Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

I may have misread your post, but I have the N900 and Incredible with 2.2. Incredible blows the N900 away with Flash performance and compatibility, but the N900 has two advantages: keyboard and stylus. N900 would be sweet with Flash 10.1.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

The Galaxy S series doesn't have Froyo yet, so we do not have Flash although Skyfire does a pretty decent job when it comes to flash video though.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

Personally, I like having the hardware keys like the back button. To that end, doesn't the N900 have hardware zoom and maximize keys? By your argument, isn't that handled well in Android where the N900 fails? Just seems more of a matter of personal preference (as you rightfully pointed out at the end) and a misguided rant than a genuine critique or comparison of the two on that element.

They BOTH have a full desktop web experience. If you keep getting websites that are formatting their sites for a phone, it's because they coded a specific experience for your user agent's string--which you can easily change. The only reason why you think the N900 is a desktop experience is because websites have NO idea what an N900 is and so they fall back on whatever their default happens to be for unknown client types (usually a desktop layout). If you go to your desktop and change your user agent string to iPhone or Android, you'll also get mobile website layouts from lots of websites.

I would argue that the advantage here is in the Android side. Not because you get BOTH a mobile-friendly layout, if you want it, and a desktop layout, if you prefer that--because, really, both the Android and the N900 can do this (you can also change the user agent on the N900 and get mobile layout websites too), but because it has Flash 10.1 (unlike the N900 and some other mobiles with an orphaned older Flash or a Flash Lite).

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

I'm getting my galaxy s on sunday and was browsing the net to get to know it before I get it and I stumbled upon this live wallpaper. LOL.

Watch at : 1:48...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HPBW...eature=related

Edit : PS. Don't shoot the messenger!!!

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

The thing I miss with the SGS is a community such as TMO...ofcourse there is Xda but not as great as TMO....SGS is one of many devices they support......keep coming back to tmo even after migrating away from the N900

any suggestions danramos

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

From some reading I have done on XDA, you are right.
TMO is a lot more fun, people are responsive and it feels like home here, I suggest you find a local android forum where you live, things will surely get more private there.

I found one at www.iandroid.co.il - People there speak my language and understand my jokes :P

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

That live wallpaper is brilliant! I do love boobies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbHj-cMv00s

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

Why are you singling me out?

...oh hell, we all know why. :P

http://androidforums.com/
http://forum.androidcentral.com/
http://www.droidforums.net/forum/

Also check out their blogs at
http://www.androidcentral.com/
http://www.droidforums.net/

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

No ulterior motive dan....just asked

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

How is it a "misguided rant"? I have clearly stated that it is my opinion. The hardware buttons on the N900 seem to be implemented due to the lack of multitouch. Also, the only application that actually made use of the rocker keys and was dependent on them was the gallery, which I agree was a bad idea. The web browser did just fine with the double tap feature. The volume rocker were a bonus. Therefore to say that the user experience of the N900 depended on the volume rockers or any hardware buttons is redundant and clearly, Android is more depended on hardware/soft keys outside the touchscreen real estate, which again, is pretty pointless and isn't intuitive at all.

Btw, I do understand the difference between the mobile and desktop pages and how the user agent effects what you see. I made that comparison keeping all of that in mind. The Vibrant still hasn't received the 2.2 update, so no. They are really on par. I tried to download an mp3 file today from a website, that worked on the N900 but didn't work on the Eclair brower. The N900 browser still has some advantages over Eclair.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

We've clearly had vastly different experiences with Android web browsing. I've downloaded many types of files using either the Dolphin or built-in web browser without any issues. I've even downloaded your ill-fated mp3 formatted files without any problems. I'll tell you that it's at least as good, if not better, than desktop web browsing in my experience. I suspect the N900 browsing experience is similar, so I'm not sure why there's a great big argument over which provides a more "desktop" experience when they can both do an excellent job.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

Nonsense, hardware buttons are implemented because they are hardware buttons. Presence of multitouch doesn't negate the value of having physical hardware dedicated to something as frequently used as typing.

