|
Theres a bigger difference than you think. I have here a Sony Xperia E1 and a Motorola Moto G (2nd gen) The Xperia is also $59 and Sony is a more widely known brand so let's assume they're similar. The Moto G was $179 new some years ago the Xperia is $59 today. On paper, they're similar in terms of ram, cpu cores, flash, gpu, etc. But in practice... there is an absolute world of difference, and we're not talking flagship phones vs cheap ones, we're talking one cheap phone vs a slightly less cheap phone, but still low-mid range. The screen on the sony sucks by comparison, its all washed out and grey (not IPS), the speakers also suck, the camera sucks, the letters in the SONY logo are falling off it now says SO, the thing is a bastard to hold on to because the case is slippery. It's also just slower for some reason, even though the CPU is faster, so I assume the flash is crappy? And the digitizer sucks, scrolling goes wobbly all the time. (I thought, oh, I'll buy a cheap Sony, they make good stuff... I guess cheap shit is cheap shit no matter whose name is on it.) and that's Sony, so I can only imagine Blu is worse. (just FYI, flagships are better at everything in terms of speed, display quality, camera, feeling, etc, but they also do A LOT MORE physically, i.e. they have NFC, they're waterproof, they read fingerprints, they have multiple gyros, etc) |
From the specs I can find, the R1 HD has a 5-inch 720p IPS display and much better reviews than the Sony Xperia E1 did. Not only that, at the time of its release the E1 was competing with the Moto E which (like its bigger brother) also had an IPS screen and far better reviews than the E1.