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.

Thread beginning with comment 585037
To view parent comment, click here.
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

RE[4]: Hmmm
by kurkosdr on Sat 22nd Mar 2014 10:01 in reply to "RE[3]: Hmmm"
kurkosdr Member since:
2011-04-11

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.


I meant I can't figure out which religious view exactly it offended.

But on the other hand, neckbeards have such complicated views and so annoying behaviour, I honestly don't want to spend time to find out.

Now that the power of the downvote is being gradually stripped from neckbeards, what remains for them? Slashdot?

Edited 2014-03-22 10:02 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: Hmmm
by fmaxwell on Sat 22nd Mar 2014 10:41 in reply to "RE[4]: Hmmm"
fmaxwell Member since:
2005-11-13

I meant I can't figure out which religious view exactly it offended.


Thou shalt not praiseth any product made by Apple. If a man praiseth an Apple product, you shall smite the blasphemer, voting down his words and casting scorn upon him, for Linux is our Lord and savior.

If Apple built a 3 oz. smartphone with 100 hour talk time and enough CPU horsepower to render the next Pixar movie, you'd still be voted down if you wrote anything positive about it.

I cannot understand why people are impressed by really big phones; it's like believing that a 3 inch diameter wristwatch represents the height of watchmaking skill.

Edited 2014-03-22 10:44 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[4]: Hmmm
by zima on Tue 25th Mar 2014 00:22 in reply to "RE[3]: Hmmm"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

What I wrote is obviously true

Your assertions are trivially disproven by the existence (you might simply not be aware of them, living in your Apple-centric perception bubble) of other smaller than iPhone smartphones with comparable specs (for example among the Xperia Mini series of devices)

Reply Parent Score: 2