LightBlog

mardi 20 décembre 2016

Ulefone Metal XDA Review: An Often-Hilarious Trainwreck of a Phone, But a Step Forward For Ulefone’s Developer Relations

The Ulefone Metal is an entry level smartphone with a premium finish, that just can't quite stick the landing. It comes incredibly close to being a phone with good price-performance (especially thanks to Ulefone releasing the kernel sources and trying to support developers), but some issues with polish and a couple "What were they thinking?"-style design decisions create a questionable user experience (for now).

In this review, we'll take an in-depth dive into the Ulefone Metal. Rather than listing specs and talking about how the experience felt, this feature attempts to provide a thorough look with contents relevant to our reader base. At XDA, our reviews are not meant to tell a user whether a phone is worth buying or not — instead, we try to lend you the phone through our words and help you come to the decision by yourself. Before getting started, let's get the specification sheet out of the way:

Device Name: Ulefone Metal Release Date/Price Available Now, Starts at US$ 109 (MSRP US$ 169)
Android Version 6.0
2016-05-01
Display 5.0 inch 720p LCD (294 ppi)
5 point multi-touch
Chipset MediaTek MTK MT6753 | Octa Core (8×1.3GHz Cortex-A53) | Mali -T720 MP3 GPU Battery 3050 mAh, Charging at 5V 2A
RAM 3GB LPDDR3 666 MHz Sensors Fingerprint, Accelerometer, Gyroscope, Proximity, Compass, Ambient Light
Storage 16 GB, microSD expandability up to 128 GB Connectivity MicroUSB OTG, Dual-SIM slot (nanoSIM and microSIM/microSD), 3.5mm audio jack
Dimensions 143 x 71 x 9.35 mm (67.84% screen-to-body) Rear Camera 8 MP (IMX149), ƒ/2.0, 1080p @ 30 Hz
Weight 155g Front Camera 2 MP

Index

 DesignSoftware – UISoftware – UXPerformanceReal World UXCameraDisplayBattery LifeAudioDeveloper RelationsFinal Thoughts

Design

The feel in-hand reminds me of my old HTC Legend. It's got that same "heavier than it looks" feel to it and relatively-sturdy looking construction. Its body doesn't feel "premium" like an HTC 10, but it feels nice in the hand in it's own right. The solid metal construction and chamfered edges come together nicely. The only problem with the frame itself is that it is not properly supported at the MicroUSB port, allowing you to easily bend the thinner metal between the MicroUSB port and the display into the device with just a small amount of pressure.

Ulefone Metal Feature Image

The feeling in-hand doesn't extend beyond the frame however. The buttons aren't loose, but they feel squishy and are quite silent. There's no satisfying tactile feedback, there's no click, it just sort of moves out of the way. The SIM tray is a similar story. Yes, it works, but it doesn't quite click into place the right way, and it can be a tad bit hard to open at times. It often catches on the way in, and you're left unsure as to whether to push harder (for fear of breaking it), or to take it out and try again. The MicroUSB port is again the same story, and you feel like you're almost going to break it.

Ulefone Metal Rear Image

Speaking of buttons, the capacitive buttons show some… interesting… choices as well. Not only is the back button on the right (which to be fair, despite what Google recommends, is preferred by some), but the multi-tasking button is instead bound as a menu button, and a long press of home is how you access multi-tasking. I couldn't find a way to rebind them either. Oh, and they're a mix of Holo and Holographic style buttons too (except with a blockier back button, and a chimney on the home button).

Ulefone Metal Buttons Short

Interestingly enough, the buttons in the manual don't match the buttons on the device. In the manual they instead show the home, menu, and back buttons that appeared on the Samsung Galaxy S II, and don't list how to access the recent apps list.

The Ulefone Metal also shipped with some complimentary accessories, which is nice. Unfortunately the accessories themselves are not so nice.

Ulefone Metal Flip CoverThe case is advertized as being leather, but doesn't feel like it… that's fine though, leather isn't needed for this. It's a windowless flip cover which fits the phone pretty well, and it wakes the phone when you open it. Unfortunately it doesn't shut the phone off when you close it. Instead, it puts the phone into a media control mode (which you can't use through the cover, although it appears that the cover for Ulefone Future can use it) and waits for the screen to timeout before shutting down (which could be a while depending on your settings).

The device also shipped with a tempered glass screen protector, which is a great addition, as it can be hard to find good screen protectors for some smaller brands. Oddly enough, my device came with two screen protectors pre-applied, the usual shipping one with information about the phone on it, and a second one beneath that which felt like a standard plastic screen protector. I'm not sure if it was meant to be a permanent addition, however it definitely wasn't applied properly, so I was thankful for being able to switch it out.

The tempered glass screen protector is supposedly curved to fit the 2.5D edge of the screen (although, upon inspection, the edges look rather flat), and supposedly blocks blue light to "protect your eyes" (completely missing the point behind blue light filters). Rather than mentioning the effects of blue light on our circadian rhythm and sleep cycle, Ulefone's advertising claims that blue light is "a kind of high-energy light that can increase the toxin in macular region of human eye balls" and that "such a protective glass is indispensable to mobile phones." (nevermind that if that was actually an issue, they could just tune the display to reduce the amount of blue light generated, either through hardware or software).

Ignoring the toxins bit (what "toxins" exactly?), it's a bit concerning that Ulefone either seems to think that non-ionizing radiation (more specifically, visible light) is dangerous at the levels created by a phone, or they are playing to that crowd in an attempt to sell more devices. Worse still, their marketing implies that they actually went and made their product worse (by including a screen protector that is designed to reduce colour accuracy instead of a normal one) in their half-hearted attempts to attract that crowd. Thankfully, despite what their marketing claims, the screen protector appears to be just a normal screen protector anyway, and won't damage colour accuracy.

Software – UI

The UI is nice and clean with an approach that stays relatively close to stock Android. The quick settings menu is almost unchanged, with the only major differences being a change in logo for the cellular data symbol and the addition of a toggle which launches a pop-up for audio profiles (separate from the do not disturb toggle).

Ulefone Metal Lockscreen Ulefone Metal Homescreen Ulefone Metal Quick Settings Menu Ulefone Metal Recents Menu

The settings menu saw a more drastic change however. In place of Android's settings list (with toggles), there is a four-by-eight array of icons which are sorted into categories ("Wireless & networks", "Device", "Personal", and "System"). These icons are bright colours that feel a bit out of place next to the the rest of the UI, especially when compared to the relatively muted camera and settings icons that Ulefone used. The bright colours don't carry further into the settings menu however, as once you pick an icon, the page it links to is usually largely the same as it is on stock Android, with the notable exception of the prominently placed "Turbo download" menu, which allows you to use Multipath TCP to simultaneously download over WiFi and cellular connection.

Ulefone Metal Settings Menu 1 of 2 Ulefone Metal Settings Menu 2 of 2 Ulefone Metal Multipath TCP Turbo Download Ulefone Metal Permission Management

Ulefone also has a persistent notification giving you a quick link to the app permission management page. The only way to get rid of it is to disable permission management (which Ulefone makes nice and easy to do for some reason), and even then it comes back every once in awhile (like when you reboot).

The default launcher comes with two pages dedicated specifically to music and photos, with a giant record player on one (with no visible playback controls), and a small photo gallery on the other (which only lets you see up to two photos at a time, and both are rather shrunken at that with a substantial amount of wasted space). Thankfully both pages can be removed in the settings menu.

Ulefone Metal Picture Page Ulefone Metal Music Page Ulefone Metal Camera Ulefone Metal Camera Menu

The camera UI is relatively basic, but really doesn't fit in with Material Design. The menus and shutter button in the camera have a distinctive Gingerbread feel to them, with certain parts taking on a bit more of a transparent Holo-esque design.

The sound recorder similarly feels out of place. The flat title bar simply doesn't fit with the gradient on the timer, or with the slightly skeuomorphic VU meter for that matter. The UI just feels like a mishmash of different styles. It doesn't have an identity.

While it was clear from day one that the Metal wasn't licensed by Google (as it was missing almost every required pre-installed app, except the Play Store, Search, and Gmail), Ulefone solidified that position in the first software update I received from them, where they lifted the icons from multiple Google apps for use in their ROM, including the logos from Google Play Music, Google Photos, and Google Messenger (the latter of which they modified by turning some of the lines from white to transparent, removing the depth that the icon normally has). That may fly under the radar while Ulefone is a small company, but doing things like that now leaves them open to copyright lawsuits later on if they grow. Yes, the logos fit well with the majority of the UI (and certainly fit better than the old Gingerbread-style stock Gallery app that Google has abandoned), but there are other options that also would fit, and without being copyright infringement at that.

It's especially bad if you do something as outrageous as installing Google Photos (because who would want to use Google Photos instead of the default gallery, right⸮), leaving you with two different apps with the same name and logo beside each other, but with substantially different features (unless you decide to disable one).

"The UI just feels like a mishmash of different styles. It doesn't have an identity."

That being said, the logos that they designed themselves are actually not half bad (I'm assuming that they were designed in house). The camera icon follows Material design fairly well, and fits with the rest of the UI. It really is a shame that Ulefone felt that copyright infringement was a better path than continuing to create their own logos.

Ulefone Metal Sound Recorder Ulefone Metal Preinstalled Apps Ulefone Metal FM Radio Ulefone Metal Music Player

Software – Features & UX

Ulefone Metal Floating IconThere is a floating shortcut button, reminiscent of Facebook's Chat Heads and Paranoid Android's Halo, that gives you quick access to some useful features, like a clipping tool for screenshots, or a floating calculator, or quick access to settings. I'll be the first to say that I can be extremely picky about how this type of UI element is implemented (I absolutely adored Halo, but Chat Heads never really caught my attention), and something about this method just doesn't sit right with me. It might have been the inability to hide it (even when watching video), or how slow the animation to bring it up is, I'm not quite sure, but whatever it was, I promptly started looking for a way to disable it, and I couldn't find an option. I understand the appeal of a floating quick actions tile, but I never really found any benefit in this one, and it only ended up getting in the way for me.

I normally take a few tries to get my phones to learn my fingerprint, and the Ulefone Metal is no exception there. What was an exception was that the Ulefone Metal has the ability to bind the fingerprint sensor to open different apps for different fingers. This can be a very useful feature, but in this case it brought a major issue. Ulefone didn't properly set up the bounding boxes in the fingerprint menu, making it extremely difficult to access the menu for renaming and deleting a finger. The settings gear to access it is very small and hard to hit with my big clumsy hands, with most of my attempts to access it resulting in me opening the menu for choosing which app to activate with that finger instead. It got to the point where I just gave up, and left the phone without a working fingerprint sensor, which is really a shame. Thankfully, it is an issue that could be relatively easily fixed with a software update. HTC, Sony, Xiaomi, ZTE, etc. all have a way of handling this without issue. You just make the bounding box be a square from the top of the row to the bottom of the row (and the same width), instead of just barely covering the target object itself. You can even place a small visible separator to help people identify where the button ends and the rest of the row begins. It's a tiny little thing, but it can make a world of a difference.

Ulefone Metal Fingerprint App Ulefone Metal Fingerprint Bounding Box HTC 10 Layout Bounds Bounding Box Sony Xperia Z3 Layout Bounds Bounding Box

While the device does let you hot swap SIM cards, it can be a bit slow to recognize the change, resulting in a bit of a wait after you put a SIM card in before you can use it, or a bit of a wait after you take the SIM card out before the data connection stops.

The Ulefone Metal also has a weird design choice in that any time you come within range of an open Wi-Fi network, it notifies you. If your phone is set to vibrate, it vibrates. If your phone is set to ring, it rings. As with most features that Ulefone added, there doesn't seem to be a way to turn this one off. The only way I found to disable this "feature" is to disable the Wi-Fi network notification completely, which results in you losing some functionality in order to disable Ulefone's "addition", just like with the permission management notification.

