11 replies to this topic

[lostone]

Sorry if this question has been asked but i did try to find it but no luck i have been looking for a new android mobile and was going to get the blade again then i saw the monte carlo.Can not unlock that so thats no good.Then i came across the Huawei U8800 on this site as it happens,so the question is guys is it better than the blade and why and is it worth the extra £££ thanks for your help

[chickenfeeder]

Bigger camera sensor, slightly bigger screen, better build quality from the sounds of it (haven't held one myself) ARM7 processor @ 800MHz (vs Blade's ARM6 @ 600MHz) meaning you have a more advanced processor, more future proof, Flash compatibility amongst other things (also open to more rom options e.g. MIUI a probable future possibility if you're into that kinda thing).

Only advantage of Blade at the moment is availability of Gingerbread but that is only temporary. Definitely worth the extra cash. Having a Blade at the moment I would get the U8800 if I had the spare cash.

[chickenfeeder]

And regarding the Monte Carlo as that only has an ARM6 as well (albeit @ 800MHz) you're again limiting yourself UNLESS you really want a 4.3in screen on a budget. Still I'd go for the U8800.

[Banner]

I've recently got a U8800 as an upgrade from the Blade.

The build quality is several divisions above that of the Blade.
Its very fast for a budget phone too £173 from CarPhoneWarehouse is definitely the best price that I've found.
The camera is sooo much better than the Blades
I can go a full day with a fair bit of twittering and surfing throughout the day and still have around 30 to 40% this is down the the battery being slightly bigger (1500mah) and slightly better (Li-Po not Li-Ion)

Surfing is a much more pleasurable experience .
i haven't noticed any lag on it either even with a s*** load of apps.

Definitely worth the money

Trust me you'll love the blade but after a few months you'll be hankering to upgrade to something faster and smoother.

[XphX]

I would go for the u8800. The blade is already noticeable slower than the expensive phones (like the galaxy s2 for example). The u8800 on the other hand still performs great in comparison to expensive phones. There is just one thing the u8800 cannot do very well: Playing N64-games; the hardware is just too slow. But i do not know if the expensive phones perform this task better.

Your u8800 will last longer as the blade, you get the best value for your money. There is no phone for that money that has a screen with 3.8" and a fast cpu. There is the defy, yes. But it has a widespread failure and therefore it is not recommended to be bought.

Besides: Screens smaller than 3.8" are really, really small. 3.8" fits nicely in my pockets and is reasonably big.

[That-Guy]

I upgraded from the Blade to the U8800 and haven't looked back.

We will have OFFICIAL CM7 soon enough too, love this phone.

[urbanbumpkin]

XphX, on 13 August 2011 - 08:50 PM, said:

I would go for the u8800. The blade is already noticeable slower than the expensive phones (like the galaxy s2 for example). The u8800 on the other hand still performs great in comparison to expensive phones. There is just one thing the u8800 cannot do very well: Playing N64-games; the hardware is just too slow. But i do not know if the expensive phones perform this task better.

Your u8800 will last longer as the blade, you get the best value for your money. There is no phone for that money that has a screen with 3.8" and a fast cpu. There is the defy, yes. But it has a widespread failure and therefore it is not recommended to be bought.

Besides: Screens smaller than 3.8" are really, really small. 3.8" fits nicely in my pockets and is reasonably big.

Hope you could advise. I'm looking at getting either the U8800 or the Samsung Galaxy Ace.

Would you still recommend the U8800? The spec looks good but it's a lesser known brand (and I haven't seen an in depth review for the the U8800.

Does anyone know when the carphone warehouse is looking to get them back in (currently showing no stock!!!)

[urbanbumpkin]

XphX, on 13 August 2011 - 08:50 PM, said:

I would go for the u8800. The blade is already noticeable slower than the expensive phones (like the galaxy s2 for example). The u8800 on the other hand still performs great in comparison to expensive phones. There is just one thing the u8800 cannot do very well: Playing N64-games; the hardware is just too slow. But i do not know if the expensive phones perform this task better.

Your u8800 will last longer as the blade, you get the best value for your money. There is no phone for that money that has a screen with 3.8" and a fast cpu. There is the defy, yes. But it has a widespread failure and therefore it is not recommended to be bought.

Besides: Screens smaller than 3.8" are really, really small. 3.8" fits nicely in my pockets and is reasonably big.

PS Is the Huawei pronounced 'waay-way'?

[Pelemane]

urbanbumpkin, on 14 August 2011 - 09:54 PM, said:

Hope you could advise. I'm looking at getting either the U8800 or the Samsung Galaxy Ace.

Would you still recommend the U8800? The spec looks good but it's a lesser known brand (and I haven't seen an in depth review for the the U8800.

Does anyone know when the carphone warehouse is looking to get them back in (currently showing no stock!!!)

U8800 is a lot better than Galaxy Ace. Ace has 320×480 display and it's poop. And Aces processor is 800MHz ARMv6 so Huawei wins.

urbanbumpkin, on 14 August 2011 - 09:57 PM, said:

PS Is the Huawei pronounced 'waay-way'?

Wikipedia says it is pronounced as "hwa way" in English.

[XphX]

urbanbumpkin, on 14 August 2011 - 09:54 PM, said:

Hope you could advise. I'm looking at getting either the U8800 or the Samsung Galaxy Ace

Of course get the U8800. The Samsung is more expensive, at the same time the hardware is old already (very, very bad screen resolution). People are still going to buy this rubbish because they do not know about hardware specifications.

[john.smith]

Like XphX said, U8800 is better in resolution (much more refined and detailed). Also U8800 has 2GB internal memory, where thanks to developers at Modaco you can use more than 1GB for apps. In comparison Galaxy Ace only offers 158MB usable capacity for apps.

I think Huawei is worth buying if you don't mind it being a tad bigger. I am not sure what you mean by in depth review, but because of Sofiz I have a chance to play with U8800, Galaxy S II, ZTE Blade and a few more devices and compare them directly. All I can say is U8000 is a respectable player in the market.

Hope these help!

urbanbumpkin, on 14 August 2011 - 09:54 PM, said:

Hope you could advise. I'm looking at getting either the U8800 or the Samsung Galaxy Ace.

Would you still recommend the U8800? The spec looks good but it's a lesser known brand (and I haven't seen an in depth review for the the U8800.

Does anyone know when the carphone warehouse is looking to get them back in (currently showing no stock!!!)

[urbanbumpkin]

john.smith, on 17 August 2011 - 07:00 AM, said:

Like XphX said, U8800 is better in resolution (much more refined and detailed). Also U8800 has 2GB internal memory, where thanks to developers at Modaco you can use more than 1GB for apps. In comparison Galaxy Ace only offers 158MB usable capacity for apps.

I think Huawei is worth buying if you don't mind it being a tad bigger. I am not sure what you mean by in depth review, but because of Sofiz I have a chance to play with U8800, Galaxy S II, ZTE Blade and a few more devices and compare them directly. All I can say is U8000 is a respectable player in the market.

Hope these help!

Thanks for all of the advice, all I need to do is find some where that's got one in stock.