Official Avail. Nov 13th - Android 4.2 - LG Nexus 4 - Asus Nexus 7 - Samsung Nexus 10

[Ravynmagi]

What is the "SlimPort HDMI" on the Nexus 4? Never heard of SlimPort before.

 

[BenSkywalker]

What is the "SlimPort HDMI" on the Nexus 4? Never heard of SlimPort before.

Interesting tech-

http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/10/analogix-slim-port-technology-lets-you-connect-your-phone-to-you/

 

[zerogear]

Don't even try. This is the guy who RALLIED hard against Google when the Ip5 came out because the IP5 was announced to have support for basically every single spectrum. Much bashing against google because Apple had ONE phone that was compatible with everything. Cue 10 minutes later when we learned that there were multiple models of the IP5 to support different frequency bands.

Suddenly, it doesn't matter there are different models for different frequencies.

:whiste:

 

[bearxor]

AT&T doesn't want a AWS compatible iPhone on the market.

Man, you wouldn't be able to quantify how quickly I would cancel AT&T and move to StraightTalk with a TMobile SIM on a compatible iPhone. Hopefully next year!

 

[cheezy321]

Look, I don't give a crap about international LTE. Most countries don't even have LTE. I don't care to subsidize or wait on them. Google is only releasing this phone in handful of countries. Tough luck to the rest of them. You suddenly care about international LTE yet don't care about pentaband 3G? Google is one of the few who actively support T-Mobile and prepaid carriers. Where's the iPhone that support T-Mobile 3G? Why aren't you whining about that? That effects many more members here and people in the US. Where is the outrage? Why can't Apple make iPhone that works on T-Mobile 3G?

Why would apple make an iPhone for a carrier that it doesn't officially support?

Google supports tmobile and prepaid carriers because that is where the majority of android sales are taking place. Over 1.3 million devices are activated every day. The GS3 is by far the most popular android phone out there right now. They project 30 million sold by end of 2012. 30,000,000 out of a projected 234,000,000 android phones sold since May.

Android is the king of low end 'smartphones'.

 

[jpeyton]

Android is the king of 'smartphones'.

Fixed.

Low-end, high-end, doesn't matter, Android is capturing the lion's share of sales.

And with Samsung posting an Apple-like $7.3 billion quarterly profit, Apple isn't the only company cashing in anymore. So much for that argument.

Canaccord Genuity technology analyst Michael Walkley estimated that Apple‘s 59% of operating profits and Samsung’s 47%, combined to take 106% of all smartphone profits.

Mr. Walkley estimated that in 2013, AAPL will sell 193.9 million smartphones, while Samsung will sell 303.6 million, combining for over 50% of market share.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/canacco...apple-samsung-take-106-of-smartphone-profits/

 

[TuxDave]

Fixed.
Low-end, high-end, doesn't matter, Android is capturing the lion's share of sales.

I have to agree. I think Android (Samsung especially) is positioning itself well as a premium brand that people will pay for. I kind of wonder if they've gotten to the point where people go to a store and ask for a "Samsung Galaxy phone" vs "Android phone". That would be a good place for Samsung to be.

I was in San Francisco this past weekend and man, Samsung's marketing department must've gotten a huge budget this time. Every single possible advertising spot at the Montgomery Bart station was for the SGS3. And when I say EVERYTHING, I mean it. All the signs along the trains, along the walls, on the floors, above the escalators. It was getting a little sickening. You felt like you were at a Samsung station, not really a Bart station.

 

[Ravynmagi]

Interesting tech-

http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/10/analogix-slim-port-technology-lets-you-connect-your-phone-to-you/

It sounds exactly the same as MHL to me. Meh.

PS... actually worse, at least I already have an MHL adapter, don't even see where you can buy these SlimPort HDMI cables. Wonder why they switched to this?

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Look, I don't give a crap about international LTE. Most countries don't even have LTE. I don't care to subsidize or wait on them. Google is only releasing this phone in handful of countries. Tough luck to the rest of them. You suddenly care about international LTE yet don't care about pentaband 3G? Google is one of the few who actively support T-Mobile and prepaid carriers. Where's the iPhone that support T-Mobile 3G? Why aren't you whining about that? That effects many more members here and people in the US. Where is the outrage? Why can't Apple make iPhone that works on T-Mobile 3G?

Look, international LTE isn't the most important feature I'm looking for in a phone. It's a standard. It's just like HSPA bands or 2G GSM bands.

You know why I don't care about pentaband AWS? Because it was some stupid crap T-Mobile decided to jump on with like two other Canadian carriers. To offer a pentaband iPhone, they're essentially going to bend down to T-Mobile and offer the phone carrier subsidized. IT's like saying why don't I care about Verizon LTE bands or AT&T LTE bands. It's because the manufacturer will have to sell that phone through the carrier.

You know that I'm not a fan of the carriers to begin with. So any move that circumvents the death grip of the carriers is a welcome one for me. I don't expect anyone to offer AT&T LTE or Verizon LTE on an unlocked model not sold through the carrier. But if they do, massive kudos. However, if they do want to offer LTE on a phone sold not through a carrier, they better then have the international bands.

Why do you act like there must be outrage when a US carrier is excluded? It's the US' fault for not jumping onboard with global standards and being the most backwards in terms of unlocked phones and device portability across networks. That's why I have ZERO sympathy.

We can debate whether LTE really affects our purchases or not, but being one step behind Apple in terms of LTE implementation when that's been a negative against the iPhone 4 and 4S, as well as lacking removable storage or even reasonable onboard storage are huge negatives against the phone. To pretend those aren't even negative aspects about the phone and make excuses shows your bias.

Don't even try. This is the guy who RALLIED hard against Google when the Ip5 came out because the IP5 was announced to have support for basically every single spectrum. Much bashing against google because Apple had ONE phone that was compatible with everything. Cue 10 minutes later when we learned that there were multiple models of the IP5 to support different frequency bands.

Suddenly, it doesn't matter there are different models for different frequencies.

WTF are you saying? When the iPhone 5 came out I had plenty of questions. I asked if this was going to be a single model, and yes I was somewhat excited. If you watched the keynote, they made it sound like it was going to be global (and by global it means US + rest of the world) LTE. They didn't discern between 3 models. Anandtech later revealed the 3 models. Yes it was disappointing. But at the same time, it was finally one phone getting LTE coverage around the world, even if it required 3 submodels. By comparison the Galaxy S3 doesn't do that.

Yes I'm disappointed that there require multiple models of the iPhone 5 to support different bands, but is the blame on Apple? Should I bash Apple? Maybe that's the best Qualcomm can do. Maybe some of the fault lies with the world for not standardizing these frequencies. I'm sure some blame falls on the US carriers too. But Apple did a very damn good job in trying to make the differences between the VZW/Sprint, AT&T, and international models seem negligible. It's an invisible spec difference to consumers. Compare to the SGS3 where you need different SoCs and have different memory specs on the US versions.

At the end of the day what I'm trying to say is it would've been nice if they put quadband 2G, pentaband 3G, howevermanybandsyouneedforLTEtocoverVerizonAT&Tandtherestoftheworld 4G all in a phone. But we all know that's not possible. It would've been nice to put something that could've been easily done like the iPhone 5 global baseband.

Apple does have an unlocked phone that you can buy for $350-

http://www.walmart.com/ip/Apple-iPho...ocked/21280984

You may be utterly shocked, but it doesn't have LTE either, or a tollerable display, or a reasonable amount of RAM, or a remotely decent SoC, and it's only 8GB.

People who don't worship the essence of Apple consider price in their factoring of the worth of a product. 8GB 3GS or 16 GB Nexus 4 for the same price.... hmmmm.... I'm not going to quite call that close.

Discontinued product. You're talking about a product from 2009. Congratulations. Not even a reasonable comparison. I said if Apple were to launch the iPhone 5 (meaning a NEW product) with a lack of LTE and 8GB/16gb options (nothing higher), you and the rest of the haters here would've bashed the hell out of it. We would have a thread about the unmitigated failure of Apple and Steve Jobs rising from the dead to decapitate Tim Cook. Please. Let's be honest here. I would've bashed Apple for that, but I'm willing to attack both sides. It seems any bit of criticism against Google gets a bunch of excuses.

 

[BenSkywalker]

Discontinued product. You're talking about a product from 2009. Congratulations. Not even a reasonable comparison.

$350

Far, far away from where you are at there is a place outside of the Reality Distortion Field simply called reality. In this place called reality we have this thing called money.

$350

This thing we call money is used to buy things. Companies build things and then they set a price on it. People have to work for this thing called money, at least most of them, and due to that the value of things is largely determined by how much money it costs.

$350

When someone is looking at say, a new car, they don't bash the Ford Focus for not having the same DOHC V8 that the Lexus has as the Lexus costs twice as much. The reason for this, is because you have to spend a different amount of money to acquire them.

$350

If a company like Ford came out with something that was comparable to the Lexus, but had an even larger interior but a smaller gas tank and engine for half the price, most people would be extremely excited because of how much value it offered.

$350

Please. Let's be honest here.

Let's do just that.

$940

http://www.amazon.com/Apple-iPhone-1...one+5+unlocked

$349

https://play.google.com/store/devices/details?id=nexus_4_16gb

For about the same price as an unlocked iPhone 5, I could buy a Nexus 4 *and pay for a year of service*.

If Google launched the Nexus 4 at the absurdly high price of $940 then yes, every member on this board would be trashing it as an absurdly bad POS. But like you said, let's be honest. They launched it at $350. That is entry level smartphone pricing coming with a 4.7" 720p display, one of the fastest SoCs on the market and no contractual obligations at all.

You know that I'm not a fan of the carriers to begin with. So any move that circumvents the death grip of the carriers is a welcome one for me.

The Nexus 4 is exactly what we need to break the death grip of the carriers in the US. If you are being honest, which is what you said you wanted, then you should be giving them a standing ovation for offering such a part. Instead, you are sitting their trying to justify Apple more then doubling the price point for a couple dollar modem.

 

[Ns1]

Not even a reasonable comparison.

We are comparing on dollars only, and bottom line is: off contract, for $350, you can buy a 3gs or a Nexus4. Pretty much a no brainer.

 

[Fire&Blood]

After reading that article I don't think it was so much an issue of cost, rather time and head aches. Google simply didn't want to get burried down in the pursuit of trying to get certified to run LTE(and CDMA for that matter) on AT&T/Verizon/ect when a perfectly functional, easy to use and wide open GSM band using "good enough" HSPA+.

I think in the case the juice wasn't worth the squeeze. Instead they have a very high spec'd (other than kinda whimpy storage options) unlocked phones at prices that should cause carriers to pucker up a bit.

4.7" phone + quad core + 2GB RAM + unlocked for $349 off contract? That's some serious hardware for a un-serious price.

Totally agree. In a way, I perceive this phone as google's revenge at the carriers for all the damage they did/still do. I believe it's priced aggressive enough but carriers can withstand anything, the US market is deep into the subsidy model. So deep that instead of realizing the freedom they lose on subsidy plans, people are lashing out at exclusion of LTE, However, for the minority that has seen the light, this is a great deal, I'm glad they pulled this off. I hope it sells well, it deserves too, it's affordable for many that waited for it but that crowd is still minimal, here is to hoping it can draw many outsiders with it's price.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

$350
SNIP

The Nexus 4 is exactly what we need to break the death grip of the carriers in the US. If you are being honest, which is what you said you wanted, then you should be giving them a standing ovation for offering such a part. Instead, you are sitting their trying to justify Apple more then doubling the price point for a couple dollar modem.

