Motorola DROID X vs. HTC EVO 4G
If it weren't for the slightly stronger output by the DROID X's speakers, calling quality would've been identical. These high-powered Android sets are fantastic when it comes down to placing some good old fashion phone calls as voices were clear, distinct, and free from any background distortion to muddy the experience. However, our callers did mention to us that our voices did sound better on the Motorola DROID X – the same goes when using the speaker phones on both handsets.
While testing out in the greater Philadelphia region, both smartphones were more adept in retaining signal to the network. There was no instance when we experienced dropped calls or frequent fluctuations with bar signals on either handsets.
Setting the phones to the middle brightness setting and restricting the HTC EVO 4G from searching for a 4G network, battery life on the Motorola DROID X was definitely better. We were able to pull out a full day of normal usage before requiring a recharge – meaning push email, web browsing, text messaging, and an occasional phone call were all encountered. As for the HTC EVO 4G, we were able to crank out 15 hours of continuous normal usage before it expired. Naturally, you're going to constantly need to have a charging source on hand if you don't want to find yourself with no juice, but luckily both phones will be more than equipped in getting you by a good 8 hour work shift – that's unless you're a power user.
Ultimately, timing played a key role in how things turned out as the HTC EVO 4G was the first out of the gate and set the precedence for other handsets released after. The commercials and advertising campaigns for the HTC EVO 4G perfectly sum up its talent – being a first in almost every category. It's the first Android powered handset to include a 4.3” display and 4G connectivity in the US market – plus it greatly brought the notion that these monstrous devices tacking on impressive hardware can still look good on the outside. It might not exude the premium feeling materials in use on the Motorola DROID X or durability, but its design is still compelling enough to take notice as it offers some things not found on the DROID X – like a front-facing camera and kickstand. However, the second Android smartphone in the US market to pack a 4.3” display continues Motorola's push in the Android market as it plays close to the strengths seen with the original Motorola DROID. Overall, we witnessed the DROID X excel in areas like taking photos & videos, peppy speeds when navigating, and battery life. But when the HTC EVO 4G set the notion of video calling via its front-facing camera, its omission on the DROID X is just one that can pull some people to gravitate to the EVO 4G. Pricing is the same for both handsets at $199.99 on-contract, but one will have to remember the cost savings you'll see over the course of 2 years by siding with the HTC EVO 4G. Nevertheless, you can't deny that the premium you'll be paying for service by choosing the Motorola DROID X is worth it as it's backed by Verizon's extensive and reliable network. But to tell you the truth, the knowledge of 4G speeds can be alluring and should especially be a focal point in making a decision if you're located in a market where 4G is present.
Motorola DROID X vs. HTC EVO 4G Video Comparison:
1. stix26 posted on 20 Oct 2010, 01:55 0 0
Good comparison. Im ok to not have the video chat and 4G . We know sprint likes to be the 1st to do things but they have never been know to be the best at anything. So ill take the X. Those are the only 2 areas the Evo would do beter in anyway.
3. de2philly posted on 13 Jul 2010, 16:14 0 0
Whats wrong with being years ahead of the competition in technology and being way cheaper than the only network that is better than Sprints (Verizon)? I think having a prob.slightly better phone w/ the EVO with a great network and saving $40 a month is equal to having a slightly better network w/ Verizon, no?
11. matt512 posted on 14 Jul 2010, 09:18 0 0
So if I pay $85 a month with Verizon, your'e telling me I can get the same features on Sprint for $45? I'd like to see that in writing.
13. IHatePhones posted on 16 Jul 2010, 23:31 0 0
Well $15 a month saved with Sprint still isn't anything to sneeze at. $360 total saved for the 2 year contract you're on... That's almost another phone at full retail cost. But hey that's just me I guess.
18. BlackSirius16 posted on 17 Jul 2010, 13:42 0 0
How is booting up an already dieing 3G network and calling it 4G being years ahead??? they practically screwed themselves over
2. BlackSirius16 posted on 13 Jul 2010, 14:32 0 0
bottom line, both are fantastic top of the line phones with small differences. You'd be hard pressed to find any device that could definitively top both of these. I personally prefer the Droid X because I'm a Droid Nut but I've used both and honestly even though the Droid X is slightly faster their both top notch and excellent quality.
14. IHatePhones posted on 16 Jul 2010, 23:33 0 0
A nut about Droid the name or Droid the phone? They have two manufacturers making their "Droid" line, Motorola and HTC. They ALL run the Android OS. They just thought ahead and licensed the word "Droid" from Lucasfilms. (Smart move by the way Verizon, as more people now know the brand than they know what the heck it is!). That was NOT directed at op btw, it's just that I have an Android on Sprint and people ask me all the time if it is a "Droid" lol. And this has been great for Motorola too, as all they had prior was the Razr line and that was years ago.
16. BlackSirius16 posted on 17 Jul 2010, 01:32 0 0
oh yes I obviously meant I'm a lucasart droid nut jeez man cut me some slack haha. I meant the Droid Line including HTC and Moto Devices. I llike them because of their styling and their general top of the line demeanor
37. dsg_cobra posted on 29 Jul 2010, 22:22 0 0
droid is really any verizon android phone that is top of the line, lg may be included in this now that they have got their feet wet in the smart phone game.
4. de2philly posted on 13 Jul 2010, 16:16 0 0
Unless you need constant international service I still dont get why 90% of Americans arent on Sprint or Verizon. They are both #1 (Verizon) #2 (Sprint) in dropped calls nationwide. Verizon has the best overall 3G & Voice (Sprint is JUST behind them) and Sprint is the only with 4G (Sprint will also be about $40 cheaper a month per line) - why people go with T-MO or especially AT&T anymore still boggles my mind. Haters welcome.
7. BlackSirius16 posted on 13 Jul 2010, 22:00 0 0
no hater here. T-mobile's practicaly bankrupt, and AT&T is the worst network I've had the miss fortune of trying
10. baldilocks posted on 14 Jul 2010, 05:22 0 0
Because AT&T simply has better coverage where I am. Sprints network (at least in Delaware) has always been and still is a joke. Traveling in Erie, PA and parts of Eastern Kentucky many friends with Sprint or Verizon were shit out of luck when it came to service - AT&T was great. THAT's why not everyone wants to be on Sprint or Verizon. (That and the freedom to use many unlocked GSM phones on AT&T is another good reason.)
5. ajac09 posted on 13 Jul 2010, 18:22 0 0
both great phones but in the end sprint is cheaper and Id rather pay 40 less to use the same network as the droid x and have only a phone that is about 1% less then it
6. BlackSirius16 posted on 13 Jul 2010, 18:54 0 0
but on a network thats about %60 of verizons?
8. de2philly posted on 13 Jul 2010, 22:57 0 0
? Wrong - Sprint is 2nd behind Verizon in dropped calls and 2nd in 3G coverage; and has 4G now which Verizon doesnt; and when Verizon does Sprints coverage will still be 10's of millions of people covered ahead of Verizon with 4G. Plus Sprint & Verizon has a roaming agreement; 60%? I'd say more like 96% but with 4G --- so if paying $40 a month more to pay is what you want (if you live in Montana or if you are willing to pay that for 1 less dropped call a month) so be it. lol
9. BlackSirius16 posted on 14 Jul 2010, 00:47 0 0
You do realize that that WiMax crap isn't frickin 4G god damnit. No one understands that WiMax is just a slightly faster version of 3G it's implementation is just way more expensive than more commonly used 3G so it backshelfed until Sprint for some ungodly reason decided to resurrect the beaten dog and give it a shot. Lte is 4G, Lte is real, Lte is unbelievably fast, faster than WiMax, Lte is the new standard, Lte will open up so many possibilities that it will change the way we think about phones, and Verizon will be the first reliable mainstream network to launch it. And also idk what the hell kind of roaming agreement sprint has with verizon all I know is that the reason I switched from sprint to verizon was because the call quality on verizon was superior and I was gettin up to 15 dropped calls in my regular working month, after switching to verizon about 3 years ago I think I've had two.
12. SMH posted on 16 Jul 2010, 08:35 0 0
"and when Verizon does Sprints coverage will still be 10's of millions of people covered ahead of Verizon with 4G" For the record Sprint is the first company to have a 4g phone true however they are not the first to have a 4g network. Verizon has been building up their 4g network and stopped adding to their 3g network for over 2 years now. Plus Verizon makes more money than Sprint by a lot and they bought more then 65% of the LTE (4g) spectrum in the US and even with the roaming agrrement which CURRENTLY allows Sprint to use Verizon's network Verizon still has 35% more coverage nationwide. So no Sprint is not now or will they ever be better than Verizon or have more coverage. That's why Verizon doesn't attact Sprint or Tmobile because its would be like picking on a 5th grader. As for AT&T Verizon only attacts their networks to smash the Iphone basically saying great phone..terrible network. Oh as far of the review, I like both phones and I'm sure just about anybody can get what they need from both devices. As long as they have coverage
15. IHatePhones posted on 16 Jul 2010, 23:49 0 0
They'll have better coverage when Sprint buys out Verizon.... Yeah, I uh thought it sounded pretty unrealistic as soon as I typed it too...
17. BlackSirius16 posted on 17 Jul 2010, 01:34 0 0
maybe if you reversed the names it might be more likely. for the most part though both are unlikely verizons been building Lte for years they wouldn't buy WiMax
22. mcdach3 posted on 21 Jul 2010, 12:27 0 0
Black, you're a bit of an idiot. Neither WiMax OR LTE are true 4G speeds according to the ITU. ITU specifies 4G speeds being 100+ mbps. Granted, LTE is rated at 100mbps but will NOT perform anywhere near that on the user end. Verizons LTE network is estimated to deliver 8-12 mbps on the user end while WiMax is currently delivering between 5-10mbps. Yes LTE is faster than WiMax at its current state but when WiMax gets its IEEE 802.11m upgrade (aka WiMax II) Speeds will be 1GBPS+. Also Sprint had several very large partners that greatly reduced their cost of building the WiMax infrastructure ya know like Google, Time Warner, and believe me the list goes on. Now perhaps with your extensive insight into mobile technology and related info you can tell us all why such distinguished well performing companies such as these would support something you correlated to a "beaten dog"? Hmm sounds like you have no clue what direction WiMax is REALLY headed. It will eventually be used for mobile internet WITHOUT phone capabilities turning ENTIRE CITIES in to a giant hotspot all while helping Sprint and Clearwire generate the revenue they need to build yet another network with ADVANCED LTE specifically designed to handle cell phones with it's IMS technology for VOIP and blazing fast internet for handsets. Sprint has assets in the $20billion area when concerning spectrum and is poising for more than just a bright future with cell phones but all of connectivity as a whole. Not to mention they will keep unlimited Data when your big red is doing away with it at the end of the month. Hmmm yet another game breaker not to mention the price of plans. Oh and look for Sprint and T-mobile to merge in the next 18months which will give Sprint ever MORE revenue to build it better, not to mention a savory tie to a European telecom GIANT that will spawn the growth of a true WORLD WIDE NETWORK. Thank you have a nice day
23. mcdach3 posted on 21 Jul 2010, 12:30 0 0
SMH, You're kind of misinformed too, or maybe ignorant, I'm not sure yet. Read comment below and watch out for SPRINT
24. BlackSirius16 posted on 21 Jul 2010, 18:49 0 0
Really, because after you pathetic display of totally baised information and wild world wide network theories are laughable, I figure I'll crush you now with Lte advanced, future upgrade to the Lte nework with minimum 100 mbps mobile speeds and minimum semi mobile and fixed speeds of just north of 1gbps, while tests have been successfully preformed with operating speeds of semi mobile devices at over 1.6 gbps. I don't know if your just misinformed, ignorant, or both but read this link and watch out for verizon. bitch http://www.3gpp.org/LTE-Advanced
25. mcdach3 posted on 21 Jul 2010, 22:11 0 0
Hmm could SWEAR I did mention LTE advanced,but dumbshits like you cant read the fine print lol. biased nothing VZW is a joke, why do you think Vodafone is starting to distance itself... hmmm get off the big red ball sack BRA lol
26. SMH posted on 22 Jul 2010, 07:55 0 0
This mcdach3 really needs to calm down....seriously...first of all Sprint tried the merger thing already and that worked out so great for them....NOT. Plus no one is saying that Sprint is bad at all but they wont be able to keep up with VZW. Lets use logic here Verizon Wireless does cost more per month but they still have over 30 Million more subscribers and they looses less customers then Sprint does. So that means VZW has more money to build up their network faster. Couple that with the fact that they bought up most of the LTE spectrum than how couls Sprint catch them? Oh and as far as them loosing their unlimted plans well I'm sure that will happen but not uintil after they roll out their 4g which is not next month (smh). I'm also sure Sprint would eventually do away with them as well. Again mcdach3 use logic Sprint is a business how could they make money spending billions on a network and then giving the service away? Unlimited data plans means network conjection , especially when voip is being impletmented, and then no one will want them anyway...Tell me I'm misinformed when I review cell phone complanies for a lving....SMH
27. SMH posted on 22 Jul 2010, 07:58 0 0
PS: Vodafone own 49% of VZW so no they not seprarting from them. When VZW makes money Vodafone makes money. In fact Verizon Communication and Vodafone may even merger (which I hope they do not) so again you're wrong.
28. BlackSirius16 posted on 22 Jul 2010, 15:20 0 0
id read your fine god damn print you little bitch, i also adressed it as bullshit, Lte is verizons, they own so much of the spectrum that sprint could never be a major lte vendor so shut the hell up and listen to what im saying retard
29. mcdach3 posted on 22 Jul 2010, 17:38 0 0
Verizon and Voda wont merge (not merger) While Voda is the parent company to VZW and pratically gave them the assets to build their network, Voda and VZW are in a bout bc Verizon is refusing to pay Voda it dividends from the heavy investment Voda has mad into verizon, hence the distance I was referring to. Trust me I know more about this than you do :) currently on the exec side of a big wireless company :)
30. mcdach3 posted on 22 Jul 2010, 17:42 0 0
OH and hey dipshit, why don't you pop over to Boy Genius and read the newly posted article about sprint :) sprint has WAY WAY WAY more spectrum than anyone else and will be the ONLY UNLIMITED LTE VENDOR VERY SOON get your facts straight fuck tard. LTE is not owned by verizon they aren't even the first to deploy it. There are companies in other parts of the world that have had it deployed for public consumption for several months now. God I love being right and especially when the press just reinforces what I say. P.S. I'll enjoy resting my balls on your chin thunder cunt :)
31. mcdach3 posted on 22 Jul 2010, 17:48 0 0
Hmm what are the odds that a tech forum would post an article such as the one on BGR today following our little debate? Hmm you review cell companies for a living? Obviously you aren't that good at your job or you would have known to pay attention to spectrum auctions and who's really ahead of who :) did I mention I work to keep one of these big 4 up and running? hmm sounds like I know just a little bit more than you.
32. BlackSirius16 posted on 22 Jul 2010, 21:43 0 0
retard, i so that article and laughed my ass off, verizon owns over 60% of the Lte spectrum so yeah, FAIL ON YOU RETARF THEY"LL NEVER OWN ENOUGH TO BE BETTER
33. mcdach3 posted on 22 Jul 2010, 22:00 0 0
it's ok we all know I'm right :) I'd be butt hurt too if I just got raped by my cock haha later pumpkin
34. CRICKETownz posted on 23 Jul 2010, 02:45 0 0
@mcdach3 - regardless of your supposedly vast knowledge of all things wireless and position as an exec. (i guess) your faith in the all powerful Sprint falls a little short. You seem to elaborate on the "future" of the wireless industry but can you humor me for a minute and elaborate on why Sprint seems to lose football stadiums of customers seems like every quarter? And why are they still number 3 wireless carrier? Not even number 2 in the game... Sprint has free nights & weekends startin at 12 noon, free unlimited, pick 75 favs, unlimited+ data, no contract, call any house phone, car phone, bag phone, free calls to Mars, no roaming on Jupiter, upgrade your phone every hour, free any phones all for $6.99/mo, hell Sprint will even pay you $69.99/mo to carry their service (very exaggerated i know but you get the point). This bastard Dan Hesse gives everything away but still...number 3, almost in danger of bein passed up by T-Mobile. So if you can intelligently answer my two questions with a valid reason why your ramblings of the "diamond" that Sprint has up their sleeve i'd like to hear it b/c as far as I (and the rest of america except for some odd reason you) can tell, what you are sayin and what actually is reality don't line up. Which further confuses me on why you have this lofty attitude... So congratulations sir, trophy goes to you for the most elaborate argument about absolutely nothin at all. Cheers.
35. mcdach3 posted on 23 Jul 2010, 04:26 0 0
@cricket - the answer to both of those questions is the same. The problem is not what is going on right now but what has happened in the past. A lot of people have a bad taste from Sprint bc of poor customer service in the past and rightfully so. Their customer service has sucked as well as their business plan. The one thing they have done right over the past 10-15 years is invest in spectrum and that puts them in a very advantageous position. They are loosing customer on the prepay side but that churn is slowing down every quarter and quite a few of those subs "jumping ship" are moving to their boost mobile or virgin mobile side which still translates to revenue. With the adaptation of 3G CDMA devices on boost for unlimited EVERYTHING for $60 a month people see that value of NO CONTRACT. Same thing with Virgin Mobile, the devices are getting better and people are starting to notice. Because of those two subsidiaries over the next decade we will see a GIANT shift in the telecom industry in the US to pre pay, no contract service. A big part of the world already operates this way so its really no surprise. Look at Verizon starting to sell their 5-spot prepay, no contract hotspot, the other US carriers will being following in suit bc it is good for business and is solid revenue. Sprint is losing subs because of what Forsee and his admin did to the company with the Nextel Merger and poor Customer service guidelines but they aren't really losing all of the subs that are terminating contracts and its almost advantageous given it SAVES THEM TIME AND MONEY ON CUSTOMER SERVICE. Boost and Virgin are both 90 percent automated service. If all of Sprints assets were combined into one big number they would probably be a much closer 3rd if not 2nd. They have been bleeding subs very rapidly yes you are right but they have begun slowing the bleeding and have been very creative with generating revenue while "losing" subs for a write off bc they are still gaining revenue on their pre-paid side. It will turn around soon and S will be a dominating contender once again. You guys really don't have to believe me but I'm right and paying attention to what I am saying and researching it and possible even investing in some stock after INTENSIVE research would be a really good idea. I don't work for S but I do own stock there and from when I bought it up to this point I am up well over 130%, so like I said, I'm not telling, I'm just saying
36. SMH posted on 23 Jul 2010, 11:15 0 0
For the record @mcdach3 Sprint's is also loosing post paid customers as their 1st quarter reports a Postpaid Churn rate of 2.15 percent compared to Verizon and At&t both being at 1.07 percent which is way lower by industry standards. Also I highly doubt your an executive of anything important otherwise you wouldn't be arguing your pointless non facts in the comments. I think you just work for Sprint but I do applaud your passion Also for you to believe that Sprint bought WAY WAY more of the LTE Sprectrum lets me also know that you're clueless. The LTE Spectrum was auctioned so what money does Sprint have over Verizon or even At&t to out bid them? Verizon has been the leader in revenue for years now even when At&t had more customers and At&t is a worldwide company doing quite well besides their inferior service. Sprint was on the verge of bankrupt and although there making a good comeback they still have a lot of ground to make up. So yes there is some bias here for both Sprint and Verizon I can see by reading everone's comments but the fact is as long as there are cell phones Verizon would always be near the top. As of now Sprint is not going to catch Verizon and that's because Sprint has to keep lowering their prices to keep there customers but loosing money from their bottom line (not saying there in the red) so they have less money to build with. So you see like or not the only was Sprint could be as big as Verizon is if Verizon buys Sprint which is more likely then Sprint beng bigger than Verizon***** Also for the record Verizon showed in their reports that they still have the most loyal customer and JD Powers rates them to have the best cell phone service, customer service (or sometimes a close second to T-mobile but number 1 in 09) and the Motorola Droid was voting as the gadget of the year selling 1 million devcies faster than the Iphone 3gs***Lastly with Verizon starting to come out with powerful phone customer's like they have no reason to be doubted by anyone and if Sprint ever really became a threat Sprint would just align their Prices with At&t and Verizon so that advantage would be meaningless at that point at that time because monthly prices could be changed at antyime as shown in the past
38. dsg_cobra posted on 29 Jul 2010, 22:42 0 0
mcdoosh i mean @ mcdach3 what he means is wimax which is still cdma non global, is dieing because the global standard in countries like china and japan and europe are going with lte as their standard aswell. which means they will see it is a dead end and wimax 2 will never surface water when they see how far verizon and at&t succeed with lte they will stop hoping they didnt waste to much money and start fresh with lte. now sit back and watch how lte changes the world. your garage door remote and security alarms and much much more will all use lte look at verizon's site for open development and all the inventors that make things that work off verizons network now and think about how much more will come with 5-6x's the speed.
40. kabukijoe posted on 31 Jul 2010, 00:01 0 0
Please.... there's nothing to "watch out" for. If Verizon gets something like that the average American wouldn't pay the ridiculous fees they would ask for to use it, VZW is FAR too greedy and only getting worse... Their ridiculous 3G fees are already gradually pissing their customers off more and more every day. You wouldn't be able to use LTE Advanced on VZW unless you had the money to fly your private jet to the Verizon store to sign up.
46. Xavier82 (unregistered) posted on 15 Aug 2010, 10:51 0 0
I have Sprint and I have free roaming on Verizon network on the rare instances I don't have service with sprint. The ONLY time that has happened was when I was in the mountains on vacation in TN. Anyways, I pay nothing to roam. I never lose calls as I can always make them either on sprint or from verizon. I love sprint, and I pay less and get more with my plan. I mean come on! Unlimited talk, text, and data with free roaming and 4g service (which I have in Orlando) for only $79 (thats including the 10.00 for the 4g service!)! Speaking of 4g I'm already averaging about 5-6 mbps on the 4g network which is awesome to me. Eventually it will be up to 12mpbs and I'm sure higher later on as they develop the technology but really, I don't think I need more than that for me to be happy. I'm extremely happy with 5mbps as it is.
19. Glorfindale posted on 18 Jul 2010, 12:52 0 0
Boy, Motorola really made a comeback here. Two successful flagship devices of excellent design and quality. I'd be surprised if Moto actually went back to basic devices now. For the review, great success on both devices. I'll probably go for the X when I'm eligible.
20. InJuxHurYlem posted on 19 Jul 2010, 02:41 0 0
There is NO argument about the networks. Sprint's network is good, though not as good as Verizon. However, Sprint users are allowed to roam on the Verizon network for free. I was on the northern California coast camping last weekend. There was no Sprint coverage within 40 miles and I was happily data roaming, for free, on the Verizon network. And if you happen to live in 4G area, then that's gravy. So, yes, you have to be crazy not to be with Sprint right now. The historic issue with Sprint was their terrible phone line-up. With the Hero and Moment and now the EVO and Epic, you can't say that any more.
21. dvancleave posted on 19 Jul 2010, 20:44 0 0
Well, I have a unique advantage in comparing Sprint with Verizon. I personally carry a Verizon phone of my own. And I also carry a Sprint phone with my job. And I do a lot of driving throughout Central and Southern Indiana, sometimes down into Kentucky. So I can compare the two side-by-side. Obviously both have good coverage in high density areas (more developed). But I have been noticing that my Sprint phone tends to have more bars on avergae in remote ares than my Verizon phone. Of course the make and model of the phones could come into play. And I am merely comparing the signal strength. But I have had just as many dropped calls with Verizon as I have with Sprint. I am out of contract with Verizon on July 25. I have been with them for 7 years now and I am satisfied with the service. But Verizon definitely costs more, especially when you add data and texting plans. So I am going to take a gamble and make the switch to Sprint this time around. And I'm probably going to opt for the Evo. Oh, I also have a Sprint Mobile Broadband USB Adapter for my laptop that my job provides. And it works great! I won't bash Verizon. They do have a great network. It's just economics.
39. dsg_cobra posted on 29 Jul 2010, 22:55 0 0
i work for verizon and although it saddens me that you will be canceling your service, your mature approach makes since and i cant complain or bash. if only more people that canceled were like this. the majority of the time its for impulse decisions like iphone and that pisses me off to no end.
44. ilkesmrtphnz (unregistered) posted on 08 Aug 2010, 18:13 0 0
are you guys seriously arguing over phones, carriers, and networks?! how about we all grow up, just use the phone were happy with, and stop fighting on the internet over objects.
45. scorpio85 posted on 12 Aug 2010, 11:01 0 0
Its funny how people defend there phone and carrier. Do you think these carriers give a shit about any of you besides taking your money, then why do you care so much about them?
47. steveymacjr (unregistered) posted on 17 Aug 2010, 20:27 0 0
I have two things.. First you Can use a CDMA internationally, checkout sprint.com/sww and vzw.com/international this article needs to be corrected with this information. Second, in the hotspot section you made it seem like the only difference between the Droid X's and the eVO's hotspot is that the EVO can handle more connections, while that is true, the biggest difference is that Verizon puts a 2Gb cap on the data you can use ..Sprint's hotspot has no such cap, be it on 3G or 4G... This is a huge difference, just last month i used 20Gb of data since i use my phone in my car pool, and share the connection with 3 other people, the Droid X user in the car won't allow his to be shared:)
48. David Rietz (unregistered) posted on 24 Aug 2010, 13:29 0 0
verizon is a much much stronger service, I own both phones so I would know. The X has a better battery life and more efficient processor. Also a better aspect ratio. The evo has a smoother interface and a front camera for video calling. In my opinion you cant go wrong with either one, but verizon pushed the X a bit farther!
49. cameraguy (unregistered) posted on 12 Dec 2010, 13:25 0 0
The sample photos provided for the two cameras do not support the conclusion of the testers that the Droid X takes better pictures than the Evo. The resolution and apparent sharpness of the pictures taken by the Evo is clearly greater than the pics taken by the Droid X.
I don't have either of these phones, so I'm only going by what I see in this review, but I wonder if the photos got labeled incorrectly? There is just no way that one could conclude that the Droid X produced better photos based on these samples.