Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 29th Oct 2012 18:14 UTC
Google While Microsoft is unveiling all about Windows Phone 8, Google ruined the party a little bit by 'leaking' all about Android 4.2, the Nexus 10 tablet, and the new Nexus phone, the LG Nexus 4. There's some pretty awesome stuff in here from Google - except for the fact the devices themselves are kind of ugly.
Order by: Score:
Quite like the look
by alcibiades on Mon 29th Oct 2012 18:36 UTC
alcibiades
Member since:
2005-10-12

Agreed about the pricing, very impressive. As for the look, I rather like it. Tastes vary, but its not going to be a showstopper in any case. Rounded corners!

Reply Score: 6

RE: Quite like the look
by chithanh on Tue 30th Oct 2012 02:05 UTC in reply to "Quite like the look"
chithanh Member since:
2006-06-18

The Verge says in their preview that the Nexus 4 looks much better in person than on pictures.
http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/29/3569540/google-nexus-4-preview-p...

Reply Score: 2

And no micro-SD
by emarkp on Mon 29th Oct 2012 18:44 UTC
emarkp
Member since:
2005-09-10

The entire reason I got my Nexus One was for the standard: earphone jack, MicroUSB plug, and micro-SD card slot.

I don't get it, why do away with micro-SD?

Reply Score: 6

RE: And no micro-SD
by No it isnt on Mon 29th Oct 2012 18:50 UTC in reply to "And no micro-SD"
No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

Two reasons: instability and Microsoft extortion money. Removable storage means VFAT, which is patented.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: And no micro-SD
by smashIt on Mon 29th Oct 2012 19:19 UTC in reply to "RE: And no micro-SD"
smashIt Member since:
2005-07-06

and Microsoft extortion money. Removable storage means VFAT, which is patented.


doesn't count
you don't need VFAT to use sd-cards (and i think the patent in question has been invalidated)
and i'm sure lg and samsung already own an unlimited license for vfat

Reply Score: 8

RE[3]: And no micro-SD
by No it isnt on Mon 29th Oct 2012 21:05 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: And no micro-SD"
No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

You don't, except people will want to read their sdcards on their computers, which tend to run Windows. According to most accounts, MS demands some number of $s per device (usually 15). Last I saw mention of the vfat patent was when a court in Germany decided Motorola infringed on it.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: And no micro-SD
by Jokel on Thu 1st Nov 2012 06:33 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: And no micro-SD"
Jokel Member since:
2006-06-01

Well.. It is very easy to incorporate a ext4 driver on the CD that is containing the manual etc. Just pop in the CD and a few minutes later your ext4 formatted micro-SD card is easy readable.

Result? No money for Microsoft, because you are working with a filesystem they cannot ask money for.

As most people would only use their own system to read that device, it would not be a big problem. And who knows? If other manufacturers notice they can make things cheaper that way it maybe will become an alternative.

Edited 2012-11-01 06:34 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: And no micro-SD
by jptros on Fri 2nd Nov 2012 19:25 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: And no micro-SD"
jptros Member since:
2005-08-26

Not sure why any of the companies involved would invest in writing, shipping and supporting a file system driver when services like Google Drive are available for leveraging which allow the user to sync their files between devices without plugging their phone into a computer period. If it's not already, I expect google drive to be heavily integrated into Android by google themselves which from what I can tell comes at no added expense to the device makers period. Not to mention not including said hardware has to be cheaper to manufacture which translates to either a cheaper price tag or added revenue or both since no file system software has to be written or licensed.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: And no micro-SD
by JAlexoid on Wed 31st Oct 2012 11:15 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: And no micro-SD"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

It's not vFAT. It's exFAT and other SD related patents.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: And no micro-SD
by chithanh on Tue 30th Oct 2012 01:57 UTC in reply to "RE: And no micro-SD"
chithanh Member since:
2006-06-18

Removable storage means VFAT, which is patented.

I agree that it may be related to patents. But the devices all support USB OTG mode where you can connect a USB flash drive with VFAT. So that can't be the reason.

SDXC cards however may come with exFAT, which indeed requires royalty payments. The SD card association has really painted itself into a corner by choosing a patent encumbered filesystem.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: And no micro-SD
by dsmogor on Tue 30th Oct 2012 09:11 UTC in reply to "RE: And no micro-SD"
dsmogor Member since:
2005-09-01

I also though so, until I realized that if they support mass storage mode are eligible to that anyway.
Besides MS wont bother to go after such a niche device risking clash with Google lawyers.

Reply Score: 2

RE: And no micro-SD
by Kalessin on Mon 29th Oct 2012 21:17 UTC in reply to "And no micro-SD"
Kalessin Member since:
2007-01-18

No micro-SD? 16GB is pitiful if you there's no external storage (let alone 8GB). It drives me crazy that my current phone only has 32GB external storage. I can fit only a fraction of my music on there, and while I can certainly live without being able to put it all on there, it's really annoying to not be able to. And streaming services (including Google Music) don't cut it, because streaming all of that data is a total waste of money in comparison to putting the songs in local storage (it also requires have a good connection, which I don't always have).

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: And no micro-SD
by chithanh on Tue 30th Oct 2012 02:01 UTC in reply to "RE: And no micro-SD"
chithanh Member since:
2006-06-18

No micro-SD? 16GB is pitiful if you there's no external storage (let alone 8GB).

That there is no external storage is not entirely correct. You can use an USB OTG cable and connect normal USB flash drives.

This is of course much less convenient than having an SD card inserted into the device.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: And no micro-SD
by TemporalBeing on Tue 30th Oct 2012 17:38 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: And no micro-SD"
TemporalBeing Member since:
2007-08-22

"No micro-SD? 16GB is pitiful if you there's no external storage (let alone 8GB).

That there is no external storage is not entirely correct. You can use an USB OTG cable and connect normal USB flash drives.

This is of course much less convenient than having an SD card inserted into the device.
"

Well, considering you'd be able to change it - it would be more convenient as most that have the SD cards have them placed such that you have to power off the device to take them out or put them in. So they tend not to be extra storage so much as expandable storage to the limits of the device.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: And no micro-SD
by JAlexoid on Wed 31st Oct 2012 11:17 UTC in reply to "RE: And no micro-SD"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19
Canceled
by tessmonsta on Mon 29th Oct 2012 19:04 UTC
tessmonsta
Member since:
2009-07-16

I thought Google officially cancelled (not just delayed) the playground event for the new Nexus line...

Reply Score: 1

Comment by some1
by some1 on Mon 29th Oct 2012 19:21 UTC
some1
Member since:
2010-10-05

Apple should be unhappy they started this whole "retina screen" hype. Now each Apple device has a lower resolution than a respective Nexus device.

Also I do like how both devices look, at least to the extent one can judge them by pictures in play store.

