04-13-2012 02:59 PM
60 123
tools
  1. sbudaj's Avatar
    03-30-2012 10:28 PM
  2. highbar81's Avatar
    I'm holding out on passing judgement until Moto puts up a response or something. But don't let me fool you I'm not happy about it. Considering they are basically the same phone inside.
    03-30-2012 11:20 PM
  3. SeigaGen's Avatar
    I'm so glad to get rid of my bionic. First 3 I owned kept rebooting. The 4th one is now an alarm clock on my bedside on the dock. Moto really abandoned it right on release day.
    03-30-2012 11:46 PM
  4. bbycrts's Avatar
    It's fairly normal for the newest, most current phones to get the new technology first. I believe Motorola has said the Bionic will get it - but hadn't given a date yet.

    Patience, Grasshoppers.
    TA8088 likes this.
    03-30-2012 11:46 PM
  5. Lee_Bo's Avatar
    Well since Moto already stated we would get ICS, I'm holding out for it. If not, it's Gnex time.
    03-30-2012 11:55 PM
  6. 1812dave's Avatar
    When the time comes that ICS is pushed to our Bionics, I suspect that we will be having all sorts of sw issues like we did with the initial OS release. It took two updates to straighten our Bionics out. When we get ICS, we will be back to square one. I'd just as soon not update. It always takes months for revisions.
    03-31-2012 02:30 AM
  7. SCXR's Avatar
    When the time comes that ICS is pushed to our Bionics, I suspect that we will be having all sorts of sw issues like we did with the initial OS release. It took two updates to straighten our Bionics out. When we get ICS, we will be back to square one. I'd just as soon not update. It always takes months for revisions.
    I agree. I sold the Nexus and purchased the Bionic a couple of weeks ago. I had all kinds of issues with the Nexus. Random reboots, low volume, sounded like a fax machine was going off on some phone calls - had to reboot, keyboard is not nearly as good as the Moto keyboard. The battery on the Bionic lasts about 4 times longer than the Nexus. I had to recharge it 2-3 times a day even with light usage.

    I have not had one issue with the Bionic. ICS is overrated IMO. Maybe version 4.04 will be better.
    1812dave likes this.
    03-31-2012 09:34 AM
  8. doogald's Avatar
    If there really is ICS coming for the Razr series this week, this will be the first time that we didn't hear a huge chorus of people advertising that they were invited to a SOAK test by Motorola. Add to that the fact that Moto still lists the Razr and RazrMaxx as in planning and evaluation stage for ICS, while the Chinese version of the Razr is scheduled for Q2. I tend to no believe this.

    That said, I believe that when Moto first started talking about ICS updates for the Bionic and Razr, they hinted strongly that the Razr would see it first, so that part should not be surprising. The OEMs tend to update their newest handsets first.
    03-31-2012 11:57 AM
  9. 1812dave's Avatar
    I just hope they get most of the kinks out of ICS before they foist it on us. I hate "fixing" what isn't broken--my bionic works fine as is.
    mccornwall likes this.
    03-31-2012 02:20 PM
  10. nocaldawg's Avatar
    I too am glad I moved from the Bionic to the Rezound (Set to get ICS 4/6). Moto should be ashamed of how they have handled the Bionic from the start.
    03-31-2012 02:23 PM
  11. 1812dave's Avatar
    I too am glad I moved from the Bionic to the Rezound (Set to get ICS 4/6). Moto should be ashamed of how they have handled the Bionic from the start.
    Yet u hang out in the Bionic forum? How's that working for u?
    miller3078 and Syounger64 like this.
    03-31-2012 03:10 PM
  12. FastMoneyPlaya's Avatar
    What is so much better about ICS? My Bionic works fine - no compliants since the update.
    mccornwall and cjsmoove like this.
    03-31-2012 06:04 PM
  13. brainwash's Avatar
    Windows 95 is fine, why do I need to upgrade?
    Seriously though, GB on the Bionic works well. ICS has security and performance updates etc. After using unofficial ICS versions for the past couple of months I find it awkward to try to use gb for any length of time. Either way, this is the best phone I've owned.

    Sent from my XT875 using Tapatalk
    04-01-2012 11:44 AM
  14. 1812dave's Avatar
    Windows 95 is fine, why do I need to upgrade?
    Seriously though, GB on the Bionic works well. ICS has security and performance updates etc. After using unofficial ICS versions for the past couple of months I find it awkward to try to use gb for any length of time. Either way, this is the best phone I've owned.

    Sent from my XT875 using Tapatalk
    windows 95 was crap. no comparison to Win 7. I would rather have a stable version of GB than go back to being in seemingly-endless waiting mode with ICS for updates to fix all the things that it breaks. And I still don't see how ICS is going to improve my phone to the extent that you allude to. Feel free to explain PRECISELY what you find so wonderful about ICS.
    04-01-2012 11:52 AM
  15. BasPilot's Avatar
    windows 95 was crap. no comparison to Win 7.
    It worked though, right? That was his point. While both worked just fine, the newer software is definitely better.
    04-01-2012 01:43 PM
  16. 1812dave's Avatar
    R u nuts??? 95 didn't work "fine" neither did 98. Vista is crap. 7 is excellent
    cordoni likes this.
    04-01-2012 05:35 PM
  17. 3rdpig's Avatar
    R u nuts??? 95 didn't work "fine" neither did 98. Vista is crap. 7 is excellent
    I used DOS, then the early version of Windows like 3.1, then 95, 98, ME and XP and somehow I managed to get my work done, play games and communicate effectively. According to you that shouldn't have happened.

    Looking back and comparing them to 7 they seem like crap, but at the time yes, they worked fine.
    04-01-2012 10:06 PM
  18. Nicketmaster's Avatar
    The comparison of Win 95 to GB, though, is a silly one. The only version of windows that I will say worked "well" was 2k. The rest worked acceptably well for most things, but not "well." GB has it's issues, as does ICS, but comparatively it is not nearly in the realm of any old version of Windows.

    As for getting ICS on the Bionic, if it never comes I'll get a new phone in a year. If it does comes, I'll also probably be getting a new phone in a year or so. A few months with a perfectly good os on my phone is not something I am going to complain about. And if I were the type tho would, I'd probably be running a rom, anyway.
    04-02-2012 12:07 AM
  19. conanbarb's Avatar
    And I still don't see how ICS is going to improve my phone to the extent that you allude to. Feel free to explain PRECISELY what you find so wonderful about ICS.
    I'm actually curious about this as well. I'm in IT and I love updates that add features, but ICS just doesn't excite me like Froyo did. Can somebody please tell me what the "gotta have" features in ICS are?
    1812dave and cjsmoove like this.
    04-02-2012 05:06 PM
  20. 1812dave's Avatar
    I used DOS, then the early version of Windows like 3.1, then 95, 98, ME and XP and somehow I managed to get my work done, play games and communicate effectively. According to you that shouldn't have happened.

    Looking back and comparing them to 7 they seem like crap, but at the time yes, they worked fine.
    My first OS was DOS 2.11 If you think DOS was fine, you have REALLY LOW expectations. At least DOS was tricky enough that some of my wages were derived from teaching it!! Along with Excel and one of the older versions of Windows--whatever was used in 1994.

    DOS 6.22 wasn't too bad, when compared to earlier versions.
    04-02-2012 05:52 PM
  21. SnydersWeb's Avatar
    Ok.. at risk of further derailing this thread:
    The thing is hindsight makes mistakes practically glow in the dark. At the time each OS/Graphical Shell was written, it was done to "fix" the problems of the past. I too am a long-time MS veteran (edlin anyone?) and can say that mostly each and every new OS has improved in some ways upon its predecessor. Windows 95 was quite revolutionary for its day. The only real big mistakes I've seen MS do thus far have been:"Microsoft Bob", and "Windows ME".. - Vista I feel has been much maligned.

    Back on subject:
    I'm frankly a little disappointed that Moto isn't being more aggressive on getting ICS. Overall I'm just hoping that they don't further gut the darn thing by removing the ability to hide unwanted apps at least (it's bad enough we get the darn things shoved in our faces anyway). Oh well, I've purposely kept away from Rooting and so on in hopes of getting in on the soak test when they FINALLY start rolling it out.

    Conanbarb: the biggest thing ICS gives is a new UI. Someone wrote up this article:
    Android 2.3 Gingerbread vs. Android 4.0 Ice Cream Sandwich
    conanbarb likes this.
    04-02-2012 07:38 PM
  22. WebOS Refugee's Avatar
    Conanbarb: the biggest thing ICS gives is a new UI.
    And multitasking that, like the WebOS concept from which it draws much of its inspiration, actually works, smoothly, unlike the close-and-reopen setup that 2.3.4 employs.

    Oh, and full use of both processor cores.
    04-02-2012 09:15 PM
  23. slayerfaith1982's Avatar
    I'm wondering how "new" the UI will really be though. Since Moto skins everything pretty much, I'm sure the skin will carry over to ICS and that way aesthetically you won't notice a difference other than minor things here and there. Has anyone seen a leaked build of what the UI looks like w/ how moto is gonna treat their skin?
    04-03-2012 09:21 AM
  24. luke31's Avatar
    Yea, look in the RAZR forums and you'll see screenshots.
    04-03-2012 10:15 AM
  25. SnydersWeb's Avatar
    I'm wondering how "new" the UI will really be though. Since Moto skins everything pretty much, I'm sure the skin will carry over to ICS and that way aesthetically you won't notice a difference other than minor things here and there. Has anyone seen a leaked build of what the UI looks like w/ how moto is gonna treat their skin?
    This might give us an idea what to expect.. overall looks quite nice:
    04-03-2012 10:18 AM
60 123
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD