Active Topics
-
Camera phone competition March 2023 "Endless" (35)
to General by Maemish - 2 days, 12 hrs ago -
TLS 1.2 for N9 is ready (28)
to MeeGo / Harmattan by smartblu9 - 2 days, 13 hrs ago -
Maemo repository (3)
to Community by torsen - 3 days, 5 hrs ago -
Error after installing Leste on sdcard (11)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by Maemish - 4 days, 3 hrs ago -
Introducing ubiboot N9 (multiboot OS loader) (1,393)
to Alternatives by smatkovi - 5 days, 9 hrs ago - more...
|
2010-09-07
, 05:20
|
|
Posts: 176 |
Thanked: 149 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
|
#112
|
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.
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.
|
|
2010-09-12
, 01:27
|
|
Posts: 21 |
Thanked: 22 times |
Joined on May 2010
|
#113
|
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.
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.
|
|
2010-09-12
, 02:00
|
|
Posts: 22 |
Thanked: 7 times |
Joined on Nov 2007
|
#114
|
Android too, has a lot of potential and is very impressive.
| The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to morgon For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2010-09-12
, 02:13
|
|
Posts: 1,255 |
Thanked: 393 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
@ US
|
#115
|
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.
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.
|
|
2010-09-12
, 03:05
|
|
Posts: 21 |
Thanked: 22 times |
Joined on May 2010
|
#116
|
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.
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.
|
|
2010-09-12
, 06:18
|
|
Posts: 103 |
Thanked: 9 times |
Joined on May 2010
|
#117
|
Originally Posted by discomullah
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.
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 !
|
|
2010-09-12
, 06:57
|
|
Posts: 21 |
Thanked: 22 times |
Joined on May 2010
|
#118
|
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.
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.
| The Following User Says Thank You to discomullah For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2010-09-12
, 11:37
|
|
Posts: 103 |
Thanked: 9 times |
Joined on May 2010
|
#119
|
Originally Posted by discomullah
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.
But if someone is buying either of these phones for the first time which one would you suggest ?
 |
| Tags |
| n900-fail-wail |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
| Thread Tools | |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 23:09.
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.