Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by CardJoe, 24 Jun 2010.
There should be no review of IPhone 4 on bit-tech.net.
TechRadar have recently published a good long-term review of the iPad, seeing how it fared over the course of a month.
On release, every other site will publish their iPhone 4 reviews, and they will almost all read like a list of technical specifications. What would perhaps be more interesting, and useful, is a long-term test like TechRadar's, which is more likely to uncover any awkward design flaws or to reveal hidden gems.
I don't get the fascination with this device. Of all handsets for Bit-tech to ask about, they ask about the least impressive device from the last few years. Granted, the iPhone 4 has at least, eventually, met some of the hardware specifications of current handsets, thanks to its decent 5 MP camera and 720p video recording capability, but the iPhone has not been and is still not a revolutionary device when looked at pragmatically.
Does a device earn a revolutionary title merely because of how many units it sells, e.g. the iPhone, or does a device earn a revolutionary title when it enables a new way of interaction, e.g. Wii? Both of the aforementioned products have had the revolutionary moniker associated with them since they've been released, but the latter is the only one deserving of such a title as it brought about a new way of gaming interaction. All the iPhone did was refine an interaction technique that had been available for years. This is not to say that Apple's mobile OS isn't, in some areas, innovative, but it can't be called revolutionary by any standards given its multitude of shortcomings; many of which have only now been resolved by iOS 4, a version of software that has been over 3 years in the making.
In addition, Bit-tech would be foolish to think that reviewing a mobile device would do anything but upset their loyal fan base. Leave mobile reviews to Gizmodo and Engadget and concentrate more on what you're good at.
How about a durability test.
Dropping, Hammer, car, android mobile fight to the death, any thing along those lines
With something like a smartphone - where it's mostly subjective, and only so objective - some 'real-world benchmarks' and a video review of the usability would be great, and a closing statement with some thoughts on the physical feel of the device would be great.
I wouldn't go too in-depth, B-T do a great job with computer hardware & games, you don't need to branch out too much.
Bit Tech review of iPhone 4 should consist of only 2 words.
Real in depth reviews on specific uses would be cool. Which does the best Flash enabled browser, for example. Real low level details other reviews gloss over.
Also don't rule out Symbian devices, there are millions out there. The new Nokia N8 looks like it will be competitive too.
drop test with bumper case! i got it, hope it can survive more than 3 drops.
in the youtube comment about iPhone 3G, iPhone 3G uses ARM 11 IP, not Cortex A8. only 3GS uses a Samsung manufactured A8 originated chip, iPad and iPhone 4 uses Apple's own A4 chip that uses part of Cortex A8 IP.
I would be interested in your subjective impressions of the phones.
e.g if you first conducted the tests and found that in theory phone A is better than phone B
then, try using phone A for a week and then phone B
If you then preferred phone B despite knowing it to be technically worse - that would be interesting!
I think obvious things like the camera picture quality, and battery life are relevant.
Plus as a bonus for you guys i imagine you might get free review samples? maybe you can start giving them out in your competitions!
I think the reason you're struggling, bit-tech people, is that you have a commercial imperative to talk about these things but frankly they don't actually do very much. It's a phone, which is a straightforward device which is trivial to get right with current technology. It's a video and audio player, likewise. It's a web browser, same again. You're struggling for benchmarks; well, that's to be expected, because there's not that much functionality to benchmark. It makes calls, it plays audio and video, it surfs the web. All of these things are easy and all do them well. It ain't a graphics card where you can graph the frames per second. There's almost nothing to say - which is why you and everyone else are struggling to find things to say.
And finally yes, I hate to be a predictable Apple basher, but the differentiation is in the details and the general usefulness of the thing. Apple's devices are predictably well made and the UI is lovely, but they've all been completely hamstrung by company restrictions. You can't use an iphone as a generic USB-attached storage or sneakernet device. You can't just drag and drop video and mp3 onto it. You can't tether it to your laptop. The GPS is almost unusably bad. The battery is effectively a hirohito destructor chip of near-unreplaceable nature.
Every review of ipad or ipod touch or iphone should absolutely castigate it for these horribly obvious failures that other things do out of the box as a matter of course. Compared to many other smartphones, the iphone is terrible in every way. Hopelessly crippled and restricted. But I don't think you're going to do that, are you, because the market has decided that iThings are bestest of all and the press will as usual reflect the market's opinion...
A bit tech reader survey on iphone usage might be a useful preface to an article.
e.g I personally barely use any apps, but access the internet on it a lot (particularly sat on the sofa!). Therefore internet (and wifi) performance is important to me.
You may find that the majority of your readers have very different usage habits - therefore testing other functions would be more relevant to them.
Only if the review looks like this:
Can it make calls and send SMS messages? That's all i need to know.
Honestly, Anand does such awesome reviews of smartphones, that you should either just do exactly what he does, or not bother.
to me, the only really useful review is to see what these phones are like to live with, so you'd have to have one person using multiple phones to repeat the same task to see which coped with regular use best.
you can measure the power of the cpu etc, but as has already been said - the 'performance' of a smartphone is more about how it feels to use it, and you can't measure that in the same way you can a cpu heatsink, and there's less definable data you can retrieve.
stick to what you guys do best before you end up jack of all trades master of none
Only if it's a smartphone round up.
Please do expand to phones! The current pc hardware market is getting stale. Focus on roms for android as well!
Separate names with a comma.