POST A COMMENT

46 Comments

Back to Article

  • blackmagnum - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    Beat that iPhone 6! This year Android& Co. will offer superior hardware at a cheaper price. What other innovations could Apple have waiting in the R&D department? Reply
  • hojnikb - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    They dont "need" innovation. They have a large user base, that is willing to buy anything they sell.
    That being said, they still make hell of a great phones. Yes, they are expensive, but so are other highend phones.
    Reply
  • jjj - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    The iphone is not high end.
    A 4 inch low res screen (320-ish ppi is low now) with scores of missing features (microSD, wifi ac, wireless charging, dual SIM, NFC, IR blaster and many more) is not high end even if the SoC is fast. I'll give it upper mid-range but not high end.
    In fact if the iphone had any other brand on it and would be priced at 300$ it would barely sell a million units in a quarter. Nobody sane actually wants a 4 inch low res screen unless it a very cheap device and all they can afford.
    Everybody is so lost in the marketing BS that the don't dare to look at the actual product. It's toyish tiny and a huge amount of missing features for an outrageous price.
    Or if you want to look at the actual BOM, high end devices have 30-40% higher BOM.
    Reply
  • hughlle - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    However you could also argue that it more like a built for purpose racing car. It does not have air conditioning, or a radio, or surround sound, or cruise control, but it goes like a bat out of hell. Such a racing car would still be considered high end. Many of those features are features that android flagship devices are lacking. Reply
  • Sushisamurai - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    I would like to differ, as I'd rather have fast internal NAND at higher capacities than a microSD, and hence willing to pay $200 extra apple premium for that 64GB. Wireless charging would be nice if it was more efficient (like 85%), I also don't need dual SIM (if I travel, I'd just use the new SIM). I haven't had a huge use case for NFC not IR blaster.

    AC wireless would be nice though for my wifi transfers, but that would also increase end user cost for a compatible router.

    In the end, I haven't switched to android purely because I want a "high end" phone that can be used with one hand and has high capacity NAND. Plus, comparatively, I like the camera accuracy, color reproduction, and the calibrated screen
    Reply
  • hughlle - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    I agree with you. I am very much anti-apple, but am mature enough to still accept that they make good products for the masses. It's not like they're selling lemons. The idea of microSD on a phone to me, well i just ignore it, i'll always pay more for the additional onboard NAND. And i tried NFC once to transfer a single photo between my phone and tablet, won't be doing that one again. Wireless charging, worthless to me, i'm not that much of a lazy bugger.

    In short many of these things are gimmicks, they are not prerequisite to being high end.
    Reply
  • lilmoe - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    I like the way Apple vertically integrates the crap out of their products (mostly in software). Samsung, for example, can absolutely do the same, they can collaborate more among their branches (Samsung Mobile, Semiconductor, and Samsung Electronics) and create a more tightly integrated and optimized platform even with Android (just like their SSD solutions). They have top notch and industry leading parts, but the software is holding them back, and Samsung Mobile has absolutely no problem buying lots of competing off-the-shelf parts from others, making a seamless experience among their devices that much harder. I'm not totally sure which would ultimately save them more money (since that's what most companies ultimately want), but since they sell hundreds of millions of devices a year, I'd believe that manufacturing all of their own parts would be more beneficial and cheaper in the longer run since the volume would be so high..
    They started out in the right direction with the OG Galaxy S and the S2 following that (albeit their shortcomings), but since then were focused more on brute force specs and marketing, making potentially useful features nothing more than gimmicks. I bet they'll do better at this point cutting funds on advertising and instead focusing more on developing a well integrated top of the line platform that is recycled the following year for mid-range (or minis), and recycled yet again for lower end the year after. They can have as many models as they want with those recycled platforms, except with better software, seamless integration, faster updates, and a much better user experience. That's exactly how Apple recycles their platform in iPads, iPods, Apple TVs, and whatever else iOS devices they have.

    Sure, Apple's iOS portfolio is highly overpriced for the R&D and features. But HTC, Samsung and other Android OEMs are not doing their portfolios any favor IMHO. Other than the particular flagships, they're just building disposable junk that isn't worth much the following year, and are forgotten the year after.
    Reply
  • Assimilator87 - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    "AC wireless would be nice though for my wifi transfers, but that would also increase end user cost for a compatible router."

    You'll pay $900 for a phone, but not $100 for an AC router? I'd rather have 64GB of fast internal NAND AND 128GB of microSD storage.
    Reply
  • supgk - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    You're trying too hard jjj... sounding quite desperate scraping that barrel mate.

    The iPhone doesn't need a million gimmicky features like IR blaster or NFC that is very much an "under construction" (remember when Samsung changed NFC chips in the S4 and all older tags broke?) - or microSD that is insecure and can't store apps or google play movies or other DRM media (good luck trying to explain that to users, even to experts)

    Also what do users care about BOM costs... they're not going to tear down their phone into components to sell at their local version of the Shenzhen market, what users really care about is resale price and iPhone trumps there.
    Reply
  • Iconoclysm - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    The iPhone is absolutely high end. You are confusing feature bloat with a quality build. Reply
  • darwinosx - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    ppi is not resolution and the pip is 326. The resolution is 1136 X 640 which on a four inch screen is more than enough and the display quality overall is still better than pretty much any Android phone as is the camera. On a year old device.
    Few Android phones have micro sd and even fewer will because nobody uses it and Google doesn't want it on phones. Ditto wireless charging.
    AC is just now becoming a thing and it will be on the new phones announced in a week or so.
    Build and materials quality also make the iPhone high end as well as cpu, motion coprocessor, other internals, and size.
    The price is the same or even lower than most high end Android phones that have distinctly inferior build and materials quality and are not even close in service and support as well as app election and quality.
    The iPhone 6 will blow any existing Android phones out of the water. It will be fun to watch.
    Reply
  • flamingspartan3 - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    A diplay with a PPI of 326 appears pixelated next to a display with a PPI of 440. Regardless of what Apple says, the iPhone does not have the best display of any phone. That honor goes to the Samsung Galaxy S5. The LG G3 takes better photos than the iPhone 5S and even the Nexus 5 can match it. Having "distinctly inferior build and materials quality" is subjective. Plastic has many advantages over the metal used in the iPhone 5S. Plastic is more flexible, less likely to scratch and usually results in better WiFi and radio performance. The HTC M8 more than rivals the iPhone 5S if if you want metal and other devices like the LG G3 also have metal. Android apps are often times much more flexible than what the iPhone can even hope to offer; an app like Tasker on Android can do things that the iPhone can't even hope to do. The HTC M8, LG G3 and Samsung Galaxy S5, all class-leading Android flagships, offer MicroSD card slots. Reply
  • GC2:CS - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    If you got galaxy S5 and iPhone side by side, you can't even say the iPhone looks pixelated next to it, thanks to the diamond Pen tile matrix samsung uses the actual sharpness difference is 17%, unnoticeable in other words (excluding artifacts).
    iPhone display is very bright, low in reflectivity, has great accurate colors, sufficiently high contrast, great wieving angles and so on. It's more than good enough (quality, not size) for any android user, it's not a dealbreaker. Only area where amoleds crushes LCD's is contrast, but that is apperent only in dark.
    Reply
  • flamingspartan3 - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    The Galaxy S5 gets dimmer, brighter, has better viewing angles, has more accurate colors and is also significantly sharper. Reply
  • flamingspartan3 - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    This video shows the Nexus 5 in comparison with the iPhone 5S's camera.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qp6clWG-b5c
    Reply
  • higgsbosun1 - Sunday, August 31, 2014 - link

    Not pretty much better! “Based on our extensive Lab tests and measurements, the Galaxy S5 is the Best performing Smartphone display that we have ever tested. It has a long list of new records for best Smartphone display performance including: Highest Brightness, Lowest Reflectance, Highest Color Accuracy, Infinite Contrast Ratio, Highest Contrast Rating in Ambient Light, and smallest Brightness Variation with Viewing Angle. The Galaxy S5 has raised the bar for top display performance up by another notch – an impressive achievement for OLED technology!” http://www.displaymate.com/Galaxy_S5_ShootOut_1.ht... Reply
  • supgk - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    Haha let's see this handle Android L/ART runtime in AArch64 with 1GB RAM ... Reply
  • lilmoe - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    Even with the shortcomings in memory, it should handle things better than it currently will. That said, this IS a midrange devices after all... Anything above 2GB on upcoming 64bit flagships running Android L should see a good improvement in performance and efficiency. Reply
  • tipoo - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    Android L actually has features that negate the memory impact of 64 bit, moreso than iOS. Reply
  • hlovatt - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    This isn't the site for people with an axe to grind. If you don't personally want to buy an Apple device then don't buy one. If you have facts then state them and also give the downside of your favoured device. Please don't rant on AnandTech it is a sanctuary were people can have informed discussion, there are plenty of sites were uniformed comment are the norm. Let's keep AnandTech at the top.

    In the case of this HTC phone, it isn't going to win a performance or build quality war against an Apple phone. But it will probably be cheaper, therefore whether the phone is good or not will depend upon its price to performance and price to build ratios. Time wil tell when pricing and performance are known and when Andriod L is available on the phone.
    Reply
  • Iconoclysm - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    Well that's funny, because Apple had 64-bit a year ago as well as a fingerprint sensor that is acceptable enough to actually include on a phone. And this year, you think nothing new is coming? Reply
  • steven75 - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    It is indeed extremely ironic this guy doesn't realize it took Android a full year to catch up with a 64-bit processor Reply
  • GC2:CS - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    Beat in what ? This phone was announced in a rush and I don't see any info about when it will start selling, even then, if the iPhone 6 is "just" worlds third 64-bit phone I don't think Apple can be considered ashamed. I don't know how a quartet of low clocked off the shelf A53 cores can represent superior hardware compared to second generation of fully custom super-wide 64-bit ARM architecture. Reply
  • darwinosx - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    We have been nearing that drivel for years and its no more true now than it ever was. Reply
  • DesterWallaboo - Sunday, August 31, 2014 - link

    Ummm.... Apple iPhone 5s is 64-bit. This is Android playing catch-up. Reply
  • hojnikb - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    Wow, another dissapointing phone from HTC. I bet this is gonna be 250€+
    On the other hand, we have chinse phones based on MTK chipset, which are probobly marginally slower but have far superior screens, bigger battery and display and no bloatware aka sense.
    And they cost half as much.
    Reply
  • Alexey291 - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    Well this IS supposed to be a mid-range phone you know? Reply
  • hojnikb - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    Yeaah.But as i've said, there are other less known brands with far better phones that cost half as much.

    Those companies are really ripping us off. But no one really cares, since most people buy phonse on cotract and dont really see the real price.
    Reply
  • LiviuTM - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    "While it may seem strange that ARMv8 on Android phones is first to appear on a non-Android smartphone" - must bu non-somethin else :) Reply
  • przemo_li - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    Well, insistence on 20nm may explain a bit why custom ARM8 are not here yet.

    But I think that bigger influence have... availability of off-the-shelf designs from ARM coupled with few manufactures who actually sell them unmodified.

    Building something will always take more time vs using ready thing.
    Reply
  • Sushisamurai - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    I keep hearing things about android L. Given its 64 bit nature, are we saying only the OS is 64bit, or are we saying the OS and all apps are 64bit compatible? Cause having 64bit OS with 32bit apps would defeat the whole 64bit push and performance gains... Reply
  • A5 - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    I'd think the OS and the Google Apps will be 64-bit at launch. Other apps will move to 64-bit at a later point, likely whenever they update their design to Material. But you have to switch the OS before *any* apps will switch.

    Apple went through the same thing a year ago and it wasn't really a big deal.
    Reply
  • steven75 - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    It wasn't a big deal because Apple did a lot of planning for it in advance. It's been a year since then, so you'd hope Google did the same in that time, but I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't. Reply
  • Sushisamurai - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    Sorry, I should have clarified a little more - I wonder if it'll be mandatory 64bit for all apps (like apple) or like our x86 platform where u have this "wide" mix of 32bit and 64bit applications that are compatible. Reply
  • aryonoco - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    All apps that are developed using the Android SDK will run in 64 bit mode by default, without developers needing to do anything.

    This is because these apps are all written in Java, and with Android L, they are compiled at the time of installation by ART to the appropriate binary, which if you are on ARMv8, will be 64 bit.

    Unlike iOS, Android developers don't even need to recompile their apps to make them 64 bit.

    The only exception is native apps developed using Android NDK (mostly games). These apps need to be recompiled by the developer to become 64 bit compatible.
    Reply
  • A5 - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    Thanks for clarifying. I'm not an Android (or any mobile) dev, so I don't keep up with SDK news. Reply
  • tipoo - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    Hmm, might be a decent step up from the Moto G/other Snapdragon 400 quad cortex A7 phones. I'd like to see a performance for the CPU and GPU compared to the G. Reply
  • darwinosx - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    What amazing was not mentioned in the ad, I mean article, is that the Android OS itself is not 64 bit so having 64 bit hardware is meaningless. yes I know they are kludging up Android L to be somewhat 64 bit but it is not remotely close the the full 64 bitness of iOS. Reply
  • squirrelboy - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    " As this phone ships with Android 4.4 it's likely that it is running in AArch32 mode only, with AArch64 coming with Android L." Reply
  • extide - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    "yes I know they are kludging up Android L to be somewhat 64 bit but it is not remotely close the the full 64 bitness of iOS."

    Lol, wow, fanboy much? Android L will be fully 64-bit, and it runs on an entirely new runtime (ART vs Dalvik) -- this is no kludge, this is a massive update to the OS, and the whole OS will be 64-bit.
    Reply
  • rpmurray - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    64-bit is a gimmick. Or so the fandroids were saying last year. Reply
  • GC2:CS - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    Of course they were saying that when Apple made a complete 64-bit platform and sold dozens of millions of them, I think is safe to say that there is more than 100 million 64-bit mobile devices by now.

    But when they will get an "64-bit" marketing sticker, without any benefit, suddenly android leapfrogged Apple and it's behind again.
    Reply
  • SirKnobsworth - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    For the moment it is, yes. So are the core count and DPI space races.

    I somewhat suspect that Apple's early entry into the 64 bit arena has less to do with performance or marketing and more to do with making sure the entire app ecosystem is at 64 bit when mobile devices actually start to need more than 4GB of RAM.
    Reply
  • leomax999 - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    Didn't Intel atom had some 64bit enabled flavors? Reply
  • extide - Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - link

    Yes Atom has been 64-bit for a long time. Some of the early Atoms were 32-bit only but even he old Bonnel based ones supported 64-bit in the later versions, and of course all the Silvermont ones are 64-bit. Reply
  • leomax999 - Thursday, August 28, 2014 - link

    So question is if atom had 64bit variants on phone Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now