Iphone 5 Review by Engadget

G

goofball

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
1,574
Reaction score
0
Like the title says.

http://www.engadget.com/2012/09/18/apple-iphone-5-review/

Interesting for me was the speed.

Two times faster? Twice the graphics performance? Better battery life? Actually, yes. The iPhone 5 over-delivers on all those promises. Running the Geekbench test suite on the iPhone 4S gave us an average score of 634. The iPhone 5 netted an average of 1,628. That's more than twice as fast and, while you won't necessarily see such huge increases in day-to-day usage, apps do load noticeably quicker, HDR images are processed in half the time and tasks like video rendering in iMovie are equally expedient.

SunSpider scores average at 924ms, which is more than twice as fast as the 2,200ms the iPhone 4S manages and still quite a bit quicker than the 1,400ms scored by the Galaxy S III and the 1,700ms managed by the HTC One X. More important than numbers, web pages load very quickly, snapping into view as fast as your data plan can shovel the bits into Safari and, once there, smoothly reacting to your gestures.
Click to expand...

Sorry, it's spelled Engadget. :-)
 
Last edited:
Iphone 5 Review by Engaget

...another thread. What a way to start the morning.
 
Hamster said:
...another thread. What a way to start the morning.
Click to expand...

I'm going to agree and disagree... Been waiting for the guys at Engadget and Gizmodo to get their hands on one and review it, so there we'll have to disagree. Sadly, a flame war will no doubt ensue here on MyBB and there Hamster, we are in full agreement.
 
I'd love it if it didn't turn into a flamewar. It's awesome to wake up and read all the reviews. Pretty much universally praised.

Prediction: It'll sell double iPhone 4S's numbers.
 
Looks good from this review. Actually did much better in the benchmarks that I thought it would after the unveiling.
 
phoneJunky said:
Looks good from this review. Actually did much better in the benchmarks that I thought it would after the unveiling.
Click to expand...

I agree. The speeds look great and I think the panorama mode on the camera is quite cool and looks like it will actually work.

The metal back is also a big improvement for me.

Wonder when the pre-orders in SA will open...
 
Engadget? What was once one of the tech websites in the world, is now commonly seen as a joke
 
cerebus said:
I'd love it if it didn't turn into a flamewar. It's awesome to wake up and read all the reviews. Pretty much universally praised.

Prediction: It'll sell double iPhone 4S's numbers.
Click to expand...

My prediction : More than double
 
Yea you're probably right. It's just such a beautiful phone - right away you can see how much obsessive detail they put into reengineering basically every aspect of the design. Nobody else cares half as much about the hardware they put onto the market.
 
Ima go with this guy from the comments:

Fifth313ment
This review is a journalist joke Engadget:

My favorite is that if you go back and read Engadget's own HTC EVO 4G LTE review the EVO LTE gets bashed for it's own 2-tone back side (polycarbonate/anodized aluminum) calling it a "mish-mash of materials lining the back of the phone"! In the iPhone 5 review the same 2-tone back side (glass/anodized or raw aluminum) is the "hallmark of design" and "These glossy bands break up the matte uniformity, but help boost antenna performance"! What was it doing on the EVO LTE? The small polycarbonate area covering the back of the EVO LTE was there to serve as an antenna pass through for better signal range and to protect the camera lens.

Engadget where are the performance benchmarks, screen comparisons (3G, 4, 4S, HOX, GSN, SGS3, etc) or camera shootouts? They also don't make any mention of a missing hardware shutter button on the iPhone 5, which they mention and bash just about every Android phone for not having?

As for battery performance the EVO LTE only made 9 hours of battery life in Engadget's review, however, my EVO LTE gets a full 24+ hours with 5+ hours of screen time (and many other review sites gave the EVO LTE much better battery scores)! And most of the time I make 2+ days with less screen time! On the iPhone 5 "tests" reveal that Engadget is getting 14+ hours of battery life when NOT ONE OTHER REVIEW has anywhere near that result, on GSM test models no less (CDMA models usually do worse on battery)! Oh and if you're keeping score at home Engadget also bashed the EVO LTE for having an internal battery, which is mentioned no where in the iPhone 5 review.

As for the screen Engadget says, "The new height results in a phone with more usable space and better presentation for HD content (the iPhone is finally 16:9)." Now anyone who doesn't know any better would think the iPhone 5 has an HD screen due to that sentence and nowhere in the article do they mention that the screen is not HD! They do mention the iPhone's resolution but most users don't understand how to read XxX units? They figure if they say HD enough (FaceTime HD, HD content) it will propagate the readers mind and they will just believe it's true?!

And finally (I can think of 50 more but I'll limit my post to these) when mentioning the wireless connectivity options on the iPhone 5 the way Engadget words the CDMA vs GSM paragraph would leave any non-tech user thinking that CDMA networks (Verizon & Sprint) can't do simultaneous voice and data, which we know isn't true as the SGS3, EVO LTE, Viper, etc all support this! You don't mention that this is a flaw of the iPhone 5 and users are left thinking that their carriers are inferior!? At one point in the review Engadget tried to make it seem like the Android LTE phones would get the same or slower speeds than the iPhone 5 ("Data transmission speeds were at or above comparable Android LTE devices!").

I've never seen such a review in which Engadget panders to Apple in every way! I'm surprised Engadget didn't bring up the argument (as many retail & grocery stores explain products getting smaller by placing them in larger appearing containers) that the iPhone 5 has a smaller 4 inch screen so that it will fit better into your hand during calls! Maybe I missed it? Pure pandering crap!
Click to expand...

Not intended as a slight at iFans or the iPhone, but a cursory glance hardly creates the impression that Engadget's presented an unbiased review. That being said...

tumblr_mag23mErjJ1qa2wo1o1_1280.jpg
 
Humankind can be thankful that good old Steve Jobs found tech and not scientology.
 
greg0205 said:
I'm going to agree and disagree... Been waiting for the guys at Engadget and Gizmodo to get their hands on one and review it, so there we'll have to disagree. Sadly, a flame war will no doubt ensue here on MyBB and there Hamster, we are in full agreement.
Click to expand...

(OT: Can't remember in which of the billions and billions of threads we spoke about the Maps situation. I said, I'd apologize if I was wrong. I believe it turns out I was, I therefore humbly apologize :) Although I may prefer google maps -right now, the new maps in ios6 look great! I'd like to see it in action sometime -which I'm sure I will :D )

Aaaaaand back on topic!

(I HOPE it was you I had to apologize to! Otherwise, I look like a real tool now :D [I know it was SOME "Greg" :D ] )
 
The new maps are a 50/50 situation. The actual mapping and turn by turn accuracy isn't quite up to Google's standard. But the flyovers are apparently pretty phenomenal to watch, especially since the GPU does such a smooth job of accelerating them.
 
cerebus said:
The new maps are a 50/50 situation. The actual mapping and turn by turn accuracy isn't quite up to Google's standard. But the flyovers are apparently pretty phenomenal to watch, especially since the GPU does such a smooth job of accelerating them.
Click to expand...
Surely it would be as accurate as the tomtom maps I'm currently using?
 
cerebus said:
The new maps are a 50/50 situation. The actual mapping and turn by turn accuracy isn't quite up to Google's standard. But the flyovers are apparently pretty phenomenal to watch, especially since the GPU does such a smooth job of accelerating them.
Click to expand...

In Joburg and Pretoria google maps are very accurate, but going up north and it isn't all that accurate any more. Surely TomTom maps must be better or the same as google maps?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X