The official Nexus 5 thread.

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Using the zoom as an example doesn't really work. The maxx is a regular phone in all ways. The form factor is the same as other phones. There's no downside to the big battery. It's totally fair to compare other phones to it. Indeed we should do that all the time if we want that sort of battery life.
The zoom is very much a niche device, there's a big compromise that it had to make in its form to get that lens and optical zoom.

Why is it not fair to want other phones to be more environment proof as well?

That's perfectly fair to ask for other phones to be more environmental proof. Maybe we'll get there someday, but until that's some sort of standard that most smartphone manufacturers start following, the one or two early adopters are more niche. Therefore it's not fair to penalize the standard GS4 or HTC One or iPhone 5 for not having waterproofing until say Apple's the last one to get on the bandwagon.

Overall, there's nothing wrong with demanding more from our phones. That's like saying I want my non-hybrid car to be as efficient (roughly) as a hybrid car. I want my non-Maxx phone to have just as good battery as a Maxx phone. I want my smartphone camera to be as good as my DSLR.

I don't think these are unreasonable desires. How realistic are they all depends on how much technology can bring us there. But at the same time, people need to realize that these are different classes we're comparing to, and its apples and oranges. Motorola made it very clear to us there's a non-Maxx and a Maxx version of its phones. Unless it just makes a single model that's got 3000+ mAh, I don't see why we are complaining about the battery life of other phones by comparing it to the Maxx.

Furthermore, the Maxx is priced higher and is thicker. Yes, those might not be big compromises to you or I, but it's certainly a compromise for some. In that same vein it's like saying everyone should just buy the Galaxy S4 Active because it doesn't sacrifice much compared to the regular GS4. In the end it's up to the consumer, and it's clear there's a standard version and a Maxx version.

If anything I find it more reasonable to complain that Samsung or HTC are not pursuing a "Maxx" variant of their phones. It's more that they are not offering a direct competitor to the Maxx, and are just competing against the non-Maxx. Does it make sense to throw in the Maxx #s for comparison's sake? Sure, but isn't the Maxx just supposed to outdo any phone anyway? Wasn't that it's purpose? Yeah. So even if you do compare against it, I really don't understand how much usefulness you get out of that data.

 

[bamx2]

Glass back (again ? ) . No thanks.

 

[lothar]

It may not be critical, but is it a downgrade? Yes. You're saying it's ok for you, but is it actually better that you use HSPA over LTE? I highly doubt it. Maybe T-Mobile's LTE network is still young, but I can't really see why someone should be using HSPA over LTE on AT&T unless of course they're prone to going over their data limits easily in which case that would still be a problem on HSPA.

HSPA on AT&T is a downgrade compared to LTE.
On T-Mobile's DC-HSPA+ 42 compared to LTE, not really.

Or maybe it was AT&T that didn't fully invest in their HSPA+ network like the rest of the world did with DC-HSPA 42 while AT&T remained on mostly HSPA+ 14 and HSPA+ 21?

As for the iPhone, yeah, it sucks that it's only 16gb. If I had my way I'd get a 32gb iPhone at least, but work's not going to give me anything more. But at least there's a 64gb option if someone really wanted that. As I said before, if you really want that $249 Nexus go for it, but I'll gladly pay the $599 for a flagship model with 64gb storage, LTE, etc. and no compromises. I'm sure there's many other people who bought the Nexus 4 who will agree that they would easily have paid $100 more for more storage, better battery, LTE, etc.

The fact that you think that there wouldn't be any compromise in a $599 flagship model of any phone is in itself laughable.

I would have paid $100 more for better storage, better battery, and LTE if such a thing ever existed. Too bad it didn't.
But I absolutely would not pay $100 extra for only slightly more storage(16GB vs 32GB iPhone), or $200-300 for only extra battery(in the case of LG G2 with 3000mAh and this potential Nexus 5 with 2300mAh).

And just because I wouldn't mind paying extra for more features that I would have preferred, does not automatically mean I'm going to get the Optimus G, G2,(or whatever phone) over it's Nexus equivalent in protest either.

I'm not arguing that nonremovable sd card and battery automatically equates to better build quality or smaller form factor. Are you saying that you can design JUST as small of a phone with removable batteries and SD card? I don't get what finding an exception proves. I was never saying there aren't any exceptions. I was just saying that it's possible to improve build quality and decrease thickness by going non-removable. Are you saying if Samsung went with a nonremovable option the GS4 would be fatter? Or are you saying had HTC built the One with removable storage and battery that it would be better built and thinner? None of us have the answer to that because all we have are apples to oranges comparisons by finding one exception to the rule, and we can't say what the iPhone would have been with removable versus non-removable battery. Anyway, this is besides the point.

Yes, I am. And finding an exception exactly proves that designing such a thing isn't impossible.

I agree with you on the last part. I only brought it up because you automatically assumed that the benefits of designing a phone without removable battery and SD card means smaller, thinner, and better build quality which is simply not true.
Almost anything can be designed if you have enough bright engineers and designers. There is absolutely no proof that removable battery and SD card means a smaller and thinner device, or better build quality.

Perhaps, but basically the $200 tablet market is just Amazon and Google. Who really competes at that range? Samsung Galaxy Tab 3 and its 1024x600 resolution? You can probably remember how many threads slamming 1024x600 tablets and why anyone would buy anything else than a Nexus 7.

