I am in a dilemma which one to buy. Their specs are pretty similar
though the HTC model is better for video and the Galaxy has the extra
UMTS Band V (850 Mhz) that can come handy in some places (though I'm not
sure if I ever go to those places.) Which one would you choose?
> I am in a dilemma which one to buy. Their specs are pretty similar
> though the HTC model is better for video and the Galaxy has the extra
> UMTS Band V (850 Mhz) that can come handy in some places (though I'm not
> sure if I ever go to those places.) Which one would you choose?
Me? -- the extra UMTS band. I have far more use for that
than for handset video :-) . HTH. Cheers, -- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.
On 2011-10-13, tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Oct 2011 11:25:54 -0700, Cameo wrote:
>
>> I am in a dilemma which one to buy. Their specs are pretty similar
>> though the HTC model is better for video and the Galaxy has the extra
>> UMTS Band V (850 Mhz) that can come handy in some places (though I'm not
>> sure if I ever go to those places.) Which one would you choose?
>
> Me? -- the extra UMTS band. I have far more use for that
> than for handset video :-) . HTH. Cheers, -- tlvp
I'd take an extra UMTS band as well, but the spec page here:
On 10/13/2011 2:44 PM, Dennis Ferguson wrote:
> I'd take an extra UMTS band as well, but the spec page here:
>
> http://support.t-mobile.com/docs/DOC-2614
>
> suggests that the HTC phone is a 5-band UMTS phone. You can't
> do better than that, I suspect the Galaxy only supports 4 bands.
If that spec was accurate then I would take the HTC, too, However,
T-Mobile seems to be all over the map with the specs of that one.
I took my info from the spec tab of this page:
On 2011-10-14, Cameo <cameo@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 10/13/2011 2:44 PM, Dennis Ferguson wrote:
>> I'd take an extra UMTS band as well, but the spec page here:
>>
>> http://support.t-mobile.com/docs/DOC-2614
>>
>> suggests that the HTC phone is a 5-band UMTS phone. You can't
>> do better than that, I suspect the Galaxy only supports 4 bands.
>
> If that spec was accurate then I would take the HTC, too, However,
> T-Mobile seems to be all over the map with the specs of that one.
> I took my info from the spec tab of this page:
>
><http://www.t-mobile.com/shop/Phones/cell-phone-detail.aspx?cell-phone=HTC-Amaze-4G-Black>
That one says it supports only 4 bands, but they are the best
4: 2100 plus the 3 North American bands. If you become an AT&T
customer via acquisition, or if the roaming agreement T-Mobile is
rumored to get with AT&T if the merger fails includes 3G service,
the HTC version of the specs still includes all the right stuff.
So I still like the looks of the HTC, based solely on that band coverage,
unless T-Mobile has crippled it further somehow.
On 10/13/2011 9:35 PM, Dennis Ferguson wrote:
> That one says it supports only 4 bands, but they are the best
> 4: 2100 plus the 3 North American bands. If you become an AT&T
> customer via acquisition, or if the roaming agreement T-Mobile is
> rumored to get with AT&T if the merger fails includes 3G service,
> the HTC version of the specs still includes all the right stuff.
>
> So I still like the looks of the HTC, based solely on that band coverage,
> unless T-Mobile has crippled it further somehow.
I agree again, but I don't know which specs to believe till I see some
detailed independent reviews of both phones.
On 10/13/2011 10:07 AM, tlvp wrote:
> Me? -- the extra UMTS band. I have far more use for that
> than for handset video :-) . HTH. Cheers, -- tlvp
I've just read that next week Google might announce its new Nexus phone
(Nexus Prime) by Samsung. Might be worth the wait. Maybe this time it
will be a real world phone, unencumbered by all the carrier junkware.
Hello,I am new here.
I will prefer HTC because my brother bought this last week,It's shape and design is very good,remaining features are almost same as the Galaxy.
>I've just read that next week Google might announce its new Nexus phone
>(Nexus Prime) by Samsung. Might be worth the wait. Maybe this time it will
>be a real world phone, unencumbered by all the carrier junkware.
In the US, the google samsung nexus prime is a verizon phone (CDMA). Very
disappointing.
They announce the phone in Hong Kong which is primarily GSM (or perhaps GSM
only), so I'm sure they must have a GSM version.
Also, some web site says the screen is not as good as the galaxy S II
because of subpixel something which I don't understand.
On 10/22/2011 12:14 PM, bob wrote:
> In the US, the google samsung nexus prime is a verizon phone (CDMA).
> Very disappointing.
That just means that Verizon gets it first, not that it will get it
exclusively.
> They announce the phone in Hong Kong which is primarily GSM (or perhaps
> GSM only), so I'm sure they must have a GSM version.
It's already clear that the phone will also come in GSM version.
> Also, some web site says the screen is not as good as the galaxy S II
> because of subpixel something which I don't understand.
I don't get it either because I thought the more pixel, the better
it is. We'll just have to see when it comes out. I wish we had some
definite dates instead of just "later this year."
By the way, searching at some developer web sites whose participants
already unlocked both the Amaze 4G and the SG2 phones, claim that the
extra UMTS bands are in the unlocked phones. So unless the Nexus Prime
has some compelling features over these two phones, I think I pick one
of these two. I am undecided yet as to which of the two though.
Samsung Galaxy S II or HTC Amaze 4G? 
Linear Mode
