For you who have compared with S3 and Razr HD

**MikeLip** · 02-10-2013, 05:50 PM

How would you rate this phone on display? I have heard from places like Gizmodo (yeah, I know - consider the source) that the display isn't all that - maybe not as good as the S3. I'm sure it beats the Razr HD, but the S3 display is pretty spectacular. I also wonder about battery. Some reviews say battery sucks, dying in a matter of hours, some say it's better than the S3. I do have the S3 and the battery seems about average for a smart phone.

I know the phone has a mere 16gig, but so far I've used maybe 8. I don't carry music or videos. The biggest thing I have on board is Tomtom.

I am interested in the phone for better performance, adequate battery, great display, larger screen. If the Galaxy Note 2 had a higher density screen I'd probably go for it.

The Android Central review basically foamed at the mouth for this phone.

**jtb79** · 02-10-2013, 06:00 PM

I had the S3 and returned it after a week. Got the DNA and have had it for close to a week now and i'm much happier with the DNA. To me the screen is a little better on the DNA and the battery life is about the same. For whatever reason, the DNA just fits me better than the S3. It feels better in my hand, call quality is better (I live right in the middle of the city and get a bar more than the S3), and it feels like a better built device. I also like the Sense skin HTC has on it (My first HTC Phone) and have had no issues whatsoever with the phone. Hope this helps.

**mightyfacundo** · 02-10-2013, 07:35 PM

I compared the S3, Note 2, and DNA screens, and for me, the DNA was the big winner. That doesn't mean that there's anything wrong with the screens on the other phones, but I just felt that the DNA displayed colors more accurately and had a sharper picture than the others. As for storage, of course I would love to have more, but it isn't a reason for me not to own the phone. I can't speak about it's performance compared to the others, but it is super smooth and plenty fast. The battery lasts me all day, and I use it to listen to podcasts all day while I'm working, phone calls, music, internet browsing, emails, texts, games - basically everything. Overall, I'm very happy with it, and I think Gizmodo is crazy to think it's not a great display. That's ridiculous.

Just curious, but why are you thinking of moving away from the S3?

**JHBThree** · 02-10-2013, 08:53 PM

Originally Posted by mightyfacundo

I compared the S3, Note 2, and DNA screens, and for me, the DNA was the big winner. That doesn't mean that there's anything wrong with the screens on the other phones, but I just felt that the DNA displayed colors more accurately and had a sharper picture than the others. As for storage, of course I would love to have more, but it isn't a reason for me not to own the phone. I can't speak about it's performance compared to the others, but it is super smooth and plenty fast. The battery lasts me all day, and I use it to listen to podcasts all day while I'm working, phone calls, music, internet browsing, emails, texts, games - basically everything. Overall, I'm very happy with it, and I think Gizmodo is crazy to think it's not a great display. That's ridiculous.

Just curious, but why are you thinking of moving away from the S3?

They actually didn't say the DNA was worse than the S3. They said it was better than pretty much everything except for the iPhone and One X, mainly because of color reproduction and brightness.

**MikeLip** · 02-11-2013, 05:18 AM

Originally Posted by mightyfacundo

Just curious, but why are you thinking of moving away from the S3?

My daughter wants the S3. So obviously the reasonable thing is to give her mine and get a DNA

**MikeLip** · 02-11-2013, 06:58 AM

Originally Posted by JHBThree

They actually didn't say the DNA was worse than the S3. They said it was better than pretty much everything except for the iPhone and One X, mainly because of color reproduction and brightness.

Gizmodo USED to be a good place to go for tech news, reviews and information. Now they seem more interested in being all edgy (read - using questionable language in headlines and leaders, and concentrating on getting drunk, as if that made them seem cool rather than 15 year olds running a web site) and posting click-bait rather than supplying useful information. Engadget does a much MUCH better job, and BGR better yet.

**xlDeMoNiClx** · 02-11-2013, 07:58 AM

Originally Posted by MikeLip

Gizmodo USED to be a good place to go for tech news, reviews and information. Now they seem more interested in being all edgy (read - using questionable language in headlines and leaders, and concentrating on getting drunk, as if that made them seem cool rather than 15 year olds running a web site) and posting click-bait rather than supplying useful information. Engadget does a much MUCH better job, and BGR better yet.

This is why I prefer to just use forums nowadays instead of so-called "tech-sites" since they're falling in quality IMO as time goes by.

**MrRicks84** · 02-11-2013, 11:01 AM

Originally Posted by MikeLip

Gizmodo USED to be a good place to go for tech news, reviews and information. Now they seem more interested in being all edgy (read - using questionable language in headlines and leaders, and concentrating on getting drunk, as if that made them seem cool rather than 15 year olds running a web site) and posting click-bait rather than supplying useful information. Engadget does a much MUCH better job, and BGR better yet.

Pocketnow, Techno Buffalo & Phone Dog are some good ones also. I agree, Gizmodo is a no go.

**JHBThree** · 02-11-2013, 11:41 AM

Originally Posted by MikeLip

Gizmodo USED to be a good place to go for tech news, reviews and information. Now they seem more interested in being all edgy (read - using questionable language in headlines and leaders, and concentrating on getting drunk, as if that made them seem cool rather than 15 year olds running a web site) and posting click-bait rather than supplying useful information. Engadget does a much MUCH better job, and BGR better yet.

Oh I don't go there at all. I only remember seeing that because I searched for DNA reviews before I bought mine.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2

**Dreamliner330** · 02-13-2013, 10:05 AM

I'm thinking of switching from my MAXX HD. I really hate AMOLED and the on-screen buttons. It's also really laggy. I've been contemplating a Note 2...I just don't know.

**menelmacar18** · 02-13-2013, 11:46 AM

Gizmodo has gone so far downhill I stopped reading it, but Engadget might be worse. They have a long history of being in the bag for Apple and a few other companies because it gets them access, they simply can't be trusted to give honest appraisals of anything.

**JHBThree** · 02-13-2013, 03:05 PM

Originally Posted by menelmacar18

Gizmodo has gone so far downhill I stopped reading it, but Engadget might be worse. They have a long history of being in the bag for Apple and a few other companies because it gets them access, they simply can't be trusted to give honest appraisals of anything.

Funny. I've seen apple fans say that they're in the bag for android.

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk 2

**Dreamliner330** · 02-13-2013, 07:29 PM

I just switched to the DNA from the MAXX HD. Very happy. The DNA is much faster and there is very little lag. The screen is MUCH better on the DNA, night and day difference.

Hopefully the battery will last the day for me. Looking forward to learning about ROM options.