Ok, so for $350 is it ok if we get a 2G only phone? Is it ok if we get a monochrome screen? At what point do you stop making excuses for $350?

The LG Nexus may be priced low, but it isn't being positioned as a crap phone. It isn't in the same category as a Galaxy S3 mini. It's a powerhouse with a large screen and practically everything about it screams premium phone. It might not be top of the line 13 megapixels, or 1080p screen or whatever, but it's pretty much up there. Up there enough it can hold its own against an HTC One X or Samsung Galaxy S3.

That's why when it is competing against such phones, it deserves more storage and LTE.

I'm not justifying Apple's position to double the price. Apple's price isn't only due to including LTE. Standard unlocked flagship cell phones cost $599. Apple sells for $699. You can debate $599 vs $699 and whether Apple's justified at selling for $699, but how can you bash them for selling at double $350 when $350 is below market standard? Google's trying something new. Kudos, but look at the SGS3, HTC One X. $599 phones. And the $940 price you posted is deceptive. It shows the reselling capabilities of the iPhone.

As for the Ford Focus and Lexus V8 analogy, you know that's not the case. If we use your analogy correctly, the HOX, SGS3, iPhone 5 are represented by the V8 Lexus, while the LG Nexus is a Ford Focus? Maybe you meant the focus st or whatever the sport one is, but I'm basically thinking power vehicle versus econobox when you make this comparison. The LG Nexus is a near flagship phone. Don't think that's a fair comparison.

I'd say the SGS3 is a Mustang GT500 while the LG Nexus is a Mustang GT500 with a 2.0 inline 4 dropped in. Ok fine, if we want to compare engines to CPUs then that's not fair. So let the LTE and SDcard be some less defining feature of the car. Let's say it's a car with a cardboard seats. The internals of the car still works fine, but it's missing some feature, and it sucks bad.

Anyway, going back to your point adding an LTE modem would've been easily doable given the status of the industry, the commercial availability of baseband chips, and the cost. The inclusion of LTE would've been at most a few $ (less than $10 for sure, and most likely less than $5) in change in BOM. So yes, while this is a $350 phone, I do fault them for cutting corners like this.

We are comparing on dollars only, and bottom line is: off contract, for $350, you can buy a 3gs or a Nexus4. Pretty much a no brainer.

And an unlocked galaxy s2 sells for $400. So what? Samsung's retarded? You're comparing standard market prices for old cell phones against Google's totally different strategy of just pricing freaking low for new Nexus devices. It's not a fair comparison.

 

[s44]

And an unlocked galaxy s2 sells for $400.

$300 from T-Mo. And it's been that since the summer.

 

[Ns1]

That's why when it is competing against such phones, it deserves more storage and LTE.

You are comparing phones first and dollars later. We are comparing dollars first and phones later.

You keep saying fair comparison this, fair comparison that...

This is a completely fair comparison, because the question is "what can I get for $350?"

 

[grkM3]

i think its halarious how delrium bashes the nexus in this thread and then told the other guy in the gs3 vs iphone thread to get the nexus over the gs3 knowing it lacked lte and sd card.

you really do stand up to your name bro

 

[magomago]

Ok, so for $350 is it ok if we get a 2G only phone? Is it ok if we get a monochrome screen? At what point do you stop making excuses for $350?

The LG Nexus may be priced low, but it isn't being positioned as a crap phone. It isn't in the same category as a Galaxy S3 mini. It's a powerhouse with a large screen and practically everything about it screams premium phone. It might not be top of the line 13 megapixels, or 1080p screen or whatever, but it's pretty much up there. Up there enough it can hold its own against an HTC One X or Samsung Galaxy S3.

That's why when it is competing against such phones, it deserves more storage and LTE.

