backtop


Print 112 comment(s) - last by retrospooty.. on Oct 30 at 11:34 PM

Google expands the Nexus product family

As has been widely rumored for the past couple of weeks, Google today officially announced two new members to the Google Nexus product family: the Nexus 4 smartphone and the Nexus 10 tablet.
 
The Nexus 4 (which runs Android 4.2) was developed in conjunction with LG and features a 4.7-inch True HD IPS Plus display (1280x768). When it comes to the much bragged about screen density measurement in smartphones these days, the Nexus 4 measures in at 320 PPI. The screen is protected by Gorilla Glass 2, so you don't have to be too paranoid about scratching/breaking your screen anytime soon.
 
On the hardware front, the Nexus 4 gets its motivation from a 1.5GHz, quad-core Snapdragon S4 Pro processor that is paired with 2GB of system memory. The phone will be available in 8GB and 16GB versions, and features an 8MP camera on the back (1.3MP unit up front). The Nexus 4 also supports wireless charging and NFC.


Nexus 4
 
Unfortunately, the Nexus 4 doesn't support LTE -- it only bring with it support for 3G/HSPA+. This alone will likely scratch the Nexus 4 off the purchase list of many buyers.
 
The Nexus 4 will be sold unlocked for $299 (8GB) or $349 (16GB). T-Mobile will also make the 16GB version available under contract (two years) for $199.
 
The other big announcement from Google today comes in the form of the Samsung-designed Nexus 10 tablet. As we reported before, the Nexus 10 also runs Android 4.2 and comes with a 2,560 x 1,600 display with a screen density of 300 PPI. It features a 1.7GHz, dual-core Samsung Exynos 5250 processor with 2GB of RAM, Mali T604 GPU, NFC support and a 5MP rear camera (1.9MP up front).

 Nexus 10

The Nexus 10 will be priced at $399 for the 16GB model and $499 for the 32GB model.




Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

NO LTE
By valkator on 10/29/2012 2:08:42 PM , Rating: 4
Wow Google no 4G. This is 2012... What is the matter with you guys?




RE: NO LTE
By sprockkets on 10/29/2012 2:18:09 PM , Rating: 1
Probably has to be a carrier subsidized phone. Otherwise 42mb on Tmobile is pretty much LTE speed anyhow.

Besides, at $300-350 this is a good deal.


RE: NO LTE
By One43637 on 10/29/2012 2:37:43 PM , Rating: 2
been on Tmo with the One S. In my area, I constantly average over 12Mbps down while uploads range from 1.25 to 3.56Mbps.

That's good enough for me on a phone. Not anywhere near as advertised, but when have people gotten 100Mbps down on LTE?


RE: NO LTE
By GulWestfale on 10/29/2012 2:57:05 PM , Rating: 3
wow, only $299 for an unlocked quad-core phone with a 720p screen? i might just have found my next handset.


RE: NO LTE
By chµck on 10/29/12, Rating: -1
RE: NO LTE
By KC7SWH on 10/29/2012 3:58:39 PM , Rating: 2
I don't agree it would be a hell of an upgrade for my S1 that is starting to get long in the tooth. As far as no 4G that doesn't bother me as I have my data radio turned off anyway.


RE: NO LTE
By zephyrprime on 10/29/2012 5:35:40 PM , Rating: 2
Hey mr cherry picker. I'm on ATT with my galaxy nexus and get only 1mbit. So there!


RE: NO LTE
By Mint on 10/30/2012 11:50:48 AM , Rating: 2
Most reports put TMobile's HSPA+42 on par with AT&T's LTE in terms of average speed, and it crushes Sprint's LTE speeds.

TMobile's prepaid Monthly4G plans with an unlocked Nexus 4 (I can't believe it's only $350 off contract) will also save you $1000+ in 2 years over a comparable AT&T or Verizon plan with an inferior phone.

Google is pricing a premium phone with top build quality, top display, top CPU/GPU, wireless charging, and more down at low-end smartphone prices. That's incredible. All you give up is LTE (and microSD, which you don't find on the majority of premium smartphone sales anyway).

Be appreciative when a corporation decides to undercut its competitors with a great product rather than participate in the silent code of preserving huge margins.


RE: NO LTE
By Samus on 10/29/2012 11:36:17 PM , Rating: 2
Unfortunately with this phone in the USA, you are stuck with AT&T (expensive crap service) or T-Mobile (cheap crap service)

Without Verizon support, these phones have lost a third of their target market. The other third is lost by not support Sprint (who has more MVNO's than all other networks combined.)

Basically the only reasonable thing to do with this phone is get a T-mobile unlimited plan for $55 bucks/month and hope you have decent coverage where you travel...

Personally, here in Chicago, I never had a successful phone conversation in a vehicle using T-mobile. The call would always drop within minutes without fail. No tower transition technology, no signal wake-up (phone sleeps indefinately when out-of-service to save power) and a plethora of other missing features from T-mobiles network that the competition, even Sprint, have had for a decade, really leave a lot to be desired. This explains why T-mob has virtually no business accounts, when logistically they should have a ton since they are an international company with world-compatible phones.


RE: NO LTE
By retrospooty on 10/29/2012 3:14:40 PM , Rating: 3
"Wow Google no 4G. This is 2012... What is the matter with you guys?"

This is a head-screatcher... Maybe an error only referring to the international version? Surely US versions have LTE. We've been on LTE for years... The NExus models from last year have 4G. WTF?


RE: NO LTE
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 10/29/2012 3:16:56 PM , Rating: 2
RE: NO LTE
By retrospooty on 10/29/2012 3:17:38 PM , Rating: 2
ah... there it is... Its not out on ATT, Sprint or Verizon yet. When it comes, it will have it. We already know the Optimus counterpart has LTE.

"The $299 base version has 8GB of storage and a $349 version will have 16GB of space. For now, Google will only offer the phone unlocked through T-Mobile, meaning it won't be available through Verizon, Sprint or AT&T. That also means it will not have LTE service in the U.S."


RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 3:21:52 PM , Rating: 4
Nope.

http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/29/3569688/why-nex...

quote:
Google wants direct control of the software on Nexus devices with no carrier intervention. That alone means Google can't sell an LTE device, as there's simply no access to LTE networks without working with carriers in one way or another: Verizon and Sprint's LTE networks still require compatibility with their 3G CDMA systems, and there's essentially no such thing as an unlocked CDMA device. AT&T's infant LTE network runs on different frequencies than other LTE networks around the world, so Google would have to build a custom phone for just 77 markets in the US. Doing that without AT&T's financial assistance makes little sense.


That's gotta be embarrassing for Android fans.


RE: NO LTE
By Spuke on 10/29/2012 3:35:22 PM , Rating: 1
A huge step backwards IMO. I guess my Galaxy Nexus is my first and last Nexus phone.


RE: NO LTE
By Jeffk464 on 10/29/2012 6:24:15 PM , Rating: 2
Just put a custom rom on it.


RE: NO LTE
By ian80 on 10/29/2012 3:55:47 PM , Rating: 2
Not really.

If I want LTE I'll get a Galaxy S3 or iPhone 5 for $300 more.

Horses for courses.


RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 4:18:20 PM , Rating: 2
Just so you know, the $300 model only comes with 8GB of memory, and there's no SD card slot.


RE: NO LTE
By ian80 on 10/29/2012 4:29:59 PM , Rating: 2
And the $350 model comes with 16GB, what's your point?

It's still massively cheaper than the top end models for Android and iOS.

Stop conflating the two markets!


RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 4:38:04 PM , Rating: 2
Jeez dude, you need to STFU.

I was just trying to give you some advice.

I know how much the 16GB version is.

What are you on about conflating markets, all I did was tell you a fact.


RE: NO LTE
By ian80 on 10/29/2012 4:46:39 PM , Rating: 2
Thanks for that.

I already knew very well how much memory each version came with, it's in the article where I got the price. Not sure why you think I needed to be told it.

My response was to point out that if I want 16GB I can have it for a little more money while still remaining well below the higher end phones.


RE: NO LTE
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/30/2012 8:15:54 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Not sure why you think I needed to be told it.
Because he's a fucking douchebag who thinks he is king of the world and that he is smarter than everyone else.


RE: NO LTE
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/29/2012 7:23:09 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Jeez dude, you need to STFU.
You should take your own advice.


RE: NO LTE
By retrospooty on 10/29/2012 3:59:34 PM , Rating: 1
"That's gotta be embarrassing for Android fans."

How so? If you want a phone with those specs get teh Optumus G that it is desingned from. Google wants to release this one this way, its Google's choice. I wouldnt buy it, but google can do what they want...

Also, since you are implementing your spin engine, dont forget. What was the same of that one phone manufacturer? I cant remember, but they were the last one to make a 4G phone. As a matter of fact they just finally released thier 4G phone a few weeks ago... In late 2012. Oh yeah. I remember now. It was Apple. LOL.

Your still a doofus.


RE: NO LTE
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/29/2012 4:04:02 PM , Rating: 1
10 bucks says he will have the most posts on this article, even though, it's not an Apple article, yet, he will talk about Apple non-stop.


RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 4:14:10 PM , Rating: 3
Interesting how badly you reacted to a statement ostensibly not about you... since you claim not to be an Android fan.

quote:
If you want a phone with those specs get teh Optumus G that it is desingned from.


And get no Android updates... great alternative.

quote:
Also, since you are implementing your spin engine, dont forget. What was the same of that one phone manufacturer? I cant remember, but they were the last one to make a 4G phone. As a matter of fact they just finally released thier 4G phone a few weeks ago... In late 2012. Oh yeah. I remember now. It was Apple. LOL.


How ironic. The iPhone 4S came out over a year ago and you slated it for not having LTE. Now your precious Android creator releases a phone in NOVEMBER 2012 with no LTE support, and you're defending it.

Logical as ever.


RE: NO LTE
By retrospooty on 10/29/2012 4:27:26 PM , Rating: 2
"Interesting how badly you reacted to a statement ostensibly not about you."

You replied to my post. I responded. Interesting you felt the need to reply to my post. TRolling again are we?

"how ironic. The iPhone 4S came out over a year ago and you slated it for not having LTE. Now your precious Android creator releases a phone in NOVEMBER 2012 with no LTE support, and you're defending it."

I did slight it, because there was no LTE... But this is where you lose reality and your freakish fanboy flag flies high. I am not defending this phone. I will not buy it and I would not recommend it to anyone. I dont care what Google does, I care what products are available and this is not on my list. You, who associates themselves so closely with a company would think Google matters to me, but it doesnt.

What I said was if google wants to make this phone, then its up to google. I think its a bad move and I wont buy it. I Am also let down that the Nexus 10 is $399, I expected cheaper. Again, I wont be buying that either.

What IS good about the ANdroid platform it it has products to suit all needs. Where Apple had NO 4G phone until a few weeks ago, there were dozens avaliable on Android ranging from low end to high end and every step in between.

What is funny is your attempt to rub it in and make it as if its an issue. The only way this could be an issue is if Android somehow stopped support 4G phones. this is a budget phone on a budget carrier, you want cheap, there it is. I dont.

Again, if you do want a phone with these specs and 4G, the Optimus G is there. What exactly are you trying to prove, because your point is lost again.


RE: NO LTE
By ian80 on 10/29/2012 4:34:48 PM , Rating: 2
He's obviously more attuned to the apple market where it's for the most part high end or bust.

Not necessarily a bad thing in itself but it does seem to be clouding his vision when it comes to cheaper but adequate alternatives.


RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 4:35:44 PM , Rating: 2
It wasn't the fact that you replied that I was noting. It was the offence you took to a statement which you claim doesn't include you. Replying is natural, hence I am. Try to apply logic, please.

quote:
I did slight it, because there was no LTE... But this is where you lose reality and your freakish fanboy flag flies high. I am not defending this phone. I will not buy it and I would not recommend it to anyone. I dont care what Google does, I care what products are available and this is not on my list. You, who associates themselves so closely with a company would think Google matters to me, but it doesnt.


OK, good. Your criticism of this phone is consistent (and that's all I wanted to force out of you - just for funsies).

quote:
What IS good about the ANdroid platform it it has products to suit all needs. Where Apple had NO 4G phone until a few weeks ago, there were dozens avaliable on Android ranging from low end to high end and every step in between.


Sorry but this is irrelevant. All the alternative Androids were alternatives for iPhone users, too. It doesn't make this phone any better or worse.

quote:
What is funny is your attempt to rub it in and make it as if its an issue. The only way this could be an issue is if Android somehow stopped support 4G phones. this is a budget phone on a budget carrier, you want cheap, there it is. I dont.


Actually, for me, as I said, it's not an issue. It's you who ranted about lacking LTE being so bad, as did many Android fans, which is why it's embarrassing for THEM. I haven't once passed any judgement on it.

quote:
Again, if you do want a phone with these specs and 4G, the Optimus G is there. What exactly are you trying to prove, because your point is lost again.


As I said, if you do this, you sacrifice the instant Android upgrades.

You know what's funny? I'm actually going to buy this Nexus 4, and I think the Nexus 10 is great and may buy it too ;-)


RE: NO LTE
By retrospooty on 10/29/2012 4:43:50 PM , Rating: 2
"It wasn't the fact that you replied that I was noting. It was the offence you took to a statement which you claim doesn't include you. Replying is natural, hence I am. Try to apply logic, please"

No, you're trolling and you know it.

"Sorry but this is irrelevant. All the alternative Androids were alternatives for iPhone users, too. It doesn't make this phone any better or worse."

My point was Apple had no 4G, Google has had it for over 2 years. I was merely pointing out the flaw in your argument, but i see now, you were just trying to get a rise.

"As I said, if you do this, you sacrifice the instant Android upgrades."

Yes... But I have honestly never bought a phone (or any elsctronic for that matter) based on a future upgrade. I buy it if it has the features I want now, not next year. Next year I will be on to a new phone anyhow, regardless of what OS upgrade comes.


RE: NO LTE
By retrospooty on 10/29/2012 4:45:28 PM , Rating: 1
"'m actually going to buy this Nexus 4, and I think the Nexus 10 is great and may buy it too ;-)"

Wait... What?

Ya, post the receipts and then it's a good laugh.


RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 4:49:58 PM , Rating: 2
I'm serious, I love it.

What's not to like? Really smooth, minimal look, glass front and back. Cutting edge processor, awesome GPU, amazing screen. Battery life should be reasonable (I hope, but will check before buying).

For the price, it's simply amazing value - and I've never cared about LTE. Paired with a 10 EUR/Month PAYG all-inclusive data plan with unlimited free SMS, and I'm set.

Also, I'm bored of iOS and want to try Android.

I'm gonna get the 16GB model - 349 EUR.


RE: NO LTE
By retrospooty on 10/29/2012 5:00:53 PM , Rating: 1
What did you do with testerguy? Is he dead in the closet while you type with his ID? No biggie, I like you better ;)

Not for me, I would wait for the Optimus equivalent.


RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 5:04:03 PM , Rating: 2
The data is unlimited on that deal too. Amazing, no?

10 EUR, unlimited SMS, unlimited data. PAYG.


RE: NO LTE
By retrospooty on 10/29/12, Rating: 0
RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 6:22:49 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
All insults and "fanboy" accusations aside, you have spent days and days here listing argument after argument of how the iPhone and IOS is so superior to Android. Were you fullashit then or are you fullashit now?


Actually, I've mostly been comparing hardware, for example you've heard me rant about battery life, CPU, GPU, customer satisfaction, reliability - or how larger screens are not necessarily an advantage (or weight, thinness). Those are just factual points, they aren't anything to do with my personal opinion. I've always tried to tell you I don't care about Apple or Android.

When it comes to iOS vs Android (rather than hardware), in months and months gone by I cited apps which weren't available on iOS, and the poor upgrade cycle on Android, and perhaps malware. I've also said things like that the widgets are pointless and that there's nothing you can't do on iOS that you can on Android. I've also said that calling Android prettier is subjective nonsense. I also said that for removable battery or SD cards there are easy, obvious alternatives that make them a non issue.

I stand by all of the above. Android has caught up on the app front since months ago, so now the key apps I use are actually available, owning a Nexus means instant updates, which solves that problem. Malware is still an issue to some extent but Google is improving that too. I maintain that widgets are pointless and that you can do anything you want on either, and I maintain that calling Android prettier is subjective. Also, the phone I now want also has no removable battery and no SD card, so once again I'm being entirely consistent.

So none of what I've argued is contradictory with me wanting to use Android, I've never claimed the reverse (such as iOS being better overall, or prettier) - I always stuck to objectively provable facts. You guys consistently interpreted my analysis as bias but I was trying to illustrate to you guys that your subjective opinions on screen size, 'prettyness' etc weren't objective facts, and provide you with some actual facts. I also tried to tell you that I don't care about either company and I'm neutral, but you refused to believe me.

So the answer to your question - is neither.


RE: NO LTE
By retrospooty on 10/29/2012 6:30:17 PM , Rating: 2
OK, I get it... your fullashit both then AND now ;)

I think you really just like to argue.


RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 6:31:48 PM , Rating: 2
Show me a single inconsistency.

I dare you.


RE: NO LTE
By retrospooty on 10/29/2012 6:46:40 PM , Rating: 2
WTF? The inconsistency is your whole argument. You made a 20 something point list just a few days ago of all these things that IOS offers and Android lacks (which I wholly disagree with) ... Just last night you blasted me for saying the Nexus 10 is going to rock, now here you are less than 24 hours later wanting to buy one.

If you want to stand up here and act as if your whole tune hasnt changed here today, then I cant help you. It's just funny thats all.

Anyhow, whatever. All that aside, if you havent already had a chance to play with a decent Jelly Bean level device, you will be impressed. It's really finally there.


RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 6:57:01 PM , Rating: 2
Go back to that list.

Firstly, note that it was comparing the SG3 to the iPhone. Nothing to do with Android vs iOS, and nothing to do with the Nexus 4.

Secondly, note the conclusion - I can't be arsed to quote exactly but it was words to the effect of 'This isn't to say that the iPhone is objectively better, but it proves that you can't claim that it isn't, and can't compare the value directly'.

Thirdly - I believe a large part of that discussion was on getting value for money which clearly is disrupted by this $300 no contract phone.

Every point I made about the SG3 vs iPhone 5 remains factually the case.

I agree, re: Jelly Bean, I'm looking forward to it.


RE: NO LTE
By retrospooty on 10/30/2012 11:34:38 PM , Rating: 2
Let me make this very clear... You have now proven what I've been saying all along, with Android you get more and pay less.

You cleverly twist words and steer the debate in a different direction but in the end you know I was right all along. Your debate skills far outweigh the points you choose, so in the end wrong is wrong. Anyhow I'm glad you made a good choice


RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 4:47:17 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
No, you're trolling and you know it.


Actually, I was testing you. I was seeing if you were intelligent enough to realise that my criticism of 'Android fans' didn't have to apply to you.

quote:
My point was Apple had no 4G, Google has had it for over 2 years. I was merely pointing out the flaw in your argument, but i see now, you were just trying to get a rise.


Sorry, but when Apple had no 4G there were loads of other handsets with LG and that means that not having LG doesn't matter. Choice is a bitch, you see.

quote:
Yes... But I have honestly never bought a phone (or any elsctronic for that matter) based on a future upgrade. I buy it if it has the features I want now, not next year. Next year I will be on to a new phone anyhow, regardless of what OS upgrade comes.


Well for me device support is important.


RE: NO LTE
By retrospooty on 10/29/2012 4:54:46 PM , Rating: 1
"Actually, I was testing you"

It's really not your place to test anyone here, its an open forum and your high opinion of yourself is only shared by... yourself.

Funny though, your test only shows that you are fullshit and I am not ;)


RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 4:56:26 PM , Rating: 2
LOL


RE: NO LTE
By Reclaimer77 on 10/29/2012 5:18:13 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
How ironic. The iPhone 4S came out over a year ago and you slated it for not having LTE. Now your precious Android creator releases a phone in NOVEMBER 2012 with no LTE support, and you're defending it.


So you feel the need to defend and/or slam Android, and pointlessly try to compare a Nexus device with Apple's flagship Halo phone...

I'll leave you to ponder the "logic" here. You realize this isn't a halo phone aimed at the general consumer, right?


RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 5:21:04 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
So you feel the need to defend and/or slam Android, and pointlessly try to compare a Nexus device with Apple's flagship Halo phone...


Please quote where I 'slammed' Android.

As for 'pointlessly comparing' - come off it. Consumers compare what's available. It's not rocket science.

I'm asking for people who criticised a lack of LTE previously to be consistent, nothing more, nothing less.


RE: NO LTE
By Reclaimer77 on 10/29/12, Rating: 0
RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 5:53:06 PM , Rating: 2
Like it or not, all phones these days, even cheap ones, come with LTE.

The Nexus isn't just any phone, it's widely reported as Google's flagship phone. So it's not like BMW vs Hyundai - and Google would take great offence to that suggestion.

Google could have negotiated with carriers just like every other manufacturer did.

I do think I'm making good points - I am, and my views are widely echo'd by the knowledgeable community. I don't care about you or your reactions, you're just an irrational Android fanboy who will defend missing LTE on one phone but say it's fine on a phone released a year later.

And really, if you honestly think I am to be liked by morons like you, you're sadly mistaken. I aim to be right, which I always achieve.


RE: NO LTE
By retrospooty on 10/29/2012 6:07:01 PM , Rating: 2
"The Nexus isn't just any phone, it's widely reported as Google's flagship phone"

No, it isnt. "Nexus" indicates its a Google branded phone, there are other Nexus models. This one is obviously low end.

Right now, Samsung, HTC, and MOto all have NExus models on the way. There will be 4 separate Nexus models out... Even rumours of a Sony one.

Now you are arguing with reclaimer here something that you are already aware of above.

I think I am getting it... You really just like to argue. You are more about the argument itself than the point of view you are taking arent you?


RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 6:30:34 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
No, it isnt. "Nexus" indicates its a Google branded phone, there are other Nexus models. This one is obviously low end.


http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/29/3569540/google-...

quote:
The Nexus 4: Google's flagship phone lands November 13th for $299


And it's got the fastest CPU (I believe) of any phone to date, so it's most definitely not low end, and the screen quality is right up there. In fact it's essentially the Optimus G. To call it low end is a massive, massive stretch.

quote:
Right now, Samsung, HTC, and MOto all have NExus models on the way. There will be 4 separate Nexus models out... Even rumours of a Sony one.


So? That means nothing.

quote:
Now you are arguing with reclaimer here something that you are already aware of above.


What?

quote:
I think I am getting it... You really just like to argue. You are more about the argument itself than the point of view you are taking arent you?


It's just obvious that this Nexus 4 is intended to be a top of the line phone, just look at the specs. Even non-top of the line phones these days include LTE, so it's a big inconsistency. That's why basically EVERY site is making a big deal out of the fact that it doesn't have LTE.

If you want to be consistent, you should join them. But you're just too much of a brainwashed fanboy to bring yourself to criticise anything Android. It's absolutely pathetic, to be honest.


RE: NO LTE
By retrospooty on 10/29/2012 7:48:48 PM , Rating: 2
Tguy... you are still hopelessly delusional. Even when we agree on something you are still all tied up in knots about what other people mean. You get the complete wrong meanings form half of what you read... I am done. I just cant take you any more. My troll feeding is done for the day.


RE: NO LTE
By ian80 on 10/29/2012 9:52:03 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/29/3569540/google-...

So the verge claims it's their flagship phone... and ??? Hint.. They're not Google, it's their statement not the one Google made. For what it's worth I'll give you the true definition of a flagship -

'A ship that carries a fleet or squadron commander and bears the commander's flag' or

'A ship, esp in a fleet, aboard which the commander of the fleet is quartered' or

'The most important ship belonging to a shipping company' or

'A single item from a related group considered as the most important, often in establishing a public image'

And here's the rub - It doesn't have to be the most powerful in the fleet, It just needs to carry the essence of what the fleet stands for' - and I'll willingly accept that's my statement.

quote:
And it's got the fastest CPU (I believe) of any phone to date, so it's most definitely not low end, and the screen quality is right up there. In fact it's essentially the Optimus G. To call it low end is a massive, massive stretch.

Oh please. arm/mobile/desktop cpu designs are moving so fast I can't possibly see how they couldn't include the most up to date designs in CPU development. As far as processing capacity is concerned this is nothing. However I'll see you on the other side with a galaxy s4 or an iPhone6 or whatever...

But I'll ask you one question and it's something you were keen to point out to me - Does 8GB storage space strike you as top of the line?

quote:
Right now, Samsung, HTC, and MOto all have NExus models on the way. There will be 4 separate Nexus models out... Even rumours of a Sony one.
So? That means nothing.


It means everything. A base OS is only as good as the hardware supporting it. Surely you must know this, however given your posting history I think you'll choose to ignore it.

quote:
It's just obvious that this Nexus 4 is intended to be a top of the line phone

Rubbish, let's just look at it's failings:
- Internal memory - 8 or 16GB - Not exactly high spec (in fact quite pathetic) - Removable storage - Nothing compared to what's available.
- Screen size - Ultimately if you were to go with display quality may I recommend an iPhone 5 or possibly even an SG3 depending on your pleasure.

quote:
So? That means nothing.
Rubbish. The very nature of the environment (this instance being) Android encompases, indicates the possibility of something advancing over previous generations, long may that live whether it's Google \ Apple or Microsoft.


RE: NO LTE
By retrospooty on 10/30/2012 1:08:30 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly... The Verge saying that means nothing. They are assuming something that was never said. It's certainly not a flagship. Low end is not a great description either, it's more of a specific need phone. Its high end with LCD and CPU/CPU for sure... If you want a fast new phone with a great screen and don't have or care about 4G, SD card or removable battery its a fantastic option at a great price. I'd still really like to see a Nexus with all of the above.


RE: NO LTE
By Reclaimer77 on 10/29/2012 6:48:20 PM , Rating: 2
A "flagship" phone that comes unlocked, carrier free, without a contract?

Dude, there's no such animal. Think about it. This is why it doesn't have LTE! How many times do we have to tell you?

quote:
Google could have negotiated with carriers just like every other manufacturer did.


Wait wait, you have criticized Google before for not "taking control" of Android from the carriers. Well now they have with the "Nexus" line. So you criticize them for that? You can't have your cake and eat it too.

quote:
And really, if you honestly think I am to be liked by morons like you, you're sadly mistaken. I aim to be right, which I always achieve.


AHAHAHAHAH!!!!


RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 6:52:08 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
A "flagship" phone that comes unlocked, carrier free, without a contract? Dude, there's no such animal. Think about it. This is why it doesn't have LTE! How many times do we have to tell you?


Talk about dumb. This is an aggressive move by Google - the fact that it hasn't been done before is the point , just like the Nexus 7.

quote:
Wait wait, you have criticized Google before for not "taking control" of Android from the carriers. Well now they have with the "Nexus" line. So you criticize them for that? You can't have your cake and eat it too.


Can't you? It seems to me that Apple can. They get control of the carriers AND have LTE. Silly boy....

Besides, I'm not criticising personally, I don't care about LTE. My point is that YOU fanboys who slated the 4S should have a shred of intelligence and be consistent about what you criticise.


RE: NO LTE
By Reclaimer77 on 10/29/2012 7:03:31 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I don't care about LTE.


Then shut the fuck up? Go back in time, and shut the fuck up and eliminate the 30 posts about something you "don't care about" while you're at it.

quote:
Can't you? It seems to me that Apple can. They get control of the carriers AND have LTE. Silly boy....


Well 'silly boy', Google and Apple have entirely different strategies at work here. Again, you want to make things seem equal when they aren't. Apple can apply leverage that others can't atm, and Google can do some things that Apple can't/wont. Such is the spice of life.

quote:
My point is that YOU fanboys who slated the 4S should have a shred of intelligence and be consistent about what you criticise.


Except this isn't the "4S" of Android and never will be, wasn't intended to be. I understand the point you are trying to make, but it isn't going to stick. You're comparing apples to oranges here.

The fact that you'll never walk into a Verizon, Sprint, AT&T shop and see this phone on display, should clue you in.


RE: NO LTE
By Spuke on 10/29/2012 10:17:11 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Then shut the fuck up? Go back in time, and shut the fuck up and eliminate the 30 posts about something you "don't care about" while you're at it.
LMAO!!! Can this be put at the bottom of all the Dailytech threads?


RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 4:21:01 PM , Rating: 2
Oh and also, just FYI, there's no removable battery, and no SD card slot. Also, the front and back are both made from glass.

Now I personally have no issues with any of the above, but I know certain anal retentives do so I hope they voice their concerns on this phone as they have with other products. After all, they wouldn't want to be inconsistent (biased), would they?


RE: NO LTE
By retrospooty on 10/29/2012 4:31:45 PM , Rating: 2
"Oh and also, just FYI, there's no removable battery, and no SD card slot. Also, the front and back are both made from glass. Now I personally have no issues with any of the above, but I know certain anal retentives do so I hope they voice their concerns on this phone as they have with other products. After all, they wouldn't want to be inconsistent (biased), would the"

There isnt and I wouldnt buy it. AGain, this is a low end phone with a high end CPU and screen... Now if it were the high end phone and didnt offer those thinks like say, the iPhone that would be laughable.

You should stop now, you arent going to win this argument as there are other Android phones available. If this were the only one, it would be bad. As a matter of fact, its not only not the only Android available, its not even going to be the only 2012 Nexus, as there are Nexus models coming from Samsung, Moto and HTC as well.


RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 4:40:50 PM , Rating: 2
A phone and how good or bad it is has nothing at all do with the fact that it's inadequacies (as you see them) are not present in other models.

And who's trying to win an argument, again, just stating facts. Nobody can dispute what I factually stated so I've pre-won (as is always the case).

Very sensitive, aren't we?


RE: NO LTE
By retrospooty on 10/29/2012 4:49:31 PM , Rating: 2
I dont argue those facts. This phone is inadequate.

What I disagree with is your pompous attitide and skewed reality.


RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 4:51:34 PM , Rating: 2
Come on, don't hate ;-)


RE: NO LTE
By retrospooty on 10/29/2012 4:57:24 PM , Rating: 2
LOL, I dont hate... If I hated, I wouldnt respond, you'd be invisible to me.


RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 5:00:07 PM , Rating: 2
Would I be dead to you, too? :-)


RE: NO LTE
By Mint on 10/30/2012 12:35:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
AGain, this is a low end phone with a high end CPU and screen...
Are you kidding me?

A "low end phone" with a top CPU, top GPU, top screen, top build quality, wireless charging, NFC? WTF are you smoking?

Missing microSD and 16GB memory are characteristics of so many high end phones (in fact the majority when you include iPhone sales) that it's ludicrous to exclude it based on that one criteria. It's simply a fact that most people in the target market don't find 16GB a limit at all.

As for LTE, it's only a factor for Verizon. For everyone else, HSPA+ is in the same neighborhood.


RE: NO LTE
By ian80 on 10/29/2012 4:38:04 PM , Rating: 1
Gee I wonder if theres a device with a removable battery, SD slot and maybe even LTE I can pay some more for.

Choice is a bitch eh!


RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 4:44:55 PM , Rating: 2
A phone and how good or bad it is has nothing at all do with the fact that it's inadequacies (as you see them) are not present in other models.

And also - what you just said can be applied to any weaknesses of any phone, ever.


RE: NO LTE
By ian80 on 10/29/2012 4:54:11 PM , Rating: 2
'A phone and how good or bad it is has nothing at all do with the fact that it's inadequacies (as you see them) are not present in other models.'

If those other models cost the same then yes this would be a bad deal. As it stands I have the option to match the functionality and consequently price or if, shock horror, those features aren't deal breakers to me, pay less.


RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 4:58:17 PM , Rating: 2
I don't disagree.

I just pointed out that if you want to defend this phone, do it because of this phone (ie it's price) - not because other phones do the things this one lacks.

Clearly they aren't deal breakers for me, I'm buying it.

;-)


RE: NO LTE
By ian80 on 10/29/2012 5:03:50 PM , Rating: 2
What?

That is exactly what I was doing. The inclusion of other phones was simply to point out that if I want a phone with those features I could get still one be it Android, iOS or WP.


RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 5:07:18 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Gee I wonder if theres a device with a removable battery, SD slot and maybe even LTE I can pay some more for.


Correct answer was 'it's cheaper'.


RE: NO LTE
By ian80 on 10/29/2012 5:32:08 PM , Rating: 2
Which I pointed out in my very first post to you, I even gave you a 'horses for courses' for your troubles.

Given the fact that in the majority of my posts I mention price in some form or another I'm fairly confident anyone else looking at our posting history will see exactly where I'm coming from.

Oh and thanks for the correct answer, I didn't realise you got to set the testing around here.


RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 5:57:04 PM , Rating: 2
Absolutely incorrect.

Your first comment was:

quote:
Not really. If I want LTE I'll get a Galaxy S3 or iPhone 5 for $300 more.


In other words, you're defending a device based on features found on other devices.

Wrong answer. Uh Uhhhhhhhhh.

Correct answer was to point out that this phone is better value for money.

quote:
Given the fact that in the majority of my posts I mention price in some form or another I'm fairly confident anyone else looking at our posting history will see exactly where I'm coming from.


Your points on money were about the other devices offering the features this phone lacks. You didn't need to reference any other phone with the missing features, because that isn't a defence. You basically tried to justify the missing features by stating both a) That this phone is cheaper (correct) and b) There were other phones available with the features (incorrect).

B) is the one I am correcting you on.

And yes I do the testing because I'm the most intelligent.


RE: NO LTE
By ian80 on 10/29/2012 6:19:22 PM , Rating: 2
The very crux of this discussion revolved around LTE not being present. I simply pointed out that there is a significant price difference between the phone where it is missing and the phones where it isn't - admittedly they were the only ones I could think of. I'm sorry if it's too much of a stretch for you to figure out I'm discussing cost here but there's not much I can do about that. Like I said I'm pretty confident others will see it that way.

As for the second aspect of your statement it was my intent to point out that missing functionality at lower prices relates to additional choice in the market. At no point did I say that this phone should be forgiven for missing functionality because an iPhone or S3 has it just that if I really want it I can still get it elsewhere - choice.

It is possible to speak about both aspects and fortunately you do not get to decide which ones are correct or not.

'And yes I do the testing because I'm the most intelligent.'

Very mature.


RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 6:37:04 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The very crux of this discussion revolved around LTE not being present. I simply pointed out that there is a significant price difference between the phone where it is missing and the phones where it isn't - admittedly they were the only ones I could think of. I'm sorry if it's too much of a stretch for you to figure out I'm discussing cost here but there's not much I can do about that. Like I said I'm pretty confident others will see it that way.


You are missing the point. If someone comes to me and says - your car doesn't have a 0-60 time of 3.6 seconds, I can't defend my car by saying 'I can buy a car which does for X more'. That isn't a defence. Because it in no way proves anything about the relative value of either.

The proper defence of my car would be 'this car represents good value for money for what it is, you can't get a better spec for less money'.

Do you see the difference?

Sorry, but the first is logically incorrect. It does nothing to justify the product in question whatsoever. And it's not me deciding that, it's basic logic.

quote:
It is possible to speak about both aspects and fortunately you do not get to decide which ones are correct or not.


Of course it's possible to speak about both aspects, but talking about both aspects doesn't reach the same conclusion. Take this quote:

quote:
Gee I wonder if theres a device with a removable battery, SD slot and maybe even LTE I can pay some more for.


Sorry but this does absolutely NOTHING, at all, to defend the phone in question. Lets compare to laptops. You come to me and say my laptop has no screen. I say, 'Gee, I wonder if I can buy a laptop with a screen for more money'. Does that in any way address the missing feature? NO.

You need to realise this, and quickly. Which is why I made the intelligence comment. And I didn't use it lightly.


RE: NO LTE
By ian80 on 10/29/2012 6:50:37 PM , Rating: 2
I am not defending the phone because other phones have that functionality I'm pointing out it's not the end of the world for in this instance the android market. As per your car analogy if someone came to me and said car X takes longer than 3.6 seconds I'm saying there are alternatives that are quicker - note this is nothing to do with 'my' car as in this instance I don't have one.

I'll take your statement:

quote:
Gee I wonder if theres a device with a removable battery, SD slot and maybe even LTE I can pay some more for.

Sorry but this does absolutely NOTHING, at all, to defend the phone in question.

as confirmation that you've at least subconsciously realised this.

Where I am defending the phone is on its price and this is emphasised in most posts I make.

Now drop the superiority complex, you haven't earned it.


RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 7:01:05 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
As per your car analogy if someone came to me and said car X takes longer than 3.6 seconds I'm saying there are alternatives that are quicker - note this is nothing to do with 'my' car as in this instance I don't have one.


This is exactly the point! We're in a comments section discussing car X, and you're talking about alternatives which has no relevance!

It's also nothing to do with car X. Because your comment is completely independent of product X. You will always be able to get other cars which do whatever regardless of whether product X exists or not.

quote:
Where I am defending the phone is on its price and this is emphasised in most posts I make.


And as I've very clearly articulated on numerous occasions, the price defence was the only valid one. Citing alternative phones is not.

All you're doing now is agreeing with me that you weren't defending the phone with those claims. Which has been my point all along. You're doing nothing but proving my point.


RE: NO LTE
By ian80 on 10/29/2012 7:32:34 PM , Rating: 2
Ok, let's go back to the root of your original comment (at least the point where I jumped in).

quote:
That's gotta be embarrassing for Android fans.

Note the statement 'Android fans'. You are not talking about a particular car you're talking about a particular collection of cars.

Here's my point, if (given the features you listed plus LTE) Android phone A doesn't cut it for you there's possibly Android phone B that has all of the features you yourself pointed out.

Remember we're talking about android here not because I'm a fanboy (don't even have a smartphone) but because according to you they're embarrased as hell. This is not a defence of the current phone (we both did that with the price) but the 'eco-system' for lack of a better phrase, in the same way that someone saying the iPhone 5 connector renders their accessories useless I'd be entitled to say the iPhone 4 ones will be fine.

So to recap - As regards market alternatives I'm not talking about car X (that's your hopefully unintended misdirection) I'm following your original comments which stated brand X which happens to include cars 1,2,3 etc..


RE: NO LTE
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/29/2012 7:40:50 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
And yes I do the testing because I'm the most intelligent.
Wow, you are an absolute, egotistical piece of shit....

Un-fucking-believable...

You are most certainly a troll, and this seals the deal. Why anyone would bother responding to you after this comment is beyond me.

You are a pathetic, low life loser...


RE: NO LTE
By ian80 on 10/29/2012 8:51:50 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You are most certainly a troll, and this seals the deal. Why anyone would bother responding to you after this comment is beyond me.

Famous last words - I do like a challenge.


RE: NO LTE
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/29/2012 8:54:32 PM , Rating: 2
;)


RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 6:03:20 PM , Rating: 2
(and also - none of this conversation has stemmed from your first answer, to which I didn't even object at the time).


RE: NO LTE
By zephyrprime on 10/29/2012 5:38:39 PM , Rating: 2
I hate it when they make tablet's out of glass. Tablets and phones need a good grip. I have a touchpad and I've had an ipad and they are too smooth and constantly slide through your fingers so you have to keep re-positioning them.


RE: NO LTE
By momorere on 10/29/12, Rating: -1
RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 4:43:33 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
What is really embarrassing is the douchebag company that just now came out with it 2 years AFTER everyone else. I won't mention any names but it is your beloved company. Oh wait, they failed to implement NFC on the iPhone 5 in favor of developing their own version of it just to differentiate themselves from the masses as per usual.


Sorry, how is releasing LTE more embarrassing than releasing a phone AFTER without LTE, for people who claim that phone without LTE is inferior?

And also, which, out of NFC and LTE, is more widely adopted.

It's HILARIOUS how quickly you Android fans all turn around and start defending a lack of LTE.

The best arguments so far are 'but other phones miss other features' or 'but other Android phones have it'. Neither have any relevance to the current phone in question. Fanboyism at its extreme.


RE: NO LTE
By moriz on 10/29/2012 5:03:33 PM , Rating: 2
the original galaxy nexus GSM (aka maguro) didn't have LTE either. a version with LTE (toro and toro plus) was released later. chances are, we'll see the same thing with the nexus 4.

to me the lack of LTE doesn't bother me, since i don't even have a data plan. the non-removable battery is fine too, as long as there's a way to hard reset the phone, since i like to use custom roms. the only time i open my galaxy nexus is when i royally screw something up, and have to do a hard reset.


RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 5:10:43 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
to me the lack of LTE doesn't bother me, since i don't even have a data plan. the non-removable battery is fine too, as long as there's a way to hard reset the phone, since i like to use custom roms. the only time i open my galaxy nexus is when i royally screw something up, and have to do a hard reset.


Couldn't agree more.

Generally all data plans have 'maximum data usage' so having LTE doesn't really get you anywhere. For normal websites HSPA+ is perfectly fine and if you're downloading anything bigger you'll run into throttling anyway. Also non-removable battery has never been an issue for me either - if you need extra juice get a case or portable charger.

One question - can you send the phone in to have the battery replaced?


RE: NO LTE
By moriz on 10/29/2012 5:22:09 PM , Rating: 2
depends on what the warranty covers. i'd imagine completely enclosed phones like the nexus 4 to have the battery covered under warranty as well.

one thing to make a note of: if you unlock the bootloader to allow for installing a custom ROM, you'd void the warranty. so make sure your device is working properly before doing something like this.


RE: NO LTE
By Reclaimer77 on 10/29/2012 6:35:02 PM , Rating: 1
Uhh two years ago or last year if you wanted an Apple phone with LTE, what could you do?

If you wanted an Android phone with LTE two years ago, or last year, you bought one with LTE.

If you want an Android phone with LTE today, you don't buy this Nexus, there are dozens of other phones out there WITH LTE to choose from. Was that so hard?

It's hilarious how you are trying to build a major deal out of this. How this fact isn't "relevant" to you is beyond comprehension. Are you sure you know what relevant means? I don't think you do.


RE: NO LTE
By testerguy on 10/29/2012 6:44:31 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Uhh two years ago or last year if you wanted an Apple phone with LTE, what could you do?


Firstly - LTE 2 years ago wasn't even available in Europe. Full stop. So the premise is flawed.

Secondly - if you wanted an iPhone, it would be despite the fact that it didn't have LTE. People who bought iPhones had every bit as much choice in phone as people who bought Androids (and more choice than Android fanboys). If they really wanted LTE - they could get an Android, just like you could. If they really wanted an iPhone, then by definition LTE wasn't as important to them.

Thirdly - your collective grouping of all phones on Android as if they are one device, or from one manufacturer, is ridiculous. You're effectively saying that if you took 6 devices, all absolutely awful, but all containing one useful feature, that Android would be the best choice because you can get whatever you want.

Fourthly - none of what you've said has any impact whatsoever on the fact that if someone wants this up-to-date Nexus phone , and LTE, they have no option available to them . The bottom line is that this phone should have had LTE.


RE: NO LTE
By momorere on 10/29/2012 11:08:54 PM , Rating: 2
You're wrong so you can go ahead and give up. crApple was 2 years late to 4G and chose to not implement NFC. Now they are working on their own flawed pointless competitor to NFC. They gotta stay away from what others are using and show how to truly invent it. Again YOU ARE WRONG. I know it is truly a foreign concept to you in your glorious crApple utopia but the truth hurts sometimes and usually ALOT.


RE: NO LTE
By Jeffk464 on 10/29/2012 6:23:01 PM , Rating: 2
Not only that but I thought the LTE radio was actually built into the S4 processor.


RE: NO LTE
By Jeffk464 on 10/29/2012 6:21:57 PM , Rating: 2
Yup, no 4G no me. I currently have the galaxy nexus on verizon and LTE is one EXTREMELY important feature. Much more important to perceived speed of the phone then if the chip is dual core vs quad, or 1 ghz vs 1.5ghz, etc. I wonder if google is rotating their support for different carriers so as not to alienate any of them. Oh well, I guess when I'm due for a new phone I will have to buy a non nexus phone and use a custom rom to put it back to pure android.


RE: NO LTE
By Spuke on 10/29/2012 10:21:35 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Oh well, I guess when I'm due for a new phone I will have to buy a non nexus phone and use a custom rom to put it back to pure android.
Same here. Kinda sucks to have to do that.


RE: NO LTE
By natehow on 10/30/2012 8:36:07 AM , Rating: 2
Honestly T-Mobile is my carrier of choice I have had every major carrier and T-Mobile's HSPA+ network is awesome. considering I rock the $30 no contract monthly plan. This phone will probably be my next handset. Also have a Galaxy S3 on Verizon LTE for work and speed tests end up almost identical on a consistent basis.


$100 for 16GB?
By GGA1759 on 10/29/2012 2:19:24 PM , Rating: 2
I love when they offer tablets without a micro SD slot and then want to charge $100 to go from 16GB to 32GB. No thanks.




RE: $100 for 16GB?
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 10/29/2012 2:23:23 PM , Rating: 3
They only charge $50 on the Nexus 7 which makes it even more weird.


RE: $100 for 16GB?
By geddarkstorm on 10/29/2012 2:42:18 PM , Rating: 2
Amusing that the phone seems to have better hardware than the tablet. I don't see this Nexus 10 competing well with the 7, let alone the Surface or iPad. Honestly, it would be better for a $100 less than it is. As much as I've criticized the Surface for its pricing, this is kinda worst; and I'd personally take a Surface over the Nexus 10, for sure.


RE: $100 for 16GB?
By augiem on 10/29/2012 3:26:01 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
and then want to charge $100 to go from 16GB to 32GB.


My thoughts exactly. There's some kind of brain disconnect at Google.

Idea: Let's release a tablet at cost to drive customers to our online ecosystem and get them hooked for life driving our profits for the next 20-30 years. We'll starve out Apple and make profits on the services now and in the future.

Implementation: Yeah, let's release a 16GB model at cost. Oh and how about this? We can upsell them a 32GB for a $100 premium just like Apple. Wow, we'll be making a huge $95 profit per tablet!

Someone left their battle plans at home.


RE: $100 for 16GB?
By augiem on 10/29/2012 3:36:35 PM , Rating: 2
I realize they are purposely limiting the memory on the devices to drive cloud usage. That's probably their logic behind it. 16GB users will be more likely to use the cloud whereas 32GB will be more self-sufficient. But ultimately, both sets of users will become dependent on Google's system (email, chat, apps, books, movies, music, maps, docs, etc.) even if they don't use the cloud storage part as much. The $100 punishment fee is unwarranted and doesn't fit well within their overall strategy IMO.


RE: $100 for 16GB?
By Nutzo on 10/29/2012 3:51:47 PM , Rating: 2
Really disappointed, but not suprised. Wish Goggle had included a memory slot so I could add my own flash card for expansion when I need it. The 16GB is barely enough for current usage, and the $100 extra for 32GB is too much.
Otherwise this tablet looks great, and the $399 price is good. As the size of apps grow, the 16GB of non-expandable memory will make the tablet obsolite before it's time. Like having a laptop where you can't upgrade the ram or harddrive.

For the $399 price, this would have been my first tablet, IF it had a memory slot. Guess I'll have to keep looking.


RE: $100 for 16GB?
By GotThumbs on 10/29/2012 4:19:38 PM , Rating: 2
People. Stop your dam whining.

When comparing to Apple....its 599 for the 32GB wifi version. You can't even get the Ipad II (399 16GB) with 32GB.

I know you would all love having companies give you their products for free, but you need to wake up and be realistic in your expectations, Else I would LOVE to see you develop a better tablet that can compete in the same market if you think it can be done better for much less.

Regarding the SD card, I would have liked to see the addition of this, but I haven't' even used that feature in my Xoom (32)and don't expect too, unless I want to load it with a bunch of movies for a plane flight. I have lived without it for well over two years...so it's not as critical IMO.

With the components and internals, I feel this is a more than fair price point considering the market place competitors. Regarding lack of LTE on Nexus 4...I don't see this as a deal-breaker (IMO)as I only use my data access rarely. For those of you who really use it...fine, but I'm betting most users are not going to be majorly inconvenienced by this.

For years salesmen have told you that you need all the newest and greatest features....and then when you have owned it for several months...most realize they don't use/need all the features they were told they had to have

Salesmen/Marketers are in the business of selling you things you may or may not need or even want at first. In the end....they don't care once you leave the showroom/store. Don't con yourself into thinking otherwise.

That car salesmen doesn't care if you can make your fourth months payment....That realtor does not care if you can't make your mortgage, your car payments and furnish the house. That's the biggest part of the problem in the US. People fail to take responsibility for what they can afford and what they actually need. They get caught up in the salesmans schmoozing/upselling or the lame excuse of competing with the Jones's.

In the end, shop for yourself and your needs. Don't be a dope to others pressure/whims.

Buy another phone/tablet if you want different features than what these offer. Simple and no need for any whining about features.


RE: $100 for 16GB?
By augiem on 10/29/2012 6:50:08 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
People. Stop your dam whining.


I'm talking business strategy and you blow it off as "whining". I'm SOO tired of always hearing from people like you on DailyTech.

quote:
I know you would all love having companies give you their products for free, but you need to wake up and be realistic in your expectations


Have you not been paying attention? Google selling the Nexus 7 AT COST is their strategy! It's not my desire to get a free tablet. They are the ones doing this AND letting people know this fact. It's highly inconsistent to then upsell a $100 upgrade.


RE: $100 for 16GB?
By Reclaimer77 on 10/29/2012 6:52:47 PM , Rating: 2
So your issue is that instead of a profit margin of $300+ like Apple and others, they might make $100 if you choose an upgrade, and NOTHING if you don't?

That makes sense to you to be angry about that?


RE: $100 for 16GB?
By augiem on 10/29/2012 7:56:30 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
That makes sense to you to be angry about that?


Who says I'm angry about it? I'm saying the strategy seems half implemented. I think if Google is serious about going the cut-throat route, they should do it fully.

The only thing I'm angry about is the one-off knee-jerk responses like "Stop whining." That's insulting and eliminates any possibility of discussion or debate because it's essentially saying "you're an idiot and everything you just said is invalidated."


RE: $100 for 16GB?
By zephyrprime on 10/29/2012 5:37:33 PM , Rating: 2
Poor people will but the 16GB and the people with more money will spend the extra $100. It is actually perfectly effective and smart price discrimination.


RE: $100 for 16GB?
By Mint on 10/30/2012 12:03:14 PM , Rating: 2
Which is exactly why Apple does it.

There's no competition for an Android tablet with specs like this. All these whiners should be happy that Google isn't charging $100 more for both models.

Anyone buying an iPad2 now looks like a complete tool. 1/5th the pixels and less than half the performance for the same price.


RE: $100 for 16GB?
By TakinYourPoints on 10/29/2012 5:30:02 PM , Rating: 2
The smaller these devices get, the less room there is for SD card expansion. When there is barely enough room to solder RAM modules on the PCB, you have to figure its even harder to put a much larger mounting assembly and physical port in there.

And yes, the pricing of the 32GB version is clearly a way for Google to make a little profit on the hardware given that they're making none on the 16GB model.


RE: $100 for 16GB?
By web2dot0 on 10/29/2012 5:46:16 PM , Rating: 1
You know why?

Because Google realize that they aren't make jack all off their Tablets that's why!!! :-D
Reality strikes baby.

Imagine all these people buying a $299 product, and spend $25-50 loading up their SD card with 32-64GB cards.

Not the best business case to make profit off tablets. Just saying ....

-----

Let me hear those Android fanboys come in droves and explain why this is so much better than Apple.


T-Mobile Value Plans
By EnzoFX on 10/29/2012 2:16:05 PM , Rating: 2
At just $299, this is great for those looking to save with T-Mobile value plans, buying phones unsubsidized. You may only get hspa+but you get the latest hardware otherwise. ATT should subsidize this for free =P.




RE: T-Mobile Value Plans
By Spuke on 10/29/2012 3:37:36 PM , Rating: 2
Except that AT&T, Verizon and everyone else that more than 2 customers and two counties worth of coverage won't get this phone.


I love the Android fan boys!
By web2dot0 on 10/29/12, Rating: -1
RE: I love the Android fan boys!
By retrospooty on 10/29/2012 5:46:09 PM , Rating: 2
What a strange world you must inhabit.


"This is from the DailyTech.com. It's a science website." -- Rush Limbaugh














botimage
Copyright 2015 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki