Galaxy S2 confirmed for Verizon

[DT]

Hey, just curious. Why did you return your Atrix?

Short answer (rare for me ):

The Pentile display, combined with so-so color/contrast made it painfully mediocre. The increased resolution also scaled down standard resources, so the details on smaller screen objects becomes very important.

Locked bootloader, so no replacing/removing Blur (even with LP/ADW services are still running). I'm talking about being able to run different kernels (and more), not just swapping out resources like taskbar backgrounds.

The Camera was very disappointing, mainly due to the really poor software, thought he optics weren't much either.

It was fast, had terrific battery life, the HDMI out was slick, good form factor, good GPS, but at the end of the day, I didn't think the cost and contract extension was worth it - it wasn't "better enough" vs. the Captivate.

FWIW, at this point, based on the reviews to date, the SGS II +does+ appear to be better across the board (display, performance, battery, GPS ... and I'm assuming the bootloader won't be an issue either ... )


(OK, so that wasn't quite as short as I intended )

 

[jcnyc]

I had teh Atrix too and my primary reason to return it was ATT's scum business model of throttling your supposed 4g speeds. Seems liek ti was a godo decision considering Atrix Users still do not have their 4g enabled on the upload side.

 

[chocobosandwich]

@jinwons you claim to not care but you reply enough to other people's posts defending LG and claiming it is better while using unsubstantiated opinion as fact. You are full of it, and I only started posting in reference to your reply to another poster, getting miffed that he didn't include LG in his list and then "explaining" how great LG is and how HTC is not.

But you are right, we should go back to talking on topic, back to before you derailed it by trumpeting LG phones that aren't even in Verizon's catalog.

 

[jinwons]

@jinwons you claim to not care but you reply enough to other people's posts defending LG and claiming it is better while using unsubstantiated opinion as fact. You are full of it, and I only started posting in reference to your reply to another poster, getting miffed that he didn't include LG in his list and then "explaining" how great LG is and how HTC is not.

But you are right, we should go back to talking on topic, back to before you derailed it by trumpeting LG phones that aren't even in Verizon's catalog.

What's unsubstantiated opinion that I claimed as fact? I simply pointed out that G2x is in T-mobile lineup right now and Thrill 4G is coming up for AT&T so they should be included in the list of dual core phones. And G2x is currently fastest android phone as of now. That's not fact? It has nothing to do with LG's reputation on android. Then you just tried to refute my post without providing any objective technical things other than brand image and calling me biased to Korean companies. So I had to respond to yours.

I now realize that you simply don't consider LG as worthy android player yet, which is fine for me. You may chime in the LG forum like Revolution or G2x as this is SGSII forum and let's keep on SGSII topics.

 

[SirKronan]

Short answer (rare for me ):

The Pentile display, combined with so-so color/contrast made it painfully mediocre. The increased resolution also scaled down standard resources, so the details on smaller screen objects becomes very important.

Locked bootloader, so no replacing/removing Blur (even with LP/ADW services are still running). I'm talking about being able to run different kernels (and more), not just swapping out resources like taskbar backgrounds.

The Camera was very disappointing, mainly due to the really poor software, thought he optics weren't much either.

It was fast, had terrific battery life, the HDMI out was slick, good form factor, good GPS, but at the end of the day, I didn't think the cost and contract extension was worth it - it wasn't "better enough" vs. the Captivate.

FWIW, at this point, based on the reviews to date, the SGS II +does+ appear to be better across the board (display, performance, battery, GPS ... and I'm assuming the bootloader won't be an issue either ... )


(OK, so that wasn't quite as short as I intended )

Thank you. I was worried that I was the only one utterly disappointed with that screen. Nice to know I'm not alone. And none of the photos I saw on it looked as good as my photos on the Fascinate (which is a lot like the captivate.)

Needless to say, I'd really like the SGS2 to hit Berizon sooner rather than later.

 

[ArmageddonX]

I'm new to the Android world. I bought a Palm Pre back in 2009 and absolutely hate the device.

I've got my sights set on the Samsung Galaxy S2 because it fits every last one of my requirements.

However, I thought the S2 was a GSM phone. Doesn't that mean it'll be on T-Mobile or AT&T? Sprint and Verizon are CDMA right?

The reason I ask is that I'm with Sprint and my contract is up in November. However if it's coming to Verizon soon I'll pay my ETF with Sprint & switch to Verizon.

 

[SirKronan]

I'm new to the Android world. I bought a Palm Pre back in 2009 and absolutely hate the device.

I've got my sights set on the Samsung Galaxy S2 because it fits every last one of my requirements.

However, I thought the S2 was a GSM phone. Doesn't that mean it'll be on T-Mobile or AT&T? Sprint and Verizon are CDMA right?

The reason I ask is that I'm with Sprint and my contract is up in November. However if it's coming to Verizon soon I'll pay my ETF with Sprint & switch to Verizon.

I would just finish up my contract if I were you, as long as you can possibly do it. By "soon" most of us are thinking September at the very earliest. Another poster spoke with a Samsung rep in a Berizon store who had both the Stealth and SGS2 in hand, and he said that for sure Berizon is getting the SGS2, and as far as he knows it's coming with the same form factor as they are getting on GSM carriers, AND with LTE tech installed. This is still remarkably close to mere speculation, but the forum member reporting this is one that I have found to usually be reliable.

I certainly hope they don't do all the different variants, some with notably reduced specs, like they did on U.S. carriers for the Galaxy S. That was a disaster, and made Samsung's reputation suffer considerably for one of the longest waits to get 2.2 on a top tier smartphone released in the latter half of 2010. It was ridiculous. Limiting it to a CDMA/LTE variant and one GSM variant, with as minimal of changes as possible between networks would make the updating process simpler for them, and quicker to the end users. I would think it would make manufacturing the darn things more cost effective as well. The more specs they can share across the line, the cheaper they will be to make.

But there are four ways in which Berizon might possibly cripple it that wouldn't surprise me ONE BIT after owning a Fascinate:

1. Bing (like the Fascinate, their 1st SGS variant, and the upcoming Revolution)
2. Reduce onboard memory from 16GB to 2GB (Fascinate AND Droid Charge)
3. Remove any type of video output (Fascinate)
4. Remove FM radio (Fascinate)

Every single one of those changes would be right in line with what Samsung did for Berizon on the Fascinate, and every single one of those changes will also make the device cheaper for Berizon and help offset the cost of integrating the LTE tech.

I really hope we get it pretty much the way it is now. I'd rather lose LTE than have ANY of the top three above-mentioned cripples happen to this otherwise sensational device. I want its large battery and pretty much perfect form factor, as well as video out and gobs of internal memory. I wouldn't miss the FM radio, though.

 

[ArmageddonX]

Berizon? Good info but that part confused me.

I'm really trying to wait but I have a Palm Pre and I HATE the thing. I'm just so sick of it and not to get off topic but the webOS2.0 lie was the last straw for me. I feel like I'm drownding on this Palm. I'm on my phone probably 8 hours a day and this thing just doesn't do what I *need* it to anymore.

Desperate for a solution but I don't think I can wait for November. I may break down and get an EVO3D next month, even though the S2 has a better screen & a better camera.

 

[edward90]

Samsung gs2 isn't going to verizon any time soon...sorry..they can't even release last gen phones on time ..

 

[jinwons]

But there are four ways in which Berizon might possibly cripple it that wouldn't surprise me ONE BIT after owning a Fascinate:

1. Bing (like the Fascinate, their 1st SGS variant, and the upcoming Revolution)
2. Reduce onboard memory from 16GB to 2GB (Fascinate AND Droid Charge)
3. Remove any type of video output (Fascinate)
4. Remove FM radio (Fascinate)

Every single one of those changes would be right in line with what Samsung did for Berizon on the Fascinate, and every single one of those changes will also make the device cheaper for Berizon and help offset the cost of integrating the LTE tech.

The moment I see them crippling SGSII with things like that, I'm leaving Verizon no matter how good their network is. Hopefully AT&T buying out T-mobile doesn't get approved and Sprint makes transition to LTE not too late.

 

[SirKronan]

The moment I see them crippling SGSII with things like that, I'm leaving Verizon no matter how good their network is. Hopefully AT&T buying out T-mobile doesn't get approved and Sprint makes transition to LTE not too late.

I am SO WITH YOU if that happens. I have a line available for upgrade now, but I'm going to hold off until we see what happens to the SGSII for it to work on Berizon.

 

[mrvirginia]

the only way to get a non-crippled SGS2, with great dev support, and not have to wait is to import the Euro version and use on AT$T.

so you have to ask yourself... which is more important, non-crippled device for $699-$749 or crippled device for ~$250-$300.
for me, it's the former. all the way. my main reason is dev support. i'll be able to mess around with it as easily as my current phone. it's worth paying that much more. plus, i get paid 3 times in July so that covers that price fully. no brainer.

 

[kyler13]

the only way to get a non-crippled SGS2, with great dev support, and not have to wait is to import the Euro version and use on AT$T.

so you have to ask yourself... which is more important, non-crippled device for $699-$749 or crippled device for ~$250-$300.
for me, it's the former. all the way. my main reason is dev support. i'll be able to mess around with it as easily as my current phone. it's worth paying that much more. plus, i get paid 3 times in July so that covers that price fully. no brainer.

Ya see, I'm not interested in joining the lackluster deathstar network. I have an annual upgrade eligibility right now and I'd love to just get the latest and greatest, ebay it, and import an int'l phone....but that's not an option with Verizon.

 

[SirKronan]

Ya see, I'm not interested in joining the lackluster deathstar network. I have an annual upgrade eligibility right now and I'd love to just get the latest and greatest, ebay it, and import an int'l phone....but that's not an option with Verizon.

Some of us are stuck with Verizon. I don't like them too much these days, but AT&T is absolutely evil. I have said this before, and I will say it again. mrvirginia, you are absolutely correct, and I would almost be willing to pay that much, but AT&T is satan's cellular network. They are horrible horrible horrible in more ways than I can count, but in many ways I have substantial documentation, personal experience (both as a reseller and as support) with AT&T as a company going back for years, even before everything went cellular. I know that all corporations are after making money, but AT&T is the shadiest, most dishonest, unethical, uncaring company I have ever dealt with personally. And I have dealt with some real "gem" companies, too. I am praying this merger doesn't happen, and that I can someday get unlocked superphones from Europe and run them on T-Mo. T-Mo was my last bastion of GSM hope for the United States. If the merger happens, I'll be stuck with Sprint or Verizon, and that is most unfortunate.

The top development is always going to GSM tech first, since that's what the WORLD has. Our 300 mil is small fry compared to the rest of the world that buys cellphones. 'Tis the curse of CDMA. It's great tech, overall, but it's not worldwide, and as a manufacturer I would be stupid to put CDMA compatible device development above GSM.

Hence our predicament.

 

[ArmageddonX]

I dont understand why (if the international community) is using GSM why Sprint & Verizon don't just switch technology. They would make more money and get newer devices. Wont they have to eventually anyway? I'm really ignorant when it comes to stuff like that though.

 

[thrawn86]

By the time it finally does get to vzw I'm sure D3 rumors will be swirling. I'm really not sure I'll be able to resist when it finally comes to AT&T. They may be awful, but all cell providers are. AT&T just happens to be the worst.

why Sprint & Verizon don't just switch technology

Its just as simple as turning a dial on a radio. sigh.

 

[SirKronan]

I dont understand why (if the international community) is using GSM why Sprint & Verizon don't just switch technology. They would make more money and get newer devices. Wont they have to eventually anyway? I'm really ignorant when it comes to stuff like that though.

It would take VAST infrastructure changes. They come dangerously close to an international standard with LTE tech. It does, after all, use a simcard, and the LTE radio chip/tech actually have every capability needed to handle a variety of sim cards, but Verizon has made it just different enough in some specific ways that the "eff'd it up" again, to put it in simplified terms.

CDMA actually has a few advantages over GSM, technology wise, if you look up the specifics. Hit the wikipedia article on both for some really useful stuff.

I share your desires, though. I wish they all had GSM standard, and just worked together to improve that as much as possible. Can you imagine how incredibly beyond awesome it would be if Sprint, Verizon, AND AT&T/T-Mobile were ALL GSM carriers we could get nationwide here?

Talk about competition. That would truly be a free market with real competition, and real freedom to consumers. So many other countries enjoy that, and yet in the "land of the free" we have combined, all-powerful mega companies that literally control it ALL. Every other non 2nd or 3rd world country in the world would likely fall off whatever furniture they might be sitting on from hysterical laughter if an AT&T user told them that they had a 2GB data cap on their mobile broadband plan.

And we truly are in a sad state here. I don't know if you guys follow tech news, but I believe North Carolina (correct me if i'm wrong, someone) some local municipal governments got together to provide their own local internet service to compete with Time Warner (almost as evil as AT&T) for cable internet, and AT&T for DSL (surprise, surprise!) They provide faster service for less money, and when users started switching, what happened?

Time Warner, on record, made some generous campaign donations to a state senator who mystically and conveniently began her campaign against the injustice of "government" competing against a business. What the hell is going on in this country ... ? It wasn't a state or national government that banned together to control and SQUASH competition, and destroy LOCAL small businesses, which is what the laws supposedly were designed to protect. It was a few local governments who took out private sector loans to provide a LOCAL service and create MORE jobs and competition (against GIANT telecoms) and save money for the end user at the same time.

Sad. Actually Time Warner probably is just about as evil as AT&T.... They might even make it to my elite list of satan's companies some day.

 

[chicknlil]

Some of us are stuck with Verizon. I don't like them too much these days, but AT&T is absolutely evil. I have said this before, and I will say it again. mrvirginia, you are absolutely correct, and I would almost be willing to pay that much, but AT&T is satan's cellular network. They are horrible horrible horrible in more ways than I can count, but in many ways I have substantial documentation, personal experience (both as a reseller and as support) with AT&T as a company going back for years, even before everything went cellular. I know that all corporations are after making money, but AT&T is the shadiest, most dishonest, unethical, uncaring company I have ever dealt with personally. And I have dealt with some real "gem" companies, too. I am praying this merger doesn't happen, and that I can someday get unlocked superphones from Europe and run them on T-Mo. T-Mo was my last bastion of GSM hope for the United States. If the merger happens, I'll be stuck with Sprint or Verizon, and that is most unfortunate.

The top development is always going to GSM tech first, since that's what the WORLD has. Our 300 mil is small fry compared to the rest of the world that buys cellphones. 'Tis the curse of CDMA. It's great tech, overall, but it's not worldwide, and as a manufacturer I would be stupid to put CDMA compatible device development above GSM.

Hence our predicament.

It's ironic ... your experiences with AT&T was essentially my experience with Verizon. I ended up having to sic my state's Attorney General on them in order to be refunded an ETF that I was never supposed to be charged (contract extended w/o my consent). I know they've got the best service in my area, but I simply don't trust them not to try and screw me over again.

AT&T, at least for me, is reliable. As a "premier" customer, my calls are answered quickly, and 95% of the time I get someone competent to speak with ...and their retentions staff is top notch. The only place I could get a cheaper rate, even with work discounts (of which I already have a good sized one w/AT&T) would be T-Mobile, but given their uncertain future, it's not worth the risk.

Back to the matter at hand: It's foolish to expect that this phone won't be crippled by the US Carriers - you're certainly not going to get the FM receiver, and they no doubt will be loaded with useless bloat that you'll only be able to get rid of if you're rooted. I can hope that I'm wrong, but I'm realistic enough to know that I'm probably not.

I'd love the international SGSII for the freedom it offers, but I'm likely 'stuck' waiting for the US Varient.

 

[ArmageddonX]

I simply cannot wait. My phone is breaking and I have to make a choice ASAP. Trying to hold out for a phone but no way I can make it to a SGII US Variant... but thank you for explaining the technology.

 

[John Jason]

Back to the matter at hand: It's foolish to expect that this phone won't be crippled by the US Carriers - you're certainly not going to get the FM receiver, and they no doubt will be loaded with useless bloat that you'll only be able to get rid of if you're rooted. I can hope that I'm wrong, but I'm realistic enough to know that I'm probably not.

I really want an FM radio in my next phone. Are there no phones available for US carriers that have an FM radio? And I don't understand why carriers would want to do away with an FM radio. If I can't listen over the air I'll be forced to stream it over the net, dramatically increasing the amount of data I would use. Why would carriers want to eliminate a feature that reduces how much data their customers use?

 

[jinwons]

There are some technical advantages to CDMA over GSM technologies. CDMA signal travels farther and penetrates to buildings better. So it requires less number of towers than GSM to cover the same area. Globally GSM dominates but still there are about 20% of CDMA carriers globally. It's not like Verizon, Sprint are only CDMA carriers in the world. The 3GSM technique like UMTS/HSPA+ employed by most GSM carriers for 3G data is also kind of CDMA technology called W-CDMA.

I think once every carrier goes to 4G LTE this issue of incompatibility and slow release of new phones will be gone. LTE is 4GSM/UMTS based technology.

 

[kyler13]

There are some technical advantages to CDMA over GSM technologies. CDMA signal travels farther and penetrates to buildings better. So it requires less number of towers than GSM to cover the same area. Globally GSM dominates but still there are about 20% of CDMA carriers globally. It's not like Verizon, Sprint are only CDMA carriers in the world. The 3GSM technique like UMTS/HSPA+ employed by most GSM carriers for 3G data is also kind of CDMA technology called W-CDMA.

I think once every carrier goes to 4G LTE this issue of incompatibility and slow release of new phones will be gone. LTE is 4GSM/UMTS based technology.

You guys put forward some good information here. Just as an addendum, people need to understand that the dynamics of the US are different from every other country in the world. No other country is as big AND population distributed as the US which poses some difficulties for widespread coverage in this country. As jinwons mentioned, CDMA is a better standard for cost effective blanket coverage and it actually is an advantage to Verizon's accomplishment of blanket 3G coverage across it's network. GSM, on the other hand, requires more resources, and you'll find that even AT&T, the biggest GSM carrier in this country, still relies on large amount of roaming agreements with smaller operators to provide EDGE/GPRS coverage to complete their "98% coverage" claim. A good example of this: I have family about 5 hours north of here. With AT&T, I'd have HSPA (3G) coverage for about 2.5 hours, it would drop to EDGE for the next 1.5 hours, and the last hour I'd be in GPRS coverage and would remain so for the duration of my stay. With Verizon, I'm 3G round trip including my stay. Of course, some of this is due to more of a lack of commitment by AT&T which I addressed in another thread, but regardless, it would take a larger financial commitment for AT&T to blanket the country with GSM/HSPA than it did for Verizon to make CDMA/EVDO available.

It's all a bit complicated but suffice to say, the chances of this country's mobile network evolving as a unified standard were pretty slim from the get go.

 

[kyler13]

I really want an FM radio in my next phone. Are there no phones available for US carriers that have an FM radio? And I don't understand why carriers would want to do away with an FM radio. If I can't listen over the air I'll be forced to stream it over the net, dramatically increasing the amount of data I would use. Why would carriers want to eliminate a feature that reduces how much data their customers use?

I've had a FM radio in my HTC Incredible from day 1.

 

[blitz118]

I really want an FM radio in my next phone. Are there no phones available for US carriers that have an FM radio? And I don't understand why carriers would want to do away with an FM radio. If I can't listen over the air I'll be forced to stream it over the net, dramatically increasing the amount of data I would use. Why would carriers want to eliminate a feature that reduces how much data their customers use?

The htc evo on sprint has an fm radio.

 

[SirKronan]

I've had a FM radio in my HTC Incredible from day 1.

The htc evo on sprint has an fm radio.

So does my old Samsung Omnia. hehehe...