Moto Insider: 9/1

It's not like they knew the Targa was coming to their network? seriously? or am I misunderstanding what you are saying? Anyway its a moot point, all I am saying is It doesn't make sense to release to phones that close, with no real difference other than a jump in RAM.
 
It's not like they knew the Targa was coming to their network? seriously? or am I misunderstanding what you are saying? Anyway its a moot point, all I am saying is It doesn't make sense to release to phones that close, with no real difference other than a jump in RAM.

You are misunderstanding, unless Verizon = general public now. They are different processors, different experiences, etc. Motorola has never released 2 identical smartphones on different carriers. Sprint has the Photon, AT&T has the Atrix, we're getting the Bionic and T-Mo... well, I don't pay attention to them. It is a moot point though, and has no real effect on anyone here, honestly.
 
You are misunderstanding, unless Verizon = general public now. They are different processors, different experiences, etc. Motorola has never released 2 identical smartphones on different carriers. Sprint has the Photon, AT&T has the Atrix, we're getting the Bionic and T-Mo... well, I don't pay attention to them. It is a moot point though, and has no real effect on anyone here, honestly.

Sorry to call you out on this, but that's simply not true. The Milestone was released on multiple carriers, and is the same phone as the OG Droid on top of that.

I do understand your point, though, and it's valid.
 
Targa > Etna
OMAP 4430 > Tegra 2
OMAP 4430 PowerVR SGX540 GPU > Tegra 2 GPU
1 GB DDR2 RAM > 512GB DDR2 RAM
OMAP 4430 dual-channel LPDDR2 memory controller > Tegra 2 single channel controller
etc.

Never said the Targa wasn't greater, I'm saying they're marginally greater. We're still talking a 1ghz dual core processor. The OMAP will perform better, but marginally, it still doesn't change the fact that we're looking at a RAM increase and webtop that's significant changes and DDR2, but I never found it confirmed that the Etna wasn't DDR2, but I guess if the Tegra 2 can only control single channel...

Still it's a marginal improvement, imo. (with exception to the RAM) thus, the Targa was only planned to have RAM and webtop upgrade (Yes and with marginal instrument upgrade). I would think they'd try to have some other selling points to separate it from the Etna.

No normal consumer is gonna understand the OMAP 4430 1ghz dual core processor is better than the Nvidia Tegra 2 1ghz Dual core processor. they don't even advertise these points. So what's their selling point? I'm thinking the Bionic (targa) may have more to offer that we don't know about. Perhaps a different screen, NFS? Something...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jasper
when the Etna was scrapped, the guys over at HoFo said that the Targa was originally designed to be a follow up/upgrade to the Bionic/Etna. so, it was going to probly be the Bionic2. but then the Etna got scrapped, and they just assigned the Bionic name to the Targa.

so, it is a completely different device than the Etna. but, as we have seen in recent history with the Inc2, DX2, D3, etc, it was only going to have incremental upgrades - the processor change, webtop, and ram. so, it's a different device, with some upgrades - and the debate here is mainly a subjective one as to whether those upgrades can be considered "significant."
 
  • Like
Reactions: anon(387460)
when the Etna was scrapped, the guys over at HoFo said that the Targa was originally designed to be a follow up/upgrade to the Bionic/Etna. so, it was going to probly be the Bionic2. but then the Etna got scrapped, and they just assigned the Bionic name to the Targa.

so, it is a completely different device than the Etna. but, as we have seen in recent history with the Inc2, DX2, D3, etc, it was only going to have incremental upgrades - the processor change, webtop, and ram. so, it's a different device, with some upgrades - and the debate here is mainly a subjective one as to whether those upgrades can be considered "significant."

Since they never released the phone, I'd say it's significant enough. They made an entirely new design, meaning it could take this long if they are trying to make the phone work correctly. And while they were at it, they added a little extra upgrades to it. I think a phone instead of nothing is a significant enough upgrade.
 
Sorry to call you out on this, but that's simply not true. The Milestone was released on multiple carriers, and is the same phone as the OG Droid on top of that.

I do understand your point, though, and it's valid.

I apologize. I was referring to American carriers as overseas (and Canada) carriers don't directly affect us.
 
Did anyone seriously want the Etna? It was chunky and looked plasticy to me. Didn't look like it fit in the Droid line at all. The 512MB of RAM was also a big letdown considering the Atrix had 1GB. I think Motorola realized with all the other high end phones like the EVO 3D and GS2 coming, the Etna would have looked very lackluster.
 
I would have bought it over the other 3 LTE phones any day of the week. I agree about the RAM though.
 
I would have bought it over the other 3 LTE phones any day of the week. I agree about the RAM though.

Sure, it was better than the other LTE phones, but that isn't saying much considering they were old tech with an LTE radio thrown in. At least the Thunderbolt had 768MB of RAM.
 

Trending Posts

Forum statistics

Threads
956,993
Messages
6,970,952
Members
3,163,678
Latest member
Quiant