I think it's pretty hard to compete at this level when the $199 Nexus 7 from 2012 costs $185 or so to build. How do you expect anyone to get close?

If it's hard to compete at that level then why isn't it hard for manufacturers to compete at the $300-400 level for the Nexus phones. Those same people slamming 1024x600 resolution tablets are also slamming the Galaxy S4 mini, HTC One mini, HTC One S, and other "mini" phones with crappy specs that are being sold for more than the price of a Nexus phone. And a lot of those "mini" phones come with gimped storage too...Not 32GB standard.
I am one of those slamming 1024x600 resolution tablets, and I will also be one of those slamming crappy phones. The 2012 Nexus 7 came with gimped storage options...Those Samsung tablets with crap resolutions did not.

The same way ASUS is able to sell their 7" Memopad for $160. Do you really believe that ASUS sells their 7" Memopad at a loss or at cost?

Okay, they may be critical, you're right, but the notification LED is not really a standard yet. We have one manufacturer (Moto) arguing its not necessary and there are better ways. We have other manufacturers half putting them in (HTC), we have others embracing it. It's still a confusing strategy. While it's critical, it's not gimping a phone in the sense that there isn't some sort of universal expectation of an LED notification light.

On the other hand, if you cut storage to 8gb/16gb, I'd say that's pretty obvious gimping. Even if you're ok with 8gb it's far below the norm, so yes that to me is neutering the phone specs. So is cutting out LTE when other flagship phones have it at that point in time.

There isn't some sort of universal expectation for LTE(unless maybe if you're on Verizon which already has LTE plastered all over the place). The only reason you see it is because US carriers are the ones demanding it, and not the consumers. I'm sure if Samsung is able to release a US GS4 on Exynos Octa without LTE like they did in Europe(and virtually everywhere else in the world besides Korea) without the US carrier subsidy model they would have done so in house rather than pay Qualcomm to use their SOC for LTE support.

There also isn't some sort of universal expectation for storage size. If there was, then you would only see one storage size and not Apple and other manufacturers offering 3-4 different storage sizes, or only 1 storage size with a variable MicroSD option. I know plenty of people that 32GB storage is not enough for them, and like wise 64GB is not enough. I also know plenty of people that 8/16GB storage is enough for them. There isn't some sort of universal expectation of storage size that is enough for everybody or even most people.

I'm not okay with 8GB at all.
I don't like 16GB, but I may be open to it depending on the compromises
32GB is my "preferred" choice, but I'm not paying a $100 premium for that over a 16GB version. No way in hell.

I don't really understand you here. The complaints about the Nexus battery are not because its too small. It's sized just fine against the GS3 and HTC One X. The performance was just less than stellar, and worse than its Optimus G counterpart.

The GS3 and HTC One X does not have anywhere near the same engine. Not the same CPU/GPU combination. Feel free to look it up. If the Nexus 4 had the same engine as the GS3 and HTC One X, you'd have a point. The Maxx and other Moto phones released this year have the same engine. The Maxx HD and the GS3 from last year had the same engine.

Regarding the Optimus G, you had to stop what you were doing to cool off rather than throttle. How is that better in comparison than the Nexus 4? Brian couldn't run the GLBenchmark test on the Optimus G back to back without it crashing or choosing not to run at all. He had to do them one at a time and wait in between.

So you have 2 Honda Accords that drive 60MPH...
With one of them(Optimus G), you can accelerate to 80MPH but you have to stop the car to cool of and idle the engine for a bit otherwise you will get into an accident. With the other(Nexus 4), you can accelerate to 80MPH but the engine will automatically throttle to 40MPH to cool after a bit instead of requiring you to stop the car and idle the engine or risk getting into an accident like the first car does. Now with both of them, you do have the option of modding the engine to run on liquid nitrogen(running the benchmarks in the freezer in Brian's case) and both will be fine.

How exactly is your example with the Optimus G better than the Nexus 4?

The Maxx is not a regular phone. The regular phone is the Droid Razr or Droid Ultra (whatever the hell it is now). The fact is Motorola makes it a separate phone. It's a phone with the intent of having one of the largest if not the largest integrated batteries. Like I said, if you want to compare batteries, go for it, but it's no surprise the Maxx will win, which means there's no point in saying a phone sucks because the Maxx is better.

Do you also believe that the Accord EX-L V6 and the Accord EX-L V6 with built-in navigation are not the same vehicle?
Do you also believe that the different Tesla models are not in the same category?
http://www.teslamotors.com/models/features#/battery
According to you then, the Tesla Model S60 is "special" from the Tesla Model S85 which is "special" from the Tesla Model SP85.

You're using an apples to oranges comparison though. What I'm saying is you can't compare the petrol versions of the Accord and Camry and then pull the hybrid version and say "well HA!" It's like when the Accord fan says the 2013 Accord gets better mileage than the 2013 Camry, and then the Camry fan says, well the Camry Hybrid does even better, so therefore your Accord is nothing. Okay, so what's the point? The Hybrid obviously does better than the petrol version in gas efficiency, so what did you prove there? Yes it's a regular car that's sold at the dealership too, so what?

