Tempted to Cancel EVO for iPhone

[IOWA]

It's not 21.98 GB a day, it's per month. Take a look at the calculator, at the bottom it says thats how much you use in the month, and if you fill in

He didn't say month. He said "day." And even if it was per month, I am still calling it BS.

Let say Pandora was running 24/7 downloading @ 64-128k bitrate. There is still no way in hell anyone can rack up that much per month. He would need to saturate whatever phone he had at full 3G non-stop; downloading files thru multiple streams. Someone can probably do the math: Take 3G hypothetical thru-put/22GB for 30 days.

I would think whatever phone he used had to be Always charged and wired to be running non-stop to download that much data.

And if this guy thinks he can abuse that type of bandwidth on Sprint, he's gonna in for a big surprise. News are reporting that Sprint is going to start throttling data. They first people they throttle are the people abusing the bandwidth.

I think 21GB a month is achieveable on 3G if you use it like I do, using pandora and my FTP client. However my 3G usage is usally around 4-6GB monthly only because I use wifi at home/work. If I never used wifi, id be well beyond 21GB a month some months. Then again, I wouldn't try uploading/downloading that much through ftp through 3G anyways, it would take too long. But my case is a special case, and I doubt many people use like me.

Tapatalk. Samsung Moment. Yep.

 

[SeattleYanksFan]

I think 21GB a month is achieveable on 3G if you use it like I do, using pandora and my FTP client. However my 3G usage is usally around 4-6GB monthly only because I use wifi at home/work. If I never used wifi, id be well beyond 21GB a month some months. Then again, I wouldn't try uploading/downloading that much through ftp through 3G anyways, it would take too long. But my case is a special case, and I doubt many people use like me.

Tapatalk. Samsung Moment. Yep.

Damn dude. I thought I use my 3G a lot, and I only use around 1GB per month, max.

You better keep yourself locked into the unlimited data plans...

 

[mrspeedmaster]

Back to EVO 4G vs IPhone 4:

OK, chipworks did a tear-down of the the EVO.
HTC Evo Teardown by Chipworks
Image Sensors World: Omnivision BSI in HTC EVO 4G

Evo uses a Ominivision BSI sensor with a 1.4 um pixel pitch.

Steve Jobs just owned all the fanboys who have been talking about EVO's camera capabilities. It looks like the iPhone's sensor is made by SONY (Sony exmoor r-based cmos Can the iPhone 4 replace a point-and-shoot? | iPhone Atlas - CNET Reviews)

iPhone has a pixel pitch of 1.75 um

How is this important? iPhone is nearing point-n-shoot cameras like the Canon SDs/Panasonic LX3 with their 2.0 um pixel size. Backlight sensor for better low-light. f/2.8 lens. All the little details that Jobs left out. Granted, the phone's optics is not up to par w/ a real dedicated camera but it is simply better than the EVO. Now, it is just a matter of contest between Apple and Nokia.

Why the iPhone 4 Camera Is So Promising | Gadget Lab | Wired.com


1.75 um @ 5 megapixel is a quantum leap in cellphone camera hardware. It owns the EVO in both video and photo. Its the little things like this that will be unsurfacing in the next few weeks.

Nice thing about the iPhone's camera / images are the fact you can pixel peep, analyze and make critical analysis of the camera's capabilities because all the EXIF data is stored. HTC, likes too, leave out those things in their EXIF data. Maybe they want to hide some of interpolation algorithm/over-process noise reduction, hyped up luminance gain.

Here is a good article on:
Falk Lumo: Apple iPhone 4 camera specs

 

[Meowzebub]

The iphone with ATT is like a really hot chick with herpes

That's a great line - I'll have to remember it.

 

[IOWA]

Back to EVO 4G vs IPhone 4:

OK, chipworks did a tear-down of the the EVO.
HTC Evo Teardown by Chipworks
Image Sensors World: Omnivision BSI in HTC EVO 4G

Evo uses a Ominivision BSI sensor with a 1.4 um pixel pitch.

Steve Jobs just owned all the fanboys who have been talking about EVO's camera capabilities. It looks like the iPhone's sensor is made by SONY (Sony exmoor r-based cmos Can the iPhone 4 replace a point-and-shoot? | iPhone Atlas - CNET Reviews)

iPhone has a pixel pitch of 1.75 um

How is this important? iPhone is nearing point-n-shoot cameras like the Canon SDs/Panasonic LX3 with their 2.0 um pixel size. Backlight sensor for better low-light. f/2.8 lens. All the little details that Jobs left out. Granted, the phone's optics is not up to par w/ a real dedicated camera but it is simply better than the EVO. Now, it is just a matter of contest between Apple and Nokia.

Why the iPhone 4 Camera Is So Promising | Gadget Lab | Wired.com


1.75 um @ 5 megapixel is a quantum leap in cellphone camera hardware. It owns the EVO in both video and photo. Its the little things like this that will be unsurfacing in the next few weeks.

Nice thing about the iPhone's camera / images are the fact you can pixel peep, analyze and make critical analysis of the camera's capabilities because all the EXIF data is stored. HTC, likes too, leave out those things in their EXIF data. Maybe they want to hide some of interpolation algorithm/over-process noise reduction, hyped up luminance gain.

Here is a good article on:
Falk Lumo: Apple iPhone 4 camera specs

Yeah... but most of us buy a phone for things other than the built-in cam.

 

[SeattleYanksFan]

Yeah... but most of use buy a phone for things other than the built-in cam.

What he said.

 

[Caddyman]

I love it

droid phan: "android is better then iphone at everything, everything!! the iphone is a POS!!!"

iphone phan:"well here is factual proof that the iphone is better at this particular thing"

droid phan:"well no-one buys a phone for that reason"



smh

 

[cds0699]

droid phan:"well no-one buys a phone for JUST that reason"

FYP, they buy phones for a range of features that they wish to have, and a camera is only part of that. If all I wanted my phone for was a camera, then I'd go buy a camera.

 

[Caddyman]

obviously you missed the gist of my post.

i like android a lot, i have one, i razz iphoner friends like most do, but the unadulterated hatred and $hit talking that goes on here is nauseating at best IMHO.

iOS and iPhone is a solid platform, just like android. if you hate it that much just cause it competes with what you like why not just stop talking about it? why do we need 15 threads that may all start on different topic then quickly spiral into the same thing....brainless bashing.

it makes many here look childish, much like an iphone fanboy....or any fanboy.

 

[cds0699]

obviously you missed the gist of my post.

i like android a lot, i have one, i razz iphoner friends like most do, but the unadulterated hatred and $hit talking that goes on here is nauseating at best IMHO.

iOS and iPhone is a solid platform, just like android. if you hate it that much just cause it competes with what you like why not just stop talking about it? why do we need 15 threads that may all start on different topic then quickly spiral into the same thing....brainless bashing.

it makes many here look childish, much like an iphone fanboy....or any fanboy.

I actually agree with you completely. Apologies for not catching on

 

[mrspeedmaster]

Yeah... but most of us buy a phone for things other than the built-in cam.

OK, I can accept that.
Lets summarize the pros and cons of each:

Evo Advantages

• HDMI: EVO >iPhone
• Screen Size: EVO>iPhone
• 4G/3G : EVO>iPhone (in select markets)
• Larger front facing camera
• Kickstand (kinda screwed when Sense UI doesn't go in landscape mode. I see the billboard ad of the Home screen on its side on my way to work every morning).
• Google Voice integration. I really like this and I will keep my Android for this alone.
• removable storage. The cost of 32GB microsdhc class 6-10 pretty much negates this advantage.

iPhone Advantages

• Screen quality. iPhone has higher Pixel Density. It also doesn't have the problems of the Nexus One/Incredible AMOLED screens.
  Also, all the current Android superphones (except the moto droid) are all 16 bit. You can say AMOLED is better for battery and color saturation but it is horrible for text and out-door. iPhone wins in terms of over-all quality for Text/Contrast/Pixel Density.
  
• Multimedia Playback. Just search this forum for media playback, h.264, iTunes synching issues. iPhone4 specs states it will play 720P h.264/30fps.
• World Phone. iPhone 4 is a Penta-band phone, You can use it outside of the US.
• Camera. Better Camera
• Camcorder: True 720p video recording at 30fps. Not to mention app support.
• Speed: iPhone 4 is not handicapped by the 30fps screen re-draws that has been reported on the 4Evo G.
• Battery Life. I am very certain it will have similar battery life as the iPad.
• Enterprise support. iOS4 is here now. Froyo and all the 3rd party apps are still in the pipeline
• Gyroscope. This is yet to be seen how useful it is.
• Wifi: Supports "N"

Toss-up:

• Flash. Android has Flash but from my experience, it is laggy. I rather have non-laggy H.264 streaming playback. ABC, NetFlix is a dream on the iPad. Watching videos from an app or even thru the web is a much better experience. You don't get porn sites so that is a toss-up if you are into porn.
• Rooting and Jailbreaking are essentially the same.You end up getting the same desired result.
  
• Carriers. Your mileage my vary depending on location and whether you are grandfathered in your plan or not.
  ATT will have caps on their data and Sprint will start throttling. Tethering is available for both.

I am leaving out a lot of stuff like the app store, eco-system,etc...

 

[SeattleYanksFan]

I love it

droid phan: "android is better then iphone at everything, everything!! the iphone is a POS!!!"

iphone phan:"well here is factual proof that the iphone is better at this particular thing"

droid phan:"well no-one buys a phone for that reason"



smh

I definitely didn't say Android is better than iOS at everything. And even if I did, the phone's hardware is a different issue than the OS's.

But yeah, no way any Android phone on the market surpasses the iPhone 4 on both the hardware and software fronts in every aspect. Likewise for the iPhone 4. I just think, personally, for the more important factors, Android wins for me. Obviously there will be thousands+ on June 24 that disagree.

 

[Demache]

I'm actually not sure what is up with this fascination of putting a ridiculously high res screen in a small device. I know, it looks "nicer" and less "pixelated". But, hell, I'm perfectly fine with the 320 x 480 resolution of my Eris and my iPod Touch. They look perfectly fine to me. Well, my Eris shows a much more true black, but that's beside the point.

I'm old fashioned, sue me.

 

[mrspeedmaster]

I'm actually not sure what is up with this fascination of putting a ridiculously high res screen in a small device. I know, it looks "nicer" and less "pixelated"..

It is about readability; especially with text on a web browser/e-book.

Here is a list of current phones and their PPI:

List of displays by pixel density - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you notice the 4th Gen Nano, it has a PPI of 204. Even on a 2" screen, it is easier to read than an iPod Touch with a PPI of 163. You can just go to the store and compare them side-by-side.

You also have to factor into account how the MFG does the display drivers/anti-aliasing. Even though my HTC Touch Pro has a higher PPI than my Incredible, it sucks because of Microsoft's cleartype font tech and how the OS handled the higher res.

Also in real life go to any high-end camera forums. Cameras with LCDs with higher PPI have better rendition for viewing photos. It makes a big difference outside in the field if you have razor thin depth-of-field. You can't tell if your photos are blurry or not when you shoot at very wide apertures on LCDs with lower PPI.

 

[Demache]

It is about readability; especially with text on a web browser/e-book.

Here is a list of current phones and their PPI:

List of displays by pixel density - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you notice the 4th Gen Nano, it has a PPI of 204. Even on a 2" screen, it is easier to read than an iPod Touch with a PPI of 163. You can just go to the store and compare them side-by-side.

You also have to factor into account how the MFG does the display drivers/anti-aliasing. Even though my HTC Touch Pro has a higher PPI than my Incredible, it sucks because of Microsoft's cleartype font tech and how the OS handled the higher res.

Also in real life go to any high-end camera forums. Cameras with LCDs with higher PPI have better rendition for viewing photos. It makes a big difference outside in the field if you have razor thin depth-of-field. You can't tell if your photos are blurry or not when you shoot at very wide apertures on LCDs with lower PPI.

Okay, I just made a dumb post. I saw picture of a high res screen and lower res screen, and I can see how its useful. Web pages look very nice.

Sorry if this is dumb too, but for the camera one, couldn't you just zoom in to see if it was blurry? I mean sure a higher res screen removes that extra step, but that's what I just do on my camera's 320 x 240 screen.

 

[mrspeedmaster]

Sorry if this is dumb too, but for the camera one, couldn't you just zoom in to see if it was blurry? I mean sure a higher res screen removes that extra step, but that's what I just do on my camera's 320 x 240 screen.

You would think. You can zoom in and but you still can't see all the detail in a preview LCD behind the camera. I have 2 cameras. One with 320,000 dot, and the other has 920,000 dots display. It makes a big difference even when you zoom in and preview. Zooming in only gives you something like 2-4X, You would need something like 16X to see the granular focus. I shoot at apertures as low as f/1.1 so there is a lot of margin of error; especially in night shots.
I would love to see retina displays on dSLRs.