Not everyone assigns hardware keyboards that value, but enough people do that even on devices with multitouch screens, there are hardware keyboards.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

Did you not see under what context we were talking about hardware keys? Go back and read the discussion again.

Dan, there isn't a big argument. The way I look at it, mobile platforms have evolved to the point that every platform can do what you want from it, one way or the other. It's all down to personal preference. I prefer the Vibrant more because it's a very consumer friendly device and does everything pretty much right out of the box. That is why I recommended the Vibrant earlier to somebody.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

yeah that was me

I am in Asia and here we have the Variant of Variant which is called the Samsung Galaxy-S i9000.Just like Droid is called Droid in US and it is called Milestone in Asia. I have a friend who is using the SGS. And though I have still not made up mind to whether to go for the N900 or the Galaxy but I would like whichever device that I go for also has good multimedia capabilities so I feel the N900 does not really live up to the expectations.Though it plays all types of File format and blah...blah...But for me without a bright,vibrant screen all is useless. So am still thinking. Gosh ! This has become really tough it has been now 2 months and I am still not able to decide. May God give me the power to decide :D

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

Well, after two weeks of SGSing in place of my trusty N900, I have a few things to note. These are my observations. Some are factual and some are subjective. This is supplied for those who want to hear about the comparison and not for those who want to troll about the subject.
FORM
The first thing I noticed about the device is its form. It is thinner and sleeker than the N900 but that is down to the absent hardware keyboard. It feels less sturdy than the N900 but doesn't seem to be the scratch/dint magnet that is the iPhone4 (yes, test driven that too).

BOOT
There is something quite satisfying about all new hardware. Turn it on and it is pretty and shiny and new - and fast. The SGS boots promptly but so did the N900. Not put them head to head but I am writing about the feel of it all and there is no obvious winner here.

SETUP
The initial setup of any Android phone is a little irritating. Because it is "Google-powered", so to speak, it wants you to link the phone to your account. Nothing to shock an Apple user but seems like an intrusion coming from the N900's "do what you want" background. Mind you, the PR1.2 text sign-up thing kinda knocked that for Nokia.

JUST HOW YOU WANT IT
Well, neither device comes out of its box knowing who you are and what you want from your device. I suppose that might start to happen when OSs start syncing your laptops, desktops, tablets and mobiles a la Chrome/Chromium but I, for one, am not sure I welcome that.
In any event, part of the fun with both devices is finding out what it can do and how you want it to do it.
The Samsung "bloatware" is much whinged about but, in truth, is not that bad. Some of it is even helpful. Again, N900 users might not like the fact that you have to root your device to remove the Samsung content but it is not intrusive in the manner of Vodafone UK's Live! buttons all over the place.
Android is flexible. Far more flexible than many might realise. It occupies ground between the walled garden of Apple and the anarchy (cough) of Maemo. You can put the device in debugging mode so anything can be shunted between the device and computer and you can install apps that are not signed if you choose to. No nagging reminders - you set your setting and do as you will.
For the everyday user, the SGS feels free and easy. It is only when you decide that you want to see if you can <insert insane N900-only type project here> that you might have a problem.
I am neither a developer (though I live with one) nor a "I want the one with the wifis and bigger GBs. Can you set up my bluetooth for me?" sort of user. I am a geek and a tinkerer but not one who wishes to run my device from a command line alone.

SCREEN
The Super AMOLED is impressive. Really impressive. It isn't flawless and you can see, wait for it, pixels. Sorry iPhone 4 users. Vile isn't it? But it is impressive. Sorry N900 users. Your screen is nice. But it just doesn't hold a candle for clarity or ease of use. To test this, I tried to read news websites (guardian and bbc) for an hour on each. I left a day between reads. The N900 caused no physical pain but I was sure conscious of staring at that screen when I was done. The SGS is totally painless. It's true. And video looks stunning.

INTERNET
The SGS has the same range of internet options as the N900. It does support wireless n but poorly for now. I understand that froyo (Android 2.2) will improve this when it is dropped on 23 September. We watch and wait.
The performance through the SGS's standard browser is slick and fast. It is definately faster in almost all types of rendering than the N900. This was tested over wifi and HSDPA but, where the SGS really shines is when getting data over GPRS and EDGE. The N900 will get there in the end but a test of page-for-page rendering just using 2G/2.5G sees the SGS win hands down.

SOFTWARE (PC syncing etc)
Oh dear. Well, the N900 and SGS have something in common here. Shockingly poor syncing support with their respective bits of software. OVI Suite/PC Suite and Kies (for the SGS) are both slow, bulky, unreliable and, in just about every sense, tedious and unfit for purpose. Samsung has promised to fix this but I feel wary of phone manufacturers making pledges. Can't think why I got so cynical.
Much like with the N900, use wireless syncing methods and USB Mass Storage modes for each and you can get rid of those nonsensical programs for good. Apple needn't look smug either after Ping and the most recent bloat-tastic iTunes roll-out. Seriously folks, start making an effort, eh?

SOFTWARE (Apps)
"I don't want them." "I don't need them." "My phone is nothing without them!"
Whatever.
The reality is that we like to have distractions, tools and geekery on our phones. The range is from VPN, P2P, live streaming video, chat and the like through to "push button and get fart noise". Take your pick. N900 users have been saved from boring pub times by the very hard work of this community's team of geeks-in-residence. God bless them too. Without them, the N900 is a very expensive piece of toast that will get the street-cred of a pony tail and mint condition Star Trek phaser. [I admit I did have the LCARS theme on my N900 though].
There is stuff to play with and to use on the N900 and it depends on who you are and what you want to use your device for. I ran a hockey playoffs live show from a town with no bleeding wifi and nowhere to plug in on my N900. I get my work documents where and when I need them. I go geocaching and sometimes play mobile games when I get bored.
I did all of that with my N900. Thanks to some good people.
I can do it with the Android. For the same price (free). A little quicker. A little prettier.
The winner here is the SGS for the pure fact that, as a user rather than a dev, I go to the market place. I get want I want or need. It works more often than not. If I buy it but bin it within 24 hours, I get my money back automatically (yeah, take that Apple!). I can see what arch-androiders like Gina Tripani and Leo Laporte are using. Or just my mates, if they share. I can sort my apps in a more social context. And the devs are getting paid reasonably for their work. Its win win, baby. Sorry N900. OVI Store and Nokia have failed you bad.

KEYBOARD
I suppose this warrants a special consideration given the two factions that exist on here. If you want a hardware keyboard (in the UK), you will have to wait for the SG Pro (November, I understand). Nevertheless, Swype is worthy of a mention. Sure it is odd when you first give it a go but it's so very easy to pick up and it is extremely quick and intuitive. Unless you have tried it, it is hard to explain how it compares but for quick typing on the fly, it is really quite remarkable. Test drive it in a shop and see what you think.

FOR A DEVELOPER
Ok. Not one myself but my partner is. The big turn off for the N900 SDK seems to be that you have to dig around for all the bits you need and, despite the fine efforts of this community to pool knowledge and advice, Nokia has not really pulled out all of the stops to make Maemo quick and user-friendly.
The attraction, it seems, of the iPhone's SDK is that it is a one stop shop for everything. It's all there. It's workable entirely offline and it is well supported and has a clear (now!) set of parameters as to how you can do things. It may be restrictive and walled but it is user-friendly.
The SGS SDK is also a one stop shop. The support is being offered by Samsung and by Google. Admittedly, Alex is just starting to use this (after putting down the beloved iPhone 4 to play with the SGS) and is little beyond Hello World for now but the whole experience seems easier. Time will tell and, I have no doubt, this community's devs will try and test it themselves.
What it means for end users is that there are more people building more apps and monetizing more readily on the Android platform than for Maemo or MeeGo. This is good news if you want your phone to entertain you for longer.

THE FUTURE
Android is on the up. How on the up is a matter of dispute in the tech world with Apple and Google slinging figures about without any real meaning to end users. Nevertheless, Samsung are being fairly straightforward about the update roadmap and the Galaxy brand (a bit like the Nokia N Series) is not stopping here. The Tab is on the way and a Pro edition of the phone is ready for release soon.
Froyo (Android 2.2) is dropping on September 23rd. Gingerbread (Android 3.0) "may" get an SGS rollout in the fullness of time. Samsung have said "may". Who knows? But, like the Maemo community has done, the Android community is already thinking about how to force that into being.

VERDICT
The SGS wins for me. That's "for me", ok? It is a delight to use and has entirely reasonable battery life. Samsung are dedicated to it (if not to the ropey Kies program) and it shares the swiss army knife nature of the N900.
The N900 is not dead to me. I will keep it and use it for various things. It has one feature that I sorely miss. The FM transmitter on the N900 allowed me to play podcasts via the bathroom and kitchen radios. I miss that like crazy but I can work around it. The SGS 3.5mm jack is annoying as it won't allow calls to be routed through it unless there is a mic on the headset. This needs tweaking for me.

If you are trying to decide, I hope my experience will inform or assist you. If not, thanks for taking the time to read it, anyway.

Please respect my right to publish my views and don't get jump and defensive about our Nokia black sheep device. I love the N900 but, for now, I love the SGS so much more.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

The 3.5mm output in the N900 has excellent (loaded, i.e., headphone attached) frequency response (near flat except for some slight midbass hump of about 1db), and one of the best stereo separation I've ever seen, besting several DAPs.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

i think that Nokia N900 is by far superior. the feel, the beautiful keyboard, the ease of use is unparalleled. i have iphone for work and it is truly a childs toy compared to N900.....i cant wait to see what the new Meego will look. n900 qu!ity is unparalleled

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

It's worth noting that GSM arena tested the Frequency Response of the Samsung Galaxy S and it's as close to perfect as you're likely to get with a portable device:
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_i900...view-478p6.php

The phone screams quality from top to bottom.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

That's the unloaded (I.E. no headphone attached) figures. Those figures will plummet for almost every phone once you test it with a headphone attached as well.

Edit : And the phone doesn't scream quality. Have you handled it in real life for extended periods of time? Versus the N900, it really feels like some sort of sub $100 made in China knockoff phone you can pick up in Chinatown.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

Thanks for the clarification! Have you listened to it with headphones and done a comparison with the N900?

I've not handled the device, is the 'cheap feel' due to its weight, tightness of the back cover, or some other characteristic?

Edit: Actually I'm quite interested in this. Do you know of any stats about the N900/GalaxyS loaded/unloaded FR?

I've found an interesting subjective listening test comparing the iPhone4 to some other devices. Now I understand that the iPhone4 is a very different device, however I read somewhere on GSM arena that Samsung actually supplies Apple with the sound hardware, which may explain some of the audio similarities of the Galaxy S and iPhone4. Not air tight, but still interesting:
http://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/93...rs-comparison/

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

I recently applied the voodoo lag fix for my galaxy s, it made a huge difference as my phone was getting really hard to use.

I am now concerned about something I read about the impact of froyo. It seems that even though froyo works really well with snapdragons and TIs, it doesn't have such a big impact on hummingbirds. If this turns out to be the case (it seems to be at the moment), then people should stir away from samsung and towards HTC,

The N900 is just in a different league. What lets it down is not the apps, nor the browser or hardware etc. It is just that its "phone" features are primitive comparing to any proper phone and nokia is not willing to invest into fixing those.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

So but does the N900 Screen (Display) appears as a disaster in front of the SGS Amoled Screen ? I have heard people say this after working on Amoled Screen, display of N900 looks Dull though they may appear Sharp.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

The N900's screen is ok, but the brightness and saturation on the SGS are superior. I got both phones.

To the poster above the previous one, I don't know why you are worried about the 2.2 update, even if it's just 30% or 20% faster then voodoo, The SGS is still blazing fast when it's working properly.

I had the JF4 firmware, I updated using Kies to the JG4 and the phone is flawless now. GPS also works perfect. If android 2.2 just brings some features, i'll be happy enough. (flash 10.1)

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

Heh... just, go look. Stick around to the end to get why I posted it here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lK7IzfLmyco

Nokia really needs to step up. :)

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

I need that on my N900. Nitdroid just got even better :)

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

The 2.2 update gives something like a 600% performance increase on HTCs. That's what I was expecting I would get on the Galaxy.

I am on JM6 and it still has some slight lag issues. Switching to the phone app some times takes 2 seconds which I understand that for most people is ok but for me is frustrating.

Sometimes the phone will ring and it won't let me swype answer until it is too late.

And creating a shortcut to an app on the desktop sometimes takes ages.

In any case, when you can get something 3 times faster with the same money, why would you get the slower product? I guess it is just the Super AMOLED screen that makes the difference.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

The iPhone 4 uses a Cirrus Logic DAC, which is not supplied by Samsung AFAIK. The Apple A4 SoC used in the iPhone 4 however is supplied by Samsung.

Most modern phones will play music 99% as well as DAPs. When you consider the general usage area, the difference becomes absolutely negligible.

The Galaxy S feels cheap because of the glossy glossy plastic used. The matte plastic of the N900 feels as if it was made out of higher quality plastic and feels more expensive as well. The tasteful black metal border on the N900 helps as well. Additionally, the Galaxy S's buttons IMO also feel cheaper than that of the N900's, more mushy than the N900's.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

I find it very stange when people keep talking about the exteriors of Galaxy-s which frankly does not feel any cheap plastic as it is being made out for. Overall the Galaxy looks quite a slick piece of device. And for god's sake are we looking at the Phone for what if offers or merely talking about how does it looks. A BMW is a BMW not because for how it looks but what it offers after sitting in it. I dunno what is this plastic crap people are going on and on about...

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

I don't know if you had a chance to play with the HTC phones,
I had in my hand a Hero, Desire and Nexus One (not htc)
And they are ALL slow, less responsive, and generally less attractive imho.
If the speeds get to be on par at 2.2 when you compare the galaxy s to the others, it's fine by me. The galaxy S sports other features that I like very much.

BTW, I don't remember if I said this already, i'm running JG4 and the gps locks in 3 seconds from the moment the Nav app starts, the only place the phone hangs is when adding an application shortcut. To be honest, I only did that 3 times in total, and it only hanged on the 1st time.

For the price the galaxy S costs, really, this is amazing.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

Wow, I'm extremely impressed by the quality of the SGS camera in low-light situations:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvrTA...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLzKQQz8-MM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PuQZt31Wmk4&translated=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vca5K...eature=related

I don't know a lot about digicams, but this seems crazy good. Many cellphones I've tried degrade in to pixelated messes in the dark. I can understand why they left out the flash!

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

Yes I did have a chance to play with the desire. My wife has one. Without the lag fix I applied to the Galaxy S, the HTC was miles ahead. After I applied the lag fix, they are on par. Her phone is still on 2.1 though.

Once she gets 2.2 her phone will be 6 times faster. As an indication, the best 2.2 linpack score for the Galaxy S is about 14MFlops. In contrast there are some HTCs that perform at around 50MFlops.

See here for more info on this:

http://www.greenecomputing.com/2010/...n-on-my-phone/

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

VZW version has Flash Lite 4.1, which plays most Flash 10 content, but at about 50% the efficiency of Flash 10.1. I was surprised how much better 10.1 was. I expected relative results I got from the N900 and Archos 5 (non Android model).

Flash Lite 3 on Archos 5 with same chipset as N900, plays much better than Flash 9 on the N900. A lot better.

Opposite with Flash 10.1. Plays FAR better than Flash Lite 4.1 did. No comparison. Sad thing is Flash Lite 4.1 plays far better than Flash 9 on the N900, so everything is relative.

added:

BTW, I can not help but notice even less Flash sites work now for the N900. A lot now come up with "need Flash player". Lame.

As far as Linpack, I have an Incredible and average 30.1 mflops, so seems odd the Galaxy is less than half. Android 2.2 makes that much difference? Hummingbirds chipset should kick snaps butt.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

As I understand it, Android2.2 includes optimizations for the Dalvik interpreter which improves performance DRASTICALLY for apps (like linpack) that are compiled for the DalvikVM (probably the majority). I remember Google touting 4-5x performance boost which is HUGE. Consider the leap other systems got when moving from 2.1 to 2.2.

Take the Nexus One linpack score that jumped from ~7MFLOPS to ~37MFLOPS (over 5x higher!)
http://www.overclock.net/software-ne...provement.html

Expect to see a HUGE performance increase in apps that use Dalvik, as the Galaxy S moves up to Froyo.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

Hmm. Yesterday tested Galaxy S and well screen is really good but on the other hand N900 screen is not bad either still of course it looks bit dull after this beast.

It was nice to see how well it/android interacts with touch and how fluid it was but after a while it really hit me. I´m using phone, not computer. And after a while I thought that this reminds me somehow of symbian. Really do not laugh :) Also I had to use HW buttons to use it properly. Weird IMO. I have to test more so maybe i should install nitdroid, but still it just feels phone on steroids. Not pocketable computer. I don't not why but that was first "feeling" :)

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

Err, early tests of (alpha builds of) Froyo on the SGS doesn't have the JIT compiler enabled, so...

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

I think it's worth noting that phones like the N900 have apps that are already running at native speed, as they have compiled binaries running right on top of the OS with no interpreter in between. The speed gains in Froyo's Dalvik VM bring Android apps closer to native speeds using the JIT. The benefit of using Dalvik vs. native code is mainly portability, and may include some security features as well.

Just to note, Dalvik's portability is why Android can be quickly released across many different hardware devices (ARM, x86, plus variants)

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

Sorry, but you're getting carried away here, bordering on FUD.

Phones like the n900? You mean, all one of them.

Sure, I'm a GNU/Linux fanboi, but please don't trivialize the awesomeness and uniqueness of the n900. Especially in it's native OS form. Write once, run everywhere has panned out much better for C based code than it has for Java or any bastard child there of. And don't forget what code base the forked Android kernel is running on.

Tread lightly when touting Android byte code portability as a feature. One missing library or wrong version of something, and everything can still go to sh*t. Unfortunately, HTML, CSS, and Javascript are the closest things we have to a silver bullet.

Fanboi out. Carry on.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

What?! FUD?! Are you serious? Why are you picking a fight when I'm saying that phones like N900 are already running at maximum speed (native speed)? If anything this is a disadvantage of a Dalvik binary (or a tradeoff depending on how you look at it).

Are you saying that a general binary is as portable than a Dalvik binary?

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

Again, what phones like the n900? There's only one.

I wasn't responding about speed, the topic was portability.

Without the proper supporting cast (compiler, drivers, shared libraries, ..., etc.), has it ever really mattered? Python's a better answer than Dalvik. Source code compiler and byte code compiler properly stay close to each other, and source code distribution is optional. A Python JIT is rarely considered based on how easy it is to either create Python bindings, or actually directly access native shared libraries.

In practical terms, Dalvik's best features are its memory and blob management, and maybe its security, but not its portability.

Re: N900 vs samsung galaxy s
 

I got a SGS ... nana nana na na!