I'm not talking about $300 versus $600. I'm talking about the Maxx. If I say a phone is good in battery life, you will bring up the Note 2 and Maxx. I've already shown you the Note 2 is a different class and that's not a good comparison. You then bring up the Maxx. But I've already shown you that the Maxx is a different kind of phone. It wins in battery, but it doesn't necessarily prove the phone you're comparing it against sucks in battery.

The Maxx is not like an Accord gas vs. hybrid debate. The main part of a car is the engine. The main part of a phone is NOT the battery.
Accord gas and hybrid doesn't have the same engine. The Maxx and other phones(including several others from Moto themselves) do.
If anything it's more like both of them are hybrids, except one comes with an enlarged battery pack by default as an already included "tech package" that cannot be separated which you pay more for so you don't have to buy more gas, while others ship with crap batteries with the ability for you to buy a better battery pack on the open market, and others come with crap proprietary battery packs that are irreplaceable. They all have the same engine, they all have the same major specs besides battery pack. They still have the same Android OS version and SoC running underneath.

You have proven absolutely nothing about the Maxx being a "different" kind of phone from others. It's still running the same exact Android OS version and Snapdragon 600 engine underneath as some other phones are. The only difference is a different coat of paint(TouchWiz/Sense/MotoBlur/Stock and others), a larger battery pack, and some other useless options(insert TouchWiz and Sense gimmicks here) like 20" Chrome alloy wheels and other stupid things that some people pay extra for.

In the end I don't get WHAT you're trying to say. Are you trying to say the Nexus is not gimped/neutered? I really don't get why you're just trying to jump on a few lines out of context like what I said about non-removable SD cards and stuff.

I'm saying ALL phones are gimped/neutered. Whether intentionally or unintentionally is another question that needs to be separately answered and is not the same question.
But ALL phones are gimped/neutered. That part is a fact and inseparable.

 

[lothar]

Wow, trying too hard there much? You know very well the Maxx is designed as a battery monster, not a standard phone. If it was just your typical phone, then why is there a non Maxx version?

You can compare to the Maxx all you want, and yes it does make sense if you say "I wish my [Insert any phone] had the battery life of a Maxx/Note 2," but saying you're disappointed the GS4 doesn't beat the Maxx/Note 2 is not a fair statement.

No one said it was exotic except you.

Yes the data can be included, but it's like reading a review about sedans comparing the Camry and Accord, but you demand that an exotic car's performance be thrown in there for comparison. Sure, useful for reference only.

You were the one equating the Maxx to an exotic car in your analogies, not I nor anyone else in this thread.
Based on your analogy, I can only conclude that you think the Maxx is some sort of exotic phone that shouldn't be compared to any other.

Clearly you had nothing to say about the GS4 Zoom and the GS4 Active. It's not really fair comparing the optics of the GS4 Zoom with a standard smartphone and it's not fair comparing the waterproof abilities of a phone with the GS4. I guess Sony Xperia Z phone is the exception.

If I cared about camera on a phone as much as I cared about battery on a phone, then I would have argued with you on that point.
But I don't care about it and won't waste my breath on arguing on something that I don't care about.

The same thing with waterproofing. If I cared about it, I would have brought up the Xperia Z. But I don't, so I ignored your post entirely and left it for someone else that care about those features.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

HSPA on AT&T is a downgrade compared to LTE.
On T-Mobile's DC-HSPA+ 42 compared to LTE, not really.

Or maybe it was AT&T that didn't fully invest in their HSPA+ network like the rest of the world did with DC-HSPA 42 while AT&T remained on mostly HSPA+ 14 and HSPA+ 21?

LTE is an upgrade in latency. Furthermore given how HSPA acts with network dormancy, it takes a few seconds to initiate that connection. That's a huge difference compared to LTE. In terms of bandwidth you might be getting great bandwidth on HSPA on T-Mobile, but not everyone has that. And please, not every carrier int he world has DC-HSPA. I fly overseas enough with my Nexus 4 and I've only run into DC-HSPA once on a trip to Europe. Every other carrier is simply HSPA+. Going through Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, China, I have yet to see DC-HSPA either. Most of them are going straight to LTE.

So yes you can penalize AT&T all you want but it's not like they're really behind the curve or anything. In fact they got LTE out earlier than most worldwide carriers and tbh I notice far less congestion on their network than the ones I've been on in Asia.

Of course its anecdotal so slam me all you want.

The fact that you think that there wouldn't be any compromise in a $599 flagship model of any phone is in itself laughable.

Now now, we're just nit-picking now too much are we? I should clarify my statement then. I'd gladly pay more for a phone that's not neutered. So I'd gladly pay $599 last year if the Nexus 4 had LTE, more storage, calibrated screen and better camera software (maybe not interface, but at least to be able to produce the same kind of exposures as the Optimus G).

I would have paid $100 more for better storage, better battery, and LTE if such a thing ever existed. Too bad it didn't.
But I absolutely would not pay $100 extra for only slightly more storage(16GB vs 32GB iPhone), or $200-300 for only extra battery(in the case of LG G2 with 3000mAh and this potential Nexus 5 with 2300mAh).

And just because I wouldn't mind paying extra for more features that I would have preferred, does not automatically mean I'm going to get the Optimus G, G2,(or whatever phone) over it's Nexus equivalent in protest either.

