Replying to: Galaxy III vs RAZR MAXX HD (SIGNAL STRENGTH) by gacollege
Re: Galaxy III vs RAZR MAXX HD (SIGNAL STRENGTH)
As for battery life, the AMOLED screen sucks rocks, and they both have AMOLED screens. You have two reasonable choices:
1) Spend the extra $100 for the MAXX variant, and not the regular one.
2) Buy a spare battery for the Samsung and keep it in your pocket all day long, because you'll probably need it by about 4:00. Then, deal with remembering to charge the spare every day, which means popping the back plate off your phone no less than twice a day.
If I were you, I would wait 3 weeks for the LG Nexus handset to show up on stage. It's going to have the same "size" battery as the Galaxy S3, but the AMOLED burns through battery more than 50% faster than an IPS screen will.
http://www.engadget.com/2012/04/13/lg-renames-optimu ... »
Check out the graph on the bottom slide.
Oh, and I would put LG one step ahead of Samsung on antenna quality. They're not as good as Motorola, but they're good (in general).
- Re: Galaxy III vs RAZR MAXX HD (SIGNAL STRENGTH) by Jarahawk
- Re: Galaxy III vs RAZR MAXX HD (SIGNAL STRENGTH) by CellStudent
- Re: Galaxy III vs RAZR MAXX HD (SIGNAL STRENGTH) by crazyeaglefan236