I'm not justifying Apple's position to double the price. Apple's price isn't only due to including LTE. Standard unlocked flagship cell phones cost $599. Apple sells for $699. You can debate $599 vs $699 and whether Apple's justified at selling for $699, but how can you bash them for selling at double $350 when $350 is below market standard? Google's trying something new. Kudos, but look at the SGS3, HTC One X. $599 phones. And the $940 price you posted is deceptive. It shows the reselling capabilities of the iPhone.

As for the Ford Focus and Lexus V8 analogy, you know that's not the case. If we use your analogy correctly, the HOX, SGS3, iPhone 5 are represented by the V8 Lexus, while the LG Nexus is a Ford Focus? Maybe you meant the focus st or whatever the sport one is, but I'm basically thinking power vehicle versus econobox when you make this comparison. The LG Nexus is a near flagship phone. Don't think that's a fair comparison.

I'd say the SGS3 is a Mustang GT500 while the LG Nexus is a Mustang GT500 with a 2.0 inline 4 dropped in. Ok fine, if we want to compare engines to CPUs then that's not fair. So let the LTE and SDcard be some less defining feature of the car. Let's say it's a car with a cardboard seats. The internals of the car still works fine, but it's missing some feature, and it sucks bad.

Anyway, going back to your point adding an LTE modem would've been easily doable given the status of the industry, the commercial availability of baseband chips, and the cost. The inclusion of LTE would've been at most a few $ (less than $10 for sure, and most likely less than $5) in change in BOM. So yes, while this is a $350 phone, I do fault them for cutting corners like this.



And an unlocked galaxy s2 sells for $400. So what? Samsung's retarded? You're comparing standard market prices for old cell phones against Google's totally different strategy of just pricing freaking low for new Nexus devices. It's not a fair comparison.

Let us put it like this:

I guarantee you that Google did an assessment of what matters in a phone to a tech savvy consumer.
And I bet you that storage came near the bottom. That doesn't mean it isn't important, it means that other items were a "bigger deal"

I bet you also that SPEED was important, but once you reached a certain point you couldn't tell the difference.

I bet you they looked at the market and said "Well...that Verizon thang didn't work out for now". They also probably noticed that AT&T has a ways to go to full deploy its LTE network. They also know that Tmobile's LTE plans go for 2013. And that isn't the time it takes for LTE to be as pervasive around the country - estimates are it could take up to 3 years for AT&T who is already well under way*.


Seems like its straight forward for this Phone taht was just released-
(1) if you have to cut costs, do it on storage. In fact there is a segment of users for whom they'll never use 8 GB on a smart phone - they are attracted to the other features
(2) forgo LTE but make sure that you still get decent speeds (Too bad its HSPA+ 21, and not HSPA+ 42 - but Hey it may still be "Good enough" Honestly I care more about responsivenes/ latency than raw download speed).

*http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Saving-Money/2012/0927/What-you-can-expect-from-4G-LTE-coverage

 

[Zivic]

I am not overly excited about the phone... but in the grand scheme of things, this is the what the market needs. actually the galaxy nexus' availability on google play was the first real step forward, but that was months after its initial release. This phone's availability out of the chute at 349 bucks is an awesome deal. f^ck these carriers and their BS 600+ unsubsidized phones.

I had been dead set on getting the wife and I new lumia 920's. the 349 nexus4 16GB has put that idea to bed. not going to happen. No way I am going to subsidize another phone and lock into a contract.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

i think its halarious how delrium bashes the nexus in this thread and then told the other guy in the gs3 vs iphone thread to get the nexus over the gs3 knowing it lacked lte and sd card.

you really do stand up to your name bro

You're the guy who can't even speak any logical sentences without talking about your 2700mah battery doing 7 hours of screen time. In that whole battery discussion, that's ALL you offered.

The reason why I chose the Nexus over the SGS3, which is a decision I will be making when this device goes on sale, is because for Android devices I value ROMming. I think more than a few people can attest to my needs to install CM10 here. In that case Nexus > SGS3 for me.

I went with a specs assessment the last time and decided to sacrifice screen by going SGS2 over GNex. I regret it. While the screen isn't something I'm overly disappointed about or even mildly disappointed, I'm disappointed the SGS2 didn't get the level of development I had hoped for. I was clearly also banking on Google choosing Exynos as their Nexus SoC as they did with the Nexus S, but that gamble failed.

Let's make it absolutely clear that if the Nexus 4 were on sale today I'd hit buy it now in a heartbeat. Who knows what might change in 2 weeks, but as it stands I plan to buy it. That doesn't mean I have no criticism of it. I will also say I just got an iPhone 5 coming in. It's a work phone, so I don't plan on using it for my personal business. I'm less invested in the iPhone and less likely to screw around with it given that it's a work device. So yeah I'll probably take better care of it, not carry it with me on all my excursions, etc. It'll see less use, less abuse, less tweaking.

But I clearly decided that as a personal device the LG Nexus 4 is probably my phone. Doesn't mean I have to be 100% happy about it. It all just started as disappointment with no global LTE and low storage amounts. But obviously to the Android supporters here, they're willing to brush any negative complaints aside and fault me.

If Google offered 16gb/32gb options instead and offered LTE, would any of you be at a disadvantage? Would it hurt you? Seriously.

Let us put it like this:

I guarantee you that Google did an assessment of what matters in a phone to a tech savvy consumer.
And I bet you that storage came near the bottom. That doesn't mean it isn't important, it means that other items were a "bigger deal"

I bet you also that SPEED was important, but once you reached a certain point you couldn't tell the difference.

I bet you they looked at the market and said "Well...that Verizon thang didn't work out for now". They also probably noticed that AT&T has a ways to go to full deploy its LTE network. They also know that Tmobile's LTE plans go for 2013. And that isn't the time it takes for LTE to be as pervasive around the country - estimates are it could take up to 3 years for AT&T who is already well under way*.


Seems like its straight forward for this Phone taht was just released-
(1) if you have to cut costs, do it on storage. In fact there is a segment of users for whom they'll never use 8 GB on a smart phone - they are attracted to the other features
(2) forgo LTE but make sure that you still get decent speeds (Too bad its HSPA+ 21, and not HSPA+ 42 - but Hey it may still be "Good enough" Honestly I care more about responsivenes/ latency than raw download speed).

*http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Saving-Money/2012/0927/What-you-can-expect-from-4G-LTE-coverage

Okay, so here's the thing. They decided to double the CPU when a dual core Krait is fast as hell already. What happened to those rumors of a bumped up GNex to 1.5ghz? No one showed too much disappointment. Hell all of you reasoned that the Nexus was never meant to be a flagship phone. Ok, so here they went all out. Not dual core Krait. QUAD core Krait. And if Krait is competitive with A15, it's very possible this phone can be faster than the Nexus 10 in some cases.

2GB RAM? Nice but is it necessary? I don't think many of you would notice the difference between 1gb and 2gb IF Google managed memory properly (setting minfree values and OOM groupings properly).

These features are less tangible to most users than 3G vs 4G yet they all got bumped. Not just bumped, but PUMPED.

And look, if storage isn't a big deal, why would you fall back to even lower specs? 8gb/16gb? What's wrong with 16gb/32gb? We all know NAND is cheap and we dislike Apple for charging a huge premium. Furthermore, why would you go to smaller capacities than the current GNex? What I'm saying is there's a market standard, and that's 16gb + microSD. If you're not going to offer that you should be doing 32gb at least. HTC learned that with the One X+. My point is some specs are just flat out awesome, but others are like "WTF you went backwards."

 

[deputc26]

Seriously wish Google would go back to including sd cards, I spend a lot of time with no reception and an sd slot can't add all that much to the BOM.

That being said I'm seriously happy that goog is sticking it to the carriers, filthy filthy carriers... now if only the n4 would work on pageplus...

 

[ilkhan]

(2) forgo LTE but make sure that you still get decent speeds (Too bad its HSPA+ 21, and not HSPA+ 42 -

I believe they've confirmed its actually HSPA+42.

 

[magomago]

I believe they've confirmed its actually HSPA+42.

Google did?

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

I don't get how the LG Nexus 4 is an example of Google sticking it to the carriers. How is this any different from the Galaxy Nexus?

1) Ok, so there's no partnership with Verizon

What did that change? Did Google/Samsung sacrifice anything (ok sure some resources) in having a VZW version? Did it significantly negatively impact the HSPA+ international version? Maybe the VZW version left a sour taste in people's mouths because VZW as slow to upgrade, but once again the HSPA+ version was maintained the way it was meant to be.

If anything the LG Nexus cuts out an extra opportunity for VZW users. To me the VZW deal was an extra. Icing on the cake. The basic international version of the Nexus is still offered in both cases. All of a sudden Google's sticking it to the carriers by not offering a VZW version? It's not like the carriers are like "oh crap we're missing out on the Nexus" either because it's only going to work on the GSM carriers just like the previous GSM Nexii anyway.

2) But you bring back T-Mobile

So how is this any different than the Nexus One or the Nexus S? Now it's just another T-Mobile launched Nexus instead of a VZW Nexus. But once again how is it sticking it to the carriers if you're partnering with T-Mobile? Google's just partnering with a different carrier this time. Maybe VZW blew it, but that's besides the point.

My point is you stopped partnering with a larger carrier and ditched them for a smaller one. Still doesn't change the fundamental fact that you need the partnership to sell the phone to Verizon customers in the US. The same goes with Sprint.

3) This phone doesn't fundamentally change the fact that the carriers are still in command.

You're not going to run this phone on a CDMA network, and you can't run it on AT&T LTE. You know why I was upset about not having LTE? In a true suck it manner to the carriers, Google would've added global LTE. Maybe not the American flavors because that would possibly sacrifice international LTE, but at least the global band. And if the could somehow incorporate AT&T (yes AT&T is important because you can use a SIM card and use any SIM-based phone you want) bands, then that would be really sticking it to the carriers. You can't really tell Verizon to shove it because you're not going to be able to use a phone on their network unless you sell it through them.

So essentially, I don't see anything different with this phone at all.

The only difference I see is pricing, and that's not telling the carriers to suck it. It's telling Apple, Samsung, HTC to compete. But since these manufacturers have had ages to sell unsubsidized phones for lower prices, only time will tell if they want to compete.

 

[Fire&Blood]

Apparently some people still don't understand what the Nexus is about.

It is not meant to be a "complete" phone, neither of the 4 were. When they were launched, they were either accompanied by better siblings or they
were intentionally lacking in certain areas because they weren't supposed/allowed to draw too much intention. What is the purpose of the Optimus G? Why would LG even bother making it if the Nex4 had LTE and larger storage at $299?
Since inception, Nexus has been about carefully promoting Android without hurting the OEM's tasked with making one. All Google did with the latest phone is compromise less than they did in the past. Including LTE would mean bending over backwards again to please the carriers, more storage would have killed the final incentive to opt for the Optimus G, find me an OEM that would have done that.

 

[quest55720]

If you have good ATT coverage in your area this phone will tell them to suck it. Switch to strait talk plus this phone and cut cell phone bill in half or less. This is the first reasonably priced high end phone to come out in the US. I could buy the nexus 4 and 1 year of strait talk for the price of a unlocked Iphone 5. Seems like a F'u to the carriers if you ask me. Hell I might even get lucky and when my ATT contract is up jun1 13 and the nexus 4 might have a 32 gig version for 349.99.