x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Options
    Close






Samsung Galaxy Nexus release date on Verizon set for Nov 21st?

0. phoneArena 18 Nov 2011, 09:35 posted on

The Samsung Galaxy Nexus is probably the hottest Android device ever made – at least that's what initial expectations and reviews point to, so we can't wait for the 4.65-inch Ice Cream Sandwich…

This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 09:39 6

1. superguy (Posts: 293; Member since: 15 Jul 2011)


I don't believe it until I see Verizon announce it, or it shows up on their website. Been too many let downs with dates.

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 09:43 2

2. protozeloz (Posts: 5396; Member since: 16 Sep 2010)


Yep and 21th is really close

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 11:18 2

34. Synack (Posts: 677; Member since: 05 Jul 2011)


I wonder how much this is going to be retail, because that's what I'll be paying for it. Droid Charge is now up on eBay LOL.

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 09:47 10

4. remixfa (Posts: 14255; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


agreed.

And they better hurry up and release the damn thing. If they do actually have any exclusivity, then everyone else is waiting for them to launch so they can launch it too.

Oh wait.. conspiracy theory time. IF VZW actually has a timed exclusivity.. say a month.. maybe they are pushing it back on purpose to make sure their launch exclusivity window includes christmas to reduce chances of people going to another carrier and increase people going to VZW for the phone.

Just a wild eyed theory, but i wouldnt put it past them.

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 10:01 4

7. iamcc (Posts: 1319; Member since: 07 Oct 2011)


That actually makes more sense than anything I had thought of.

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 10:17 4

11. darkkjedii (Posts: 22148; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)


Good theory

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 10:45 4

23. ayephoner (Posts: 850; Member since: 09 Jun 2009)


good theory remix.

i came in to post that it wouldnt make much sense to launch on monday with no prior info. i expect on monday they will announce the launch date of 11/28 and either announce the preorder or start taking preorders.

and that would make the the month fall exactly past christmas...

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 11:08 2

33. LewsTherin006 (Posts: 140; Member since: 18 Nov 2011)


knowing verizon, you are prolly right. They just released some killer phones, and want to end the phone release spree with the phone that they passed the GS2 for, the nexus. They need to hurry up and release it, i want to get it for Tmobile.

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 11:08 2

32. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5993; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)


It would be nice for the G-Nexus to be released on the 21st. I would make a point to visit the local VZW store to spend some time learning about ICS so I can know what to expect when it gets rolled out for my RAZR next year. Things are popping in Android land.

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 17:15

56. Kmack (Posts: 26; Member since: 15 Nov 2011)


what do you mean let-downs? *coughbioniccough* :P

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 09:46 3

3. newman69 (Posts: 14; Member since: 06 Nov 2011)


ANYWAY IT'S UNOFFICIAL INFORMATION~~~DAMM
I NEED NEXUS ASAP

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 09:54 3

5. nak1017 (Posts: 328; Member since: 08 Jan 2010)


Seriously though, Google and Verizon really sh!t the bed on this one... it's a phone, not medication, just release it already

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 10:50 2

25. ayephoner (Posts: 850; Member since: 09 Jun 2009)


while, im upset its not out yet, im still waiting. as are many. i dont think theyre losing many sales at all due to the delay. and what sales they are losing are to the razr and rezound, which vzw would probably rather have you own anyways.

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 13:08 1

42. nak1017 (Posts: 328; Member since: 08 Jan 2010)


That might be true, but it's hurting google's brand since they're tied to this phone directly. I hope they remember that next time they get the idea to sign an exclusivity contract, as short as it might be...
Verizon is the tip of the spear on the product launch and they're duller than ever.

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 09:57

6. nicodek (Posts: 4; Member since: 18 Nov 2011)


Well as much as I want this phone I'll be debbie downer and point out the Nov. 21st date on theverge was in the article about the UK release and followed a comment about how it was silly to only sell it in one store on launch. So it's possible the google confirmation that it would be available "almost everywhere" on the 21st was only in reference to UK sales.

Also verizon only ever said it would be available by the end of the year and the google/samsung announcement didn't say (IIRC) to the US in November only that it be out in November and it is but sadly only in the UK.

sigh

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 10:05 2

8. kshell1 (Posts: 1143; Member since: 05 Oct 2011)


i still say only a 5mp cam on a flagship phone with ICS is horrible :/ what other flagship only has a 5mp camera instead of a 8mp. h*ll the droid razr in china has a f'n 13mp camera and the same screen as the nexus

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 10:21 5

13. superguy (Posts: 293; Member since: 15 Jul 2011)


MPs aren't everything. If the phone has better optics and software, a 5MP camera can produce a better picture an 8MP camera. Would you rather have a 12MP DSLR or a 14MP point and shoot camera?

MPs are good mostly for scaling and printing. You can make a much bigger print with a higher MP camera.

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 10:21 3

14. baldilocks (Posts: 753; Member since: 14 Dec 2008)


MP ratings have NOTHING to do with camera quality. I can't believe some of you still complain about that... :shakes my head:

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 10:28

18. terabyteRouser (Posts: 457; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)


I'm sure megapixels have something to do with camera quality or else there would be no measurement for it.

I guess it would be more accurate to say that after a certain number of megapixels, the camera confronts the law of diminishing returns and other factors become more important, such as optics.

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 10:31 6

20. remixfa (Posts: 14255; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


megapixels measure image size, not picture quality. That is more involved with software, features, and over all actual camera hardware like the aperture and lens quality.

MPX means NOTHING when talking about quality... only size of the picture.

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 10:37 2

21. terabyteRouser (Posts: 457; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)


So are you arguing that if I had a 1 megapixel digital image from a camera with excellent optics, that it would be equivalent in quality to an 8 megapixel digital image from a camera with the same optical technological capability?

If the answer is no, then relegating megapixels to a non-factor status would be inaccurate.

I would agree that number megapixels have a limited contribution to the final quality of an image, but to say it has no impact whatsoever is simply not true.

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 10:49 3

24. bellringerbrew (Posts: 3; Member since: 18 Nov 2011)


That is exactly the case.

If I take a 1mp sample out of a photo taken with an 8mp camera, the photo taken with the better optics will win every time.

However, if I try to enlarge a 1mp photo to the same size print as I can make with an 8mp photo, of course the quality will suffer.

MP is simple a measurement of the number of pixels in the file. If it helps, think of it as resolution. There is a point where a poor quality screen with high resolution will still look worse than a high quality screen with a lower resolution.

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 10:53 1

27. terabyteRouser (Posts: 457; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)


Lol, the final statement is laughable considering the nature of computer technology.

In the computer world, the number of bits define the level of depth of a particular medium.

Graphics quality:
1 bit - 2 colors
8 bits - 256 colors (.gif image)
16 bit - 65536 colors
32 bit - 4.29 million colors

Music/Video quality:
32 kbps
64 kbps
128 kbps
320 kbps
320 kbps variable bit rate

In digital technology, saying the number of pixels a camera captures is irrelevant is contradictory fundamentals of the digital/analog paradigm.

That's why there is usually a sweet point in digital technology. Once the digital depth reaches of level beyond human imperceptibility then there is very little need to continue to advance the capability.

For instance in gaming, the human eye regards motion as smooth at the rate of 30 frames per second (fps). However display technology for a long period of time only rendered images at 60 Hz-75 Hz, possibly 85 Hz. This made it almost unimportant to have a GPU render beyond the rate of 60 fps.

And the difference between a 1 megapixel image and 5 megapixel image is easily perceived by the human eye. However going from an 5 megapixel to 8 megapixel image (granted that the camera hardware is at a constant of good) would be less perceptible.

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 11:23 3

35. bellringerbrew (Posts: 3; Member since: 18 Nov 2011)


So if I presented you with a photo taken with a 1MP camera and a 1mp crop of the same subject taken from a camera with an 8mp sensor but identical optics as the 1mp camera, you could tell the difference? Of course not as the 2 pictures would be identical (they both will have the exact number of pixels with the same subject matter).

As a photographer, the advantage to more MP is having more to work with when editing, NOT the quality of the photo. I can make larger prints, or tighter crops the more pixels we have to work with - assuming the photo is of a high quality to begin with.

Keep in mind we are really talking about the difference in a 5mp vs. 8mp cellphone camera, none of which have very high quality optics.

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 11:27

36. terabyteRouser (Posts: 457; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)


A 1mp photo and a 1 megapixel crop of a 8mp, I would say yes, I could tell a difference because they wouldn't be the same photo. I mean fundamentally they would have to be different right? Thus not identical. The number of megapixels would be the only thing that is identical...

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 11:49 3

38. bellringerbrew (Posts: 3; Member since: 18 Nov 2011)


They could very simply be essentially the same shot, I would just have to "foot zoom" in for the photo.

What is so hard to understand that MP is simply a measurement of the number of pixels, not the quality of the photo.

This horse is dead.

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 12:21 4

40. burnetet (Posts: 6; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)


You are an idiot.

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 13:43

46. terabyteRouser (Posts: 457; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)


Could you name something that I said that was idiotic?

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 13:39 2

44. ayephoner (Posts: 850; Member since: 09 Jun 2009)


www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.htm

posted on 18 Nov 2011, 13:55 1

49. terabyteRouser (Posts: 457; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)


Great article! It was very informative. I did not realize that film was that much superior to digital cameras.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories