Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

I think I have just found the right person in you to answer my questions since you have both N900 and Samsung Galaxy-S. Can you please answer some of my questions

1. When you watch a Video on the N900 does it look a grade fader then the Samsung Galaxy-s, How would you rate screen resolution and display when you compare it with the Samsung Galaxy-S. I know with the Amoled screen the Galaxy will definitely be better, but is the N900 lacking far too behind. is it like it is completely out of the race against the Galaxy.

2. Android and MAEMO 5 are 2 different things, BUt when you used both do you feel Android is more easier and friendly to use than the MAEMO 5.

The driving point for me will be the screen display between both. What I look for is when I am visiting a webpage it should give ma a near to PC experience,which I guess with the 4 Inch Amoled screen Galaxy also kind of gives it. And then of course the Screen Display if I am watching a video or playing games.

Can you tell me your observations about these points.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

My disgust wasn't aimed towards you... it plain sucks that I'm left high and dry due to Verizon's side deal.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

Meanwhile, back at my evil lair...

Dan: YES! I have it! I HAVE IT! SOON, all the world will BOW to the power of SKYPE on my Motorola Droid! MWahahahahaha...

[music interrupts the laughter, Dan presses a finger on the screen and the Droid beeps obediently]

Dan: Yes, hello? Mother? UGH! Why do you always call when I'm in the middle of my plans for ruthless world domination??? ...yes, yes, milk.. eggs.. bread...

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

Well, I have just ordered my little SGS from a Scot on eBay.
Not ditching the N900 just yet. I will certainly miss the flash and the FM transmitter.
But..
I am going to have a play with it and nip back on here for a "compare and contrast" sort of post.
<puts up his hate-screen in case an angry NIFOC 14 year old thinks I might be an SGS convert>

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

I hear that the picture takes wonderful quality pictures in low light.

Another unknown feature is the sound quality. Apparently, the Galaxy S has damn-near-perfect fidelity streaming out of the 3.5mm jack:
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_i900...view-478p6.php

In fact, the above link is a wonderful review, the likes of which are not typically seen at the more popular blogs.

One thing is certain, the Galaxy S hardware is top-tier.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

Yup! i can vouch for the awesome almost perfect sound of the Galaxy S.. it really is good :) !

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

No, not at all—though this might be because I've had the N900 for long enough to get used to it. Android feels like an unhappy compromise between the walled garden "we know what's best for you" of Apple and the "we trust you, and in the end it's your device" of Nokia.

I'm in a somewhat similar boat as the OP and others... I got an Epic 4G, and now I can't decide whether to keep it, or stick with my N900. The Samsung's hardware "feels" better—the keyboard and screen are just absolutely gorgeous. But Maemo is a far superior OS—I'd forgotten the reasons I moved away from Android. It's more intuitive and more powerful... now I don't know whether or not to stick with the functional or the pretty.

But if we wanted pretty, we'd have iPhones, right?

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

And if you wanted support you'd... naw, too easy...

The whole diss against the Galaxy S is still odd to me.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

I find the Android operating system unintuitive and underpowered. If you like Android and are moving from an N900, the Galaxy S Pro is your only choice. Beautiful hardware, especially the keyboard and screen. It's light, if a little plasticky and a tad on the big side. But it requires you to like Android, which is not an OS for everyone. It's not a "diss against the Galaxy S," it's a lament that the operating system isn't one I like as much, or find as useful, as Maemo. I don't think that's unreasonable.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

You find it odd to see people on the Maemo forums being defensive? :)

God... I suddenly had the urge to reply "Yeah well... your face is unintuitive and underpowered." What the hell is wrong with me??

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

Oh, I find Maemo definitely the better OS, just way under utilized and unrefined in some points that I - as a consumer - expect to be fully fleshed out in 2010. That didn't happen, unfortunately I doubt it ever will.

I could care less about the "disses" to be honest, just that there's a lot of FUD in this thread (you are by far not one of them) that state, at a bare minimum "If it's not Nokia, I won't ever like it".

And to me, that very closed mentality is... just plain friggin' weird. All OS's and devices are just tools. I run 5 different operating systems without issue and I don't favor a one over the other really. I just use what works the best for me.

Won't lie. I don't "like" Android, but it's better for my workflow in a lot of areas than the iPhone. Maemo fits my style for development and administration, but sucks for media and ultimately phone calls. Android's contact list sucks in a bit because despite removing the sync to my gmail accounts, it still lists them when I try to message somebody. There are inconsistencies that annoy me in Android, that I don't like. And iPhone? Refined, but dumbed down like a valley girl.

Regardless, I like the 4" Super AMOLED, the Hummingbird processor, the faster than anything else out feel, and the fact I'm getting 2.2 in less than a month (as announced).

Is it perfect for everybody? Nope. Probably why I've lag fixed, rooted, custom kernel, 1.2ghz overclocked, gps logging turned off, and removed all of the bloatware as well as tweaked TouchWiz. That's an awful lot to do on a "limited" platform.

I cannot say the same for the extremely open nor extremely closed. The "middle" path has treated me well. All that was required was an open mind.

And you sir... I believe you are very open minded and knowledgeable. Take care.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

I'm going to let my inner-a**hole hang out for a moment...

All I see is a bunch of undelivered, yet implicit, promises that a lot of folks around here somehow fell for (Nokia Reality Distortion Field?) and those that did not fall for it, they attack.

Those that still believe in it - they attack everything else.

Yet... I don't see very much to persuade me to believe in a damn thing they believe in. "It's the most open"... show me. I don't see 1/10th of the activity in terms of OS level hacks and development than I see at XDA-Developers. I mean, I just replaced the whole friggin' file system (RFS) to EXT4 and upped my entire speed on my Captivate.

I don't see 3D engines and apps. I see... well nothing.

For an open playing field, not much of anything is going on. PR1.2 and... that's it.

Instead of attacking, prove me wrong. Meanwhile, I'll be over here putting Android on my iPhone and modifying the living daylights out of my Captivate... there's a new Froyo firmware leaked out and I have to reverse my lag fix and revert from EXT4 before I do that.

Or I might go to a plain vanilla (sans TouchWiz) firmware and enjoy the lack of Samsung induced bloat.

I got real friggin' options. I don't see too many on the N900 besides sit... and wait... and hope.

And attack.

</inner a**hole>

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

It is though :<

Seriously, though, I preordered the G1 and started with Android when it was new and exciting operating system (also, at the time, I was using Windows Mobile—and the difference between the (non)evolution of Windows Mobile since 2008 and Android since 2008 is scary).

I agree with Gerbick, though, that there are definite advantages to the OS, especially in comparison with others. However, I've used WinMo 6 and 6.5, iOS (via an iPad), Android through Android 2, and Maemo; on balance, I prefer the N900's operating system to anything else out there. I wouldn't discourage anyone from getting a Galaxy, but if you already have an N900 you are, frankly, the kind of person who is likely to prefer the way the N900 does things from the get-go. I think.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

Wow, I was just being rhetorical. :D ...but yeah. I don't understand the defensiveness. I've said it all along--I've had an N800 and was looking for reason to buy into the next Maemo (so far, remaining unconvinced) and now it's all about MeeGo. In the meantime, Maemo's been ABOUT as open as Android (less so, near as I can tell) and so I don't see anything that convinced me that it was a platform that proved itself (not just words) to be any better. In my itch to get something new, I ended up getting a Dell Mini9 and a Motorola Droid in lieu of the next thing from Nokia and I'm increasingly glad I did. ...Every... Day. Still, I hold out and hope for something more along the lines of a true and open "like the desktop experience" Linux platform but in the meantime, the experience with Android has begun to convince me that maybe I don't need it or maybe that simple being OPEN is the key (not necessarily the desktop experience Linux).

I don't know, but it just seems to me that the defensiveness of folks around here isn't helping to convince me that Nokia's offerings are any better. Some evidence and delivered goods would, but certainly not the "It's the best thing I've ever used! You're an ***hole for disagreeing!' arguments. :rolleyes:

So anyway, yeah. Synchronicity. I'm right there with you. :)

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

I ' M Y E L L I N G F O R N O R E A S O N !!!!

Kidding, of course, everybody rocks.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

Galaxy S is nice, my brother has the Galaxy S gt-i9000 and i find it a tad too big. But if you are that keen to get one, then i advise the Galaxy S Vibrant or Captivate. But i don't think they're available in some countries.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

support from samsung? Check their track record.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

I love the galaxy hardware but would never be able to cope with Android.
I tried it and I didn't like it. But I'm the sort of person who can wait for the right product though. I just love the way things work on the N900. Just the little things like being able to tap on a blurred area of the screen to get out of a window.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

Let's see. their drivers have been open sourced and there are JH2, JH3, JM6 firmware (among others) out there and Froyo has been announced in the next month.

GPS does need to be fixed, but that's been announced too.

Past tense, hell yeah. Samsung sucked. Still do in most areas. But the Galaxy S series seems to be their right step forward. The same way that folks hope that MeeGo turns around Nokia's start/stop/restart process.

So far, I've benefited from this change in fortune from Samsung. I can't say the same for my Nokia purchases (past tense).

Here's to the future. Let's hope Samsung and Nokia don't leave us high and dry like they have in the recent past.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

ive been on the fence im up for a new phone for tmobile. the galaxy seems pretty cool but im a big camera guy. Does picture quality suffer from lack of flash. If so how badly?

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

Hmm....if you go to tmobile store and ask them to borrow the galaxy, you can try it out yourself :).

I found the galaxy eventhough its faster than the earlier generation of android. (mytouch and g1), for the youtube the quality is "bad" for that high end processor. So flash may not be optimised yet.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

are you speaking of flash player or camera flash?

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

I'm not missing the flash, I tend to take photos of things off in a distance typically. But that usually means with better lighting to begin with. I have a smaller Sony DSC-T77 for photos that I'll take up close because it doesn't introduce a lot of noise into photos where I have to use the flash and they might be under 2 meters close to me.

I can play around - this is where I have to be honest - I've rarely used the camera on my Captivate (Galaxy S derivative) mainly because I've yet to have any reason to take any.

Edit: I did take this picture, but it was in the sunlight as you can tell. Sorry I can't answer your question... now you have me thinking about testing it.

I tend to photo as if I need good lighting first.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

That woulld be geat. A side by side compared tyo your n900.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

I just made one for you: http://www.flickr.com/photos/2966151...7624888394038/ Pardon the mess on the table. Every phone was set to auto mode. I took 2 pictures with and without flash on the n900. The one from the n82 is a really old and I forgot why it isn't focused...:p

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

The comparison photo is missing with flash. The n82 still looks even though its out of focus.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

It's fun to see people with their own little mutual admiration society act so smug about people who happen to disagree with them.

I don't even know anyone "on the N900"-- what does that mean, anyway? Like being on heroin?

I'm enjoying my N900. I plan to abandon Nokia in good time, but in the meantime the N900 strikes me as pretty superior to what's out there. I don't know whether Nitdroid is really representative of Android, for example, but I've spent many hours trying to love Nitdroid, and I reluctantly notice my great relief when I return to Maemo and my N900 the way it was meant to be.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

I've used Android extensively, with much hacking courtesy of XDA, (albeit on an older model), and as great as it is, the two devices are two entirely different beasts. Android is great for communication and updates; phone, email, texting, the news, etc. Whereas, Maemo is great for actually getting things done. Which one you value more is up to you, but the fact of the matter is, the N900 is not a phone.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

Nobody was disagreeing nor agreeing with me. There's nothing smug about stating a truth that other folks would not.

Reread what you quoted and what I stated. I said that I don't see too many options, not on the N900... that was in regards to "real friggin' options".

Good for you. If you enjoy it, so be it. It is an enjoyable device; it's just not the device I need for myself to support my needs.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

Stripping your terrible font and color selection, it is inevitable that newer hardware will beat out older hardware. What the N900 lacks in screen quality it, for some people, will make up for in capability.

So even being ~9 months behind the times, it might be just the right device even now if you're the right kind of person.

Certainly, I've not seen anything yet that compares. Yes, better hardware is out but OS wise, nothing yet. MeeGo portends to be the first.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

Augustya I don't think anyone is arguing about the screen quality here. The galaxy has the best screen on the planet hands down. I even talked my younger sister into getting one because I knew that she's the sort of person who is more likely to watch a movie on her phone than remote desktop / VLC into work.

Heck even the Omnia had a better screen, the HD2 had a bigger screen. But I chose the N900 for the OS, as I'm sure most other people on this forum did.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

I'd like to add to the discussion as well by typing up my little comparison between th N900 and the Samsung Galaxy S (Vibrant). I had an N900 which I sold and finally got a Vibrant on a deal that was too good to pass. There are my personal opinions and experiences which I thought would be worth sharing because they might be beneficial to anyone trying to compare these handsets from a general user's perspective. I am aiming for objectivity in this comparison because that's how I look at my experiences. Should there be any bias, consider it human and let it slide. :)

Hardware:
Build wise, the N900 was superior by leaps and bounds. It was a typical Nokia handset which screamed SOLID and built to last. The Vibrant feels like its made from cheaper materials, even though its very much more sleeker than the N900.

So far, I miss the invincible feel the N900 had but also love how I can't feel the Vibrant in my pants' pocket. I loved carrying the N900 around without a carrying case and just a screen protector but can't take that chance with the Vibrant because of the flimsy hardware materials used. Taking pictures with the N900 was a great experience because all I needed to do was slide the camera shutter and shoot. With the Vibrant and a lack of dedicated camera button makes the camera painful to use, coming from the N900.

The radios, be it wireless or GSM, are way better on the N900 again. This should have been a given but they came to me as a surprise on how weak they were on the Vibrant. This was particularly noticeable in low coverage areas and steaming music while driving. I am aware that it also depends on the software used, but the Vibrant has dropped more calls and has a generally lower in-call quality in terms of reception as well.

On-board speakers are the same as well where the year old stereo speaks on the N900 outshine Vibrant. The sound was crisp and clear on N900 whereas it sounds muffled on the Vibrant. Let's not forget the intuitive QWERTY keyboard on the N900, the N900 had the hardware a smartphone should have. I didn't mind the bulk or the spacing of the "space" key, which I thought worked better on the a keyboard that size by reducing travel and letting the right thumb do the work.

The only thing that the Vibrant has over the N900 is a Super-Amoled screen. Both in size and beauty. If you want to demo something on a mobile, the Vibrant's Amoled is the way to go. Everyone, and I mean everyone that has looked at the screen on my Vibrant has dropped their jaws. Add to that a live wallpaper such as that one with ripple effect, you get to have fun with the "oh I'm jealous comments", especially from iPhone 4 users.

Software:
The Vibrant is running on Android 2.1 (Eclair). A 2.2 update is due pretty soon on the stock kernel. This is my first Android handset. The first couple of hours went by cursing out the very unintuitive way in which Android works. For example, the presence of hardware keys on a touchsreen phone. The presence of a "back" button where it should have all been controlled within the confines of a screen. Symbian^3, Maemo and iOS are great examples of this.

The need of hardware keys on Android could have easily been eliminated and I consider this laziness on Google's part. If they call it differentiation, it is not a very good one in an era where touchscreens dominate. After overcoming this barrier, Android is a very pleasant experience. The Vibrant is FAST. It is snappy and the Hummingbird processor impresses. Everything loads up instantaneously and load times are now a conceptual phenomena. The N900 on the other was quick, but obviously not as fast as the Vibrant. There are times where I am amazed of how quickly everything works on the Vibrant. The N900, to me, definitely could have improved, where wait times could have been eliminated and the software could have been refined for that purpose. The upcoming Nokia N8 is a great example of that.

The Vibrant is a great example of "just works". After having dealt with Maemo and sometimes having to troubleshoot it like a computer, Android is a breath of fresh air. But where it shines, there lies its greatest weakness. The lack of multitasking. The year old N900 still shines in this area. This is why the N900 felt more like a mobile computer than a smartphone. I loved having the ability to do a number of things at the same time especially when communicating with different people at the same time. Android has a long ways to go before it can come close to Maemo in this regard. So going from an uber geeky handset to a consumer aimed product was a nice change. And if anyone is tore between the two, the choice would be down to which side you prefer most? The consumer friendly side where you want things to just work or the uber geeky where you wouldn't mind missing a call or two for the sake of a hack that you are working on.

Nokia wasn't kidding when they said that it was meant PURELY for development purposes. I am surprised they didn't turn it into a development product like the LG Windows Phone 7 handset. In terms of sheer potential, the N900 still has the edge over anything other smartphone on the market.

In terms of connectivity, both phones are equal. One has better hardware and the other has better apps.

Overall:
It comes down to preference. This has been my slogan lately if people ask me what phone is better because most smartphones today can do it all, one way or the other but it's what you want from it. The N900 was a great experience for the geeky side of things. I learned a lot in terms of how things work in an OS, both on a smartphone and a computer. The Vibrant is a nice review of what Google's upto. Android too, has a lot of potential and is very impressive. So right now, I'm in love with the Vibrant because its a consumer device that just functions the way you want it to.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

That is true and don't forget one thing: If you have a rootable device (like the Galaxy S) you can really easly put a chrooted Debian (or Ubuntu or whatever) on it and then you have a good Phone-OS (Android) as well as a nice environment for your geeky needs.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

Agreed. Galaxy S is nice, but Sammy is not the most prompt or reliable for updates. The dual cores coming in four months are as significant a jump in performance as the omaps and snapdragons were to the 7200 chipsets. My tandem use of the Incredible and N900 will cover until the real next gen hardware is released.

Added:

disco,

With Tmo in KY, the N900 was weak with GSM reception. At one time, I tested three N900s at the same time and linked here last year showing the N900s, since ironic having three while most people were still waiting for one. N900 had the weakest reception of any phone I owned - went back to using my G1 as main device.

On Verizon now, with 3g almost everywhere. Still use N900 for media, since the only phone that can touch the N900 for sound quality from 3.5mm is (ironically) the Galaxy S- it has a VERY good DAC.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

I've heard of an "end of September" 2.2 push for the Vibrant. Either way, a root and a custom rom are not a bad option either. Dual cores I read are not getting to the mass market by before end of 2011. I'm going to wait out for Symbian^3 and MeeGo and see how they play out. Both of these platforms have huge shoes to fill in after Maemo and Android. :)

The Galaxy S might have better DAC. In general observation without any testing, I did hear better sound quality with an AUX-in in my car. It could be a placebo effect, but I'd have to have both devices side by side, playing the same file using the default media players. I can't do that anymore.. lol. Verizon is great with reception, T-MO is spotty here in the DFW area. That's a first I've heard regarding the G1. I had better 3G results with the N900 than the Vibrant in all cases.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

Hey,

Since you have used both the Vibrant, I guess you are the right person to answer this. I know the N900 opens up all webpages as it would open on a Desktop, But I am not talking about that point, in terms of Readibility, Viewing. Do you think the N900 is Far, Far too behind then the Vibrant. I mean does one feel the viewing on the N900 boring and not pleasant. I am sure by now you would have also surfed a bit on your Vibrant, which one do you think has a better Internet surfing experience Vibrant or the N900 I am saying in terms of viewing and readibility. My basic purpose is Internet Surfing, Emailing (So the UI that the phone is using for Email or the Email client that the phone is using has to be very user friendly and easy) and IM. So in that sense also which one do you think is better. I know the Vibrant will be better in Multimedia and entertainment but from a Internet surfing experience, Push Email and IM which one do you think is more easy.

Cheers !

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

In terms of web browsing, there isn't much of a difference on both handsets. The N900 still has some advantages in terms of the full desktop web experience. Flash compatibility and page rendering are two of them. But the Eclair browser isn't too far behind. It is certainly fast. So both are very comparable. In certain cases, I've found Eclair to be faster than the N900, probably due to a higher speed processor. Coming from the N900, I was skeptical of Android's browsing experiencing but it hasn't disappointed me yet.

As for the Email experience goes, the Gmail integration on the Vibrant is great. That's an Android thing I believe. Notifications are handled really nicely. Emails open up instantaneously and attachments are handled well. I'm using the Samsung mail client for a Hotmail mailbox and it does the job. In some cases, the Gmail app functioned better than the N900, because I found modest to be clunky when it came to handling huge files. I emailed about 5 pictures close to 6MBs today and it happened pretty painlessly from the Gmail client.

Notifications are a nice experience so far. Not as intuitive as the N900 but pretty good nonetheless. I used eBuddy yesterday for my IM needs and it was great, sans the lack of a physical qwerty keyboard of course. I'd say, go for the Vibrant because it's newer, has a longer shelf life left and it's always good to try out a platform you havn't used. You can always sell it back and buy an N900, and actually save some money in the process. :)

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

But if someone is buying either of these phones for the first time which one would you suggest ?

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

I recommend the Vibrant.