• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

***Official Galaxy Nexus Pre-Release speculation thread**

Status
Not open for further replies.
xtop said:
you're not worried about what jcase said?



edit: and by worried, i mean, if those specs are indeed wrong, does that mean the whole thing is wrong? or just those specs. hmmmm
Click to expand...

Oh, I see what you meant. I'm not too worried. The guy who supposedly used it is a longtime poster on AC, and seems to have their trust. I've read some of the most negative garbage in that forum, so to have them trust what he says might mean something.

Also, as CK has said, testers might have had the device at different times of development.

Steven's love tunnel, remember, also said that it had a larger battery than the 1750 mAh that teamandIRC claims, and that it was very fast and smooth, and that it was running at 1.5 GHz. This matches up to the latest leak by the AC guy.

I shall believe, I shall believe!
 
S1dewinder said:
Didn't Samsung do this with the Galaxy SII in Europe/Asia. If I remember correctly, you tapped the bezel to launch the search function (since a search button was lacking).
Click to expand...

I don't know if I'll like this. Won't accidental touches make life miserable all the time? I use my phone in portrait mode all the time for texting and emails and i can see me accidentally going into search mode on a constant basis. Please tell me I'm thinking way too into this:(
 
trophynuts said:
cool. I read the article this morning about his travel plans. I often fly to SouthEast Asia many times a year so i definitely know what he is about to go through.....the Jet Lag coming back is BRUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUTAL!!
Click to expand...

I travel to China on work often and the jet lag on the way back isn't as bad as flying in going to bed and waking up 6hrs later for a marathon trip between factories! Asia is a fun experience and the accommodations are top notch and affordable.
 
burntorangefan said:
I think you've missed the point. The original poster believed a company had the right to protect what they believe is theirs. Your original post, which said: "This assumes that one agrees (with the US Government) that IP is something that can be legitimately owned." My point, and I wasn't making an ad populum fallacy argument, was that there are MANY countries which acknowledge intellectual property rights (most) and agree with the original poster's argument. It's not a debate in your freshman or sophomore philosophy logic class. In the real world, laws exist that govern such rights. The philosophical merit of those laws may be in question - as you've properly noted. I was trying to point out that the original poster is backed up not only in the US, but in courts all over the world. Sorry, I may not have done a good job of making that clear.

I went on to say that if you don't believe in IP rights you shouldn't be posting, which is too far. There are clearly people that believe in open source as an end all be all proposition and that no one owns ideas. Fair enough, but unfortunately, I don't have the time to debate that with you either here or in PM. Besides, it detracts from the main point of the thread which is all of our eagerness to have this phone....Let's all enjoy the newest leak, crack a cold beer (if you're of age) and enjoy the announcement tomorrow night! Take care...
Click to expand...

Please, we're begging you guys... Do this in another thread, please? I know it's kind of a 'anything goes' thread, but even so.. It's not unimportant, just totally off the discussion track here .
 
Apparently, on early Sunday morning, I incoherently babbled something about Ice Cream Sandwich to my wife in my sleep. All this waiting is getting to me!
 
binary visions said:
I know what your point is. It's just incorrect ;)

Your service is your service. It's a fixed cost. Verizon isn't making $14.58/month more profit just because you purchased the phone outright, and they aren't paying out $14.58/month for the entirety of your contract.

There's a marginal cost that we're discussing here. That's the $350 difference between on-contract and off-contract. Verizon is paying that, in return for getting a guaranteed revenue stream from you. If they don't pay that, they don't ask for anything extra from you. Since these phones aren't worth anywhere near $649 to Verizon, their actual cost associated with this is very small - and were they to drop your bill by $14.58, it would be a huge money sink for them.

Don't equate value with retail pricing. The phones have a value to Verizon of probably between $200 and $300. Just because you must pay $649 off-contract doesn't mean that Verizon values them at that price.

Lastly, consider: if you are on-contract, you have to buy the phone from Verizon or a Verizon-authorized dealer. If you are off-contract, you could buy the phone anywhere. So your additional $350 that you paid isn't going to Verizon at all in that case.
Click to expand...

*SIGH*

I was basing my math on buying the phone full retail FROM Verizon, so yes, they WOULD get the extra $350 and still charge me for it over the months as I continue month to month. Why buy it from Verizon? Because they're the ones who are going to have the phone in stock on Launch Day, and that's when I want the phone.

Equally, I bought my OG Droid subsidized on November 6, 2009. So at the end of my term, my monthly rate should drop because I'm done paying for the phone, right? I know that won't happen... but it should.

So IF I buy the phone full retail from Verizon, my bill should drop because I'm not subsidizing anything. If it doesn't go down, then they're effectively charging me each month for a phone I've already paid for.

Do I smell a class-action lawsuit in here? ;)

You think you're right, I think I'm right. We may BOTH be right from different perspectives. I believe we may have to agree to disagree on this one...
 
bldgengineer said:
I thought that was reserved for Han? :D:D
Click to expand...

If I remember correctly, he prefers to be called Hans. :cool:

bruno-lederhosen.jpg
 
Don S said:
Please, we're begging you guys... Do this in another thread, please? I know it's kind of a 'anything goes' thread, but even so.. It's not unimportant, just totally off the discussion track here .
Click to expand...

I second the crap out of this one.

AntimonyER said:
Try again, Steven will be getting that one as well. He is a ninja.
Click to expand...

Since when is a Ninja equivalent to a thieving criminal? :p

smittysmitt3434 said:
If I remember correctly, he prefers to be called Hans. :cool:

bruno-lederhosen.jpg
Click to expand...

Gross! Now I have to pour bleach in my ears to clean my brain of that image. Hide that crap! Ick!

I'm so happy today, guys! Did you see the freaking Bears game last night?! Can anyone say Super Bowl?! Yee haw!!!
 
I hope everyone realizes that this is the last day we will be able to get all excited or depressed about rumors about the next nexus device. It will all be official tomorrow night.

I didn't participate all that much in this thread, but I am going to miss reading the ramblings of some of you....

:D
 
metasin said:
I have been wondering about the rumored tension between Google/Samsung and Verizon (sorry to bring that back up). What if VZW and Moto were going to surprise us and announce that the RAZR was actually going to release with ICS? How would that work now that their event is proceeding the G/S event?
Click to expand...

It just doesn't make sense. If the razr was launching with ICS why would it have the buttons on bottom?
 
I had a dream last night that I had the nexus and I was so caught up in playing with it that I didn't go to sleep until an hour before I had to get up for class. I could easily see this happen in the near future.
 
The_Chief said:
*SIGH*

I was basing my math on buying the phone full retail FROM Verizon, so yes, they WOULD get the extra $350 and still charge me for it over the months as I continue month to month. Why buy it from Verizon? Because they're the ones who are going to have the phone in stock on Launch Day, and that's when I want the phone.

Equally, I bought my OG Droid subsidized on November 6, 2009. So at the end of my term, my monthly rate should drop because I'm done paying for the phone, right? I know that won't happen... but it should.

So IF I buy the phone full retail from Verizon, my bill should drop because I'm not subsidizing anything. If it doesn't go down, then they're effectively charging me each month for a phone I've already paid for.

Do I smell a class-action lawsuit in here? ;)

You think you're right, I think I'm right. We may BOTH be right from different perspectives. I believe we may have to agree to disagree on this one...
Click to expand...

I think that people are focusing on the wrong thing here. It's not about getting the service at a discount, it's just about being able to cancel your contract whenever you feel like it and switch carriers without paying a ETF. That's it. It has nothing to do with getting a discounted service. By signing the contract you're telling VZW that you promise to stick with them and give them your business for 2 years and they reward you for that by discounting your phone. If you pay full retail for your phone, and don't sign a contract, then why would they reward you for not promising to stay with their service?
 
The_Chief said:
Welcome to the forums and my point exactly!

If I pay full retail for the phone, my bill should go DOWN substantially because they're not subsidizing anything. If my bill doesn't drop, there's no reason to pay them TWICE for the phone by going the full retail route.
Click to expand...

Then don't buy it full retail? Not that difficult and good luck trying to get them to reduce your bill. Your bill has very little to do with phone prices.
 
binary visions said:
I know what your point is. It's just incorrect ;)

Your service is your service. It's a fixed cost. Verizon isn't making $14.58/month more profit just because you purchased the phone outright, and they aren't paying out $14.58/month for the entirety of your contract.

There's a marginal cost that we're discussing here. That's the $350 difference between on-contract and off-contract. Verizon is paying that, in return for getting a guaranteed revenue stream from you. If they don't pay that, they don't ask for anything extra from you. Since these phones aren't worth anywhere near $649 to Verizon, their actual cost associated with this is very small - and were they to drop your bill by $14.58, it would be a huge money sink for them.

Don't equate value with retail pricing. The phones have a value to Verizon of probably between $200 and $300. Just because you must pay $649 off-contract doesn't mean that Verizon values them at that price.

Lastly, consider: if you are on-contract, you have to buy the phone from Verizon or a Verizon-authorized dealer. If you are off-contract, you could buy the phone anywhere. So your additional $350 that you paid isn't going to Verizon at all in that case.
Click to expand...
I understand Cheif's thought process, but you are completely correct here.

I posted earlier that whether the phone is $50 or $600, it hardly compares to my two year service price of $3500 :eek:.

Verizon does make more profit from unsubsidized phone purchases, but it is a drop in the bucket compared to the service charges. They are willing to take a few hundred less upfront, to gain thousands on the backend.

I remember we had this discussion in the DX forums where people were compaining about being locked into a contract. No one is ever locked in, you're free to leave anytime you want, just have to pay the ETF. The ETF plus subsidized phone costs is approximately equal to the unsubsidized phone cost, so I don' understand why people want to buy they phone unsubsidized, thinking they are going to "stick it to the man".
 
The_Chief said:
I'll bet I am paying twice for the phone!

Look, I understand that if I pay $299 for Gnex, I'm locking into a 2-year revenue stream for Verizon while they make up the difference in price and make a profit on the phone. But if I buy the phone outright, they've got their costs and profit up front and have no business charging me again.

$649 Full Retail minus $299 subsidized = $350 that Verizon is spreading out over two years. $350/24= $14.58 per month. If I pay full retail for the phone, my bill should DROP $14.58 because I already paid for the phone and there's nothing to subsidize! But I betcha the monthly rate WON'T drop.

And THAT'S the point I'm trying to make here.
Click to expand...
$649? What phone other than the iphone costs that full retail? None on verizon the bionic is the most at 589. Can't see this being much more full retail since the nexus s was 529 and the nexus 1 also was 529 full retail.
 
The_Chief said:
*SIGH*

I was basing my math on buying the phone full retail FROM Verizon, so yes, they WOULD get the extra $350 and still charge me for it over the months as I continue month to month. Why buy it from Verizon? Because they're the ones who are going to have the phone in stock on Launch Day, and that's when I want the phone.

Equally, I bought my OG Droid subsidized on November 6, 2009. So at the end of my term, my monthly rate should drop because I'm done paying for the phone, right? I know that won't happen... but it should.

So IF I buy the phone full retail from Verizon, my bill should drop because I'm not subsidizing anything. If it doesn't go down, then they're effectively charging me each month for a phone I've already paid for.

Do I smell a class-action lawsuit in here? ;)

You think you're right, I think I'm right. We may BOTH be right from different perspectives. I believe we may have to agree to disagree on this one...
Click to expand...
The thing that you don't understand is that the bill you pay is different from the cost of the phone. They are not related. VZW and others save themselves with a ETF to recoup their money. Your bill isnt going to go down and good luck trying to sue, that is what every american does and look it shows with how our country is today.:rolleyes:
 
Boy have I opened up a keg of worms here...

I know Verizon will not lower my bill, though they SHOULD in principle. I also understand that I'm merely paying $350 more for the convenience of leaving Verizon any time I want to (doubt that - everyone else has crappy service here and no one else has LTE here).

SO: I shall likely pay the subsidized price, remain a serf of Verizon, and bank the $350. That'll help cover the cost of my new entertainment center (coming Black Friday/Cyber Monday because I want a friggin' DEAL :D ).

The end. You win. I win. We all get Gnexi. And Verizon wins big time... that's why they have great big buildings and we have little bitty houses :p
 
xtop said:
you're not worried about what jcase said?



edit: and by worried, i mean, if those specs are indeed wrong, does that mean the whole thing is wrong? or just those specs. hmmmm
Click to expand...


Pretty sure the 4460 is the 1.2ghz version, so not an issue of underclocking, since that would be stock speed. 1.5 ghz would be overclocking it.
 
nj02vette said:
I understand Cheif's thought process, but you are completely correct here.

I posted earlier that whether the phone is $50 or $600, it hardly compares to my two year service price of $3500 :eek:.

Verizon does make more profit from unsubsidized phone purchases, but it is a drop in the bucket compared to the service charges. They are willing to take a few hundred less upfront, to gain thousands on the backend.

I remember we had this discussion in the DX forums where people were compaining about being locked into a contract. No one is ever locked in, you're free to leave anytime you want, just have to pay the ETF. The ETF plus subsidized phone costs is approximately equal to the unsubsidized phone cost, so I don' understand why people want to buy they phone unsubsidized, thinking they are going to "stick it to the man".
Click to expand...


Of course if you're in the USA your best bet is to buy it on Verizon... but many of us are outside USA so we need to buy it unsubsidized (and unlocked). That's the point to pay 650 dollars for it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom