|
|
|
HTC shows off first Mango devices
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 12 October, 2011
Smartphone maker HTC has announced today the launch of their first Windows Phone 7 Mango devices.
The devices, the "Titan" and "Radar," will launch in Taiwan this month and elsewhere in the near future.
Titan has a massive 4.7-inch screen, dual cameras (8MP/1.3MP) and a 1.5GHz Snapdragon processor.
Radar has a 3.8-inch touch screen with 480 x 800 resolution and a 5.0 megapixel camera.
... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
Member
|
12. October 2011 @ 19:05 |
Link to this message
|
|
Don't they seem a bit under-spec'ed?
I guess maybe, just maybe, not for a WP7 device? How efficient is W7 for phones supposed to be?
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
|
EzCeazy
Junior Member
|
12. October 2011 @ 19:29 |
Link to this message
|
They are out of date already, why is Microsoft behind in the game after supposedly "trying"
|
|
Interestx
Senior Member
|
13. October 2011 @ 11:36 |
Link to this message
|
Maybe it's just me but with all these phones, even the higher spec'd ones......what is so impressive about them?
At the end of the day it's still just a phone & you go to your workplace or home & use a proper multi-media device.
It might be "a massive screen".....for a phone.
But let's have a little reality check, it's not a 'massive screen'.
It would still be like trying to watch a film on a postage stamp sized screen.
Yes it's OK for texting or sending pics or video clips I guess but why anyone would get that excited about what will always be such a small screen is beyond me.
Even if it has reasonable res & pixel density.
Besides some brand/product snobbery I don't see what the fuss is about.
I have a 'smart' phone (which I got cos it was a real bargain) with a load of bells & whistles I rarely, if ever use.
|
Staff Member
4 product reviews
|
13. October 2011 @ 13:01 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Interestx:
Maybe it's just me but with all these phones, even the higher spec'd ones......what is so impressive about them?
At the end of the day it's still just a phone & you go to your workplace or home & use a proper multi-media device.
It might be "a massive screen".....for a phone.
But let's have a little reality check, it's not a 'massive screen'.
It would still be like trying to watch a film on a postage stamp sized screen.
Yes it's OK for texting or sending pics or video clips I guess but why anyone would get that excited about what will always be such a small screen is beyond me.
Even if it has reasonable res & pixel density.
Besides some brand/product snobbery I don't see what the fuss is about.
I have a 'smart' phone (which I got cos it was a real bargain) with a load of bells & whistles I rarely, if ever use.
That's the point here that a lot of AD's regulars don't understand because we are "techies." The average user does not care, and Windows Phone 7 is efficient. The phones will sell well,to the tune of 20 percent market share by 2015.
|
Member
|
13. October 2011 @ 13:13 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Interestx:
Maybe it's just me but with all these phones, even the higher spec'd ones......what is so impressive about them?
At the end of the day it's still just a phone & you go to your workplace or home & use a proper multi-media device.
It might be "a massive screen".....for a phone.
But let's have a little reality check, it's not a 'massive screen'.
It would still be like trying to watch a film on a postage stamp sized screen.
Yes it's OK for texting or sending pics or video clips I guess but why anyone would get that excited about what will always be such a small screen is beyond me.
Even if it has reasonable res & pixel density.
Besides some brand/product snobbery I don't see what the fuss is about.
I have a 'smart' phone (which I got cos it was a real bargain) with a load of bells & whistles I rarely, if ever use.
Sorry to hear it. I use my phone ridiculously. They're impressive because they get faster and more battery-efficient; I game. It's just what I do. So give me a quad-core device with 1-2 GB RAM and its own little GPU and I'm in hog heaven! I already play Nintendo64/Playstation games at 60 FPS (NES, SNES, GBA, GBC, etc. as well, but those aren't as unlikely to be on a phone) and can't wait to be able to do so while also keeping my browser loaded onto a couple of pages with relevant info without murdering my battery after half an hour.
I mean, I understand it's not for everyone, but don't knock the actual usefulness of it either. Think about the fact that I have my own business; I don't want to always have to keep up with a clunky laptop or tablet that has a good chance of getting noticed and stolen and I don't want to have to have two or three different devices going to talk to a customer, update a spreadsheet, tweak some code, and write out an invoice/email it all or update it to the "cloud." And I watch shows on it as well, sure it's small and you can miss some minute details, but it's still better than an old CRT TV in my opinion (not that I have any) and you get the gist of it. Slightly larger screen, slightly better resolution, slightly less minute details lost, yeah?
Again, sorry you don't max your phone out, but what casual user would? That's why they make underwhelming devices at good prices. But for people like me who can use it, and better yet want it and will pay for it, good spec'ed phones are irreplaceable, and badly spec'ed phones don't deserve my attention other than consulting a customer in to a proper decision based on their own needs and price-range.
It's my mobile computer, and damn it I want it to work as well as my non-mobile computer for the same content lol a good bit of the time my phone is my only option, so something like this Mango would likely drive me up the wall as I waited for apps to load or a web-page to finally pop up even though I've got 3G/WiFi on. Yes, I have better set-ups available, but I can't always access them and even more important, you can't account for power/internet outages totally and so it's a good idea to have something capable that does not rely on these things completely.
Originally posted by "DVDBack23":
That's the point here that a lot of AD's regulars don't understand because we are "techies." The average user does not care
Exactly, though less nerd-raged ^.^ I mean, that's the great thing about the current eco-system of technology: there's something for everyone.
~*Livin' Electronicallly*~
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 13. October 2011 @ 13:23
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
voyager
Member
|
21. October 2011 @ 15:25 |
Link to this message
|
|
No front camera?
|
|
