Bummed.

[cckgz4]

16gb 4S is $199 with contract. Sorry, the Titan is not even close to on par with the 4S. Does not mean I will not still be getting a Titan over a 4S, but it should be cheaper for me to do so. Droid Bionic can be had for $150 on contract.

I'm not about to argue especially over opinions, but they have the same memory, same camera, and the titan has a bigger screen. In the end its all about preference. Wp7 shouldn't have to slash all its phones done just to get a leg up when they have a radar for 99, the focus and hd7 for 50 along with the flash. Sorry but I don't feel the same way. And the sidelining isn't called for from others. This isn't a competition, at least not for the consumers

 

[lumic]

I think it's merely a case of hardware requirements. At this stage, dual-core is unnecessary, but Apollo will very likely change that.

There are some things you must consider here. Windows Phone has the capability to run virtually anything that has been thrown at it smoothly. The problem of weaker hardware lies in several areas:

- Browser loading times and app loading times. Make no mistake, they are slower than dual-core devices and this is one area which can definitely be improved upon.

- Sloppy developers and bad coding. Why do some apps run slow? Because the developer is too lazy to optimise or write code properly. This can't be helped, so just throw better hardware at it. Seriously.

- Gaming. This shares a lot with the previous point - I think the reason that we don't see crazy 3D titles is because many developers simply don't know how do push out that quality while maintaining performance. The fact that The Harvest remains untouched after a year is troubling.


As for the hardware argument, I do think the manufacturers should have done a little bit more. The upfront cost is literally nothing in comparison to the subsidies obtained through the life of the contract, and wasn't Microsoft halving the production costs of Windows Phones? The Radar should have been $50, the Titan and Focus S $150. The Lumia should be $100.

 

[canesfan625]

As for the hardware argument, I do think the manufacturers should have done a little bit more. The upfront cost is literally nothing in comparison to the subsidies obtained through the life of the contract, and wasn't Microsoft halving the production costs of Windows Phones? The Radar should have been $50, the Titan and Focus S $150. The Lumia should be $100.

They have about cut it half from when it was first released. BOM is still around $220. It will probably be later 2012 before anymore cuts. The biggest reason for the cuts are to get more vendors on board. Not necessarily to pass on to consumers.

 

[glidingsideways]

I am, for sure. But I don't think most people care about RAM and number of processors. But people like you and I surely want to know these things.

I am actually a tech geek.. I build and fix computers for fun and I am a gamer guy.. And I use pro tools on an eyefinity set up at home with a hexacore cpu OC"ed with an aftermarket cooling soution.. just as an example that I kinda know what I am doing.

However I don't need a dual cpu on my phone.. and especially not on WP7.. the OS is clearly very well optimized... Everything is smooth as ice on my Focus S. Yes I paid 149.99 for it and yeah maybe I over paid a little bit if you want to compare it to a High end galaxy nexus 2 or whatever but to me its a beautiful phone that does everything and more.

I came over to wp7 from android and honestly maybe it was just me but I found android to be incredibly buggy.. battery hogging... and hitchy.