Reply Score: 9

RE: Comment by some1
by rikkirakk on Mon 29th Oct 2012 22:21 UTC in reply to "Comment by some1"
rikkirakk Member since:
2012-07-30

Also I do like how both devices look, at least to the extent one can judge them by pictures in play store.


Agreed. I quite like the look of the devices, but I'd really have to hold and use on in person to judge. If it passes the touchy-feely test, AND ends up supporting 3G/LTE then I will likely be replacing my now obsolete iPad 1 with one of these.

Apple should be unhappy they started this whole "retina screen" hype. Now each Apple device has a lower resolution than a respective Nexus device.

I imagine they're crying all the way to the bank.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by some1
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Tue 30th Oct 2012 14:44 UTC in reply to "Comment by some1"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Retina isn't about having the highest resolution possible, its about having the highest resolution practical. They were actually quite smart about the marketing. They drew an arbitrary line called retina, saying that any greater resolution can't revel any more information to our biological eyes. So apple's response to these higher resolution screens is quite predictable: they'll say the extra pixels are wasted.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by some1
by Janglin_Jack on Tue 30th Oct 2012 15:41 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by some1"
Janglin_Jack Member since:
2010-10-20

they will say that until they release a new tablet with higher resolution.
then they will call it icornea or something, and rejoice that it's the real resolution a person can really really see.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Comment by some1
by some1 on Tue 30th Oct 2012 15:52 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by some1"
some1 Member since:
2010-10-05

Originally they said that Retina is 300 PPI, because this is the "magic number", but the iPad 3 had less but was still Retina. Nexus 10 has exactly 300. To argue it's wasted they'd need to revise what Steve said on iPhone 4 release.

Also the argument that there's an optimal number is harder to sell. Typically when people are told that some metric is important, they are easy to convince that the more the better. See GHz, megapixels etc.

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Comment by some1
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Tue 30th Oct 2012 18:47 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by some1"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

I think you missed the ipad 3 announcement where they clarified the retina moniker to include the distance the device is to be used at.

Its apple, they have a lot of experience telling people that specs don't matter when they don't measure up to the competition.

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: Comment by some1
by some1 on Wed 31st Oct 2012 01:53 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by some1"
some1 Member since:
2010-10-05

Oh yes, good point. Apple was doing fairly well recently, so I forgot the vast experience they have in explaining why they don't need higher-spec hardware with all the magic software they've got.

Reply Score: 3

SOLD
by jonoden on Mon 29th Oct 2012 20:03 UTC
jonoden
Member since:
2012-02-13

This will be replacing my GNex come November.

Reply Score: 2

RE: SOLD
by cdude on Mon 29th Oct 2012 20:07 UTC in reply to "SOLD"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

Indeed great devices. I am looking out for the Nexus7 with 32GB RAM. That clearly beets any Surface. Speaking of Surface: the SDK was still not released? How to they expect people to write apps? Start to believe the rumors that the SDK is delayed cause of the upcoming Surface Phone carry truth. Related to Surface Phone: http://yle.fi/uutiset/game_over_for_nokia_says_ex-microsoft_exec/63...

Edited 2012-10-29 20:17 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: SOLD
by some1 on Mon 29th Oct 2012 21:22 UTC in reply to "RE: SOLD"
some1 Member since:
2010-10-05

Ahead of Microsoft’s Windows Phone 8 rollout on Monday, a 16-year Microsoft veteran says he sees his former employer buying out the ailing Finnish mobile phone giant.

Oh, no one saw it coming.

Reply Score: 5

Re:
by kurkosdr on Mon 29th Oct 2012 20:17 UTC
kurkosdr
Member since:
2011-04-11

Why no micro-SD card in later Nexuses? Simple answer: politics. Google wants you to use Google Drive (the decision to ditch micro-SD from nexuses must have been taken around the time they started planning google drive), because they see a vast amount of personal data to mine through. Or at least they want to push users to use their services, so they can serve ads and subscription plans. Even if a micro-SD was a no-no for whatever technical reasons, there is no reason why they couldn't have made a 32GB and 64GB version of the Galaxy Nexus.

PS: Didn't know microSD was officially supported by Android. That's news to me. I thought micro-SD support was a kludge by the OEMs. Does the Nexus One mount the external SD to /sdcard/sd, /sdcard/_ExternalSD or /ext-sd ? Because i 've seen all those three variations by OEMs.

Edited 2012-10-29 20:21 UTC

Reply Score: 7

RE: Re:
by darknexus on Mon 29th Oct 2012 22:09 UTC in reply to "Re:"
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

PS: Didn't know microSD was officially supported by Android. That's news to me. I thought micro-SD support was a kludge by the OEMs. Does the Nexus One mount the external SD to /sdcard/sd, /sdcard/_ExternalSD or /ext-sd ? Because i 've seen all those three variations by OEMs.

On my Nexus One running stock Android, it was mounted to /mnt/sdcard/.

Reply Score: 3

Nexus 4
by WorknMan on Tue 30th Oct 2012 02:20 UTC in reply to "Re:"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

I'm sorry, but the new Nexus 4 phone is a joke:

NO LTE
NO 32 GIG VERSION
NO SD CARD SLOT
NO removable battery
NO real reason to upgrade

Hey Google, 2010 called and wants its smartphone back. And while Google is making excuses about why an LTE phone is so impractical:

http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/29/3569688/why-nexus-4-does-not-hav...

Apple just released an LTE phone in the US on all major carriers. So now Google customers are stuck between buying this piece of shit or having to choose a phone that is violated by the carriers and will take 6-8 months to get updates.

If Apple can manage to work with carriers and get us LTE with timely updates, why can't Google? I don't like iOS at all and would rather tongue the sweaty asshole of a Kenyan marathon runner than own an iPhone, but sometimes being an Android user is goddamn frustrating.

Edited 2012-10-30 02:20 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE: Nexus 4
by leos on Tue 30th Oct 2012 03:12 UTC in reply to "Nexus 4"
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

I'm sorry, but the new Nexus 4 phone is a joke:

NO LTE
NO 32 GIG VERSION
NO SD CARD SLOT
NO removable battery
NO real reason to upgrade

Hey Google, 2010 called and wants its smartphone back. And while Google is making excuses about why an LTE phone is so impractical:

http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/29/3569688/why-nexus-4-does-not-hav...

Apple just released an LTE phone in the US on all major carriers. So now Google customers are stuck between buying this piece of shit or having to choose a phone that is violated by the carriers and will take 6-8 months to get updates.


I'm an iPhone user but I think this phone is brilliant. So it's not LTE which is a little surprising in 2012, but it's also $299. That's crazy affordable for the technology. Never missed an SD card or a removable battery so I don't see that as a negative.

