Mobile review. Comparative testing of current compact smartphones. Memory, RAM, chipset, performance

Apple iPhone 7, Samsung Galaxy A3 (2017), Sony Xperia XZ1 Compact and Sharp aquos R Compact

Introduction

Just eight years ago smartphones with screen sizes up to 4 "were the overwhelming majority of all devices, but over the years, gadgets have grown at leaps and bounds, and some manufacturers have already managed to extend the concept of" compact "to smartphones with a screen diagonal of 5.5 inches. Unfortunately, the palms of users do not have time to grow so quickly, so many people have a new difficulty - to find an up-to-date and high-quality smartphone that requires only one hand to operate. If we take Russian retail, then smartphones of small sizes (up to 67 mm in width and up to 140 mm in length) with the actual filling can be counted on the fingers - already a traditional series Xperia Compact from Sony (so far only the XZ1 Compact is available for purchase, although the XZ2 Compact will come soon, but this is a completely different story), the two-year-old iPhone SE and iPhone 8, as well as the Samsung Galaxy A3 (2017), which, although it is a representative of the lower of the middle segment, carries on board all the filling necessary for a modern user. In the Japanese market, the Aquos R Compact smartphone from Sharp, the eternal rival of Sony, is still presented.

We wanted to thoroughly carry out comparative testing of all the above devices, but we did not manage to get an answer from Apple on the provision of any of the iPhone for testing, so the company from Cupertino will be represented in our test last year's iPhone 7, the experience of using which your humble servant had a year ago and which is still quite relevant device for everyday use.

We will try to carry out the comparison as objectively as possible, evaluating each parameter on a ten-point scale, but it should be borne in mind that this is not a full-fledged test with an overview of all the features of the devices, namely, a comparison of impressions from everyday real use, therefore detailed information for the apparatus, refer to the respective reviews on the website. We will also keep in mind that some parameters are purely subjective (exterior and interface, body materials, options for the location of connectors and buttons, choice of ecosystem), so we will not rate them. Well, we will start with these points. Go!

Design

Discussing the design decisions of manufacturers is perhaps the most thankless task. Any design solution will always have both ardent opponents and supporters, so this part will be the most individual.

From the point of view of the overall design, the most advantageous for me is the smartphone from Sony. Yes, this design has changed only slightly over the course of five years, yes, it may seem boring and outdated to some. But after spending a little more than two weeks with this device, I looked at this design with different eyes - not everyone needs a super-fashionable framelessness and a “blurry” appearance. You can definitely say that he has his own face, and I even partly regret that this face has changed noticeably in the new generation, but, on the other hand, continuing to milk the Omnibalance cow from the distant 2013 would be a completely unacceptable move, so let's hope that the Japanese will find a new identity.

With devices from Samsung and Apple, everything, in principle, is also clear. Both devices look quite organic and as “basic” as possible, and their appearance works on the image of the device, which will suit most people well.

If you want something more extravagant, then you can choose a different color variation, since all participants have their choice. The Korean apparatus has three of them: black, pastel blue, and “golden” which has already nourished eyes. On the Russian market, in addition to this, the pink color is not yet presented, which is a pity, because all competitors from this test have something similar.

The iPhone 7 has more colors, but the choice is still limited: gray, dark gray, black, “gold” and “rose gold”. There was also a scarlet version of PRODUCT Red on sale for a while, but now it's quite problematic to find it in stores. By the way, in the iPhone 8 the number of colors was reduced to only three: black, silver and “ pink gold”, But it is possible that later will be presented and other options, as was the case with the“ seven ”.

Japanese phones have historically never had a problem with bright colors, and both test participants from the Land of the Rising Sun confirm this.

Apart from the standard black and silver, the Sony device got a very bright “sunset pink” and a little more muted, but also interesting “twilight blue”.

The smartphone from Sharp is offered in more color variations, and among them you will have to break your head. First, like many Sharp devices for the domestic market, Aquos R Compact is sold by different operators(Softbank and AU by KDDI), and the general color of these two devices is only one: "moon-white", presented on our test is White color with a slight pearlescent shade. The version from Softbank, in addition to it, got a dark gray version (Tourmaline blask) with black accents and the same small splashes of mother-of-pearl, as well as dull gold and lavender. The AU version comes in three variants: the aforementioned white, pure black and hot pink (again with mother of pearl). There is also a SH-M06 version (it is she who participates in the test), not locked under any of the operators, but she did not get a single bright color - only black and white.

Returning to the general impressions of appearance, I can only note that the phone from Sharp is a bit of an “amateur” thing. And if I got used to the camera peephole, “cut” into the screen, almost immediately and did not notice it, then I could not get used to such a huge amount of unused space below. When the same strip was on the older model, Aquos R, it didn't look strange - it was balanced on top by a similar strip with a speaker, camera and sensors. But here it looks very disproportionate, and it's hard for me to understand why the engineers did not use it for the touch keys, instead stealing the area from the screen. It's good that the on-screen buttons can at least be hidden, and then the fingerprint scanner takes over all their functions, but the screen could still be made larger.

If you do not touch on the front side and the color palette, the silhouette of the phone can be called neutral-pleasant and does not evoke any strong emotions.

Ergonomics and convenience in everyday use

Criteria for evaluation: the number of connectors (2 points out of 10), the relevance of the connectors (2 points out of 10), the number of control elements and their information content (3 points out of 10), the quality of the fingerprint sensor (3 points out of 10).

Since we are talking about compact smartphones, the ergonomics of which are obviously head and shoulders above large “shovels”, it is impossible to say that one of them is “categorically inconvenient”. But all the same, the devices represent different design solutions, so something will be a little more convenient, and something a little less.

Having used each of the devices for at least a couple of weeks as the main one, I can say with confidence: the most ergonomic device of the presented ones is the Sharp Aquos R Compact, followed by the XZ1 Compact from Sony. Devices from Samsung and Apple are located approximately in the same place for me - they have a similar thickness, they equally threaten to slip out of hands without a case, and although Samsung slips a little more because of its glass back, it is a little narrower, so it lies in my hands more confident. Just as I'm not happy with the modern diagonal race, I'm not happy with the thick race either. In all honesty, I will say that I did not feel absolutely any discomfort from the fact that the thickness of the Sharp reaches almost a centimeter. In the front pocket of tight-fitting jeans, they all stick out almost the same, but a couple of extra millimeters of thickness noticeably add to the convenience of holding the device in hands. His edges do not cut his palms, and he is in no hurry to greet the floor, as his thinner brothers do. Of course, thin cases have their advantages - if you put a good case on them, you can turn them into something more convenient, while customizing the appearance, and not suffer from excessive thickness. By pure coincidence, along with a smartphone from Samsung, I got an excellent Spigen case for it - the tenacity and grip of the device just increased significantly, roughly on par with Sharp. And besides, there was some kind of protection of the case from shocks, thanks to the dense rubber from which it is made, and the protruding side above the screen. I am sure that there are even more such cases for the iPhone, but still I prefer it when I can normally use the smartphone out of the box, without buying additional accessories.

Sony Xperia XZ1 Compact could also take the first place in terms of convenience, sharing it with Sharp, but the situation was severely spoiled by the right angles on the top and bottom, which unpleasantly dig into the palm if you take it in the hand with a “reliable” grip. Also, the smartphone is not very convenient to take from the table - for this you need to make a little effort, because the almost rectangular shape of the case does not make it easy to pry it off with your fingers. All the other three devices did not have such a problem at all.

According to the materials of the case, I would distribute smartphones as follows: the first place is again Sharp with a plastic back cover and a metal frame, on the second - the XZ1C made of a special type of plastic that feels like metal, and an aluminum iPhone, on the third - a glass "sandwich" of a Korean smartphone. I can explain why I put “non-premium” plastic in the first place. Because it is not so slippery, not fragile at all, and besides, it does not chill your hands in winter. I'm willing to put up with quick scratches, but would prefer a more ergonomic material for my hand. Perhaps metal and glass look and feel more solid, but if the whole “premium” of a smartphone lies only in the material of the case, then it's worthless. For some reason, in high-class cars, comfortable chairs are made from the best materials, sitting on which you can drive a couple of thousand kilometers in any weather, so why are smartphones worse that we do not let go of our hands for several hours a day? Maybe in the subtropics the aluminum case will not have the disadvantage associated with metal cooling the hand, but we live in a country in most of which there are negative and near-zero temperatures for nine months (and somewhere more) a year, so we will estimate smartphones based on these conditions. Again, the shortcomings of the case of any device can be corrected with a properly selected case, but this way we again come back to the fact that this is an additional cost of money and time, so the devices should be evaluated in a “out of the box” condition.

I am glad that all test participants are protected from moisture penetration - a really useful feature, which only five years ago was realized only in Japan. And although this does not mean that you can immediately dive with them in a pool or water park, but at least you can not be afraid to get caught in a downpour or drop into a puddle. Since the protection standard is approximately the same (only the iPhone has IP67, the rest - IP68), we will not give points for this parameter.

