windows mobile is better then symbian even though n95 work many 3rd party apps only windows mobile 6 has windows live messenger send files photos videos voiceclips !!!!
when will skype video calls
but no 3.5 mmjack output
nokia and sonyericsson where using symbian on some of there phones
now sony ericsoon notice what are the advantages and possibilities !!!! i am impressed my only problem , is the tv out my friends !! tv out like the n95 >
sony has good battery for gsm calls and mp3 playback
but nokia has the best multi task os with symbian and only nokia has that quick menu bouton to see running apps just press and hold it you will see a drop down list on the left side of a symbian phone
unlike windows mobile you have to go to home screan to go see running apps
sony makes excellent camera phones
since the w810i the sony ericsson phones i ve used where nothing compared to any high end phones from nokia
HOPE IT S MADE SOLID (se has screan issues on a couple models)
i wonder what wold i buy besides a n95
tytn II or sonyericsson XPERIA X1
vs htc 7501 or 7510
People used to always say how symbian was really efficient as in you didn't need loads of RAM or CPU power funny how you now see symbian handsets with 400mhz cpu and 128mb ram lol WM does more and uses alot of resources but as symbian get more advanced it will be exactly the same.Neither are efficient
Symbian fans come in here slagging windows .I found a stack of evidence that suggests symbian isn't all that.One of many articles
Symbian poses to be "like Linux, but for cellphones", and Symbian consortium often uses the word "open" to even more pretend that Symbian is good, like clearly Open Source Software must be, due to pure intentions of people who develop it. Symbian also tries to hide the fact, that due to sheer numbers of units sold, Symbian is mainly just Nokia´s tool to combat Microsoft, and not a multipolar cellphone industry initiative. Similarly, contrary to the Symbian propaganda, Symbian OS is not an open source operating system but a closed proprietary system based on an outdated EPOC operating system for PDAs from British company Psion (thus it´s no coincidence that Symbian consortium is located in UK although most developers of Symbian work for Nokia in Tampere city in Finland).
One last thing...
There is no way a N95 will be faster than the X1, not because of the display anyway. 450Mhz processor with WVGA BRAVIA is already faster than the 332Mhz processor with QVGA.
As stated in the specs the X1 is 528Mhz, so along with the WVGA and being BRAVIA powered, the N95 will always be slower in that aspect.
Heh. Sorry, I keep realizing I have more to say. ^__^
I will admit that generally, when comparing two phones with same everything except the QVGA and WVGA screens, the QVGA phone will be faster.
However, I just wanted to make a point that WVGA phones have every possibility of being faster than QVGA phones. After all, the phone's speed always boils down to its processor.
My bad, ended post too early.
I didn't read your part about comparable CPUs. Sorry, haha, the SO905iCS uses a TI-OMAP 2430 processor with PowerVr Graphics.
The N95/N82 uses a TI-OMAP 2420, also with PowerVr Graphics.
The TI-OMAP 2430 clocks around 450Mhz, while TI-OMAP 2420 clocks around 332Mhz.
As for the clocked speeds, the 2430 is obviously superior, but even with a slower processor, the N82 shouldn't lag THAT much behind.
All of NTT DoCoMo top line FOMA phones (i.e. currently 905i) run on WVGA screens (480x864 for SE's, and 480x854 for the other ones like Panasonic, NEC, Sharp, and Fujitsu). All of which run on Symbian's MOAP OS.
All processor stats and info are not shown publicly, but having used them myself, I have noticed no matter how many programs you multitask, whether it be games, music, video, etc., it will not show ANY signs of lag or slowing down.
Name them then!A WVGA screen shows five times more information than a QVGA display.Compare two devices using comparable CPU's one with WVGA display one with QVGA res-so E90 n95.N95 is quite a bit faster
Untrue. There are many WVGA phones that go just as fast or even faster than those with QVGA.
Have you seen a WVGA 16M colours BRAVIA screen? On a 2.7 inch screen which would make sure it's even smoother than a larger screen.
Shut the nonsense. No one likes you.
I think its a great cellular device!I give the features, the look, and the device performance a 10! GO SONY ERICSSON XPERIA X1!!!!
(but really.. i dont even have the phone.. and ive never seen it before in my life.. but this was fun!:])
The X1 in all the videos we are seeing is using the test ROM not the final release version.You can't judge the device yet that said no WVGA phone would be as fast as those with the pathetic QVGA resolution.Since we have been invaded by Nokia users they will know better than anyone how long nokia took to get the n95 upto speed-TWELVE MONTHS AFTER RELEASE
Nokia was into the business of selling oil/foods till 1980's and then it came into business of wireless, where as Ericsson is in wireless field for more than 100 years, sony itself doesn't need any introduction for electronics and its high appeal and quality.
Ericsson and Sony are innovators big time
one small eg of Ericsson invention
Bluetooth tech invented and Patented by Ericsson:-)
So nokia ppl don't consider SE at lower level cheers
this phone is still under development so don't go by any un-authorize inf on battery life or anything, unless untill specified by SEMC
and for all ppl, battery life for any phone frm any company in 3G mode is going to be less
reason:- in GSM operation of TRX/power amplifier is either in 1 slot or max 2/3 slots whereas in 3G mode all 8 slots operate all the time and the transciever is on all the time.
So its the inherent problem of 3G technology of low battery life and if it is HSDPA and HSUPA enabled then its even less.
so stop complaining about anything without knowledge
ha ha ha
Nokia not a single phone has HSUPA
whereas Xperia has HSDPA+HSUPA and not just 1 band quad band UMTS and quad band GSM+EDGE, touch UI, querty keyboard, N82 is nothing in front of xperia
Is it true that this phone is going to be priced over $1000? WOW. I don't think it's worth it. For that price I'd rather get the HTC Athena. Bigger screen with better resolution, and a better web browser too for only around $900. I'd consider this phone for no more than $700.