Apple iPhone 4S vs Samsung Galaxy Nexus

We see how the new Galaxy Nexus from Samsung holds up against Apple's updated iPhone 4S

We compare Apple’s new baby, the iPhone 4S, to Samsung’s latest Galaxy Nexus handset.

Form:
Samsung Galaxy Nexus - 135.5x67.9x8.9mm, 135g
Apple iPhone 4S - 115.2x58.6x9.3mm, 140g
The iPhone 4S hasn’t changed a bit from the previous iPhone 4 on the outside, it’s pretty much exactly the same.
For iPhone fans this isn’t too much of a problem but we’ve become rather bored of its plain design.
The Galaxy Nexus is the nicest looking Nexus phone so far as it’s been stretched out and enlarged compared to its predecessors.
In part this is to accommodate a large screen, but these larger proportions are more flattering and help the phone to avoid looking too ‘bubbly’.
Often with ‘softer’ handsets with an abundance of rounded corners and curved edges the look becomes boring or odd.
While the Galaxy Nexus may not be our favourite handset visually it’s a better looking phone than the iPhone 4S.
Winner – Samsung Galaxy Nexus

DisplayApple has been leading the pack for some time on display technology with its acclaimed Retina display, but the main problem has always been the limited size.
At 3.5-inches the iPhone 4S’ screen is certainly at the lower end of what many now expect from a full-sized smartphone.
The iPhone 4S uses an LED-backlit IPS TFT capacitive touchscreen at a resolution of 640x960 pixels, which gives a very high pixel density of 330 pixels-per-inch (ppi).
Display features include scratch-resistant glass with an oleophobic surface to repel fingerprints, as well as multi-touch input support, a three axis gyroscope sensor and an accelerometer.
Samsung’s Galaxy Nexus has one of the larger screens on the market at 4.6-inches but unlike many other large displays Samsung has managed to keep the pixel density at a high 316ppi thanks to an impressive screen resolution of 720x1280 pixels.
The Galaxy Nexus uses Samsung’s own Super Amoled technology and also features the same oleophobic coating, multi-touch input, accelerometer and gyro sensors as its rival.
Choosing a winner in this round is pretty difficult, both have impressively high pixel densities which are more or less unrivalled by other smartphones.
The iPhone 4S has the higher pixel density but the Galaxy Nexus makes up for it by having a much larger touchscreen than the iPhone’s rather small display.
Winner – Samsung Galaxy Nexus

Storage
Apple’s handset comes in three storage variants with a choice of 16GB, 32GB and 64GB. Any model you pick will have 512MB of RAM but true to form Apple hasn’t included a card slot on this device.
With the Galaxy Nexus there’s only the first two options for 16GB or 32GB of in-built capacity and like its opponent it has no card support. Samsung’s handset does better on RAM though with 1GB to help the processor.
This is a trade-off which depends on your preferences, a 64GB upper limit on the iPhone 4S is great, though it’ll cost you a pretty penny to get hold of this variant.
However, you lose out on RAM with Apple’s handset.
On the opposite end of the spectrum the Galaxy Nexus doesn’t have the lofty 64GB option, but 32GB is still a lot to play with and it has twice the RAM of the iPhone.
Winner - Draw


ProcessorIt’s dual core devices all round here, which is a first for an Apple phone, not so much for Samsung though which is why we feel the company could have pushed the boat out a bit more on the chipset and graphics processing unit (GPU).
Both are using ARM Cortex-A9 processors, the iPhone 4S is clocked at 1GHz while the Galaxy Nexus comes in at 1.2GHz.
The iPhone 4S uses Apple’s own A5 chipset and a PowerVR SGX543MP2 GPU, a combination previously used in the iPad 2 to good effect.
Samsung’s Galaxy Nexus runs a TI OMAP 4460 chipset and a PowerVR SGX540 GPU, which while competent enough isn’t as highly powered as some other ‘premium’ Android phones such as the Galaxy S2, and the GPU is the same as one used in the previous Nexus S phone, which launched at the end of 2010.
The ace up iPhone’s sleeve is that, despite the Galaxy Nexus having an extra 200MHz on the clock, Apple is particularly adept at optimising its operating system to its processors and other hardware, so we should see some pretty slick performance just as we did on the iPad 2.
The Galaxy Nexus is sure to still power through things, however, though it has to be said it won’t blitz gaming and intensive multimedia as much as we hoped.
Winner - Draw

Operating SystemThe iPhone 4S is the debut device for Apple’s new iOS 5 operating system, while the Samsung Galaxy Nexus is the first handset to run Google’s new Android Ice Cream Sandwich platform, version 4.0.
iOS 5 has a number of new improvements, including the iMessage service, expanding messaging from just SMS and MMS text to include a BlackBerry Messenger style service between iPhones.
The browser has also been enhanced and is much faster, it also features some new viewing modes for either storing web pages to view later or stripping them down to raw text for easier reading.
Twitter has been more extensively integrated, though you still have to download and install it to take advantage of these features. There’s also the Newsstand app which aggregates all your newspaper and magazine subscriptions into one place and supports background downloads.
Unique to the iPhone 4S is the Siri Assistant, a voice operated assistant which can help you organise your calendar and allows you to set reminders, read text messages, reply, make phone calls and search for information.
Android Ice Cream Sandwich brings many of the changes made in the tablet-specific 3.0 Honeycomb to the smartphone platform.
This includes faster web browsing with smoother touch control and tab functionality, an enhanced Google voice search (though not as advanced as Siri), a completely re-designed interface and improved customisation, app switching and multi-tasking controls.
Both systems are the most advanced iterations we've seen from their respective developers so far, but we don’t feel one is necessarily better than the other, it’s a case of personal preference.
Winner - Draw

Camera
The Galaxy Nexus is a little disappointing when it comes to the camera as it only uses a 5-megapixel primary at 2592x1936 pixels.
Video capture is at 1080p and there’s a secondary 13-megapixel front-facing camera with video-call support.
It features an LED flash, autofocus, touch focus, geo-tagging and face detection.
Apple has upgraded the iPhone’s camera to an 8-megapixel primary at 3264x2448 pixels, but it’s not just the megapixel count and resolution which has been ramped up.
A fifth lens has been added and an improved aperture to allow in more light and improve photo quality.
The iPhone 4S supports video calling over Wi-Fi and features a front-facing VGA secondary camera.
It has an LED flash and video light, autofocus, touch focus, image and video stabilisation, face detection and geo-tagging.
Apple’s decision to upgrade the camera in the iPhone 4S means it wins this round easily against Samsung’s lacklustre offering.
Winner – Apple iPhone 4S

Final Thoughts
Both phones have decent specs and fit in nicely at the higher end of the current phone market, however, considering all the build up and hype neither are the ‘game changers’ we were expecting.
Both have processors which will handle most of what you can throw at them, although the Galaxy Nexus could have opted for better chipset and GPU architecture to make it a truly excellent smartphone.
The other area where the Galaxy Nexus lacks is the camera which just isn’t anywhere near good enough for a flagship device these days.
We’re disappointed that both handsets have rejected micro SD functionality, but both have considerable onboard storage space.
It might only be a problem having no card capability if you store a ton of music or eBooks but let’s face it this scenario is becoming increasingly the norm for many phone users.
Both displays are excellent, the iPhone has a higher pixel density but the Galaxy Nexus isn’t far behind and has a far larger screen with a higher resolution.
In conclusion, we're calling this one a draw but we feel that both are 'good enough' premium phones rather than anything exceptional.

Read more »

Samsung Galaxy Nexus vs. Motorola Droid RAZR: which would you rather?

If you had to choose between the newly announced Samsung Galaxy Nexus and the newly announced Motorola Droid RAZR, which phone would you choose? I feel so bad for Motorola right now (well, not so bad, really, they’re about to be owned by Google) because the whole world probably just forgot about the Droid RAZR.
The two devices aren’t that far apart. What really differentiates them is the OS. The Galaxy Nexus will run Android 4.0 and the Droid RAZR will run Android 2.3. The difference is huge, especially after you check out all the new features in Ice Cream Sandwich.
Check out the chart below, courtesy of Engadget and let us know which of the two phones is going to be your next phone.

