Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Cellphones Google Handhelds

Google Nexus One Hands-On, Video, and Impressions 262

Posted by timothy
from the there's-a-nap-for-that dept.
wkurzius writes "Engadget has gotten their hands on a Nexus One and have put their first impressions up for the world to see, including whether or not they think it's the 'be-all-end-all Android phone / iPhone eviscerator.' Their opinion? 'Not really.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Nexus One Hands-On, Video, and Impressions

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 02, 2010 @11:28PM (#30628936)

    I'm more than a little disappointed that they seem to be going down the same path that Apple did, which is pretty much to stick you with a certain wireless carrier.

  • by cupantae (1304123) <maroneill@NOSpam.gmail.com> on Sunday January 03, 2010 @12:07AM (#30629144)

    I can't see exactly what's wrong with this phone. All that was meant by the "not really," I think, is that it isn't mindblowingly superior to other Android phones. It looks very nice.

  • Critical (Score:5, Insightful)

    by iluvcapra (782887) on Sunday January 03, 2010 @12:33AM (#30629284)

    No multitouch? Okay.

    No physical keyboard? Okay.

    No multitouch AND no physical keyboard? Sorta fatal combination.

  • by LostCluster (625375) * on Sunday January 03, 2010 @12:45AM (#30629324)

    Not quite an apples-to-Apple Inc. comparison there.

    Apple effectively has two very similar packages in "smartphones", would you like the 3GS in 16GB or 32GB. Some non-S 3G phones are still in inventory and selling at a discount. And let's not forget Apple has the bigger App Store, and developers who target the iPhone also get to see their apps run on the iPod Touch which isn't considered a "smartphone" for lack of a phone.

    Development for Nokia's line of phones is much harder, because there's more than one screen size and a much wider range of capabilities.

    It's a little more than just product moved that matters. Nokia's App Store is nothing compared to the iTunes App Store, and we know 30% of all money that goes through that goes straight to Apple.

  • by MikeURL (890801) on Sunday January 03, 2010 @01:02AM (#30629400) Journal
    If you take a look at their financials about 96% of their revenue comes from the ads they place on their search results. The rest is adsense and then all the other stuff is a rounding error.

    Google very clearly exemplifies why a company of their size and profitability should be paying a huge dividend. They hold on to their money like these projects they are investing in are high-growth high-profit ventures and they aren't. So now Google is a hardware reseller? Who the fuck did the RROI for shareholders and decided that works out.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 03, 2010 @02:00AM (#30629676)
    /spending 2min to install blackra1n and rock/cydia and have a great phone!

    Paying $500 + signing a $100/month contract on a phone which may get bricked on the next update because you hacked it: priceless.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 03, 2010 @02:09AM (#30629728)

    As a long time Nokia fan and former employee, I have to say, I really enjoyed their Series 40/60 phones in the early to mid part of the decade. But after having an N95 phone and comparing it with the iphone OS in the ipod-touch (i know, i am ignoring comparable capabilities, and focusing on usability) there was no comparison.

    Symbian is long in the tooth and needs to just die. The development environment is crap on windows and sucks even more on linux/OSX. I've done development for Symbian/WinMo/iPhone and Symbian is the most painful when it comes to the tool chain and development platform.

    Usability wise, Symbian also pretty much sucks.

    Now, I have not used an n95 or n900, and stil have friends at the mothership that enjoy these phones. But, Nokia really needs to focus on developer tools and platform as well as general overall usability of the phones. Otherwise, they will be reinventing themselves again in another year or so.

  • by shawb (16347) on Sunday January 03, 2010 @02:14AM (#30629748)
    I honestly think Google is a lot smarter than that... they don't sell data to the advertisers. Google keeps that data in house and simply decides which ads to show to which viewers. Selling that data would be like a dairy farmer selling his cows. In fact, that's one thing that almost makes me trust my data with Google... they don't want their competitors getting their hands on that data. It's not a kind heart and dedication to not being evil that drives Google to keep your data safe... it's pure financial self interest (and not even the enlightened variety.)
  • by Darkness404 (1287218) on Sunday January 03, 2010 @02:24AM (#30629798)
    The thing about the iPhone is... it crashes... often (I don't have one but the majority of my family members do, as do a few of my friends). Sometimes it fails to pick up calls, applications crash, SMS messages are sometimes delayed hours, while I would be quick to blame it on AT&T, my current "dumb" phone doesn't have these problems (well, not that theres any applications to crash on the stupid thing...) while running on AT&T. On my iPod touch, applications will occasionally simply refuse to load, Facebook will randomly crash when loading, there are a few websites Safari doesn't like and crashes, etc. While for a lot of people these may be simple annoyances, for some a lost call may be lost money.
  • Re:Ok.. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Darkness404 (1287218) on Sunday January 03, 2010 @02:29AM (#30629818)
    ...But that is assuming your wireless carrier doesn't mess with VoIP. While I don't think T-Mobile would (heck, they even supported unlocked iPhones for free!) other carriers might not be so forgiving AT&T, Verizon
  • by abigor (540274) on Sunday January 03, 2010 @02:38AM (#30629880)

    Games? I don't play them on a phone, but a lot of people sure seem to.

  • by dafing (753481) on Sunday January 03, 2010 @05:03AM (#30630456) Journal
    Im not hearing many good things about Android...a phone is perhaps the most important gadget you rely upon, believe it or not, you can live without your computer! It only takes an hour or so to completely reinstall a computer operating system, or you can just buy a new one off the shelf if it dies.

    But a phone, if it dies when you are stranded somewhere...its life or death. I've grown attached to my phones, funny to think that ten years ago I didnt actually have a cellphone. But now, the thought of being away from it literally creeps me out, "have I gotten a call?", "does someone need me?" etc.

    I was actually a little scared to get a smartphone, I thought there must be so much more to go wrong with my phone. My iPhone has never crashed in its basic Apple programmed duties yet, I'm hoping it stays that way!

    Its seriously not acceptable to have a glitchy phone, in the same way I wouldnt accept a buggy GPS unit. I've been in situations before when my phone has literally saved my life, Im not going to risk it with what appears to be a seriously unstable OS.
  • by JSBiff (87824) on Sunday January 03, 2010 @10:39AM (#30631576) Journal

    "You apparently never studied RF physics."

    Not much, not in depth. Only a little bit, while studying for an Amateur Radio Technician license. But, enough to know that the following statement isn't completely accurate:

    "88.1 mHz to 107.9 mHz requires a much smaller antenna than anything in the gHz-plus range."

    I call BS on that. The length of the antenna that is required is *inversely* proportional to the frequency, because the length of the antenna is a function of the wavelength of the frequencies being tuned. You can have antennas that are approximately 1/4 wavelength, 1/2 wavelength, or 1 wavelength (I suppose it's possible to design an antenna which is some other fraction, but in ham radio, those seem to be the most common lengths).

    So, IIRC correctly, wavelength is derived thusly: Wavelength is the distance the radio wave travels (at the speed of light) in one cycle

    C = 299 792 458 m / s
    f_1 = 100 Mhz = 100 * 10^6 cycles / s
    f_2 = 1700 Mhz = 17 * 100 * 10^6

    L_1 = C/f_1 = 299 792 458/(100 * 10^6) = 3 m / cycle

    L_2 = C/f_2 = 299 792 458/(17 * 100 * 10^6) = 0.176 m / cycle

    So, I don't know why you're going on about antenna size. A cell phone has to have an antenna, *anyhow*, and neither the T-mobile or AT&T cellphones have giant antennas, so that should be reason enough to dispel your argument about the antenna. The only question, really, is the tuner circuitry. Perhaps a 200 or 300 Mhz range really is too much range to pack into one cheap radio chip?

  • Re:Ok.. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by whisper_jeff (680366) on Sunday January 03, 2010 @11:48AM (#30631950)

    Better display and better hardware than the iphone as well. To be honest, this sounds like a winner.

    Sorry, but I've heard this argument before in discussion about the iPod. 1,001 times before. Every time I hear it, it clearly tells me the commenter just doesn't get it. You clearly do not understand why the iPhone is successful. Here's a tip: the iPhone wasn't the best hardware when it came out. It's never been the best hardware. There's always been phones with superior hardware offerings. Yet it still is an enormous success. Figure out the reason for that "yet" and you might realize why your "better hardware" point is absolutely meaningless.

    Or, to put it more bluntly, this phone might be a damn snazzy phone and absolutely kick ass in a lot of ways but it won't be an iPhone killer.

  • by metamatic (202216) on Sunday January 03, 2010 @03:09PM (#30633456) Homepage Journal

    I have an N800, and I'm familiar with Maemo. It has a lot of fairly basic deficiencies. For example, there has been a bug open for several years about the fact that it's impossible to set your preferences for date format. That's a bit of a killer for me, trivial as it may seem, as I use ISO format everywhere, and the last thing I need is my phone and organizer using a different format from everything else.

    I've also been displeased with Nokia's lack of continuing support for older devices. When I went through the hell of reflashing my N800 for the 2008 OS release, Nokia said that would be the last reflash needed, as they had added a proper package manager. In fact, it was the last reflash needed because they dropped support for older hardware and told everyone to go buy an N900.

    Then there's the fact that the windowing toolkit on the N900 is a dead end, due to be replaced by Qt in the inevitable N910--which you will no doubt have to buy, because they won't offer an OS update for the N900.

    No, sorry, but Nokia does not fill me with enthusiasm.

Nobody said computers were going to be polite.

Working...