Galaxy S4 - Watch Thread....

ChronoReverse said:
That's ridiculous CHANG3D. Open source has no such implications as you're propounding.
Click to expand...
Open = Chrome OS, Firefox, Open Office, Linux kernel, GIMP, etc (aka pretty much every open-source software released other than Android)

Android = You take what we give you when we give it to you. If you want to make changes, you can fork it.

There is no community development or complete freedom over the software.

Maybe you guys have gotten used to the watered-down definition of "open" for too long.
 
CHANG3D said:
Android = You take what we give you when we give it to you. If you want to make changes, you can fork it.

There is no community development or complete freedom over the software..
Click to expand...

There is absolutely no requirement for an organization to incorporate user-made patches into the official tree. Android is far from the only open source project to do that. Android IS open source. If it weren't, people wouldn't even have the option of forking it.
 
From the Free Software Foundation:
“Free software” means software that respects users' freedom and community. Roughly, the users have the freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software.
Click to expand...
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
Richard Stallman is probably the most stringent and zealous of open source advocates but even he doesn't share your view that you must be able to make changes to Google's code tree. You only need to have the freedom to do what you want to the code for yourself. And that's only GPL.


Apache is opensourced too and all it requires is release of the code with the license (and attribution). In the end, it's just YOUR definition and certainly isn't the end all and be all.




More detail:
A program is free software if the program's users have the four essential freedoms:

-The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).
-The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
-The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2).
-The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.

A program is free software if users have all of these freedoms. Thus, you should be free to redistribute copies, either with or without modifications, either gratis or charging a fee for distribution, to anyone anywhere. Being free to do these things means (among other things) that you do not have to ask or pay for permission to do so.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
LOL , just tried to call T-Mo to order and SGS4 via phone ..... and was in phone support hell , apparently it is odd to want to buy a phone outright without a contract because the transfer he made to a dept. that would help was to the same automated system that sent me to him in the first place :D .... i think ill have to try after work with a different rep (or go to a store wed, apparently corporate T-Mo doesn't want my money now ...)
 
Who cares what Stallman thinks? Dude's crazy. He honestly believes that no software should exist that isn't FOSS. While I can't say that wouldn't be nice, it's definitely not possible. He goes much too far.
 
dandragonrage said:
Who cares what Stallman thinks? Dude's crazy. He honestly believes that no software should exist that isn't FOSS. While I can't say that wouldn't be nice, it's definitely not possible. He goes much too far.
Click to expand...
That I agree with.

P.S. I have met Richard Stallman and had lunch/dinner (dinch?) with him (back in 2005). Table of 6 if I recall correctly. I was the only guy there without a beard.
 
Last edited:
ChronoReverse said:
Talking about 3.0 which Google didn't release the source for.

Come back when you're being relevant to 4.x
Click to expand...
A great majority of the article deals with Android in general. Not releasing Honeycomb source because the software is buggy is just one small paragraph. Come back after you read the statements made from the man you're quoting.

P.S. Feel free to also check out http://fsfe.org/campaigns/android/android.en.html <--- yes a link on from FSF on android...
 
Last edited:
CHANG3D said:
A great majority of the article deals with Android in general. Not releasing Honeycomb source because the software is buggy is just one small paragraph. Come back after you read the statements made from the man you're quoting.
Click to expand...

Yes but it's not really directly Android itself.


I dismissed the crap about binary blobs, Google apps like Youtube as well as hardware manufacturers implementing additional DRM because that's not Android itself.

Furthermore, the argument there is more about copyleft and less about open source. By his definition on his FSF website, Android itself is open.

P.S. Feel free to also check out http://fsfe.org/campaigns/android/android.en.html <--- yes a link on from FSF on android...
Click to expand...
Android is a mostly free operating system mainly developed by Google. Unfortunately, the drivers for most devices and most applications from the "market" are not free (as in free speech, not free beer).
Click to expand...


So no, in the end you're still completely off-base.
 
ChronoReverse said:
Yes but it's not really directly Android itself.


I dismissed the crap about binary blobs, Google apps like Youtube as well as hardware manufacturers implementing additional DRM because that's not Android itself.

Furthermore, The argument there is more about copyleft and less about open source. By his definition on his FSF website, Android itself is open.
Click to expand...
Sorry, you said Stallman and FSF say it's open. I just found direct links from both saying Android is not.

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/android-and-users-freedom.html
http://fsfe.org/campaigns/android/android.en.html

You wanted "proof" from the "experts" on whether it's open... well, sorry, you're wrong. Quoting them here and there without the complete message is wrong.

Now, you can certainly say that who the hell cares what they say because Stallman is a crazy anarchist/socialist. But don't put words in their mouths. I'm sure they wouldn't like it.

I certainly don't mind what Google is doing. Google could play nice with OEM's by giving them the source code a month earlier than releasing to the public. Not that OEM's would do anything with it. And not that Google has to either. Again, I don't mind that Google doesn't go "RTM" prior to releasing their code to the public.

P.S. You just quoted the FSF calling Android a free OS... so how am I wrong again?!? I don't see the word "open" in it.

P.P.S. Other links to check out:
http://www.wired.com/business/2010/10/is-android-open/
http://www.pcworld.com/article/246140/is_android_open_not_so_much_study_finds.html
http://marketingland.com/what-is-the-one-true-android-and-how-open-is-it-21664
 
Last edited:
Who cares 99% of the people buying android don't give a flip if its free or not in any form, it could be as closed source as windows and they would still buy it. Sooner or later we all know google is going to take android proprietary, it will surely be slow and step by step but it will happen. Next time if the Linux nuts want to keep things free tell them to write their liscense better. But they won't ever do that cause they know they probably wont survive without all those companies that jack Linux as a stepping stone.
 
Read your links.

There is talking about combining GPL and Apache. Apache is still open source even if it's not compatible with GPL (which Google may be doing wrongly).

Another I just addressed. The Drivers and Apps that you use with Android is not Android itself. Even the bit about depending on libraries not part of Android is similar because it's device dependent so it's a manufacturer add-on and again not Android itself.



You are wrong. Stallman is having a problem with a subtly different area of Android (and I even feel it would be nice if it were the way he wants it) and he's right about that part (although he may be conflating it with Android itself like you are). But it's again not directly relevant.
 
ChronoReverse said:
Read your links.

There is talking about combining GPL and Apache. Apache is still open source even if it's not compatible with GPL (which Google may be doing wrongly).

Another I just addressed. The Drivers and Apps that you use with Android is not Android itself. Even the bit about depending on libraries not part of Android is similar because it's device dependent so it's a manufacturer add-on and again not Android itself.



You are wrong. Stallman is having a problem with a subtly different area of Android (and I even feel it would be nice if it were the way he wants it) and he's right about that part (although he may be conflating it with Android itself like you are). But it's again not directly relevant.
Click to expand...
Question: do you honestly believe that you can win this debate if it was Richard Stallman himself defending his statements that you are grossly misquoting?

Just wondering...

Once again, I don't care about Google not being open as long as they're free. Seems like you just can't get your mind around it. Well, go support Firefox OS. It's open.
 
CHANG3D said:
Question: do you honestly believe that you can win this debate if it was Richard Stallman himself defending his statements that you are grossly misquoting?
Click to expand...
Nope, you're the one misunderstanding.

Once again, I don't care about Google not being open as long as they're free. Seems like you just can't get your mind around it. Well, go support Firefox OS. It's open.
Click to expand...

Oh gee, Firefox OS also needs the binary blobs to run. I guess it's not open either.
 
Why would you even care if its free changed ultimately 99.9% of everyone who uses android buys it with a device and that device is no cheaper free or not, see all phones have similar price points no matter what OS they run.
 
Just reposting this. Since he ignored it, I'm taking this as an admission to him being wrong (unless he wants to find this nonexistent post).

Medion said:
I'm flattered that I'm constantly on your mind.

CHANG3D said:
He supposedly contacted a known Samsung shill and then vouched for the shill... Honestly, Medion is probably doing a very good job as a Samsung employee...
Click to expand...

Never happened. Link to the post or it never happened.
Click to expand...
 
This train got derailed very fast, this a S4 thread or an android 'open' discussion?
 
I'll get it back on topic, what do current GS3 owners think of GS4? I am not impressed, mostly due to TouchWiz. It makes me think what will it take for Samsung to truly update the software, at this point they are very successfully selling the GS series which have a familiar UI like iPhones.
 
I'm not impressed with Touchwiz at all but the phone itself is very nice. I tried Samsung's gimmicks and promptly turned them all off.

I have the Canadian GS4 so bootloader's unlocked already just waiting for Cyanogenmod to be released (already rooted) =)


I have only one complaint about the GS4 and it's that the bottom bezel is too small. I'll probably get used to it soon enough but I occasionally tap the screen when trying to use one of the buttons.
 
Touchwiz and other bloat crap... Honestly, the only way to use Samsung phones is to root them and install CM or something else that has nothing to do with stock. I have been runnin CM9.1 for ages on my GS and never looked back. I would upgrade but I was stupid and installed SWTOR mobile security key... Makes life hard since this is not my main phone any more.
 
Got an order in-store .... this is honestly the most excited ive been about getting a phone ...... cant wait the next 4 days lol

Any tips for it guys on what to disable immediately ?
 
picked one of these up at at&t in oregon, they have a million in stock. I traded in an Iphone 4 (non s) with a ruined screen from falling into a glass of water and they still gave me 118 bucks for it. So I paid 80 bucks out of pocket. not too shabby. I gotta tell ya...... coming from IOS and a 4.... these things are amazing. we got the 1.9ghz four core in oregon.....
 
W.Feather said:
Got an order in-store .... this is honestly the most excited ive been about getting a phone ...... cant wait the next 4 days lol

Any tips for it guys on what to disable immediately ?
Click to expand...

As soon as you boot it up, go to your apps list. Make a mental note of things you want to get rid of (write it down if more than a few).

Then, from the home screen, hit the menu button and select settings. Scroll to applications/application manager. Swipe to the far right menu (ALL), and begin scrolling down. As you find apps that you want to remove, click on them. Select "Force stop", then "clear data," and finally, "disable" which will be in the top right where the "uninstall" button would normally be. If it instead says "uninstall updates," do that, and then "disable" should become an option. After the JB update to my SGS2, I must have disabled at least 30 Samsung/Google apps that I don't care to use.
 
Ah so they let you disable em easier now huh?

Ive had Nexus only devices for bout two years. Last Galaxy I had was the S2 ..... honestly cant wait to get wifi calling back lol.


Ill end up playing with it stock for a bit, played with the demo unit @ t-mo today, and honestly didnt see any of the lag people are complaining about, must not be on the t-mo units ? (TW is still fugly)
 
Just a few tidbits here. First, the "HTC will get CM, Samsung will not" fanboys may want to bury their heads in the sand for this one.

CM 10.1 nightlies are starting to hit the S4, starting with the T-Mobile variant. Steve (Cyanogen) Kondik goes on to pre-announce that the international Exynos 5-equipped i9500 WILL be getting CM 10.1 in the near future.

http://blog.gsmarena.com/cyanogenmod-10-1-nightly-available-for-samsung-galaxy-s4-for-t-mobile/

The next tidbit shows just how dumb some of the "developers" in our community can be.

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/XDA-Big.LITTLE-Kernel-Exynos-5,22420.html

That's right folks, after Samsung repeatedly stated that Exynos 5 will be alternating quad-core and will NOT work in 8-core function (a mode that is supported by Big.Little but not implemented in Exynos 5 at this time), a developer comes out and complains that the Exynos 5-octa does not work as an 8-core CPU. Brilliant! I suppose tomorrow he's going to predict a sunrise as well!
 
Poorly written article, the focus from the developer is trying to get across that the kernel can't differentiate work loads between an a7 and a15 and how some programs would only stay on the a15. Terrible article by tom's.
 
Trimlock said:
Poorly written article, the focus from the developer is trying to get across that the kernel can't differentiate work loads between an a7 and a15 and how some programs would only stay on the a15. Terrible article by tom's.
Click to expand...

Guess I need to eat some crow. I should have went to the source first.

Here's the thread that started the article.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2258519

Basically, he's stating that battery life comparisons won't mean much until they finalize the driver (unless this ends up being a hardware limitation). Also, he answered one of my questions in a subsequent post. Basically, I wondered how the OS would see the CPU frequencies, because the OS never seens an 8-core processor, either A15 or A7. All the OS sees is ARMv7 quad-core.

So apparently, the A7 is mapped at half frequency, up to 600mhz, and the A15 is mapped 1:1 at 601mhz to 1600/1800mhz (depending on model, as the Korean model goes to 1.8ghz).

So if the OS is reporting 500mhz, that means that the quad-A7s are running at 1ghz, but at 601mhz, it's A15 running at 601mhz. He goes on to explain that if you use a CPU-controlling app (like SetCPU, my personal favorite), to keep your device locked at 600mhz or lower if you want to use the A7 exclusively (at 1.2ghz).
 
I saw a S4 at one of the local Best Buys. The screen was gorgeous looking. My Droid Bionic's screen is crap when side by side lol. I'm on Verizon though, I wonder why they always release a phone a month after everyone else.
 
skigz said:
I saw a S4 at one of the local Best Buys. The screen was gorgeous looking. My Droid Bionic's screen is crap when side by side lol. I'm on Verizon though, I wonder why they always release a phone a month after everyone else.
Click to expand...

Droid Bionic's screen is crap compared to almost anything. They used a PenTile LCD w/ white subpixels for increased brightness. It is without a doubt the worst smartphone screen that I have EVER seen.
 
skigz said:
I saw a S4 at one of the local Best Buys. The screen was gorgeous looking. My Droid Bionic's screen is crap when side by side lol. I'm on Verizon though, I wonder why they always release a phone a month after everyone else.
Click to expand...

TBH, the Bionic's pentile qHD LCD was/is crap when side by side anything else :p. I thought it was worse than my OG Droid's display despite the resolution difference.

I usually say Verizon is so much slower to launching phones because they have to figure out the best way to put their logos on the front of the phone and lock it down more so than other carriers. But it seems that they're going going to brand the front of the GS4 like they did the Note 2 and AT&T still got their GS4 out on time with a locked/signed bootloader. So honestly I don't think they have any excuse other than their craptastic phone/update vetting ("testing") process.

Edit: Argh, Medion beat me to it about the Bionic's screen, lol.
 
Last edited:
Medion said:
Droid Bionic's screen is crap compared to almost anything. They used a PenTile LCD w/ white subpixels for increased brightness. It is without a doubt the worst smartphone screen that I have EVER seen.
Click to expand...
Was great in the daylight though :p
 
Medion said:
Droid Bionic's screen is crap compared to almost anything. They used a PenTile LCD w/ white subpixels for increased brightness. It is without a doubt the worst smartphone screen that I have EVER seen.
Click to expand...

Yeah the display is pretty horrible. I wasn't trying to imply that it was a good screen. I got it mainly because it was the first Verizon phone to have dual cores and LTE.

Can't wait to get a S4 though!
 
Having used the GS4 for little while... its OLED display isn't that hot, I'm afraid.

It's still too dark in bright outdoor light, the color isn't quite right and I can actually notice the PenTile layout even at 1080p (it's just less visible than it was on the GS3). The HTC One and iPhone 5 are far far more viable outside and are just nicer to look at, even with the iPhone's smaller screen size. It's not a terrible screen -- look at the Xperia Z/ZL for that -- but it reflects Samsung's fixation on promoting OLED over picking the best panel. It's not like there aren't thin LCD smartphones.
 
I still want to play with an S4 and a HTC One side-by-side. Best I could do today was grab them at Target (where you can't power them on). At the risk of sounding like a Samsung fanboy/shill, I'm going to go against the grain here on build quality.

Make no mistake, the One uses superior materials. In terms of build material, the One wins handily. But in terms of build quality, I'll take the S4. It felt solid in my hands, more so than the S3. It did not feel flimsy at all. I didn't feel any gaps or ridges on the device. It felt truly solid. The One, by comparison seems like two aluminum pieces joined by a plastic ring, like a plastic/metal sandwich. I felt gaps and ridges. And on the front, the glass was near flush with the aluminum on the left side, but not even close on the right. I'm hoping that it felt like crap only because it was a Target display model. So, I'll give it the benefit of the doubt until I get my hands on an operational unit. But from what I saw today, HTC has the better materials, and Samsung has the better build quality. Please note this is just an observation. In the end, build quality doesn't matter to me since either will go into a case.

And WOW, at the sheer size of the screen. Holding the S4 and S3 side by side, they seemed to be of comparable length and height, with the S4 seeming slightly smaller. In fact, the official specs have them both listed as 136.6mm tall and the S4 being 0.8mm narrower (width). And despite this, the screen is larger. I felt like I was holding a nearly bare screen. This is very impressive engineering, IMO.

The S4 has moved up in my short list of phones (it was near the bottom). I will try to play with an operational S4 and One and see if either is worth my time. But for now, my shopping list seems like:

  1. Nexus 5 (if 32GB+ and LTE)
  2. Motorola Fall lineup
  3. Galaxy S4
  4. HTC One
  5. Nexus 4 LTE
  6. Sony Xperia Z

If the S4 or One knocks me off my feet, I'll snap one up this month. If they both leave me wanting, I'll look to the upcoming alternatives. The Nexus 4 LTE would have won me over if it had existed last October. As it stands, a rumored May unveiling and June launch puts it 4-5 months before the next Nexus, so why bother? The Xperia Z is both ridiculously expensive for an unlocked model (16GB model costs $100 more than the HTC One 64GB developers edition), and lacks AWS HSPA+ support.
 
Medion, the Z is coming to T-Mo shortly.

That being said, I really wish the One was a true unibody design, much like an improved Desire HD. I'm not really impressed with anything out there right now, but I know I'm not a fan of the size of my Note 2.
 
I've been using my GS4 naked for the past couple days while waiting for my Spigen Neo Hybrid case to come in. Being VERY careful because I might cry if I dropped and broke it haha. This thing is amazingly light too (although for some reason, lightness is no longer considered a premium quality like it was 10 years ago).


I've been comparing it to a friend's GS3 and wow they really do look alike. On the other hand, the feel in hand is noticeably different if you grip it and apply some force. People have complained about creaking in the GS3 (and I've noticed it in my Note 1) but it's absent for the most part in the GS4. However, creaks sometimes develop over time so I'll see what it's like down the road in 3 months.


Screen is day and night compared to previous AMOLEDs I've owned (Nexus One, Note 1). I owned the One X instead of the GS3 and always ribbed my friend about his way less sharp GS3. I can't see the effect now even when looking for it (and I know how to look for it). I suppose having the Red and Blue subpixels individually on par with the iPhone 5's screen means you'd need to be closer than 6 inches to see the Pentile effect at all. I bought a large screen so I don't have to peer down my nose at it =)


Camera is only par for indoor shots. It's quite capable for static shots (if you have a steady hand) but will not capture motion as well as the One can. Outdoors though, the camera is brilliant.

Here's some stuff I snapped over the weekend. Every one was using Full Auto, no Burst (so I didn't just take a bunch at once and choose the best one). I've noticed Sport mode bumps up the ISO and doubles the shutter time. Pictures which would use ISO-50, 1/1300s shutter would be ISO-100, 1/2600s shutter instead. I'm happy with the outdoor results, there's a bit too much oversharpening done in the filters but the halos are only really visible at 100%. Click to open full size.

My bike wheel after I set it spinning.


Chose a dandelion to see the captured details.


The red turned out nicely.


Cropped from original. Not sports mode.


Cropped for the detailed part.


Cropped and not sports mode to capture the motion.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top