I agree, that you and I won't be getting a Nexus equivalent because we value the Nexus brand line too much. Losing updates, development community, and sleek AOSP is not worth it IMO. So in saying that I'll pay

Yes, I am. And finding an exception exactly proves that designing such a thing isn't impossible.

Except I never said it wasn't impossible. I said that by going non-removable opens the door for increased build quality and a smaller form factor. Finding an exception doesn't really disprove that, but just shows that some companies suck. Similarly getting paid more can give you a more comfortable lifestyle, or it could screw you over just as much if you suck at managing money still.

I agree with you on the last part. I only brought it up because you automatically assumed that the benefits of designing a phone without removable battery and SD card means smaller, thinner, and better build quality which is simply not true.
Almost anything can be designed if you have enough bright engineers and designers. There is absolutely no proof that removable battery and SD card means a smaller and thinner device, or better build quality.

It's engineering rationale isn't it? The fact that you need to have a removable cover with slots accessible to the user for the battery and SD card means you have to leave some gap here and there. And how can having a physical gap with the cover result in better build quality than a homogeneous piece of material?

You're right someone can screw that all up and design some piece of crap phone, but if done right it should be better. Like I said, you and I don't have definitive proof that all things equal a removable versus non-removable device is slimmer or fatter because no such comparison exists.

If it's hard to compete at that level then why isn't it hard for manufacturers to compete at the $300-400 level for the Nexus phones. Those same people slamming 1024x600 resolution tablets are also slamming the Galaxy S4 mini, HTC One mini, HTC One S, and other "mini" phones with crappy specs that are being sold for more than the price of a Nexus phone. And a lot of those "mini" phones come with gimped storage too...Not 32GB standard.
I am one of those slamming 1024x600 resolution tablets, and I will also be one of those slamming crappy phones. The 2012 Nexus 7 came with gimped storage options...Those Samsung tablets with crap resolutions did not.

The same way ASUS is able to sell their 7" Memopad for $160. Do you really believe that ASUS sells their 7" Memopad at a loss or at cost?

The manufacturers are having trouble competing with $400 Nexus phones aren't they? There are no $400 flagship phones out there.

There isn't some sort of universal expectation for LTE(unless maybe if you're on Verizon which already has LTE plastered all over the place). The only reason you see it is because US carriers are the ones demanding it, and not the consumers. I'm sure if Samsung is able to release a US GS4 on Exynos Octa without LTE like they did in Europe(and virtually everywhere else in the world besides Korea) without the US carrier subsidy model they would have done so in house rather than pay Qualcomm to use their SOC for LTE support.

The problem with LTE is its so carrier dependent especially with bands and stuff, but here we are talking about an unlocked cell phone. That means it should be working with the maximum # of carriers as possible. Hence the pentaband. Weren't you one of the people who slammed phones for not having AWS? If anything there's far more LTE users than AWS users, so to me LTE should get priority.

There also isn't some sort of universal expectation for storage size. If there was, then you would only see one storage size and not Apple and other manufacturers offering 3-4 different storage sizes, or only 1 storage size with a variable MicroSD option. I know plenty of people that 32GB storage is not enough for them, and like wise 64GB is not enough. I also know plenty of people that 8/16GB storage is enough for them. There isn't some sort of universal expectation of storage size that is enough for everybody or even most people.

I'm not okay with 8GB at all.
I don't like 16GB, but I may be open to it depending on the compromises
32GB is my "preferred" choice, but I'm not paying a $100 premium for that over a 16GB version. No way in hell.

You might not pay that extra $100, but certainly many people do. Samsung, Motorola, Google, Apple all have business models around that. You can even see it with the subsidized phone market.

I think there's a universal expectation for a decent amount of storage on your phone. And what I'm saying is if 16/32gb has been the norm for Apple since 2009, then how is 8/16gb acceptable nowadays? Yes make the excuse that it's the first for a $299 unlocked phone. That's fine and all for a budget option, but I personally would like an option for more. 16/32gb is the minimum configuration I'd be happy with, but I'd be much happier if they push the limits to 64gb.

The GS3 and HTC One X does not have anywhere near the same engine. Not the same CPU/GPU combination. Feel free to look it up. If the Nexus 4 had the same engine as the GS3 and HTC One X, you'd have a point. The Maxx and other Moto phones released this year have the same engine. The Maxx HD and the GS3 from last year had the same engine.

Yes but the reason behind that is because those other phones were released much earlier and therefore were not designed with quad core Kraits at that time. The Nexus 4 was one of the first quad core Krait phones. And Moto doesn't really push bleeding edge, so it's understood they didn't go quad core, and still haven't gone quad core today.

Regarding the Optimus G, you had to stop what you were doing to cool off rather than throttle. How is that better in comparison than the Nexus 4? Brian couldn't run the GLBenchmark test on the Optimus G back to back without it crashing or choosing not to run at all. He had to do them one at a time and wait in between.

I meant battery life was worse. But in general the Nexus 4 was just worse than the Optimus G on many fronts-- poorly calibrated screen, bad camera, battery life.

So you have 2 Honda Accords that drive 60MPH...
With one of them(Optimus G), you can accelerate to 80MPH but you have to stop the car to cool of and idle the engine for a bit otherwise you will get into an accident. With the other(Nexus 4), you can accelerate to 80MPH but the engine will automatically throttle to 40MPH to cool after a bit instead of requiring you to stop the car and idle the engine or risk getting into an accident like the first car does. Now with both of them, you do have the option of modding the engine to run on liquid nitrogen(running the benchmarks in the freezer in Brian's case) and both will be fine.

How exactly is your example with the Optimus G better than the Nexus 4?

Yes the Optimus G handles throttling worse. I'll give it to you that the Nexus 4 wins in the throttling case. But like I said, there's other things the Nexus 4 isn't as good at.

Do you also believe that the Accord EX-L V6 and the Accord EX-L V6 with built-in navigation are not the same vehicle?
Do you also believe that the different Tesla models are not in the same category?
http://www.teslamotors.com/models/features#/battery
According to you then, the Tesla Model S60 is "special" from the Tesla Model S85 which is "special" from the Tesla Model SP85.

The Maxx is not like an Accord gas vs. hybrid debate. The main part of a car is the engine. The main part of a phone is NOT the battery.
Accord gas and hybrid doesn't have the same engine. The Maxx and other phones(including several others from Moto themselves) do.
If anything it's more like both of them are hybrids, except one comes with an enlarged battery pack by default as an already included "tech package" that cannot be separated which you pay more for so you don't have to buy more gas, while others ship with crap batteries with the ability for you to buy a better battery pack on the open market, and others come with crap proprietary battery packs that are irreplaceable. They all have the same engine, they all have the same major specs besides battery pack. They still have the same Android OS version and SoC running underneath.

You have proven absolutely nothing about the Maxx being a "different" kind of phone from others. It's still running the same exact Android OS version and Snapdragon 600 engine underneath as some other phones are. The only difference is a different coat of paint(TouchWiz/Sense/MotoBlur/Stock and others), a larger battery pack, and some other useless options(insert TouchWiz and Sense gimmicks here) like 20" Chrome alloy wheels and other stupid things that some people pay extra for.

I'm not saying they're special in that they're 1 in a million. They're special when compared to the standard version in that they're different. There's no direct competitor with the Tesla S60 and S85 anyway, so you're better off comparing the two. It's obvious the S85 has more range. Now you're just talking about why a 32gb iPhone is better than a 16gb iPhone in storage. It's a no brainer and what's your point? What I'm saying is you need to do apples to apples comparisons. So for example it makes sense to compare two $199 smartphones (w/ contract of course) because you're equating budgets. It makes sense to compare two similar cars like the Camry and Accord. Of course you don't compare the entry level Camry and top of the line Accord and then claim gloat how the top of the line is better. Well duh?

With your logic we might as well just cite the 64gb iPhone which has existed since 2010??? and just say that all other phones today suck because they don't have 64gb. The standard model is the 16gb, so it makes sense to compare against the 16gb.

Until Motorola stops differentiating between the non-Maxx and Maxx phones, they are two distinctly different products.

I'm saying ALL phones are gimped/neutered. Whether intentionally or unintentionally is another question that needs to be separately answered and is not the same question.
But ALL phones are gimped/neutered. That part is a fact and inseparable.

Well that's not what I'm saying. I'm differentiating between an engineering decision that results in a compromise and an intentional neuter which cuts a spec that is seen as an industry standard across other smart phones.

The way an HTC One is "neutered" without a removable battery and storage is NOT the same thing has a Nexus 4 being neutered without LTE and only 8gb of storage.

 

[lothar]

I'm not saying they're special in that they're 1 in a million. They're special when compared to the standard version in that they're different. There's no direct competitor with the Tesla S60 and S85 anyway, so you're better off comparing the two. It's obvious the S85 has more range. Now you're just talking about why a 32gb iPhone is better than a 16gb iPhone in storage. It's a no brainer and what's your point? What I'm saying is you need to do apples to apples comparisons. So for example it makes sense to compare two $199 smartphones (w/ contract of course) because you're equating budgets. It makes sense to compare two similar cars like the Camry and Accord. Of course you don't compare the entry level Camry and top of the line Accord and then claim gloat how the top of the line is better. Well duh?

With your logic we might as well just cite the 64gb iPhone which has existed since 2010??? and just say that all other phones today suck because they don't have 64gb. The standard model is the 16gb, so it makes sense to compare against the 16gb.

Until Motorola stops differentiating between the non-Maxx and Maxx phones, they are two distinctly different products.

Then stop comparing a $300-349 Nexus phone to a $600-$650 phone then claiming that it's been neutered in however way and start comparing the Nexus 4 to it's competition like you're supposed to then.
Compare the $300-349 Nexus 4 to it's competitor in the same price range which are the Galaxy S3 mini, Galaxy S4 mini, HTC One S, and stop trying to compare the Nexus 4 to a top of the line $600 phone like the Galaxy S4, Optimus G2, Optimus G, or iPhone 5 then.
What exactly is the problem?

Fine. Until Apple and other manufacturers stop differentiating between their 16/32/64GB phones, they are distinctly different products.
They are all distinctly different products and have different SKU and UPC #'s after all.

Well that's not what I'm saying. I'm differentiating between an engineering decision that results in a compromise and an intentional neuter which cuts a spec that is seen as an industry standard across other smart phones.

The way an HTC One is "neutered" without a removable battery and storage is NOT the same thing has a Nexus 4 being neutered without LTE and only 8gb of storage.

Answered in below quote.

Well that's not what I'm saying. I'm differentiating between an engineering decision that results in a compromise and an intentional neuter which cuts a spec that is seen as an industry standard across other smart phones.

The way an HTC One is "neutered" without a removable battery and storage is NOT the same thing has a Nexus 4 being neutered without LTE and only 8gb of storage.

If any company is able to achieve something(I don't care whether people call it an exception or not), then I don't see the reason of an engineering decision of why another company couldn't particularly achieve the same without compromise as being a valid excuse.
It's like when I'm in school getting 92 on an exam and I tell my mom that there's this smart person in my class that always gets 99's on all the exams, my mom response to my comment of me being unable to achieve the same is "Does the person have 2 heads?"
If it's achievable, then it's achievable. The fact that only few people or companies can achieve it is completely irrelevant. Do the designers of the company that achieve it have 2 heads?

You also still haven't proven that anything more than 16GB was seen as an industry standard across other smartphones in the year 2012.
What's the sales data breakdown of the 16GB vs 32GB vs 64GB iPhone 5? I'm quite sure the 16GB would have eaten at least 65-85% of those iPhone 5 sales meaning anything >16GB was far from being an industry standard in 2012.

There are many people around the world that care more about battery life than LTE.
Who are you kidding in assuming that a phone with gimped battery life and SD storage isn't the same thing(or even more important than) as being neutered without LTE and only 8/16GB storage?

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Then stop comparing a $300-349 Nexus phone to a $600-$650 phone then claiming that it's been neutered in however way and start comparing the Nexus 4 to it's competition like you're supposed to then.
Compare the $300-349 Nexus 4 to it's competitor in the same price range which are the Galaxy S3 mini, Galaxy S4 mini, HTC One S, and stop trying to compare the Nexus 4 to a top of the line $600 phone like the Galaxy S4, Optimus G2, Optimus G, or iPhone 5 then.
What exactly is the problem?

Fine. Until Apple and other manufacturers stop differentiating between their 16/32/64GB phones, they are distinctly different products.
They are all distinctly different products and have different SKU and UPC #'s after all.

The issue is Google's pricing model is different than all other OEM's pricing. It's not really fair when Google uses revenue from software instead of revenue from hardware.

No I don't expect a $300 phone to have the exact same featureset of a $600 phone. I've said it's fine if they want to go with a few gimped features, but at the same time they should recognize that there are people who want a flagship phone. After all the Nexus is flagship in most aspects except for a few obvious omissions--LTE and generous storage options in line with the rest of the industry. The other mid-range phones you mentioned not only work on a different pricing model, but are missing features left and right. They're smaller, have worse CPUs, worse cameras (except the One Mini), and are clearly middling on most levels. It's not the same as a Nexus with a bleeding edge CPU, GPU, great screen (unfortunately not calibrated). Also, it's not like Google markets the Nexus as a mid range phone. It's just got a mid range price. My concerns would be far different if Google released a GNex-level phone for $249, but that's not the case.

Answered in below quote.

If any company is able to achieve something(I don't care whether people call it an exception or not), then I don't see the reason of an engineering decision of why another company couldn't particularly achieve the same without compromise as being a valid excuse.
It's like when I'm in school getting 92 on an exam and I tell my mom that there's this smart person in my class that always gets 99's on all the exams, my mom response to my comment of me being unable to achieve the same is "Does the person have 2 heads?"
If it's achievable, then it's achievable. The fact that only few people or companies can achieve it is completely irrelevant. Do the designers of the company that achieve it have 2 heads?

There's a major flaw in your logic. You've shown an exception, but it doesn't mean it's now disproved a general trend. I never said its an absolute rule that going to non-removable options GUARANTEES you a smaller form factor and better build quality.

For the sake of not going too far fetched, let's compare two people working on an exam versus 1 (rather than an individual with 2 heads). Assuming the two people aren't going to rip each other's heads off and they're sane collaborators, chances are they will do better on the exam than just 1 person. Is there a chance that you have a genius in the class who does better alone than anyone else? Yeah, but in general two heads are better than one, no? Unless you have some personality clashes that prevent collaboration, the general concept of collaboration usually results in better results.

So let's go back to the phone example. Your exception means that it IS possible to build a phone with good quality with removable components. However, you never answered if it could be even better if built with non removable components. We never really have a fair comparison of removable versus nonremovable.

But based on engineering rationale like I said, a homogeneous material is likely going to have better build quality than a few pieces with gaps.

You also still haven't proven that anything more than 16GB was seen as an industry standard across other smartphones in the year 2012.
What's the sales data breakdown of the 16GB vs 32GB vs 64GB iPhone 5? I'm quite sure the 16GB would have eaten at least 65-85% of those iPhone 5 sales meaning anything >16GB was far from being an industry standard in 2012.

No but where did I say I need to do that? You just showed that for iPhones the minimum is 16gb, and there's a few people using more than 16gb. With the Nexus 4, it's a step back to 8gb/16gb. There isnt an option for more space if I wanted it.

There are many people around the world that care more about battery life than LTE.
Who are you kidding in assuming that a phone with gimped battery life and SD storage isn't the same thing(or even more important than) as being neutered without LTE and only 8/16GB storage?

I was never talking about battery life versus LTE. Those two aren't mutually exclusive.

You keep acting like all other phones = gimped battery life against the Maxx. The Maxx is not representative of what average smartphone battery life is. Like I said it's a niche model designed to have more battery. I don't get why that penalizes the GS4 or HTC One. Gimped battery life is more like the Nexus 4 if you are to believe GSM Arena's Endurance rating figures.

As to your point about no SD storage, this can be a dealbreaker for some like you or me or other tech geeks, but this is why HTC and Apple offer 64gb options of their phones. They are mitigating the loss of an SD card reader. It's a compromise sure, but I wouldn't go as far to say it's gimping considering all other manufacturers are going this route (Motorola, Nexus phones, HTC, Apple).

The Nexus 4 lacks key features that most other competing smartphones have like reasonable storage and LTE. That's why I called it neutering because those features are prevalent across other phones. Now you can explain it with the price and all other excuses, and that's why I'm asking for a more well rounded flagship product. Is it WRONG for me to ask for that?

 

[lopri]

@lothar: You know you're wasting time. Every other day it's about how Android is not as smooth as iOS, how Android sucks up more battery. Even though Android and iOS are completely different platforms. Yet, in his world MAXX (which runs Android) is something special and should be excluded when talking about battery performance of Android phones. Oh, I am sure he has his reasons for this as well. The question is: Do you really care?

I am about to visit an AT&T store to check out the G2. I think we can say 2013 is the golden age of smartphone, as far as Android is concerned. Galaxy S4, HTC One, Nexus 4, Nexus 5, Optimus G Pro, G2, Moto X, Galaxy Mega, Note 3,.. holy moly the choices are overwhelming!

 

[cliftonite]

The issue is Google's pricing model is different than all other OEM's pricing. It's not really fair when Google uses revenue from software instead of revenue from hardware.

No I don't expect a $300 phone to have the exact same featureset of a $600 phone. I've said it's fine if they want to go with a few gimped features, but at the same time they should recognize that there are people who want a flagship phone. After all the Nexus is flagship in most aspects except for a few obvious omissions--LTE and generous storage options in line with the rest of the industry. The other mid-range phones you mentioned not only work on a different pricing model, but are missing features left and right. They're smaller, have worse CPUs, worse cameras (except the One Mini), and are clearly middling on most levels. It's not the same as a Nexus with a bleeding edge CPU, GPU, great screen (unfortunately not calibrated). Also, it's not like Google markets the Nexus as a mid range phone. It's just got a mid range price. My concerns would be far different if Google released a GNex-level phone for $249, but that's not the case.

The Nexus 4 lacks key features that most other competing smartphones have like reasonable storage and LTE. That's why I called it neutering because those features are prevalent across other phones. Now you can explain it with the price and all other excuses, and that's why I'm asking for a more well rounded flagship product. Is it WRONG for me to ask for that?

Yes it is WRONG for you ask for those features. You are NOT entitled to ANY of them. IF you don't like the specs for the PRICE then don't buy the phone. Google is running a BUSINESS if they want to subsidize their phones by getting users to use there ecosystem there is nothing wrong with that. NOTHING is holding Samsung/HTC/LG for creating the same services that Google has that makes me want to buy an Android phone.

And Google markets the Nexus devices as developer devices not some crazy high end device.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Yes it is WRONG for you ask for those features. You are NOT entitled to ANY of them.

It's not wrong to ask for features. You're right. Google doesn't have to listen to customers. Why don't you reply to each one of the posts in the iPhone thread complaining about the 5C costs. Oh wait, you won't because you're biased. When it's a phone you like, there's nothing wrong with it, so anyone asking for more is in the wrong. But if it's a phone you don't like, complain away.

IF you don't like the specs for the PRICE then don't buy the phone.

Ridiculous attitudes like these stymie progress.

Google is running a BUSINESS if they want to subsidize their phones by getting users to use there ecosystem there is nothing wrong with that. NOTHING is holding Samsung/HTC/LG for creating the same services that Google has that makes me want to buy an Android phone.

Google can price things however they like. I'm saying it's not fair to put the loss leader model that Google and Amazon use to comparison with the traditional sales model Samsung, HTC, LG use. Just because the Nexus 4 is priced at $299, doesn't mean you complain why the GS4 is priced at $599 and so forth for every product. Sure you can have a desire for other OEMs to follow and slowly drop their prices, but it's not like you need to start a revolution and burn down Samsung buildings for charging $599. My point is to stop citing the $299 price point as a price that EVERYONE needs to follow. There's two distinctive business models. Even if one is better than the other, the change won't be overnight to get everyone on board.

And Google markets the Nexus devices as developer devices not some crazy high end device.

Perhaps, but the Nexus 4 isn't a mid-range specced phone. This may have been the sentiment when the Nexus program started with the Nexus One, but I can guarantee you Google's not positioning its other Nexus products as just developer devices. You'd be foolish if you think Google's holding the Nexus 4 back just because its a developer device. If anything Google learned how popular the Nexus line could get in 2012, and as seen with the Nexus 7 2013, they're pushing it as a mainstream consumer tablet. Yeah I'm sure everyone buying it at Amazon, Walmart, Best Buy are developers who don't want high end spec phones.

