chart on qualcomm's wiki that confirms that they are the same Snapdragon (system on chip) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia there it is


what else. there was something else. oh yeah, apparently huawei brought the x6 to cincinatti (how the **** do you spell that?) as the ascend x and t-mobile is getting it as something else. lets hope the western releases are somehow updated from the asian ones. but i doubt it. but remember the oem is not huawei but foxconn this is not a rebadged huawei but probably a design made available by foxconn that phone manufacturers around the world are using. lets hope motorola did something special.
squallz506 is offline  
Last edited by squallz506; July 1st, 2011 at 03:04 AM. Reason: formatting
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to squallz506 For This Useful Post:
Gmash (July 1st, 2011)
sponsored links
Old June 30th, 2011, 11:32 PM   #41 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 24
 
Device(s): LG P999 running CM7 @1.55GHz
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 4
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mashu View Post
not sure whether its the same phone (with Huawei), but i found this image from an indonesian website:


It listed all the rebranded phone from Huawei U9000, including Motorola Triumph
notice that the motorola is THE ONLY ONE with a different button layout. lets hope that is symptomatic of other differences! oh and sorry for the two posts in a row but i appear to be the number one motorola triumph fanatic.
squallz506 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old July 1st, 2011, 12:17 AM   #42 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 21
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by squallz506 View Post
now listen here kiddies the qsd8255 and the msm8655 are almost identical. first off the qsd8255 is known as the msm8255 in the western world. and all msm8x55 chips have the same core, the same clock speed (1ghz), the same tech 45nm, the same adreno 205 gpu, etc. both are second generation snapdragons. google it. the 8655 is cdma and supports ev-do rev. 0 and A, the 8255 is strictly gsm. that is the only difference! i was suprised by how many sites quoted my unauthenticated information so i had to set it straight. i believe there is a chart on qualcomm's wiki that confirms that they are the same Snapdragon (system on chip) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia there it is.
I already said this above succinctly: "Its not the same processor but the same SoC design" and "The Motorola also uses a newer revision of the reference design and has a different radio system to support that specific processor and CDMA networks."
syadasti is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old July 1st, 2011, 12:56 AM   #43 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 24
 
Device(s): LG P999 running CM7 @1.55GHz
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 4
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by syadasti View Post
I already said this above succinctly: "Its not the same processor but the same SoC design" and "The Motorola also uses a newer revision of the reference design and has a different radio system to support that specific processor and CDMA networks."
ok lets get down ad dirty while i expose you. now after i post this i am going to be the bigger man and end this argument because i like this forum and want the thread to stay on topic. so after this no more arguing. if you try to argue or insult me i will just ignore you like the bickering child you are acting like. now i do not know how to quote from other threads so here are the links to the individual posts you made regarding the triumph in the other threads.
The Moto Triumph in Thailand??
"Its a different revision with a different processor and different radio/antenna design - not minor differences."
and
Bad News, the Triumph may be a rebadged low quality Huawei
"Its not the same as I said - newer revision, different chipset, and different radio system."

that there is a contradiction first you say "Its not the same... newer revision, different chipset", and "Its a different revision with a different processor... not minor differences".
then you say "Its not the same processor but the same SoC design" might i add soc is synonymous with chipset?. truth is the processors clock out the same, have the same gpu, same cache, same everything except the radio frequencies so the processors really arent all that different.
treated. arguement over. lets get back to talking about the motorola triumph.

edit: more info, the 8255 hit the market sooner (11.03.2010) on the my touch 4g. the htc thunderbolt was the first with an 8655 (04.17.2011).

other phones with an 8655: HTC Thunderbolt, HTC Droid Incredible 2, LG Revolution, Sharp IS05(SHI05), and, in case you forgot, the Motorola Triumph.

8255: HTC Desire HD, HTC Desire S, HTC Incredible S, HTC Inspire, Sony Ericsson Xperia series, Sharp GALAPAGOS 003SH/005SH, Sharp DM009SH, Blackberry Bold 9900/9930, Blackberry Torch 9810, Blackberry Touch 9860, CSL Mi410 (Foxconn FB400 based), Huawei U9000 IDEOS X6 (also Foxconn FB400 based)
note: some of the above phones are the same but on different carriers.
squallz506 is offline  
Last edited by squallz506; July 1st, 2011 at 02:17 AM. Reason: formatting
Reply With Quote
Old July 1st, 2011, 07:45 AM   #44 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 21
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

You haven't exposed anything, all of those statements I said are true. Its a different version of the same SoC processor - its the CDMA version and the system board on the Triumph has some changes so its a different revision of the reference design.
syadasti is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old July 1st, 2011, 08:04 AM   #45 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Gmash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: neither Here nor There
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,698
 
Device(s): Samsung Galaxy S3, Huawei Mercury (stock/rooted), Huawei Ascend (CM7 2.3.5 @710mhz)
Carrier: Cricket

Thanks: 2,247
Thanked 1,524 Times in 1,166 Posts
Default

I don't understand all the hair-splitting going on here. Are peoples feelings really hurt that Motorola isn't actually making this phone? Who cares? Don't people realize how incestuous these companies are? Trying to keep track of who makes what and who has the patent for what would make your head spin. Thats why they are suing each other all the time. Does the fact that Foxconn makes it mean it's less of a good phone than it was yesterday? Isn't the list of phones with the same processors impressive enough? It's going to be a damn fine phone for a $300 prepaid Android regardless, so just relax and enjoy it.
Gmash is online now  
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Gmash For This Useful Post:
JWhipple (August 14th, 2011), squallz506 (July 1st, 2011)
Old July 1st, 2011, 08:32 AM   #46 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 21
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

No one is saying the outsourcing is good or bad but its normal across the industry. This is a technical point but what I said is true in my last post is true.

This is similar to the GSM vs. CDMA iPhone 4 - different revisions of the same phone. In that case its the same exact processor with the same exact SoC design. The radio system design does lead to significant differences - both hardware and network based - no SIM, no simultaneous data/voice (CDMA/Verizon network is capable of this on other phones BTW), different system board revision, minor button placement and exterior design differences, better antenna design (no antennagate grip reception problem), lower max data transfer rate (due to CDMA network but Verizon's real world speeds are better), voice conferencing limited to two callers, no call hold, manually set call settings (call forward, call waiting and caller id), and the hotspot feature is available on Verizon (not a technical limitation).
syadasti is offline  
Last edited by syadasti; July 1st, 2011 at 08:36 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old July 4th, 2011, 12:08 AM   #47 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
isaacj87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 1,132
 
Device(s): LG Optimus L9, Nexus 7
Carrier: MetroPCS

Thanks: 93
Thanked 1,792 Times in 494 Posts
ikarosdev
Default

Just my 2 cents on this...

Even if the Triumph is a rebranded Huawei X6, Motorola probably has better quality control than Huawei. Moto will support the phone better than Huawei and they have a reputation to uphold. While they do look similar (with very similar specs), I don't think this phone is a Huawei. Even if it is, the X6 (on paper) would be a great phone for pre-paid users.

It seems Huawei is busy making their own higher-end phone for Cricket (Huawei Glory), so while the Triumph might be manufactured by the same company, it's probably more Motorola than anything else. I have high hopes for this phone and it'll probably be my next phone.

If Moto kept their word and left the bootloader unlocked (and release the source code in timely manner), I'd like to put CM7 on it. When I worked on the Huawei Ascend, it wasn't fun (it was like polishing a turd), but this looks like a great phone to put CM7 on.
__________________
"Do not worry about your difficulties in Mathematics. I can assure you mine are still greater." --Albert Einstein
isaacj87 is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to isaacj87 For This Useful Post:
KOLIO (July 31st, 2011)
Old July 5th, 2011, 05:54 AM   #48 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Tyler, Texas
Posts: 265
 
Device(s): I lost count
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 34
Thanked 79 Times in 51 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by isaacj87 View Post

If Moto kept their word and left the bootloader unlocked (and release the source code in timely manner), I'd like to put CM7 on it. When I worked on the Huawei Ascend, it wasn't fun (it was like polishing a turd), but this looks like a great phone to put CM7 on.

Yes if this is like the OG droid, then great devs like yourself can make this phone shine! Had cm7 on my ascend because of you! But metro data couldnt do it anymore. Hey quick question? any chance you could possibily work on bring MIUI if you decide to jump on the device??? Gladly donate to the cause!
903Tex is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old July 5th, 2011, 11:22 AM   #49 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
isaacj87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 1,132
 
Device(s): LG Optimus L9, Nexus 7
Carrier: MetroPCS

Thanks: 93
Thanked 1,792 Times in 494 Posts
ikarosdev
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 903Tex View Post
Yes if this is like the OG droid, then great devs like yourself can make this phone shine! Had cm7 on my ascend because of you! But metro data couldnt do it anymore. Hey quick question? any chance you could possibily work on bring MIUI if you decide to jump on the device??? Gladly donate to the cause!
I had a look at MIUI awhile back (because I wanted to have it on the Ascend and Optimus V) and IIRC, the whole reason I couldn't get it is because their source isn't open. There's probably no doubt that the Triumph will run MIUI, but it's up to the MIUI devs. It's a shame they won't release the code.
isaacj87 is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to isaacj87 For This Useful Post:
KOLIO (July 31st, 2011)
Old July 5th, 2011, 04:07 PM   #50 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
insertusername's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 62
 
Device(s): iPhone 3GS
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 3
Thanked 14 Times in 11 Posts
Default

Even if it is a rebranded Huawei, I still think it's a really good phone for what it is. On the other hand, rumor has it that the Optimus Black will come out on VM too.
insertusername is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply

Motorola Triumph
Current Rating:
Rate this Phone:

The Motorola Triumph for Virgin Mobile sports a 4.1-inch screen on a super thin .4-inch body. With a 5MP camera that shoots HD video, a VGA front-facing camera, and HDMI-out, the Triumph offers a great set of features for Virgin Mobile customers ea... Read More



Go Back   Android Forums > Android Phones > Motorola Triumph
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:57 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.