Not only G900 takes a beating from pathetic nokia fanboys. Even samsung G810 suffers the same.
the ratings are low because nokia fanatics tried sooo hard to take SE phones down. this phone didnt even hit the shelves yet! makes u wonder how people are able to evaluate the phone's performance.
Because, it isn't much better than one SE has out right now. Plus it ain't quadband. POS right there.
From a review i read it said like all other SE UIQ Wi-Fi phones it doesn't support the g-wi-fi standard,but i see the spec sheet here says it does, but this does,that doesn't change the fact that even a gaming phone from NOKIA beats an imaging SE in almost everything except the camera,lets just hope the camera doesn't have the same Green Tint bug as the P1 and W960.
G900 could have been SO much better in my opinion.
i totally agree with ryan!! this phone deserves at least higher than 8.5!
Im clearly disappointed with the sony ericson phones. Why is it that SE phones are weak? No Wi-fi, EDGE, or the signal reception is too slow? I believe with the comment below, not everyone needs touchscreen.
Plus, the N81 has crap camera quality. So what if it records in VGA 30fps? If you have to reduce it to QVGA to make the video look decent it ain't worth a thing.
N81 better in that:
Has a better battery
Wi-Fi b AND g (G900 only b)
16million colour display
A LOT more apps are availbe for it
Supports VGA 30FPS high bit rate videos etc. . . The list goes on. The G900 is running 3yearold hardware and doesnt support or can't run most of the above.
Tell me hoe your lovely N81 is better then this?
the g900 is much better then N81
Don't be so sure,the newer NOKIAs are very power efficient, like the phone im using: Nokia N81. It has a 1050mAh battery and a stand-by time of 420h whereas the G900 has 380h. Also NOT everyone needs a touchscreen.
Im sorry but the only nice thing about G900 is the Camera, and Touch UI but even my N81 whipes the floor with this, SE need to move away from the 220mhz weak CPU, this is why they have a longer lasting battery than some NOKIAs is because SE use slower CPUs, G900 is also missing EDGE, and 3.5mm jack so realy us NOKIA "Fanboys" arent feeling threatend at all by this already outdated phone, although im sure the Camera will be great.
Off-topic:IMO,one possible reason why the rating of this phone is low because some users may have clicked the "vote" button before rating the item since it's default is "5"... Webmaster should change the default to "-" so voters are forced to select a rating before pressing the VOTE! button...
OK... this is the first real improve since K750i. I bet this phone will be cheap for its specs.
- Touchscreen and hardware keys with a good joystick
- Good battery
- Friendly and improved interface
- I've seen better looking SE
- No 3.5mm jack
With any doubt this is a very good phone, surpassing nokias bad battery life, big sizes, high prices and lack of touchscreen.
And I think Nokia fan boys know that, since they did a good job lowering the score of this mobile.
I rather have the LED flash than the xenon flash because the xenon flash can't be use as a torch or flashlight.
and how the heck the G700 has higher rating than the g900? u guys must be sh***ing me. hhahaa
how the heck this phone's ratings are under 8.0? are you kidding me? hahahha