 

[cliftonite]

It's not wrong to ask for features. You're right. Google doesn't have to listen to customers. Why don't you reply to each one of the posts in the iPhone thread complaining about the 5C costs. Oh wait, you won't because you're biased. When it's a phone you like, there's nothing wrong with it, so anyone asking for more is in the wrong. But if it's a phone you don't like, complain away.

Because I don't care about the iPhone. And I never said there was anything wrong with it. The reason I did not buy the Nexus 4 is because of its poor battery like and the lack of LTE. I did not go around whining that Google should have included LTE, 128Gb of NAND, LTE bands in Ethiopia because you travel there.

Google can price things however they like. I'm saying it's not fair to put the loss leader model that Google and Amazon use to comparison with the traditional sales model Samsung, HTC, LG use. Just because the Nexus 4 is priced at $299, doesn't mean you complain why the GS4 is priced at $599 and so forth for every product. Sure you can have a desire for other OEMs to follow and slowly drop their prices, but it's not like you need to start a revolution and burn down Samsung buildings for charging $599. My point is to stop citing the $299 price point as a price that EVERYONE needs to follow. There's two distinctive business models. Even if one is better than the other, the change won't be overnight to get everyone on board.

NO ONE is saying that every phone needs to be $299. I bought my Note 2 because of the features that the extra $300 offered (larger screen, LTE, battery, etc) You are the one who CONSTANTLY WHINES about Google NOT offering ADDITIONAL features @ the $299 price point. If you want those feature you always have the choice of paying for them. YOU are the one who wants features that the $599 phones have for $299.

Perhaps, but the Nexus 4 isn't a mid-range specced phone. This may have been the sentiment when the Nexus program started with the Nexus One, but I can guarantee you Google's not positioning its other Nexus products as just developer devices. You'd be foolish if you think Google's holding the Nexus 4 back just because its a developer device. If anything Google learned how popular the Nexus line could get in 2012, and as seen with the Nexus 7 2013, they're pushing it as a mainstream consumer tablet. Yeah I'm sure everyone buying it at Amazon, Walmart, Best Buy are developers who don't want high end spec phones.

The fact that it does not have LTE, a large battery, and more storage make it a mid range phone. Inclusion of those features would have made it more of a premium product.

 

[lopri]

Nexus 5 revealed, inadvertently. A vendor @Amazon has a skin for the N5 listed, currently unavailable. The release may be imminent.

http://www.amazon.com/Skinomi-TechSk...s=nexus+5+skin

 

[lopri]

Looks basically like LG G2 with less curvage.

Edit: and thinner body so the rumor of smaller battery may be true. Buttons on the side unlike the G2.

Edit 2: Actually a better description would be a stretched Nexus 4. I am liking what I am seeing. I expect the screen is like 90% of the front surface.

 

[dlock13]

That is an exceptionally tiny power button if true!

 

[Red Storm]

That better not be the power button. It's way too high up, needs to be closer to the middle...

 

[dlock13]

That better not be the power button. It's way too high up, needs to be closer to the middle...

Might just be a horrible render to get Skinomi publicity.

 

[VashHT]

That render looks exactly like the N4 to me, not just similar but exactly the same.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

That better not be the power button. It's way too high up, needs to be closer to the middle...

It's barely higher than the Nexus 4. Are you advocating for a power button in the middle? Or just closer to the middle? Basically what position is that?

 

[dlock13]

It's barely higher than the Nexus 4. Are you advocating for a power button in the middle? Or just closer to the middle? Basically what position is that?

I think if that thing is 5" large, it would be smarter to have the button slightly higher than the middle of the side. So if it's that high like in the render, then that is way too high IMO.

 

[kaerflog]

The teardown. Pretty official to me.http://www.phonearena.com/news/LG-N...torn-down-and-on-camera-in-new-filing_id47391

 

[CrystalBay]

I wouldn't be surprised to see the Moto X being down sized either included in the lineup also . This is included in the Gnexus line upD: Or a google edition type Moto x

 

[Eug]

The Nexus 4 is sold out in the Canada Play Store, and has been formally discontinued at one of the carriers too.

Nexus 5 is likely imminent. Looks like it is 68-69 mm wide too. Not for me. I wonder what the pricing will be like though. $350 16 GB again, or more?

 

[lopri]

From the link kaerflog posted:

The filing is for a "class 2 permissive change" for the LG G2, which is the device that the new Nexus is assumed to be based on. Previous filings have indicated that the device will be a bit smaller than the Nexus 4, but have a slightly larger display at 4.96-inches. The device has a 2,300mAh battery, and is expected to be fitted with a Snapdragon 800, at least 2GB of RAM, and of course it will be the first device released with Android 4.4 KitKat.

Is that physically possible?

 

[MonkeyK]

The teardown. Pretty official to me.http://www.phonearena.com/news/LG-N...torn-down-and-on-camera-in-new-filing_id47391

Picture six looks like wireless charging and a removable battery

 

[AViking]

Picture six looks like wireless charging and a removable battery

What about picture 20 though? Sealed battery?