Galaxy Nexus Review • Hacker News Board

Re: Galaxy Nexus Review

#41

Post by dman » Thu, Nov 17, 2011, 10:16 PM UTC

esrauch wrote: post #36

dman wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I only kept my post brief to be polite. While I agree that Hacker News is the place to show off hacks hijacking threads is not the way to do it. If parent poster has a hack that is worth showing on HN he should submit it as a news item and if there is intrinsic merit the post will attract an audience. Posting self promotional information on threads that are tangentially related is in poor taste in my opinion. Its a s…

If he was pushing a random android app on an article that was about a random android phone then you would have a good point. In this case it is more than just tangentially related, the vast majority (read: pretty much all) android phones don't have barometers, this is pretty much the only phone that can even run it. And it also answers the question of "what would I ever do with a barometer on my phone?".

The thing with subjectivity is that it is subjective.

Re: Galaxy Nexus Review

#42

Post by schrieaj » Thu, Nov 17, 2011, 10:18 PM UTC

glimcat wrote: post #15

Complains about the camera's sensor, blames the lens. Wait, what? And what is objectively wrong with it? The big red text complains about "color reproduction" - does this guy know anything about photography? Neither camera is color-calibrated, that's what Lightroom is for.

Actually, a bad lens can have an effect on color reproduction by not letting all light through equally.

Re: Galaxy Nexus Review

#43

Post by gurkendoktor » Thu, Nov 17, 2011, 10:18 PM UTC

polshaw wrote: post #33

I can't believe how much everything is still framed around the iphone. I think its crazy to call this phone just 'competetive' with the iphone 4S; especially the screen-- it is clearly a significant step up IMO. ICS is surely at a point where it can, currently, safely be considered to be ahead of iOS- especially in its unadulterated 'nexus' form. And whilst pentile isn't perfect, its 720p FFS. If that wasn't enough O…

I think it's just very practical (regardless of the light it casts, and FWIW, the Nexus got a perfect score).

Comparing form factors with the iPhone works because the iPhones have always been around the same size. Comparing displays to the retina display works because it's the most common smartphone display.

If they said "it's good" or "it's as good as the ObscurePhone X4", it would be harder for me (and probably others) to rate the Nexus.

Re: Galaxy Nexus Review

#44

Post by justinglow » Thu, Nov 17, 2011, 10:30 PM UTC

Thanks for the kind words about The Verge, everyone! Just a heads up, but we (Vox Media, home of The Verge and SB Nation) are hiring: http://sbnation.theresumator.com/apply

Re: Galaxy Nexus Review

#45

Post by eavc » Thu, Nov 17, 2011, 10:39 PM UTC

Arrington's view of the original Droid is what tipped me fully into buying the phone. I think Josh's review of this may have cemented me for the Galaxy Nexus.

Re: Galaxy Nexus Review

#46

Post by hansy » Thu, Nov 17, 2011, 10:47 PM UTC

icarus_drowning wrote: post #39

Is it just me, or is anyone else incredibly impressed with The Verge? Their reviews are incredibly detailed, and yet they still manage to make extremely interesting, short, and informative video reviews for many products. Add to that the fact that the site, at least to me, is absolutely gorgeous, and I think I've found my new favorite gadget site.

Mine used to be Engadget, but the comment quality is simply awful on the website with flame wars springing up every which way.

I think some of the top-level editors of Engadget left to start The Verge. Because of this, the actual product reviews on Engadget, which I initially liked, have decreased in robustness as well.

Re: Galaxy Nexus Review

#47

Post by glimcat » Thu, Nov 17, 2011, 10:47 PM UTC

schrieaj wrote: post #42

glimcat wrote: post #15

Complains about the camera's sensor, blames the lens. Wait, what? And what is objectively wrong with it? The big red text complains about "color reproduction" - does this guy know anything about photography? Neither camera is color-calibrated, that's what Lightroom is for.

Actually, a bad lens can have an effect on color reproduction by not letting all light through equally.

Factors like chromatic aberration are going to be a problem long before relative quantum efficiency.

Re: Galaxy Nexus Review

#48

Post by canes123456 » Thu, Nov 17, 2011, 10:53 PM UTC

juliano_q wrote: post #2

Quite impressive. 10 for performance and software (iPhone 4S received 8 and 9). The device seems to be very good, but ICS is the star here. I am eagerly waiting to receive the update at my Nexus S.

In the video the phone looked like there is still some lag compared to an iPhone.

Re: Galaxy Nexus Review

#49

Post by InclinedPlane » Thu, Nov 17, 2011, 10:54 PM UTC

matheusalmeida wrote: post #8

juliano_q wrote: post #2

Quite impressive. 10 for performance and software (iPhone 4S received 8 and 9). The device seems to be very good, but ICS is the star here. I am eagerly waiting to receive the update at my Nexus S.

Am I the only one who thinks that a 10/10 is... let's say, hard to believe ? What does that mean? In terms of software, it doesn't have bugs, it's completeley optimized and you have days of battery life and tons of available memory ? Is the integration of all functionalities perfect ? You don't need task managers to kill faulty apps ? Anyhow, we are in a free world where everyone can make reviews and I'm glad we are…

Grade inflation is rampant in reviews. The dynamic range is really effectively about 6.5/7 to 10. So a 10 actually means something more like 3 stars out of 3.

Re: Galaxy Nexus Review

#50

Post by potatolicious » Thu, Nov 17, 2011, 10:55 PM UTC

glimcat wrote: post #15

Complains about the camera's sensor, blames the lens. Wait, what? And what is objectively wrong with it? The big red text complains about "color reproduction" - does this guy know anything about photography? Neither camera is color-calibrated, that's what Lightroom is for.

You can't get RAW files out of that sensor (well, maybe someone will hack something together, but definitely not out of the box). Also, to rely on Lightroom, iPhoto, or any post-processor to get your photos to look good is a stupid strategy. People who take pictures with phone cameras by and large aren't at all interested in tweaking them later.

The onus is even stronger than on DSLRs to get the defaults and automatic settings right, since you're dealing with a demographic that is even less inclined to tweak, but will judge the results nonetheless.

I think the criticism is completely fair.