Motorola 'Droid X' to Challenge iPhone 4's Retina Display? [Updated]

[ChazUK]

Gosh, you're far too humble Chaz… You replied to me quicker than I could hit refresh on my browser and read my own comment! Seriously dude, how did you do that?

That was a quick reply wasn't it! I'm getting too quick at typing... Need to step away from the iMac.

 

[satcomer]

You can tether with any Android phone thanks to pdanet. It's even available on the Android Market.

Not if the Android is on the AT&T network.

 

[zenoran]

Not if the Android is on the AT&T network.

My Nexus is on AT&T and I enjoy free wifi tethering in Froyo.

Carriers can lock phones all they want but there are always hacks or ways around it. Most carriers want to regulate tethering because they aren't getting they're extra $30/month they demand for stock ROMs. The fact is, all you have to do is flash a custom ROM and you'll get what Google intended for you to have; unrestricted, free Internet tethering.

Apple's devices are a little different and you can't exactly flash custom ROMs but you can jailbreak. I haven't read up on the new iPhone to know if it has wifi tethering or not but if it does I'm sure it will be detectable from ATT through the OS-supported methods and they will charge you for it. I'm sure there will still be jailbreak apps that will share the connection and bypass this but all of that is still TBD; especially dependent on if the new iPhone can even be jailbroken. I'm sure tethering will be a service on the iPhone that has to be enabled on your account for it to work. vs. Google could give 2 craps about the carriers with their vanilla OS and ICS tethering will probably remain undetectable.

 

[uberamd]

My Nexus is on AT&T and I enjoy free wifi tethering in Froyo.

Carriers can lock phones all they want but there are always hacks or ways around it. Most carriers want to regulate tethering because they aren't getting they're extra $30/month they demand for stock ROMs. The fact is, all you have to do is flash a custom ROM and you'll get what Google intended for you to have; unrestricted, free Internet tethering.

Apple's devices are a little different and you can't exactly flash custom ROMs but you can jailbreak. I haven't read up on the new iPhone to know if it has wifi tethering or not but if it does I'm sure it will be detectable from ATT through the OS-supported methods and they will charge you for it. I'm sure there will still be jailbreak apps that will share the connection and bypass this but all of that is still TBD; especially dependent on if the new iPhone can even be jailbroken. I'm sure tethering will be a service on the iPhone that has to be enabled on your account for it to work. vs. Google could give 2 craps about the carriers with their vanilla OS and ICS tethering will probably remain undetectable.

I'm pretty sure that all tethering is detectable via deep packet inspection.

 

[Pigumon]

What's with phone's having HDMI outputs now-a-days? Seems like such a useless feature to me.

The phone is only a small part of it. This is a better version of an iPod Touch, which is a media center, with a phone added.

So why would you NOT want hdmi output? You could take your videos with you anywhere in the world and view them using a single cable.

As for blu-ray, you can get 720P video compressed to 700mb with little compression artifacts, and 1080P under 2GB. It's like a Jpeg photo at 80% quality, you can't tell the difference without the original to compare it to.

 

[yg17]

I'm going to back you up on that one JediZenMaster, especially when AT&T pull crap like this. I HATE branded handsets and will now refuse to buy any locked or branded handset. This is where Apple and the iPhone have a massive advantage by keeping the networks restrictive ways out of iOS's business.

No network software tampering = Apple win.

Unles Google produce another untampered, network free handset like the N1, it will most likely be my Last Android handset as I do not want the networks f****** with my smartphone.

So instead of carriers tampering with software on the iPhone, Apple does the tampering for the carriers. How is that any better?

Google doesn't do any tampering, and the carriers do it, which blows. But there's always the N1 or other unbranded devices that no one is screwing around with. There's no such option for the iPhone. Neither Google or AT&T is dictating what I can and can't do with my N1 and I like it that way. Even if I imported an unlocked iPhone from another country and used it on AT&T, I believe the iPhone would detect I'm on AT&T and disable tethering, which is ridiculous.

 

[ChazUK]

So instead of carriers tampering with software on the iPhone, Apple does the tampering for the carriers. How is that any better?

Google doesn't do any tampering, and the carriers do it, which blows. But there's always the N1 or other unbranded devices that no one is screwing around with. There's no such option for the iPhone. Neither Google or AT&T is dictating what I can and can't do with my N1 and I like it that way. Even if I imported an unlocked iPhone from another country and used it on AT&T, I believe the iPhone would detect I'm on AT&T and disable tethering, which is ridiculous.

As long as unbranded handsets exist from Google, I'll have an option. At least with the Nexus One, updates will be prompt and untampered with.

My HTC Hero I used to own STILL hasn't received an update thanks to Sense UI and a friend of mine has an Orange UK branded HTC Desire and they have preloaded it with crap and modified things like the browser icon to an Orange one and it loks hideous. Read about what they did to the thing!

It's that kind of crap that I hate with network branded phones and the N1 or an iPhone wold let me have the cleanest experience with either platform.

 

[matticus008]

[*]It doesn't work with iTunes (yet when Palm tries to do it they are labelled scum and unanimously slated).

Oh not that old chestnut again. My Blackberry works with iTunes, the official way. Palm could have done it properly and they chose not to.

So instead of carriers tampering with software on the iPhone, Apple does the tampering for the carriers. How is that any better?

Example?

Google doesn't do any tampering, and the carriers do it, which blows. But there's always the N1 or other unbranded devices that no one is screwing around with. There's no such option for the iPhone.

Unbranded devices are still supposed to respect the account settings provisions in the SIM, regarding tethering and everything else.

Neither Google or AT&T is dictating what I can and can't do with my N1 and I like it that way.

Of course AT&T is dictating what you can do on their network; they may just not be acting against the hacks or have their system set up improperly on their end. Failing to prevent something is not the same as authorizing it.

Even if I imported an unlocked iPhone from another country and used it on AT&T, I believe the iPhone would detect I'm on AT&T and disable tethering, which is ridiculous.

That's how most Android phones work, too (and all of them are supposed to). If you don't have a 3G plan, you can't reasonably expect that buying a phone with a 3G modem will give you 3G access. If your plan doesn't allow tethering, then regardless of the phone you use, you can't expect tethering.

 

[zenoran]

I'm pretty sure that all tethering is detectable via deep packet inspection.

sure anything is possible... it just isn't something that any carrier has implemented that I know of. They aren't going to monitor everyone's data traffic the overhead of that is enormous.

 

[ChazUK]

Oh not that old chestnut again. My Blackberry works with iTunes, the official way. Palm could have done it properly and they chose not to.

That's good to hear. I was referring to the people that inaccurately say that itunes doesn't work with android. There are plenty of iTunes syncing solutions for Android (missing sync, iSyncr, doubletwist) but people like to say "it doesn't work" without an ounce of research or knowledge.

"that old chestnut" is simply one of the negatives thrown out into the wind.

 

[spyda]

Droid Does.

 

[macUser2007]

...
That's how most Android phones work, too (and all of them are supposed to). If you don't have a 3G plan, you can't reasonably expect that buying a phone with a 3G modem will give you 3G access. If your plan doesn't allow tethering, then regardless of the phone you use, you can't expect tethering.

Not true.

 

[BaldiMac]

What's not true?

 

[yg17]

sure anything is possible... it just isn't something that any carrier has implemented that I know of. They aren't going to monitor everyone's data traffic the overhead of that is enormous.

And you can fool DPI if you spoof your computers' browsers user agent to match that of your phone. Obviously if you're downloading large files you might raise further suspicion, but for web browsing, there wouldn't appear to be any difference between packets from your phone's browser or computer's browser.

 

[macUser2007]

What's not true?

That you can't tether with Android, even if your plan doesn't allow it.

Duh.

 

[BaldiMac]

That you can't tether with Android, even if your plan doesn't allow it.

Duh.

Well, he didn't say that. What he said was actually true.

 

[Xibalba]

So I guess the Droid doesn't do... 300+ ppi.

um, no, what the Droid doesn't do is have a "720p screen" as originally advertised...and then subsequently redacted...

 

[matticus008]

"that old chestnut" is simply one of the negatives thrown out into the wind.

No, the old chestnut is the argument that Palm's actions were in any way excusable. Your assertion that "when Palm tried to do it" is a steaming load, because they never tried to do it in an above-board way.

Palm's troubles had nothing to do with connecting to iTunes and everything to do with how they did it. As I said, there are plenty of ways to interact with iTunes, including officially supported third party mechanisms. Nobody faulted Palm for the act of trying to work with iTunes.

 

[ChazUK]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 1.6; en-us; Archos5 Build/Donut) AppleWebKit/528.5+ (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.2 Mobile Safari/525.20.1)

"that old chestnut" is simply one of the negatives thrown out into the wind.

No, the old chestnut is the argument that Palm's actions were in any way excusable. Your assertion that "when Palm tried to do it" is a steaming load, because they never tried to do it in an above-board way.

Palm's troubles had nothing to do with connecting to iTunes and everything to do with how they did it. As I said, there are plenty of ways to interact with iTunes, including officially supported third party mechanisms. Nobody faulted Palm for the act of trying to work with iTunes.

Look, you are taking my point out of context.

People inaccurately say Android "doesn't work with iTunes" without even checking to see if it does (and it does) the same way your blackberry does, the "right" way.
This can only lead me to believe people want to knock Android because it doesn't natively sync with android as other solutions DO exist.
The only other company to my knowledge to have native sync was Motorola with the Rokr and Palms hacked solution is panned unanimously.
You seem to think I was defending Palm for what they did, but I wasn't. In no way was I condoning Palms actions and I feel a little sorry for anyone who bought a Pré with the intention of using it with iTunes as Palm advertised.

Am I any clearer yet?

 

[lPHONE]

The new Driod is trying to out do the iPhone?!?! What a new story

Maybe it will finally kill off those ugly Blackberries in the process.

 

[appleseed76]

What's with phone's having HDMI outputs now-a-days? Seems like such a useless feature to me.

The HDMI port can make your smartphone a portable media player that can be jacked into anyone's compatible TV. However, the size of HD movies definitely becomes a factor and you would have to have a very fast internet connection to stream anything in HD. AT&T's 3G ain't gonna' cut it.

This is way Apple still only offers a composite or a component cable adapter for the iPhone. Everyone hasn't converted over to HDTVs just yet, especially businesses and schools. Steve wants to make sure you can view it on any TV available.

 

[Xibalba]

I admit 110% that Apple fanboys are also annoying. They are. But what happens is the Fandroid crowd suddenly feels like they are NOT annoying, they think they are above being annoying because they use open devices and are freedom lovers. Well guess what androidians, YOU'RE NOT. Fandroids have eclipsed the Apple fanboy annoyingness and have now officially become the most annoying group of people on the internet.

Agree - extreme fanboys of any product or service are quite annoying.

Right now, Android is the best alternative for those who hate Apple or the iPhone and so until another OS or manufacturer comes out with relatively comparable software/hardware, fandroids will persist...

 

[tigress666]

Agree - extreme fanboys of any product or service are quite annoying.

Right now, Android is the best alternative for those who hate Apple or the iPhone and so until another OS or manufacturer comes out with relatively comparable software/hardware, fandroids will persist...

So true. I'm more of an iphone fan but really, android is the only competitor out there I see that I'd even consider (basically I see it as a reasonable enough compromise).

But not the Evo, way too big. I agree with Steve that sometimes it's worth some sacrifices to keep a device small (I appreciate my nice thin, Macbook Pro. Even my 2007 Macbook which is thick in comparison is pretty thin compared to a lot of laptops these days). Yes, I would like a more powerful computer, but I have to admit, not willing to go with a bigger laptop to get that. So far I'm pretty happy with my new 2010 Pro that he sacrificed using a newer chip for having a better graphics card. It may not be that much faster than my old computer, but it is much more capable (I can at least play some modern games on it). And honestly, if we aren't talking firefox (which unfortunately is the thing I use the most on the computer) it is noticeably faster than my old computer. Firefox is a pig (btu has too many features I enjoy thta I can't get myself to give it up. And sadly, I'm pretty sure the features I like are what slows it down).

 

[vijay007]

iOS is certainly less responsive on my 3Gs, when compared to Android OS on the Incredible or the EVO running 2.1 - plus Android 2.2 is measurably faster.

I like iOS UI a little better, but it's close. Android OS can also be customized to look better.

The EVO, with its 4.3" is larger than the iPhone, but it does not feel drastically different in the hand, or in the pocket. But the 4.3" screen makes a HUGE difference to stuff like web browsing.

Oh, and instead of blue Lego pieces, you get actual web content, too.

Really???

I got the Evo to get me through the 4 week period after selling my 3GS and buying the iPhone 4. Android on Evo (as it is) is not as responsive as iOS 3.1.2 on 3GS. In fact, it has a noticeable lag. Android UI is nowhere closer to iOS. Some of it's UI interactions have been blatantly copied from iOS.

Also, Evo is HUGE. When I got it, I felt the 4.3" screen would be nice for browsing and watching videos. Having used it for 2 weeks, I feel it is not a comfortable sized phone hold and talk/carry with. 3.8"-4" would be the optimal screen size for a smartphone.

The above are not only my opinion, but also my friends' who have tried the Evo.

 

[matticus008]

Look, you are taking my point out of context.

No, I'm not.

People inaccurately say Android "doesn't work with iTunes" without even checking to see if it does (and it does) the same way your blackberry does, the "right" way.

I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about the comment "yet when Palm tried...", which can only be taken either as a defense of Palm's efforts or a swipe at people who criticized Palm. There is no other context for that statement.

Here's the full statement:
"It doesn't work with iTunes (yet when Palm tries to do it they are labelled scum and unanimously slated)."

If the intent was to suggest that Android devices do work with iTunes, then Palm has nothing to do with it, and the statement should have been, "(but the following Android phones do work out of the box with iTunes)". Instead, the statement clearly reads that people criticize other products for not working with iTunes, but also criticize products that do try to work with iTunes. It unambiguously attempts to set up a showing of hypocrisy, but it's wrong. That's all I've been saying about it.

You seem to think I was defending Palm for what they did, but I wasn't. [...]
Am I any clearer yet?

Well that last part is much clearer, yes, but it isn't what you said the first time.