Samsung Galaxy Nexus

Droid RAZR by Motorola

Price (on contract)	TBA	$299
Processor	1.2GHz dual-core likely Texas Instruments OMAP 4460	1.2GHz dual-core Texas Instruments OMAP 4430
Display	4.65-inch curved glass HD Super AMOLED 1280 x 720	4.3-inch qHD Super AMOLED 960 x 540
Primary camera	5 megapixel with zero shutter lag	8 megapixel
Front-facing camera	1.3 megapixel	1.3 megapixel
Video recording	1080p at 30fps	1080p at 30fps
Cellular	LTE / HSPA+	LTE + CDMA / EVDO or HSPA+ / GSM
WiFi	802.11 a/b/g/n	802.11 b/g/n
NFC	Yes	No
Memory	1GB RAM	1GB RAM
Storage	16GB / 32GB internal storage	16GB internal storage 16GB microSD card
Operating System	Android 4.0 Ice Cream Sandwich	Android 2.3 Gingerbread
Battery	1,750mAh	1,800mAh
Quoted Battery life	TBD	Up to 12.5 hours talk time Up to 8.9 hours video
Weight	135g / 4.76oz	127g / 4.48oz
Thickness	8.94mm / 0.35in (HSPA+ model)	7.1mm / 0.28in

via Engadget

Read more »

T-Mobile HTC Amaze 4G vs Galaxy S II [Video]

Today is the day, the HTC Amaze 4G and Samsung Galaxy S II are both available right now at T-Mobile. Before you run down to your nearest T-Mobile store or head to the online shop and pick one up, we figured you’d like a little hardware comparison video showing off the goods both phones have to offer. Today I present you with a quick little Amaze 4G vs Galaxy S II hardware comparison video, check it and all the pictures out below.

We have covered both of these phones plenty in the recent past and before you watch the comparison video  If you are considering either of these phones then you most likely already know plenty about them. We have 1.5 GHz dual-core processors in both along with 1GB of RAM, 16GB internal storage, 8 MP rear and 2 MP front cameras. Basically they are pretty similar in regards to the internals. Its the hardware on the outside that is different. The looks, feel, size, and then the software of course. Both are running Android 2.3 Gingerbread and feature a few slight UI changes by their respectable creators. For now lets just check out the video shall we?
HTC Amaze 4G vs Samsung Galaxy S II video


With two powerhouse top tier smartphones such as these, this will most likely come down to user preference. Some might love the Sense UI or amazingly great build quality of HTC with the Amaze 4G, others might be interested in having a super sleek and lightweight phone from the Galaxy S II. Two large factors are the AMOLED display in the SGSII, vs the higher resolution qHD Super LCD in the Amaze 4G. Then you have battery life and performance, benchmarks and more. I go over all of this in extreme detail in both of the device reviews linked to above so feel free to read over them and see all the pictures to help you decide.

Happily provided is the video above as well as a few pictures in the gallery below. Instead of getting into details about the battery life or benchmark results I’ll just once again urge you to check out our full reviews. Benchmarks don’t mean everything and both phones perform extremely well for daily use and I’d be happy with either one over on T-Mobile.
The choice is yours, what phone would you rather buy from T-Mobile today — the Galaxy S II or the Amaze 4G?

Read more »

Samsung Galaxy S II vs iPhone 4S browser comparison and load times [Video]

The iPhone 4S is finally here and while we don’t have a 5 to compare things to, we do have the 4S to throw up against the Samsung Galaxy S II for a few browser load times and overall performance tests as I’m sure plenty are interested in seeing the results. I always told myself I’d never use the word “iPhone” in a title here at Android Community but this isn’t about me — its for you, the readers. A little friendly competition is always nice right? Because where would we all be without it — probably still using Nokia candy bar phones daily. Enough of that, check out our video below.

Now I’m not going to get too crazy here or break down all the little things about Android or iOS, iPhone 4S or Galaxy S II, instead I’ll just show you all the video by our sister site and good man Vincent from SlashGear. Your humble narrator (me) wouldn’t be caught dead with an idevice so we’ll just have to take Vincents word for it. First off he compares the iPhone 4 to the iPhone 4S in a browser test or three just for fun and to see how well the new A5 dual-core processor chugs along in the “S”, then he moves on to the good stuff — Android. The first attempt with the Galaxy S II he doesn’t hit go, so don’t get discouraged and break anything just yet, watch the entire clip.
iPhone 4S vs Galaxy S II browser test


I myself am not in control of the testing here, but from initial results the iPhone 4S performs quite well, I’m sure everyone expected that as the original held its own pretty well too. One of the fastest processors around currently, the 1.5 GHz Qualcomm in the Galaxy S II performs very well but is just barely by a hair beat by the new A5 dual-core iPhone 4S in most tests. I’d rather have the SGSII perform 1 second slower and have a full flash experience personally. We could argue about this all day, flash or no flash, or try other sites but when it really comes down to it iOS is highly efficient as is Android — not to mention many many websites are designed with iOS in mind.
This is just one prime example that we don’t need blazing fast quad-core processors and huge 4.7″ displays to have an awesome experience. I can’t see myself browsing the web and reading websites with that puny little 3.5″ display, but that is just me. Android has came a long ways over the past few years and is growing daily. The rapid growth and development of the entire ecosystem is just one more reason to be completely excited about things to come. The iPhone 4S may slightly be faster by a tiny hair at the moment, but wait for those quad-core processors to start hitting the streets and this will be an entire different story. I know I mentioned we don’t need the quad-cores, and we still don’t, but I sure would love to have one.
In the end both sides will remain extremely competitive, they will drive innovation and Samsung and Android will continue to rise and rise. Do take note that Android 2.3 Gingerbread is well over a year old, and iOS 5 was just released. Once we get the newer, bigger, better, and faster Android 4.0 Ice Cream Sandwich powered Samsung Galaxy Nexus I’d love to run these tests again and see who’s boss (and we will).
For now we’ll just have to agree that while they didn’t release a newer and bigger iPhone 5, Apple’s done a decent job with the new iPhone 4S. Apparently there is more to it than just the S so the upgrade kit I was planning to sell pictured below might not work after all.

What do you think of the video? We would love to see your comments in the appropriate section below.

Read more »

HTC Sensation XL vs HTC Sensation XE vs HTC Sensation

The HTC Sensation, Sensation XE and Sensation XL - a triumvirate of Gigantosaurus-screened handsets poses a serious shopping dilemma as to which version to opt for. Each is an Android phone and each one described as a flagship handset by Peter Chou​ the his team from Taiwan.
With different processors, accessories, colour schemes and all sorts of other bits and bobs to choose from it's difficult to decide which to go for. It's even a bit of a challenge trying to work out which is which. As ever, Pocket-lint has done the difficult part for you and laid each one bear and clear for you to see against the the other. So, here to help out is the HTC Sensation XL vs HTC Sensation XE vs HTC Sensation. The words have lost all meaning.

Form Factor

1st: Sensation XL

132.5 x 70.7 x 9.9 mm, 163g

2nd: Sensation XE

126.1 x 63.2 x 11.3mm, 148g

3rd: Sensation

126.1 x 63.2 x 11.3mm, 148g

The good news from the off is that all three of these phones look and feel good when you’ve got them in your hand. Traditionally, that’s been the HTC way as long as the company has been knocking out Android smartphones. Each of these sensational devils is machined from a solid block of aluminium making them reassuringly heavy and just a bit lush.

The HTC Sensation and Sensation XE are more or less identical. Measurements-wise, they’re identicalc but you get the red Beats branding on the black back of the XE plus a ring of the same colour around the camera lens. It’s a matter of taste really but we reckon the majority of folk will prefer the limited edition look of the XE.

But the one that beats (pun, partially intended) them both is the HTC Sensation XL. On the stats side, it’s significantly thinner than the other two, making it seem more premium as well as allowing it to fit more snugly against the line of your clothing. On top of that, it also comes in a two-tone silver and white, and that makes it pretty tasty.

Display

Tie: Sensation

4.3-inch, 960x540, Super LCD, 256ppi

Tie: Sensation XE

4.3-inch, 960x540, Super LCD, 256ppi

Tie: Sensation XL

4.7-inch, 800x480px, LCD, 199ppi

It’s really impossible to sort this category out, and we had all three devices in front of us when we were thinking about it.
Ultimately, the big screen HTC Sensation XL is very impressive. 0.4 inches on the diagonal might not seem like much on paper but to behold there’s quite a staggering difference. The XL hits you in the face with its super-large display in a way which the other two just don’t and the lower resolution and pixel density don’t really come across. What does seem lacking is all down to the screen technology itself. While the XE and straight Sensation get the benefit of HTC’s Super LCD power, the XL doesn’t and, as a result, the last of the three here is just a little less impressive as far as colour punch goes; about 10 per cent less colourful if we had to try and put a figure to it. So, this one all comes down to what you’d prefer - a bigger hit or a more colourful one.

Engine Room

1st: Sensation XE

1.5GHz Snapdragon MSM8260

2nd: Sensation

1.2GHz Snapdragon MSM8260

3rd: Sensation XL

1.5GHz Snapdragon MSM8255

Why does the Sensation and its MSM8255 system-on-a-chip come bottom of the pile? Because it runs a single core processor rather than the dual-core units sitting in the Snapdragon set ups on the smaller two devices. Now, it’s arguable at the moment as to how much the Android software can really use a second core but if a touch of speed here and there combined with the promise of potential isn’t enough for you, then there’s always the graphics to consider.

The Snapdragon MSM8260 contains an Adreno 220 GPU rather then the Adreno 205 in the HTC Sensation XL. In real terms, what that means is that the XL is considerably out-striped on the graphics front. It’ll render HD videos and games more smoothly now but, more importantly, it'll still be good enough towards the end of your contract when developers have moved on to games that have really started to push your hardware to its limits. We're not so sure how well the Adreno 205 will be doing at the end of 24 months.

Oh, and for your records, all three phones come with 768MB of RAM.

Imaging

1st= Sensation

8MP rear, 0.3MP front, 1080p video capture

1st= Sensation XE

8MP rear, 0.3MP front, 1080p video capture

3rd: Sensation XL

8MP rear, 1.3MP front, 720p video

If you asked most people whether they’d prefer Full HD video recording or a little more resolution on the webcam, the answer, for most, will be the 1080p; not all, but most. The tricky part is that HTC has gone to some detail to describe the snapper on the XL in a way that the Taiwanese mobile maker just hasn’t with the other two.
The XL’s rear camera, with its very wide (for a mobile) f/2.2 aperture potential and back-illuminated sensor, both of which combine for better results in low light conditions, sounds like an excellent piece of kit but for quite how much of a difference it makes in terms of image quality, we’ll have to wait for the full HTC Sensation XL review. It's quite possible it will turn out with the best rear-facing camera of the lot.

Connectivity

1st= Sensation

Wi-Fi, BT 3.0, DLNA, Wi-Fi tethering, HDMI-out

1st= Sensation XE

Wi-Fi, BT 3.0, DLNA, Wi-Fi tethering, HDMI-out

3rd: Sensation XL

Wi-Fi, BT 3.0, DLNA, Wi-Fi tethering

It’s arguable if HDMI-out is quite so relevant these days as more and more devices become DLNA certified for you to stream you media to without wires. However, TVs tend to sit in our homes for a long time and there are probably more out there without Wi-Fi modules in them than with. So, the inability to hard wire the HTC Sensation XL to your TV and get all your HD content on the big screen is going to grate every now and then. Not so much a win for the HTC Sensation and Sensation XE but a loss for anyone that opts for the XL.

Battery Life

1st: Sensation XL

1600mAh, up to 710 mins talk time

2nd: Sensation XE:

1730mAh, 550 mins talk time

3rd: Sensation

1520mAh, up to 500 mins talk time

Thee Sensation XL offers quite a big advantage in terms of battery life over the straight HTC Sensation and Sensation XE depsite not having as big a battery pack as the last of the three. The difference is likely to be down to having a less power-hungry system-on-a-chip as well as having fewer pixels push and possibly to do with the nature of the screen technology as well. Whatever the reason, though, the result is that if you’re deeply concerned about not getting enough juice out of your handset, you might want to seriously consider the HTC Sensation XL over the others.

Software

1st: Sensation XL

Android 2.3.5 Gingerbread + Sense 3.5 + Beats

2nd: Sensation XE

Android 2.3.4 + Sense 3.0 + Beats

3rd: Sensation

Android 2.3.3 + Sense 3.0

We’re not going to sit here and tell you that the difference in secondary decimal places of Android versions is that important but having the latest issue of Sense as well as the Beats audio software and hardware additions is quite a bonus. Sense 3.5 has largely identical functionality to 3.0 but it’s a smoother fit and finish.

The Beats by Dr Dre​ tie-in means that your audio is going to sound better on both the XE and XL to the normal Sensation, particularly if you use the Beats branded headphones that come in the box.

Storage

1st: Sensation XL

16GB

2nd: Sensation XE

1GB + 8/16GB microSD in-box

3rd: Sensation

1GB + microSD

Yes, both the HTC Sensation and Sensation XE have larger storage potential thanks to the obvious addition of a microSD port but phone memory is both more useful and easy to manage on Android than anything removable. One of the problems is that you can’t store every app on microSD and, with just 1GB of internal to play with, it’s not going to take many stubborn developers before you fill up your quota on the two smaller screen devices.

Extras

1st: Sensation XL

iBeats/Beats Solo headphones

2nd: Sensation XE

iBeats in-ear headphones + 8/16GB microSD

3rd: Sensation

4GB microSD (if lucky)

The inclusion of the Beats in-ear headphones in the boxes of both the XE and XL phones is a good one. Pocket-lint would always normally advise leaving the free-with-the-phone headphones in the box that they came in but getting the pair approved by Dr Dre bundled means you don’t have to turf out another £60+ on top of your mobile purchase.
The super extra is if you choose to go with the limited edition white HTC Sensation XL which comes with the Beats Solo on-ear headphones as part of the package. For the record, the Solos, pound for pound, are possible the best quality Beats in the entire range. They also happen to be relatively portable.

Price

1st: Sensation

£385

2nd: Sensation XE

£500

3rd: Sensation XL

£unknown

No prices just yet for the HTC Sensation XL, so not a lot we can say about this round for the time being but expect this big screen phone to be pricier than both of the 4.3-inch models. The real shocker is how much extra you have to pay for the HTC Sensation XE now that the straight Sensation is old enough to have had a significant price drop. When you’re talking about some headphones and a touch more on the CPU clock, that’s quite a price hike.

Conclusion

1st HTC Sensation xl

2nd: HTC Sensation

3rd: HTC Sensation XE

It’s a horrible decision to have to make. You’d probably feel most proud brandishing an HTC Sensation XL about you as you go about your life but that terrible hollow insecurity that your phone’s a weakling on the inside might be a little too much for some people to bear.

If you’re more about browsing the web than watching videos or playing games, then the XL is probably still the best one to go for, so long as that missing Full HD video recording doesn’t bite too much. It’s stylish, it’s got a nice big screen, it’s super thin and the Beats inside mean your music listening gets a little kick too. There’s also the healthy whack of storage to enjoy

On the other hand, if you’re a keen video watcher and are into your imaging, you might prefer the straight Sensation. Sure it doesn’t have the Beats branding and headphones of the XE but that £115 margin would buy you a better quality pair than those iBeats anyway and probably wind you up with a better audio experience. And, if you happen to own your own decent headphones already, then it’s really no contest.

Oddly enough, it’s the only Sensation XE that we’d tell you to steer clear of at the time of writing. Despite still being a very good handset in its own right, for now, it just doesn’t offer enough to make you choose it over either of the other two.

When it really, really comes down to it, if money is not particularly an issue, then we’d have to say that the HTC Sensation XL is the one to go for. Yep, there’s no dual-core processor, yep, there’s only 720p HD video and, yes, there really ought to be more pixels than there are but we don’t reckon you’ll really notice that stuff too much. What you will notice is a good looking phone, with a really usable big screen, a nice fat internal flash drive, a super-smooth UI and that somehow doesn’t seem to run out of power when you really need it.

Read more »

HTC Sensation XL vs Samsung Galaxy S II

The HTC Sensation XL now makes that three flagship Android handsets from the Taiwanese mobile makers. Peter Chou and his team have also once again team up with Dr Dre and Jimmy Iovine to bring Beats Audio software and headphones to an HTC smartphone and that gives this package one hell of an extra shine, but is it quite shiny enough?

Lurking in the wings, as ever, is the current King of the Androids in the shape of the Samsung Galaxy S II begging the big question for any wouldbe buyer - just which one is the better phone? So, we’ve lined up these two smartphones’ spec sheets and worked it out on paper at least. It’s the HTC Sensation XL vs Samsung Galaxy S II.

Form Factor

Tie: Galaxy S2

125.3 x 66.1 x 8.49mm, 117g

Tie: Sensation XL

132.5 x 70.7 x 9.9 mm, 163g

In terms of pure measurements, it’s the first round to the Samsung Galaxy S II. As ever, it’s all about how thin and how light a mobile phone is when it comes to something that’s going to be sitting in your pocket, weighing you down and interrupting the carefully tailored lines of your clothing. The SGS2 is a touch thinner and considerably lighter. The other possible disadvantage to the Sensation XL is that it’s physically bigger on the other dimensions as well, but that has its plus points later on, as we’ll see.

However, that said, we're going to call the round a tie because, as far physical design goes, it’ll be the machined aluminium block of the Sensation XL that has the edge over the more plastic look and feel of the Galaxy S II for aesthetics and ergonomic pleasure. To be fair to the Samsung, though, that doesn’t mean that it comes across as low rent. It’s still a nice piece of kit to own. Just not as satisfying as all-metal handsets.

Display

1st: Galaxy S2

4.27-inch, 800x480px, 218ppi, Super AMOLED Plus

2nd: Sensation XL

4.7-inch, 800x480px, 199ppi, LCD

It’s a very close run thing in the display category. Yes, the HTC Sensation XL screen offers a bigger viewing platform than that of the SGS2 but, sadly, at the same resolution. So, it’s one thing to lose that sharpness as a result of a lower pixel density but what it is that tips the balance is down to the screen technology itself. HTC has gone for a straight LCD but Samsung has all that panel innovation to lean back on when it comes to its Super AMOLED Plus. Without experiencing both for ourselves, we’d normally call this one a draw but word from our man on the ground who’s had some review time with the HTC Sensation XL is as follows:

That the resolution is comparatively low isn't great, the sharpness isn't really there, but it looks fine. The colours are good and vibrant and the viewing angles are fine from what I saw. The SGS2 probably has the better display though.

And there you have it.

Engine Room

1st: Galaxy S2

Samsung Exynos 4210

2nd: Sensation XL

Snapdragon MSM8255

The systems-on-chip in both phones offer plenty to be happy about but it’s the lack of a dual core CPU on the Sensation XL that will draw the criticism. It’s arguable as to whether a dual-core CPU is really needed on a smartphone at the moment anyway, but there we go.

The Samsung Exynos 4210 consists of a 1.2/1.5GHz ARM Cortex-A9 CPU running the show compared to the 1.5GHz ARMv7 Scorpion on the Sensation XL. In the graphics department, it’s Samsung’s Mali-400 vs the HTC’s Adreno 205 in a battle where the former out-benchs the latter. And the final mini-round of the catgegory is for memory, again, where the Samsung wins with 1GB of RAM plays 768MB on the Sensation XL. So, dual-core or not, it’s another victory for the Samsung Galaxy S II.

Imaging

1st: Galaxy S2

8MP rear, 2MP front, 1080p video capture

2nd: Sensation XL

8MP rear, 1.3MP front, 720p video

Sadly, the headline specs - namely the missing 1080p video capture from the HTC Sensation XL camera - is what tells the story here. HTC has gone to great lengths to describe a wide aperture snapper that shoots open to f/2.2 backed up by a dual LED flash when you need it but it’s all for nought because the fact is that people want Full HD recording. The slight dip on the resolution of the front-facing webcam doesn’t really help much either. As it goes, the XL might shoot better quality images but we simply won’t know that until the HTC Sensation XL review is in.

Until then, we will leave this category with one interesting caveat from the Samsung Galaxy S II review and that’s that the autofocus does tend hunt around a bit during video capture and that can ruin your clips as they drift in and out of sharpness on occasions. You have been warned.

Connectivity

1st: Galaxy S2

Wi-Fi, NFC, 4G, BT 3.0, DLNA, Wi-Fi tethering

2nd: Sensation XL

Wi-Fi, BT 3.0, DLNA, Wi-Fi tethering

The SGS2’s constant pipping of the XL to the post is making the HTC look like a bad handset which it certainly isn’t. It might not be a big deal in the UK that there’s no 4G radio or NFC technology included but in countries where both infrastructures exist, that could be quite a let down. As we say, both phones here have got the basics, as well as tethering potential and the luxury of streaming your bits and pieces without the need of cables, but it’s the Samsung Galaxy S II that can claim the advantage on paper.

Battery Life

1st: Sensation XL

1600mAh, up to 11 hours talk time

2nd: Galaxy S2

1650mAh, up to 8 hours talk time

Despite the larger battery unit, the quoted life of the Samsung Galaxy S II is smaller than that of the Sensation XL. Now, it’s quite possible that Samsung has stated 3G talk time whereas HTC’s refers to 2G talk time but, since Samsung has said no more on the matter, then that’s what we have to believe - that you can get up to 8 hours of talk time on the SGS2 after a single charge.

That may be because it’s running a dual core processor or more RAM or a different screen technology. Or it may be inaccurate. Either way, both phones will probably make it from dawn till dusk on a single charge and that’s about it.

Software

1st: Sensation XL

Android 2.3.5 Gingerbread + HTC Sense 3.5

2nd: Galaxy S2

Android 2.3.4 Gingerbread + TouchWiz 4.0

We can sit and argue about tiny decimal places of updates on Gingerbread but what separates the sheep from the goats in this software match-up is the custom user-interfaces each compay has placed on top of Google’s mobile platform. TouchWiz 4.0 is ok. It neither gets in the way nor adds anything really significant to the equation apart from All Share and the wireless syncing tool that is Kies Air both of which you can find replacements for on the Android Market anyway. As it goes, the only unique piece of software is the Swype keyboard which is actually rather good.

The Sensation XL, on the other hand, gets the benefit of HTC Sense 3.5 UI which is known for its neat integration of your contacts and their details, as well as an excellent graphical look and feel. On top of that, the XL also comes with the Beats by Dr Dre audio circuitry inside to improve the quality of your digital music.

Storage

Tie: Galaxy S II

16/32GB + microSD

Tie: Sensation XL

16GB

Bit of an odd one this but the HTC Sensation XL comes in just one memory size and with no expandable storage options. 16GB isn’t titchy and will probably do you fine but in the face of anywhere between 16-64GB on the Samsung Galaxy S II, it’s really no competition. The question is just how much data are you looking to carry around at any one time?

Price

Galaxy S2

£410 (16GB)

Sensation XL

£unknown (16GB)

No prices just yet for the HTC Sensation XL, so not a lot we can say about this round for the time being. However, since the SGS2 has been around for a while and the XL is fresh out of the blocks, we’re willing to bet that’s the latter that comes out more expensive.

Conclusion

1st: Galaxy S2

2nd: Sensation XL

Apart from a dubious call on the battery and a good win on the software front, the HTC Sensation XL doesn’t come out too well on paper against the current king of the Androids. All the same, to warn you off the Sensation XL would be a mistake. It’s a good looking device with a good looking UI and some great sounding audio. It even comes packaged with some decent Beats By Dr Dre headphones too. For pure grunt though, it can’t quite match the Samsung Galaxy S II which will run games better and is probably the superior device to use as a video player too.

That said, if you’re all about look and feel, playing music, browsing the web and taking cracking stills, then you may find that the HTC Sensation XL is actually more suited to your needs.

Read more »

iPhone 4S vs iPhone 4

The iPhone 4S has arrived and with it the panic from well over a million iPhone 4 users out there who suddenly feel the sweat on their brow and sinking ache in the pits of their stomachs because they no longer own the number one Apple handset in town. There are, of course, only three ways of dealing with this and, since Pocket-lint isn’t, officially speaking, inclined to advise drinking lighter fluid until you forget, then your choices are either to get pre-ordering on 7 October or to discover that the iPhone 4S isn’t actually that much better the iPhone 4. So, which is it to be?

As ever, we’re happy to help out with your decision making by laying both handsets side by side in virtual comparison and picking through their respective details. Naturally, the results are best viewed next to the iPhone 4S review itself but, for the time being, here is the iPhone 4S vs iPhone 4.

Form Factor

Tie: iPhone 4S

115.2 x 58.6 x 9.3mm, 140g

Tie: iPhone 4

115.2 x 58.6 x 9.3mm, 137g

Well, waddya know? After all those imaginative mock-ups, the iPhone 4S has the very same case as the iPhone that’s been known and largely loved for the last 12 months plus. So, well, it’s a tie then. The form factor has been good up until now and it remains good, if a little unexciting, still. It’s still pretty thin at 9.3mm and certainly light enough at 137g or even when 3g heavier. We might have all rather got used to the way it appears but the iPhone 4S will still be a good looking handset.

Display

Tie: iPhone 4S

3.5-inch, 960x640px, LCD with IPS

Tie: iPhone 4

3.5-inch, 960x640px, LCD with IPS

The one area where most iPhone users were probably crying out for an improvement was in screen size but the bad/good news, depending upon your point of view, is that that the iPhone 4S screen is identical to that of the last incarnation. It’s still got that outstanding pixel density but sadly not the real estate to back it up. So, for the time being, it’s a case of holding it closer to your retinas if you want to get a better look at whatever that film is that you’re trying to watch is. Better luck next year.

Engine Room

1st: iPhone 4S

Apple A5

2nd: iPhone 4

Apple A4

As with the iPhone 3GS, that “S” stands for speed and so the iPhone 4S processor set up is the big selling point over the older model, and this is one category where you want to be paying close attention. As predicted, Captain Cook and his crew have taken the Apple A5 chip from the iPad 2 and stuffed it into the guts of the iPhone 4S.
The Apple A4 consists of a 1GHz ARM Cortex-A8 CPU with a single Hummingbird core and PowerVR SGX 535 graphics processor GPU. There’s also 512MB of RAM to back it up. The Apple A5 chip has a dual-core ARM Cortex-A9 processor clocked at 1GHz. On the graphics front, it’s an upgrade to a dual-core PowerVR SGX543MP2 GPU and there’s, again, 512MB of RAM in support. According to Apple, what this means in real terms is a chip that has a CPU twice as powerful as its predecessor and a GPU that can work seven times harder.

Imaging

1st: iPhone 4S

8MP rear, VGA front, 1080p video

2nd: iPhone 4

5MP rear, VGA front, 720p video

There weren’t going to be many places that Apple could make a realistic improvement on the iPhone 4 without making things very costly and more difficult to manufacture but replacing the camera was one of them. The slightly dated 5-megapixel unit has been replaced by a far healthier sounding 8-megapixel sensor and the ability to shoot a more headline and impressive 1080p is a big bonus too.

Naturally, megapixels aren’t everything, so Apple has improved the optics on the iPhone 4S by opening up the maximum aperture from f/2.8 to f/2.4. That, plus a change in image sensor technology, is quoted as allowing 73 per cent more light gathered than on the iPhone 4 camera. There’s also the bonus of face detection, stabilisation and noise reduction to a degree. In short, we're talking sharper shots and at lower light levels too.

Connectivity

1st: iPhone 4S

HSPA+, GPS, BT 4.0, Wi-Fi, ant. switching, AirPlay Mirroring

2nd: iPhone 4

3G, GPS, BT 2.1, Wi-Fi

There’s not a lot missing from the iPhone 4 connectivity arsenal but there are two noticeable gaps, one of which has been filled by the addition of a 4G radio inside the iPhone 4S. HSPA+ support isn’t much good if you live outside the US and a handful of other countries but it will offer up to 14.4Mbps download speeds in Utopian conditions.
With the iPhone 4 and its straight 3G, the best downlink you’ll be looking at is more like 7.2Mbps. As we say though, just because the iPhone 4S works with HSPA+, it doesn’t mean that you’ll be experiencing it where you are. What might be the real advantage is the improvements to the antenna such that it can switch between the radios more smoothly and, fingers crossed, not drop so many calls.
Finally, there's also the added bonus of AirPlay Mirroring with the iPhone 4S. While the iPhone 4 and AirPlay app will still allow you to stream videos and music from your phone to your HDTV and speakers via Apple TV, it doesn't allow you to show everything that's on your handset such as web pages, games, messages and all the rest. That's all possible with the iPhone 4S.

Battery Life

1st: iPhone 4S

up to 8 hours 3G talk time

2nd: iPhone 4

up to 7 hours 3G talk time

Running the same screen and a more efficient chip at very similar output means that all it takes is a bigger power pack to get more life between charges on the iPhone 4S battery than on the iPhone 4, and that’s exactly what Apple has gone and done. While the older model can bring you up to 7 hours 3G talk time, 14 hours 2G talk time, 6 hours internet use over 3G, 10 hours of video playback or 40 hours audio; anyone purchasing the latest edition can look forward to 8 hours talk 3G talk time time, 14 2G talk time, 6 hours internet use over 3G, 10 hours of video playback or 40 hours music.

So, when Apple says that it’s improved the battery, as far as the quoted specs go, what you appear to gain is a single hour of 3G talk time. And that’s it. Not a massive boost here.

Software

1st: iPhone 4S

iOS 5 + Siri

2nd: iPhone 4

iOS 5

The launch if the iPhone 5 has also seen the arrival of iOS 5 which we all knew was coming since Jobs dropped the details at WWDC 2011. Both phones will be able to run this latest version of the mobile OS with the difference that one will have it installed out of the box and the other you may or may not have to update yourself depending on if you already own your iPhone 4.

The major difference is the addition of Siri - a voice-controlled personal organiser of a sort which will translate your more human, sentence based commands into actions such as opening specific apps to search and do things for you. So, for example, it can set alarms, read and reply to your messages, find restaurants and the like.

Storage

1st: iPhone 4S

16/32GB/64GB

2nd: iPhone 4

8GB

Is it for the video, is it because there’s no removable storage or is it because storage is just cheap these days? We’ll never know, but the fact remains that the 64GB iPhone 4S offers double the space of the previous model and that’s a lot to play with. The nasty part is that the 16GB and 32GB version of the iPhone 4 line have been axed from this moment on, meaning that anyone who opts for the older model from new is limited to a rather small 8GB storage space only. Just count your luckies that there’s iCloud to give you a hand.

Price

1st: iPhone 4

$99

2nd: iPhone 4S

$199/299/399

The bonus of going for the more budget option is that you get the more budget price to go with it, although that’s of little comfort to anyone who already owns the iPhone 4. Annoyingly for those in search of a bargain, the price differential reflects the halving of the storage space each time and the actual difference between the iPhone 4 and 16GB iPhone 4S is actually much greater than that. Worth bearing in mind.

Conclusion

1st: iPhone 4S

2nd: iPhone 4

There’d be something seriously wrong if the iPhone 4S didn’t come out on top here but is it so much better that you need to upgrade? Well, if games aren’t your thing and if the idea of Siri doesn’t drive you wild with excitement, then the answer is probably no. Sure, it’s got a better camera and takes video at a higher resolution and it even has a marginally longer battery life too but none of this is any reason to try to buy your way out of a contract. It's also arguable as to whether 4G connectivity or AirPlay Mirroring - which only works with Apple TV anyway - is really going to add enough value for many people as well.
Much as with the iPhone 3GS, you can bet that it’s the 2012 iPhone launch that will see a bigger update to the hardware and the kind of thing that you will be wanting to sell your grandmother in order to get hold of.

If, however, you’re looking to buy for the first time, then don’t bother with the straight iPhone 4. Sure, you’ll find it a little cheaper out there but the difference in cash isn’t really worth it and any saving you make will be outbalanced by that sense that you’ve got an inferior phone with an inferior camera too.

Read more »

Comparison chart: Samsung Galaxy S II vs. the iPhone 4S – Yes, the SGSII still rocks!

As you probably know, Apple announced the latest version of its iPhone today, the iPhone 4S. A lot of people were expecting an iPhone 5 announcement, since that didn’t happen, many Apple fans have been disappointed throughout the world. Not only are they disappointed because the iPhone 5 wasn’t announced, but also because the iPhone 4S doesn’t really offer that much. If you look at the specs of the iPhone 4S, it’s what many Android phones have been launching with for quite some time now.
Samsung wanted to remind the world of its powerful Galaxy S II phone. Compared to what Apple announced today, any variant of the Galaxy S II is still far more superior. Check out the comparison chart below to see for yourself.
In addition to the comparison chart below, not the following about the Galaxy S II:

• Screen Size: In terms of screen size benefits scale by AREA (length x width), the AT&T Galaxy SII has 42% more screen area than the iPhone 4S. The Sprint (Epic 4G Touch) and T-Mobile variants of the Galaxy S II have 58% more screen area than the iPhone 4S.
• Download Speeds: In terms of download speeds, AT&T’s Galaxy S II supports AT&T’s HSPA+ network speeds of 21Mbps, 50% more than the iPhone 4S’s HSPA 14Mbps. With T-Mobile, the Galaxy S II can support speeds of 42Mbps, compared to the iPhone 4S’s 14Mbps.
• Phone Size: When it comes to size, the Galaxy S II is still the thinnest phone on AT&T, Sprint, and T-Mobile, even after the announcement of the iPhone 4S.
• Openness: The Galaxy S II supports an Open Ecosystem. You are free to get your content from who you please. Want to buy your apps from Amazon’s Appstore, Google’s Android Market, or any of the other appstores available? What about buying music? Want to buy your music from Amazon, Rhapsody, or Samsung’s Music Hub? The choice is yours. Remember that with the iPhone 4S, you’re stuck with iTunes.

So, disappointed Apple fans, my word of advice to you is to head over to your local AT&T, Sprint, and soon T-Mobile store and pick up a Samsung Galaxy S II. You will not regret it.

Read more »

iPhone 4S versus the Android competition

The eyes of the world were on Cupertino today, as Apple unveiled their next generation iPhone 5 slightly improved iPhone 4S. While much of the focus of the keynote address was on new features in iOS 5, there are some definite hardware and software upgrades to the top-tier iPhone model to consider. To see how the iPhone 4S stacks up against the competition, we pitted the flagship phones from Samsung, Motorola, HTC and LG against it in a hardware showdown. Here’s how the Galaxy S II, DROID BIONIC, Sensation 4G and G2x compare:

As you can see, the iPhone still bests just about everything in screen resolution, but falls far behind in the screen’s physical size. That isn’t an important factor for some, but it’s a big deal for others. The iPhone 4S’ processor is well in line with the rest, but we don’t have numbers on certain specs like RAM and battery capacity, so a hard line comparison is difficult. The iPhone’s radio brings it up to speed with “4G” phones, but only on AT&T. While the iPhone’s most expensive model has a jaw-dropping 64GB of storage, Apple once again eschewed any sort of removable memory.
Of course, this chart only includes currently-selling phones. New competitiors like the Samsung Galaxy S II HD and Galaxy Note best the iPhone as far as the screen goes, and who knows what goodies are lying inside the DROID RAZR or Nexus Prime. We’ll have to wait a few weeks for details on the latest and greatest in the Android world – for new smartphone hardware from Apple, be sure to tune in in about 12 months or so.
)

Read more »

ZTE Skate vs Huawei Blaze

It's a battle of the budget Android this time around, as we compare the ZTE Skate with Huawei's Blaze

Not everyone has heaps of expendable income just waiting to be splashed on the latest dual-core Android or iPhone. Some of us set a budget and stick to it. But where does that leave us when it comes to picking up a smartphone?
Well, thankfully there's plenty of choice and among the leading sensibly priced devices Huawei's Blaze and ZTE's Skate stand-out as genuine contenders. But how do these two budget marvels stack up against each other?
Let's find out.

Display
ZTE's Skate features a 4.3-inch TFT touchscreen that operates at a resolution of 480 x 800 and displays 16 million colours. The device also offers a decent pixel density of 217ppi, putting it way above the likes of Samsung's Galaxy Ace, and other so-called budget smartphones.
The Huawei Blaze offers up a 3.2-inch TFT display that operates at a resolution of 480 x 320, displays 16 million colours and features a pixel density of 180ppi - which is considerably less than the Skate but still higher than the aforementioned Galaxy Ace.
Both of these devices pack a considerable punch in the display stakes, despite their modest price point but the extra screen real estate of the ZTE Skate gives it the advantage.
Winner - ZTE Skate

Power
Huawei's Blaze is powered by a single-core 600MHz Qualcomm MSM7227 CPU and features 512MB ROM, 256MB RAM and support for Micro SD cards up to 32GB in capacity.
While there's distinct lack of serious horsepower (and some lag at times) the smaller processor does cope amply with what it's intended to, making it a good balance of economy and necessary oomph.
The ZTE Skate raises the stakes (but not by much) with an 800MHz CPU and 512MB RAM, giving it a definite advantage over the little Huawei. The Skate offers support for Micro SD cards up to 32GB too.
Naturally we weren't expecting fire and brimstone from the device but the performance is surprisingly fluid overall!
Winner - ZTE Skate

Form
ZTE Skate - 125.9x67.8x10.4mm, 120g
Huawei Blaze - 110x56.5x11.2mm, 104g
Both of these contenders are solidly constructed, using mainly plastics. Neither are heavy, bulky or unusually uncomfortable to handle either.
The ZTE Skate definitely takes the tape ahead of the Huawei Blaze in terms of good looks though, with the latter looking like the jumbled offspring of a Nexus One and an LG Optimus P500.
Winner - ZTE Skate
Software
Android 2.3 (Gingerbread) is the order of the day here, with both devices operating on the popular Google platform.
There are minor customisations made by both Huawei and ZTE though, giving users a few widgets and apps to help spruce up their homescreen. And while the effort should be commended we wish that manufacturers would just let Android be unless they're planning on putting in some serious effort.
Both contenders perform well on the operating system, though the ZTE Skate clearly benefits from the extra 200MHz of grunt at its disposal.
Winner - ZTE Skate

CameraHuawei's Blaze features a 3.15-megapixel snapper with autofocus that performs as you'd expect it to, which is to say pretty poorly.
The device does benefit from a secondary camera though, which is a nice inclusion on a low-end smartphone.
ZTE has equipped the Skate with a solid 5-megapixel shooter that benefits from autofocus, LED flash and geo-tagging.
Performance is middling on the whole, but in decent light conditions you'll likely be pleasantly surprised with what the device is capable of producing.
Unlike the Huawei the Skate does not feature a front-facing camera though, so if video calling is a must-have you'll have to look elsewhere.
Winner - Draw

Despite its considerable charm the Huawei Blaze has been roundly beaten in this comparison, but that needn't reflect poorly on the overall appeal of the device.
At its price point (around £175) the Blaze is a very competitive little smartphone but for around £15 more you can pick up the ZTE Skate and in all honesty you couldn't spend that sum better if you tried.
The Skate is a really pleasing device to use and offers up solid performance, good looks and robust construction at an excellent price, and it's a worthy winner today.

Read more »

HTC Titan vs HTC Sensation XE

We're putting the latest Windows Phone 7.5 driven HTC device, the Titan, up against its fraternal rival, the Sensation XE

If you're undecided whether to put your money behind Microsoft's Windows Phone platform or Google's world conquering Android, today's comparison may help you out as we aim to see which device brings more to the market – the Mango flavoured HTC Titan or the Android-driven Sensation XE.

Power
The HTC Titan is powered by a Qualcomm MSM8255 chipset which consists of a 1.5GHz single-core Scorpion processor and an Adreno 205GPU.
The inclusion of 512MB RAM, when Android rivals are looking to move beyond 1GB, is a disappointment, but not one which affects the stability or speed of the device a great deal.
The Sensation XE takes the 1.5GHz processor of the Titan and doubles it, with its Qualcomm MSM 8260 Snapdragon chipset. The GPU on offer is also beefier and the Adreno 220 should cope well with games and eye candy for the foreseeable future.
It's a pity HTC didn't choose to upgrade the device's RAM though. 768MB is plenty for now, but it won't allow the device to age quite as gracefully as some of its peers.
Winner - HTC Sensation XE

Camera
Optics aren't HTC's strong suit, but we've taken a look at what these devices offer nevertheless.
The Sensation XE packs the same 8-megapixel as the original Sensation, which includes dual-LED flash, autofocus, geo-tagging, image stabilisation, face detection and instant capture.
While the spec-sheet sounds impressive it isn't all that it's cracked up to be. Image quality is unreliable at best, though it's capable of snapping some half decent snaps in good light.
The device also captures video at 1080P and boasts a secondary VGA camera for video calling.
The Titan features an 8-megapixel camera too, with autofocus, LED-flash and geo-tagging and we've yet to see some real world examples of its product, so we can't pass judgement at this stage.
The device also captures 720P video and offers a 1.3-megapixel front-facing camera for video calling.
Winner - HTC Sensation XE

Software
HTC's Titan ships with version 7.5 of Microsoft's Windows Phone operating system, otherwise known as 'Mango', and we're more than pleased with the choice of OS.
The platform is nice to look at, easy to use and features some excellent upgrades over the original release, such as beefed-up social network integration, threaded emails and the new Internet Explorer 9 which features a souped-up new Javascript compiler, making it a very fast phone to surf upon which to surf the Web.
There are too many updates to list them all individually but Microsoft has assured users there are 500 updates, so rest assured you'll find plenty to impress.
The Sensation XE runs on version 2.3.4 of Google's Android OS, and the device performs excellently on the platform.
The device is fast, stable and secure and offers users the benefit of the hundreds of thousands of apps in the Android Market, an eminently customisable user interface (made all the better by HTC's own Sense UI) and all the social network integration you can shake a stick at.
For now we still prefer Android, but Microsoft has done a great deal to buoy our confidence in its OS with Mango!
Winner - Draw

Screen
The HTC Titan features a 4.7-inch S-LCD screen which operates at a resolution of 480 x 800 and a pixel density of 199ppi - which is less than stellar.
The Sensation XE weighs-in with a smaller S-LCD screen, at 4.3-inches, but one with a greater resolution (540 x 960) and much more impressive pixel density of 256ppi.
Side-by-side there isn't a world of difference in their real world application, though if you're big on visuals and watch a lot of content on your smartphone you'd be better off siding with the higher quality display of the Sensation XE.
Winner - HTC Sensation XE

Form
HTC Titan - 131.5 x 70.7 x 9.9 mm, 160g
HTC Sensation XE - 126.1 x 65.4 x 11.3 mm, 151g
Both devices, being HTC, are of a generally high build quality. The use of high quality materials add greatly to the general aesthetic of both smartphones too, giving them both a leg-up over the plastic fantastic devices on offer from other manufacturers.
Neither will feel like a mill-stone in your pocket, but at 160 & 151 grams they won't feel floaty light either, but a reassuring weight is underrated in our opinion and both devices offer a nice balance and feeling in the hand.
Winner - Draw
While the Sensation XE has taken the tape first in this comparison it's fair to say that HTC has two winners on its hands overall.
The Titan is a fine looking, well-appointed 'Mango' device which will benefit immeasurably from the inclusion of this latest iteration of Windows Phone. It's nice to look at, nice to use and slick - nearly as slick as another fruit-based competitor!
The Sensation XE is a great device, and owing to the more polished OS, improved drive-train and smaller chassis its able to hold off the steady advances of the Titan.
We aren't sure for how long though.

Read more »

HTC Radar vs ZTE Tania (Rumours)

We pit the HTC Radar up against the mysterious ZTE Tania – both devices are Windows Phone 7 Mango

We see how ZTE’s forthcoming Tania handset compares to HTC’s Radar in a battle of the budget Windows Mango smartphones.

Form:
HTC Radar - 120.5x61.5x10.9mm, 137g
ZTE Tania – Unknown
HTC is extending its signature ‘softly’ shaped handsets to its Windows Phone devices. The Radar looks pretty much like every other HTC handset ever made, which means it isn’t unattractive by any sense of the word, but it is rather generic.
ZTE has a habit of making handsets which look remarkably like HTC phones and the Tania is no exception, though it has to be said it does look a little cleaner and more elegant than HTC’s Radar.
From what we've seen, the Tania definitely seems to have more about it in the 'wow-factor' department. And for a budget handset, this is quite rare.
Winner – ZTE Tania

Display:
HTC’s Radar is fitted with a 3.8-inch S-LCD capacitive touchscreen, the resolution is 480x800 pixels giving a pixel density of 246ppi.
As usual for HTC phones the screen is made from Gorilla Glass so it’s not going to smash easily, and features multi-touch input.
Accelerometer and gyro sensors allow for screen interface rotation.
The Tania uses a larger 4.3-inch capacitive touchscreen at the same resolution as the Radar, giving a pixel density of 217ppi.
The Tania’s larger screen is nice but with the Radar you get the same resolution and a much higher pixel density, meaning it’ll have a much sharper picture.
Winner – HTC Radar

Storage:
ZTE’s Tania comes with 4GB of onboard storage and 512MB of RAM to boost the processor. The HTC has the same 512MB of RAM but doubles the internal storage with 8GB of space.
Windows Phone 7 handsets, for the most part, do not support microSD. This means your limited to internal storage, which is 4GB and 8GB respectively in this case.
Taking things as they are it seems the HTC Radar has more storage space to play with, which makes it the more appealing of the two given the RAM is on par.
If you want expandable storage and Windows Phone 7 Mango, you'll have to wait until Nokia's handsets arrive. They're the only ones that will support it – guess that was part of the deal all along.
Winner – HTC Radar

Processor:
Both phones run single core 1GHz processors with graphics processing units (GPU). The Radar uses a Qualcomm Scorpion on the MSM8255 Snapdragon chipset paired with an Adreno 205 GPU.
Each handset should be quite capable of decent performance thanks to the 1GHz clock speed and good optimisation of single core processors on the Windows Phone operating system.
Winner -Draw

Operating System:
These are both Windows Phone Mango powered handsets running the latest build of Microsoft’s operating system for smartphones.
Microsoft has added plenty of changes to the new build, but when running it you actually find it’s all rather subtle and contributes to an overall more slick and intuitive platform without being able to put your finger on precisely why.
Part of it is down to a greater integration of communication and social networking services, along with the system pushing more information out to you at all levels.
Mango’s ‘People’ hub goes to great efforts to aggregate all message and social network information from all your contacts into one easily accessible place, and it lets you respond simultaneously to multiple contacts across multiple mediums including webmail, exchange email, SMS and MMS text, instant messaging, Facebook statuses and Tweeting on Twitter.
Email inboxes can also be merged and pinned to the start menu keeping your emails right where you want them.
Performance has noticeably improved, which is saying something as it was pretty good before. You also get an excellent multi-tasking system this time round which keeps your non-active apps in hibernation, so they only cause minimal battery drain.
One of the really nice things about Windows Phone Mango is, because of Microsoft’s licensing agreements, manufacturers aren’t allowed to load their handsets with interface overlays and bloatware, so you’re getting the same build as the next guy with a different brand phone and it should run quite well all round.
Generally we’re pretty impressed with Windows Phone Mango, it’s easy to use and has a lot to offer most users. Android and iOS should be looking worried right now.
Winner - Draw

Camera:
Both phones are fitted with 5-megapixel cameras at 2560х1920 pixels and with LED flash, the Radar also has a VGA secondary camera. HTC’s device features autofocus, digital zoom, geo-tagging, video calling and 720p HD video capture.
Quite an even match on cameras here, both are adequate offerings without being anything exceptional.
Winner - Draw

Final Thoughts:
These phones are equally matched power-wise with equal processor specs, the camera setup is also very similar on both devices.
However, the HTC Radar comes out ahead on storage and display even if the ZTE Tania is a better looking phone.
As budget handsets they’re not earth-shattering but they’re a cheaper way of getting access to a very appealing operating system and, in fairness, they punch above their weight in terms of performance.

Your Ad Here

Read more »

Amazon Kindle Fire vs iPad 2

The Amazon Kindle Fire has arrived complete with its 16 million colour screen and all the backing of the enormous online retail platform that is Amazon itself. Big, but is bigger necessarily better?
There also happens to be a certain other massive player in the tablet market in the shape of the company who redefined it back in April 2010 with the arrival of the first iPad. So, now with the iPad 2 ruling the roost, how is Amazon going to compare with Apple in this space and, more importantly as far as your decision goes, how do their tablets match up? Here is the Amazon Kindle Fire vs iPad 2 to help you figure that one out.

Form Factor

Tie: iPad 2

241.2 x 185.7 x 8.8mm, 613g

Tie: Kindle Fire

190 x 120 x 11.4mm, 413g

It’s not really fair comparing a 7-inch tab to a 9.7-inch one on form factor stats alone - the larger one is quite obviously going to be bigger and heavier. All the same, we’re going to call it a tie this time around.

Yes, the Amazon Kindle Fire is made small enough and light enough to hold in one hand - and anyone who’s tried to do the same in bed with an iPad 2 will know that that’s not so easy - but what gets us a little concerned is that, despite its more pocketable (well, baggable) size, it’s, well, a little bit fat. The similarly sized Blackberry PlayBook comes across a touch chunky and that’s 9.7mm thick. So, the Kindle Fire, at 11.4mm, might not be as physically beautiful as the competition.

Engine Room

Tie: Kindle Fire

OMAP 4430

Tie: iPad 2

Apple A4

In some ways, it’s not hugely relevant to compare the power specs of these two tablets. Both are essentially designed as closed system devices and, as such, you can bet that they’re designed to run their respective content with much aplomb. All the same, we may as well split open these systems-on-a-chip that run the two to find out what’s inside.

On the RAM front, both the Apple A5 and OMAP 4430 contain the same 512MB complement. The CPUs are also identical. Each is a dual-core ARM Cortex-9 set to run at a clock speed of anywhere between 1-1.2GHz. In fact, the only thing that separates them is the GPU. The iPad 2 has a PowerVR SGX543 and the Kindle Fire has a PowerVR SGX540. For the sake of a 67 MPolygons per second vs 60 MPolygons, we’re calling this one a tie to all intents and purposes. Those willing to nit pick may do so at the bottom.

Display

1st: Kindle Fire

7-inch, 1024x600, 169ppi, IPS

2nd: iPad 2

9.7-inch, 1024x768px, 132ppi, IPS

There are some tiny differences between the Amazon Kindle Fire screen and that of the iPad 2 but they more or less balance each other out. Both are multitouch, both are based on LCD technology and both have IPS which gives them as wide a viewing angle as possible, just in case you’re feeling generous enough to want to share your screen.

What you do get with the iPad 2 display is more of it but the advantage that the Amazon Kindle Fire has is that it maintains a similar resolution at slightly smaller size. So, you get a bit of a boost of pixel density for a snappier picture but at the expense of a little less screen real estate. The other advantage the Kindle Fire has is that the aspect ratio of the device is far closer to the film-friendly 16:9 rather than the more awkward 4:3 on the iPad 2. What might just tip the balance though is that the Kindle Fire screen has been chemically hardened to make it more durable. For whether or not this makes a physical difference, we'll have to wait and see.
At the end of the day though, this isn’t a category that should encourage you to choose one over the other.

Storage

1st: iPad 2

16/32/64GB + iCloud

2nd: Kindle Fire

8GB + USB + Amazon Cloud

Another close run category here. Neither of these devices has SD removable storage and if it were down to internal flash alone, then the iPad 2 would win with its choice of three storage sizes, all of which are bigger than the 8GB on offer in the Amazon Kindle Fire even if it does have a USB port to back it up.

The tricky part comes in because both devices also offer cloud storage. On the one hand you get iCloud with the iPad, and there’s a couple of issues here. The first is that, at the time of writing, iOS 5 and iCloud are not available on the iPad 2. However, we are expecting that to change very shortly. The next problem with iCloud is that, so far, although there’s been mention of TV shows and it doesn’t look like you’ll be able to sync them or films from the off while out and about.

So, the picture you get with the iPad 2 is that, over Wi-Fi, while at home, you're more or less covered but when out of range of your home library to sync with your options start to narrow a little. Once we're talking 3G coverage only, then there's a maximum file download size that kicks in which means no videos from iTunes at all and no big apps either.

The Amazon Kindle Fire, on the other hand, comes supported by the Amazon Cloud Storage system which promises to store as much of your Amazon bought content as you like, be it books, films, TV shows or whatever else digital that the retail giant sells. In fact, this is pretty much key to the entire model for them.
With that behind you, you can stream direct or download at the touch of a button, whatever you like. Now, that’s all very well at home, work or even at a hotel but the problem is that, because the Kindle Fire doesn’t support 3G, when you’re on the move, you’re at the mercy of whatever is sitting on that 8GB of internal memory alone. According to Amazon, that’s around 10 films.

We’re not saying that that isn’t enough but what it does mean is that using a Kindle Fire does require a modicum of thought and preparation that the Apple iPad 2 doesn’t, even if it's only with music and smaller files that you see the benefit.

Battery

1st: iPad 2

Up to 10 hours video

2nd: Kindle Fire

Up to 7.5 hours video

OK. Nice and simple this time. You’ll get more battery life out of the iPad 2 than the Amazon Kindle Fire. Naturally, the quoted specs are your classic “up to” figures which means that you’ll need to turn off the Wi-Fi and Bluetooth, possibly dim the screen and generally not touch the thing at all once you start watching your movies, but they should be just about be achievable nonetheless. Either way, it’s the iPad 2 that will last longer.

Connectivity

1st: iPad 2

Wi-Fi, BT, 3G, HDMI

2nd: Kindle Fire

Wi-Fi and USB

This isn’t normally the strongest of categories for the iPad 2 but it still manages to get one over the Kindle Fire on connectivity. The fact that Amazon hasn’t included that same free 3G that comes on the rest of the Kindle range is a bit of a bummer. It might be something that Amazon sorts out later but given that we’re talking about transferring feature length video files rather than books, it might never happen.

All the same, paid or otherwise, not having a mobile internet connection of any kind is a bit of a loss. On the plus side, there is a USB slot that you don’t get on the iPad 2 but it’s not quite as useful as perhaps it was in the past. Its best function might be as a removable storage device.

The other downer is that there’s no video-out socket in the way that the HDMI adapter provides for the iPad. So, this isn’t something for taking round to your mate’s and plugging into the back of their TV. When it comes to your TV, however, an Amazon app on your set linked to your Amazon account might remove the need for video-out. On top of that, who knows what Amazon may or may not let you do over wireless by the time this hits the shelves although it seems unlikely that users will get access to the DLNA certified apps like Skifta and Twonky.

However you look at it, there’s quite a few ifs there and, ultimately, the iPad 2 is more flexible a device on this front for the moment.

OS Software

1st: iPad 2

iOS

2nd: Kindle Fire

Android Gingerbread-based

We’re all pretty familiar with iOS these days, whether its iOS 4 or iOS 5. What you get is a relatively closed system with a bunch of things that you can do but also a whole host of things that just aren’t possible the way that are on Android. The plus points, of course, are that it works very well and it’s very easy to use, even if it doesn’t offer a high level of flexibility.

The Kindle Fire might run Android 2.3 Gingerbread but it’s a highly customised and closed down version. The big killer is on the apps front, but more on that in a moment. From what we’ve seen so far, the experience, although very attractive, looks like it offers even less room for manoeuver than iOS with the main face of the Kindle Fire OS a series of carousels where you can purchase and sift through your Amazon books, music and videos.

The other interesting part of the platform is the Amazon Silk browser for the old surfing of the web over Wi-Fi. Silk is a tabbed browser set to be lightening quick because half the computational work is done off-device and up in the cloud in the Amazon servers. It’s a feature known as split browsing. While it all sounds very good, the downside is that Amazon then knows all of your browsing habits. Now, naturally, this is something that your ISP probably knows anyway but a shop (Amazon) knowing all about your other shopping habits is some seriously valuable information for them. It’s up to you how you feel about that. Fortunately, you can turn the split browsing off.
There's also Amazon's Whispersync technology to enjoy whereby your videos and books will pick up where you left them on other devices.

Apps

1st: iPad 2

iTunes App Store (500,000+ apps)

2nd: Kindle Fire

Amazon App Store (3,800+ apps)

If there’s one place where Amazon has got you buy the balls it’s on the app front. The Amazon App Store is all you’ll get access to on the Kindle Fire rather than the vast expanses of the Android Market. The Amazon version launched in March 2011 with 3,800 applications to choose from and you can bet that it won’t include any services that interfere in any way with the company’s selling of content and positioning of its tablet device. There’s still plenty of big name games but don’t expect many tools to wrestle control of the tablet back over to you.

On the other hand, the iPad 2 gives you access to the 0.5 million and more apps sitting on the best app store in the world. No contest.

Content Library

1st: Kindle Fire

Amazon

2nd: iPad 2

iTunes Store

This is where the Amazon Kindle Fire really comes into its own both for the user and for Amazon. The 7-inch tablet gives you access to the entire Amazon Instant Video collection of TV shows and films which amounts to a catalogue of over 100,000 possibilities. Each one can be bought and downloaded to the device or rented and streamed. What’s more, anyone signed up to the £50/year Amazon Prime service can get over 10,000 of these rented for free. The comparison on iTunes is around 6,000 videos with nothing decent for free

Music is where you might expect Apple to do better and, indeed, there’s around 14 millions songs on offer worldwide, but, again, Amazon offers more with 17 million on the MP3 Store which you can stream for your cloud space or download to the device. Beyond that, there’s books, comics, newspapers, magazines and audiobooks and it’s not even worth making comparisons here. This is Amazon’s bread and butter. If it’s access to buy content that you want, then read no further.

File support

1st: iPad 2

Most things

2nd: Kindle Fire

Not everything

Again, this all comes down to what apps you’ll be allowed to use but while there’s just about every kind of player and converter to deal with those files that the native side of iOS cannot reach, that might not be possible with the Kindle Fire. Currently, the supported file format list by Amazon is:

Kindle (AZW), TXT, PDF, unprotected MOBI, PRC natively, Audible (Audible Enhanced (AA, AAX)), DOC, DOCX, JPEG, GIF, PNG, BMP, non-DRM AAC, MP3, MIDI, OGG, WAV, MP4, VP8.

So, with no AVI, no EPUB and no FLAC support, it might be frustrating when it comes to playing your own library of films, books and music on the Kindle Fire.

Imaging

1st: iPad 2

Rear camera (VGA stills, 720p video)

2nd: Kindle Fire

Nothing

Um.

Price & Availability

1st: Kindle Fire

$199 (£127)

2nd: iPad 2

Wi-Fi: £339/£479/£599, 3G: £499/£579/£659

The Amazon Kindle Fire is cheap. Really cheap. It’s less than half the cost of even the most basic of the iPad 2 range and it’s going to offer a good, entertaining tablet experience to more or less everyone, and that’s hard to ignore.

It’s available for pre-order now but there are currently no plans to take it outside of the US. Doubtless, those plans will turn up eventually but, with a lot of licensing and agreement paperwork to get through, don’t expect anything in the UK for at least a year.

Conclusion

1st: iPad 2

2nd: Kindle Fire

It’s a little churlish to talk about winners and losers in this comparison but, if you want a blanket “who would win in a fight” type result, then it’s the iPad 2. Ultimately though, the reason we at Pocket-lint write these match-ups is to help you out with your buying decision, and to say that the iPad 2 is the tablet for everyone over the Amazon Kindle Fire would not be correct.

There are some differences worth noting. Yes, the iPad will last you a bit longer, it’s a better looking piece of kit, it has 3G, a camera and it’s more flexible in terms of what you can do with it. The real story, and where you need to think long and hard, is about what you want to do with it.
If a tablet, for you, is about watching movies and TV, and reading an enormous wealth of publications and periodicals, then it’s definitely the Kindle Fire that’s the one for you. If playing games, communicating, working and generally using a tablet as a tool is just as important, then it’s the iPad 2 and that’s where you need to be at. At least until the iPad 3 comes out.

Read more »