OnePlus One Revealed: a CyanogenMod Smartphone

One plus One revealed? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-23 07:00 · Score: 2, Funny

42 I guess?

Re:One plus One revealed? by Defenestrar · 2014-04-23 07:22 · Score: 5, Funny

I see you've dealt with Verizon billing before too.
Re:One plus One revealed? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-23 09:35 · Score: 1

Obligatory link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2isSJKntbg

Too good to be true? by schnell · 2014-04-23 07:00 · Score: 3, Interesting

$300 for the 16 GB model and $350 for a 64 GB model? Knowing what Samsung charges for comparable devices, and knowing how much better economies of scale it has, this sounds exciting but just a little too good to be true.

--
"95% of all Slashdot .sig quotes are incorrect or completely fabricated." -Benjamin Franklin

Re:Too good to be true? by ArcadeMan · 2014-04-23 07:07 · Score: 3, Insightful

If we can buy a single 32GB Micro SDHC card for under 20$USD and 64GB for 40$USD at Amazon.com, I'd say that almost all companies are totally ripping us off when it comes to built-in device storage.
I'm guessing it costs them around 6$USD for 32GB and 12$USD for 64GB flash storage ICs since they buy millions of them.

--
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
Re:Too good to be true? by EmagGeek · 2014-04-23 07:08 · Score: 4, Informative

It's being sold direct by the Chinese manufacturer:
OnePlus
Unit B 9/F. Lockhart Centre
301-307 Lockhart Road Wanchai
Hong Kong Central
Hong Kong
Cutting out markups by US retailers can only lower the final consumer price. Units will ship directly from China most likely, and most US consumers will be surprised when they receive bills from the shipper for US Customs clearance. It's unlikely they will be able to get away with checking the "Gift" box on the customs forms for 10 million phones.
Re:Too good to be true? by EmagGeek · 2014-04-23 07:10 · Score: 4, Interesting

MicroSD uses a cheap n-wire serial interface. Embedded FLASH, especially that which is used for XIF, is parallel and much much faster, and more expensive owing to the larger packages with higher numbers of pins for parallel interfaces.
Re:Too good to be true? by Agares · 2014-04-23 07:13 · Score: 1

Usually the markup on things we buy can be pretty high. Sometimes it can be as bad as 200%-400% no joke.
Re:Too good to be true? by Andy+Dodd · 2014-04-23 07:18 · Score: 1

It is.
That's why they have their ridiculous invite system to deal with the lack of availability.

--
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
Re:Too good to be true? by ArcadeMan · 2014-04-23 07:22 · Score: 4, Interesting

Maybe that's a problem waiting to be fixed? Not everything needs extremely fast storage and I'm guessing the biggest storage capacities demanded by some people are caused by audio, video and photos. Since digital cameras can now record full HD video and use Micro SDXC cards, I'd say that one way to lower the cost and increase the capacity at the same time would be to include both "slow" and "fast" storage.
Something like Project ARA could give the choice to users. Add a cheaper unit that contains 256GB of slow storage and 16GB of fast storage or add a more expensive unit with 64GB of fast storage only. The OS would be able to decide for itself if a storage is fast enough for a given task (JPEGs and AACs go to the slow storage, the apps go in the fast storage, etc).

--
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
Re:Too good to be true? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2014-04-23 07:23 · Score: 2

I certainly wouldn't doubt the use of non-upgradable internal storage as an effective price discrimination and margin padding tactic; but there is the issue of flash and controller quality.

If you are running something nearly the weight of a full OS (and a RAM constrained one that spends a lot of time killing processes and trying to reload them before anybody notices), you want good performance from your flash and controller (consider the user happiness that the first gen Nexus 7 created before it gained TRIM support and the flash was fragmenting and I/O going to hell). That costs more per gigabyte, more in line with what a decent SSD would (which still isn't all that much, these days; but it's a bit steeper than a basic SD/SDHC card).

If you just want bulk mostly-read storage, lousy flash doesn't matter nearly as much.

Unfortunately, there really isn't a terribly elegant way, and mobile OSes tend to adopt the 'the filesystem doesn't exist if we don't show it to you' theory of UI design, in any case (unless you have onboard/SD to serve as an obvious boundary) to present multiple flash subsystems of nonuniform performance to the user, even if some of them really would be better off with 16GB of bat-out-of-hell flash and 128 or 256 of cheap as chips stuff for their media storage and playback.

Maybe we'll see some of the stuff designed for server and SAN use, with the assorted designs for using faster devices to increase the overall performance of a larger pool of cheaper storage, make it down to phones at some point; but until that happens, non-uniformity is unlikely to be a crowd pleaser.
Re:Too good to be true? by bberens · 2014-04-23 07:28 · Score: 1

Bear in mind that the LG Nexus 5 is only $350. I'd assume the Nexus 6 is coming soon (about the time this phone might get wide-spread availability) and will come in at about the same price point.

--
Check out my lame java blog at www.javachopshop.com
Re:Too good to be true? by EmagGeek · 2014-04-23 07:34 · Score: 1

For accessing sequential data, serial interfaces do pretty well. You send an address once, and just keep on clocking out (or in) high speed serial data and the flash controller in the card increments the address automagically.
The problem comes with XIF implementations that are highly random, and change access addresses often. That is not fast on a serial flash where address setups take a long time.
Re:Too good to be true? by ArcadeMan · 2014-04-23 07:43 · Score: 2

As I said in another of my comments, I think "slow storage / fast storage" would be simple enough, with the OS able to know that it must store apps in fast storage and media in the slow storage.
Call it "Apps storage capacity" and "Media storage capacity" if it helps, the typical user doesn't need to know or even care why there's two kinds of capacities if the end result is more media storage for a lower price tag.

--
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
Re:Too good to be true? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-23 07:45 · Score: 2, Informative

It's being sold direct by the Chinese manufacturer:
OnePlus
Unit B 9/F. Lockhart Centre
301-307 Lockhart Road Wanchai
Hong Kong Central
Hong Kong
Cutting out markups by US retailers can only lower the final consumer price. Units will ship directly from China most likely, and most US consumers will be surprised when they receive bills from the shipper for US Customs clearance. It's unlikely they will be able to get away with checking the "Gift" box on the customs forms for 10 million phones.
I've bought plenty of merchandise from Chinese manufacturers ($1000+ per shipment) and never had to pay any unexpected customs charges, everything was paid in the shipping/handling fees.
Re:Too good to be true? by Andy+Dodd · 2014-04-23 07:51 · Score: 4, Interesting

The Nexus 5 is subsidized by Google so that it's sold nearly at cost or possibly even below it.
Google's business model here is that it gets people into the Play Store ecosystem, which is where Google really makes their money on Android.
OnePlus has no such business model, which is why they're limiting access to the device via their invite system.
One additional worry bead about this price point is that it means they're likely not funneling much money to Cyngn (Cyanogen, Inc) to support this device. For various reasons (mainly, the Cyngn guys being notoriously difficult to work with), Cyngn-backed devices get little to no community input on CyanogenMod builds.
As an example of what happens when you don't pay Cyngn much for a device, see the Oppo N1. Once Cyngn got what they wanted (experience with taking a device through the GMS certification process), they deallocated most engineering resources for the N1, which has since then received minimal level of support effort from Cyngn. The end result is stuff like location services being broken for 2 months straight in CM11 nightlies. Nearly everyone who bought the CM edition of the N1 switched to Omni, which is maintained on that particular device by three guys (disclaimer: I'm one of them) in their spare time. That's how badly Cyngn deprioritized the device - three guys in their spare time are investing more into suppporting the device than cyngn is. (Admittedly, we're making better use of our time too - see below.)
I expect users of the OnePlus One will see the same with the next Android version beyond 4.4 on the OnePlus - the team at Cyngn take the "no bug reports against nightlies" rule VERY seriously, and the results of that show in the quality of nightly builds that are maintained by them. (Many of the community-supported devices are supported by maintainers who have a thread on XDA, where they'll hear if a device has a major issue. The end result is that most people have a high expectation of quality even from nightlies due to the "community maintainer pays attention to what's going on" workaround, but you won't see that from Cyngn-backed devices.)

--
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
Re:Too good to be true? by emag · 2014-04-23 07:52 · Score: 2

Doubtful, according to the FAQ. At least, I'm hoping the warehouses mentioned are, based on the initial countries of availability, in North America, Europe, and Asia.

--
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." --H.L. Mencken
Re:Too good to be true? by msauve · 2014-04-23 08:06 · Score: 4, Informative

"MicroSD uses a cheap n-wire serial interface."

Uh, no. While it's true that SD cards offer backwards compatibility with MMC, modern cards transfer using a 4 bit wide parallel bus, and it's not nearly as simple as the SPI mode. With regard to your argument, have you ever looked at the flash chips in an SD card? Last I checked, they use the same memory dies as the "embedded" packages, and add the cost of an SD controller and more complex packaging. On the host side, there's the cost of an SD controller (although that's probably "free" with the SoC) and socket.

More specific to the original point, if a phone already has 16G of flash, the cost of upping it to 64G is minor - the parallel interface you mention is already there, and the difference in packaging costs between 16G and 64G chips is likely zero.

--
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
Re:Too good to be true? by bill_mcgonigle · 2014-04-23 08:08 · Score: 1

$300 for the 16 GB model and $350 for a 64 GB model? Knowing what Samsung charges for comparable devices
Yes, but the recent build estimate based on tear-down for the S5 was $255 or so.
That gives these guys in China almost a hundred bucks, which is a good margin for any business. Samsung is just making money hand-over-fist, but there's plenty of long-tail to profit in.

--
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Re:Too good to be true? by richtopia · 2014-04-23 08:22 · Score: 2

Keep in mind that teardowns of the S5 put the manufacturing cost ~256USD. While this does not take into account a lot of costs like design, if the OnePlus One is selling at zero profit to gain market share they could with similar specs to the S5.

http://www.gadgetcluster.com/2014/04/it-takes-only-256-for-samsung-to-produce-a-galaxy-s5-handset/
Re:Too good to be true? by drachensun · 2014-04-23 08:47 · Score: 5, Informative

In the USA customs on phones and similar mobile computing devices is 0%. Unless they come from Japan and have a 16 bit or larger CPU, then its something outrageous like 200% which I assume is some ancient 1980s calculator tariff thats still hanging around. If you do not require a formal entry, typically there are no customs duties or charges at all. Formal entry is not required for packages sent by mail carrier with a value $1500, unless they are in a special category like munitions, produce, etc, etc. Even with a formal entry this category doesn't have any duty but your customs agent will typically charge a % for handling the paperwork. DHL used to charge me 0.25% I think, its been more than I year though so I can't remember exactly. This isn't true for most western countries, the EU has VAT and local sales tax, Canada has a national sales tax, many other countries have crippling duties. In short, drop shipping to the USA is not a problem and won't add duties. I used to do a formal entries of this kind of merchandise about once a month when I had this going www.pengpod.com .
Re:Too good to be true? by buswolley · 2014-04-23 08:52 · Score: 1

Chinese spying?

--
A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.
Re:Too good to be true? by TubeSteak · 2014-04-23 08:55 · Score: 3, Insightful

and the difference in packaging costs between 16G and 64G chips is likely zero.
I never would have pegged the price difference between 16GB and 64GB as $50.
That means every other phone out there is practicing enormous and arbitrary price discrimination by jacking up the cost of storage.

--
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Re:Too good to be true? by Carewolf · 2014-04-23 09:01 · Score: 4, Insightful

I never would have pegged the price difference between 16GB and 64GB as $50.
That means every other phone out there is practicing enormous and arbitrary price discrimination by jacking up the cost of storage.
Well Duh! Why do you think Apple for instance doesn't allow SD cards in their phones?
Re:Too good to be true? by Carewolf · 2014-04-23 09:03 · Score: 2

MicroSD exists in many different speeds. They use the same microcontroller as the embedded flash, and can be just as fast if using similar chips (can in fact be faster if your phone has cheap internal flash).
Re:Too good to be true? by Threni · 2014-04-23 10:22 · Score: 1

Chinese quality? Remember those shitty cheap Chinese Android tablets running Android v2.7.2 etc, or the mp4 players that had been hacked to report 64gigs of ram but actually held 4gb?
I look forward to exercising my uk consumer rights with people who speak English as a 3rd language.
Re:Too good to be true? by jrumney · 2014-04-23 11:59 · Score: 1

While mobile phones might use some such flash for the bootloader and OS, the bulk of that 64GB storage is eMMC, which is basically an SD card without the plastic casing.
Re:Too good to be true? by TubeSteak · 2014-04-23 12:11 · Score: 2, Insightful

Well Duh! Why do you think Apple for instance doesn't allow SD cards in their phones?
I assumed it was because they didn't want to compromise on their museum quality designs.

--
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Re:Too good to be true? by 4wdloop · 2014-04-23 12:16 · Score: 1

It has little to do with cost of flash.
It's about maximizing total profit averaged across all units sold. If they only had 64G model they would have loose many sales due to much higher price point (say they would have to sell it for $400).

--
4wdloop
Re:Too good to be true? by Chibi+Merrow · 2014-04-23 12:42 · Score: 2

A truly "free" OS would not have a "monopoly" market place for apps
Well good thing I can install alternative app stores on my Android phone, then.

--
Maxim: People cannot follow directions.
Increases in truth directly with the length of time spent explaining them
Re:Too good to be true? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2014-04-23 13:07 · Score: 1

Oh, I'd certainly be in favor of such a feature, and I'm a little surprised that none of the 'throw things at the wall until some of them stick' Android vendors seem to have tried it; but I'm just not wildly optimistic. On the low end, they just use junk, on the high end they love that SKU tiering ability, and none of the mobile OS vendors seem particularly enthusiastic about the fact that local storage even exists, since it inconveniences their assorted 'cloud' nonsense and sometimes adds little slots to the otherwise sleek-looking handsets.
Re:Too good to be true? by mjwx · 2014-04-23 14:09 · Score: 1

Well Duh! Why do you think Apple for instance doesn't allow SD cards in their phones?
I assumed it was because they didn't want to compromise on their museum quality designs.
Nope, it's because it would give the user too much choice and as we all know choice is baaaad.

If an Iphone user had to pick between 4 memory sizes, their heads would explode.

--
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Re:Too good to be true? by flyingfsck · 2014-04-23 20:34 · Score: 1

The problem is that video requires two orders of magnitude more storage than audio, so including a separate tiny slow storage device for audio would make it more expensive.

--
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
Re:Too good to be true? by strikethree · 2014-04-23 22:10 · Score: 1

Link to your project page please? Obviously, searching for Omni alone will not return what I want. Omni Cyanogen seems to be returning some results. I will eventually find your project but a link would be nicer. :)
(I use CyanogenMod but I dislike portions of it.)

--
"Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
Re:Too good to be true? by strikethree · 2014-04-23 22:12 · Score: 1

Never mind. Omni Rom was sufficient. Thank you! I always appreciate work (even the work done by the CM team). I am glad you are writing roms.

--
"Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
Re:Too good to be true? by zyzko · 2014-04-23 23:34 · Score: 1

This has been used already by Nokia in Symbian devices and also on N900 (Maemo).
Granted, memory might have been even more expensive then (even relatively to requirements on what is considered much) and this could have been seen as a "smart choice" and not so surprisingly what happened was that Nokia would squeeze the fast "application" memory to a bare minimum, and it left users complaining that their "C-drive" is full on their mighty 16 GB device with 13 GB free. No premium manufacturer concerned with user experience today would do this (unless they can get away with it transparently and hide the fact from the end user) .
Re:Too good to be true? by AmiMoJo · 2014-04-24 00:02 · Score: 1

Android devices have had this since the early days. You can move apps from internal memory (fast) to your "SD card", which doesn't have to be a real SD card (it can be more internal memory).

--
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Re:Too good to be true? by bingoUV · 2014-04-24 17:44 · Score: 1

Trademarking low positive integer numbers beats design patenting rounded corners, I guess.

--
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.

impressive specs by etash · 2014-04-23 07:01 · Score: 1

Does anyone know what's the name of the company or who's behind it ? I have this feeling there must be some giant behind this new face.

Re:impressive specs by EmagGeek · 2014-04-23 07:07 · Score: 1

OnePlus
Unit B 9/F. Lockhart Centre
301-307 Lockhart Road Wanchai
Hong Kong Central
Hong Kong
Re:impressive specs by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-23 07:10 · Score: 1

Does it matter? All of them are equally fucking crap. Give me one with open source software (including firmware in all radios) and we can start talking.
Re:impressive specs by quarterbuck · 2014-04-23 07:28 · Score: 1

They have a "careers" page on their website and all the jobs are in Shenzhen. They have two caucasian looking guys on their employee website, but they could be from Hong Kong for all I know.

--
http://slashdot.org/submission/1062723/Cheap-mobile-data-plan?art_pos=2
Re:impressive specs by mythosaz · 2014-04-23 08:14 · Score: 1

They have two caucasian looking guys on their employee website, but they could be from STOCK PHOTOGRAPHY for all I know.
There we go...
Re:impressive specs by Ralph+Wiggam · 2014-04-23 08:50 · Score: 1

Who do you expect to write radio firmware for free?
Re:impressive specs by Blaskowicz · 2014-04-23 10:46 · Score: 2

It's not even that, who will pay for the certification of it with every FCC-like agency, and how can you possibly go through that process every time you build it or change a single line of code?
And even if that were possible : no, they won't let you have a user-modifiable SDR that operates (receive/transceive) on the GSM/LTE/3G frequencies.
To the original AC : get a HAM radio license and play on your alloted or unlicensed frequency slots. (what does HAM mean by the way?, I'm thinking of the stuff that's a bite like bacon)
Re:impressive specs by amiga3D · 2014-04-23 11:23 · Score: 1

The manufacturer? Shouldn't hardware come with open firmware? If we didn't eat shit continuously they wouldn't feed it to us.
Re:impressive specs by tepples · 2014-04-24 09:16 · Score: 1

Data communication on licensed radio bands and free software mix poorly. By the time the software patents on a given air interface have expired, the licensed carriers have all moved to a newer generation of air interface that packs more customers onto the same spectrum.

Oh Em Gee! by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-23 07:05 · Score: 1

*drool* I used CyanogenMod to get hotspot capabilities with my last carrier, since I PAY FOR THE CELLULAR CONNECTION and I should be able to use it when I want it. I also used to to get rid of CRAP I didn't want like nascar and football apps.

This is awesome!

*drools some more*

Now if we could only get a carrier that let you buy a phone and just pay them for service....

Re:Oh Em Gee! by Minderbinder106 · 2014-04-23 07:34 · Score: 1

You mean like AT&T or T-Mobile? http://www.att.com/shop/wirele... http://www.t-mobile.com/bring-...
Re:Oh Em Gee! by emag · 2014-04-23 07:40 · Score: 1

Closest I can come in the US is T-Mobile pre-paid plans. My wife and I switched our phones to it after "test driving" the service with our Nexus 7 (2013) tablets for a few months. Even with double the devices that we had on AT&T, we cut the monthly cost in half...

--
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." --H.L. Mencken
Re:Oh Em Gee! by ynp7 · 2014-04-23 09:26 · Score: 1

You can bring your own phone on all T-Mobile plans. Where have you been for the past year?
Re:Oh Em Gee! by Virtucon · 2014-04-23 09:36 · Score: 1

Use SimpleMobile, H2O Wireless etc. They have better plans and no stench of pink lock-in.

--
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
Re:Oh Em Gee! by emag · 2014-04-23 10:06 · Score: 1

Right here. Why? Did I not make it clear that we were testing the coverage of the T-Mobile network with our tablets before we switched our phones over?

--
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." --H.L. Mencken
Re:Oh Em Gee! by emag · 2014-04-23 10:07 · Score: 1

Lock-in is difficult on unlocked Nexus devices in a pre-paid situation.

--
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." --H.L. Mencken
Re:Oh Em Gee! by Virtucon · 2014-04-23 10:11 · Score: 1

Yeah that's why I use SimpleMobile (TMO Network) and H20 Wireless (AT&T) and unlocked and rooted phones. No more contracts for me and it's been that way for nearly 3 years now.

--
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
Re:Oh Em Gee! by JustNiz · 2014-04-23 10:13 · Score: 1

I for one read your first post as implying it specifically had to be a prepaid plan.
Re:Oh Em Gee! by Thantik · 2014-04-23 12:36 · Score: 1

You're joking, right? T-Mo has a $30/month unlimited data plan, and H20 has a $30/month...500mb data and unlimited talk? Who on fucking earth with a smartphone, actually uses it to TALK anymore? Give me my fucking data.
Re:Oh Em Gee! by Virtucon · 2014-04-24 01:36 · Score: 1

Uh how about those where fucking T-Mobile doesn't work which if you're in BFE Kansas it doesn't. Last time I checked it wasn't working well in NYC either. T-Mobile's network when it does work and you have coverage is fine but for us that move around a bit, we have to either go AT&T or H20. H20 is an alternative if you don't like AT&T's policies and bullshit but still like their network.

--
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"

...and you can't buy one by MetalliQaZ · 2014-04-23 07:09 · Score: 1

At least not yet. Still unknown as to when it is going on sale, I believe. Also you will not be able to buy one from Verizon in the US. Not sure about other carriers but I sorta doubt it. Cool to see a phone ship with Cyanogenmod, though.

--
"Here Lies Philip J. Fry, named for his uncle, to carry on his spirit"

Ooh! Pick Me! by VorpalRodent · 2014-04-23 07:10 · Score: 1

The answer is two.

--
Take it to the limit, everybody to the limit, come on, everybody fhqwhgads.

Project Ara? by ArcadeMan · 2014-04-23 07:10 · Score: 1

Is Project Ara too new, that's why they're not using it?

--
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins

Re:Project Ara? by Immerman · 2014-04-23 11:58 · Score: 1

Modularity usually comes at a price. I'm hopeful that we can begin to move towards such a device, but it will almost certainly be more expensive up front than an equivalent unified device. If nothing else you have the added cost of the the dozens of little interconnects to deal with. The long-term cost savings come from incremental upgrades, but I have my doubts as to how well it can get established in a market where most people are accustomed to continuously buying a new, heavily subsidized phone on a regular basis. The market is starting to change, but it's going to take a while.
And then of course there's the issue of how gracefully does it handle being dropped and having the CPU module come disconnected for a moment? Or can you reliably prevent such an occurrence? A unified device potentially offers far more durability. Of course you could also make the CPU/memory/battery combo a unified, or at least far more durable, interconnect as well.
And finally, to answer your question: Yes. The Project Ara MDK is currently only in version 0.10. You'd have to be mad to base a commercial product on it at this point.

--
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Re:Project Ara? by Immerman · 2014-04-24 01:30 · Score: 1

That's true, slap a case over it and the modules are unlikely to go anywhere, though without being able to find any concrete information on the physical data interconnect I can't say much about the risks of momentary signal and power loss. And I bet you those electro-permanent magnets don't come cheap.
I'd mostly agree about not caring about gracefully handling being dropped, except... are you 100% sure that that Very Important Meeting and Phone Number you added to your schedule (and nowhere else) has actually been saved to flash and not still only stored in RAM since the calendar app is still running in the background? Beyond that I suspect actual work is very rarely done on a phone, and I really don't care much if my Angry Birds progress gets lost.

--
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.

easy by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-23 07:11 · Score: 1

move to europe...

Re:easy by compro01 · 2014-04-23 07:12 · Score: 1

Or Canada. Even Bull and Robbers offer BYOD plans.

--
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
Re:easy by compro01 · 2014-04-23 07:50 · Score: 1

No. Accurate rebranding for Bell and Rogers.

--
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
Re:easy by tepples · 2014-04-24 09:25 · Score: 1

It's not just the BYOD plans, as even AT&T has started to offer those to keep customers from jumping ship to T-Mobile. It's two things: automatically getting a monthly data plan added to your voice and text plan when the carrier detects that your SIM is inserted into a smartphone instead of just blocking data service, and automatically getting a tethering rider added when the carrier detects that your device is connecting to hosts deemed "PC-only", such as hosts involved in desktop operating systems' update mechanisms.

Gotta hand it to them by danknight48 · 2014-04-23 07:11 · Score: 1

The video is simply stunning, really grabbed my attention and filled the information void inside of me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

A clean phone with Cyanogen mod straight from purchase, yes please!

I'd dump my iPhone for one of these... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-04-23 07:13 · Score: 1

but why are all these nice Android phones so bloody big. What about those of us who want a 4" or smaller phone? I don't personally wear giant or baggy pants and do not want to carry a phone in a bag or dreaded belt clip.

Re:I'd dump my iPhone for one of these... by Dracos · 2014-04-23 07:23 · Score: 1

Furthermore, what about those of us who want--nay, require--a hardware keyboard? I don't give a rat's ass about gestures or voice recognition, but I do want to type on real buttons while my entire screen is visible. Such things are no longer being developed, which is why I still have my Epic 4G. In the 3 years I've had it, it has has been connected to WiMax (yeah, it's a Sprint pre-LTE device) for a total of about 4 minutes, because there never was WiMax coverage where I live, but I still have to pay a stupid $10/month data surcharge.
Re:I'd dump my iPhone for one of these... by csumpi · 2014-04-23 07:56 · Score: 1

Not sure if you got the memo, but iPhones will also be bigger soon.
Re:I'd dump my iPhone for one of these... by Archangel+Michael · 2014-04-23 10:34 · Score: 1

Because Most People HATE itty bitty keys on phones. You might like them, but I'll never go back to a physical keyboard.
Generally speaking once you figure out Swype (Swiftkey or similar), you'll also never go back. I can type nearly as fast as a regular FULL size keyboard on my Android Phone.And for short messages it is even better than mashing who knows how many keys trying to type on microscopic keys.
Or ... you know ... you could just Google for Sliding Keyboard case for your phone ...

--
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Re:I'd dump my iPhone for one of these... by jonwil · 2014-04-23 11:40 · Score: 1

I have a Nokia N900 and LOVE the keyboard.
Re:I'd dump my iPhone for one of these... by Zynder · 2014-04-23 11:49 · Score: 1

Well you've met one today: ME. I hang on to my Droid 4 just for this very reason. There is no lost screen real estate since it slides out from behind it and the keyboard is soldered directly to the motherboard (much to my dismay) so it doesn't really make the phone any thicker than it was already gonna be. Maybe a millimeter or 2 max. They are solid plastic keys with great feedback- not those shitty rubber ones from an 80s calculator that you're referring to. The only complaint (and it really isn't a complaint) is that after 3 years of heavy constant use, the keyboard lettering is flaking off and I can't really change them. The battery is also soldered in but it's still charging great after 3 years. I'll solder a new one in if I have to.

As far as sucky and cramped I must say "you're doing it wrong!" These keyboards are thumb keyboards. I think I actually type faster on them than a standard qwerty. YMMV of course but your opinion and mine are diametrically opposed. Swipe and screen keyboards are completely useless to me.

Give me a physical keyboard, and I'm sold by barlevg · 2014-04-23 07:25 · Score: 2

Hell, considering no flagship phone has sported a physical keyboard in years, I'm likely sold anyway. I was seriously debating getting a Nexus 5, but I actually prefer Cyanogenmod over stock Android.

Re:Give me a physical keyboard, and I'm sold by vux984 · 2014-04-23 08:30 · Score: 1

Stuff like this has existed for a while for various flagship phones.
http://ca.mobilefun.com/38058-...
Re:Give me a physical keyboard, and I'm sold by barlevg · 2014-04-24 00:50 · Score: 1

I'm fine with this as a solution, but the S3 is hardly a flagship any more, and I haven't seen a version for the Moto X, HTC One or Nexus 4/5 (and I will never buy another Samsung after my horrible experiences with the Galaxy Relay--essentially an S3 with a keyboard).

Re:Nice toy by nitehawk214 · 2014-04-23 07:26 · Score: 3, Funny

What kind of "work" do you do on a phone?

--
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust

Here's the problem by slashmydots · 2014-04-23 07:28 · Score: 1

This is starting to change with just a couple exceptions but for the most part, here's the situation in my city. I can choose from the CDMA carrier Verizon, CDMA carrier US Cellular, CDMA carrier Airfire, CDMA carrier Cellcom, CDMA carrier Sprint, or several other CDMA carriers. Oh and then there's the GSM carrier, AT&T but who's stupid enough to go with that pile of shit that they call a company. CDMA phones have to be built for a carrier and that's the end of it. So for buying just "a phone" your choices are GSM or GSM. That means 100% AT&T, which is never going to happen. So basically nobody in this town can buy this phone unless they're stupid enough to be an AT&T customer.

That said, somehow we just got an HTC One M8 from Cellcom with a SIM card. No idea how they did that but apparently agreements are being made. So except for the fact that there goes any remote hope of getting coverage more than 2 miles from a major highway (in Wisconsin), that's a step in the right direction. But basically if you bring in a "blank" phone and say activate it and any CDMA carrier, the answer is no.

Re:Here's the problem by sanosuke001 · 2014-04-23 07:36 · Score: 1

I'm thinking of switching off Verizon for similar reasons after this phone announcement; CDMA phones are usually fucked with by Verizon because they're custom. I've never had reason enough to leave until now. It looks like it'll support T-Mobile networks and their LTE is passable where I live. Verizon's LTE is spotty at best anyway most places I go so why the hell not? Great phone, no bloatware, I'm intrigued.

--
-SaNo
Re:Here's the problem by richtopia · 2014-04-23 08:31 · Score: 1

Have you investigated the virtual network operators? Cricket was just bought by ATT and will remain relatively independent, but borrow their towers.

But yes, I agree, whenever a new phone comes out that looks exciting I think how it does not help me, although the Samsung S5 is coming to Virgin Mobile so I may move to that depending on price.
Re:Here's the problem by idontgno · 2014-04-23 08:35 · Score: 1

Came here to say this.
"Nice phone. Good luck in the US of A getting any carrier to activate it and let you use it. But hey, at least it's a small wifi-only tablet with theoretically access to cell data."
I suppose it'll work out OK in the more communications-civilized* regions of the world.
*In other words, places where regulatory capture hasn't occurred and customers have more rights than livestock.

--
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.

Re:And As Usual... by ProzacPatient · 2014-04-23 07:32 · Score: 1

...No card slot, no keyboard, no daylight readable screen, and therefore no sale.

Why do companies insist on copying the same lack of features of the big-name manufacturers while still calling themselves "revolutionary?" It's just another clone phone, the Toyota Camry of boring copycat "me too" featureless blank slates that already flood the marketplace.

Yawn.

No microSD card slot? A non-removable battery? Into the trash it goes.

I was a little disappointed when I found out that you had to be invited to have the option of buying one but I wasn't aware they had gotten rid of the microSD slot and removable battery so I guess I'll be looking at the Galaxy S5 instead even if I had an invite. For the life of me I don't understand why people consider a non-removable battery (and batteries are very prone to failures) to be a feature; I like to have spares in case I go somewhere charging is not possible or convenient or in the more likely case the original battery loses its ability to keep a charge like I've experienced with two different Li-Ion batteries.

No Qi? by emag · 2014-04-23 07:44 · Score: 1

Wireless charging (preferably via Qi, as I have several Qi chargers between home & work) seem to be the only thing I'm not seeing listed in the specs.

Still, it's been a while since I got excited about a phone, and I told myself that if something cool came out, November would be a good time to upgrade my N4.

--
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." --H.L. Mencken

Re:No Qi? by Midnight_Falcon · 2014-04-23 09:13 · Score: 1

I don't see it listed in the specs but I also don't see it listed as not being there. I agree, I have an N5 and use wireless charging at my desk, and especially in my car ($40 Qi-charging vent-mounted dock is a godsend) -- so while the rest of this phone seems pretty awesome, I'd lament the loss of Qi.
Re:No Qi? by emag · 2014-04-23 10:05 · Score: 1

Absolutely. I'm back and forth from my desk all day, and like to keep my phone & tablet batteries topped up, just in case I need them. I started to worry about the usable lifetime of the micro-USB jack, so switched over to Qi at work exclusively.

--
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." --H.L. Mencken

Sounds like the Techdy Basic Bear by Paco103 · 2014-04-23 07:44 · Score: 1

Remember the $200 Android phone? Seems like they took pre-orders, but as far as I can tell never delivered. What are the odds this is the same kind of vaporware?

Re:Nice toy by Kjella · 2014-04-23 07:48 · Score: 5, Funny

Astroturfing Microsoft on websites, duh...

--
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings

No SD card? by csumpi · 2014-04-23 07:54 · Score: 1

No SD card? That won't kill my flagship phone.

4-inches to freedom by nowsharing · 2014-04-23 07:54 · Score: 2

After having owned a Galaxy S3 for a year, I'm ready for the return of smaller phones. I've been waiting for prices to come down on used GS4 Minis. However, if they released a OnePlus with a 4" screen, I'd order it immediately.

A phone configured specifically for CyanogenMod is a killer feature in my book. My next phone will have to be much smaller, lighter, and thinner than 5.5" unfortunately. Any suggestions?

Re:4-inches to freedom by PixetaledPikachu · 2014-04-23 17:22 · Score: 1

After having owned a Galaxy S3 for a year, I'm ready for the return of smaller phones. I've been waiting for prices to come down on used GS4 Minis. However, if they released a OnePlus with a 4" screen, I'd order it immediately.
A phone configured specifically for CyanogenMod is a killer feature in my book. My next phone will have to be much smaller, lighter, and thinner than 5.5" unfortunately. Any suggestions?
If you want a flagship phone then Sony Xperia Z1 Compact will probably suit you http://www.sonymobile.com/glob... a 4ish inc phone with Snapdragon 800

Re:And As Usual... by hawguy · 2014-04-23 07:54 · Score: 1

...No card slot, no keyboard, no daylight readable screen, and therefore no sale.

Why do companies insist on copying the same lack of features of the big-name manufacturers while still calling themselves "revolutionary?" It's just another clone phone, the Toyota Camry of boring copycat "me too" featureless blank slates that already flood the marketplace.

Yawn.

No microSD card slot? A non-removable battery? Into the trash it goes.