Connectors

If the previous points were purely “subjective”, then starting from the next one we will already rate smartphones. Subjective personal feelings, of course, can be found everywhere, but in the case of the assessed parameters, we tried to follow sufficiently strict criteria for this assessment so that the score was given not just at the “like / dislike” level.

It is difficult to assess the location of the connectors, as each user has their own preferences. For example, for a long time I did not consider the location of the “mini-jack” important, and that was until I walked around with a smartphone with a connector at the bottom and appreciated the convenience of such a solution. So it is much more convenient to carry the device with the headphones connected in the pocket of jeans or trousers, and to hold it in your hands too. However, some people convince me that, on the contrary, it is very inconvenient and the connector on top is the most the best way, it is not for nothing that most manufacturers use it. Most likely, this is just a matter of habit, so we decided to rate it not by the location of the connectors, but by their relevance and quantity.

There are no problems with relevance: the iPhone uses the usual and very convenient 8-pin lightning for charging and synchronization, for which there is an enormous number of wires, cradles and docking stations, and its rivals from the Android camp have a modern and also convenient USB Type-C, which over the years increases the choice of accessories. Therefore, there is complete parity here.

But in terms of the number of connectors, we have one obvious “loser”. No matter how much they say that the future belongs to wireless accessories, it has not yet come, and millions of people still use wired headphones and headsets of various types, shapes and costs. And all sorts of splitters and adapters is a complete blasphemy and a mockery of the connectors themselves. Removing the score from the iPhone 7 for the lack of a 3.5mm jack.

Governing bodies

The most convenient arrangement of the controls, as for me, is possessed by the iPhone 7 and Samsung Galaxy A3 (2017). Separate volume control keys are much more convenient than a combined rocker, and the location spread out on different sides is more quickly deposited in the mechanical memory.

An American smartphone can put a plus sign behind the silent mode switch - although this element is not absolutely necessary, its presence still simplifies life a little. It is a pity that it cannot be reprogrammed for another action. Another powerful plus of the "American" is the "Home" button with a built-in Touch ID fingerprint scanner. And if the button itself (which is already, as it were, not a button), made according to technology Force touch, not very happy (pressing is indistinct, and requires habit, and generally gives the feeling that the entire lower part of the front panel is being pressed), then the fingerprint scanner itself is close to ideal here - the recognition speed is the highest, the number of failures is minimal. In general, the iPhone 7 earned a solid “five” for its buttons (it falls short of six because of Force Touch).

The Sony spokesman earned only three points in this part. First of all, due to its not very informative volume rocker and pile-up of elements on one side - 2 points (it would have been “one”, if not for the extremely convenient two-position camera start button, which works just gorgeous). Secondly, because of the indistinct fingerprint sensor, which, although it is successfully under the fingers, does not always recognize them if the button is pressed while the smartphone is lying on the table. Another device from Sony very often swore that my hands were supposedly wet, to the extent that I specially wiped the sensor with a dry cloth, washed my hands with soap, wiped them dry, and the phone still assured me that it wasn’t will recognize my wet fingers. Therefore, for “fingerprinting” only one point out of three.

Another device from Japan, Aquos R Compact, turned out to be much more pliable "on pressing", having received 5 points.

The smartphone lacks additional controls, but for clearly marked and informatively pressed power and volume buttons, as well as for a fingerprint scanner, which can work as touch button“Home” and perceptual gestures to simulate the “Back” and “Recent Apps” buttons, he gets 2 points. For the excellent work of the fingerprint scanner - a solid "three", it practically does not make mistakes when recognizing, reminds of "wet hands" only when they are really wet, and unlocks the smartphone just with lightning speed, almost on a par with the device from Apple.

A smartphone from Korea gets four points. There are no additional controls here, but the ones (both mechanical and touch) work well - that's 2 points. But the work of the fingerprint sensor was a little upset - the scanner sometimes does not recognize taps, it remembers only three fingers, and it is also a little slower than the rest of the participants - 2 points.

Equipment

This will be the only point where a three-point rating system is applied, simply because the accessories are either there or not.

Criteria for evaluation: the presence of a charger (1 point), the presence of a headset (1 point), the presence of additional useful accessories (1 point).

The trend towards a decrease in the number of accessories is simply impossible not to notice. As always, Japan is ahead of the rest in this regard - not even a charging cable has been put into the box for smartphones for the domestic Japanese market lately. However, we were at least lucky with the Sharp Aquos R Compact version - although it is sold exclusively in Japan, in the SH-M06 version (not blocked for any operator) the manufacturer got confused and put charging block and a USB Type-C cable. Please note that if you want to take a smartphone of an interesting color in any of the operator's versions, these accessories will not be there.

Both "Japanese" come out of this round losers: they have a charger unit and a cable (1 point), but they have neither a headset (0 points), nor any usefulness (0 points), considering that the adapter for Watching Japanese one-seg television from Sharp does not count as such.

Smartphones from Korea and the United States receive a full score: the iPhone can be considered "cheating", because the manufacturer put an adapter in the box, which would not be needed if the 3.5 mm jack remained in place, but the presence of an adapter with microUSB Samsung's Type-C box is a really useful addition.

Screen

Criteria for evaluation: pixel density (2 points), quality protective glass and oleophobic coating (2 points), brightness levels, light sensor performance (2 points), viewing angles and sun exposure (2 points) and contrast (2 points).

Evaluation of screens, like many other things, is rather subjective. Someone likes IPS-screens, someone AMOLED, someone thinks that high resolutions are unnecessary, and someone's eyes cut the pixels. Therefore, we will not delve into the jungle of technical terms and various screen “enhancers” and will try to evaluate those parameters that really affect daily operation.

Conventional places in this category are occupied in half - the first is shared by devices from Apple and Sharp (9 points each), the second - by Sony and Samsung (8 points each). Relatively speaking, we can say that the screens of all four are good, it's just that each of them has its own small drawbacks, noticeable only in comparison with another smartphone.

"American" received two points in all categories except pixel density (326 ppi). This indicator would be invisible, and it could even be called far-fetched, if not for the Aquos R Compact with its stunningly clear screen (470 ppi) lying next to it. In comparison, the displays of all other participants immediately began to look a little looser. The samurai itself did not reach the top ten because of the third generation Gorilla Glass protective glass, while the rivals have glasses of the fourth (Samsung) and fifth (Sony and, presumably, Apple). We really didn’t want to check the difference in impact resistance of glasses, but, according to Corning, each subsequent generation significantly increases resistance to impact and deep scratches, so that new generations receive higher scores.

The Sony smartphone also lost one point in the battle for pixel density (319 ppi), and also went one point for slightly lower contrast than the competition. Note that it is not so low that it interferes or even annoys during use, but, as they say, everything is learned by comparison.

Galaxy A3, of course, also fell short of an excellent mark in terms of pixel density (312 ppi), and the features of the AMOLED matrix (the ill-fated Pentile) still add fuel to the fire, but I repeat - these differences are noticeable only in direct comparison with other screens. And here's another point the Korean device really lost on its merits - for an inadequate level of automatic brightness. The maximum brightness is amazing, you can safely read and watch videos in the sun, the minimum brightness is also at a digestible level, even in pitch darkness you can safely continue using your smartphone. But if automatic brightness control is enabled in the parameters, the smartphone still keeps a fairly high level even in complete darkness. That is, if darkness sets in abruptly, the effect will be comparable to a bright flashlight shining in the eyes. You have to turn off the brightness manually, and when you forget about it in the morning and go out into the street, you wonder why you can hardly see anything on the screen. In general, a strange algorithm - auto-tuning seems to be there, but it still dances around some value that you set manually. True, this does not apply to the bright sun - apparently, when the sensor detects very strong light, it actually mobilizes all the pixels at full power.

By and large, the Korean device could have been given a point for the rather convenient Always-on-display option, but it still consumes battery power quite noticeably, so it's hard to attribute it to the indisputable advantages. And competitors also have their own methods of notification: Sony and Sharp have excellent multi-color LEDs on the front panel, while Apple has a flash wink and Raise-to-wake function, so there is a high risk of making subjective assessments.

Software features

As mentioned in the introduction, we will not be covering OS or ecosystem preferences. Everyone has their own opinion of what an ideal mobile operating system should look like, so let's leave that outside the scope of this comparison. Instead, we will evaluate more realistic and comparable indicators.

Criteria for evaluation: the intuitiveness of the software shell and the number of useful "features" (5 points), software support for the smartphone by the manufacturer (5 points).

And again, two contestants scored the same number of points. Ahead are Sony Xperia XZ1 Compact and Apple iPhone 7 (9 points each), and a little further - Sharp Aquos R Compact and Samsung Galaxy A3 (8 points each).

Smartphone from Sony takes its software shell - this is the undisputed "top five". As for me, this is the most successful mix from the stock Android interface and branded shell from the manufacturer. There are many really useful "chips" here, and at the same time it does not become a kind of kitsch, as is the case with Korean manufacturers, and looks pretty close to what you will see on the "nexus" and "pixels". The most useful software tricks I can call (for myself) a convenient and balanced standard launcher, as well as the Battery Care and Xperia Actions applications, which allow you to bring the automation of the daily work of the smartphone to new level... The Xperia application store, where interesting applications of the day appear periodically at a discount (or even free), a choice of themes, an application for manually checking all device functions - these are useful things, but not for every day. In general, I will not paint all the details of the Xperia shell, whoever needs it can find detailed review smartphone and thoroughly study everything. I can only give four points to the soft support of the Japanese apparatus. Although it is good, because traditionally the flagships of this manufacturer receive two major updates (if we count different versions of Jelly Bean and Lollipop as one), even such results pale in comparison with support for smartphones from Cupertino. What else are Xperia smartphones good at - they almost always have a large number of third-party firmware, mods, skins, that is, the community support is at a high level here.

The iPhone 7 received its unconditionally deserved "top five" in terms of updates and software support (just think, the five-year-old iPhone 5S is still getting a fresh version of the OS), but it falls short of the same result according to the first criterion. Still, whatever one may say, the key advantage of iOS in its "golden years" - maximum ease of use and minimum clutter - with each new version recedes further and further into the background. If we compare the first impressions of using the iPhone 4S on iOS 5, when you pick up your smartphone, it just works and you get used to it in almost five minutes, with the impressions of the first use of the latest versions of Apple's mobile operating system, it’s impossible to get rid of the feeling that increasing the number of functions (sometimes completely useless) did not go to her advantage. The powerful competition between the two American leaders in the mobile OS market forces them both to constantly “borrow” features and successful solutions, and this has already reached such an extent that after a couple of major releases, we, as ordinary users, will not be able to see a serious difference between them, and this kind of frustrating. Given that the latter iOS version and so it received many functions that have long had analogues in Android (customizable control center, choice of photo and video formats, screenshot editor, file manager, audio support in FLAC, drag and drop, auto auto mode, etc.), it is still very far from the functionality that the OS from Google can offer. This, of course, is also true in the opposite direction - Android will also have to change more than one generation before it begins to use the “iron” resources of smartphones as competently (if at all). In general, the iPhone gets 4 points for its ease of use: as the saying goes, “Jobs is not on you”.

Smartphone from Sharp cannot boast of a huge number of useful software “tricks”, but it will delight fans of “vanilla android”. This is almost a stock version of the Google OS, which has single changes in appearance and some interspersed software features (like, for example, the traditional Sharp and very convenient auto-scrolling function that allows you to read articles, books, like other vertical content, without constantly scrolling it with your finger, or , for example, recognition of holding the smartphone in hand, thanks to which its screen will not turn off until you put it down or turn it off). There are much fewer "unnecessary" applications that are common for purely Japanese gadgets. It is worth noting that all this is relevant only for the SIM-free version of SH-M06, the operator's versions, as before, have a large amount of "garbage", which, thank God, can usually be removed.

In general, the phone could theoretically give five points for the simplicity and convenience of the interface, if not for one “but”: there is traditionally no Russian language in the system by default, only Japanese and English. I don’t experience any particular problems from this, but I know that many users are ready to poke around in adb and morelocale, just to set up their smartphone to support their native language - this is, in fact, the only way to make the smartphone speak Russian (albeit partially). After installing the locale, applications that support it initially are transferred to it, and this is almost everything except the system interface (switches in the curtain and settings). And thanks to the widest customization options for Android, the SMS application, the dialer, and even the lockscreen launcher will speak in the desired language. But all the same, these actions are not very clear and not at all intuitive for some users, so the Sharp smartphone loses one point for the need for forced Russification.

As for the support for Aquos R Compact, the manufacturer in large letters on the official website assures about two full years of software updates (from the moment it entered the market) and two major OS updates. As in the case of Sony, this is a nice help, but it does not reach Apple devices with their long life cycle. Therefore, the "four".

An interesting situation emerges with the Korean device: its shell, in my opinion, is the most useful and functionally filled not only among the test participants, but among all Android shells in general. But she also played a cruel joke with him: the hardware of a mid-budget smartphone does not carry such a heavy load, which makes the impression of using the OS much worse than what we see on the flagship. However, the speed of work will be evaluated in the next part, so we will focus on convenience and “usefulness”. With this here full order- Korean programmers did a great job and transferred many of the flagship software to middle-class devices, which is good news. Almost everyone will find something really necessary and useful here for themselves. For example, a well-thought-out data backup system that allows you to restore all your contacts, messages, calls, applications and files from your old phone, simply by logging into your Samsung account (yes, I know that the same is on the iPhone and it works even better there and more convenient, but among Android smartphones it is the most powerful system data recovery). Or a chic system Samsung Pay, who helped me out several times when NFC payment did not work or was absent (it was especially amusing when sellers in stalls tell you: "But our phone payment does not work," and then they open their mouths a little when you pay with your phone in front of them) Or the very convenient Samsung Connect application, which allows you to connect several audio output sources at once and choose between them in the notification shade (for example, wired headphones, Bluetooth speaker and Miracast screen). In general, Samsung has earned a full and solid “top five”.

Unfortunately, this cannot be said about software support - the smartphone initially came out on the sixth Android version, has already been updated to the "seven", but the update to the Oreo version, apparently, is postponed for an indistinct period. But even if it does update, it will definitely be the last update in its lifetime, so it won't be able to keep its relevance for a long time. Only "C".

Performance and speed

Criteria for evaluation: interface speed and the presence of crashes / errors (5 points), performance in benchmarks and games (5 points).

Since it is incorrect to compare technical characteristics on different operating systems (different versions of the same operating system), we decided that we would compare devices in terms of those indicators that affect everyday use. And although I have never been a fan of measuring "parrots" in benchmarks, I can admit that in our case cross-platform benchmarks are the only way to more or less objectively evaluate the computing power of different devices.

Probably, it will not be a secret for anyone that this test has two unconditional leaders in performance: the gadget from Sony wins due to the most powerful chipset from Qualcomm, combined with an HD-screen, and the iPhone - due to the exponential optimization of the OS and the perfected symbiosis of hardware and software component.

However, the second "Japanese" lagged behind his fellow countryman not critically - at least in terms of the interface and performance in games. With the first, everything is clear - a “pure” android always works better than proprietary shells, besides, it is also well optimized by the manufacturer, but with the second the situation is more interesting. Thanks to the 120Hz screen and very fast LPDDR4X RAM, some optimized games give FPS around 80 (WoT Blitz at all high settings, WoWarships, Mortal Kombat X) and even up to 100 (simple games). Most of the big titles are not optimized for this screen frequency, so usually we are talking about 30 or 60 fps (depending on the game settings). So if you want a compact smartphone with a screen like the Razer Phone (it also has an IGZO matrix from Sharp), then the R Compact is your choice.

Well, about the smartphone Samsung already mentioned above - the performance of the device is already low due to the budget platform, so it was also "finished off" by the heavy shell from Samsung, which sometimes simply did not have enough resources, which is why it began to slow down even when flipping through desktops. It's good that there is an item in the settings that is responsible for cleaning the RAM and ROM. Thanks to its widget on the desktop, you can at least slightly improve the situation with lags. And even in spite of this widget, the smartphone still has to be rebooted periodically. But, thanks to the weak chipset, Samsung never burned the palm - even under the heaviest loads and during charging, it was only slightly warmer than the body, while Sony and Apple devices warmed the hand a little more noticeably (but not criminally), and Sharp sensations from heating is located between them.

Autonomous work

Criteria for evaluation: video playback time at a brightness of about 200 cd / m2 with the wireless modules off and at maximum speaker volume (3 points), browsing time via Wi-Fi with the same brightness (3 points), battery charging speed (2 points), the presence of energy-saving modes (2 points).

What can I say, the "Korean" took a powerful revenge in the test of autonomy. Not only did he outperform all rivals in timing autonomous work, so he also managed to do it with a battery that is noticeably smaller in capacity than that of most other rivals. In real use, the difference revealed in the test is not so striking, but in any case, you can safely count on a full and very active day of using the Galaxy A3, and if you limit watching videos and games, then even two or three days. If the iPhone had a battery of the same capacity, it probably would also perform impressively, but we have what we have.

Galaxy A3 also captivates with its powerful energy-saving mode, more precisely, two modes (balanced savings and maximum). Once, for the sake of interest, I turned on the maximum at two percent of the charge, and safely forgot to charge when I got home. When I remembered it had been at least 3 hours and it was still showing one percent battery, amazing. At the same time, it cannot be said that the device turns into a “pumpkin” in this mode - even with the mode turned on, you can go to the browser (only Samsung Internet and Chrome), look at the maps ( Google maps) and take a picture. It’s a pity that Samsung Pay doesn’t work, it seems to me that this is a big omission.

Sony also has a very good energy saving system - the STAMINA and Ultra STAMINA modes perform practically the same functions as those of Samsung, but the “extreme” mode is much less convenient, and not so tenacious. But the XZ1 Compact can boast of useful intelligent "tricks": for a week or two of use, the smartphone analyzes how you use it, how it charges, and adjusts the processes for this. For example, it remembers at what time you usually put it on charge and at what time you take it off, and if you put the device on charge at night, it will recharge only 90 percent overnight, and the last ten percent will take an hour before wake-up, thus extending the life of the battery.

Smartphones from Sharp and Apple cannot boast of powerful power saving modes: the first one at least has the ability to turn it on when the selected charge level (from 10 to 90 percent) is reached, the second does not even have this, only manually. Aquos R Compact, on the other hand, pleased with super-fast charging from an adapter compatible with the QC 3.0 protocol from Qualcomm - a full charge from one percent to one hundred took 1 hour and 5 minutes. Thus, he slightly compensated for his low autonomy.

The iPhone 7 also has the ability to “fast” charging, but it is not officially documented, although many smartphone owners use it: “native” charging gives only 1 A of current, while charging from the iPad (10W or 12W, depending on models) can supply up to 2A of current to the iPhone, significantly reducing the charging time.

Like the two Japanese participants, this is a nice opportunity, but it requires the purchase of additional accessories, while the Korean device, although it does not support any fast charging, charges from its adapter in 1 hour and 40 minutes. Firstly, it is convenient, because you do not need to buy anything, and secondly, it is more useful for a battery that is not exposed to high voltages or currents and practically does not heat up. So the Galaxy A3 got its victory in this category as objectively as possible.

Wireless interfaces, communication quality

Criteria for evaluation: the quality of reception of cellular and satellite signals (4 points), the quality of Bluetooth / Wi-Fi reception and the relevance of the supported protocols (3 points), the presence of additional communication modules (3 points).

What you can be happy about is that in the majority modern smartphones reception quality cellular signal almost equaled. No, of course, there are still phones with an unsuccessful case design, where the main function of the phone, namely calls, does not work as it should, but there are fewer and fewer such phones even among budget “Chinese”, not to mention the A-brands. However, in other communication interfaces there are still quite often large differences, not in last due to the presence / absence of new connection protocols.

From point of view cellular all devices coped perfectly, but two stood out a little: iPhone - its cellular module lost the network a little more often (there is no talk of a bad signal, it was just that there were a couple of breaks more than other participants) and Sharp - its signal is one of the most stable among all, but in its arsenal there is only one "Russian" LTE band, or rather, Band 3. Personally, I had no problems with this, since both operators I use broadcast on this frequency in my city, but If you are critical of support for fourth-generation networks, then you definitely need to keep this in mind when considering a device for purchase, since you can find information on the network on the frequencies at which operators broadcast in different regions, so this will not be a super-difficult task.

Concerning satellite signal, then, again, all four devices worked perfectly, and only two of them can be slightly chided for the lack of support for the Beidou navigation system - iPhone 7 and Samsung Galaxy A3 (2017), but this system is not so widespread, but the usual GPS / GLONASS enough for the eyes, so we will not take points for such a trifle.

Situation with others wireless interfaces differs slightly more. An unsurpassed leader in this category for me was the device from Sony - I had no complaints about all its wireless modules for all two weeks of use. Wi-Fi is fast and stable, Bluetooth is up to date (version 5.0) and supports almost all protocols (except ANT +), and NFC is fully functional. The absence of ANT +, to be honest, amazed - all the previous “compacts” of the Z-series supported this protocol, and if I can still understand the reason for abandoning it in the X Compact (the device was unprotected and was less suited to an active lifestyle), then why is it so and was not returned in the new flagship, it is generally incomprehensible. Yes, few people need this function, but its availability for these people can be a significant factor in choosing a smartphone, especially considering the protected characteristics of the device.

Sony is followed by his “fellow countryman” under the Sharp brand - there were no problems with the Wi-Fi and Bluetooth signal (also of the fifth version), the wireless Internet speed (when using a router broadcasting in the 5 GHz range) is only slightly lower than Sony, but here the NFC module already has a slightly curtailed functionality - it does not support transport cards and Mifare keys. ANT + support is also missing, but in the case of this manufacturer, this is more a rule than news.

I would divide the third place between the two remaining devices: while the iPhone has high stability Wi-Fi signal and the exponential stability of the Bluetooth signal (albeit the module version 4.2), Samsung's download speed is noticeably lower, and the Bluetooth signal (also 4.2) becomes unstable when both modules are loaded at the same time (connection to an access point via 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi, connecting to a wireless speaker via Bluetooth and broadcasting the screen via Miracast).

But on the other hand, the Korean device has an "almost full" NFC (also without Mifare), and support for the ANT + protocol, and an additional "killer feature" - emulation of a magnetic card using MST technology for the Samsung Pay application. The “American” has none of this, and the NFC module only supports payment by Apple Pay- no accessories, transport cards or proximity keys.

For the sake of fairness, it should be noted that the sound transmission lags in the Samsung device can be partially forgiven, because only he and his American competitor natively support the choice of the sound output source, all other Android smartphones when simultaneously connected to Miracast devices and Bluetooth selects one output from them by default and does not allow the user to decide what he wants to listen through.

Data store

Criteria for evaluation: the amount of built-in memory (4 points), the ability to expand the memory and the maximum amount of supported memory (3 points), the ability to choose a configuration with a different amount of memory (3 points).

This is the shortest category of comparison: here everything, in principle, is clear even without a description. But just in case, let me remind you: Apple smartphones neither supported any memory cards, nor do they, but instead, the company from Cupertino offers the possibility of a fairly wide selection of trim levels. All four smartphones, one way or another, support connecting external drives via USB Type-C and Lightning connectors, respectively. Therefore, we will leave this criterion unappreciated.

Multimedia

Criteria for evaluation: speaker volume on the ringtone (2 points), speaker volume and quality in multimedia mode (2 points), support for high-definition wireless codecs (2 points) and additional music capabilities (2 points), video playback (2 points).

Evaluating smartphones from a musical point of view is still a quest. People's preferences in this area sometimes differ even more than when it comes to choosing a display. Still, there are objective factors that can significantly affect the sound quality in headphones, for example, the presence of a dedicated DAC and support for high-definition wireless codecs. Therefore, I will not give marks for “wide stage”, “clear positioning of artists” and other audiophile criteria that depend not only on the “transport” itself, but also on the sound source, and also on the listener's personal perception of the world. Although, of course, I will briefly touch on them, where can I go without it.

And again in the leaders of the category Sony smartphone- not only is there not a single complaint against it in both criteria, but it is also the most music-oriented device out of the four. Firstly, the built-in player is the most convenient, thoughtful and at the same time simple music player from all stock applications, if not all. Its capabilities are not as great as those of advanced third-party players like Neutron or PowerAmp, but thanks to this it remains visually uncluttered and intuitive. I liked that right in the stock player I can listen to music in the Google Play cloud, for which I have to install the paid Cloud Player on other phones. I liked that the local media library is loaded almost instantly, even when the number of tracks exceeds two and a half thousand. Well, I really liked the sound of the phone itself - whatever one may say, Sony managed not to completely lose the musical magic of Walkman’s, even if this magic is pure mass product designed for audiophiles only in part. The headphone jack honestly serves its money, even with regular headphones. I have not had the opportunity to test a suitable Sony headset supporting proprietary pinout and active noise cancellation without additional modules (MDR-NC750, MDR-NC31EM), but at one time I tried the Xperia Z3 with the second model - the sensations are awesome, I am sure that nothing will change here either. Sony stereo speakers are also gorgeous, and even located on the front side, so watching and playing videos is a pleasure.

There are no problems with wireless audio - if, for example, branded accessories with support for the latest LDAC codec still need to be looked for, and their choice is small, then devices with support for aptX-HD / aptX are quite enough.

It should be noted that only three test participants showed a fairly high volume of the multimedia speaker (from 70 dB and higher): Sony, Apple and Samsung. Unfortunately, the same volume level does not mean the same quality - the stereo speakers of smartphones from Apple and Sony sound richer and can even serve as portable speakers for unassuming listeners. On the other hand, the Galaxy A3 can boast of an unusual, but rather convenient location of the speaker - it is located on the right edge, just above the power button. If you get used to this arrangement, then it really becomes convenient: neither in landscape, nor in portrait orientation in the hands, nor lying on the table, the sound does not overlap. But, on the other hand, if you want to do this on purpose (for example, to hear someone), then this is done very easily and as efficiently as possible - the thumb, if desired, practically drowns it out. Also, the Korean device can be praised for the presence of an FM radio, for the ability to simultaneously output sound to two sources (for example, music plays on a Bluetooth speaker, and the video being watched on the phone itself), for an excellent built-in equalizer, which has rather subtle sound adjustment options, and for a good player Samsung Music, which, however, must first be downloaded from the store Samsung apps(originally installed by Google only Play Music). From the point of view of listening to music in a headset, both wired and wireless, it does not have particularly outstanding sound - this is an average smartphone sound, but, again, a good built-in equalizer will help to hide the shortcomings of the connected headset a little, and this is already enough for the vast majority of users ... There is no support for newfangled codecs for Bluetooth - only the good old SBC.

The not very convenient stereo configuration of the iPhone 7 (one speaker is at the bottom end, the second is combined with the spoken one) does not allow you to fully experience the sound panorama and makes you pay attention to the phone's grip in landscape orientation. We have already evaluated the absence of a headset jack, so this will not affect the rating in this category. If you have really good wired headphones with a standard "mini-jack", then it may make sense to use the supplied adapter, in other cases it is better to find something with a lightning connector (the choice is small, but present) or even switch to "wireless ”. With him, everything is at the level here - the AAC codec is quite flexible and is used as widely as possible in the Apple ecosystem, which means a minimum of unnecessary conversions from codec to codec and, accordingly, losses in sound quality. In terms of sensation, when using headphones that support both AAC and aptX (not aptX-HD) with two corresponding sources, the differences between the two modes are imperceptible or perceptible with the slightest bias (sometimes in one direction, sometimes in the other). The only software "sound enhancer" in the iPhone is the built-in equalizer in the settings, which has only preset presets that may not suit everyone (I never chose anything, I just turned it off). In the case of smartphones from Apple, you can count on a serious sound only using high-quality lightning headphones with a dedicated DAC, in other cases the sound is the same ordinary and does not stand out either in a bad or in a good way, as in almost all other "contestants" ...

Well, the Sharp smartphone is a clear outsider, at least in terms of a multimedia speaker. Not only is it alone here and located at the bottom end (it is easy to block it with your fingers), but it is also quieter than its competitors - this is especially noticeable when watching videos and listening to music. This is a traditional story for purely Japanese phones - in this country, the speaker volume does not play important role in choosing a phone, since it is customary there to respect others and not interfere with them as much as possible. On the other hand, there are no problems with connections: the latest Bluetooth chip supports the aptX-HD codec, and if paired with accessories of the same version, it will confidently keep in touch at even greater distances than usual.

In terms of headphone sound, this is about the same average sound as in the case of Samsung and Apple. There is neither a dedicated DAC, nor sound settings from any eminent audio company (as is the case with the Arrows NX series from Fujitsu), nor an advanced built-in player and equalizer (both provide google app Play Music), however, the sound cannot be called bad either. He's just ordinary.

I do not see any point in dwelling in detail on other multimedia characteristics, since even smartphones from the middle segment already quite adequately reproduce videos in 4K resolution both in built-in and in third-party applications, including wireless monitors. The possibility of a wired connection to the screen is hypothetically present only on the iPhone, but in fact it is very confused and costly financially (in addition to an expensive adapter, you also need to have a suitable cable and monitor with mandatory HDCP support), besides, it is slightly inferior in quality to wireless AirPlay, therefore we will not regard it as a serious advantage.

Unfortunately, in the case of Samsung, there is no support for the H.265 (or HEVC) codec at all, and 4K videos on the H.264 codec are not played by the built-in player, but are well digested by the MX Player application.

A smartphone from Sony can please the owners of the Playstation 4 game console from the same manufacturer - the smartphone has preinstalled app for a remote game Remote Play, but this is hardly relevant for a large number of people, so I think it is not worth considering this feature as decisive.

Cameras

Well, the final point of testing will be the category of cameras. As with display and sound, personal preference and taste cannot be dispensed with. Someone really cares about the maximum resolution of the frame, but someone is indifferent to it, so long as the frame is not faded and muddy. Someone is worried about newfangled chips like shooting with a blurred background, someone give a powerful manual mode with a bunch of settings, but for some, only basic shots in the “clicked and it turned out beautifully” mode are important. All these are very different criteria, but their presence / absence, one way or another, affects the convenience of using a smartphone as a camera. We will try to bring our subjective view of the overall results of the images as “out of competition” information, and the marks will be given according to more objective parameters. Since it will not be possible to fit all the criteria into a ten-point system in this category, we allowed ourselves another prank - we made it 12-point, divided the category into subcategories (“Photo”, “Video” and “General parameters, etc.”), each of which they have already been directly divided into four criteria with a maximum possible score of 3 points. The final score for the camera will be displayed as the arithmetic average between these three subcategories.

Criteria in the "Photo" category: exposure, contrast and dynamic range (3 points); color saturation and white balance (3 points); sharpness, presence of artifacts (3 points); shooting in low light conditions, noise (3 points).

Criteria for the category “Video”: maximum video resolution, sharpness, stabilization (3 points); sound quality (3 points); exposure, contrast, dynamism. range, artifacts (3 points); saturation and white balance in the video (3 points).

Criteria for the category “General and Miscellaneous”: Autofocus operation and shutter speed (3 points); ergonomics of the camera application (3 points); the presence of software "chips", including the video mode in slow-mo and manual mode of the photo (3 points); the quality of shooting the front camera is generalized, without individual parameters (3 points).

I draw your attention to the fact that shooting from all devices was carried out under the same conditions, and the automatic mode was selected in the camera settings. The presence of a manual mode is a separate plus, but nevertheless it is not relevant for everyone, and even to evaluate pictures with different capabilities manual setting- it's a completely thankless job.

Unfortunately, the device from Apple did not participate in part of the photo tests, because it had already left our editorial office. Therefore, do not be surprised that he will have a smaller number of ready-made shots (but it is quite sufficient for studying the quality of a photo in different conditions).

Sharp Aquos R Compact

I will allow myself to comment on the ratings and express my personal opinion about the cameras. By and large, the test results did not surprise me. We clearly have two leaders (Sony - 10 points exactly, Apple - 10.3 points), but these two leaders are completely different. As usual, if you need a camera in your smartphone according to the principle of “click and it turned out beautifully”, then an American device is best for you. It has a minimum of settings, and it practically does not require user intervention, but this is a coin on two sides. No matter how well the automation works, sometimes it has to be corrected, and although the Xperia XZ1 Compact's automatic algorithms work a little worse than the competitor's (but still good), it has an order of magnitude more opportunities to tighten the photo for a certain situation. It's a shame that there is no support for RAW images in the stock camera (by the way, none of the participants has it), so there would be no price for it at all. Software tricks like the creation of three-dimensional face models are pleasing, of course, but not for a very long time.

The difference between the leaders becomes even stronger when it comes to video shooting - the Japanese device has a large number of options and settings (take at least the same slow-mo at 960 fps), excellent sound recording quality and, in general, a high-quality module that upset only its own behavior when shooting in bright sunlight. Interestingly, given a large number of settings, the Sony smartphone cannot be called overloaded in terms of the camera interface, although, of course, the study of this interface will take some time.

The device from Cupertino can oppose it with an excellent optical stabilization, a clear picture and a minimalistic interface, created according to the principle of sufficiency for the majority - just like the furniture from Ikea. But the "slowmo" is already losing out to its Japanese competitor - here "only" 240 fps. Even more frustrating is the mono sound, albeit not bad in quality.

A typical "middle peasant" in terms of the camera, the device from Sharp, did not show any impressive results (the average score for the camera is 7.6), but it also did not terrify, as was the case with the company's flagships three years ago. If you are not picky about the camera and use it only for the rare capture of family moments, posting them later on “instu”, then this result will be enough for you. But you shouldn't regard it as a full-fledged replacement for a camera - there are too many restrictions and too few opportunities. The only serious advantage of all the latest Sharp flagships, I think, is a very nimble and unloaded camera application - it's how to take the simplicity of the interface iPhone cameras and add a little more settings to it without losing ergonomics. The coolest feature of the stock Sharp camera is a very convenient manual mode, which has a large number of flexible settings that allow you to take a little more “tasty” photos.

Well, the last one in this standings is the Samsung Galaxy A3. As cool as the cameras of the Korean flagships are, the camera of our today's hero is just as weak. She, of course, takes good pictures during the day, and it's not even a shame to show them to friends, but the slightest step away from the illuminated place or towards the lighting itself, and the pictures turn into something indistinct. With video, it's still sadder - only FullHD resolution, no stabilization, not the best sound quality and a very narrow dynamic range will in no way help you record something beautiful.

Of course, if you compare the smartphone with its predecessors, you can see an improvement in photo characteristics, but still the “youngest” A-series flagships are still far from the flagships. On the other hand, a Korean smartphone is likely to suit an undemanding user who chooses a smartphone not because of photo capabilities, but according to more prosaic criteria. Remembering an old anecdote, you can say: “Well, yes, well, horror. But not horror-horror-horror ”.

Results and conclusions

To preserve the purity of the experiment, scores were given as each section was written, so at the time of writing the last part, your humble servant did not yet know the winner himself (simply because it is very difficult to remember so many numbers in your head). Well, let's start summing up.

And the results are such that the difference between the devices turned out to be not as great as one might expect. Of course, if we consider this comparison as a semblance of a sports all-around, then we have a clearly delineated winner: the Sony XPERIA XZ1 Compact, which finished the fastest. The distribution of the remaining places is interesting: the smartphone from Apple was better in many categories, but before the victory it lacked a couple of points. And the remaining two participants, although separated by only a couple of points, differ much more than the numbers indicate.

Each of the tested smartphones showed both strong and weak sides, which I think is a good indicator - each customer will be able to choose what suits him specifically. If you want more, and even in a compact body, then the priority is given to the device from Sony. And it is also suitable for music lovers - a good sound path and musical orientation will not upset music lovers.

If you want an ultimate camera that does its job and does not require knowledge of photography, as well as excellent system optimization (which, although it has become more complex, is still quite easy to learn), then the Apple iPhone 7 will be for you “what the doctor ordered. " Another undoubted advantage of a smartphone from an American company will be a powerful ecosystem and just an unimaginable number of possible accessories, both simply stylish (covers, bumpers, bags, etc.) and extremely functional (docking stations, protected covers). However, it is definitely not suitable for those who want their smartphone to live longer than until the evening.

The same can be said about the Aquos R Compact smartphone from Sharp - it is far from being a record holder for survivability (although it will withstand the same busy day), but it takes on, perhaps, a controversial, but unique and extremely ergonomic design, which attracts the views of others and the owner (especially in bright colors). A beautiful and clear screen with a unique high-frequency scanning technology, which is also pleasing to the eye, is another strong trump card in the sleeve of the Japanese flagship. Well, a nimble operating system, not littered with any shells, is the key to minimal glitches, jams and crashes. But you have to put up with an average camera and the lack of a full-fledged Russian-speaking system in this very system.

Well, the Samsung Galaxy A3 (2017) is fully consistent with its focus - this is a mid-budget device that is unlikely to please the owner with high-speed work or a powerful camera, but it will help to stretch out a couple of busy days without recharging, without losing the functionality that is in the shell from the Korean manufacturer a lot (so much that the smartphone does not always cope with this burden). A whole arsenal of modern and not so (hello to all fans of FM radio) wireless modules will help the smartphone stay relevant longer, which cannot be said about it operating system which may not see more updates.

Dear colleagues, friends and visitors of the mobile-review.com resource!

Over the past few days, the Mobile-Review.com website has been subjected to constant DDOS attacks from unknown persons. Several tens of thousands of computers from all over the world are involved; these are “infected” machines or, as they are called, botnets. Since the first attack, which led to the inoperability of the site due to the full load of the channels, the attack scheme has changed many times. Starting from the attack of individual machines, ending with the attack of the entire subnet in which the resources of Mobile-Review.com are located.

The attackers hope that by disabling the Mobile-Review.com site, they will not allow readers to obtain objective information about events in the world of mobile communications, read independent device reviews and communicate on forums. Considering that such attacks can be carried out by individuals or small groups of people, we treat this incident as attempted censorship of the Internet ... More than 200,000 of our readers from all over the world who visit the site every day to obtain relevant information, or simple communication, are deprived of information. These attackers are pitting themselves against society. From censoring unwanted publications or articles, there is only one small step to an attempt to total control over various media outlets, to impose their own vision of the world, in their own selfish or political interests. The danger of such a development of events can hardly be underestimated. Given the free tools for a DDoS attack, both individual fans of a particular brand and any company with sufficient resources to implement it can be involved in it. Unfortunately, with this type of attack, it is almost impossible to track the attackers, as well as to legally prove their guilt. This spring, similar attacks were carried out against other media outlets, for example, Ekho Moskvy, the website of the Kommersant newspaper.

At the time of the first attack, an anonymous message was sent to the Internet pager of the Mobile-Review.com editor-in-chief, which said that Apple fans were behind the attack on the resource and that this was a kind of revenge for the iPhone and its assessment on the pages of the publication. It is possible that this is so, or it is possible that the message was sent in order to make the situation even more confusing. It is no secret that “sharp”, problematic materials often appear on the pages of the edition, which many do not like. Recently, there have been a lot of such materials - we consider it our duty to tell our readers and subscribers not only about various new products and news of the mobile world, but also warn about certain facts that interfere with comfortable work with various electronic gadgets, and can also cause damage consumers of products and services.

The attack on Mobile-Review.com is unprecedented in scale and persistence. That's why we consider it necessary to draw the attention of both the online community and our readers to the fact of censoring unwanted points of view. If you do not express your point of view on the events taking place today, then tomorrow you will consume only the information that they deem necessary and possible to provide you. Perhaps this statement will seem excessive, pretentious, but it is not. Big things are created from small events. Today Mobile-Review.com is attacked and readers cannot get to us, tomorrow it will be another resource, and so on. All together and only in this way, we can stop this practice.

We do not have ready-made solutions on how to implement our plans, make the Internet better and protect all publications and readers from such censorship. We will be glad if colleagues in the shop, readers, ordinary people express their points of view on this problem. Everyone on their own resource, forum, corner of the network, which they visit. The problem is worth protecting against the possibility of future censorship.

V this moment the editors of the site do not have a ready-made action plan for countering such threats in the future. The technical plan of the current activities is clear and we are making every effort to return to normal work. The editorial office is working normally, materials are being published. From time to time we restore the site to work and hope to finally win in the near future. You can express your point of view in my personal blog at eldarmurtazin.livejournal.com.

Contents of delivery

• Smartphone
• Charger(fast charge QC 3.0)
• USB Type C cable
• Clip for SIM tray
• Instructions

Specifications
Dimensions and weight	150.1 x 72.5 x 8.28 mm, 163 grams
Body materials	Glass, aluminum
Display	5.65 inches, 1080x2160 pixels, 427 ppi, IPS, 18: 9, automatic adjustment brightness, Corning Gorilla Glass 3
Operating system	Google Android 8.1, Yandex shell
Platform	Qualcomm Snapdragon 630, 8 cores up to 2.2 GHz, Adreno 508
Memory	4 GB RAM, 64 GB ROM, microSD memory card up to 128 GB
Wireless interfaces	Wi-Fi a / b / g / n / ac, dual-band, Bluetooth 4.1, NFC
Network	GSM 900/1800/1900 3G 4G LTE cat. 6 band 3,7, 20, 38, 40 - CA2 Dual SIM, nanoSIM
Navigation	GPS, GLONASS
Sensors and connectors	USB Type C (USB 3.1), OTG Accelerometer, Proximity sensor, Ambient light sensor, Fingerprint sensor (on the back), Gyroscope, E-compass, Hall sensor
Main camera	16/5-megapixels (the second module was disabled at the beginning of sales), LED flash - there are no effects other than HDR, f / 2.2
Front-camera	5 megapixels, flash - no additional effects
Battery	Li-Ion 3050 mAh, average battery life one full day Fast charge 50% in 35 minutes
Degree of protection	Absent
Colors	black
Sound	one speaker, Qualcomm Aqstic audio codec - WCD9340 DSP
Peculiarities	Voice control Alice, the ability to ask a question "Listen to Alice"

Positioning

Yandex has already made several attempts to create its own devices and spent a lot of time and effort on it. The first smartphones from Yandex were those on Yandex.Kit in early 2014, it was an initially dead project, which I even overestimated at that time, considering that up to a dozen smartphones could appear. In reality, the matter was limited to a few hundred pieces of Honor devices, there was no demand for them, and Huawei switched these devices back to Android.

Around the same time, the company hatched plans to release its own tablet, the project was called "Erica" ​​and he was buried after the article that came out with us. It has become a good tradition for me to consult Yandex publicly and explain why their ideas are extremely far from life.

History tends to repeat itself, as it happened with the project of the first smartphone from Yandex, which was developed internally and presented to the public in November 2018. Yandex's approach in this aspect is extremely simple - the company took over the Taiwanese ODM-manufacturer Arima, which once produced phones for Sony Ericsson, and with the fall of this company has become very dim. This is not a basement China at all, a good factory with a decent quality of workmanship. They even have their own small set of devices that are designed for third-party companies. As a basic model for Yandex.Telephone, such a semi-finished product was taken - the Z2 model.

The problem with this story is that Yandex did not fully understand what good production and good smartphone as a blank. Arima has a rather expensive production, but little experience in the development of modern smartphones. When you come with your product, you will get a high-quality assembly, a minimum of problems. It's a completely different matter when you take a workpiece from Arima, its quality is very different from mass factories, since there is no such experience, and most importantly, these are piece stories. The company's engineers simply do not have so many clients to get their hands on the creation of devices and, as a result, they have a lot of childhood ailments that cannot be fixed quickly. At Arima, they learn to create smartphones and are at about the same level as Yandex, they just have access to the Chinese market and may ask what and how to do.

Don't believe me? Let's remember that Yandex announced the presence of a dual main camera, a 16-megapixel main module, and a 5-megapixel second one. During the presentation of Yandex.Telephone, it sounded that the second camera module is not working yet! Subsequently, with new firmware it will be "turned on". In my memory, even C-brands are not best quality never put on the market a model with a disabled second module. It happened that the software did not work correctly, it happened that the second module turned out to be a fake, but such that the manufacturer could not master the software and did not give any opportunities? This was not the case.

And for the buyer this is a very strange message - buy a device with two cameras today, and then someday we will turn it on. But you need to pay for its presence here and now. You definitely can't do it, it's a road to nowhere. You never get a second chance to make a first impression. And the problem is related to the fact that Arima simply could not make normal software, well, they do not know how in Taiwan until this, the technologies of mainland China have not reached them. And the capricious moods that it could be done with one left, suddenly evaporated. It does not work out to do this, in any way.

From communication with Yandex, I brought out two important thoughts. First, the company firmly believes that they have developed the device on their own and have done a lot of work. For example, I was shown how the phone case was in the beginning and how it changed later.

And this is how the device looks after long iterations to change its appearance.

Are there any differences? Undoubtedly. And the fact that people have worked on this is also beyond doubt. The only problem is that this work was done from a misunderstanding of the modern smartphone market and what the consumer needs. This is largely wasted work, erroneous judgment, which led to a strange result. Is Yandex.Telephone perceived as something unique? Not at all. Asking different people everywhere I heard the same thing - this is a purebred Chinese, there is nothing unique about him. And it's true, it turned out to be a good device in the style of Huawei / Honor or other large companies. But outwardly it has nothing to do with Yandex.

The second thought is directly related to what Yandex is - it is a company that creates services and the product, as a rule, is programs. In the same Yandex.Taxi, the basis of the product is code, not hardware. The philosophy of creating physical products is very different from that for programs, you cannot release some stable hardware and further release its capabilities to a new level with releases. Who cares how Yandex.Phone will take pictures in a year? People buy a finished product and if it improves, it will be a pleasant surprise. But it is impossible to say that you can release a semi-finished product and then finish it to the state of a commercial product. This is the approach of a software company, where all these mistakes are forgiven and often the consumer does not even realize them. But when creating glands, this is unacceptable.

An important detail that shows that Yandex did not understand what the hardware market is. Before the launch of Yandex.Telephone, these devices began to appear on operators' networks, and in large quantities. I followed this with great interest, since the geography of these devices differed and there were a little more than a couple of hundred of them. Then my first acquaintance with this product in its commercial component took place, since Yandex employees acted as beta testers. The disadvantage of this approach is that the most loyal employees of the company tested the product, this is the most favored nation regime. But the most important thing is that Yandex.Phone for them, as a rule, was the second, additional one. And many beta testers did not even see the problems that lie on the surface, which created a distorted picture of the world. This is a childish mistake that a person who has been developing glands for a long time will not make, or negates the disadvantages of this approach, which is also possible.

Yandex has priority areas, strategic ones. And one of those is Alice, since Google is in no hurry to enter the Russian market with a similar solution in columns, we can also say about Alexa from Amazon. The idea of ​​building your smartphone around Alice sounds sound inside Yandex, it is an excellent differentiator from any smartphone on the market that are so similar to each other. But in all honesty, is it really that important for the average consumer? It doesn't matter at all, he doesn't care what to say “Ok Google” or “Listen to Alice”. Moreover, the target audience does not actively use voice control. And that's the problem. One would assume that Yandex.Telephone is designed to show the ecosystem, different applications, but then the question arises that this is an ordinary Android smartphone, where applications and services from Google hang on the first screen. That is, even here it did not work out to make its own decision, which shows the position of Yandex in the market.

Who could potentially be interested in this device? There is no doubt that any person will receive it as a gift, that is, the cost of the device will be zero. They don’t look a gift horse in the mouth; this proverb works here as well as possible. Another thing is who will give this device? It is possible that Yandex, then everything will fall into place.

For Yandex employees, this device can also be interesting, especially if it will be sold with some gigantic discount of 50% or simply paid for its cost, I think in the end, somehow the remains of this phone will be sold somehow. For an ordinary, mass consumer, the purchase of Yandex.Phone is a random process, one might say chaotic, when a device is selected under the influence of a seller or by typing. As an informed purchase, this smartphone looks like an odd choice. And below we will discuss in detail why this is so.

Design, dimensions, controls

The choice of materials is typical for products at this price - glass and metal frame painted in the body color. Due to the fact that the device was not planned to be a massive color, only one black color (after all, the realization of the impossibility to sell any noticeable volume is inherent in the choice of one and the most boring color). The solid black color is rather boring, it does not play in the light. Similar models from Huawei / Honor, and now Samsung, shimmer in different colors, black is always one of the possible colors and nothing more.

The size of the device is good, it fits perfectly in the hand and ergonomics does not cause any difficulties (150.1 x 72.5 x 8.28 mm, 163 grams). The case gets dirty, but this is a problem for all such models, here the oleophobic coating is like in the C-brands, it will not last long enough. But this is a typical situation for this kind of models, the same Huawei a couple of years ago allowed itself something similar, burned and is doing better now.

I didn't drop my smartphone on purpose, but a couple of times it fell from the table onto the oak flooring, the device is slippery and if you put it on a book, it can slip off. No consequences happened, the glass withstood, there are no chips on the frame. But then who and how lucky. I recommend using the covers that Yandex has created for this model, they are typically priced, at the same time of fairly good quality and, most importantly, that they are bright.

On the back panel you can see a dual camera, it is built into the body of the device and does not protrude. The alignment of one of the modules is incorrect, moved out relative to the hole in the case, but this is an assembly problem. I have three different Yandex.Phones, all commercial and everywhere this moment is different, on one everything is fine, on two there is an offset.

The fingerprint sensor is located on the rear panel, the sensor is recessed into the body, which is widely used in inexpensive models up to 10,000 rubles. It does not always work instantly, on the street in cold weather it dulls. This module is cheaper than those that are put into products of similar cost from other companies.

On top end there is a 3.5 jack for a headset, the latter is not included in the package, which is good, there will be no reason to throw out cheap headphones. There are two microphones in the device, on the top and bottom ends, they work well, noise cancellation is present, although in difficult situations, for example, headwind with snow, the device fails. But this is normal in the absence of complex algorithms, and where can Arima get them? This is a basic, reference device based on the Qualcomm platform, that is, the very minimum required.

On the right side there is an on / off button and a paired volume key. At the bottom there is a USB Type C connector, as well as a loudspeaker - there is only one in the device, which is somewhat frustrating, in this segment you can already count on two loudspeakers.

The slot for two SIM-cards is combined, that is, either two nanoSIMs, or one SIM-card and a memory card. Interestingly, a paper clip is made, this is the letter I.

But it is not very convenient to carry such a “clip” with you, and the cheapness of the execution is visible here in the facets. A weak point that I would like to see implemented differently. This can be considered nit-picking and overstated quality standards on my part.

Display

The technical characteristics of the screen are as follows - 5.65 inches, 1080x2160 pixels, 427 ppi, IPS, 18: 9, automatic brightness control, Corning Gorilla Glass 3. There is no stupid bangs or notches, which is already pleasing. The bezels of the screen are not at all huge, it is quite comfortable in size, including for one-handed operation, if you have a large one.

I'll start with a simple one - there is an automatic brightness control, it copes with the work normally, there are no complaints. I have enough brightness for the room, outside in the sun I would like more, but there is no crime here either, everything is typical for its class.

There are no additional screen settings as such, neither can you adjust the color temperature, nor change anything else. The only additional feature is the ability to leave pop-up notifications in standby mode (the screen lights up and the notification is shown in black and white). The thing is more than useless, and the energy consumption increases.

On two of the three devices there are phantom clicks, you touch the screen and it works in applications, somewhere it is more noticeable, somewhere not. I read user reviews, some note this feature, that is, these are not quirks of my hands or perception. I'll make a reservation that there are no tapes.

Despite the fact that this is Gorilla Glass 3, you are not protected from scratches on the screen, they are quite easy to plant (small scratches, they are not very visible in life). Someone may be annoyed, but this is a familiar sight for all similar devices, on the same iPhone the glass is much worse and softer, less resistant to scratches. So we can assume that there is no problem here.

Battery

In the apparatus Li-Ion battery with a capacity of 3050 mAh (the actual capacity is slightly below 3000 mAh, but you can label within the range of 10%, so there are no questions - this was done in order to somehow increase the value of the device in the eyes of the buyer). In this segment, the battery capacity of 3000 mAh is considered basic, most devices have a battery of 4000 mAh or even more.

Declared talk time up to 20 hours, standby time 580 hours and last digit Yandex uses it in advertising, which is very funny and causes exactly the opposite reaction. If the switched on device is simply put on the table with the SIM-card inserted, then the energy consumption per day will be 15-20%.

In theory, the Qualcomm chipset should not be gluttonous, in practice the radio part is far from ideal, and the more you move around the city, use the subway, the faster the device sits down. On the days when I was traveling around the city, my smartphone was discharged by the evening (up to thirty minutes of talks, 1.5-2 hours of screen operation, 4G). Very average and not impressive.

For example, in the access point mode, the device works for 5-6 hours at most, for more it is not enough. This is the same problem with the radio part that I mentioned above, and with active data transmission, this time is reduced even more, to 3-4 hours. And the device begins to noticeably heat up in the upper part.

The smartphone does not set any records in terms of the battery, these are average values. The size of the battery matters and here it is clearly not enough for those who do not only call or write SMS on the phone.

Quick charge (QC 3.0) included, full charging time is 1 hour 45 minutes. In 35 minutes, you get half the battery charge. Wireless charging is of course missing.

I repeat that they saved money on the battery, classmates in the price group have better batteries. With this money, Yandex could easily put a 4000-5000 mAh battery.

Memory, RAM, chipset, performance

It is possible that Yandex wanted to show that their product is more interesting than many others, since it is built on a Qualcomm chipset and for this they chose the rather old and unpopular Snapdragon 630. In the same Arima there are products on the 660 chipset, 636 have been on the market for a long time, and also devices on the latest generation are already appearing. Why Yandex chose this chipset is unknown. There is another curious story here that raises many questions. In the summer of 2018, Qualcomm sold the remnants of the Snapdragon 630 for half the price, it was the sale of the remnants. But then there were no people willing to buy this chipset, rumors claimed that there were some problems with the radio part and Qualcomm itself had already forgotten about this chipset, focusing on 636 and subsequent ones. I don’t presume to say that this is one hundred percent true, but the fact is that there are few models based on the 630 chipset, there are almost no mass models among them.

The device has 4GB of RAM, which is not bad, 64GB of internal memory (eMMC 5.1 of course). The data transfer rate in memory is good for this class of devices, not maximum, but sufficient.

Memory cards can be installed up to 128 GB, there are also no pitfalls. But since the device uses Yandex.Loncher, strange performance flaws emerge. For example, everything is fine in the interface until you install your applications, after which it starts to slow down in standard tasks. Don't believe me? Take a look at the video how it looks in Play Store(the connection is good, there is nothing like this on the other phone).

The feeling that the phone is doing something in the background, and so heavy that it cannot work with ordinary applications. Exactly also happens on Twitter, Instagram, but not always, the error is floating. That is, sometimes the device works perfectly, and sometimes it shamelessly slows down. The feeling that some process is taking up memory and preventing applications from working normally.

In synthetic tests, the performance is average, there are no achievements here.

Compared to classmates, everything is rather dim. For example, Honor 8x performs better.

As for me, the device is not the most stable and fast, in real life lags appear, which come out randomly and spoil the impression of the device. This is the quality of the software, which is far from ideal.

Communication capabilities

Arima took the Qualcomm reference platform and practically did not update it, as a result, we have Bluetooth 4.1 here and the absence of any advanced codecs for sound, there is neither AptX HD nor LDAC. And the phone's performance may simply not be enough for them. Therefore, in wireless headphones the music is quite flat, on the other hand, if you use Apple's AirPods, you will not notice it, the sound quality matches this headset.

Initially, on Yandex.Market, the description of the smartphone indicated that it supports LTE cat.12, but with joint efforts and with my submission, we corrected this error, the declared characteristics are LTE cat.6. Aggregation of two carriers is supported, which is not bad for a device of this level and, in theory, can provide up to 300 Mbps per download (upwards, in theory, 150 Mbps). In practice, I did not like how data transfer works and decided to check this point. To do this, I took a Megafon SIM card ( best set frequencies, there is aggregation), as well as for comparison Samsung Galaxy S8 + (also 2CA, model on Exynos). I measured the speed on one device, then on another, rearranging the same SIM card.

The result turned out to be interesting - almost always Samsung showed a noticeably higher data transfer speed, and the gap was sometimes significant. I got the strong impression that frequency aggregation on Yandex.Phone is not working or is not working correctly.

But the most curious thing is that the quality of communication on Yandex.Phone can jump in a completely unpredictable way, look at these three screenshots.

Switching from 4G to 3G and vice versa is often associated with problems, the phone falls out into 3G and does not return back, you need to forcefully drive it there. VoLTE support is not yet available, so if you come across a mention somewhere, then you definitely should not believe it.

For me, this moment is not at all surprising. If you take a reference device with average characteristics, a kind of semi-finished product, finish it with the help of factory engineers, who have a very distant idea of ​​this, then you get the following result. It's a pity, but Yandex.Telephone does not stand up to any comparison with other devices of its class over the radio.

It remains to say about the advantage of the device over some Chinese devices, it has NFC. You can use it for a variety of tasks, including paying with Google Pay. Everything works well, someone comments that Yandex.Money works every other time, but I don’t use the service, I cannot comment, most likely these are software problems, not hardware flaws.

Camera

The front camera does not have any additional modes, but for some reason they installed a flash. As if it raises the value of the device in the eyes of potential consumers. In place of Yandex, I would try to make face recognition, since it is widespread in this class of devices. Take a look at examples of shots taken with the front camera.

The main camera is dual, as you know, the second module simply does not work, it was turned off until better times. In the interface area, we have a very simple UI, there are no additional settings - no animation, no AR effects, no bokeh, absolutely nothing. Even the face enhancers that the basement Chinese brand has itself have not been added here. To say that this is strange is to say nothing.

The camera does not have any allogorythms other than the basic ones, it is a raw semi-finished product, which for some reason was added to a product that was called commercial. In the light, the camera shoots back and forth, see the comparison with the Mate 20 Lite (the device is a little higher in class).

Mobile-review.com

Mobile-review.com
Home page
Url:
Commercial:
Site type:	site about mobile equipment and technologies
Registration:	optional
Languages):
Beginning of work:
Current status:

This is one of the most popular projects with a daily audience of over 100 thousand people (according to http://www.mobile-review.com/ad/ - presentation media kit)

Command

• Chief Editor: Murtazin Eldar
• Deputy Editor-in-Chief: Sergey Kuzmin
• PDA Section Editor: Artem Lutfullin
• Personal audio and video (MP3) section editor: Ilya Tarakanov
• Section Editor Operators: Sergey Potresov
• Accessories section editor: Sergey Kuzmin
• Descriptions section editor (Phones): Ivanov Konstantin
• Budget phones section editor: Vladimir Fokin

Links

• android.mobile-review.com | Everything about Android and phones based on the "robot": Acer, HTC, LG, Motorola, Samsung, Sony Ericsson

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.

See what "Mobile-review.com" is in other dictionaries:

Mobile-review- (often abbreviated as MR) is a professional website, dedicated to reviewing mobile devices. This includes mobile phones, PDAs, MP3 players and so on. The site was founded on 2 September 2002 by Eldar Murtazin. This site has its own test lab and…… Wikipedia

Mobile High-definition Link- (MHL) is a proposed industry standard for a mobile audio / video interface for directly connecting mobile phones and other portable consumer electronics (CE) devices to high definition televisions (HDTVs) and displays. The MHL standard features a…… Wikipedia

Status Active Industry Mobile Industry Exhibition Venue Fira de Barcelona City / Region Barcelona ... Wikipedia

Mobile operating system- A mobile operating system, also known as a mobile OS, mobile software platform or a handheld operating system, is the operating system that controls a mobile device or information appliance similar in principle to an operating system such as ... ... Wikipedia

Mobile, Alabama- Mobile City From top: Pincus Building, Old City Hall and Southern Market, Fort Condé, Barton Academy, Cathedral Basilica of the Immaculate Co… Wikipedia

Mobile Suit Gundam SEED Destiny- Cover of the first Mobile Suit Gundam SEED Destiny DVD featuring Shinn Asuka and the mobile suit ZGMF X56S Impulse in the background. 機動 戦 士 ガ ン ダ ム SEED DESTINY… Wikipedia

Mobile Suit Gundam 00- Japanese DVD cover of Mobile Suit Gundam 00 Volume 1 機動 戦 士 ガ ン ダ ム 00 (Kidō Senshi Gandamu Daburu Ō)… Wikipedia

Mobile search- is an evolving branch of information retrieval services that is centered around the convergence of mobile platforms and mobile phones and other mobile devices. Web search engine ability in a mobile form allows users to find mobile content on…… Wikipedia

Mobile application development- is the process by which application software is developed for small low power handheld devices such as personal digital assistants, enterprise digital assistants or mobile phones. These applications are either pre installed on phones during…… Wikipedia

Mobile edge- Mobile Edge, LLC Type Privately Owned Industry Consumer Electronics Founded 2002 Headquarters ... Wikipedia