I'm happy I'm free of Samsung now after returning my Galaxy S.
It cost me 599€ euros (16gb, no operator lock) and it sucked. The screen is simply amazing but the lag was terrible. Felt like throwing it at a wall sometimes. It is fast but had these bubbles of lag that never went away.
Having to perform lagfixes on something out of the box was pathetic too.
Also, the GPS was totally useless, not for navigation, not for tracking, useless.
No wonder Samsung is delaying this as the problems are huge. I feel sorry for all the SGS owners.
I bought my galaxy S some 2 weeks back, and i was shocked to see it running on "Froyo" when i had expected "Eclair"... a week later, my cousin bought a Galaxy S from the same store, but his thing was running on android 2.1... am i lucky or was some guy at samsung messing around with phones and gave me 2.2???
i will wait no problem,,,and where is the main forum for i9000.samsung company.
TC, 22 Sep 2010If you do not mind some lagging and do not mind a Quadrant score below 1000 then you can insta... moreHTC Desire is OK too, but Galaxy S is a bit better (has 802.11n), SLCD and SuperAmoled are both very good. With the trio HTC Desire with 3.7 inch, Galaxy S at 4 inch, and Desire HD at 4.3 inch (all with Froyo) , there is no excuse now for not buying an Android phone:). And no reason to buy a Nokia whatever.
Anonymous, 22 Sep 2010Looks like they have no intention of bringing 2.2 to Galaxy S, only feeding disinformation to ... moreWhy they would do that? The leaked test version works just fine. They might want to improve some things (maybe related with Java), I'm sure they are not held back by a serious bug.
i seriously hope this hasnt effected the uk update release date, the end of this month is far away enough as it is!!!
TC, 22 Sep 2010Super-LCD is better than Super-Amoled because it azcyually has a noticable higher real resolut... moreCould be, than you look very deep inside, but for watching as a simple user - s amoled looks much more attractive. Also sLCD seems to pale before the sun.
The best screens at the moment are: supper amoled, the second - retina display.
Galaxy s runnin 2.1 is still the shit, 2.2 oviously gonna be better, i can wait
TC, 22 Sep 2010Super-LCD is better than Super-Amoled because it azcyually has a noticable higher real resolut... moreYou don`t know what you are talking about, S Amoled is currently the best , and it`s the future( Oled is also the future of Tv screens) ,lcds will slowly start to disappear once the cost of oleds start to go down.
Looks like they have no intention of bringing 2.2 to Galaxy S, only feeding disinformation to keep sales on.
2.2 comes with the next device this is how Samsung is doing the business.
Robert, 22 Sep 2010HTC's sLCD sucks in compared with supper Amoled. Super-LCD is better than Super-Amoled because it azcyually has a noticable higher real resolution because some super-amoled colour pixels are much bigger than other pixels, and the colours on super-amoled are fake and even though black is really black on super-amoled the problem is that many other dark colours also become black, beautiful but fake almost animated not real.
OMW it's the death of Android *shock* *fake drama*. Amazing how the fan boys only say this for certain other manufacturers.
If you do not mind some lagging and do not mind a Quadrant score below 1000 then you can install a fully functional Froyo in the beta-version xxjph. Lagfix removes lag and add speed but has some bugs with 2.2.
In late october customers will have gone bored with Galaxy S, just as they now have gone bored with X10 and its promised but still not seen 2.1.
HTC Desire is definetly a much better phone than Galaxy S, (if you have a network provider that is compatible with the "buggy" 3G-connection software of HTC Desire).