HTC U Ultra Review: What went wrong?

Daaaamn. Sure can't live with all those bezels around a display.
2 companies remove bezels- already a mainstream. Others with bezels are just old-fashioned.
 
This phone is a mess, yes.

About the secondary display, I find it very useful. It's not a gimmick. Just to let the reviewer know, I'm using LG V10. For me, it's very helpful for quick access and seeing basic info without turning on the main screen.
 
Pretty good review from Techspot. I don't really agree with the rating though. A 3,000 battery from a flagship is not a kiss of death. I'm running a ZTE Axon 7 with almost the same hardware/software combo. It has incredible battery life with only a 3,250mAh battery. It's less about the specs and how you use them.

The price is ridiculous. The author also deserves props for calling out the second screen (which is possibly why it costs so much?). The physical design does seem clunky.

Overall, the phone seems like a very mediocre showing that needs to be cut in price ASAP. 45/100 seems extreme but I guess not completely out of line.
 
The 3000 mAH battery producing such poor battery life points to a horrid, horrid kernel or other software issues to me.

The first page of this review was painful to read. It felt like you were bashing the phone because it was fun. God forbid it have BEZELS. Believe it or not, most people dont care about bezels assuming they arent an inch wide.
 
Pretty good review from Techspot. I don't really agree with the rating though. A 3,000 battery from a flagship is not a kiss of death.

For THIS phone it is.
I have the LG stylo 2 plus and I use it for work. I may be using my phone for 6 hours in and 8 hour work day. When I work 12's I use it for about 9 hours. It has a 5.7 inch screen and I never really have a problem with battery life. At the end of the day I'll be at about 40% if I don't charge it. If I get the chance to charge it a few times throughout the day then it doesn't really go below 70%.

I don't understand this need for a bigger battery that everyone is demanding. I fall right under power user because I'm streaming Pandora all day as well as having my GPS always on(you know, with the screen lit and everything). What are ANY of you doing that you demand more out of your phone than I do? How on earth do you go through more battery than I do? Do you guys need some tips on making your battery last longer?

What are you guys doing with your phones that you completely drain a 3000mah+ battery in less than 9 hours?

Here is a quote about my phone from PCMAG.
Battery life is great. The phone clocked 6 hours, 53 minutes of runtime when streaming full-screen video over LTE at maximum brightness.

I leave my screen on all day, usually between 50-75% brightness and I'm not streaming video. I easily get 9 hours out of a charge with room to spare. That means after work I still have about 5-6 hours left of light usage before I actually need to charge it.

What in the actual F*** are you guys doing with your phones?
 
Last edited:
You should ask TechSpot since they tested the phone....
I know what TechSpot did, they posted benchmarks. I'm asking the other users of this forum what THEY do that 3000mah isn't enough. BTW, those benchmarks in no way reflect real world usage. Benchmarks are only a way to test one phones battery against another, nothing more.
 
All this New Phone crap....

When I'm buying a new phone, the price doesn't concern me. The only thing that concerns me greatly is the usability:

- UI responsiveness, as I cannot stand the lag, especially when typing something
- General experience, which comes from the device's overall quality and the quality of apps

I wandered into a shop 2 days ago, and spent about 1 hour playing with the following phones:

- Galaxy S7, Galaxy S7 Plus
- Galaxy S8, Galaxy S8 Plus
- iPhone 7, iPhone 7 Plus
- iPhone 6S

Plus a few other "simpler" phones, including HTC ones, Huawei, etc...

Why did I go there? Because after 3+ years my Note 4 started irritating me by becoming terribly laggy. And I also got tired of an over-sized phone, and I've missed the good old days when I would put my phone in a pocket without thinking twice about it.

And what do you think I bought in the end, considering money is not an issue? iPhone 6S. Because it felt like the only phone from all that variety/zoo that while looked like a phone, it felt like a phone in the hand - just the right size, just the right fit, perfect screen size and quality for what I need. Why didn't I get at least iPhone 7? - because that new button they made (one that doesn't press), it felt like it would be annoying the hell out of me, as it doesn't provide the kind of feedback I'm used to; that and the removed phone jack - screw that, I want my phone jack.

I kind of surprised myself, but now, 2 days later I am convinced I've made the right choice.

B.T.W. That Galaxy S8 and Plus - they look and feel as a product with only one focus - get a WOW, to convince simpletons that this is the new $hit. Well, I didn't like it at all. To me it looked like a toy more than a usable/practical phone, and felt awfully fragile as I held it in my hand.
 
Last edited:
Pretty good review from Techspot. I don't really agree with the rating though. A 3,000 battery from a flagship is not a kiss of death.

For THIS phone it is.

Then someone on their engineering side screwed up. If other phones on the market are doing better with similar specs, then it's hard to imagine why HTC couldn't. Cramming a bigger battery into the phone is poor solution to patch a bigger underlying problem.