I was a little disappointed when I found out that you had to be invited to have the option of buying one but I wasn't aware they had gotten rid of the microSD slot and removable battery so I guess I'll be looking at the Galaxy S5 instead even if I had an invite. For the life of me I don't understand why people consider a non-removable battery (and batteries are very prone to failures) to be a feature; I like to have spares in case I go somewhere charging is not possible or convenient or in the more likely case the original battery loses its ability to keep a charge like I've experienced with two different Li-Ion batteries.

While I don't necessarily consider a non-removable battery to be a "feature" (though maybe it is if manufacturer claims that it lets them create a thinner phone are true), I never removed the battery in my Galaxy Nexus after almost 2 years of use, and while the Nexus 5 battery is "non-removable", that only means that it'll take 20 minutes to change the battery if it fails, it's really not that hard to open the phone. I already carry a USB battery pack for recharging other USB devices, so I don't really need to be able to change batteries on the fly.

Given the choice between a MicroSD card slot and a removable battery, I'd opt for the MicroSD, since I like to load up movies for long trips and would love to be able to just pop in a 64GB MicroSD card with dozens of movies rather than downloading them on the phone.

Re:Nice toy by bobstreo · 2014-04-23 08:04 · Score: 1

What kind of "work" do you do on a phone?

Probably Bing searches

Re:And As Usual... by bobstreo · 2014-04-23 08:07 · Score: 1

...No card slot, no keyboard, no daylight readable screen, and therefore no sale.

Why do companies insist on copying the same lack of features of the big-name manufacturers while still calling themselves "revolutionary?" It's just another clone phone, the Toyota Camry of boring copycat "me too" featureless blank slates that already flood the marketplace.

Yawn.

No microSD card slot? A non-removable battery? Into the trash it goes.

I was a little disappointed when I found out that you had to be invited to have the option of buying one but I wasn't aware they had gotten rid of the microSD slot and removable battery so I guess I'll be looking at the Galaxy S5 instead even if I had an invite. For the life of me I don't understand why people consider a non-removable battery (and batteries are very prone to failures) to be a feature; I like to have spares in case I go somewhere charging is not possible or convenient or in the more likely case the original battery loses its ability to keep a charge like I've experienced with two different Li-Ion batteries.

Is there a real need for an SD slot when you have 64GB of storage available?

Re:And As Usual... by Kjella · 2014-04-23 08:17 · Score: 1

For the life of me I don't understand why people consider a non-removable battery (and batteries are very prone to failures) to be a feature; I like to have spares in case I go somewhere charging is not possible or convenient or in the more likely case the original battery loses its ability to keep a charge like I've experienced with two different Li-Ion batteries.

Well, I can't speak for the failure rate but my iPhone 4 is now 3.5 years old and during Easter I used it a lot, even after a day of heavy use I still had 20% battery left. Today it's at 67% after a 2 hours of GPS tracking. For daily use it's still fine and I'm guessing will be fine for years to come. For weekends and vacations away from a charger I'm considering getting a battery pack - compared to the original 1420 mAh battery you can get a 7000-10000 mAh external charger for cheap. You put it in your backpack or luggage, plug it in where you sleep at night even if that's a remote cabin or a tent in the wilds. Or for that matter just turn off the "smart", if I kill data traffic it'll last very long as a dumb phone as I've done that abroad due to cost. Basically as long as the battery works it's not really a problem.

--
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings

Re:Nice toy by Cley+Faye · 2014-04-23 08:31 · Score: 1

What kind of "work" do you do on a phone?

Probably Bing searches

But Bing is only for porn... oh.

Re:Nice toy by richtopia · 2014-04-23 08:33 · Score: 1

Tether my laptop

Re:And As Usual... by richtopia · 2014-04-23 08:38 · Score: 1

I used to think that reliability was also a reason for the non-removable battery, however the new Samsung S5 claims to be certified for dust resistance and water to 1m.

For the daylight readable screen I've never seen any phone with one (or ebook reader or tablet for that matter), so I suspect there is just a lack of technology. We've seen prototypes and demos, but there may just not be high volume manufacturing in place for these screens.

Critical work. by mmell · 2014-04-23 08:40 · Score: 2

But only when I'm not at home or at work, and only when I've forgotten to bring both my laptop and my tablet (with bluetooth keyboard) with me. In short - times when I've cracked a duh-lithium crystal by exceeding duh-factor eight.

Incidentally, my phone and tablet both run Android - and the tablet is only marginally better than the phone at actually doing anything productive. Even with BusyBox and a decent SSH client, the OS and interface just aren't optimized for much beyond gaming, entertainment and basic connectivity (at least, to me).

Re:And As Usual... by compro01 · 2014-04-23 08:41 · Score: 1

Is there a real need for an SD slot when you have 64GB of storage available?

3 words : 4K video recording.

It's an excellent way to watch your storage fill up at about 7 megabytes per second.

--
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time

Re:And As Usual... by ProzacPatient · 2014-04-23 08:42 · Score: 1

Is there a real need for an SD slot when you have 64GB of storage available?

Now this is purely speculation but your comment made the thought cross my mind; perhaps some manufacturers omit SD card slots to give people incentive to upgrade to more expensive models rather than doing something like buying a 128GB microSD card and putting it into a smaller GB or 16GB model.

No SD slot == No thanks. by JustNiz · 2014-04-23 08:45 · Score: 2

No SD slot == No Thanks.

I'm frankly surprised not many other people here seem to be all over the lack of an SD slot.

I like having my entire music collection, my entire photo library and 1 or 2 movies with me just in case. I also like being able to use my phone as a USB stick if I need to. ...and in case anyone suggests it, storing it all in the cloud just doesn't cut it.

Re:No SD slot == No thanks. by dark_requiem · 2014-04-23 09:47 · Score: 1

Wow, I actually didn't notice that until I saw your post. Total deal breaker, which is tragic, I was all about this phone up until the moment of realization. I constantly walk around with at least 2 64GB cards in my wallet, Get a phone with large internal storage, keep all my apps on the internal, have bulk data and media on the cards. Without a slot, my entire mobile storage strategy goes right out the window. This seems like an incredibly foolish design decision, and one that will turn away a large part of the phone's potential market, namely people like me who actually store lots of data (video, mostly, people always trip when you connect your phone to their TV and start playing quality HD movies instead of the trifling low-bitrate shit they're used to from Netflix and the like). The ones most likely to miss this feature are probably the same kind of folks who've been playing with Cyanogenmod for years, too (again, me). And seriously, what would a slot have done to the price of the phone? I'd happily pay the extra to have an SD slot.
Re:No SD slot == No thanks. by JustNiz · 2014-04-23 10:05 · Score: 1

Just to let you know, no Google/Nexus phones have SD slots either. That's another range of phone models to avoid.
I did read somewhere that it was actually a (very retarded) conscious decision by Google to not have SD slots on their phones, the intent being to force you to store everything in the cloud and stream it as-needed instead. I guess the moron who thought of that one didn't even consider how people would watch a DVD or do anything else while in-flight or anywhere out of cell range, or the added load/cost that would put on your data plan.
I guess they also didn't consider many people were smart enough to think about that ahead of time.
Re:No SD slot == No thanks. by vux984 · 2014-04-23 10:19 · Score: 4, Interesting

I'm frankly surprised not many other people here seem to be all over the lack of an SD slot.
For $50 bucks more you get the 64GB model, and forget about it.
What do you need an SD slot for exactly? Do you routinely SWAP cards? Maybe you do.. but I NEVER have. If it had an SD slot, I'd buy a 32GB or 64GB card and then forget about it.
So buying a 64GB phone... amounts to the same difference for me.
I like having my entire music collection, my entire photo library and 1 or 2 movies with me just in case
This seems contrived to be an amount of data designed to fit precisely more than the 64GB built in yet be less than the 128GB you can add to, for example, and S5.
I mean, why only 1 or 2 movies? Why not all of them? And just your photos, not your hundreds of hours hi def home movies?
Is it because if you wanted your 500 DVD rips, then even a 128GB sd card won't meet your needs?
Or is it just that you need precisely 128GB of storage; and if a phone came with 128GB of storage but no SD slot, what then? Would it meet your needs or not?
Re:No SD slot == No thanks. by JustNiz · 2014-04-23 10:40 · Score: 1

Sorry whatever is left over from 64gb after system and apps have taken their chunks wont cut it for me.
I also like having my stuff on a totally different and removeable media for several reasons:
1) I can completely fill up my SD card with my crap without also worrying about putting my phone system or apps out of storage space, because they use the internal memory no the SD card.
2) Its easier to see exactly what you have if you keep your media on the SD card, as its the only thing on there, whereas the phone's internal storage is filled up with all sorts of crap from the system too.
3) I can transfer large files/lots of data to/from my phone a lot quicker by removing and using the SD card directly, than using a USB connector via the phone, which would be the only choice for internal memory.
Re:No SD slot == No thanks. by Archangel+Michael · 2014-04-23 10:44 · Score: 1

The problem with SD slot, isn't with the manufacturers, it is with Android itself. Google as depreciated the usage of "external" storage, because of issues with SD storage. Some are actually good reasons (security), while others are to protect App developers from idiots who want to move apps to SD card.
Read about it here: http://www.androidcentral.com/...

--
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Re:No SD slot == No thanks. by JustNiz · 2014-04-23 11:00 · Score: 1

All Google has done is to force badly behaved apps to stop writing all over SD cards. As far as I understand, this is a good thing with no downsides, unless you happen to be one of the clueless developers that are hacking sloppy apps together.
I didn't see anything in the article that would or should lead to the "deprecation" of SD storage itself, in fact now it is less likely to get trashed by ill-behaved apps, its use should be more supported, not less.
A policy of deprecation of SD, if it exists at all, sounds far more like a marketing strategy that is designed to make/save more corporate money, rather than being actually in the best interest of the users themselves or the actual usefulness of their phones.
Re:No SD slot == No thanks. by Archangel+Michael · 2014-04-23 11:06 · Score: 1

Well, when your app, takes a picture, and puts it on the SD card, and you stop liking the app, and deleted it, and it deletes the photos as well, then you'll understand the issue. Until then, have fun.
I shouldn't have to hook my phone up to a computer to move files around without worry.

--
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Re:No SD slot == No thanks. by vux984 · 2014-04-23 11:08 · Score: 1

I can completely fill up my SD card with my crap without also worrying about putting my phone system or apps out of storage space, because they use the internal memory no the SD card.
You need more than 64GB, and that's fine but you just need more than 64GB... it doesn't really matter if its internal or not does it.
For example, suppose the samsung s5 only supported up to 32GB SD cards. So 16GB internal + 32GB SD card... would that be better than 64GB internal? I seriously doubt it.
2) Its easier to see exactly what you have if you keep your media on the SD card, as its the only thing on there, whereas the phone's internal storage is filled up with all sorts of crap from the system too.
Would you prefer the system's smaller internal storage filled up and unable to install anything new, even though you've got 10s of gigabytes free on the add on card? How is that really better than just having a much larger internal memory to start with? But sure there's a valid argument for phyiscally separate drives too. Hardly a deal breaker though, either way.
3) I can transfer large files/lots of data to/from my phone a lot quicker by removing and using the SD card directly, than using a USB connector via the phone, which would be the only choice for internal memory.
The limiting factor is the SD card write speed, not USB3. Moving it back and forth for speed will steadily be less relevant. Maybe still relevant this generation of phones/computers... probably not for the next.
Re:No SD slot == No thanks. by BradleyUffner · 2014-04-23 11:32 · Score: 2

What do you need an SD slot for exactly?
For getting my data off the phone when I drop it and it no longer turns on.
Re:No SD slot == No thanks. by JustNiz · 2014-04-23 17:06 · Score: 1

>> You need more than 64GB, and that's fine but you just need more than 64GB... it doesn't really matter if its internal or not does it.
You are so badly short of common sense and misunderstanding all my points I'm thinking you must be trolling. Let me try one more time to spell it out:
One big advantage of having a completely separate volume (i.e SD card) for media is that you can even fill up the SD card completely, and still have no fear that the phone will become unstable because the os or some installed app tried and failed to grab a few more bytes of storage, potentially making the whole system unstable.
>> Would you prefer the system's smaller internal storage filled up and unable to install anything new, even though you've got 10s of gigabytes free on the add on card?
OK you REALLY must be trolling here. Are you really setting the same scenario I just described above, and then against all logic and common sense trying to justify that running out of system memory is somehow less likely to happen if you also put all your media on internal memory too?
>> The limiting factor is the SD card write speed, not USB3. Moving it back and forth for speed will steadily be less relevant. Maybe still relevant this generation of phones/computers... probably not for the next.
Rather than try and prove me wrong by just hypothjesising I must be, why don't you actually try it? At least with my Galaxy S3, the write performance difference is factors of 10-100 times slower to store stuff on the SD card via plugging the phone into USB over plugging in the SD card directly into my PC. Presumably the MTP emulation by the phone OS, and/or just having the extra step of a whole other processor (i.e. the phone itself) in between the transfer between a PC and the SD card is what is adding a significant extra latency/performance cost.
Re:No SD slot == No thanks. by JustNiz · 2014-04-23 17:19 · Score: 1

Are you sayting this is a common probem? (I wouldn't know because I've never personally expereinced it or even heard of it until now). Does it only happen if you install the app on SD rather than internal memory?
Re:No SD slot == No thanks. by PixetaledPikachu · 2014-04-23 17:28 · Score: 1

Exactly. No SD Slot = leave it on the shelf. No replaceable battery = keep it for yourself.
Furthermore: No OTG - Thanksalot. There are a quite few very nice USB/OTG Sticks (by LG, Transcend and maybe others) which are _SO_ useful - and that's why I'm never going to buy a phone made by Apple, Samsung and others that have no idea how to make a cool phone for everyday usage! only one more thing that would make me consider a purchase: WATERPROOF! but this one is out of consideration anyway.
Samsung Galaxy S4. Replaceable battery, MicroSD support, OTG support. If you want waterproof too, then the S5 has everything that S4 has, plus waterproofing. The bad news is it's bloody expensive
Re:No SD slot == No thanks. by Archangel+Michael · 2014-04-24 02:42 · Score: 1

The difference is between file systems. Internal storage uses one of the UNIX file systems with extensive permissions available, SD card uses FAT which has none. While one could format SD cards with something other than FAT file storage system, it would become all but useless outside the phone. Android is requiring apps to behave, and it cannot guarantee good behavior on SD cards, because of the file system used there.
It is as much a restriction of FAT as anything. THe best thing the whole Industry should do, is come up with a standard for file systems OTHER than FAT. The problem with a new standard is ...
https://xkcd.com/927/

--
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Re:No SD slot == No thanks. by vux984 · 2014-04-24 05:50 · Score: 1

One big advantage of having a completely separate volume (i.e SD card) for media is that you can even fill up the SD card completely, and still have no fear that the phone will become unstable because the os or some installed app tried and failed to grab a few more bytes of storage, potentially making the whole system unstable.
I understand that.
But with a smaller dedicated system volume you still have to fear that the phone will fill up and become unstable, because its smaller to start with.
The 'advantage' of 2 volumes is offset by the opposite scenario, where the OS and apps are installed on a fixed smaller device/partition may then run out of space despite the fact that there is still a ton of space on the 'media' volume.
The idea that having a separate media volume somehow prevents the system volume from running out of space doesn't really work out if the system volume is that much smaller to start with.
The galaxy s5 has 16GB internal, and can take a 128GB card.
The one can have 64GB internal.
The s5 can have more media, but is stuck with a much smaller system. The one can have less media but can have a lot more apps. Neither solution is better. But the 64GB internal is more flexible, and would be my preferred choice most of the time.
Besides I've got a 3TB western digital live drive + app on the phone. Odds are very good I've got everything I need on the phone, but if I really need a song that isn't, all i need is a wifi connection for a few minutes.
Are you really setting the same scenario I just described above, and then against all logic and common sense trying to justify that running out of system memory is somehow less likely to happen if you also put all your media on internal memory too?
For a lot of people, YES, that is exactly the case. I've know TONS of people over the years who have partitioned their hard drive into system and data partitions and then completely ran out of room on system long before they ran out of space on data.
If they'd had the same amount of space as a single partition they'd have been fine. Hell, if they'd have had half the amount of TOTAL space in a single partition they'd have been fine.
Rather than try and prove me wrong by just hypothjesising I must be, why don't you actually try it? At least with my Galaxy S3,
You are arguing with me about a phone that is now 2 generations old. We're talking new phones and the future here: USB3 (and beyond).
And other than the initial sync/load who cares? Surely you don't re/re your SD card everytime you need to add another 2 dozen new songs to the card or copy the latest 2 dozen photos off it.
Re:No SD slot == No thanks. by JustNiz · 2014-04-24 07:33 · Score: 1

Your logic is all based on the assumption that a phone that supports SD necessarily also has a smaller (read: inadequate) internal space for just apps, when comapred to phones without SD slots.
I don't think that is even close to true. Furthermore for me at least any currently available phone that only has internal memory already isn't big enough for all my needs.
Your example of making too-small partitions isn't even close to being a logical equivalent of having the abiltiy to also plug in an SD card.
>> You are arguing with me about a phone that is now 2 generations old. We're talking new phones and the future here: USB3 (and beyond).
Not as far as I'm concened. My whole point is that I have a 2 generations old phone that nothing newer can compete with, because most don't support SD.
>> Surely you don't re/re your SD card everytime you need to add another 2 dozen new songs to the card or copy the latest 2 dozen photos off it.
No, but if I want to put a couple more movies on it I do. I don't even have that option with any phone that only has internal memory.
Re:No SD slot == No thanks. by vux984 · 2014-04-24 07:58 · Score: 1