Performance

While phone SoCs have come a long way, there is still a substantial performance gap between a flagship SoC like the Snapdragon 820 or Exynos 8890, and an entry level chip like the MediaTek MT6753. The eight A53 cores running at 1.3 GHz are distinctively low-end, and the three cluster Mali-T720 GPU isn't a powerhouse either. The experience is designed with the intent of competing with Qualcomm Snapdragon 4xx and 61x series chips, and it shows. While the MediaTek MT6753 won't win any performance titles, the A53-based design should have fantastic energy efficiency, at least in theory.

CPU & System

While the A53 isn't very powerful, it does take up a tiny amount of die space and is incredibly efficient, allowing MediaTek to shove eight of them into the entry level MT6753 chipset. As a result, the Ulefone Metal suffers heavily in single core tests, but the eight A53 cores allow it to perform reasonably in multi core tests.

This shows up very clearly in Geekbench, where the phone is barely able to hit 600 in single core testing, but multi-core testing from idle sees it hitting a respectable score of 2468, about half of what the flagship chips are putting up currently.

The Ulefone Metal has a weak showing in PCMark however, with competing devices like the Honor 5XNextbit Robin (both of which we reviewed earlier), and the ZTE ZMax Pro handily beating it in every category except for the Web subscore, where the Ulefone Metal pulled even.

Ulefone Metal Geekbench 4 Ulefone Metal PCMark 2 Score Comparison

AnTuTu tells the same tale of woe, with the similarly-priced ZTE ZMax Pro leading in every category (and doubling the score for 3D). Some of the subscores for AnTuTu stay relatively close though, with the Ulefone Metal not trailing by too much in the RAM subcategory.

After seeing the results of the other benchmarks, Basemark held no major surprises either. While the Ulefone Metal pulled even with the ZTE ZMax Pro in the System subscore, it fell behind in every other subscore, with only half the graphics score of the ZTE.

Ulefone Metal AnTuTu Ulefone Metal Basemark OS II

In our sustained load test, the Ulefone Metal gets incredibly hot, with my Seek Compact Pro reading the surface as hitting a scorching 52°C | 125.6°F, and still climbing by the end of our test. Surprisingly, single core performance did not drop despite those high temperatures, but multicore saw a ~10% drop in Geekbench score from the first run to the last. This test barely fazes most devices that we review, and this result shows substantially higher temperatures than even the Snapdragon 810 devices that were known for throttling as a result of overheating. It should be noted that while the Ulefone Metal hits 38°C | 100.4°F after just one run (more than most phones' peak temperatures in this test), the device started at just 26 degrees in our pre-test measurements.

This phone doesn't throttle much, but it really should. There is no excuse for a phone getting so hot that you can barely hold it. Even temperatures in the high 30s, which the Ulefone Metal hits after just a couple minutes of use, can a be a bit uncomfortable. Something in the 50s is outright hot to the touch.

Ulefone Metal Geekbench Throttling Performance Over Time Ulefone Metal Geekbench 52 Degrees

GPU & Gaming

The phone's GPU is incredibly weak: a three-cluster Mali-T720 simply doesn't keep up with any Qualcomm chip currently on the market, and it really shows. The Ulefone Metal's low resolution helps to mitigate the issues that the weak GPU brings, but even that can only do so much.

3DMark Slingshot is barely even a slideshow (with certain sections being listed as having a frame rate of "0"), Manhattan has single digit frame rates, and even the age old T-Rex brings the Ulefone Metal to its knees.

Ulefone Metal 3DMark SlingShot Extreme Ulefone Metal GFXBench 4 Manhattan T-Rex

Thankfully, despite getting quite hot in our sustained graphics test, frame rates didn't drop further with continued usage. Although it was already pretty close to 0 anyway. In our 3DMark throttling test, the Ulefone Metal hits 43 degrees after just its first run, which also happens to be the temperature that the Google Pixel XL peaked at in this test, and it continues to climb as the test goes on. Towards the end of the test, performance drops a little bit, but you really should expect more throttling from a device that is getting this hot (and continuing to get hotter as the test ended).

GFXBench's battery life test is a similar story, with performance staying mostly around the same level, while temperatures continued to climb. The results were surprisingly consistent as the test went on, with the results all staying in a range of 395.1 frames per run, +/- 1.1 frames. That's a mere 0.3% variance up or down, resulting in substantial range compression (and a spiky looking graph). For comparison, the Pixel XL sees a drop of around 10% from its first run to its lowest score.

Ulefone Metal 3DMark Score Over Time Ulefone Metal GFXBench Battery Test

With how tiny the performance drops are for the Ulefone Metal and how extremely high the temperatures get (in both our CPU and GPU throttling tests, as well as in endurance tests like PCMark's and GFXBench's battery life tests), it almost looks as if the Ulefone Metal simply doesn't have any substantial thermal management code (performing at the highest level it can, regardless as to how hot it gets), which would be scary if true.

Memory & Storage

Having 3GB of RAM is absolutely fantastic for an entry-level phone, and should be more than enough to ensure that you won't run out of RAM in all but the most RAM intensive situations. This is helped further by the fairly lean OS that the phone runs by default. With nothing open, the Ulefone Metal was reporting just 850MB used, and over 2 GB available.

Ulefone Metal Sequential Random
Read Speed 154.10 MB/s 11.87 MB/s
Write Speed 37.66 MB/s 4.63 MB/s

The storage is about on par with what would be expected for the price (test on Androbench, default settings). While 16GB with an SD card is enough to get by on (although I tend to prefer 32GB and higher), and while the performance is definitely on the slower side, it is acceptable for the price.

Real World Performance

The OS generally performs fairly smoothly, but there are a couple weird hangs in certain places. When you go to unlock the device, after swiping up it will freeze for a half second before bringing up the page to enter your pattern/pin/password.

Some of the bugs are just strange. In the default launcher, when you long press an app icon to move it, usually it will stay on the page it is currently on, but occasionally it will jump to the primary home screen (even if that screen is full).

Setting up the cellular data connection for the first time is a bit of a pain. The phone defaults to data being turned off (which is a good idea to some extent), but after inserting a SIM card it asks you if you wish to enable data for that SIM card. If you hit yes it turns on data for the SIM card in Settings->SIM cards, but it leaves the one in Settings->Data usage->Carrier Name set to off, and you have to manually go in and change it.

The scroll friction on the Ulefone Metal seems to have been set very high. In the settings menu, anything other than a heavy swipe will only travel a short distance.

"Some of the bugs are just strange."

For example, a swipe that would get me all the way from the top of the HTC 10's settings menu to the bottom, will only move the Ulefone Metal's settings menu a couple lines.

Signal strength appears to be fairly weak. The phone supports Band 7 LTE (for which there are multiple towers near my house), but I had to walk almost right next to the tower before I could get connection. WCDMA is a bit stronger, but according to the spec sheet I shouldn't have WCDMA connection in the first place. The phone officially only supports WCDMA bands 1 and 8, but in Canada, networks only use bands 2, 4, and 5. After some exploring with MediaTek's Engineer Mode, we discovered that the phone supports WCDMA band 5, despite claiming that it doesn't, and was using that to connect to the network.

We reached out to Ulefone to inquire about this issue, and after a bit of investigation on their part, they said that the Ulefone Metal "does support UMTS Band 5, but the software hasn't been optimized well, so we don't announce it officially." This was a bit worrying to us for a couple reasons. If the WCDMA band 5 support is truly too poorly optimized to even be announced, then it likely should have been disabled through software until a point in time at which it is ready for use (as, if the claim is true, leaving it enabled could potentially cause a host of other issues).

More importantly though, it caused some worry for us that the Ulefone Metal was potentially not licensed to use WCDMA band 5. So, since the Ulefone Metal's packaging marks it as being tested by both the FCC and CE, we decided to take a look at the FCC filing information to confirm that it had been tested and approved for use of WCDMA band 5. Unfortunately, we could not find any, so we reached out to Ulefone again to see if they could direct us to the filing information (which they are required to keep on hand for CE). As it turned out, Ulefone did not get FCC certification for the Ulefone Metal, and the FCC logo was printed in error. Thankfully Ulefone was able to provide us with the CE technical file, which unfortunately does not list it as being certified for use on WCDMA band 5. Upon learning that the Ulefone Metal is likely unlicensed to use WCDMA band 5, I switched the phone into airplane mode, and have not re-enabled the cellular radio since.

Camera

The camera hardware is interesting in some ways. The Sony Exmor R IMX149 sensor is mentioned almost nowhere online (with just 30,000 Google results), except in reference to a couple of small brands, with it not even appearing among Sony's product listings. We reached out to a couple of these smaller companies, and from what we gather, it appears that the IMX149 was a custom sensor developed for a "larger OEM" which was used in a prior device, and the remaining stock is now being cleared out as it is no longer needed for that device. We reached out to Sony as well to try to learn more about the IMX149, but they were not available for comment about the sensor's history (for obvious reasons).

The Sony Exmor R IMX149 is a 6.18 mm x 5.85 mm BSI CMOS sensor with a 5.7 mm (1/3.2 Type) diagonal and 1.4 μm pixels with a total resolution of 3288 x 2512, allowing for an effective resolution of 3280 x 2464. This is about the same size and resolution as the IMX145 that appeared in a couple of the phones in Apple's iPhone line, and the popular IMX179 that is used as the front facing camera for the Google PixelPixel XL, and Nexus 6P, and the rear facing camera for the Nexus 5. That being said, there is a lot more to sensor quality than just the size and resolution.

Unfortunately, the fast pace at which cameras have been improving combined with some software oddities and what looks like a very poor lens, means that the camera simply doesn't stack up.

First up is Ulefone's decision to allow the cameras to capture at 13 MP and 5 MP instead of their native 8 MP and 2 MP. While there is some interesting discussion to be had about alternate ways of interpreting image data from Bayer filter sensors, the differences between pixels and sensels, and super-resolution photography, Ulefone does not appear to have leveraged any of them. In the images below are resized crops of 13 MP and 8 MP photos taken consecutively, and most of them either appear to be either so similar as to be virtually indistinguishable, or are even slightly in favour of the 8 MP version. This would indicate that they may just be running an upscaling filter after capturing the images at the camera's native resolution.

8 MP Cropped Image 1 13 MP Cropped Image 1 8 MP Cropped Image 2 13 MP Cropped Image 2

Seeing these results, we reached out to Ulefone again, and they confirmed that there was no secret sauce here. It's just a "standard scaling algorithm".

Interesting hardware choices and questionable scaling decisions aside, there still remains the question of whether the Ulefone Metal has a good camera, and the answer is no.

Ulefone Metal HTC 10 ZTE ZMax Pro Sony Xperia Z3 Moto E LG G2 Ulefone Metal HDR HTC 10 HDR ZTE ZMax Pro HDR Sony Xperia Z3 HDR Moto E HDR LG G2 HDR

In our first daylight scene, the Ulefone Metal's camera weaknesses shine through quite heavily. In the non-HDR images, it somehow manages to almost completely blow out the sky, while simultaneously underexposing the rest of the image. The HDR images for the Ulefone are a bit better, reducing the amount of clipping and brightening up some of the dark areas, but it also crushed the blacks a bit (for reasons unknown). The Ulefone Metal performs so poorly in this sample, that even the HDR image is arguably outperformed by the non-HDR images taken from my $10 Moto E.

Ulefone Metal Histogram Ulefone Metal HDR Histogram

For reference, here is what the histogram for the same picture taken with an HTC 10 looks like. The very leftmost and rightmost bars in each image represent the amount of clipping.

HTC 10 Histogram HTC 10 HDR Histogram

Unfortunately this trend was not limited to the first picture set. The Ulefone Metal underperformed in every test of the rear facing camera that we tried, including numerous sets beyond what we included in this article.

Picture 5 Ulefone Metal Picture 5 HTC 10 Picture 5 ZTE ZMax Pro Picture 5 Sony Xperia Z3 Picture 5 Moto E Picture 5 LG G2 Picture 5 Ulefone Metal HDR Picture 5 HTC 10 HDR Picture 5 ZTE ZMax Pro HDR Picture 5 Sony Xperia Z3 HDR Picture 5 Moto E HDR Picture 5 LG G2 HDR Picture 6 Ulefone Metal Picture 6 HTC 10 Picture 6 ZTE ZMax Pro Picture 6 Sony Xperia Z3 Picture 6 Moto E Picture 6 LG G2 Picture 6 Ulefone Metal HDR Picture 6 HTC 10 HDR Picture 6 ZTE ZMax Pro HDR Picture 6 Sony Xperia Z3 HDR Picture 6 Moto E HDR Picture 6 LG G2 HDR Picture 14 Ulefone Metal Picture 14 HTC 10 Picture 14 ZTE ZMax Pro Picture 14 Sony Xperia Z3 Picture 14 Moto E Picture 14 LG G2 Picture 14 Ulefone Metal HDR Picture 14 HTC 10 HDR Picture 14 ZTE ZMax Pro HDR Picture 14 Sony Xperia Z3 HDR Picture 14 Moto E HDR Picture 14 LG G2 HDR

The worst part of the camera appears to be the lens, and that really shines through in pictures that require substantial dynamic range to be captured properly. The night shots with streetlights in them came out as such a blurry mess that I started to doubt whether I had actually cleaned the lens properly. So, I gave the lens an extra thorough wipedown and went out to test it a second time, and got the same results. It's a wonder how a lens this bad made it through QA.

Picture 2 Ulefone Metal Picture 2 HTC 10 Picture 2 ZTE ZMax Pro Picture 2 Sony Xperia Z3 Picture 2 Moto E 2015 Picture 2 LG G2

The images from the Moto E are particularly telling in this instance. The Moto E performs terribly, and that is to be expected with its 5 MP 1/5″ sensor, however the higher quality lenses on the Moto E results in it seeing substantially less blurring of the street light. It really leaves us wondering how the Ulefone Metal could have performed with better glass.

Picture 2 HDR Ulefone Metal Picture 2 HDR HTC 10 Picture 2 HDR ZTE ZMax Pro Picture 2 HDR Sony Xperia Z3 Picture 2 HDR LG G2

The HDR images are a bit more interesting in some ways. The Ulefone Metal definitely sees some improvements in foreground brightness, but the red tint only gets worse, and the limitations of the poor quality glass show through just as strongly. While the Sony Xperia Z3 and the ZTE ZMax Pro pick up substantially more background details in the HDR images, the background continues to be a giant black blur for the Ulefone Metal.

Last, and certainly least for photography on the Ulefone Metal, is the flash. The flash is extremely weak, to the point where I almost cannot imagine a situation in which it would be useful. In the flash test below, I took pictures of a tiny hill in relative darkness with a couple different phones. In this test, most of the phones lit up most of the hill, with the HTC 10 even lighting up the whole thing (including the small trees on top).

The Ulefone Metal's flash failed to do that. In fact, it barely was able to light up my own feet when I pointed it directly downward. It was so bad that the HTC 10 without flash performed about as well as the Metal with flash.

Flash Test Ulefone Metal Flash Test HTC 10 Without Flash Flash Test HTC 10 With Flash Flash Test LG G2 Flash Test Sony Xperia Z3 Flash Test ZTE ZMax Pro Flash Test Ulefone Metal Ground in Front of My Feet

Now, admittedly, I rarely use flash when taking photos, instead trying to find better lighting and finding ways to use longer exposures whenever possible, but sometimes you simply cannot avoid it. For the times where you simply can't avoid using flash, the Ulefone Metal's flash is weak enough that you might as well not have one.

With the actual photos are out of the way, let's touch on the features. Ulefone advertises a manual photo mode for the Metal that actually looks pretty nice, but I couldn't find anything that even resembled it. The closest I found was a manual ISO setting hidden away in a menu.

Ulefone Metal Manual Camera Advertising Ulefone Metal Manual Camera Reality

Video defaults to an H.264 video and AAC audio in a .3gp container at 640×480 @ 30 Hz for some reason. It can be switched to 1920×1080 @ 30 Hz, but the setting doesn't tell you that it is changing the resolution. It just lists four "Video Quality" settings to choose from, "Low", "Medium", "High", and "Fine". Recording from the lockscreen always defaults to the "Medium" setting of 640 x 480 @ 30 Hz, even if you have it set otherwise in the phone itself. That means every time you want to record video without unlocking the phone, you have decide between either manually resetting the resolution, killing the entire speed advantage of not unlocking, or making do with 640×480 video.

The camera has a slow motion video mode, which are all the rage right now. But instead of increasing the frame rate and then playing it back at a reduced speed (so you still get ~30 frames per second of video), it drops the frame rate from 30 Hz to 20 Hz, so that if you play it back at one quarter speed, you get just 5 frames per second, and it is quite noticeable. It also limits the resolution to 640 x 480 and disables EIS and Noise Reduction, but at that point, I don't think anyone cares anymore. You're much better off just filming at normal speed and manually slowing it down yourself.

The camera is one of the worst smartphone cameras I have used to date, and I have a feeling the image sensor is not to blame. Poor quality glass, an unintuitive UI, and questionable software decisions come together to make for a very poor photography experience.

The front facing camera is atrocious. The non-HDR images taken with the Ulefone Metal have so much clipping that it looks like I applied a filter, and the HDR images aren't much better. Looking at the histograms from this scene is a bit ridiculous to be honest.

Picture 8 Ulefone Metal HDR Picture 8 Ulefone Metal Picture 8 HTC 10 Picture 8 ZTE ZMax Pro Picture 8 Sony Xperia Z3 Picture 8 Moto E Picture 8 LG G2 Ulefone Metal Front Facing Camera Histogram HTC 10 Front Facing Camera Histogram

Display

A 720p 5" LCD display is certainly nothing to write home about, but it does very well in certain areas for a phone in this price point. The display gets surprisingly bright for an entry level phone, outshining my Moto E 2015, and the white point calibration feels pretty decent (if a bit blue at times). Unfortunately that brightness does mean that the display doesn't get quite dark enough at night at minimum brightness though, with it easily lighting up dark rooms, and it still isn't quite bright enough for easy reading in daylight either.

Ulefone Metal Daylight Picture

Despite those positives, the fact that it is a $109 phone does shine through in certain ways. Most noticeably, colour shift starts appearing fairly heavily at even a 45 degree angle, and there is some backlight bleed (although it is fairly uniform on our test device).

Ulefone Metal Colour Bars

Battery Life

It pains me to say this, as battery life is one of the features that I care the most about, but the Ulefone Metal has fairly bad battery life. With the hardware it has it shouldn't, but it does.

Ulefone Metal PCMark 2.0 Work Battery Life
Min. Brightness 5 h 55 m
Med. Brightness 4 h 51 m
Max Brightness 3 h 44 m

Ulefone advertises that the Metal's 3,050 mAh Li-Po battery with its 5" HD screen as equivalent to a 5.5" FHD phone with a 4,500 mAh battery (it would theoretically be closer to a 3,400 mAh battery in that situation, but I digress) and that it is capable of "1.5-day normal use or 1-day heavy use", but it simply doesn't live up to that. If anything, in my testing it gets just over that of standby most of the time, let alone "heavy use". Even a light benchmark like PCMark killed it in 4 hours on minimum brightness on certain runs (on a freshly wiped device). For comparison, the Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 with its 5.5" FHD display and 4,000 mAh battery got almost 16 hours in the same test.

Unfortunately, it is difficult to pinpoint exactly what is causing the issue. A portion of the problem may be the WiFi battery drain bug that the Ulefone Metal has, however it is likely just misreporting the WiFi drain, rather than actually draining extra power, as my unit consistently claims ~20% WiFi drain, even while in airplane mode. When left on for two days, it reported about 10,000 mAh of battery drain between WiFi and Phone Idle alone, but still had 43% of its 3,050 mAh battery left.

Ulefone Metal WiFi Drain Ulefone Metal WiFi Drain 5000 mAh Ulefone Metal WiFi Drain Idle 5000 mAh

Even in airplane mode on minimum brightness (where the WiFi power usage should have no effect), the phone could only eke out 7 hours and 20 minutes of PCMark.

Ulefone is now aware of the misreported battery drain issue and are working on fixing it, but it is looking like that won't address the issues with battery life.

Audio

I put this phone's speaker up against every phone I had nearby trying to find a device that I liked less, and I could barely find one. I'm a little bit shocked to be honest, I can't remember the last time I've seen audio quality this bad. Even the Moto E that I picked up for $10 last year handily outperforms the Ulefone Metal. So did the HTC 10 (obviously), the Samsung Galaxy S7, the Moto X Play, the ZTE ZMax Pro, the LG G2, and the Sony Xperia Z3.

I tested it against a Samsung Galaxy S2, hoping that it would beat it, but it didn't. The Ulefone Metal is louder, but the S2 still has much clearer audio. It's a toss-up at best.

So I broke out my HTC Legend (not helping the whole situation with Froyo on the dashboard) to test against it, and while I finally found a phone that the Ulefone Metal beats in speaker quality, it wasn't by much. The HTC Legend (a midrange phone from almost 7 years ago) was louder than the Ulefone Metal by a significant margin, thanks in part to its front-facing speaker, but it was really tinny and had almost no bass (and I have reason to suspect that the speaker on my HTC Legend might be damaged…).

Just being back-mounted alone is a bit of a strike against a speaker, but worse than that, the speaker had muddy bass and tinny highs. It definitely is possible to have acceptable audio with a rear facing speaker (as the ZTE ZMax Pro proves), but the Ulefone Metal simply isn't up to the task.

Ulefone Metal EQHeadphone audio was fine, it had no problem driving my Sennheiser HD 598s, but I can't think of a single modern phone that really does have issues with that. Audio quality was a bit of a step down from some of the other phones I tested with, especially in terms of clarity, but it wasn't really something I would have noticed if I wasn't looking for it. It's got a bit of a weird curve to it though. Some mid-range sounds that would normally be barely noticeable in the background sit right out in front with the Metal, as if they were the focus of the song. And that curve really butchers some songs. Nine Inch Nails' With Teeth in particular loses a large chunk of its complexity with the Ulefone Metal. If you enable their EQ, it just gets worse. The "Normal" mode pushes the bass, and adds extra distortion in the process, and the more aggressive EQ settings aren't any better.

The microphone does an OK job. It seems to trend a bit quiet and does a poor job of cutting out noise from wind, but it does a good enough job to get by for the price. The one part where it really does fall flat is the fact that it only has a single microphone, which is mounted on the bottom. While this is fine for phone calls in areas with little background noise, it makes it extremely hard for the phone to perform any noise cancellation, makes it harder to hear the subject when recording a video, and can have a dramatic effect on call audio. For comparison, the Moto E and ZTE ZMax Pro that I keep bringing up both have multiple microphones.

If you use the built in voice recorder, it records in AAC at ~128 kbps, again in a .3gpp container, which is fine (although it would have been nice to see some higher quality choices). Oddly enough, despite only having one microphone, the Ulefone Metal still records "Stereo" audio. The two audio tracks are identical, provide no real benefit, and only serve to increase file size, but there are two of them.

Developer Relations

We are very pleased to see that Ulefone released the kernel sources for the Ulefone Metal, and they did it in an acceptable amount of time to boot. While the MediaTek chipset and lack of pre-existing popularity among developers will likely hold back the development of ROMs, it is a good starting point that will help interest in Ulefone's devices grow in the development community over time. If Ulefone keeps up the good work with the Metal's software, their next phone will be more likely to see a strong developer following (and we may even see a nice little community develop for the Metal over time).

That developer friendliness is already starting to pay dividends. Just a couple days ago, XDA members fire855, DerTeufel1980, and superdragonpt launched a 7.1.1 AOSP ROM for the Ulefone Metal as part of their Team M.A.D. (Mediatek Android Developers) project, which has gotten quite a bit of positive attention for the Ulefone Metal. We haven't had a chance yet to test their build ourselves, but we are quite excited to see how it progresses.

As for Ulefone, it appears that they are providing some updates, and even included a decently laid out changelog, which is fantastic to see. Unfortunately, the changelog wasn't listed in the OTA itself (which only had "Minor Bug Fixes" listed), and certain key changes weren't mentioned (like the icon changes mentioned in the UI section of this review).

We will have to see how this progresses, but if Ulefone can build upon this stepping stone, they may be able to find a niche and build a loyal development community for their products.

Final Thoughts

The Ulefone Metal looks and feels like a nice phone, but its rough edges and the tough competition at that price point prevent me from recommending it. It has many of the right pieces, but it simply hasn't put them all together yet.

While the Metal is lacking, it does show great potential for the future. The build feels solid, the spec sheet ticks almost all of the boxes for the price point, and Ulefone seems to be putting a legitimate effort into their developer relations. There are just a couple (major) nagging issues that need to be fixed.

If Ulefone can 1. figure out what is causing their battery drain issues, 2. continue to polish the rough edges of their software (especially the camera software), and 3. make regular incremental upgrades, then one of their future phones could be a solid choice.

In the meantime though, it is incredibly hard to recommend the Ulefone Metal over a device like the ZTE ZMax Pro, the Xiaomi Redmi 4, or a refurb flagship from previous years like the unlocked refurb/used LG G3 devices that can be found for around $110 USD on Ebay and Swappa currently.


Check out XDA's Ulefone Metal forums!



from xda-developers http://ift.tt/2ibT4xs
via IFTTT

Google is Investigating an Audio Issue with some Pixel and Pixel XLs

While most reviewers feel the Google Pixel and Pixel XL devices are among the best Android smartphones you can buy right now, some users have been experiencing a fair bit of issues with their new smartphone.

We were first made aware of a lens flare/halo issue that people are having with the camera. Google acknowledged this issue and is currently working to fix it. It's unclear if they will be able to eliminate the issue entirely, but a recent update did appear to soften the halo effect.

But then another strange bug appeared that caused the screen to go pink within the camera viewfinder. The bug would freeze the device and force the person to reboot their phone if they wanted to temporarily fix it. Although this one appeared to be far less widespread, it was happening to enough people that Google acknowledged it on their product forums and is investigating it as well. We haven't had an update on this issue since December 5th, but we are told they are continuing to look into the issue.

This time, a few users are reporting that their Google Pixel device is starting to have audio popping and cracking. A thread was started in the Google Product Forums about this bug toward the end of October, and Google officially responded to it about a week into November. There were enough people having this issue that it warranted some attention, and at the time Google started to request bug reports from those who were having the issue.

This audio issue picked up some steam this week when a thread about the bug hit the front page of /r/Android. A day later, the same Pixel Community Manager who responded in November gave us an update on the issue. They thanked everyone for their bug reports and examples, and then re-iterated that the team is aware of the issue. Furthermore, Google is currently investigating the issue and the company will keep consumers up to date when new information is available.


Source: Google Product Forums



from xda-developers http://ift.tt/2gYKvop
via IFTTT

Sprint, Virgin Mobile, and Boost Mobile to Launch the Galaxy J3 Emerge Next Month

The 2016 Samsung Galaxy J3 was a budget smartphone the South Korean conglomerate launched way back in January of this year.

This smartphone launched with a 5″ 720p display, Exynos 3475 SoC (while some had the Spreadtrum SC9830), and 1.5GB of RAM. Samsung has reportedly updated a few of the internal components of this device and will re-brand it as the Galaxy J3 Emerge early next year.

This leak comes to us from Evan Blass, who states he viewed a copy of the device's user manual. Rumors have been calling this device the 2017 Galaxy J3, but it's unclear if other markets will receive the device at all, let alone with that name. So for now all we are seeing is a small redesign of the device itself with a two-tone gray color, but the bigger changes here are the internal hardware specs.

Instead of the Spreadtrum/Exynox SoC, the Galaxy J3 Emerge will launch with the Snapdragon 430, 2GB of RAM and 16GB of internal storage. The original J3 launched with Android 5.1.1 Lollipop, but the new J3 Emerge is said to have Android 6.0 Marshmallow installed out of the box. The camera setup remains the same as the U.S. variant of the original J3, with a 5MP rear-facing camera and a 2MP front-facing camera (both fixed-focus).

We're told to expect 720p video capture with this device, just like we saw with the U.S. variant as well. Another specification that is unchanged is the battery capacity. The new Galaxy J3 Emerge will launch with a 2,600mAh battery. While that might not sound like much, it should be plenty to give respectable battery life on a device with a 5″ 720p Super AMOLED panel.

Sadly, we're not told how much this device will cost at this time. As far as release details go, we should see the Galaxy J3 Emerge launched on Sprint, Virgin Mobile and Boost Mobile on January 6th of 2017.


Source: VentureBeat



from xda-developers http://ift.tt/2hnD1wf
via IFTTT

Imagination Technologies to Focus More on IoT and Virtual Reality

Imagination Tech is known for their MIPS CPU architecture as well as their PowerVR GPUs. We generally do not see their CPUs in mobile hardware, but Apple does use their PowerVR GPUs in the iPhone. However, it hasn't been that great of a year for the technology company, and it looks like they will pivot their focus soon. In 2017, Imagination Technologies will shift their focus from to the markets that are growing, such as the internet of things and virtual reality.

There's a big push right now in the automotive industry to create better infotainment centers. Google launched Android Auto as a solution for the software side of things, and companies like Qualcomm are working on the hardware. Imagination Technologies feels their PowerVR GPUs would fit in well here, while they're hoping the interest in MIPS CPUs for cars remains high. the company also wants to partner with others so they can have their designs used in autonomous cars as well.

They're also wanting virtual reality headset manufacturers to use their GPUs as well. In 2017, Imagination Technologies will launch the Series8XT GPU, and they are trying to sign some deals so that it will be used in high-end VR headsets. While this design is focused on the high-end, they aren't forgetting the low-end either. Earlier this year they launched the Series8XE GPU, and will be using it to expand into the low-end and mid-range smartphone market.

As much as Imagination Technologies would love their chip designs to be used in more mobile products, they just haven't had much success in this market. They tried to target enterprise servers as well, but hasn't had much success there either. Along with other IoT products, Imagination Technologies feel their CPU and GPU chips would be great for products like drones and robots too, so we'll just have to wait and see if this shift in focus works for the company in 2017.
Source: PCWorld



from xda-developers http://ift.tt/2gXVte4
via IFTTT

lundi 19 décembre 2016

In this video, Miles is going to show us some of the apps he uses everyday on his OnePlus 3T. Miles is currently running the Resurrection Remix 7.1.1 ROM as his daily driver. It's one of the community favorites as of right now. Here is a list of all of the apps that are shown in this video.

Dives – Icon Pack
Nova Launcher
LIFX
Poweramp Music Player
Solid Explorer File Manager
AfterShip Package Tracker
Fenix for Twitter
Resurrection Remix
XDA Labs

Buy the OnePlus 3T



from xda-developers http://ift.tt/2hO2end
via IFTTT

Become A Git Pro With Git 101

One of the key aspects of smart and mature development is version control. One of the most popular methods is Git. It was developed by Linus Torvalds himself back in 2005 and even Google uses it to maintain Android. Well, the major part of it. While many developers use Git on daily basis, for some it's still a riddle.

There are lots of Git guides floating around, including my own, that I wrote a few years ago. XDA Forum Moderator and Recognized Developer Vatsal has decided to refresh this knowledge a bit. He uses GitLab as his example application. Probably it's a nice moment to mention a few things about GitLab. It's an open source platform that is reliable and offers easy project importing from other sites like GitHub. With Vatsal's guide, you can easily set up your own repository, push the changes and learn how to cherry-pick in a smart way.

277d9badcbd723e913b3a41e64e8d2f3d2c80598

As XDA we fully support open-source and encourage developers and companies to make their code public. While some projects are not GNU GPL licensed, the kernel source must always be up-to-date and accessible. We encourage developers to make GitLab or any other site home for their projects. Open sourcing brings more far pros than cons, as users can eventually become contributors. Almost every Android team we know uses Git as a tool. It's an easy, yet efficient way of making things greater.

Git 101 is available as a forum thread here. It's a nice place to start your Git journey. And finally, you can share your knowledge as a Git expert!



from xda-developers http://ift.tt/2hS8Xto
via IFTTT

SultanXDA Explains Unified ROM Method and Approach on the OnePlus 3 and OnePlus 3T

Back when we covered that XDA Recognized Developer Sultanxda released his custom CyanogenMod 13 ROM and Kernel for the OnePlus 3T, a lot of people were surprised to see the "same" ROM build that was released for the OnePlus 3T make its way to the OnePlus 3 (or vice versa!).

Sultanxda adopted the unified approach to distributing ROMs for the OnePlus 3 and the OnePlus 3T owing to their largely similar hardware and low level software. This meant that the ROM offered cross-compatibility among both devices, where the same ROM zip could be distributed to the duo. Cross-compatible zips allowed users (and the developer too) to not worry about flashing the wrong zip accidentally and getting a bricked device. This is not to say that the OnePlus 3/3T are easy-to-brick — it just entails lesser headaches overall for all the parties involved.

We reached out to XDA Recognized Developer Sultanxda to shed some more light on the entire procedure, in order to encourage adoption of his method. Here are the main takeaways from the conversation with added emphasis:

What is different on the OnePlus 3/3T that allows for unified ROMs?

The reason why a unified ROM is possible is because OnePlus unified the BSP (the proprietary libraries) [Board Support Package]. Although unifying a kernel is easy, unifying a ROM is normally impossible for [ROM] developers due to inconsistencies in the BSP that only the OEM can address. On my end, all I had to do was unify the kernel and separate some GPU firmware images. The GPU's firmware images are different between the Snapdragon 820 and 821, so they are not cross compatible. I modified the kernel to make it load the correct GPU firmware for each device to fix this. I then added the corresponding firmware images to the ROM in this commit. The rest of the device-specific firmware images (such as the modem images) are located in a firmware partition on each device, so the GPU problem was the only firmware-related issue I faced.

How do the ROM and Kernel figure out which device it is?

The kernel knows which device it is running on thanks to the bootloader. The bootloader selects the Device Tree configuration (packed into the kernel image) that matches its board ID and passes this configuration onto the kernel This gives the kernel flexibility to load the appropriate configurations for both the OnePlus 3 and the OnePlus 3T. You can find the board ID for the OnePlus 3 and the OnePlus 3T by following the hyperlinks.

Do you only need a modified kernel to support unified builds?

No, the ROM must be unified as well. OnePlus unified the BSP starting from the Open Betas for the OP3, and kept it unified in the official OP3T OxygenOS release. This means that ROMs must be using proprietary libraries from either the OP3's Open Beta builds or the OP3T's official OxygenOS release in order to be unified. There is also the GPU firmware image requirement that I described above, and the OP3T's touchscreen firmware needs to be included in the ROM as well (this was added in the GPU firmware commit I linked to above).

Also, there is a caveat to the unified kernel: developers must either use my kernel (which is already unified), or they must add OP3 support to the OP3T's OxygenOS kernel. Support for the OP3T cannot simply be added to the OP3's kernel due to incomplete Snapdragon 821 support, so unification may require a lot of work from willing OP3 developers. My kernel already had complete Snapdragon 821 support when I received the OP3T (since my kernel is based off the Snapdragon 821 branch from CAF), so the unification process was rather painless for me.

I'm sure a lot of developers would rather use the OP3T's OxygenOS kernel rather than my kernel, which would require adding support for the OP3 to it. I didn't look into making a unified kernel for OxygenOS ROMs, so additional work may be required to make that happen.

Can other developers take a look at the code and see how this is done?

Yes. Sultanxda mentions that all of his work is publicly available on his GitHub account, so anyone with the requisite know-how can see how the ROM unification was undertaken. Granted, the procedure is a bit involved and requires a level of expertise, but it is a very much set-and-forget process with benefits originating in the form of lesser maintenance, less duplication of work, and a enhanced sense of assurance that people will not confuse files of the two devices as only one zip work for both. Once a ROM or kernel are unified and confirmed to be fully functional on both the OnePlus 3 and OnePlus 3T, very little additional work is required.


We hope we brought to light new information which should help more developers opt for unified builds for the devices. Development on the OnePlus 3T is growing, and unified builds are the future for both devices going forward.



from xda-developers http://ift.tt/2hMMIYG
via IFTTT