x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Options

Apple iPhone 4S vs Motorola DROID BIONIC vs Samsung Galaxy S II T-Mobile

0. phoneArena 27 Oct 2011, 09:44 posted on

All launched relatively close to one another, the Motorola DROID BIONIC, Samsung Galaxy S II for T-Mobile, and Apple iPhone 4S are all vying for supremacy in being proclaimed as the best of the best. We’ve all waited long enough this year to finally see these quality smartphones, so which one will ultimately outgun the rest in finding itself home in your hands?...

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

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 09:49 4

1. quakan (Posts: 1373; Member since: 02 Mar 2011)

my fav is the 4s but i also like the bionic as well.

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 09:53 18

2. RORYREVOLUTION (Posts: 3108; Member since: 12 Jan 2010)

Bionic is future proof? Its successor is coming out in a few days lol get that instead.

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 10:53 2

10. snowgator (Posts: 3586; Member since: 19 Jan 2011)

It is getting ICS, it is a great, quick device, wonderful reception and great LTE response... Maybe the RAZR will be slightly better with it's screen and really, really great materials that make up it's body. But the Bionic is a great device and will be a great buy even after the RAZR comes out.

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 11:00 6

11. RORYREVOLUTION (Posts: 3108; Member since: 12 Jan 2010)

I am willing to bet the RAZR will get ICS first. And besides this article is basically suggesting which phone of the three you should get. When in reality you should wait a few days for the RAZR.

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 11:22

14. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5711; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

out of the three the Bionic is the clear winner. the Bionic is going to be $50 cheaper than the Razr and to some people that matters. it's not to me because the 2 year contract is a bigger deal than the money by a long shot and i'd want more bang for my buck.

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 13:33 4

53. bigdawg23 (Posts: 449; Member since: 25 May 2011)

Bionic is not a clear winner. I have owned the iPhone 4, Atrix (Very close to the Bionic) and now SGS 2 on AT&T. SGS 2 is the best phone I have owned. The camera is better IMO.

After 6 Months with an iPhone 4, that screen is just too small. Yes the SGS 2 lacks resolution but as they reviewer said the screen covers some of that up.

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 13:42 1

54. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5711; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

xD the Atrix is no where NEAR as nice as the Bionic is. just walk into a Verizon and use one and you'll know what i mean. Motorola never has any stand out cameras.

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 14:54 11

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

sorry, but id like to see how they came up with the bionic as the winner again..

screen beauty- sgs2
screen size -sgs2
camera - 4s/sgs2
video - 4s/sgs2
internet speed bionic
apps - tie
stronger hardware - sgs2/4s

order of best to worst with updates apple, samsung, motorola

How exactly did the bionic win again? how is it the most futureproof? Its the most likely to be left in upgrade nirvana of the 3 by Moto's track record... that graph that PA posted today proves that without a doubt.

I was totally digging the comparisons right up until they announced "the winner"....

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 14:55 3

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

and lets not forget that VZW is notorious for EoL phones rather quickly so they dont have to support them.

They are the ONLY carrier to have EoL their SGS1 variant, as well as dozens of androids that have been EoL within about 6 months of launch.. cough cough eris and devour.

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 15:21 3

70. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5711; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

xD are you kidding me remixfa?

it clearly wins over T-Mobile's Galaxy S II which is an exception because Samsung tried to balance data speeds and processing power which is what Motorola did with better technology. again the displays have trade-offs. i personally like SA+ better but the Bionic is still qHD where the Galaxy S II is not. Camera i give to the Galaxy S II. i never much liked Motorola's cameras but they get the job done well enough. the Bionic is still a major player in this game although overshadowed by the Razr. it is by all means future proof. the Razr didn't become future proof because of a few extra MHz, a thinner body and more vibrant colors on the screen. T-Mobile refreshed their Galaxy S Model remember that? Verizon's refresh was in the form of the Charge. Galaxy S 4G = Droid Charge. EoL? who cares about that? i see EoL as a good thing as i might do a warranty replacement and get something better like i did with the Devour. i got a Droid 2 for it. now succeeding devices rapidly is something T-Mobile is no stranger to. the most recent example being the Amaze 4G over the Sensation 4G.

remember too Motorola also makes better PHONES. they have the best sound quality and the most reliable radios in the buis. that's part of the reason why i like them so much.

also the real order of best in updating is Apple, Motorola then Samsung. Motorola launched the first phone other than the Nexus with Froyo and had some of the first devices updated to Froyo and the Droid X was the first phone updated to Gingerbread after the Nexuses. not to mention the Nexus like updates of the XOOM.

posted on 28 Oct 2011, 15:16 2

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

Correct me if im wrong but doesnt the bionic only have 512mb of ram to the SGS2's 1 gig?

The OMAP chip in the bionic is superior to the 1.5ghz snapdragon in the hercules but its hampered by the bandwidth caps of the lower ram.

Ive put QHD against SA+ and SA+ wins. 95% of the customers that do the same think the same. Higher resolution is trumped by screen clarity and color saturation. The first thing everyone notices about the SGS2 is its screen and how pretty it is. You dont get that reaction to QHD, superior resolution or not.

I didnt say it WASNT future proof, its just less likely to get supported over the long haul. Motorola is notorious about updates. Samsung is only marginally better so its piss in one hand and crap in the other.. take your pick.

IF its EoL AND they no longer have them in stock (one doesn't automatically mean the other), then yea, you get that free upgrade.
the only thing EoL definitely means is that its NEVER going to get another update from that moment on, so EoL means a lot to people that bought the device and hope to to continue getting updates.

The sensation isnt being EoL any time soon as its still a top seller. Having a nicer version of the phone is cool but there is a $130 difference between the 2 sets. For many people there isnt enough difference to justify the cost.. especially when the SGS2 is cheaper than the amaze and better at the same time. I think ive sold 1 amaze so far. SGS2s and sensations fly off the shelf.

Samsung uses the highest quality sound codecs, hardware, and speakers available. I'll put my SGS1 up against anything... and i bet I win. :)

i went by over all track record, which moto has EoL more devices and left more devices in update limbo than samsung. Outside of the "DROID" phones, moto is notoriously horrible at updates. Even that little graphic that PA posted showed that.

"better" is subjective. I'll take sammy's light weight and super tight n durable builds over anything else in the market right now. The Razr has an interesting build but we will have to wait to see if it translates to durability.

posted on 28 Oct 2011, 16:40

106. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5711; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

the Droid Bionic has 1GB of Dual-Channel LPDDR2 RAM which actually makes it better than the Galaxy S II in that department.

i'd choose SA+ myself. SAA would be ideal but you don't lose with qHD either. i like not having jumbo sized icons and seeing text further away more easily although a little jagged because of the pentile. (i've tested this with the Droid Bionic and the Droid Charge many times)

you asked how.

that's not true. phones like the Nexus One, the Motorola Cliq, the Droid Eris, the Droid Incredible and the LG Ally got updates after they were EoL.

yeah, i'd get the Sensation myself but point is it was replaced as a top tier device. for $250 you can get a Droid Bionic now. if you want our Amaze 4G: the Droid Razr you'll have to pay $50 more for it.

i don't know about sound codecs and speakers so i'll take your word for it because i don't care. xD now if you mean hardware as far as processors and displays then i agree with you but if you're talking about the casing you know how me and plenty of other people feel about that.

no, they're not.
if you mean overall as in all activated handsets HTC beats everyone by having the most updated handsets by a large margin but Motorola comes second there and Motorola is the quickest to update handsets. look it up. that was since May and since then i hear about more Motorolas being updated than anything else especially the XOOM with it's Nexus-like updates.

by better phone i meant in it's functionality and reliability as a phone you know like ring ring phone call functionality. best sound quality, most reliable radios. Phone Arena covers these in the comparisons and reviews and gives props accordingly.

posted on 28 Oct 2011, 18:04

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

none of those phones got an update after an official EoL. I owned a cliq at one time.. lol
They gave the click the 2.1 update and then EoL'ed it like a month later.

EoL means its not getting any further support from carrier or manufacturer. Very very few instances where a device was supported after an official EoL. If Samsung can actually stick to their promise of seeing the SGS1 get ICS we will see an instance of it since VZW has already EoL the fascinate/sgs1... but something tells me it wont be updated.

The Xoom was a stock device and a VZW premier device... Anything outside of DROID gets sidelined. If you own a DROID then your fine, if you own a moto anything else than your lucky to get whatever you get. Even other motos on VZW havent faired well if they werent called DROIDS.

Outside of VZW, moto just drops the ball completely.

And as a side point, the pentile QHD screen looks way worse than the non pentile SA+ screen on the SGS2. Lower resolution, much higher pixel density.

Besides, id rather have the big icons and such.. lol, i dont like holding my phone close to me to have to read it. :) Thats all preference though.

HTC, though they have the best update reputation has left quite a few phones in the dust themselves. Honestly, all manufacturers outside of nexus devices have a crap ass record. Like i said.. poop in one hand and piss in the other. Its just "who is worse than who", but no one is good.

posted on 28 Oct 2011, 18:36

111. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5711; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

okay, my memory is a little foggy on most of those but i KNOW the Incredible was supported because it's just recently gotten Gingerbread and it's sooo EoL you can also add in the original Droid 2 as well it's EoL and it got Gingerbread last month.

it took the G2 and the G2x forever to get Gingerbread and they're stock. ;)

there hasn't been many high-end devices by Motorola aside from Droids. there's the Atrix and the Photon now and so far the Atrix has been treated just fine and the Photon hasn't really needed anything yet. o:

well guess what? the Bionic is on Verizon so what's your argument here? xD another thing is Verizon is pretty good with their end of the updating process too so that's another factor.

yeah, i'm not arguing with you about the displays. i know SA+ is better but qHD is really fine. even Phone Arena gives it props. there's still more pixels so not everything has to be jumbo sized and i do like that part about it.

yeah, HTC isn't really the first to mind when it comes to updates with me either but facts are facts. that's true but i do want my ICS like ASAP bro.

posted on 02 Nov 2011, 04:23

127. Mr.Mr.Upgrade (Posts: 474; Member since: 30 Aug 2011)

remixfa get off the phone site, you don't know what you talking bout, put it to you this way Verizon has the best service, if the phones are not on Verizon, they suck like you do

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 22:28

84. Immolate (Posts: 310; Member since: 17 Jun 2011)

Hmmm... remind me again how sgs2's screen size of 4.3" wins over Bionic's screen size of 4.3"? Seems kind of... counterintuitive.

Don't get me wrong. I have a Bionic and I think that other than being Samsung cheap, the SGS2 is a great piece of hardware, probably the overall phone of 2011, but it has one fatal flaw. It isn't available on Verizon, and this phone being a phone, the network matters... a lot.

So give me an SGS2 with a big screen and a Motorola style chassis and build quality (light phones feel cheap) on Verizon and I'd snap it up.

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 22:34 1

86. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5711; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

since the phone being on Verizon is a factor to you i'll assume you're American and i'll have to correct you. there's two variants of the Galaxy S II here that have a 4.65" display. the T-Mobile version is one of them.

posted on 28 Oct 2011, 15:04

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

immolate, the SGS2-tmoble edition has a 4.52 inch screen.. and super amoled + is way prettier to look at than QHD LCD.

we are gonna have to disagree.. i prefer light weight phones. after using only heavy phones that bounce around your pocket, using a light weight phone is awesome.

posted on 02 Nov 2011, 10:47

129. remyrz (Posts: 203; Member since: 28 Oct 2010)

so you´re only talking for the USA right? cauze i dont live there so i dont give a f.. about verizon or not.. for me.. and the description above.. sgsii wins

posted on 29 Oct 2011, 13:27 1

114. Smart (Posts: 76; Member since: 20 Aug 2011)

Exactly......All the way till the end bionic was the lagging kid and voila at the end bionic springs a major surprise....it comes out of the box adorning the "winner" tag....
While bionic may be a great phone but compared to sgs2 or even 4s it cannot be the ultimate winner...
Someone not reading the conclusion by John will also feel our way....

posted on 29 Oct 2011, 13:51

117. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5711; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

the T-Mobile Galaxy S II and the iPhone 4S do have some things that are indeed better than the Bionic but you guys are only looking at how many little things the other phones do better than the Droid Bionic but your priorities should start with power, speed and overall usability which the Bionic surely excels in here. when has Phone Arena ever been more biased towards a Droid than they are towards a Galaxy or an iPhone? i'm sure this was a difficult but well deliberated decision. it's the one i would've made in the unbiased opinion you know i'm capable of making.

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 18:36 2

79. RORYREVOLUTION (Posts: 3108; Member since: 12 Jan 2010)

Here's the thing, the RAZR is coming out in a few days. It has a much better display in the fact that it uses the SUPER AMOLED qhd display. It is pentile but it is a much better, way less pixelated display.

I took the Droid 3 and the Samsung Strato side by side and the Strato had a much better display thanks to the super amoled. Motorola was very smart to make the choice to go with Super Amoled vs LCD. You will be able to fully enjoy the qHD display with the gorgeous super amoled colors.

Plus the RAZR will have better battery life, a faster processor, and a much thinner and sturdy design.

I would gladly pay 50 dollars more for the RAZR. Don't get me wrong, both devices are good but the RAZR is obviously the better choice.

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 19:39

80. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5711; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

dude...i don't think you know. i'm Thump3r. :P
yeah, i know the Razr is a lot better than the Bionic. i'm just talking about this comparison. xD

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 15:39 1

73. douglasman100 (Posts: 24; Member since: 27 Aug 2011)

i dont know about that i just got gb on my droid 2 global....i know motorola fails. but im getting the galaxy nexus =)

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 15:50

76. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5711; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

you came after like all of the other models. xD

posted on 30 Oct 2011, 16:07

119. JeebJeeb (Posts: 3; Member since: 30 Oct 2011)

Are you stupid? You obviously have no idea what you're talking about you troll.

posted on 31 Oct 2011, 07:01

120. hardik (Posts: 1; Member since: 31 Oct 2011)

which phone i should by iphone 4s or xperia arc s?

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 10:04 6

5. AKm007 (Posts: 108; Member since: 06 Sep 2011)

Seriously? You called the Bionic the most future-proof when its successor has already been announced. And saying it is the epitome of cutting edge smartphones is absolute crock. all it has is 4G. And why aren't you using the AT&T or verizon version of the SGS2? Scared it will outclass the others. Also, the iphone's 64GB can't be considered a one-up when there are 64GB micro-sd card and with the SGS2's 16 GB gives it more than the iphone. This is a scumbag review!

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 10:27 1

7. Phullofphil (Posts: 801; Member since: 10 Feb 2009)

64gig micro as cabutrd? Maybe there tons of money and i dont believe any phone supports that size of micro card.

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 11:15 1

13. ckdb4 (Posts: 2; Member since: 27 Oct 2011)

WOW, what about the att version of the SGSII is so much better? And I believe when he states that its future proof hes refering to the fact that It has LTE dual core and is ICS upgradable. LTE would be the key because it is the future of wireless tech.

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 11:26 1

15. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5711; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

the Bionic isn't THAT inferior to the Razr. it's still a very nice phone and is clearly proven to be better than the phones it's compared to here. the only thing the other Galaxy S IIs have over the Bionic is Exynos without that the Bionic would eat them alive with it's OMAP4 and LTE support like you saw happen here with T-Mobile's Galaxy S II which made that a reality and sacrificed power for data speed which is unwise to do against the Droid Bionic being that it's the most rounded in terms of power and data speed.

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 11:31

18. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5711; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

oh and SA+ is good too, it's a trade off for qHD but i think we all like SA+ better.

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 12:29 2

39. AKm007 (Posts: 108; Member since: 06 Sep 2011)

What I'm trying to say is that they're comparing the T-mobile version of the SGS2. It isn't a bad phone but it is not the best variation of the SGS2. The verizon and AT&T versions have better processors. And that is the base of every phone. That way, remove the LTE and the SGS2 will eat the bionic alive. Besides, though LTE is fast, it's still just in it's infancy. The drawback of poor battery life is just too big of a con. The exynos versions of the SGS2 have better battery life than the Tmobile version.

the bionic isn't the most rounded in terms. LEt's see.

Design: bionic:6 SGS2:9
interface: bionic:9 SGS2:8
camera: bionic:6 SGS2:8
Processor: bionic:8 SGS2(exynos):9
Battery life: bionic:6 SGS2: 8
Web-browser: bionic:9 SGS2:8
Screen: bionic: 5 SGS2:9
All the binoic has is 4G. Other than that, it is an inferior phone in every aspect. The interface changes are minimal and can't be exaggerated .

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 12:55

47. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5711; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

well when actually pitting the Sprint or AT&T versions of the Galaxy S II against the Droid Bionic having to face the trade-offs between the more powerful Exynos Processor in the Galaxy S II and LTE in the Bionic is an inevitability however the reason why i say the Bionic is the most well rounded is because it has an OMAP4 with LTE. the OMAP4 is the next best processor you can get in a phone and for those who don't necessarily need the most power but needs a great deal of it will find it in an OMAP4 powered phone and then having LTE is a great trade-off for the additional power that you miss out on by not having Exynos. well yeah LTE is still pretty new but everything has got to be new at some point and even now in it's "infancy" it's still pretty fucking great. battery life with LTE isn't as bad on the Bionic as HSPA+ 42mbps is on the T-Mobile Galaxy S II is and the Bionic doesn't even have the lower resolution, more power efficient SA+ screen the Galaxy S II uses. it's a trade-off for having greater data speeds.

where the hell are you getting those numbers? xD
that probably sums it up when comparing an Epic 4G Touch to the Droid Bionic but remember i said the most rounded in terms of power and data. maybe you got too swept away in trying to battle my logic that you forgot what i said?

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 14:12

60. AKm007 (Posts: 108; Member since: 06 Sep 2011)

I'm not trying to battle your logic. All I'm saying is that the bionic has nothing other than 4G data speeds on its hand. Its higher resolution is still crappy because of the pentile matrix making it's actual ppi way lower than what you'd expect. Battry life was only 10 hours...in my eyes, that's pretty bad.

I don't think the bionic is a worthy buy also because of the droid razr upping it so fast. No matter what you say, the SGS2 is the better phone. it reaches high enough speeds without sacrificing battery life and also has a great camera and a screen. The droid bionics screen doesn't even come close, the camera is worse than my x10 mini and its battery life is pure bulls**t.

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 15:35 1

71. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5711; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

dude..it's definitely better than T-Mobile's Galaxy S II. don't you know anything about how different Qualcomm S3s are from OMAPs? the Galaxy S II for T-Mobile has a PROJECTED 11 hours. it 1-UP'd the Bionic which has a higher resolution, less energy efficient screen by an hour. that's so much better huh? the Bionic isn't a worthy buy on Verizon right now but it's a better buy than the iPhone 4S and T-Mobile's Galaxy S II that's the point. they share the same price range now. HSPA+ 42mbps isn't quite as good as LTE and it eats battery just like any LTE device. the camera is better but that doesn't break the lead the Bionic has in more important things like speed and power.

posted on 28 Oct 2011, 03:11

89. AKm007 (Posts: 108; Member since: 06 Sep 2011)

HSPA+ doesn't eat up battery like LTE. LTE is known to suck all the battery life from a smartphone. You seem to be blinded by your favoritism for motorola. For the hundredth time, the bionic only has LTE on its plate. It's camera is inferior, its battery life is inferior, its screen is inferor and its processor is inferior. It also has signal strength issues. The SGS2's browser is just as good if not better because it can even run 1080p youtube videos with ease. 4G is the only thing it's missing.

What I don't understand is why they took the T-mobile variant when they could have taken the verizon variant. This in itself shows that they didn't want to show the bionic in bad light. And this review is a bit biased.

posted on 28 Oct 2011, 06:41

90. AKm007 (Posts: 108; Member since: 06 Sep 2011)

*At&t, not verizon

posted on 28 Oct 2011, 10:35

92. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5711; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

yes it does. look at any T-Mobile Galaxy S II or Amaze 4G review. everybody is raging about the battery life. there's a difference in having that 42mbps. Camera is better on the Galaxy S II, the Displays have trade-offs so that's a matter of opinion, the battery life is NOT inferior. i don't even think you know what you're talking about with the battery life. i think you're just going on the fact that LTE devices are known for sucking battery and they are but HSPA+ 42mbps devices are following right in their footsteps. the OMAP4 processor in the Bionic is better than the S3 the T-Mobile version uses. remember this comparison was made between the Bionic and the T-Mobile version. you act like the T-Mobile version is the red-headed stepchild or something. that's the only version i'm saying the Bionic kills. the AT&T and Sprint versions put up more of a fight but that's only because of Exynos. that's the only different factor between the T-Mobile version and the others. the Bionic is made by Motorola and Motorola always has the best sound quality and the best radios. you seemed to have conveniently forgot about that in the comparison. the Bionic can run 1080p Youtube videos with ease too. just how much powerful do you think the Galaxy S II is over the Bionic? not that much.

okay, tell me what the difference is between the AT&T version and the T-Mobile version is again? oh that's right, Exynos. that proves my point that without that the Galaxy S II can fall to the Droid Bionic just like it did here.

biased? Phone Arena loves the Galaxy S II as much as any of us. they compared the Bionic and the T-Mobile Galaxy S II because they're the most similar. Samsung and T-Mobile wanted to deliver superior data speeds with 42mbps on a Galaxy S II, naturally that put it in a position to where it'll be pitted against the Droid Bionic being that it's the most poweful LTE phone availiable but the combination of the OMAP4 and LTE simply can't be beat by anything striving for better data speeds in this generation other than a better OMAP4 with LTE like what's in the Galaxy Nexus and the Droid Razr or if Samsung somehow gets an Exynos working with LTE.

posted on 28 Oct 2011, 11:44

93. AKm007 (Posts: 108; Member since: 06 Sep 2011)

You talk about how the the Galaxy S2 falls without the Exynos in it. But you forget that the bionic falls without the 4G in it. If you remove 4G out of the equation, then the bionic is quite useless against the others. And haven you heard about the complaints of funny noises made by the bionic. I'm not going to fight with a person who will support a phone just because they have it and don't want to feel like it was a waste of money. So have fun with your bionic.

posted on 28 Oct 2011, 12:33

94. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5711; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

yeah, that's not the case here though. xD
there's no Bionic without 4G unless you count the Droid 3 but this isn't the Droid 3 vs the T-Mobile Galaxy S II is it? it's the Droid Bionic vs. the T-Mobile Galaxy S II and 4G LTE is a factor. if this was the Epic 4G Touch vs. the Droid Bionic then i'd say there's trade-offs but it's not. it's the Droid Bionic vs. the T-Mobile Galaxy S II and Phone Arena and I are saying the Droid Bionic is better. i'm not biased at all, i just set priorities spec wise and the Bionic meets those better. i don't have any complaints about funny noises with my Bionic and don't pull out the bugs because the Galaxy S II series has a history of bugs as well.

posted on 28 Oct 2011, 13:43

95. AKm007 (Posts: 108; Member since: 06 Sep 2011)

Okay, i have to answer this. This is just sad. What I'm trying to say is "Why didn't they take the At&t version or the epic touch? It's not like the T-mobile ersion and the bionic were both from the same carrier. This makes no sense becuase they took motorola's finest, apple's finest and then left samsung with the T-mobile disappointment. And you said that the SGS2 without exynos is nothing. I say that the bionic without its 4G is nothing. And if you'll see, even without the exynos, the SGS2 is better in every way except data speeds. If the bionic loses its 4G capabilities, its becomes last year's crapola.

posted on 28 Oct 2011, 14:16

98. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5711; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

of course you'll answer. you're not going to let it go. xD
i explained that to you Samsung took the route Motorola did in trying to balence power and data so naturally we'll see how their "well rounded" creations stack up. yeah so? we're not comparing a 4G-less Bionic. why are you trying to handicap the Bionic for no reason? since Exynos was replaced with an S3 the Bionic would also be more powerful. more power, more speed, more reliable. sounds like a winner to me. i was only talking about this comparison from the get go. if you disagree with a point i made about this comparison please let it be known but if you're going to insist on making this about the AT&T or Sprint Galaxy S II ask Phone Arena to do a comparison between one of them and the Bionic and we'll see what they think and we can discuss it there.

posted on 28 Oct 2011, 15:20

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

my guess was so they would have a phone per carrier.. but sprint is missing from the list. the Tmobile SGS2 is definately the weakest version, they should have used the sprint version.

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 10:25 1

6. doubler86 (Posts: 320; Member since: 26 Jan 2011)

Great review, pretty overall fair. The only thing I would say is I agree with most of the reviews that have actually labels the Galaxy S II camera better than the iPhone 4S's camera. In this review it goes on about how the details are better on the iPhone's camera when it was the only one that couldn't capture the flame on the candle, while the flame is clear and defined on the Galaxy S II.

As much hype as the iPhone 4S camera has gotten when compared side by side, the Galaxy S II has been the better of the two. (even with the T-Mobile version lol)

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 10:27 1

8. zhieson (Posts: 10; Member since: 21 Jun 2011)

I think he means future proof in terms of features and compared to the other two. Nothing of the Bionic will be phased out anytime soon. Sure, the new phones will be faster but they won't offer anything significant in terms of usability.

Having Dual-core, LTE, and all the standard high end features makes it somewhat future proof OF THE THREE PHONES.

But the Nexus Prime/RAZR are definitely worth waiting for at this point.

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 10:31 2

9. DROIDX0430 (Posts: 468; Member since: 24 Nov 2010)

Not a fair comparison---Bionic and GSII are much more superior in all aspects of performance--- offering LTE-- vice 3g, 1GB of RAM, vice 512mb; 1.0-1.2 dual core, vice dual core 800 mhz; 4.3 or bigger screen--vice 3.7 display and the list can continue, but I will stop there... Comparison should have been Iphone4s to Droid 1 and even at that comparison the iphone4s would have a hard time competing....

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 11:35 2

20. HTCiscool (Posts: 449; Member since: 16 Jul 2011)

Even though the droids have more RAM, multitasking is much smoother on the 4S. And the 800MHz processor on the 4S is more powerful than the Exynos SoC and the OMAP4.

You have a point with the screen though, 3.5 inches now is too small.

You're definitely right about LTE however.

Instead of having a war about which one IS best, just wait for the Galaxy Nexus or Droid Razr.

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 11:43 2

22. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5711; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

Multitasking on the iPhone is no where near to the extent that it is on a true Multitasking platform like Android has been since the very beginning.

it's definitely more powerful than the OMAP4 but the differences between the A5 and the Exynos are so minimal being that they're pretty much the same thing that i'm sure the extra MHz that the all the different versions of Exynos has can offset the A5. you can't really get a good comparison unless you were comparing Apples to Apples or Oranges to Oranges.

damn straight! xD

yeah. those are the true Goliaths.

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 12:27

36. Snapdude (Posts: 128; Member since: 27 Aug 2009)

the a5 is on par with the omap 4460 soc but does trail behind exynos and the upcoming omap 4470 (which is already in final testing).please check facts before saying such things

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 12:45

46. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5711; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

me? check facts? oh that's right. you probably don't know. i'm Thump3r. i check my facts bro. xD
the A5 is most certainly better than the OMAP4430 and the 4460, the 4470 however might be on par. don't you know anything about the A5's GPU? it uses an PowerVR SGX543(MP2). the 4430 uses an SGX540 and the 4460 right after that uses a higher clocked SGX540, the OMAP4470 has the same thing the 4460 does but with a dedicated 2D Graphics Core. the Galaxy S II uses an ARM Mali-400 which i know the least about but i know it's still not quite as good as the A5's SGX543(MP2).

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 15:11

68. Snapdude (Posts: 128; Member since: 27 Aug 2009)

not talking about the gpu, the 4460 cpu is on par with a5 raw I/O processing power

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 15:38

72. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5711; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

that's irrelevant.

posted on 28 Oct 2011, 15:26

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

The A5 and the Exynos are twin chips. The only real difference between them is GPU. The A5 uses a much stronger GPU than the exynos. The A5 is severely underclocked because as a platform iOS is much less processor intensive and doesnt need the increased horsepower. The GPU is much stronger to make up for it while its playing games and such.

It is still apples to oranges though, as to properly test them against each other, they would need to be running the same OS to keep all things equal.
On the Android side of the fence however, Exynos is king in nearly every category.

posted on 28 Oct 2011, 16:42 1

107. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5711; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

mmhmm, mmhmm! >:D
King and remixfa know what they're talking about broskiii!

posted on 28 Oct 2011, 18:05 1

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

lol.. you know it KK :)

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 14:47 2

62. Ivan6479 (Posts: 249; Member since: 26 Jun 2011)

Say what? Multitasking doesn't even exist on the iPhone!

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 11:02 2

12. Johnny_Mnemonic (Posts: 240; Member since: 05 Oct 2011)

I totally agree with this answer. ( the iPhone 4S, it isn’t necessarily classified as a next-generation iPhone, since it’s nothing more than an incremental upgrade. )

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 11:28

16. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5711; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

it's the choice you have for this year so if Apple didn't do enough to compete that's their problem because sadly it's going to compete with phones like this and be knocked down by phones like this all. year. long.

posted on 27 Oct 2011, 11:30 1

17. GALAXY-S (Posts: 701; Member since: 07 Jun 2011)

"Even though it’s sporting a rehashed design, the Apple iPhone 4S is clearly the more premium looking and feeling handset out of the bunch "

"Of course, it shines brightly in the dark, but in reality, the Retina Display of the iPhone 4S produces the most accurate looking colors "

"Also, the clearly defined dedicated power button of the iPhone 4S is by far the most distinguishable and responsive out of the three devices"

"Without a doubt though, the iPhone 4S provides us with the most responsive performance "

"Clearly, the beauty about the iOS 5 experience found on the iPhone 4S is the fact that it’s simplistic, uncomplicated, and absolutely responsive. "

"Even though the iPhone 4S continues to excel in offering us a sensual web browsing experience, which has been a staple since the first iPhone,"

"Ultimately, we have to give the slight edge to the iPhone 4S with its f2.4 lens, which allows it to excel in low lighting situations"

"However, we still have to hand it to the iPhone 4S in the end with its sparkling high quality and crystal-clear audio recording"

"Previously, when an app was made available for iOS and Android, the iOS version of the app generally received more love with their polished form."

this was the worst review i have read here!!
.. Iphonearena indeed!!

* Some comments have been hidden, because they don't meet the discussions rules.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories