Smartphones on a BUDGET
PHABLETS, the phones with a screen size of five inches and above, seem like devices tailor-made for India where consumers may not want to spend on both a phone as well as a tablet. We put three budget ‘phablets’ through our gruelling tests to see how they perform.
WHAT THE RATINGS MEAN: Below 5: The product is poor and doesn’t offer the experience it promises. 5 and 6: The product works as advertised. It is functional. 7: The product is good; will not disappoint the buyer. 8: The product is very good; super value for money. 9: The product is exceptional. 10: You’re kidding, right?
Mercury MagiQ
WHAT WE LIKE Good performance: The Mercury MagiQ performs admirably. There is virtually no lag during day-to-day operations, whether you’re scrolling through hundreds of contacts, browsing apps, or juggling between a few open tabs in the browser. What’s more, its touchscreen is responsive, quick, and fantastic for a budget device.
Media playback: We liked how well the MagiQ handles video formats. Of course, it can’t play back 1080p FullHD videos or the MKV file format. But other 720p HD videos are handled smoothly.
WHAT WE DON’T LIKE Screen: The viewing angles on the screen are terrible. View the display from almost any angle other than up front, and you are likely to see a change in its brightness or distortion in colour.
Call quality: Call anyone using the MagiQ and if you’re in a noisy area, there are chances that they might not hear you clearly. The device’s microphone amplifies all background sounds and this hampers call quality.
GPS: The MagiQ supposedly supports GPS, but during tests, it could never lock onto a satellite. This means we could not use location-based services
such as Google Navigation.
Bulky: Even for a phablet, the MagiQ – with its rectangular design – feels a bit bulky, making it difficult to use as a phone.
iBall Andi 5c
WHAT WE LIKE Good performance: The Andi 5c performs impressively. There is the occasional lag when switching between apps or during scrolling in some apps, such as Tweetdeck. Mostly, the performance is incredibly smooth. It also helps that the 5c’s touch response is good, and its GPS works very well.
Media playback: The 5c handles 720p HD videos with ease (although the default video player lacks support for most formats). Given its budget hardware, the device is still incapable of handling the heavy MKV file format. But that is not a deal-breaker.
WHAT WE DON’T LIKE Ghosting: The screen on Andi 5c is not as good as what we’ve seen on other devices. It blurs during fast scrolling and images are prone to some amount of ghosting. Bulky: The phone feels heavy to hold. Besides, its wide design makes it seem rather bulky. Poor camera: The camera quality is poor and it is difficult to get usable images unless you are shooting in daylight.
Micromax A100
WHAT WE LIKE Good design: The first thing we noticed is this smartphone’s premium looks. Rounded edges, rubberized back cover, on-screen buttons and attention to detail make A100 one of the best-looking budget devices. The build quality is good and nowhere does it feel flimsy. Touchscreen: This is one of the best touchscreens we have seen on a budget phone. Colours are rendered vividly and brightly. Besides, the handset responds promptly to touches and swipes. GPS: The GPS performance is impressive. It may take a while – around 10 to 15 seconds – to lock onto a satellite, but once it is connected, it’s a solid performer. Battery life: The Micromax A100 has fantastic battery life. On average use, it lasts for over 18 hours.
WHAT WE DON’T LIKE UI lags: A100 is the only phone in this round-up that suffers from chronic lags. If you switch between apps too fast or open more than two windows in the browser, the phone seems sluggish. Try running more than a couple of apps at once and it starts to choke. Media playback: This is not one of those devices where you can just copy any media file and play it. In most cases, the phone can’t even handle 720p HD videos.
Camera: The camera in A100 is disappointing. The images it shoots lack details; and in case of low light, the pictures suffer from too much grain.
No comments:
Post a Comment