Razer Unveils Gaming Smartphone With 120Hz UltraMotion Display, 8GB RAM and No Headphone Jack (cnet.com) 168
Computer hardware company Razer has unveiled its first smartphone. While the design doesn't appear to be up to par with the competition, it does pack some impressive specifications under the hood. The Razer Phone features a 5.7-inch, 2,560x1,440-resolution display, Snapdragon 835 chipset with 8GB of RAM, 12-megapixel dual camera with a wide-angle lens and 2x optical zoom, 4,000mAh battery, dual front-facing stereo speakers, and Android 7.1.1 Nougat running out of the box. While there is a microSD card slot for expandable storage, there is no headphone jack, no waterproofing, and no wireless charging. The device also won't support CDMA carriers like Verizon or Sprint. CNET reports: [W]here most new flagship phones are shiny rounded rectangles with curved screens, the Razer Phone is unabashedly a big black brick. It flaunts sharp 90-degree corners instead of curved edges. You can even stand the phone on end. The 5.7-inch, 2,560x1,440-resolution screen is flat as a pancake, and you'll find giant bezels above and below that screen, too -- just when we thought bezels were going out of style. When the Razer Phone ships Nov. 17 for $699 or £699 -- no plans for Australia at launch -- the company says it'll be the first phone with a display that refreshes 120 times per second, like a high-end PC gaming monitor or Apple's iPad Pro. And combined with a dynamic refresh technique Razer's calling Ultramotion (think Nvidia G-Sync), it can mean beautiful, butter-smooth scrolling down websites and apps, and glossy mobile gameplay.
no Headphone, Jack (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: no Headphone, Jack (Score:1)
No headphone jack is a deal breaker. They blew it. The rest of the specs are irrelevant.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
But it appears to be a fetish here on slashdot. "The new XYP Phone cures cancer and costs $10, but it has no headphone jack so I'm not buying it".
Re: (Score:3)
If it cures cancer, then I would buy it without the headphone jack (just in case it's needed some day).
But it does not : it's a (ugly) phone that will break because of humidity (lots of places on Earth), and has no headphone jack. It's out.
To its credit : it's a flat screen. (Rounded glass sides be damned)
(I'm not personally interested by wireless charging)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm with you up to the wireless charging. I thought it was a gimmick, but two things changed my mind: 1) The first thing to fail on my last 2 phones was the charging port. 2) It's so god damned convenient.
Yes, it's not as efficient as wired charging. But the electricity cost is marginal. At work I toss my phone on my desk and it charges. At home I set it in the cradle and not only can I glance over to see what text or email came in because it's standing up, but it charges. Need to use the phone? Just pick i
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe I'll get hooked to it when I start using it then :)
So far I've always been on the port.
Re: (Score:2)
That must be the first thing you have read today, then :) :)
With the elaborate demonstration you've written to back up your statement, I can only bow to the heights of your intellect. (You can even read? I stand amazed.).
Here, take a cookie. Now run along, you scrawny toddler.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:no Headphone, Jack (Score:5, Informative)
Fuck Razer. Did you know that their mice and keyboards requires an internet connection just to be able to change settings? I bought one of their mice recently and when I found out, I refunded that shit real quick and bought a Logitech like I should have from the start.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Razer shit tends to die within 2 years in my experience. Not that it doesn't glow green, it does.
Re: (Score:2)
Great! That is the warranty period, of course.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Technically, Bluetooth audio supports existing compression - like MP3. It's just that phones and headphones don't both support it at both ends.
Re: (Score:3)
In all honesty, it's less of an issue than people make it out to be. Not wanting to deal with the USB C to 3.5mm adapter is understandable. It doesn't make it some amazingly serious flaw in the phone. It's definitely debatable whether the removal is worth the inconvenience, but an inconve
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Bluetooth audio uses lossy compression too. I bet that sounds REAL good to listen to a lossy compressed MP3 that is lossy compressed Bluetooth audio on top. And you can completely forget about doing anything with lossless audio.