Your logic is all based on the assumption that a phone that supports SD necessarily also has a smaller (read: inadequate) internal space for just apps, when comapred to phones without SD slots.
While your logic is all based on the assumption that a phone that supports SD necessarily supports SD cards big enough to hold ALL your media, and has big enough internal storage for your OS to live comfortably.
That is no more an arbitrary scenario than mine is. And that's my point. Your SD card scenario is different, and may in some cases be better, but is just as likely not to be.
I don't think that is even close to true.
And yet the Galaxy S5 really does have only 16GB storage + SD card support*, while this Oneplus one or whatever comes with up to 64GB internal. My hypothetical scenario actually exists.
Which of those 2 memory configurations would you prefer?
I don't dispute that 64GB internal + 128GB SD card support is an even better option, or that 256GB internal would be even better than that.
But if your choice is 16GB + 128GB SD or 64GB internal which would you choose? This is a real choice between real phones.
* yes in theory there is also a 32GB samsung s5... but its not actually available from ANY carriers here so it may as well not exist.
Not as far as I'm concerned. My whole point is that I have a 2 generations old phone that nothing newer can compete with, because most don't support SD.
The S3 only takes a maximum 64GB card. Assuming you bought the 32GB S3, you have a maximum 96GB storage.
There are already 128GB internal memory phones on the market. (Admittedly they are still rare.) But surely that would also be better than your S3, despite not having an sd slot.
Re:No SD slot == No thanks. by JustNiz · 2014-04-24 08:42 · Score: 1

>> There are already 128GB internal memory phones on the market. (Admittedly they are still rare.) But surely that would also be better than your S3, despite not having an sd slot.
No, because its no trouble to carry more than 1 SD card should I ever have the need.
The 128GB ( minus system space) is a hard memory limit with internal-only phones. There is no hard memory limit with a phone that can also take SDs.
Re:No SD slot == No thanks. by vux984 · 2014-04-24 09:41 · Score: 1

No, because its no trouble to carry more than 1 SD card should I ever have the need.
Why not a raspberry pi + usb3 hard drive to give you terabytes of storage in a portable hotspot; all accessible at once instead of having to swap cards to get at different files. And now again your phone has access to effectively 'unlimited' storage, without an SD card.
What scenario are you really envisioning where a bag full of tiny $100 SD cards is REALLY better than a multi-terabyte hotspot/NAS (that you can have with you or leave at home and still access from most places) for under $150?
Re:No SD slot == No thanks. by JustNiz · 2014-04-24 17:02 · Score: 1

Because its retarded to have to carry all that shit about just because a phone doesn't support SD.
Re:No SD slot == No thanks. by vux984 · 2014-04-24 21:36 · Score: 1

Because its retarded to have to carry all that shit about just because a phone doesn't support SD.
Wow, ok... "carry all that shit about" is PRECISELY what I think of a bag of SD cards, with all your media scattered around on them, accessible one at a time.
I guess you missed the part where you can access those terabytes by leaving them at home in most circumstances. Its not like they need to be hanging from your belt next to your onion.
Plus its multiple TERAbytes of available space not GIGAbytes portioned out a 100 a time; so 10s to 100s of times the space for a fraction of the price. So ... there's that.

Re:And As Usual... by Anne+Thwacks · 2014-04-23 09:10 · Score: 2

Is there a real need for an SD slot when you have 64GB of storage available?

Yes - it is about exchangeable/removable storage. Fill a card with stuff somewhere else and put it in your phone. Fill a card with stuff on your phone and take it out - perhaps you don't want your home photos at work or your client's photos at your other client (or your porn ...). Some people have been known to leave mum's basement.

As for you iPhone suckers - you can keep your damn fool metal cases. We like removeable backs and don't give a toss if they are plastic - no one sees them cos the phone is never out of its case - and the phone might get hit by a baseball bat/yacht boom/dropped down the fire escape/shut in the lift/train/car door - yes its true some people actually move about physically in their lives! Really! Its true! And we want to come home and change the battery before going out again. The only advantage of a metal back is that the phone signal can't penetrate it (???)

--
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII

Phone or mini tablet? by wonkey_monkey · 2014-04-23 10:49 · Score: 1

In my book, if you can't hold it and type with one hand, it's more like a mini tablet than a phone. Everyone else at work got the Samsung S3; I got the mini.

--
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.

Re:It's shown with Google Apps, no thank you. by Archangel+Michael · 2014-04-23 10:53 · Score: 2

You obviously do not understand Google "Android" certification process. To be called "Android", officially, you must be certified by Google and have the Play store (and other apps) installed.

From http://source.android.com/faqs...

Google Play is a service operated by Google. Achieving compatibility is a prerequisite for obtaining access to the Google Play software and branding. Device manufacturers should contact Google to obtain access to Google Play.

Other companies have other "stores" (Amazon Kindle is Android, Nook is Android) and do not necessarily use Google Play. And of course you could side load all your apps from your list of "trusted" sites like Nickolai's Android Marketplace if you want. These phones are not "rooted" but are likely to be very easy to root. And I'm sure there will be an ASOP branch you can have, without Google Play services in short order. But chances are, you're already putting Google Play on your ASOP Roms anyways, so ... what is your point again? Oh right, "privacy" ....

--
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.

Re:It's shown with Google Apps, no thank you. by Virtucon · 2014-04-23 11:09 · Score: 1

Actually as an Android Dev I do understand the process and all of my phones/tablets running Android have as much of the Google horseshit removed as possible.
If you want the "Android Compatible" label, you have to sign up to the horseshit. Never mind that your stuff is 100% compatible if you don't have the little blessing and all that comes with it from Google.

While folks might complain about how tightly controlling Apple is of IOS, I'd argue that Google is much more insidious on the shit that they force onto the community.
Play Store is one of those things along with all their bloat search shit. There was another thread today on Slashdot about how much DRM costs in terms of contracts/bandwidth. I'd submit all the horseshit Google tracks on you and your activities is much worse than any DRM related content distribution.

--
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"

How many Slashdot readers want this? by CRCulver · 2014-04-23 11:37 · Score: 1

For a site whose readership is widely associated with desktop Linux, I'm surprised to see so much interest in CyanogenMod. I loved my Nokia N900 and plan on buying a Neo900 phone both for the fact that it runs the same Debian-like system as my big computer and for the feeling of privacy (the cellular modem is separated from the rest of the system). I discovered the world of Cyanogen only after the wife bought a Samsung Android phone and wondered about its upgradeability. Compared to my own phone, Cyanogen seemed to have more of a Windows aesthetic, roughly comparable to getting one's apps from cnet or other dodgy download sites, instead of the more careful, technically detailed packaging, forums and bug reporting systems one finds from desktop Linux distros.

Re:And As Usual... by Immerman · 2014-04-23 12:29 · Score: 1

Hey, my first smartphone was a second-hand 1st-gen iPhone and I'll have you know I *liked* the metal shell, nice and durable so you didn't need any other protective layers clogging up your pocket. I'll admit I never understood the point of putting a protective case around the durable metal shell though. What, are you afraid of scratching up the surface that you'll otherwise never see? That sucker survived way more that it's fair share of abuse without problems and is still going strong, though the battery only lasts a few days on standby now. I suppose I should think about retiring it to always-plugged-in ambient media player soon, though my 3rd-gen iPod with 2-minutes of battery life is still filling that role nicely.

No more of that locked-in Apple B.S. for me though. There was a time when they were so far ahead of the competition that I could justify allowing them to lobotomize my pocket-PC into a "smart toaster", but these days there's no excuse for accepting an actively patrolled walled garden.

--
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.

e-ink and Pixel-Qi by Immerman · 2014-04-23 12:37 · Score: 1

I take it you've never tried an e-ink based reader? Just like ink on paper, and it can be refreshed fast enough to play video(as demoed by various kindle hacks), though color screens are far more expensive than greyscale. But heck, for a sunlight readable screen that doesn't suck power I'd be game.

There's also Pixel Qi, whose screens are quite impressive and integrated into a number of commercial products. The colors tend to be washed out in sunlight, but I'd *happily* settle for a basically greyscale display in the sun that gains color as the backlight starts being effective. I don't understand why we don't see a lot more of their screens around, especially considering that they're specifically designed to be manufactured on a standard LCD production line.

--
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.

Re:It's shown with Google Apps, no thank you. by swillden · 2014-04-23 15:12 · Score: 1

I'd submit all the horseshit Google tracks on you and your activities is much worse than any DRM related content distribution.

What is it that Google tracks?

--
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.

No SD, no removable battery = no sale by WaffleMonster · 2014-04-23 16:13 · Score: 1

Looks really nice yet lack of SD and user replaceable battery is a deal breaker. Would think devices targeting cyanogen crowd would come standard with at least SD slot.

Re:MicroSD and Replacable battery are killer featu by 3.5+stripes · 2014-04-24 01:43 · Score: 1

Bezels man, bezels. How did your spellcheck not fill your screen with red-underlined text?

--

He tried to kill me with a forklift!

Re:It's shown with Google Apps, no thank you. by Virtucon · 2014-04-24 01:56 · Score: 1

You're kidding right?

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/...

http://www.activistpost.com/20...

Android is the tool that Google is using to enable these things in the mobile space. Hooking you in with Google Apps is how the linkage to all these other data collection realms. Do you think it stops with your mobile device how about tracking you in your home now? It's not so much about the government collecting all of this, it's about commercial data collectors mining you for information, your preferences, your contacts, your phone calls etc. to develop a profile of you and your social network. While most would argue that it is "anonymous" in most cases or that it's for "marketing", it's not because these kinds of things erode your privacy and I chose not to be mined in my day to day activities or interactions with others.

--
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"

Re:It's shown with Google Apps, no thank you. by swillden · 2014-04-24 03:47 · Score: 1

Those articles contain nothing but paranoid speculation. Do you have any actual evidence that Google uses your phone to track you without your permission? Android does do location history, which you can turn on or off. Gmail does scan your e-mails to provide targeted ads, which you can choose to use or not. Chrome can track web history, which you can turn on or off. Google Analytics is used by most of the web to track user visits, regardless of the browser you use, but you can opt out of that as well.

If you use an Android phone but opt out of Google's tracking, you won't be tracked. In many cases (e.g. location history and web history) you have to opt in if you want to be tracked.

Google's primary business model is based around using user information to provide targeted advertising, absolutely. However, the company doesn't want to track you if you don't want to be tracked, and doesn't do it surreptitiously. https://www.google.com/goodtok... gives you links to pages that will show you what Google knows about you and let you control it.

(Disclosure: I'm a Google engineer. I don't speak for Google, though, and nothing I post on slashdot -- or anywhere else -- is an official company statement.)

--
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.

Work visa by tepples · 2014-04-24 09:17 · Score: 1

How hard is it for a U.S. citizen residing in the U.S. to learn the language of, and get a work visa in, the country you recommend?

Physical keyboard for gaming if anything by tepples · 2014-04-24 09:33 · Score: 1

I tried playing the demo of the game Pixeline and the Jungle Treasure , a platformer for Android, with the on-screen controls. I couldn't make jumps reliably because my thumb kept missing the jump button. An on-screen control lacks the tactile button edges that my thumb would use to align itself over the control. But when I paired my ZAGGkeys Flex, the control was fine, and I realized that the game was fairly obviously designed for devices with a hardware keyboard. I imagine that a lot of other games in non-point-and-click genres benefit from physical buttons in the same way.

Now that Windows XP is EOL, use UDF by tepples · 2014-04-24 09:44 · Score: 1

There already is a standard, and it is called UDF (Universal Disk Format). Every supported version of Windows can read and write UDF.

Re:Now that Windows XP is EOL, use UDF by Archangel+Michael · 2014-04-24 10:12 · Score: 1

Which format of UDF would you call "universal", Partitioned or unpartitioned? Windows requires the disk to be partitioned. On the other side, UDF only works in OSX when it is used on a full disk (unpartitioned).
Schrodinger's Partitioned disk? Both Partitioned and UnPartitioned at the same time?

--
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.

Microsoft wants royalties for FAT by tepples · 2014-04-24 09:49 · Score: 1

Fill a card with stuff somewhere else and put it in your phone.

If an SD card is meant to be removable, which file system should it use? Windows doesn't support Ext, and Microsoft wants royalties for FAT. There is UDF, but Windows XP can't read and write that without third-party software, and only very recently did Windows XP reach end of support.

Re:It's shown with Google Apps, no thank you. by Virtucon · 2014-04-24 10:07 · Score: 1

So the EFF is a bunch of paranoid speculators?

https://www.eff.org/issues/pri...

What about scanning e-mails in possible violation of wiretap laws? http://www.theguardian.com/tec...

How about the EU, are they a bunch of paranoid people? http://www.bloomberg.com/news/...

How about Google's latest land grab in Chrome, forcing third party developers to put all their apps into Google's Web Store under the guises of making Chrome more secure? Envious of Apple I guess?

Google's business model is making money off of you, you're the commodity so you either go along with it or you just start saying Moo like all the other cattle. I prefer to opt out of Google's practices wherever possible. If that means ripping out Google Search, Maps and other apps that's fine because there are alternatives to them that don't come with all the hidden strings. The whole thread here was based on Cyanogenmod which has provided great ROMs ( I have 6 devices running Cyanogenmod ) without all the bloat and the pure android experience are now creating a phone with, drum roll please, Google bloat and tracking. Sorry, that's not a step in the right direction.

--
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"

Re:It's shown with Google Apps, no thank you. by swillden · 2014-04-24 12:39 · Score: 1

I reiterate that everything I post is merely my own opinion, not an official statement.

So the EFF is a bunch of paranoid speculators?

Yes. That's not a bad thing, mind you. We need people like them being paranoid and very skeptical, ready to call attention to any actual problems. The only issue I have with that EFF page is the implication that Google might sell private data to someone with enough cash. The concern that it's available to government is perfectly valid. Avoiding giving information to Google is one solution; another is to get our overreaching government back under control.

If you choose the former you can still use most Google services. Just opt out of the tracking and Google won't keep the data about you and won't be able to give it to the government.

What about scanning e-mails in possible violation of wiretap laws?

That's done with user permission. Don't want it, don't use gmail.

How about the EU, are they a bunch of paranoid people?

Sometimes. Again, like the EFF that's largely a good thing. Your link doesn't have any specifics, so I can't offer my opinion on in what ways their paranoia is good and where it's excessive.

How about Google's latest land grab in Chrome, forcing third party developers to put all their apps into Google's Web Store under the guises of making Chrome more secure?

"Guise"? Nice try at framing the debate with loaded language.

Anyway, I actually don't agree with that decision either but I think the Chrome team (some of whom I know) were absolutely serious about the basis for their decision. They're not evil, just wrong.

Google's business model is making money off of you, you're the commodity so you either go along with it or you just start saying Moo like all the other cattle. I prefer to opt out of Google's practices wherever possible.

Certainly that's your option and it's one that Google specifically tries to enable.

If that means ripping out Google Search, Maps and other apps that's fine because there are alternatives to them that don't come with all the hidden strings.

This is where you're wrong. There aren't any hidden strings. You can choose not to believe that, of course, but I challenge you to demonstrate evidence of said strings. And I'll point out that the CM developers apparently don't believe that having the Google apps on your device is risky.

Regardless, you're certainly free to use what you like. That's why Android is open source, and why Google tries to ensure (to the degree it has control) that all devices are unlockable and flashable, etc.

--
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.

Re:It's shown with Google Apps, no thank you. by Virtucon · 2014-04-25 03:20 · Score: 1

So EFF, EU and Senate investigations into Google's privacy practices are non-existent and considering that Google is now one of the biggest lobbying concerns in DC I guess that it still can do no evil? Sorry the information is out there, like ignoring "Do Not Track" does anybody remember that one? It's pretty bad when Facebook even calls Google out for ignoring it. Oh wait, how about Google Buzz and the consent decree that went along with that? Sorry Google is a business and the business model it has is to mine users of its services by what they do, who they communicate with and where they go in the world. That's why I opt out, remove their shit and avoid it as much as possible and don't fucking trust little click boxes that presumably turn things off. Do Not Track in Chrome for example is one of those check boxes that didn't work. Today, quite honestly, I fear more from Google than I do the NSA because at least I have elected representatives that I can go after for that problem with NSA and privacy even with the slim chance that I may be able to change what the NSA does. With Google I have a CEO who thinks "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place." That myopic, retarded view of privacy is what's at the heart of why I'm anti-Google because it permeates everything that Google owns or produces. So blithely saying "we don't do that" doesn't cut it because as long as my elected officials, the EU, the EFF and the ACLU are worried about Google, then so am I.

--
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"

Re:It's shown with Google Apps, no thank you. by swillden · 2014-04-25 04:42 · Score: 1

Ah, well, I see from your recent posting history that you're just on an anti-Google tear, so there's really no point in me engaging any further with you.

If at some point you become interested in a rational conversation, let me know.

--
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.

Slashdot Mirror

OnePlus One Revealed: a CyanogenMod Smartphone

143 of 196 comments (clear)