HTC Touch HD review roundup
By Donald Melanson 
posted Nov 13th 2008 3:19PM
posted Nov 13th 2008 3:19PM
The HTC Touch HD may be somewhat hard to come by 'round these parts, but it certainly hasn't been making itself shy overseas, where it has been unboxed, examined, and given the early review treatment. Now that it's readily available in the UK, there's even more reviews of the phone cropping up, which seem to mostly agree that while it's not a phone for everyone, it definitely impresses. Among those completely blowing things out is Phone Arena, which, as you might expect, was especially impressed by the phone's screen, and describe it as "the phone for document viewing." Pocket Now was equally impressed by that "HD" display, as well as its overall performance and battery life, which they were pleased to find was about on par with the HD-less Touch Pro. CNET was even more effusive in its praise, saying that, despite its drawbacks, it is "HTC's best Windows Mobile phone yet." Windows Mobile, and HTC's GUI, proved to be a point of contention for the folks at Slash Gear, however, who say the phone would be even better running a next-gen version of the OS, or possibly even Android (a sentiment also echoed by Phone Arena). Other drawbacks include the phone's sheer size, some poor performance from TouchFLO 3D (despite an update) and, of course, it's lack of US 3G bands, which presents a bit of a problem for folks considering importing one. Still undecided? Then dive into the links below and watch the time slip away.
Read - Phone Arena
Read - Pocket Now
Read - CNET
Read - Slash Gear
Read - Phone Arena
Read - Pocket Now
Read - CNET
Read - Slash Gear
I thought that the Touch HD ran on the same frequency bands as the HTC Touch Pro? 900/2100 HSDPA?
I thought that AT&T ran on those some bands??
I guess I am wrong on that.
AT&T runs on 850+1900
It's not really fair to rate a phone down simply because it doesn't support the USA's unusual 3G bands. Everyone knows that when it comes to high-end phones, the USA isn't the place to look. Manufacturers want to use their money to produce products that will sell well and quite simply, the USA isn't ready for advanced phones yet.
The 3G may not work in the USA, but it does elswhere, like in the UK where high-end devices sell by the boat load.
Severely disappointed this device will not be coming to the US. HTC makes good products and based on specs and photos alone, this one looks like a winner.
We can keep complaining, but the reality remains. Until the US consumers start paying big $ for unlocked/contract free phones, the manufacturers have little incentive to release the hot phones in retail channels. The carriers have the average consumer used to free/almost free phones, and it will remain this way for quite some time. Its funny, because for most people, the cost of the hardware is dwarfed by the ammount of $ they pay monthly for service, especially if they have unlimited data/sms/etc.
@Ed. I believe ATT has licenses in the 2100 band, but they aren't using them yet for service and are probably saving them for future deployment (4G/faster 3G) or to fill gaps in markets they lack enough slots on the 850/1900 bands. The problem is there is almost impossible to find the exact street level map of coverage which indicated the bands.
your exactly right. i still find it amazing how many people dont know how much a full retail phone costs. people constantly tell me my phone is 'big' and was 'too expensive' and i only have a Q9c i bought on a contract for $250. it's big because it has more horsepower than those throw away free phones. that thing seriously organizes my life. i tried using my various LG flip phones over the years to plan and stuff but it was just so painful and unreliable. the high end phones are SO much better, and people just dont grasp that right now.
now true im not a big fan of very expensive phones since i can confidently say, i have NEVER had a phone that WASNT a piece of crap and ive had about 10 different ones over the years. i just cant get over the notion that if i pay upwards of $500 on a device, it might not always function properly. and with these reviews constantly talking about how sluggish such-and-such phone is and how it lacks this-and-that, i dont really see that changing any time soon. i'd say about $350 would be my limit right now and that limits me almost exclusively to subsidized phones.
Damn that's a fine looking piece of kit. That screen is to die for. It's a pitty it's stuck with old and busted WinMob. Get Android on it and watch it fly! HTC really know how to make some mighty fine kit, now just push it out as the Dream HD and you've got a winner.
http://gadgetsgamesandstuff.blogspot.com
this thing rocks! it's not even worth getting the touch pro!
Can someone please explain WHY these HTC Touch phones are always shown with dull shades-of-gray screen shots ?!! Why would anyone market, demo, or test or phone that way ?! It looks Horrible ! I know it's capable of [65k] colors but you never see them shown, just baffling.
The screen looks much nicer in person.
You've got to see one with your own eyes.
I think it's because the weather app is probably the most visually appealing application bundled with the phone.
The reason isn't really if US customers want to spend big bucks or not. I blame FCC for making US the isolate island of cell phone. In the other place, one country, or even one continent use the same bandwidth spec. You can buy a phone which can be used in whole EU, UK, and most of Asia. HTC or Samsung can sell there phones ,without negotiating with carrier, directly to a lot of people in a lot of countries. Here in US, even ATT, Verison, T-mobile all use different frequencies. If you are the cell phone manufacturers, where do you want to sell your most advance and fency phones?