You are right, of course... However, this is a smartphone with mobile gaming in mind. How important is audiophile quality sound with those sorts of applications? And there is still a USB-C option. There are places for high and low quality sound.
These arguments about smartphone sound quality are similar to when audiophiles fault exercise/sport type ear buds because they don't sound as good as studio-grade cups. They are designed for different purposes/needs and should be judged accordingly.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe if Razer would design a nice addon slider keyboard that worked well (many are available for the iPhone, but that's a silly toy) it could be a decent compromise. If it did have a mechanical keyboard I'd be preordering one right now.
The lack of a headphone jack isn't ideal, but with my latest phone I've only used it once, and that was because the bluetooth wasn't working at the time due to a software problem.
Re: (Score:2)
While I don't get the lack of a headphone jack in the other phones, here it makes a bit of sense. The speakers get in the way, I guess.
Frankly if I had the money I would buy this phone, the design is strangely appealing to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Ironic considering that Razer sells headsets with headphone jacks.
Re: That's three (Score:3, Insightful)
Battery life
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
And sound quality. Bluetooth Audio uses lossy compression.
Re: (Score:2)
Not necessarily:
https://www.lifewire.com/what-... [lifewire.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not any more it doesn't.
Because they sound average? (Score:4, Insightful)
Mostly because even the best widely supported audio codec for bluetooth sound bad?
AptX (HD) is about as good as you will get, and it is somewhat... average.
Certainly good enough for cheap(ly made, sometimes expensive priced) earbuds, 'fashion' headphones, etc.
However, still a far FAR distance from the quality available with high quality headphones.
And if you want good lipsync with video, you better either accept lower quality, or be able to adjust the video delay,
because the advanced codec add a lot of latency (166ms for AptX, less in low latency mode, but quality is reduced).
So sure, YOU may not care about the quality, and prefer your bluetooth - good on you.
Some other people still prefer quality - and this in no LP/CD comparison, there is a VERY measurable degradation with all bluetooth codecs.
Re: (Score:2)
Mostly because even the best widely supported audio codec for bluetooth sound bad?
I'm so astonished at this statement that my $5 ear buds popped right out of my ears!
Phone companies bundled shitty ear buds with phones. Consumers then thought ear buds were acceptable as headphones. Phone companies accidentally conditioned consumers to accept terrible audio quality.
Unrelated, I can't fathom why anyone thinks consumer action is a good replacement for government regulations. Consumers are idiots.
Re: (Score:2)
Mostly because even the best widely supported audio codec for bluetooth sound bad?
To be fair this is changing. Bluetooth has support for transferring AAC audio directly without transcoding however headphone support is still limited. More on point though is that a large portion of headphones need to dedicate earcup space for batteries, wireless receivers and shitty little amplifiers which has an impact on the quality of the audio due to the speaker space design. Also it doesn't help that much of these are incredibly shit (even Bose can't produce a set of headphones that don't hiss when th
Re: (Score:3)
So you're going to plug in a USB DAC, which is generally larger than a cellphone, into the cellphone to get decent audio quality. What courage to drop that headphone jack.
Re: (Score:1)
You mean this tiny thing? [google.com]
Or these tiny noise canceling earbuds [google.com]?
FM (Score:2)
No headphone jack means no cable to use as an FM antenna.
What I'd like is to see someone add DAB+ to a phone - that would be my next purchase... as long as they didn't fuck it up by not having dual-SIM and microSD.
Re: (Score:2)
Moto x4 has headphone jack, FM Radio and is waterproof. Different models have different configurations for dual sim, although the Project Fi Android One version has single sim+Micro SD.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm entirely aware that there already exist many dual-SIM, FM capable phones - I have owned several, and own one now.
However, my post was in answer to the question "...give me one reason why I should prefer the headphone jack to bluetooth."
Re: That's three (Score:1)
My cars use the headphone jack to input to car stereo. I prefer the simplicity of a cable vs another gadget I will have to power to act as an interconnect.
Re: (Score:2)
You need to keep it charged. And the less batteries you need to take care of, the better. In fact it is common for bluetooth headphones to have an analog backup using a headphone jack.
Almost all the best headphones use a jack connector (mini or full size). Just try to find a professional or an audiophile headset that use anything else. If you have a budget over $100 and you want good sound quality, BT will severely limit your options. And note that you can definitely notice the difference in sound quality b
Re: (Score:2)
Then again, last time I checked (years ago, granted) BT was utter crap. (If you like Hi-Fi, and not "boom boom")
Re: (Score:2)
I've read BT as BeaTs ... >_.
Please disregard previous comment.
Re: (Score:2)
That's not a Bluetooth problem, that's a modern headphones problem.
aptX bluetooth (Score:2)
Get a decent Bluetooth like an Anker Bluetooth headset (and not a cheap one) and I challenge you to give me one reason why I should prefer the headphone jack to bluetooth.
It's not about "any" Anker Bluetooth headset (or expensive ones) but you have to have the ones that support the aptX compression. aptX compression ensures that the audio from the game doesn't lag (or feels like it doesn't lag). Those Bluetooth headset without that will have a lagging gaming experience.
With a wired headset/headphone however, you get the same experience with a standard cheap headphone and even better with an expensive one. Bluetooth on the other hand, all those without aptX support will give
Re: (Score:1)
I've got a pair of these
https://www.bragi.com/theheadp... [bragi.com]
They're actually great for watching videos on my tablet at the gym or listening to podcasts because they can block out outside sounds very effectively. However when I VOIP call people some of them complain it's less clear than my $20 7-11 headphones.
The Headphone (dumb name) goes for $119 at NewEgg
https://www.newegg.com/Product... [newegg.com]
Because I'm in Asia I paid a fair bit more than that since they're imported ultra low volumes.
I.e. a fairly high end blueto
Re: (Score:1)
BTW if you want to find out what codec your Android device uses for A2DP enable "Bluetooth HCI snoop log" in "Developer Options". Toggle Bluetooth off and on so it reads the setting.
Connect to the device and stream some audio and then disconnect. Turn off the logging and toggle Bluetooth off and on so it reads the setting. Now you can adb pull btsnoop_hci.log and open it in Wireshark.
And that shows me that, as expected, an S5 talking to a Bragi The Headphone ends up using SBC because that's they best than
Re: (Score:2)
1. Lossy audio compression in bluetooth..
2. Wireless lag.
3. Wireless disruptions in certain situations and areas.
4. Battery life that you have to worry about on an extra device.
Since you wanted one, pick the one that inconveniences you the most.
Re: (Score:2)
Price.
I mean, I'd hope the Razer came with a free USB-C to 3.5mm adapter like other jackless phones do, so they should still work it's just a bit of extra inconvenience.
I thought iPhone was the gaming phone? (Score:3)
Best phone CPU/GPU combo
Apple API for direct access to hardware
The most games in the App Store
Re:I thought iPhone was the gaming phone? (Score:5, Funny)
Another fucking luddite irrationally fixated on UI devices with physical buttons and displays larger than 5 inches across just because of some anachronistic obsession with "accuracy" or "responsiveness" or "being able to see shit".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm a hardcore PC gamer and I still play some games on my phone, and no not really casual ones.
What (Score:1)
MicroSD slot? Decent speakers? If the bootloader is unlockable this is my next phone!
Simply doing what others refused to do. (Score:2)
Every phone using chipsets capable of high/variable refresh rate should have been released with it.
Every phone with room ought to have dual, front-facing speakers. (Although I'd definitely take waterproofing over the ginormous speakers Razer uses.)
Although I doubt Razer will have an enormous hit with this, I really hope it sells like hotcakes. It is absolutely ridiculous that flagship phones in 2017 weren't already leading the way with these features, and it's even more ridiculous that the only reason tha
And here's the video (Score:3)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Not listening! (Score:5, Insightful)
>"While there is a microSD card slot for expandable storage, there is no headphone jack, no waterproofing, and no wireless charging.
Companies still are not listening. It seems many of us want:
1) Larger batteries/ removable batteries
2) Larger storage
3) Wireless charging
4) Headphone jack
5) Stock/plain Android (or as close as possible)
6) Water and drop resistance (reliability/robustness)
7) Works on all carriers and unlocked
It sounds like this company got a few things right (large battery and SD slot) but still focus on more useless resolution and more RAM than probably ever needed. Many people also are looking for SMALLER SCREENS (5") but without sacrificing specs (they want a small phone, not an under-powered/under-featured phone).
Re: (Score:2)
Many people also are looking for SMALLER SCREENS (5") /quote
Yeah, I thought this was most of the point of the Retina hype. And it was for me (once it got to Android). Smaller screen without sacrificing resolution.
Re: (Score:2)
If it doesn't it in a Carhart pen pocket I don't want it.
Re: (Score:2)
Many people also are looking for SMALLER SCREENS (5") but without sacrificing specs (they want a small phone, not an under-powered/under-featured phone).
This.
My first smartphone had a 3.8" screen or so and specs near the top of what was available at the time (I didn't buy the most expensive thing available, but it did cost around $500). It was a great phone and I used it for 5 years (it still works, and I still use it occasionally when I need a secondary phone).
By the time I was shopping for a replacement, everything 4.0" and below was crap, the kind of stuff you can't run more than 2 apps on and which becomes obsolete within a year. So I thought I'd go for
Re: (Score:2)
And NFC !!!
I saw the Moto G5S Plus, really nice phone for the price, 5.5" 1080p, 5GHz wifi, SD card, quick charge, NFC, etc.
Then I realized that the North American version does not have the NFC while elsewhere in the world it has it.
It's like a $2 component? Why remove it? I'm using Android Pay everywhere! For me NFC is as important as audio jack.
Re:Not listening! (Score:4, Insightful)
How many, exactly, is "many of us"? Have you done quantitative market research? Who exactly is the 'us' that you sampled? Did you make an effort to adjust your findings to match the demographic profile of phone purchasers?
I mean, I'm not arguing that anything on your list is good or bad, but your 'us' seems like it might just be the like-minded technologically-knowledgable people that you surround yourself with and not any kind of 'us' that represents the broader purchasing market. Companies spend huge sums developing products, and they get severely punished if consumers don't want them. As an epistemological statement, I would bet they are right more often than you are on (even if not always).
More broadly, computing is no longer the domain of the knowledgable. Democratizing tech has made its benefits more widely available but it also means that the opinions and attitudes of the masses rarely more weight. We can deny the facts, we can sulk over it, or we can accept that tech is no longer the domain of techies even though we were 'here first'.
Re: (Score:2)
Companies spend huge sums developing products, and they get severely punished if consumers don't want them. As an epistemological statement, I would bet they are right more often than you are on (even if not always).
You're making the assumption that companies only respond to market demands, which we know is not true (if it were, nothing truly new would come on to the market - how many focus groups would tell you in 1995 that everyone wants touchscreen smartphones?).
Companies actively shape market demand (or at least exert a lot of effort attempting to do so), sometimes they succeed, sometimes they fail. Ergo a lot of what goes out there as product is a result not of market research are people's current tastes, but of s
Re: (Score:2)
You are confusing "what people say they want" with "market demand".
It's really easy to figure out the former -- you look at what's available and how well it's selling and there you go. Market research focuses on answering, "would people want this if we put it on the market", in advance.
Companies focus exclusively on market demand -- what people would buy if it were offered to them.
Re: (Score:2)
Moto Z play. You have to use mods and the waterproofing is a coating but it is also cheap.
With that refresh rate... (Score:2)
It sounds targeted at VR.
The Razer Razr? (Score:3)
I expect a trademark lawsuit from Motorola on this one. The name is not so different than Razr and they could easily argue that a phone under the name "Razer" will create confusion about Motorola's involvement or lack thereof.
Re: (Score:2)
I expect a trademark lawsuit from Motorola on this one. The name is not so different than Razr and they could easily argue that a phone under the name "Razer" will create confusion about Motorola's involvement or lack thereof.
Actually the model is called just "Phone". Razer is the name of the company and has existing trademarks in consumer electronics. It would be hard to justify a company not allowing to use their own company name on a product just because a specific model of product from another company sounds the same.
Re: (Score:2)
And Apple called their music store iTunes. It would be hard to justify a company not allowing to use their own company name....blah, blah, blah. Except they had to settle with Apple Records in the end - after fighting with them to get a trademark to use on computers in the first place.
Re: (Score:2)
Except that one was company name vs company name.
Re: (Score:2)
That was also just quick example. It holds whether it's a company name or not.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, and Apple Computer made a computer with a music store - and got sued by Apple Corps. Trademarks are granted under very specific markets, and are not protected universally.
Re: (Score:2)
in order to get the apple computer tm in the first place
And this is why they couldn't easily get the trademark in the first place. Actually, they should have been able to anyway (for computers) - it's just that Apple Corps was extremely litigious. Fruitopia shampoo is not made by Coca-Cola. Home Depot uses Nicorette's slogan of "You can do it. We can help." Trademarks are not universal. Otherwise, Microsoft would never be able to trademark a name like "Windows."
Re: (Score:2)
you're not wrong, but more than that, Windows isn't an acceptable trademark even within the field of window-based operating systems. that's why Microsoft settled its cases against people violating the mark; they knew they stood a good chance of having the trademark invalidated if it went to court.
Yeah no. (Score:2)
No removeable battery? No SD slot? No thanks.
Re: (Score:2)
No SD slot when they want you loading "games" onto it? Wat.
Re: (Score:3)
You may try to read the headlines again. (Maybe they have changed since you wrote this).
Or the linked article (since the headlines can be wrong).
My favorite part of the internet... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Skimming while scrolling is useful. You get a lot of judder on phones when trying to scroll, mostly due to the latency of the refresh rate of the panel itself rather than the input frequency. But I can accept that it's useful - 60Hz is not some magic number for UI.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
alarm clock
car stereo
landline telephone
Etc.
But really, it's not an "audio device." Yes, this one has some emphasis on multimedia, but its entire purpose is not to be an audio device - which is true of most phones. I don't want a monolithic device that's supposed to do literally everything - but I'm also not a cell phone gamer, so I'm not part of this target market.
Bluetooth audio lag (Score:3)
I'm waiting for there to be the inevitable latency issues with the BT audio which makes using it in a game setting impossible. Not that there are any games on mobile worthy of 120hz play. Its all funbux cashgrabs and gacha games.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm waiting for there to be the inevitable latency issues with the BT audio which makes using it in a game setting impossible. Not that there are any games on mobile worthy of 120hz play. Its all funbux cashgrabs and gacha games.
It's already like that. Playing SNES emulator with car bluetooth, its super creepy cuz the sounds are off just that little bit to mess with you.
"Gaming Phone" (Score:2)
AHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
ALMOST as irrelevant as Blackberry!
No jack, no sale (Score:3, Insightful)
And you know, I never use my jack, but damnit, I want it there for when I DO NEED it. No jack no sale. kthxbye.
sounds spectacular want one .... NOT (Score:1)
no head phone jack. no deal plain and simple
They missed a chance to innovate here... (Score:2)
nnn (Score:1)
120 Hz on Android? (Score:2)
My Android phone struggles to keep 30 Hz refresh, not just in games, but also in Google Chrome and other apps. iOS has real time scheduling and native code, while Android is still messing around with translation and the JVM. The result is that iOS is smooth, while Android invariable stutters.
Smacks head (Score:1)
The reason for rounded corners is so it is comfortable in your pocket. IDIOTS
No headphone jack = free advertising (Score:2)
I Guess Razer is Courageous, Too... (Score:2)
so Razer is following the trend, and ditching the old-skool 3.5 mm headphone jack.
Color me unsurprised.
Re: (Score:2)
wireless charge is ...meh.
I've got a phone with it, i'd rather plug it in.
It charges faster plugged in, it charges cooler plugged in, and it takes less electricity to charge it plugged in.
wireless charging is pretty much a step backwards in every possible way... except a slight convenience.
Re: (Score:2)
Except on phones with badly designed micro USB ports - then it's the only way the charger stays connected.
Re: (Score:1)
So make better ports?
Re: (Score:2)
I can't. I don't have my own fabrication facility.
Re: (Score:2)
wireless charge is ...meh.
I've got a phone with it, i'd rather plug it in.
It charges faster plugged in, it charges cooler plugged in, and it takes less electricity to charge it plugged in.
wireless charging is pretty much a step backwards in every possible way... except a slight convenience.
The average annual cost of charging a smartphone [bgr.com] is estimated at $0.25; about 1/16 of what it costs to run an LED lightbulb 10 hours/day for a year. If wireless charging is only half as efficient (my personal experience says it's not that bad, but it's not worth arguing), the cost goes up to a whopping half a buck. What will you do with all the money you save?
The convenience factor is, I suppose, in the eye of the beholder. Personally, I'm much more likely to keep my phone's battery at or near fully charged
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks that's actually pretty informative, putting the cost into real pespective instead of just relative efficiency.
I will say that I still don't like that my phone is always quite warm to the touch when its on its wireless charger. I instinctively beleive that's not "good for it".
And that stuff like those addon USB battery packs and solar chargers and crank chargers don't work as well because there the loss of efficiency really matters. But I concede that's more of a niche.
Re: (Score:2)
I will say that I still don't like that my phone is always quite warm to the touch when its on its wireless charger. I instinctively beleive that's not "good for it".
I've seen lots of comments similar to this, so I guess it must be true. My personal experience, for what it's worth, is that my phone gets no warmer when charging wirelessly than it does when plugged into the charger. If wireless is less efficient, then the charging current to the battery should be lower than it is when the phone is plugged in. So where is the heat coming from? Is the wireless charger getting hot and transferring heat to the phone? Again, not my personal experience. You want to get your pho
Re: (Score:2)
I feel the opposite way. I love my wireless charging. Set the phone down, it charges. Pick it up to use it, it stops. No fiddling with plugs or wires. Once every few months I need to fast charge my phone, so I plug it in. 15 minutes and I've got 3-4 hrs of battery ready to go. But other than that, plugging it in is a hassle. And the micro USB port was what went on my last two phones, so I'm hoping that the wireless gets me another couple of years out of this phone.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
" Once every few months I need to fast charge my phone, so I plug it in. 15 minutes and I've got 3-4 hrs of battery ready to go."
That pretty much nails the issue. I'm not excited by wireless charging, but i have no objection to it either. ... I wrote "meh" precisely because I'm not committed either way.
I guess I do like the CHOICE though.
I figure it won't be long before courageous it is to remove the charging port and remove that choice too.
And then the people using solar chargers while camping will be piss
Re: (Score:2)
I completely agree.
Re: (Score:3)
This and also a full waterproof, wireless charge and no headphone jack could ensure a complete sealed device. If it had none of that, then what is the point of no headphone jack and non-removable battery? Seriously, it is a fail.
Re: (Score:2)
If it really is a gaming phone it will support OpenGL in addition to OpenGL ES so that the NVidia Shield ports can work on it. Somehow I doubt it does that.
And honestly, it's not yet clear what, beyond the Razer brand, makes this a gaming phone. When we ask, Moss downplays that idea a bit. "It shouldn't just be a gaming phone, it should be a phone for gamers," he tells us. - TFA