It would be different if all these phones ran different architectures. Most flagship smartphones all use the same Snapdragon processors -- it's simply a matter of which one they choose out of the current lineup. Other vendors are using the same chip, same OS, and are doing it better. There is something HTC did that isn't working. If it's a software issue (like a program rendering when not necessary) then that can be easily fixed. But if it's hardware then this phone is forever doomed to poor battery life.

It's a competitive market. If HTC can't lower the price (say production costs are too high) then this will be a huge flop. There just doesn't seem to be any justification for this being the same price as a Pixel, Galaxy, or iPhone (which, themselves, have been hurt by the increasing mid-range market).

---

None of this is really bad for the consumer: Just go out and buy a Galaxy/iPhone if you want performance or an Axon/Motorola if you want better price/performance.
 
There is something HTC did that isn't working. If it's a software issue (like a program rendering when not necessary) then that can be easily fixed. But if it's hardware then this phone is forever doomed to poor battery life.
define poor battery life. I'd also like to know what phone you have, what battery size it has and what you can usually expect out of a charge. I guarantee I use my phone on a daily basis for work more than anyone else on this forum uses theirs.

I'm tired of this BS battery life argument.
 
There is something HTC did that isn't working. If it's a software issue (like a program rendering when not necessary) then that can be easily fixed. But if it's hardware then this phone is forever doomed to poor battery life.
define poor battery life. I'd also like to know what phone you have, what battery size it has and what you can usually expect out of a charge. I guarantee I use my phone on a daily basis for work more than anyone else on this forum uses theirs.

I'm tired of this BS battery life argument.

Your LG is a midrange phone. It has a budget oriented Snapdragon (430) that runs at a lower clock rate. It's screen is 720p and it lacks many other features flagship phones have that eat battery life. Arguably, your phone could have even a smaller battery and it would have no impact on day-to-day use (it has a 2900mah).

It's a little unfair to compare that LG to flagship phones like this HTC. These run much faster Snapdragons and have 1440p displays (that also tend to be much brighter).

I'm coming from a Zenfone 2 to an ZTE Axon 7 (3000mah v. 3250mah). They both last the entire day with GPS/Bluetooth, etc on. The Zenfone 2 is still a popular midrange phone while the Axon 7 is basically a flagship phone with a few caveats. The day-to-day aspects are identical between the phones. The Zenfone does email, calendar, youtube, etc just as well as the ZTE. The flagship features of the ZTE really only add to the responsiveness (apps load with no lag) and other minor issues (brighter screen, more features, better audio). The ZTE is better but both are perfectly fine for 95%+ of users.

This is a good thing though. Most of us on these forums (and from your prior posts, I know you have) have seen smartphones get more efficient battery wise. With every new efficiency smartphones have become more powerful (negating the better battery life). That seems to be largely leveling off and allowing the mid-range market to thrive. A $200 phone will do just about everything that a $700 phone will do. Unless you have a lot of money to spend, a $200 phone makes more sense for light use or for a business phone.
 
HTC have had their day, and this is a desperate last ditch attempt to squeeze some more blood out of the abandoning stone before they retreat into nothingness....they really are doomed with Pixels and Nokia's on the horizon.
 
There is something HTC did that isn't working. If it's a software issue (like a program rendering when not necessary) then that can be easily fixed. But if it's hardware then this phone is forever doomed to poor battery life.
define poor battery life. I'd also like to know what phone you have, what battery size it has and what you can usually expect out of a charge. I guarantee I use my phone on a daily basis for work more than anyone else on this forum uses theirs.

I'm tired of this BS battery life argument.
3 hours screen on time regardless of all other factors.
 
There is something HTC did that isn't working. If it's a software issue (like a program rendering when not necessary) then that can be easily fixed. But if it's hardware then this phone is forever doomed to poor battery life.
define poor battery life. I'd also like to know what phone you have, what battery size it has and what you can usually expect out of a charge. I guarantee I use my phone on a daily basis for work more than anyone else on this forum uses theirs.

I'm tired of this BS battery life argument.
There is nothing BS about the argument. Your phone has a quarter of the pixels to power as any 1440p OLED phone. Your SoC is a very slow, power miserly chip. you render a much nower resolution as well, dramatically reducing work needed. Streaming pandora takes very little power. Actively browsing the web or straming video takes far more power then audio streaming does.

Also, what is your signal like? Are you using wifi? Is your screen actually on the whole time, or is it going to sleep often?

Also useful- post a screenshot of your power use settings. I'd like to see this phone get 9 hours of SoT with active use. The few people I know in real life with LG Stylos dont get anywhere near 9 hours.
 
There is nothing BS about the argument. Your phone has a quarter of the pixels to power as any 1440p OLED phone. Your SoC is a very slow, power miserly chip. you render a much nower resolution as well, dramatically reducing work needed. Streaming pandora takes very little power. Actively browsing the web or straming video takes far more power then audio streaming does.

Also, what is your signal like? Are you using wifi? Is your screen actually on the whole time, or is it going to sleep often?

Also useful- post a screenshot of your power use settings. I'd like to see this phone get 9 hours of SoT with active use. The few people I know in real life with LG Stylos dont get anywhere near 9 hours.
You don't need a 1440p display, the idea that my phone is slow is ludacris and WHY IN THE WORLD WOULD SOMEONE STREAM HOURS OF VIDEO TO THEIR PHONE?!?

you guys have it backwards, it's not about a bigger battery, you guys need to realistic about what you need out of a phone. It's like hearing guys with giant trucks complain about the price of gas. Then it gets further exacerbated because they speed EVERYWHERE. See where I'm going with this?

Turn your wifi off when you're not using it, don't max out your brightness and I really don't understand WHY anyone would want to watch videos on their phone. And the whole video thing is almost a complete non issue. People don't spend hours a day watching videos on their phone. I spent 15 minutes watching youtube on my phone in a hotel room and I started to get back and wrist pain from trying to find a comfortable position. It's not even about the practicality of video playback, the simple act of finding a comfortable position to do so is impossible.

My wifi is off and my screen is on ALL the time because I use it as a GPS and managing deliveries and payments. My phone also has to report my location back every 30 seconds.

I just find it hilarious that for $200 I get far more functionality out of my phone than people who pay $600+. It's like people being angry that they can't run 4k on a single card, like what did you expect? Actually, here's a more relevant version of that. It's like people who buy a gaming laptop and get mad that their battery life sucks. You knew full well what you were getting into. How does a 1440p screen help people browse the web or send texts any better?

Now I will ask you the question that I have yet to get a real answer for, what are you doing on your phone that makes your battery life suck?
 
Last edited:
yRaz,

How old are you? I'm asking because there tends to be a pretty big generational gap between how millenials use their phones and how other people use their phones.

I'm an older millenial (28) and hate watching video on my phone. I use it for traditional business purposes: email, calendar, gps, the occasional call/text. I only use it for web browsing or video when I have no other option.

Meanwhile, I know a lot of younger people (early 20's) that use their phone as their primary device. They own desktops and laptops but would rather use their phone for everything they possibly can. The destkop or laptop is only for when the phone can't be used (say, gaming or productivity software). For them, getting the latest and greatest makes more sense. A 1440p, IPS panel matters. Where somone like yourself (and myself frankly) could get by with 480p if we had to. 720p is a cherry on top.
 
yRaz,

How old are you? I'm asking because there tends to be a pretty big generational gap between how millenials use their phones and how other people use their phones.

I'm an older millenial (28) and hate watching video on my phone. I use it for traditional business purposes: email, calendar, gps, the occasional call/text. I only use it for web browsing or video when I have no other option.

Meanwhile, I know a lot of younger people (early 20's) that use their phone as their primary device. They own desktops and laptops but would rather use their phone for everything they possibly can. The destkop or laptop is only for when the phone can't be used (say, gaming or productivity software). For them, getting the latest and greatest makes more sense. A 1440p, IPS panel matters. Where somone like yourself (and myself frankly) could get by with 480p if we had to. 720p is a cherry on top.
I'm 29. As far as resolution goes I think pixel density is the next megapixel wars. I hold my phone about 18 inches away from my face and I can't tell the difference between 720p or 1440p. As for the hardware it takes to power that stuff, I don't need it at all. It seems like the extra processing power is just their to power the display and not contribute much else.

I get it that the younger someone is the more likely they are to use a phone, but we don't live in a world where we don't need keyboards. Younger people, who should be in school, need a device they can do research on, type papers and print from. I can't imagine trying to type an essay on the phone so at the very least they can't live in a world void of desktops and laptops.
 
Kudos to HTC for removing the audio jack. As for the rest, the HTC is this former wunderkind who forgot what is cool ...
 
Daaaamn. Sure can't live with all those bezels around a display.
2 companies remove bezels- already a mainstream. Others with bezels are just old-fashioned.

This was one hell of an edgy review. 45 seems incredibly harsh for what looks like a mediocre phone.
Scorpus has every right to call it as he see's it and I admire the fact that he's not pandering to companies like some reviewers do just because they're afraid of not being sent anymore free goodies and placed in their black books. The problem I find with this review was that he was a bit too flattering, it should be slandered for the monstrosity that it is. This coming from an ex HTC One M8 & current 10 user with a Galaxy A series secondary device, and I really like all those devices but when the time comes for me to upgrade again next year, I'll be back fully on the Samsung bandwagon, again, after the 4 year sabbatical of the S series, assuming they don't some do something stupid with the S9 like HTC did with this thing. That would leave me in a quandary as to where to blow my money next because One Plus is not easily available here. Sony, LG & Huawei just don't do it for me, personally speaking that is. Apple, naturally, just isn't an option of any kind, I'd rather go back to using an old fashioned cell phone like my Nokia 3330, which I still have lying around somewhere.
 
Don't agree with the author about the 3.5mm jack. I like seeing them gone, it helps us move out of the dark ages. Haven't used mine in months, will never go back.
 
Back