The only concern I would have about this trend is that Google is likely just breaking even on the hardware or the margins are razor thin. So where are they making their money? Well by advertising to you. So I'm a little wary that the entire business model rests on squeezing as much money out of me post-purchase, when my personal information is so valuable to advertisers.

Edited 2012-10-30 03:14 UTC

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Nexus 4
by unclefester on Tue 30th Oct 2012 04:04 UTC in reply to "RE: Nexus 4"
unclefester Member since:
2007-01-13


The only concern I would have about this trend is that Google is likely just breaking even on the hardware or the margins are razor thin. So where are they making their money?


The fact is that tablets and phones really aren't that expensive to make. eg Just see how little Huawei phones cost in comparison to comparable models from "major" brands.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Nexus 4
by leos on Tue 30th Oct 2012 05:16 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Nexus 4"
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

"
The only concern I would have about this trend is that Google is likely just breaking even on the hardware or the margins are razor thin. So where are they making their money?


The fact is that tablets and phones really aren't that expensive to make. eg Just see how little Huawei phones cost in comparison to comparable models from "major" brands.
"

There's a difference between a quality phone and a cheap piece of crap

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Nexus 4
by cdude on Tue 30th Oct 2012 06:02 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Nexus 4"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

Since today all the devices are assembled in china by more or less the same factories there is hardly an quality argument to make on hw level. Its all the same crap.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Nexus 4
by leos on Tue 30th Oct 2012 15:05 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Nexus 4"
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

Since today all the devices are assembled in china by more or less the same factories there is hardly an quality argument to make on hw level. Its all the same crap.


As if China can't make good quality stuff. Of course they can, that's just not the usual business model. If you don't think there's a difference between the quality of an iPhone or top Android phone and a no-name chinese brand then you've clearly never used either.

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: Nexus 4
by cdude on Tue 30th Oct 2012 19:14 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Nexus 4"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

This isn't about noname brands. Are you aware that the iPhone 5 is $185 in material? The by far biggest chunk that increases the end-user price is neither QA nor sallery nor anything else (at the manufactor side - hey, foxconn, cheaper then cheap) that contributes to the quality of the product, its all the R&D and serviced that makes the final product + profit. The reason why iPhone is perceived as good quality is the overall product, design, software and services. Thats why it sells and why the high profit margins and R&D investment are possible. Assembling the hardware together id by far the lowest contributor to quality. But yes, every of that components can turn a otherwise good product bad.

Edited 2012-10-30 19:25 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Nexus 4
by nemith on Tue 30th Oct 2012 07:01 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Nexus 4"
nemith Member since:
2005-07-28


The only concern I would have about this trend is that Google is likely just breaking even on the hardware or the margins are razor thin. So where are they making their money?


Don't fool yourself. Apple is in advertising as well. Just cause you shell out a sh%t ton of money doesn't mean they aren't doing the same analytics on your usage and data.

Three is nothing to prove that Apple isn't any more or less evil than Google other than crack pot ideas about pricing of devices.

When it comes down to it the reason why Google is coming out with cheap tablets is to gain adoption. They want a consumer this holiday season to look at a Nexus device and choose it on price over some of the competition. The goal here is to try and kick start the Android tablet eco-system. Attract more developers or get current developers to write tablet optimized devices.

The biggest complaint about Android tablets is the lack of proper applications. Prove android is a proper and popular platform and allow for other non-nexus devices to charge a premium later down the road once the ecosystem is a true competitor to iOS/iPad.

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: Nexus 4
by leos on Tue 30th Oct 2012 15:10 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Nexus 4"
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

Don't fool yourself. Apple is in advertising as well. Just cause you shell out a sh%t ton of money doesn't mean they aren't doing the same analytics on your usage and data.


Big difference between being in advertising and your entire business model depending on it. The lions share of Apple's profits comes from hardware and one would hope that they will be smart enough not to endanger those profits by alienating people with intrusive adverts. I think they do get it. Just look at a mac compared to a PC out of the box. Any consumer PC is riddled with advertisements and shitty trialware software out of the box, while a mac is clean.

That said I would prefer if they were not in advertising at all.

Three is nothing to prove that Apple isn't any more or less evil than Google other than crack pot ideas about pricing of devices.


And yet people seem to believe Google's hilarious "do no evil" motto.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Nexus 4
by JAlexoid on Wed 31st Oct 2012 11:25 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Nexus 4"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

endanger those profits by alienating people with intrusive adverts

But they don't need to deliver those adverts. They can just sell the aggregate marketing data to "research" companies and let the ad agencies use that data...

Any consumer PC is riddled with advertisements and shitty trialware software out of the box

My Lenovo T430s disagrees with that statement.

Google's hilarious "do no evil" motto

If only that was their motto...

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: Nexus 4
by leos on Wed 31st Oct 2012 14:16 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Nexus 4"
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

"Any consumer PC is riddled with advertisements and shitty trialware software out of the box

My Lenovo T430s disagrees with that statement.
"

What part of consumer laptops did you not understand? I just bought a lenovo for a client and it was crammed full of crap software from Lenovo (their "enhanced" system tools) and trial antivirus bullshit.

"Google's hilarious "do no evil" motto

If only that was their motto...
"

Yeah, if only. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don't_be_evil

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Nexus 4
by WorknMan on Tue 30th Oct 2012 04:38 UTC in reply to "RE: Nexus 4"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

I'm an iPhone user but I think this phone is brilliant. So it's not LTE which is a little surprising in 2012, but it's also $299.


That's fine, but I wish they'd make two Nexus phones... one for the low-end, and one for the high-end. Fact is, if you want to stay with stock Android, you have less phones/tablets to choose from than iOS users do. And you know you have a problem when you're offering fewer options than Apple ;)

The only concern I would have about this trend is that Google is likely just breaking even on the hardware or the margins are razor thin. So where are they making their money? Well by advertising to you. So I'm a little wary that the entire business model rests on squeezing as much money out of me post-purchase, when my personal information is so valuable to advertisers.


Nice thing about Nexus devices is that they're super simple to root. And once you have rooted, then get this:

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.adaway&hl=en

That pretty much takes care of the advertising problem, so now they can waste their time tracking me all they want ;)

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Nexus 4
by cdude on Tue 30th Oct 2012 06:07 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Nexus 4"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

Let's see. Nexus 4 vs iPhone 5 is 4:5 with the differences that first not only the last 2 Nexus device are still supported and second they are all very different in specs, design, form factor unlike iPhone. Looks for me as Google offers more choice in there Nexus portfolio then Apple does with its very same phone since v1 (with the exception of the newer bigger screen).

Edited 2012-10-30 06:10 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Nexus 4
by WorknMan on Tue 30th Oct 2012 20:54 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Nexus 4"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

Let's see. Nexus 4 vs iPhone 5 is 4:5 with the differences that first not only the last 2 Nexus device are still supported and second they are all very different in specs, design, form factor unlike iPhone. Looks for me as Google offers more choice in there Nexus portfolio then Apple does with its very same phone since v1 (with the exception of the newer bigger screen).


There's only one phone that Google is currently selling, and that's the Nexus 4 (Gnex is no longer in the Play store), in 8/16gb and unlocked. With the iPhone, you get 16/32/64 and either unlocked or LTE with carriers, plus you have a choice of two different colors.

Also, Apple's got a 'player' device (iPod Touch), a 7", and a 10". Google only has a 7" and 10", and with fewer configurations than Apple does.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Nexus 4
by cdude on Wed 31st Oct 2012 07:10 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Nexus 4"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

Find your favorite Nexus in all kind of configuration, with different cases, in different colors, with all kind of different equipment on Amazon/ebay/bestsell. So what?

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Nexus 4
by JAlexoid on Wed 31st Oct 2012 11:28 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Nexus 4"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Yet in the next article you'll be arguing that Android is fragmented beyond comprehension with all of the options...

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Nexus 4
by dsmogor on Tue 30th Oct 2012 09:34 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Nexus 4"
dsmogor Member since:
2005-09-01

By solving "advertisement problem" people might ultimately "solve" application problem on Android... by making soft houses drop support for the platform.
I myself consider extra power and attention consumed by ads a fair price for the apps.
If you want to do away with the adds, consider actually supporting people who wrote the software.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Nexus 4
by WorknMan on Tue 30th Oct 2012 20:51 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Nexus 4"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

If you want to do away with the adds, consider actually supporting people who wrote the software.


I always do, assuming they give me the option (which many don't). I don't block ads to get free stuff; I block ads because I HATE advertising. (And no, I don't subscribe to cable either, just in case you were wondering.)

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Nexus 4
by zima on Sat 3rd Nov 2012 06:05 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Nexus 4"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

I wish they'd make two Nexus phones... one for the low-end, and one for the high-end.

I'd say the first would be "middle segment" at worst - and, really, this new Nexus belongs to lower reaches of high-end.

Low is something like http://press.nokia.com/2011/08/25/nokia-launches-the-nokia-101-and-... (or the earlier 1616, or whole 1100-like family), maybe touching on some lower-priced S40 handsets (like 2330, generally many visible in http://www.opera.com/smw/2011/11/ )

Reply Score: 2

RE: Nexus 4
by asupcb on Tue 30th Oct 2012 05:44 UTC in reply to "Nexus 4"
asupcb Member since:
2005-11-10

I agree with everything that you said except for the LTE part. The new Nexus 4 supports 42Mbps+ HSPA+. It's actually faster than almost all LTE networks in current existence now and for the next two to four years.

Outside of the US, a lot of mobile carrier companies will not be making truly significant upgrades in LTE until LTE Advanced (real 4G by ITU standards instead of marketing buzz) because current (3.9G) LTE carries little benefit compared to advanced UTMS networks for the majority of use cases outside of those that depend on lower latency. LTE upgrades make sense in the US because it is a major upgrade for CDMA based networks, such as those used by Verizon, Sprint, and many of the minor regional operators which make up over half of US carrier operations.

Outside of the US, focusing on improved UMTS/HSPA makes a lot more sense.

LG should probably just release a CDMA/US focused version that incorporates CDMA/LTE support.

Edited 2012-10-30 05:46 UTC

Reply Score: 6

RE[2]: Nexus 4
by WorknMan on Tue 30th Oct 2012 05:57 UTC in reply to "RE: Nexus 4"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

I agree with everything that you said except for the LTE part. The new Nexus 4 supports 42Mbps+ HSPA+. It's actually faster than almost all LTE networks in current existence now and for the next two to four years.


How does that equate to real-world speeds though? When I was on Verizon and had their Galaxy Nexus, I could get 15-20mbps when the reception was good. However, the radio on that phone was ass, so I switched to the GSM version.

On my GSM Gnex with AT&T, the fastest I've managed is about 4mbps, and that was after tweaking the APN settings a bit, with 4 bars of HSPA+. A friend of mine with the same phone can sometimes hit 5-6mbps on his Gnex with T-mo, but a lot of times, his speeds are lower than mine.

So you see, that's a pretty big difference. It's not a huge deal for day-to-day usage, but really sucks when tethering ;)

Edited 2012-10-30 05:58 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Nexus 4
by gan17 on Tue 30th Oct 2012 14:46 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Nexus 4"
gan17 Member since:
2008-06-03

HSPA+ varies wildly from country to country. Obviously, no one is going to get 21Mbps, let alone 42Mbps. Thing is, I've noticed (from Speedtest rankings and whatnot) that many European and Asian 3.5G/HSPA+ speeds are pretty close to what the average American gets on Verizon LTE (though I can't speak for latency).

Where I live, I can get the equivalent of 10Mbps+ quite often, and around 14 during the early morning hours, and I live in a very saturated city. LTE just rolled out here a few months ago, and from what I've read, users get around 20Mbps if signal permits. So, yes, LTE is obviously faster, but it's not really 4G speed like many telcos claim, and our 3.5G/HSPA+ speeds aren't all that bad here. There's obviously much more room for LTE to get faster though (4x4 MIMO - 20MHz supposedly goes up to 325Mbps), but I suspect most telcos will have moved on to totally different tech before that.

Edited 2012-10-30 14:47 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Nexus 4
by WorknMan on Tue 30th Oct 2012 20:42 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Nexus 4"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

So, yes, LTE is obviously faster, but it's not really 4G speed like many telcos claim


LOL, I don't give a good god damn if it's 'real' 4g or not. The point is that it's faster than what I have now.

BTW: I'm in Austin, TX. You would think HSPA+ would be faster than 4mbps here.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Nexus 4
by modmans2ndcoming on Wed 31st Oct 2012 01:17 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Nexus 4"
modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

All the spectrum capabilities mean shit if the carrier does not connect their towers with enough back-haul to provide you with the speeds.

Even LTE can run like ass in those cases.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Nexus 4
by JAlexoid on Wed 31st Oct 2012 11:30 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Nexus 4"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

You poor Americans...

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Nexus 4
by WorknMan on Wed 31st Oct 2012 18:07 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Nexus 4"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

You poor Americans...


LOL, you say that now, but the next time some cool new service is announced, there'll be 300 comments bitching about how the service is only available in America. Happens every time ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE: Nexus 4
by dsmogor on Tue 30th Oct 2012 09:14 UTC in reply to "Nexus 4"
dsmogor Member since:
2005-09-01

I guess you'll have to wait for Sony Nexus.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Nexus 4
by chithanh on Tue 30th Oct 2012 16:55 UTC in reply to "Nexus 4"
chithanh Member since:
2006-06-18

I'm sorry, but the new Nexus 4 phone is a joke:

Actually if you fixed all the complaints about the Nexus 4:

* Add LTE support
* Add microSD card
* 32 GB flash option
* possibly switch from IPS to AMOLED (some might disagree)
* Make battery removable

Then you would almost exactly arrive at the Galaxy S3. If Google sold it at a cheaper price, they would upset Samsung. If they sold it at the same price, people would question why we need the Nexus 4 at all. (lose-lose)

Now, Google can offer a device at an unbeatable price, and the other Android manufacturers still find a niche of people who are not satisfied with it. (win-win)

Reply Score: 4

RE: Nexus 4
by modmans2ndcoming on Wed 31st Oct 2012 01:11 UTC in reply to "Nexus 4"
modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

Tell the carriers to settle on one...or two...or three....or hell... even FOUR LTE spectrum and then you can see LTE in a contract free, unlocked powerful phone.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Nexus 4
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Wed 31st Oct 2012 04:12 UTC in reply to "Nexus 4"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

No, the alternative to a nexus phone for someone who wants android is choosing a phone supported by cyanogenmod. Like any of the Galaxy S3 models that have all of the features you're complaining about.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Nexus 4
by saso on Wed 31st Oct 2012 14:21 UTC in reply to "Nexus 4"
saso Member since:
2007-04-18

Sorry for being a bit sarcastic, but I couldn't resist.

NO LTE

LTE is a US-specific thing. Most of the world doesn't care.

NO 32 GIG VERSION
NO SD CARD SLOT

Valid criticisms.

NO removable battery

Again, nobody cares. We've moved on.

NO real reason to upgrade

Subjective opinion. Looking through the rest of your comment you make the awful impression of being a whiny kid who needs to have the latest and greatest shiny that is available on the market immediately when it's released. Perhaps the Nexus 4 isn't reason enough to upgrade for Galaxy Nexus owners, but being a 1st gen Nexus user myself, I can certainly see the appeal in the Nexus 4 (that's barely a 3 year old phone, mind you).

Hey Google, 2010 called and wants its smartphone back.

The quad-core CPU, 2 gigs of RAM and huge screen certainly aren't features from 2010, but it's easy to forget if you're only looking for spec-superiority in new products.

And while Google is making excuses about why an LTE phone is so impractical:
http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/29/3569688/why-nexus-4-does-not-hav...

Way to dismiss a valid argument out of hand.

Apple just released an LTE phone in the US on all major carriers.

An Apple phone is also a lot more expensive. Oh and it also has no replaceable battery or SD card slot, but somehow it's only bad when Google does it.

So now Google customers are stuck between buying this piece of shit or having to choose a phone that is violated by the carriers and will take 6-8 months to get updates.

Mind you, that's a piece of shit which can only, per HSPA+ spec, get up to 168Mbit/s downlink and 22Mbit/s uplink speeds. I'm sure that is something worth crying over while you watch your 2GB data cap disappear in under 2 minutes (at 20Mbit/s, regular HSPA+ speeds, you'll drain that in under 14 minutes).

If Apple can manage to work with carriers and get us LTE with timely updates, why can't Google? I don't like iOS at all and would rather tongue the sweaty asshole of a Kenyan marathon runner than own an iPhone, but sometimes being an Android user is goddamn frustrating.

The magnitude of your whining is somewhat astonishing, plus you're crying on the wrong shoulder. You shouldn't be crying over not being able to push hundreds of megabits per second through your mobile device, but rather complain to the carriers for capping your data usage at ridiculously low values or imposing crazy a FUP after some transferred amount.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Nexus 4
by Johann Chua on Wed 31st Oct 2012 15:17 UTC in reply to "RE: Nexus 4"
Johann Chua Member since:
2005-07-22

Sorry for being a bit sarcastic, but I couldn't resist.

"NO LTE

LTE is a US-specific thing. Most of the world doesn't care.

"

Globe and Smart are rolling out LTE in the Philippines.

Isn't the real problem that there are multiple incompatible LTE standards? You'd have to make separate models for each version.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Nexus 4
by saso on Thu 1st Nov 2012 10:56 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Nexus 4"
saso Member since:
2007-04-18

Isn't the real problem that there are multiple incompatible LTE standards? You'd have to make separate models for each version.

In a sense. The incompatibility seems to stem from the fact that LTE uses wildly different frequency bands. According to Wikipedia it's at least the following:

* North America: 700/800/1700/1900 MHz
* South America: 2500 MHz
* Europe: 800/900/1800/2600 MHz
* Asia: 1800/2600 MHz
* Australia: 1800 MHz

So in total it appears there are 8 bands with wavelengths from 11.538cm to 42.857cm. In practice this means you'll need more than one antenna to get good reception on all bands (if you aren't familiar with electrical engineering, you can view an antenna like the string of a violin and the electromagnetic waves it receives like a bow - naturally a certain length string wants to resonate only at a certain frequency); probably three antennas, as the wavelengths seem clustered around 3 values: 37.5cm (700/800/900 MHz), 16.6cm (1700/1800/1900 MHz) and 12cm (2500/2600 MHz). Perhaps some bright engineer might be able to combine these into a single one, as the wavelengths appear close enough for some harmonic resonance to kick in (16.6 * 2 = 33.2, 12 * 3 = 36).

Next come the filters, amplifiers and dipoles. Much of this can be done digitally nowadays, but there's nothing like a good analog preamp to make sure you have good signal clarity. In any case, these are miniature in modern ICs, so adding a bunch more isn't going to hurt manufacturing terribly (after all, pentaband phones are common nowadays and don't seem to suffer terribly inflated costs due to their radios).

The real kicker, though, is testing and certification. While LTE is a standard, knowing the companies implementing base station equipment, it's often a hit-or-miss success story with compatibility, especially as the standards get more complex. LTE is enormously complex and very young, so equipment hasn't yet had the time to mature, so there might be serious issues here that need to be ironed out. Obviously, when you're planning on selling an unsubsidized phone without carrier cooperation, you want it to be as safe on the compatibility side as possible. This, probably, more than anything, forced Google to abandon LTE and go instead for the tried and true UMTS standard.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Nexus 4
by quackalist on Wed 31st Oct 2012 17:54 UTC in reply to "RE: Nexus 4"
quackalist Member since:
2007-08-27

Yeah, I've never understand the appeal of mobile devices that run like the wind only to be forced to piffle out after a few minutes use. Why bother, why spend a small fortune...can't get my head around it.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Nexus 4
by Alfman on Wed 31st Oct 2012 18:48 UTC in reply to "RE: Nexus 4"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

saso,


WorknMan: "NO removable battery"

saso: "Again, nobody cares. We've moved on."

That's not true at all, electronic waste is a major problem and it's exacerbated when manufactures engineer non-user serviceable devices.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Nexus 4
by saso on Thu 1st Nov 2012 11:00 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Nexus 4"
saso Member since:
2007-04-18

That's not true at all, electronic waste is a major problem and it's exacerbated when manufactures engineer non-user serviceable devices.

I'm not talking about the environmental aspect. I agree with you that we are generating lots of waste, but the fact that batteries aren't replaceable doesn't really factor into people's decision to buy a phone anymore.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Nexus 4
by Alfman on Thu 1st Nov 2012 15:20 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Nexus 4"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

saso,

"I'm not talking about the environmental aspect. I agree with you that we are generating lots of waste, but the fact that batteries aren't replaceable doesn't really factor into people's decision to buy a phone anymore."

Well, the sales numbers don't lie, you are right.

However a purchase of a non-battery-accessible device cannot be construed as a vote against having accessible batteries. It's a subtle distinction having to do with the granularity of choices offered.

When given no fine grained choice about the battery, consumers will buy them anyways. However given a choice we may very well learn that many consumers would prefer an accessible battery and would even be willing to pay a bit more for it.

It is plausible a manufacturer may been aware that consumers wanted battery access, and never the less decided to do away with it for selfish reasons like built in obsolescence.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Nexus 4
by saso on Thu 1st Nov 2012 18:50 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Nexus 4"
saso Member since:
2007-04-18

However a purchase of a non-battery-accessible device cannot be construed as a vote against having accessible batteries. It's a subtle distinction having to do with the granularity of choices offered.

I never said I agree or disagree with the direction the manufacturers have taken. I was merely stating the fact of the market place - it simply doesn't factor into people's purchasing choices (I mean at large; not talking about individuals like yourself).

When given no fine grained choice about the battery, consumers will buy them anyways.

You can always purchase a smartphone with a removable battery, there's still plenty of choice, e.g. (nearly) all of Samsungs offerings, AFAIK, still have removable batteries.

However given a choice we may very well learn that many consumers would prefer an accessible battery and would even be willing to pay a bit more for it.

Sales numbers clearly show this to be false. Accept it, people just don't care.

It is plausible a manufacturer may been aware that consumers wanted battery access, and never the less decided to do away with it for selfish reasons like built in obsolescence.

Before you ascribe ulterior motives, try to look for valid technical reasons why a battery might not be field-replaceable. For instance, hinges, clips, connectors and release mechanisms all take up valuable space, compromise the device's mechanical integrity, add weight and make hardware design generally more complex. They also make certain features nearly impossible, like Nexus 4's laminated glass back (which adds scratch resistance - a feature consumers really want).

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Nexus 4
by Alfman on Thu 1st Nov 2012 20:08 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Nexus 4"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

saso,

Your not contradicting anything I'm saying except in your conclusion.

"Sales numbers clearly show this to be false. Accept it, people just don't care."

I don't think you understood the subtle distinction I was trying to point out, let me try explaining it differently...When you vote for a candidate, it does not imply an endorsement of everything the candidate stands for, in fact there may be some areas that you are in complete disagreement with the candidate you vote for. Yet you'll vote for him because you make a holistic decision based on a multitude of factors. It would be a fallacy to assume that voters agree with everything about the candidate they've voted for. Had there been more fine grained choices available amongst candidates, voters would be better able to reflect what they actually want by their vote.

Can you see how this applies to more mundane things like consumer purchases? When you claim "Sales numbers clearly show this to be false.", you've extrapolated each sale to represent consensus about a specific aspect of a device, but you haven't managed to isolate the variables properly. We'd have a much better idea of what consumers want if they had an *explicit* choice on the matter in isolation of all other variables.

Just to reiterate for emphasis, you couldn't draw a conclusion from coarse election data alone about the whether the population believes in an aspect as specific as gun rights. There may be some correlation, but to even find it means asking specific fine grained questions and not just jumping to conclusions based on the coarsely grained votes.

Sorry for the length of this post, I just think it's important to get this distinction right since it's a common misuse of sales numbers.

Edit: In the end though, we can agree that a removable battery is probably not going to be a decisive priority even for those people who would prefer it.

Edited 2012-11-01 20:23 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Multi user
by pysiak on Mon 29th Oct 2012 21:46 UTC
pysiak
Member since:
2008-01-01

My Nexus 7 is my personal device; however, with a wife and a child at home, it's not used only by me.

I welcome this feature as my card was almost charged for some silly application because my lovely 6 year old clicked away with nice shiny buttons to enhance an app with a talking cat. By buying him tooth paste.. Dear god..

I hope the accounts are FULLY seperate ;)

Reply Score: 3

LG Phone
by marcus0263 on Mon 29th Oct 2012 22:09 UTC
marcus0263
Member since:
2007-06-02

Let's see ... no microSD card ..... not a deal breaker, but very disappointing and a very bad trend that I am seeing.

But the deal breaker is if it's true is no removable battery which is another very bad trend I'm seeing.

I think I'm going to pull the trigger on the Samsung Google phone. It's cheaper, 32 GB storage and you can swap out the battery. For the life of me I cannot see how people are letting them get away with no removable battery.

Reply Score: 5

RE: LG Phone
by grumpyoldman on Wed 31st Oct 2012 21:48 UTC in reply to "LG Phone "
grumpyoldman Member since:
2012-10-08

Maybe it is a going trend with general consumers, the thinking that "by the time the battery dies, I may already be good to go for another new phone, so why buy another battery? Sooo, I don't think I need a removable battery." :-)

Reply Score: 2

LG?!
by shadowhand on Mon 29th Oct 2012 23:01 UTC
shadowhand
Member since:
2005-07-06

Does anyone know why Google choose to go with LG instead of Samsung for the new Nexus 4?

Reply Score: 1

RE: LG?!
by MrWeeble on Mon 29th Oct 2012 23:18 UTC in reply to "LG?!"
MrWeeble Member since:
2007-04-18

I would imagine because they have gone with Samsung for the last two Nexus phones (S and Galaxy) and they want to spread the love around.

Reply Score: 2

RE: LG?!
by gan17 on Tue 30th Oct 2012 01:48 UTC in reply to "LG?!"
gan17 Member since:
2008-06-03

Might be because they want as many manufacturers on board. Current Play Store listings have a phone from LG, a 7 inch tablet from Asus, and a 10 inch one from Samsung. Pretty well spread out, imho.

Might also be due to the whole yakju debacle Samsung created with the Galaxy Nexus, where I had to flash stock "pure Google" yakju firmware to replace the yakju-xx/whatever on mine just to get timely updates. Verizon users in the US might relate to what I'm talking about here (also explains why the Nexus 4 ditches LTE).

Might also be due to Samsung not putting much weight behind the Galaxy Nexus' development. It's a decent device, but the specs and performance weren't exactly what I'd call Nexus-level.

Might be that Google actually listened to my complaints about Samsung products having terrible reliability.

Edited 2012-10-30 01:49 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: LG?!
by dsmogor on Tue 30th Oct 2012 09:40 UTC in reply to "LG?!"
dsmogor Member since:
2005-09-01

I guess Samsung didn't want to spoil their GSIII sales with such no-margins device in the Galaxy family that in fact trumps their flagship on many fronts.
LG have been going on the brink of profitability for some time so it might be a relatively better deal for them.

Reply Score: 2

no sd card booo hooo..
by jimmystewpot on Tue 30th Oct 2012 00:54 UTC
jimmystewpot
Member since:
2006-01-19

I see everyone winging about the SD card.. while I concur that it would be nice to have an SD card.. at the price they are selling it unlocked that's a great deal. I would prefer no sdcard and a great price than to have an SD card and be paying top dollar/pound/euro...

Reply Score: 1

less than half the price
by unclefester on Tue 30th Oct 2012 04:13 UTC
unclefester
Member since:
2007-01-13

The 16GB nexus 4 (AUD399) is 50% less than the 16GB iphone 5 (AUD799) here in Australia.

Reply Score: 3

Talking about looks
by darknexus on Tue 30th Oct 2012 04:25 UTC
darknexus
Member since:
2008-07-15

Everyone talking about how the phone looks determining whether they'll purchase it or not reminds me of what is often said about those of us who use Apple devices: namely that we only care about them because how they look. Funny how it's just fine to do that when we're talking about Google and LG, isn't it? </sarcasm>
In all seriousness Thom, you did come off a bit shallow here. I don't think you are shallow, at least from your other writings, but it just struck me that way. I'm not trying to antagonize, just trying to be constructive.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Talking about looks
by WorknMan on Tue 30th Oct 2012 04:43 UTC in reply to "Talking about looks"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

Everyone talking about how the phone looks determining whether they'll purchase it or not reminds me of what is often said about those of us who use Apple devices: namely that we only care about them because how they look. Funny how it's just fine to do that when we're talking about Google and LG, isn't it? </sarcasm>


Unfortunately, this nonsense has spilled over into the mainstream. If it's comfortable to hold and functions well, who gives a shit about what it looks like? It's an inanimate object. You're not going to make love to it. Or at least, I hope you're not, but I wouldn't put it past some people. The way some folks talk about how 'sexy' a phone is, I wouldn't be surprised if they imagine it having tits on the front ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Talking about looks
by cdude on Tue 30th Oct 2012 06:17 UTC in reply to "RE: Talking about looks"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

On the front makes no sense. On the back so you can proper hold your phone/tablet with both hands to reach maximum satisfaction rate. Will stay a dream cause round forms are Apple's IP.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Talking about looks
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 30th Oct 2012 09:59 UTC in reply to "RE: Talking about looks"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Uh, I have always cared about how my stuff looks. I prefer using something that looks pleasing than to use something that looks like ass - especially when it comes to something I have to look at multiple times a day.

That may not matter to you, but that doesn't mean it's an invalid requirement. You're also not a better person for not caring about that, you know.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Talking about looks
by gan17 on Tue 30th Oct 2012 14:29 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Talking about looks"
gan17 Member since:
2008-06-03

I don't think this Nexus 4 looks like ass. It is, however, pretty nondescript, which is fine by me. I think it looks better than my current Galaxy Nexus. Obviously it's no N9, but then again no phone is, not even the Lumia that added capacitive buttons to the N9's clean design.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Talking about looks
by btrimby on Tue 30th Oct 2012 14:47 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Talking about looks"
btrimby Member since:
2009-09-30

Parent doesn't deserve to be downvoted. I would upvote but I already made a comment.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Talking about looks
by WorknMan on Tue 30th Oct 2012 20:50 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Talking about looks"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

Uh, I have always cared about how my stuff looks. I prefer using something that looks pleasing than to use something that looks like ass - especially when it comes to something I have to look at multiple times a day.


Sure, all other things being equal, but if you're willing to write a device off because of the way it looks without any regard to how well it actually functions, then please kindly remove yourself from the gene pool, so we don't end up with other people like you ;)

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Talking about looks
by lucas_maximus on Fri 2nd Nov 2012 21:45 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Talking about looks"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

This!!!

Something visually appealing is a important part of perceived quality.

I have a minimum standard of "looking tidy" when buying anything.

Edited 2012-11-02 21:47 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Talking about looks
by zima on Sat 3rd Nov 2012 06:19 UTC in reply to "RE: Talking about looks"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Unfortunately, this nonsense has spilled over into the mainstream. If it's comfortable to hold and functions well, who gives a shit about what it looks like? It's an inanimate object.

It was always like that, people caring & putting effort into looks, don't approach it like it's something new (look at folk dresses and trinkets for one example, old jewellery and cherished monuments at some others)

Reply Score: 2

Ugly?
by Soulbender on Tue 30th Oct 2012 04:25 UTC
Soulbender
Member since:
2005-08-18

Seriously? You think it's so ugly that you wouldn't consider it?
It's really not significantly different in design and looks from every other tablet out there. It's not like it's shock pink and triangular or something.

Edited 2012-10-30 04:26 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE: Ugly?
by Loreia on Tue 30th Oct 2012 08:01 UTC in reply to "Ugly?"
Loreia Member since:
2012-01-17

Seriously? You think it's so ugly that you wouldn't consider it?
It's really not significantly different in design and looks from every other tablet out there. It's not like it's shock pink and triangular or something.

De gustibus non est disputandum

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Ugly?
by lucas_maximus on Fri 2nd Nov 2012 22:02 UTC in reply to "RE: Ugly?"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Latin doesn't make you clever.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Ugly?
by some1 on Wed 31st Oct 2012 02:22 UTC in reply to "Ugly?"
some1 Member since:
2010-10-05

It's not like it's shock pink and triangular or something.

Oh, then Thom would be all over it.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Ugly?
by zima on Sat 3rd Nov 2012 07:27 UTC in reply to "Ugly?"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

shock pink and triangular

I'd buy that (or build? But how to make triangular display...)

Reply Score: 2

Ugly...
by nemith on Tue 30th Oct 2012 06:53 UTC
nemith
Member since:
2005-07-28

I wouldn't call the two devices Ugly by any means.

The Nexus 4 looks very sleek and with that glass back and subtle grid of shiny specs. I bet it looks pretty great up close. Simple and not showy. I think the Nexus 4 is a damn sexy phone.

The Nexus 10 has grown on me from the first leak i saw to the current the pictures with the release. The reviews says that it is a solid device and the back is similar to the Nexus 7.

I believe a big goal with the devices is to break the mold of making devices very similar to Apple and experiment with different looking devices. The Nexus 10 won't be confused with the other 50 Android (and non-android) tablets when set on a table with the screen is off. This is good thing and it's Google trying to differentiate that they are not just another company wanting to clone Apple's success by doing very similar designs.

The Nexus 4 shows this, but I believe the Nexus 10 is really going after something unique (and maybe not all that showy).

I will probably be getting both. Although I have owned every other device with the Nexus name on it so far so I am a bit of sucker for the "brand"/

Edited 2012-10-30 06:55 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: Ugly...
by cdude on Tue 30th Oct 2012 19:37 UTC in reply to "Ugly..."
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

Looks for me as the Nexus 4 is foremost a push to the lower end segment. A cheap & yet long term supported power phone. With all competition pricing there devices at iPhone level Google delivering also to the low(er) price segments is clever. I am sure this will sell well just like the cheap(er) 7 tablets that hit market like a bomb. There is a huge demand for low cost devices and google is, if not filling them then at least contributing to more choice in that segment.

I hope there next target is a <$100 phone bringing more choice into the S40+Bada dumbphone landscape and increasing Android's market share future beyond the smartphone segment. Its the right time to focus on JB like performance improvements rather then doubling the number of CPU's and RAM with every new Nexus. Better concentrate on battery life, on fluid workflows and on cheap devices.

Edited 2012-10-30 19:43 UTC

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Ugly...
by jimmystewpot on Thu 1st Nov 2012 07:24 UTC in reply to "RE: Ugly..."
jimmystewpot Member since:
2006-01-19

The one problem that they face by pushing to the lower end of the market is.. How do you monetise if nobody buys applications then what is the attraction for developers. I am a huge android fan and almost always BUY an application as opposed to use the free versions for the simple reason that I hate advertising getting in the way of a clean experience.

That's the same reason why I love vanilla android.. I loath the bloat that samsung, htc and others put in to their roms.. then people wonder why it takes so long for them to update.. not really surprising.

Reply Score: 1

Will wait for 64Gb version
by zaine_ridling on Tue 30th Oct 2012 07:35 UTC
zaine_ridling
Member since:
2007-05-13

Was ready to buy this next month, but not at 32Gb. I'll wait for the next refinement of their first 10-inch tablet first. But I will trade my Nexus 7-16Gb for a 32Gb one.

Reply Score: 1

My next phone
by btrimby on Tue 30th Oct 2012 13:20 UTC
btrimby
Member since:
2009-09-30

I made the short-sighted mistake of buying a Galaxy Nexus from the Play store this month. I am in the process of returning that and getting a Nexus 4 for the same price.

T-Mobile's cheap plans plus an LTE+3G mobile hotspot from a regional carrier means I'll spend less total than I was for my previous smartphone plan, and I get stock android.

The device itself doesn't look too ugly to me. The back is a bit wacky, but if I don't like it, maybe I'll actually get a case for the first time ever (I've never needed one for any of my phones).

$350 for a new device with only LTE missing (which I couldn't use without Verizon)! Can't really pass that up.

Reply Score: 2

microSD disappearing
by bolomkxxviii on Tue 30th Oct 2012 15:19 UTC
bolomkxxviii
Member since:
2006-05-19

microSD is missing from most of the new gear. I am in the market for a new phone and a new tablet but without a microSD card slot it is no sale. I will keep looking.

Reply Score: 2

damn you Google!!!
by modmans2ndcoming on Tue 30th Oct 2012 22:14 UTC
modmans2ndcoming
Member since:
2005-11-09

You are the only vendor that has Contract free, unlocked, inexpensive quality smartphones.....now I have to get your Nexus 4 rather than my planned upgrade in 10 months to a windows phone because the Nexus 4 has everything I want now for the price I would have paid as a "subsidized" handset.

Reply Score: 3

RE: damn you Google!!!
by grumpyoldman on Wed 31st Oct 2012 21:53 UTC in reply to "damn you Google!!!"
grumpyoldman Member since:
2012-10-08

Yup, the price point is such a temptation isn't it? It made me do a second (a third, a fourth) take on whether I should go get one already even if I really don't need to right now...but, the thought of my wife wringing my neck woke me up right quick ;-)

Reply Score: 1

CyanogenMod
by diegoviola on Wed 31st Oct 2012 05:48 UTC
diegoviola
Member since:
2006-08-15

Is Android 4.2 coming to CM10?

Reply Score: 2

rklrkl
Member since:
2005-07-06

Breaking it down from a UK user's point of view:

* Android 4.2 - finally we get multi-user accounts (there's been hacks on top of Android to get it in the past, but it's official now...yay!).

* Nexus 4 - repeated the proven mistake of releasing an 8GB Android device with no SD card (see entry-level Nexus 7 - now discontinued very quickly!). Otherwise, the UK price is good for the specs.

* Nexus 7 now price-matching the Fire HD - very good, now continues the N7 as being the best 7" tablet of any type on the market.

* Nexus 10 in the UK releasing at extortionate prices. I was so excited by the N10's specs and was just waiting for the UK price to be announced this week. I was completely crestfallen at the prices (note: these include 20% VAT - sales tax in the US is typically 4-7%):

319 pounds for the 16GB Nexus 10 - that's $514 folks.
389 (!!) pounds for the 32GB Nexus 10 - that's a painful $627.

And can you spot the highly dubious price difference: 70 pounds ($113) for just 16GB of extra storage! That's 4.37 pounds ($7.05) per GB, when SSDs in the UK are now 50p ($0.80) per GB retail inc VAT. This means Google are charging over 8 times the retail cost for the extra storage.

And, yes, in the UK, the 32GB Nexus 10 is a mere 10 pounds ($16) less than the 16GB iPad 4, so sales of the former in the UK will be disastrous, IMHO. Strangely, the front of the Nexus 10 looks eerily like my HP TouchPad, which has 32GB storage for less than a third of the Nexus 10's price in the UK. Looks like I'm stuck with the TouchPad for a while longer then.

Reply Score: 2

Votum separatum
by Zbigniew on Sat 3rd Nov 2012 14:49 UTC
Zbigniew
Member since:
2008-08-28

The most interesting new feature here is multiuser support, which is a feature that should've been on tablets from the very beginning.

No, there's no need at all for multiuser support in an OS, which has been prepared for desktops, not for servers.
Nowadays the computers are so cheap, that everyone can have his/her own. Therefore multiuser "feature" simply makes an OS unnecessarily complicated. In case of need for multiuser one could use Linux/xBSD - there wasn't any need to bloat Android with this.

Reply Score: 1