Talk:Nexus One

Comparison with other phones? Is that necessary?

This is an article about the phone itself, no comparisons should be noted. Talk the iPhone 4 article and compare it to this :) Justinxtreme (talk) 00:41, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

I was just about to mention that. It looks out of place in the article, especially comparing to the iPhone 3GS and not comparing to the Samsung Galaxy S for example. Then I went to the iPhone 3GS page and there is no comparison to any other phone let alone the Nexus One/HTC Desire. I'm going to remove it. 110.175.254.120 (talk) 23:08, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Wind Mobile , Bell Mobility, Telus

Wind Mobile is the AWS operator in Canada with licenses in all provinces, except Quebec. They operate on AWS band V. Bell Mobility and Telus in Canada operate a new HSPDA network that is not compatible with the current Nexus One. Which sucks. But what happen to Rogers' HTC devices? What do Bell's Palm devices run on? What are their OS and AWS?

Visibility under Sunlight

As a user of the Nexus One for the past week, I can certainly say that the screen is perfectly readable in direct sunlight, if the brightness is increased to 100%. The reviews referenced in the section which say otherwise probably didn't try changing the brightness setting before making their claims.--HackerOfMinds (talk) 17:46, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Will be good when someone makes a youtube video of that. There is one that attempts this, but it is shot in doors with sun hitting the devices. Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 20:43, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Why no photo of the phone???

At the moment there is no photo of the Nexus One in this article, only the logo. Why is this??? Other articles about smartphones (for instance the iPhone) have photos of the phone, so why not the Nexus One? Please can someone who owns a Nexus One take a good photo of it and upload the photo to Wikipedia. JoseySmith (talk) 22:07, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Apple vs. HTC and Nexus One

Stuff about the patent dispute should not be in this article. It is pure speculation to say that the dispute will have any impact on the Nexus One whatsoever. Please confine dispute-related stuff to the articles for the companies themselves. -- Scjessey (talk) 12:31, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Its notable that apple is suing because of patent issues related to the nexus one. There is no speculation about that. Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 16:42, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

That is incorrect. The N1 is but one of the named devices. We have no idea what Apple's specific motivations are, and the company appears to be agnostic about which of HTC's devices are infringing. When Robert Kearns sued the Ford Motor Company for patent infringement on his invention of the intermittent windscreen wiper, that action wasn't directed at specific cars using the invention at the time (like the Mustang), but at the company itself. There was no impact on the cars, only the company. The Nexus One will remain unaffected by this issue - it will be HTC itself that may or may not be affected. Adding Apple patent-related crap to this article is inappropriate. -- Scjessey (talk) 17:10, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

There are many references that state otherwise. http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9164938/Apple_goes_after_Google_s_Nexus_One_in_patent_actions   Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 17:59, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Which are covered under WP:NOTNEWS. -- Scjessey (talk) 18:00, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

So are you admitting that your statements are incorrect? Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 18:41, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, but it is not clear to me what you are talking about. The fact remains that patent filings target HTC, not specific devices. Legal actions are filed against organizations, not devices. This is not a Nexus One problem, but an HTC problem. If, and only if, some changes are made to the software or hardware of the device itself then it will become appropriate to briefly mention why. Until then, coverage of the patent dispute here would be completely inappropriate and disproportionate. -- Scjessey (talk) 19:11, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

A patent lawsuit is about specific devices, with the nexus one being the one most called out. Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 19:39, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

But the target of the action is HTC, not the devices. That's a matter for the article on HTC. -- Scjessey (talk) 19:42, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Depends what you mean by target. The target is also the nexus one as shown by numerous references. Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 19:44, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, no. The Nexus One isn't being sued. It can't put up a fight on its own. -- Scjessey (talk) 19:47, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Are you saying the references don't say the Nexus one is a target? Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 19:54, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Of course not. But that is not the issue here. The overwhelming preponderance of reliable sources refer to this as an Apple vs. HTC event, with the Nexus One only being mentioned in passing (along with many other phones). Therefore, the HTC article is the appropriate place to document this matter (since it is a corporate matter, not a device matter) and continuously arguing for its inclusion in this tangentially-related article is rather tendentious, quite frankly. -- Scjessey (talk) 19:59, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Which references are you referring to? The ones I see mention it in the title and not in passing. Continuously arguing for its exclusion in this directly-related article is rather tendentious, quite frankly. Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 20:53, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Please don't behave like a dick about this. A 5-second Google News search reveals the following top results:

• Google backs HTC in face of Apple lawsuit - The Times
• Apple lawsuit wrecks HTC’s quiet life - The Financial Times
• Apple vs. HTC: What the experts say - CNN Money
• Apple files patent lawsuit against HTC - Computerworld
• Apple Starts ‘Nuclear War’ in Patent Fight With HTC - Businessweek
• Strain on HTC From Apple Suit Is Likely to Be Long-Term - The New York Times

This is just a smattering of the top results, but I think my point is well proven. HTC will be greatly impacted by these Apple filings, but it remains to be seen whether or not the Nexus One itself will be. Without gazing into the crystal ball it is impossible to speculate. This is very much a corporate matter. If you think I'm wrong about this, I recommend you seek a third opinion. -- Scjessey (talk) 22:03, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Maybe we should take a step back and think about this, you guys seem to be getting a little worked up over what's really not that big a deal. This article claims that Apple said 10 of the 20 patent infringement claims have to do with the Nexus One. If that is the case, I think it probably bears mentioning in the article (but I would argue not in the intro). However, I'm not sure if that is the case: I haven't seen any other stories that have Apple specifically identifying the Nexus One as the target of the claims, and have a feeling it might just be a mistake or misleading choice of words on the part of the ComputerWorld author. There has been a lot of conjecture in the press about this lawsuit being aimed primarily at the Nexus One and Android indirectly. That being the case, it could comply with wp:crystal according to this line from the guide: It is appropriate to report discussion and arguments about the prospects for success of future proposals and projects or whether some development will occur, if discussion is properly referenced. ie, saying something along the lines of "pundits believe Apple's recent lawsuits are aimed at stifling the Nexus One" is acceptable, saying "Apple's recent lawsuits are aimed at stifling the Nexus One" is not. At least that is my understanding of wp:crystal. TastyCakes (talk) 22:50, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for that. I would say, however, that a preponderance of high-quality sources focus on the corporate aspect; that Apple is seeking injunction and damages against HTC for software-related details that are not specific to the Nexus One. In addition, speculation is all over the place that this is an attempt by Apple to attack Google by proxy for their development of Android - again, not specific to the Nexus One. There's no suggestion that any of this will have any impact on the Nexus One at all. Giving coverage to Apple's action here would surely be giving it disproportionate weight. The matter is already properly covered in the HTC article. -- Scjessey (talk) 23:21, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

I tend to agree, if Apple hasn't identified the Nexus One specifically in the suit. If it has, I kind of think at least a mention should be made somewhere in this article. TastyCakes (talk) 23:26, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

All Android phones manufactured by HTC (expect their most recent) and a couple of Windows Mobile phones are mentioned. The Nexus One has received no special attention in this regard. -- Scjessey (talk) 23:30, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Please don't behave like a dick about this. A 5-second Google search about Nexus One and lawsuit reveals the following results:

1. Has the image caption:The Nexus One is at the center of Apple's ongoing suit against HTC for patent infringement.
2. Apple Targets Nexus One, Maybe Google in Lawsuit
3. Nexus One to Blame for Apple, HTC Lawsuit
4. http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9164938/Apple_goes_after_Google_s_Nexus_One_in_patent_actions
5. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703807904575097392317555912.html?mod=WSJ-Tech-LEFTTopNews
6. http://blogs.wsj.com/marketbeat/2010/03/03/apple-iphone-vs-google-iphone-the-proxy-war-begins/
7. http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/03/02/25181.htm

I am making a claim that the Nexus one is a target of the lawsuit with refernces. None of the references you provided counter that claim. In other words your references are worthless as are your arguments as are your personal attack.

Agree with TastyCakes that this should be mentioned in the article. Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 14:53, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Availability: United States section needs an edit

In the section Availability: United States: "... Unsubsidized phones have no such limitation ..." - What limitation?? This sentence should either be clarified or deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.14.254.26 (talk) 20:30, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

The whole availability US section should be cut down to something like 5 sentences, globallly no one really cares about this.

iTunes Compatibility

In comparison with the iPhone, this article simply lists that the phone cannot buy from the iTunes store, which I feel is a bit of a pointless comparison, as the article fails to mention that you can instead buy songs from the Amazon MP3 store. I am going to add this bit in (Sk8er boi6000 (talk) 11:56, 16 March 2010 (UTC))

App Store Downloads?

What does the total number of downloads at the Apple App store have to do with anything at all related to the phone? Absolutely nothing that's what. Removed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.223.145.207 (talk) 17:25, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Specific absorption rate

What is the SAR rating of the Nexus One? Google's product page and owner's manual do not (so far as I can tell) mention anything about the results of SAR testing required by the FCC. I want to know these SAR radiation levels before considering buying the phone. — sloth_monkey 10:03, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Pixel density (PPI)

The article reports a pixel density of 252.15 ppi based on a source specification of a 3.7 inch display with a pixel resolution of 800 by 480. It is erroneous to derive 5 digits of precision from a 2 digit precision source. Since there are 25.4 mm to the inch, it is more likely that the pixel density is 254 ppi inferring that the display was manufactured with a 100 micron pixel pitch. Using the Pythagorean theorem, a 800x480 display has a diagonal of 933 pixels. At a 100 micron pitch, the diagonal would be 93.3 mm or 3.67 inches. This is within the rounding error of the quoted specification of 3.7 inches. Hgb asicwizard (talk) 17:17, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

T-Mobile Prepaid has data plan?

"Prepaid Plans: Great value, flexible options."

According to t-mobile, they only offer pre-paid data plans for the Sidekick platform. Going into depth about the pre-paid plan for use with the Nexus One is misleading. Yes you can use it as a phone with a prepaid plan, but it doesn't seem that you can use any of the data features. This should be made clearer.

MarkTAW (talk) 17:19, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Multi-Touch vs Limited Dual-Touch

I find the word "multi-touch" heavily misleading on the Nexus One. It cannot even register two fingers without a high probability of performing an unwanted mirroring of their positions, effectively returning a wrong position for both. This is mentioned in the article, but not understandable to an uneducated reader.

IMO, we need a concise term to describe this form of dual-touch. I think "limited dual-touch" or "relative dual-touch" might be more intuitive than 2x1D, as (oddly) proposed in the article itself.

This is apparently handled inadequately throughout multiple pages on Wikipedia. It might be very useful to have an article that explains the difference between "limited dual-touch", which is reduced to 3-diminsional universally usable output information (avg. position and finger distance), and true dual-touch, which registers two definite positions. Also, the word multi-touch should be avoided if the exact number of parallel input positions is known. 88.64.99.64 (talk) 12:46, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Done in the US

http://www.engadget.com/2010/07/21/nexus-one-is-sold-out-in-googles-store-forever/ -- so it looks like the Nexus One is done for but I have no desire to update the article to reflect that 16:33, 21 July 2010 (UTC)16:33, 21 July 2010 (UTC)68.102.171.147 (talk)

This is not the only method of obtaining the device. It purely means you cannot order directly from Google any longer and have to go through one of their Retail / Channel partners to obtain it, usually from a physical store. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.238.32.95 (talk) 21:12, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

The parent comment makes a good point. In several ways, the article says "NO MORE NEXUS ONES WILL BE SOLD <tiny>by Google</tiny>". Not to minimize the significance of Google's distribution channel, and of this news, but this article is about the Nexus One, not the Google phone store. For instance, there's a section called "Discontinuance". Shouldn't that be more like "Discontinuance of Google online sales"? TypoBoy (talk) 13:59, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Biased view of sales?

Were the sales really "notably poor"? Certainly some people have claimed so, but others have disagreed. Even aside from Google's claim that they achieved the goals they had originally intended, a couple hundred thousand units sold hardly seems "notably poor," it only seems small in comparison to blockbuster sellers like the Motorola Droid and the iPhone. Compare it to the Microsoft Kin, which reportedly sold less than 10,000 units and was discontinued after just six weeks (which the wikipedia article describes just as "poor sales," not "notably poor sales.")

Daetrin (talk) 18:28, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Foistware tone

I tidied up the tone of the Foistware section, not to mention you don't need a task killer and the reloading of those apps is largely irrelivant: http://geekfor.me/faq/you-shouldnt-be-using-a-task-killer-with-android/ Potentially worth noting that they can be removed through the likes of 3rd party firmware

Signing so it will be auto-archived in due course. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 20:31, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Samsung speculation

Should the speculation about a Samsung Nexus Two be added to the future section? I can cite many reports on many different news sites and reputable gadget blogs. NexusBoy (talk) 21:58, 8 November 2010 (UTC)