LG's Optimus 7 & Samsung's Focus Reviewed: A Tale of Two Windows Phones
by Anand Lal Shimpi on December 3, 2010 10:14 PM EST- Posted in
- Smartphones
- Samsung
- Windows Phone 7
- LG Optimus
- LG
- Samsung Focus
- Mobile
Battery Life & OS Performance
As we’ve already said in our Windows Phone 7 and HTC Surround reviews, performance is identical between WP7 devices. They all have the same amount of memory (512MB shared between the CPU and GPU) and the same 1GHz Scorpion core in a 65nm Snapdragon SoC. Handset vendors aren’t allowed to customize the OS or UI to the point where performance would be affected either.
In general Windows Phone 7 OS performance is great. The UI runs at an extremely smooth 60 fps nearly all of the time. First party apps run very well however performance in 3rd party apps is hit or miss. I suspect with faster SoCs and more experience developing for the platform, this will only improve.
I am curious to see whether OS performance and responsiveness will suffer as Microsoft updates the OS similar to what we’ve seen with iOS.
Battery life is pretty straightforward. While the Focus has a very contrasty Super AMOLED screen, it comes at the expense of power consumption, especially when displaying white. Our web browsing test wreaks havoc on Super AMOLED devices as there are a lot of white pixels in the web pages we use to test. As a result the Focus delivers the worst battery life of any Windows Phone we've tested thus far.
Thankfully WP7's default theme is predominantly black. Other than the email and IE mobile apps, the majority of the OS is mostly displaying black pixels. So while the Focus doesn't do well in our web browsing battery life test, in general usage the phone lasts longer than you'd expect. I'd say you can plan on charging the phone at least once a day for moderate usage.
The LG Optimus 7 on the other hand does extremely well across the board. It has the same sized battery as the Focus, but with a much more power efficient display.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
34 Comments
View All Comments
omega12 - Friday, December 3, 2010 - link
"Apple is the first company I've seen to take the pace of innovation offered by Moore's Law and pair it with an equally aggressive expected upgrade cycle."Last time i checked their hardware was not exactly up to date so I don't think you can say they are the kind that follows Moore's Law closely. Aggressive upgrade cycle they do have though.
Maybe you meant that with each upgrade they usually change their core hardware? But then again that's hardly the case. I don't get it.
sprockkets - Friday, December 3, 2010 - link
I think Moore and his law need to die. This isn't even cpus we are talking about, and Anand even referenced the stupid law when referring to SSDs.For that matter, if they really were following Moore's law they would upgrade like every 18 months, not 12, and others upgrade like every 6 months. And those ARM cpus are not getting upgrades solely based on litho process improvements either.
foolsgambit11 - Monday, December 6, 2010 - link
Moore's Law is often used a simple shorthand for referring to the rapid pace of technological innovation, and that's how it was used here. But given that, Moore's Law originally only said that the number of transistors that can be fit on a given size of silicon will double roughly every 18-24 months (Moore used different numbers at different times). So it applies equally well to SSDs.Anand Lal Shimpi - Friday, December 3, 2010 - link
I meant from an end user standpoint. The typical PC upgrade cycle is 3 - 5 years, Apple's sales strategy seems to be to shorten that cycle fairly aggressively.The holy grail a decade ago was selling PCs like cars - a new one every model year. Apple has effectively done that. It's great for Apple's bottom line for sure.
Take care,
Anand
StormyParis - Saturday, December 4, 2010 - link
Indeed, the car model-year explanation makes a lot more sense. People like getting stuff that is "new", it's an easy-to-grok upgrade cycle, and, thanks to technological progress, PC model-years mean more than cosmetics changes, which are what most car model-years are about.I'm wondering why most brands don't go with the yearly line-up refresh, probably towards the end of summer. I'm guessing PC companies still mainly see themselves as tech-driven, or even component-driven, which kinda explains why Apple is making a killing.
Pirks - Sunday, December 5, 2010 - link
"why most brands don't go with the yearly line-up refresh, probably towards the end of summer"That's because most brands are run by the Mototrolls and frobitches of the world.
wyvernknight - Monday, December 6, 2010 - link
Wow, its pirks, the persistent apple-lover from dailytech. Long time since i read one of your comments!Exelius - Monday, December 6, 2010 - link
Apple's hardware was pretty up to date when it was released; which was quite a while ago. The trick for Apple is that they underclock everything to achieve excellent battery life.Mobile hardware goes out of date pretty quickly; but I still wouldn't say the iPhone 4 is exactly ancient. They release one hardware upgrade and several software upgrades per year.
If you mean stuff other than the iPhone, then sure. But I'm not really sure they need to be the latest-and-greatest; the MBP is still easily the best selling laptop in the world and when you compare the MBP to truly comparable laptops, it's not poorly priced. Try to find a laptop with high-res, quality 15" screen, discrete switchable GPU, i5 or i7 and 5+ hours battery life... The entire package is what's important.
It's almost to Apple's advantage to sell slightly out-of-date components, so you buy a new one every year... Compare this with a company like Dell, HP or Acer where they release a new product every week, so the end-users know that whenever they want to upgrade, there will be a new product there for them to buy. With Apple, you try to time your purchase right after a major announcement.
mfenn - Friday, December 3, 2010 - link
The Youtube video on page 9 is marked as private. :(tipoo - Saturday, December 4, 2010 - link
Works fine for me, but not in the embedded player. You have to double click it to open it in youtube.