Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 19th Mar 2014 23:00 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless

Early last year, Oppo was (one of?) the first company to ship a phone with a full HD display, on its Find 5. I bought one, and it became one of my favourite smartphones - a small Chinese company building phones with top-notch build quality, high-end (at the time) specifications, packaged in a distinctive and minimalist design.

A new year, and a new barrier to break - Oppo announced the successor to the Find 5 today. They call it the Find 7, and it ups the display game to crazy levels: it packs a 5.5" 2560x1440 (!) display, the first of its kind on a phone (again, it could be one of the first). I honestly have no idea if it makes any sense whatsoever to have such a crazy display on a phone. Will it really make a noticeable difference over current full HD displays? I doubt it.

It further boasts a 2.5GHz Qualcomm Snapdragon 801 processor, 3GB RAM, and a 3000mAh battery. There's also a Find 7 'lite', which has a more traditional 1080p display, a slightly slower processor, and 2GB RAM. Unlike the Find 5, the Find 7 has a two features which I know will appeal to many OSNews readers: a removable battery and an SD card slot. Both of these features were added after requests from users.

Design-wise, the Find 7 loses some of the straightforward simplicity that I like so much about the Find 5; the phone is busier and messier, and the version with the crazy display has this fake carbon weave on the back that crosses into Samsung-tacky territory. The fancy elongated notification LED at the bottom is a nice touch, though.

All in all, the Find 7 is yet another noteworthy product from a Chinese manufacturer, and further proof of my conviction: Samsung, HTC, and other established players should be worried. I don't think Apple will care much, but Android manufacturers should take note.

Permalink for comment 585037
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Hmmm
by fmaxwell on Fri 21st Mar 2014 22:05 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Hmmm"
fmaxwell
Member since:
2005-11-13

I don't know why this got downvoted. But I know why facebook and gawker don't have a "downvote" button: to prevent the neckbeard patrol from downvoting to oblivion posts that violate their religion.


It sounds like you know exactly why it got down-voted. It offended the religious views of some of the non-participants.

What I wrote is obviously true, so, lacking the ability to dispute the point, the neckbeard patrol down-voted it rather than disputing it.

Reply Parent Score: 0