SF is it really that good?

[Guest Rem1x]

Just having dealings with chinese tat

[Guest dav_dako]

Lol, Ronald's got a better body than i remembered

[Guest Teasy]

I dont need to own the phone to see the shortcomings, just view the posts here?

The geezer with 300 phones at 50 yrs will probably know that the average teen makes 50+ texts a day and never has the phone turned off, so this one may be a bit useless?

This phone is for those that are willing to sacrifice battery power to exude that feeling of i got a smartphone for 99£ or wave there willies at the iphone boys?

I dont care either way, was just pointing out the shortfalls of the device as it stands.

I can go on any forum for any product and read about problems, but I'd be an idiot to think that means I know what the product is really like. You find that sort of thing out through either owning the product or doing thorough research into it. All you're doing is looking at any negative post you can see and using them to make generalisations. I mean how can you make such specific comments about things like battery life and especially build quality when you have no first hand experience of it at all?

As it happens build quality is one of the areas I'm most impressed about with this phone, and there's no shortage of things to be impressed about. Battery life isn't the best but its not half as bad as you suggest. But if you'd rather have a Wildfire with an inferior screen, less ram and slower processor for twice the price because you have a phobia of the Chinese then that's your business. Though I'd question whether or not the Wildfire is made in China, probably.

Like I said, I know what the phone does and doesn't do and what its build quality is like because.. I own one. I don't need to make weak assertions based on half truths, guesswork and other people's opinions.

Edited October 21, 2010 by Teasy

[Guest Fok@]

I had a HTC Hero who was declared the best phone of 2009.

The battery was two times worse than SF. The screen had a dead pixels and dust who was getting very easily into the touch screen. As a result, the phone was put into service several times. After one year, the touch screen stopped working. I now have a SF and the battery lasts 2 times longer, WIFI works very well, the construction quality is decent. It is without doubt the best android at that price.

[Guest Raspa]

The Blade is a very good phone for £99, but it isn't as good as some of its fawning fans seem to make out. It certainly has its problems, but for the price I can live with them. Orange have priced it just right IMO, the Blade is the perfect choice for someone who wants a sub-£100 smartphone but who realises it is just a pale imitation of the more expensive devices (that'd be me, then). If you want better build quality and a phone with less problems then I would go with HTC or Samsung (who also have problems - just not as many/as significant).

I certainly wouldn't go with LG.

[Guest AndyHibberd]

Love my blade.

[Guest goods]

so the blackberry wins.

Have a look on the blackberry forums blackberryforums.com, it's full of people complaining about their phones, so the SF wins :P

[Guest Azurren]

Wow.. We have had our issues before but never had we have to resort to pictures :P

[Guest richardyates]

Don't think I've ver been called a geezer before but...

sedj why don't you read what I wrote about battery life before you try to sound like you know what you're talking about. If you don't want to sound like you're still in nappies stop behaving like it

[Guest clonmult]

All these comments on the camera are interesting ....

Yes, you shouldn't expect anything amazing, but its probably the worst camera I've ever had in a phone by a very large margin. I was hoping it would be at least of equal quality to my older Nokia 5230, but it doesn't even come close to the quality of that 2mp fixed focus device.

Regardless of my quibbles with the phone, I'd have absolutely no problems with recommending it to anyone.

[Guest Teasy]

The Blade is a very good phone for £99, but it isn't as good as some of its fawning fans seem to make out. It certainly has its problems, but for the price I can live with them. Orange have priced it just right IMO, the Blade is the perfect choice for someone who wants a sub-£100 smartphone but who realises it is just a pale imitation of the more expensive devices (that'd be me, then). If you want better build quality and a phone with less problems then I would go with HTC or Samsung (who also have problems - just not as many/as significant).

I certainly wouldn't go with LG.

I see no problem with build quality at all and personally have had none of the reported problems, all devices have problems for some people. Obviously its not as good as the truly top of the range HTC/Samsungs (Desire and Galaxy), everybody realises that, its a quarter of their price. But it is as good or even better then Smartphones that go for twice its price.

The Camera is crap though, its the one area where they've really had to sacrifice quality.

Edited October 21, 2010 by Teasy

[Guest tiggerlator]

I sold my wildfire to get the san fran. Wildfire, crap screen, less ram, no gpu, no contest the san fran is better. If anyone thinks the wildfire is better because its got htc written on it, you're fooling yourself.

[Guest dadashi]

have you tried the camery without the back cover? it takes better pictures when it's not covered...

[Guest Teasy]

have you tried the camery without the back cover? it takes better pictures when it's not covered...

Yes actually I did notice this, it is better without the cover, might be worth modding it with a little hole in the cover just over the camera. Its still poor even then in dim light, but definitely better.

Edited October 21, 2010 by Teasy

[Guest ptdborth]

in absolute terms it's pretty good

in relative terms it's fantastic

^My favourite reply..very much sums the phone up :-) Made me smile - well done 'kissofjudas' :P Cheers. Paul

[Guest squirreleater]

Aren't iphones essentially made in china?

This phone is superb, if you don't have the money for a desire (etc) then it is the best you can get- it's a simple as that.

Find another phone as specced as this for similar money, there isn't one.

[Guest laag]

Was considering buying this a few weeks ago when i first heard about it, tbh im glad i didnt as only 3 weeks in all the ugly details are spilling out:

Poor Battery life

Wifi disconnects

Poor video performance ie avi mp4

Poor build quality it is chinese after all

Poor mp3 playback pausing stuttering etc

MMS small picture problem

Camera is rubbish

As the saying goes you get what you pay for

In this case its a phone that needs treating with kid gloves and the ability to ring every last ounce out of the battery by turning everything OFF! :P

I have a Samsung Galaxy S infront of me right now, and been using it since this morning (brother had it delivered to home instead of his uni accommodation so I get to play with it until he decides to collect it :D )

Battery life with Wifi on and going on the internet, games, radio, mp3, videos, etc is about the same as the Blade. Both phones you would need to charge on a daily basis every evening/morning.

My ZTE Blade never disconnects the Wifi. I've been idling on MSN Droid X and it's still signed in and stays signed in.

720x480 h.264 encoded videos play flawlessly. I see no problems. Youtube videos also never lag. The wildfire and LG which are similarly priced have worse CPUs then the blade so video would be worse.

Yes, My only gripe is the MP3. It stutters even when encoded in OGG. The background hiss is absolutely terrible as well.

Almost every phone is made in the far east. iPhones, iPods, etc are made in China.

The build quality is the same as the Galaxy S. The back cover comes off in 1 piece and is a cheap feeling plastic as well. I've dropped the Blade a couple of times since I bought it and all is still well. Product support? The LG GT540 only just got android 2.1 late September and is resistive. I've heard the screen input lags as well. The galaxy is also stuck on 2.1. Infact, Only a few select phone have actually got a 2.2 Froyo Update. Every phone manufacturer right now pretty much sucks for support. The HTC Wildfire is also a joke of a phone. Its an ASDA George brand with a Gucci label stuck on.

Havn't tested the MMS so I cant comment.

Camera is adequate in good lighting. I own a Canon 450D and various other compacts and TBH, every other camera is rubbish after owning a DSLR. The sensor is just too small and too much noise creeps in on both mobile phones and compact digitals. Having a flash wont help either as photos just get washed out with some unflattering white glare. If you can't bounce the flash or have a big aperture, then the camera is rubbish no matter what it is.

I would say no phone under £150 or even £200 is better then the Blade. The 3.5" 800x480 OLED is just a deal clincher, and after playing with the 4" Super AMOLED on the Galaxy S, I would say the screen on the Blade is the minimum you need to run Android or any touch screen OS comfortably (would not like to attempt to use full QWERTY on a 3.2" 320x240 screen, yikes!). I would say the Blade is 80% of what the Galaxy is, but at £79 (Student discount was -£20 off the instore price for some reason, but I'm not complaining :D )

[Guest sedj]

TBH i dont know why i started this thread?

The phone is cheap and thats all that matters, £80-£100 if it dies in 12 month + than what the hell :P

I just needed a phone that would last 24 hour on one charge maybe this is it maybe not ??

[Guest harmohn]

Steve Litchfield of The Phones Show YouTube channel rates the SF No.1 in his top 5 for October; should put your mind at ease :P

[Guest prufrock]

I dont need to own the phone to see the shortcomings, just view the posts here?

The geezer with 300 phones at 50 yrs will probably know that the average teen makes 50+ texts a day and never has the phone turned off, so this one may be a bit useless?

This phone is for those that are willing to sacrifice battery power to exude that feeling of i got a smartphone for 99£ or wave there willies at the iphone boys?

I dont care either way, was just pointing out the shortfalls of the device as it stands.

My son owns a SF and loves it...he's 15. All his mates love it, too. Apparently, they are very impressed with his phone. He had a Galaxy Spica before that.

[Guest DaveyP]

I just needed a phone that would last 24 hour on one charge maybe this is it maybe not ??

If your using it as a phone then the battery is more than capable ...(unless you have lots of friends) however if your playing games / music / using sat nav whilst on walks then maybe any android 'phone' would not be suitable.

[Guest prufrock]

I see no problem with build quality at all and personally have had none of the reported problems, all devices have problems for some people. Obviously its not as good as the truly top of the range HTC/Samsungs (Desire and Galaxy), everybody realises that, its a quarter of their price. But it is as good or even better then Smartphones that go for twice its price.

The Camera is crap though, its the one area where they've really had to sacrifice quality.

What the OP seems to not realise is that ALL phones have issues when they are first released. I own an SGS - it definitely has issues even now (nearly 4 months after being released). Luckily, I've not had the issues a lot of people have, but it's well documented.

[Guest prufrock]

I have a Samsung Galaxy S infront of me right now, and been using it since this morning (brother had it delivered to home instead of his uni accommodation so I get to play with it until he decides to collect it :D )

Battery life with Wifi on and going on the internet, games, radio, mp3, videos, etc is about the same as the Blade. Both phones you would need to charge on a daily basis every evening/morning.

My ZTE Blade never disconnects the Wifi. I've been idling on MSN Droid X and it's still signed in and stays signed in.

720x480 h.264 encoded videos play flawlessly. I see no problems. Youtube videos also never lag. The wildfire and LG which are similarly priced have worse CPUs then the blade so video would be worse.

Yes, My only gripe is the MP3. It stutters even when encoded in OGG. The background hiss is absolutely terrible as well.

Almost every phone is made in the far east. iPhones, iPods, etc are made in China.

The build quality is the same as the Galaxy S. The back cover comes off in 1 piece and is a cheap feeling plastic as well. I've dropped the Blade a couple of times since I bought it and all is still well. Product support? The LG GT540 only just got android 2.1 late September and is resistive. I've heard the screen input lags as well. The galaxy is also stuck on 2.1. Infact, Only a few select phone have actually got a 2.2 Froyo Update. Every phone manufacturer right now pretty much sucks for support. The HTC Wildfire is also a joke of a phone. Its an ASDA George brand with a Gucci label stuck on.

Havn't tested the MMS so I cant comment.

Camera is adequate in good lighting. I own a Canon 450D and various other compacts and TBH, every other camera is rubbish after owning a DSLR. The sensor is just too small and too much noise creeps in on both mobile phones and compact digitals. Having a flash wont help either as photos just get washed out with some unflattering white glare. If you can't bounce the flash or have a big aperture, then the camera is rubbish no matter what it is.

I would say no phone under £150 or even £200 is better then the Blade. The 3.5" 800x480 OLED is just a deal clincher, and after playing with the 4" Super AMOLED on the Galaxy S, I would say the screen on the Blade is the minimum you need to run Android or any touch screen OS comfortably (would not like to attempt to use full QWERTY on a 3.2" 320x240 screen, yikes!). I would say the Blade is 80% of what the Galaxy is, but at £79 (Student discount was -£20 off the instore price for some reason, but I'm not complaining :P )

I own both the SF and the SGS - the battery life on the SGS is better (it's a better, bigger battery!) I would disagree that the SF is 80% of what the Galaxy is, too. The SGS has nearly double the processing power (1ghz compared to 600mhz), for starters. It has 8gb onboard storage, too. The camera on the SGS is much, much better - it can also record in 720p HD. It plays 720p HD too.You really can't compare the two phones, as they are worlds apart technically.

Oh, unofficially Froyo has been out for the SGS for quite a while (months). The official release is on its way, too - already started in the Nordic countries and being released in a week or two in the UK. The build quality is not the same, either. The SGS has gorilla glass, for starters. It feels a whole lot more sturdy. The SF can suffer from creaky buttons (esp. the volume down button).

Edited October 21, 2010 by prufrock

[Guest sedj]

If your using it as a phone then the battery is more than capable ...(unless you have lots of friends) however if your playing games / music / using sat nav whilst on walks then maybe any android 'phone' would not be suitable.

Shame they bundled a poor spec battery with the phone, it really needs a better battery given the screen. Having seen whats out there app wise /games i will pass for now as it is not really a pocket pc as some state its not remotely capable of doing anything a pc could do 10 years ago so i will hang out for proper divx playback and better mp3 support.

[Guest laag]

I own both the SF and the SGS - the battery life on the SGS is better (it's a better, bigger battery!) I would disagree that the SF is 80% of what the Galaxy is, too. The SGS has nearly double the processing power (1ghz compared to 600mhz), for starters. It has 8gb onboard storage, too. The camera on the SGS is much, much better - it can also record in 720p HD. It plays 720p HD too.You really can't compare the two phones, as they are worlds apart technically.

Oh, unofficially Froyo has been out for the SGS for quite a while (months). The official release is on its way, too - already started in the Nordic countries and being released in a week or two in the UK. The build quality is not the same, either. The SGS has gorilla glass, for starters. It feels a whole lot more sturdy. The SF can suffer from creaky buttons (esp. the volume down button).

I realize the SGS has some perks but the whole android experience isn't worlds apart. On paper, its technologically superior, however, what I can do on the SGS I can pretty much do on the ZTE. The 720p recording on the SGS is also as laughable as the Camera on the ZTE. Although the resolution is there, the bit-rate is lacking, only really good for a Youtube candid video. 1GHZ vs 600MHZ I can sort of feel the difference, eg: the page load times and in some games. But again, they are not miles apart.

It also doesn't really have 8GB, Mine reads 5.7GB internal SD (where i put my music and videos), 1.2GB onboard (I donno how to access this yet). I still stand by my claim that the build quality of the SGS and the ZTE are the same. Pretty much the same plastic construction, even the silver bit surrounding the screen is not metal. The Gorilla Glass, I'll keep an eye on it and see if it works, as I've only been playing with this phone for a day.

And on the sturdiness thing, I think its subjective. The SGS is bigger and lighter and feels as plastic as the ZTE. Almost feels like a toy.

The ZTE is weightier, smaller and feels more robust in my hands.