How'd you get them to move your upgrade date up?Corsi said:Just got Verizon to move my upgrade date up and grabbed the Moto X for free on Amazon.
Just to follow up, this is correct. It was free.PortlandSoxFan said:If you go there with the phone, I'm pretty sure they will just give you one.
Seconded.Seven Costanza said:If you're buying off contract, I'd take a good look at the phone mentioned in the post before yours versus the S3.
Fishercat said:Seems like it's, spec wise, behind the S3 with the exception of having an updated Android (Jelly Bean), being 60 bucks cheaper (I was able to buy the S3 at 260 on VM's network, but returning it should be simple if I go in another direction), and allowing me to jump to T-Mobile (which most people say is the best prepaid option). Am I wrong in that? Looks like a pretty nice phone though all things considered.
(Also worth noting the Moto G is 3G only, but I doubt 4G has much relevance for me anyway)
My guess would be he's on Verizon.JakeRae said:Why aren't you getting a Nexus 5 at that price range?
At first, I thought that, but when comparing the specs, they all seemed similar, with the S3 being equal to or better on ceratin features. The Moto and Nexus, though new, are still budget phones in comparison to say an S4, or any other flagship phone that came out recently. It seemed that their specs would compete better with last years high end features, which would be the S3.Soxy Brown said:I would think the decision comes down to either the Moto G for $200 or the Nexus 5 for $350. Either one would be a perfectly cromulent choice.
Paying $300 for an S3 (which is a year and a half old) seems weird to me when you could get a Nexus 5 for $50 more, or the Moto G for $100 less. You realize that the vast majority of those reviews you're reading on the S3 were written in the context of the phone landscape of mid-2012, right? A lot of new phones have come out since May 2012. That you can get one that's brand spanking new for essentially the same cost as the S3.... seems like a no-brainer to me.
HillysLastWalk said:At first, I thought that, but when comparing the specs, they all seemed similar, with the S3 being equal to or better on ceratin features. The Moto and Nexus, though new, are still budget phones in comparison to say an S4, or any other flagship phone that came out recently. It seemed that their specs would compete better with last years high end features, which would be the S3.
I'm not, but that's only because I know what to disable and how to set everything up.deconstruction said:Are people really bothered by touchwiz and other pre-installed crap on the S3? It's all pretty much negligible once you (a) install an alternative launcher and (b) disable as many apps and pre-installed features as allowed. I barely notice any Samsung or Verizon intrusion. I've had my S3 for a year-and-a-half, have never rooted it (I have with other phones, so I know what potential it offers.), and am really happy with its sustained performance. It's not close to the best phone right now, of course, but the bloat criticism doesn't seem warranted to me.
Gee, maybe because it's a piece of shit?Joe Sixpack said:Given Hilly's criteria I think the S3 is the best choice. I'm not sure why the consensus seems to be opposed to it.
Blacken said:Gee, maybe because it's a piece of shit?
It's a hollow- and cheap-feeling phone (and this isn't a universal attribute of Samsung phones, the Galaxy Nexus felt very good) using a bad Android skin that gets major updates slowly and point updates only rarely while saddling you with inferior Samsung-branded applications--their mail application is a travesty, their calendar application worse. And, having one on my desk right now, the idea that its camera is anything to write home about is pretty funny.
That said, the Galaxy S3 is about the nicest plastic phone I've ever seen. Likely tired of hearing complaints about how cheap-feeling Samsung phones can be, the company decided to focus instead on making the contours more premium -- without giving up its light, inexpensive, and shatterproof material of choice.
I'm happy to report that this 8-megapixel camera lens, with backlit sensor and LED flash, is worthy of a flagship phone
As advertised, the GS3 has virtually zero shutter lag; in fact, it processed photos a hair faster than the One X.
The Samsung Galaxy S III deftly combines top-notch smart-phone performance with some of the most innovative technologies the Android platform has to offer. That includes the use of Tec Tiles--postage-stamp-sized stickers that you can program to perform a variety of tasks when you tap the phone against one. Its large, brilliant display, clever HD cameras, and ingenious options for sharing make it ideal for social networkers, though the phone's controls and other adjustments may intimidate less-experienced smart-phone users.
The Galaxy S III is one of the most advanced Android smart phones ever, with an array of gesture- and sensor-based tools to help you access and share the content you create and capture on your phone. Its rear-facing high-definition cameras can shoot a series of photos in rapid-fire succession while in camera mode, as well as snap a still picture at any moment while shooting a video.
Blacken said:The S3 was never the "best phone on the market" unless your criteria are numeric, while performance essentially stopped mattering before the S3 even came out. The user experience of the S3 is worse than contemporary HTC phones (themselves not great) as well as the likewise contemporary Nexus 4.
so I just wonder if you are applying it to your needs as opposed to mine.
With Android 4.4.1 on board, however, the Nexus 5's camera stops being a dealbreaker — it's not the best smartphone camera, but it's a camera you can use confidently and expectantly knowing that it will almost always deliver. It may not take the perfect shot yet, but rarely offers anything but a completely usable one. Burke says it's only going to get better, though he admits there's a lot to do. "Cameras can be pretty complicated," he says.
Leave.glennhoffmania said:My contract with Sprint is up in a couple of months and I'm trying to decide what to do. Lately I've been having some network issues. Randomly my email doesn't update and I can't get on the browser. It usually doesn't last very long but it's annoying and I'm tempted to switch.
The problem is that I have a really good deal with Sprint. We have lifetime unlimited data and with a corporate discount we pay like $160 for two lines. My wife doesn't want to give up the unlimited data even though we've never come close to hitting any reasonable limits.
Anyone have any thoughts on the Sprint network (I'm in NYC by the way), the value of the unlimited data, and/or whether it's worth the extra cost to switch to Verizon or T-Mobile?
glennhoffmania said:My contract with Sprint is up in a couple of months and I'm trying to decide what to do. Lately I've been having some network issues. Randomly my email doesn't update and I can't get on the browser. It usually doesn't last very long but it's annoying and I'm tempted to switch.
The problem is that I have a really good deal with Sprint. We have lifetime unlimited data and with a corporate discount we pay like $160 for two lines. My wife doesn't want to give up the unlimited data even though we've never come close to hitting any reasonable limits.
Anyone have any thoughts on the Sprint network (I'm in NYC by the way), the value of the unlimited data, and/or whether it's worth the extra cost to switch to Verizon or T-Mobile?
Trautwein's Degree said:Leave.
I left Sprint after 13 years for the reasons you mentioned. It is terrible and getting worse. I was paying $80 a month for shit. My phone is vital to my business. I switched to ATT and have an 4g shared plan with unlimited talk and text for $120 a month. I can also use my phone as a hotspot (something sprint charged for). The level of service is so much better with ATT that it's hard to describe.
glennhoffmania said:My contract with Sprint is up in a couple of months and I'm trying to decide what to do. Lately I've been having some network issues. Randomly my email doesn't update and I can't get on the browser. It usually doesn't last very long but it's annoying and I'm tempted to switch.
The problem is that I have a really good deal with Sprint. We have lifetime unlimited data and with a corporate discount we pay like $160 for two lines. My wife doesn't want to give up the unlimited data even though we've never come close to hitting any reasonable limits.
Anyone have any thoughts on the Sprint network (I'm in NYC by the way), the value of the unlimited data, and/or whether it's worth the extra cost to switch to Verizon or T-Mobile?
zenter said:
A comparable plan on TMo would cost ~$120. You probably can get by with 2.5 GB at full speeds, though. And it covers most places, especially cities. And subsequent lines are even cheaper.
Plus, they have wifi calling, which means when you're at work/home, the voice and text can go through your telco internet. If TMo also has a corp discount for your/your wife's company, you might make out like a bandit.
Of course, the one other thing to consider (besides coverage) is that device costs are divorced from plan costs. Worked out awesome for me, but may be less advantageous for you.