Guest Maringer Posted October 27, 2010 Report Share Posted October 27, 2010 the sluggishness you get from using a iPhone 3g -> the SF is, TBH, android. Its no know to be the fastest thing of the blocks period. personally after seing my friends desire side by side with the SF the SF gives you better value for money! Many people also forget screen resolution. The SF is shifting two and a half times as many pixels as an iPhone/3GS/3G so it is, perhaps, not too surprising to see the interface running a little less smoothly. And to continue a running theme, you can't get an iPhone for less than a hundred quid either. :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Afrodude Posted October 27, 2010 Report Share Posted October 27, 2010 pissing myself here :D You should get your bladder problem checked. :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ezablade Posted October 27, 2010 Report Share Posted October 27, 2010 Not really found it lagging, then again, I use an app killer to clear out all the crap that loads at startup, and the apps that sit in the background instead of closing. Also, don't bother with live wallpapers.. nice for 10 seconds, then, what's the point? I don't want to sit and watch the wallpaper! As for sound... had to load some mp3's and try, nothing wrong with what I can hear. At first thought it was a little quiet, then realised the volume as down on the earphone cable. With my Sony noise-cancelling earphones I can't hear people talking to me, much to the annoyance of the missus! Volume is perfect for me, any louder and it would be uncomfortable. Decent headphones make a difference I guess. Camera? It's a phone, if I want to take photos I'll use a proper camera, there's not a phone in existence that can match the qaulity of a good dslr. Add all the megapixels you want, with a crap lense, you get crap photos. Battery life? Pretty decent for a smartphone, although Angry Birds kicks the hell out of the battery. All in all, attempting to compare a £99 phone against a £500 one is ridiculous. You wouldn't compare a ten grand car with a fifty grand one and complain, would you? As has been said, go to any phone shop and put you San Fran next to a £99 phone and see how it stacks up... assuming you can find that many to compare it against. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bazza76 Posted October 27, 2010 Report Share Posted October 27, 2010 (edited) I have found this to be an awsome phone as i had an Xperia X10 before. Ok camera not great but sold X10 bought 2 SF's and a flip HD camera! Absolute bargin as far as i am conserned. Edited October 27, 2010 by Bazza76 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest toge64 Posted October 27, 2010 Report Share Posted October 27, 2010 Crap camera, below average build quality & battery life springs to mind - but still a fantastic phone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andy Maclean Posted October 27, 2010 Report Share Posted October 27, 2010 (edited) Sorry to jump on the bandwagon but this phone still amazes me on a daily basis. I keep turning the screen on and finding an excuse just to use it for a bit. I will admit that the stock rom was awful and the froyo rom needed a bit of fiddling to get it (almost) perfect. I can't wait for the inevitable flood of froyo roms to really show what this little phone can do. Andy Edited October 27, 2010 by Andy Maclean Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Brins0 Posted October 27, 2010 Report Share Posted October 27, 2010 One thing I really can't get over with the SF, is the simply amazing loudspeaker. It really does poop all over all other smart phones I've used in the past. The screen is also really rich and vibrant, and is easily comparable to my mother's HTC Desire, which also suffers from dreadful battery life, even if it has a larger battery. I also have an Acer Liquid running 2.2. It's battery life is far more impressive, considering the CPU is uses (same snapdragon as the Desire/Nexus just under clocked to 768MHz). It's speaker is nasty though, and the touch screen is not as accurate, even if it is more sensitive. That cost me just over £300 about 6 months ago. I can get almost double the idle time out of it, and it only has a 1350mAh battery, compared to the 1250mAh one in the SF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stooby Posted October 27, 2010 Report Share Posted October 27, 2010 I've had various Android phones from a G1 to a Desire and I have to say that, for the money, the SF can't be beaten. We all know the camera is useless, but who cares? It's a really impressive smartphone for silly money. It's worth the price just for that display! I've had mine about 3 weeks and I'm still really pleased with it. OK, tbh, I'd rather have another Desire, but since I can't get one of those brand new for £99, I'll stick with my SF and keep playing with different roms, especially since froyo is just making an appearance for it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nick Rhodes Posted October 27, 2010 Report Share Posted October 27, 2010 Still a cracking phone for the money, not just against other Android phones, but any up to £99 phone. Sure its got its compromises, but they are in the right places for me; I've not need for a decent camera. I've waited to afford a capacitive screen of reasonable size/resolution for ages. Size is good, easily pocketable. Performance is perfectly fine for my uses (pretty much for talk/text/email/calendar, light web use), just as quick as any of the current competition within the price range. Stock ROM is usable, just mildly disappointing, Pauls ROM improves things vastly (still faster than my friends Pulse running 2.2 !), Only unresolved issue is the unreliable WiFi for me, cant wait for 2.2 on this phone. Cheers, Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kame_boy Posted October 27, 2010 Report Share Posted October 27, 2010 (edited) Have to agree with the sluggish part... It really is. Just drag your finger 1 time across an iphone to understand what i mean. However, this is only true with the 2.1 rom. With the 2.2 rom i would say the SF is like a 90% on par with an iphone 3/4. The remaining 10% due to some stutterings that occur from time to time browsing through apps/menus. I see hope with the SF, at least now it's performing better than my HTC Legend on CM6 both in speed(sluggishness) and function (wouldn't know about higher-end devices like SGS or desire). So with 2.1, i would agree. Not so with 2.2. Edited October 27, 2010 by Kame_boy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest onlinejobwork Posted October 28, 2010 Report Share Posted October 28, 2010 No complaints from me, I think its a real steal for £100 Im running 2.2 with launcher pro and its a very smooth experience hi can u tell me which version of 2'2 r u using an how it different from 2'1 ? which one is better and stabke ? r u using alpha version of froyo? please mention ur experience with that rom and post link and some screenshot of that please thanks urvish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest imhappy Posted October 28, 2010 Report Share Posted October 28, 2010 Great phone for its price! Happy that I got one :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest StevenHarperUK Posted October 28, 2010 Report Share Posted October 28, 2010 I am in the fortunate position to get a go on all New Androids - and ones the public has/will never get to see. The San Fran still amazes me how much more you get for you £££, it's the only real choice up to £200 and a bit beyond. I am still linking this phone a lot - I came from a iPhone 3Gs (I had to have one to test Apps I work on) and even though I could have had other Android on loan for free I went and paid with my own money for the San Fran. What you need to ask yourself is - is the desire 4 x better - as it costs more than 4 x more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dadashi Posted October 28, 2010 Report Share Posted October 28, 2010 everyone saying the camera is "crap" compared to hero and desire, etc... I say the hero and desire camera are just as crappy, give or take a couple of % of crappiness... I have an N95 with probably the best camera ever built into a phone. It doesn't have the pixels or HD of the big sony, samsungs but it's got the best lense built into a mobile phone. And that's what counts... SOoo, generally all mobile phone cameras are "crap", the SF camera is no less crap than the rest... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kuteguy Posted October 28, 2010 Report Share Posted October 28, 2010 I have owned some very expensive phones in the past ... this beats all of them hands down Its the phone that stops me looking at other phones ;-) now if only I could find a g/f like that :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest No Expert Posted October 28, 2010 Report Share Posted October 28, 2010 All, can you please help in case I'm going mad here? Firstly, great phone absolutely no question about it, apart from the battery life. I'm losing c. 30% of battery life overnight with the phone: (1) Task Killer kills everything on screen off (2) No Live wallpapers (3) 3g off (4) Wifi off (5) Dark background on the homescreen. Is this normal? Then in the morning after some light use, the phone loses c. 1% every 3mins or so... I'd really appreciate your view as at the moment I can't even use it as a phone... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rosz Posted October 28, 2010 Report Share Posted October 28, 2010 All, can you please help in case I'm going mad here? Firstly, great phone absolutely no question about it, apart from the battery life. I'm losing c. 30% of battery life overnight with the phone: (1) Task Killer kills everything on screen off (2) No Live wallpapers (3) 3g off (4) Wifi off (5) Dark background on the homescreen. Is this normal? Then in the morning after some light use, the phone loses c. 1% every 3mins or so... I'd really appreciate your view as at the moment I can't even use it as a phone... This is not normal at all. I have the same overnight "parameters" as yours (I assume GPS is off also)..and I lose abou 3-5 % for 8 hours during the night. Is your SF new .I mean the battery may not have reach it's full capacity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest igors_s Posted October 28, 2010 Report Share Posted October 28, 2010 I'm sure the battery needs time to calibrate itself. Mine lost 80% in 2 hours this morning ( was playing and browsing on the way to work). I'm using 'Battery Left' app to obtain battery life times, and since the app needs to go through it's own calibration process i'm now trying to do a full discharge. I've turned everything on. Wifi, bluetooth, gps, 3g, skype, talk, full screen brightness, removed screen lock (screen always on). Battery was at 22% at 10:00 when i did that. it is now 12:52 and battery is at 9%. 13% on full blast in 3 hours... Going to wait and see where this leads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest finbaar Posted October 28, 2010 Report Share Posted October 28, 2010 I'm sure the battery needs time to calibrate itself. Mine lost 80% in 2 hours this morning ( was playing and browsing on the way to work). I'm using 'Battery Left' app to obtain battery life times, and since the app needs to go through it's own calibration process i'm now trying to do a full discharge. I've turned everything on. Wifi, bluetooth, gps, 3g, skype, talk, full screen brightness, removed screen lock (screen always on). Battery was at 22% at 10:00 when i did that. it is now 12:52 and battery is at 9%. 13% on full blast in 3 hours... Going to wait and see where this leads. :P My battery was indicating 19% before a 1 hour run when I listen to some podcasts on full belt - when I got back it was 20%! I have found it is very slow to go down between 20% & 5% then quick after 5%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dadashi Posted October 28, 2010 Report Share Posted October 28, 2010 (edited) .....Its the phone that stops me looking at other phones ;-) ..... Exactly :D Who would look at a droid phone with the same specifications at 3 or 4x times the price?! :P unless you're bill gates of course... Edited October 28, 2010 by dadashi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest igors_s Posted October 28, 2010 Report Share Posted October 28, 2010 Update: It took 3.5 hours will all possible setting on, full brightness and no standby (screen constantly on) to go from 22% to shutdown. I'm confident that with slight power management it's possible to get 2 full days out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Borderland Posted October 28, 2010 Report Share Posted October 28, 2010 I've had mine for a month now having moved from HTC and am very happy. Battery life is the only real issue I have, which is an Android issue AFAIK. I use A2DP all the time. It's not quite as reliable as the HTC, but very close (providing you gave wi-fi turned off at the time). Wi-fi is much better than my HTCs. The camera is no worse than my HTC, but I couldn't care less about that anyway. I do get a bit fed up with people saying it doesn't do <insert some gripe here> as well as a phone costing five times the price. Well it's pretty close IMO and that screen is amazing. If you moan about this phone, you'll moan about anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now