Any thoughts on the HTC One?

[Cattails_r_Edible]

HTC knocked this one out of the park! Amazing phone!

Remember what the doormouse said, feed your head!

 

[Fraggle79]

I like my DNA, but the One has some features I want.
1. 2 Front speakers (very often while holding DNA, my hands block the rear speaker and muffle the sound)
2. Aluminum Body looks really good
3. 64GB of Storage !!! (I should put this first but I'm too lazy to copy and paste it)

 

[rizzman]

Great hardware. Just one problem. It is hard for people like myself on JB 4.2.2 on a GNEX to have to revert back to 4.1.2. Personally I will take software over hardware anyday. This device would have been a monster as a nexus device.

 

[Ry]

Great hardware. Just one problem. It is hard for people like myself on JB 4.2.2 on a GNEX to have to revert back to 4.1.2. Personally I will take software over hardware anyday. This device would have been a monster as a nexus device.

Probably an edge case.

With Sense 5, people wouldn't notice.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

 

[rizzman]

Probably an edge case.

With Sense 5, people wouldn't notice.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

They will once KLP gets released and this device is still on JB. : )

 

[8100User]

Well storage and battery are personal... My battery lasts me the whole day, and I have no problems with the 16gb. Each to his own I guess.

Battery really hasn't been too bad on the DNA, for me. That said, I'd never turn down a larger battery, as long as it didn't add much to the size.

As for internal storage, I'm actually surprised! Two months into owning the DNA, and I STILL have over 6GB of internal memory! It's really a non issue for me.

I'm sure for others, lack of internal memory could be an issue, but I honestly don't need to store my entire music collection on my phone, and I don't watch full length movies on it.

The One does look nice, based on the photos.

 

[rkeenan]

I wish we would have received the HTC One at Verizon instead of the Droid DNA. I would have bought the HTC One over my Note 2 but for some reason I didn't like the DNA. I just the styling on the HTC One is sweet.

 

[metz65]

I'm happy with the DNA. Love the 5 " screen, the storage isn't an issue and for my usage patterns the battery has been excellent.

In fact out of the OG Droid, Droid X, Galaxy Nexus and Razor Maxx this is the first phone I have been truly satisfied with.

I don't care what kind of phone you have, that's not how I judge someone's worth or intelligence.

 

[iknownothing]

I say get a real phone - Z10. Seriously that HTC One looks sweet, but I wish it was available in black. If someone twisted my arm and forced me, I'd accept it It just goes on the pile of all the other phones I'd love to get, but by the time I will be ABLE to get it it will be old news and a NEW hot phone will be on the market. It's a plot by the tech bloggers to stay employed.

It will be available in black.

Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF300T using Android Central Forums

 

[whiteshadow001]

Frankly its not that much of an upgrade over the DNA if any upgrade at that. I'm not blown away with the HTC one at all. I still really want a DNA

Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk HD

 

[anon(924308)]

Frankly its not that much of an upgrade over the DNA if any upgrade at that. I'm not blown away with the HTC one at all. I still really want a DNA

I think one of the main selling points is the new "ultrapixel" sensor (allows in 300% more light, has larger pixels--which is different from more pixels) so the camera should be significantly better, and perform well under lowlight. Though, disappointingly enough it seems the rest of the hardware is the same--f/2.0 28mm back lens, 2.1MP front cam, both wide-angle (which is what they always use on their phones, and their phones aren't known for their cameras). I believe the past few HTC phones all essentially had the same sensor/camera hardware specs, and the only difference was the software. I'm reaaaaaaally curious to see if "ultrapixels" = a better-quality camera. The DNA is a 2013-ready phone in all other regards, but its camera essentially performs the same as a late-2011 iPhone 4S (which beats it in low-light).

I don't know if this is a result of the sensor or not, but I've actually found that ISO 100 is essentially the same as ISO 1600 on my DNA--with everything held constant, it just produces a darker image, it doesn't improve clarity or reduce noise. Don't get me wrong--I love my DNA in almost every other regard, but if you're going to release a 2013 phone, you might as well try to improve the camera hardware to at least attempt to rival its contemporaries. All in all, I think a better battery and a better camera would make the HTC One worthwhile--but I still think the DNA is a sexier phone lol.

Personally, I really think HTC should ditch that wide-angle back lens. Too much distortion, and it means anything relatively close-up requires digital zoom; I mean the front lens is almost fisheye, the distortion is so noticeable.. Why didn't HTC revamp their lenses, if they went through the trouble of creating an 'ultrapixel' sensor?

 

[jamdmyers]

I'm 'somewhat' satisfied with my DNA, of course it's had it share of issues, wifi / sim etc as well I'm sure the One will also... not ready to rediscover what works and not... also NO WireLess Charging... I'm never going back after using it on the DNA // I guess with a all alum frame it would glow at night ;-)

 

[AndroidXTC]

I really love my DNA and really don't care about the One. Im guessing down the road the DNA will be replaced by a One clone with a larger screen and thats why Verizon is not getting this version. I would bet a DNA version of the One with a larger screen will be out in the fall.

 

[osubeavs728]

I'm not really understanding how some people are saying that the One is "not really an improvement from the DNA". I love my DNA but I would switch for the One in a heart beat. The SD600 is enough reason alone for me to switch. Qualcomm said they got 40% improvement out of the 600, if I got 40% more horsepower or Gas mileage out of my truck I'd be stoked, and I'd say that's a big improvement. Storage has doubled and quadrupled from the DNA, the battery is bigger and will last longer due to the new internals, the camera is poised to be much better and it's available on almost every carrier!

It's all just my opinion, but HTC really did good here. Majority of things that people chose to B*tch about with the DNA they fixed, that alone is a big improvement. I hope this is a success for them.

 

[metz65]

I think it's an improvement. I just don't think it's so groundbreaking that it's worth ditching the DNA and spending 6 or 7 hundred dollars on it.

I don't care what kind of phone you have, that's not how I judge someone's worth or intelligence.

 

[luke31]

I think it's an improvement. I just don't think it's so groundbreaking that it's worth ditching the DNA and spending 6 or 7 hundred dollars on it.

I don't care what kind of phone you have, that's not how I judge someone's worth or intelligence.

Kinda like the Droid DNA S... **please don't hurt me**

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Android Central Forums

 

[MrRicks84]

Kinda like the Droid DNA S... **please don't hurt me**

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Android Central Forums

Lol I actually like that name for it

 

[jerrykur]

I think I would have a hard time giving up wireless charging. It is one of things that does not seem to be a big deal until you have it. Then you wonder how you got along with out it.

 

[whiteshadow001]

I think one of the main selling points is the new "ultrapixel" sensor (allows in 300% more light, has larger pixels--which is different from more pixels) so the camera should be significantly better, and perform well under lowlight. Though, disappointingly enough it seems the rest of the hardware is the same--f/2.0 28mm back lens, 2.1MP front cam, both wide-angle (which is what they always use on their phones, and their phones aren't known for their cameras). I believe the past few HTC phones all essentially had the same sensor/camera hardware specs, and the only difference was the software. I'm reaaaaaaally curious to see if "ultrapixels" = a better-quality camera. The DNA is a 2013-ready phone in all other regards, but its camera essentially performs the same as a late-2011 iPhone 4S (which beats it in low-light).

I don't know if this is a result of the sensor or not, but I've actually found that ISO 100 is essentially the same as ISO 1600 on my DNA--with everything held constant, it just produces a darker image, it doesn't improve clarity or reduce noise. Don't get me wrong--I love my DNA in almost every other regard, but if you're going to release a 2013 phone, you might as well try to improve the camera hardware to at least attempt to rival its contemporaries. All in all, I think a better battery and a better camera would make the HTC One worthwhile--but I still think the DNA is a sexier phone lol.

Personally, I really think HTC should ditch that wide-angle back lens. Too much distortion, and it means anything relatively close-up requires digital zoom; I mean the front lens is almost fisheye, the distortion is so noticeable.. Why didn't HTC revamp their lenses, if they went through the trouble of creating an 'ultrapixel' sensor?

I think the problem with the DNAs camera is all software related. The camera it has is better than the one in the one x. I read on either droid life or enhancer that HTC built the camera software from the ground up for sense 4.x instead of modifying the stock android camera app and they seemed to think it's HTCs software that makes the DNAs camera not as good.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2