LG G6

biron_w · 27 Jan 2017 at 11:45

This will be officially unveiled 26th February. A day before MWC 2017.

Rumoured of known specs:
CPU: Snapdragon 821(as Samsung have apparently got all the first lot of the 835 processor)
Ram: 6GB
Screen: 5.7" QHD
Wireless charging (apparently)
A NON removable battery

Picture showing sim card slot. Which looks like it will have a micro SD slot as well.

The phone will also apparently have Google Assistant.

Silly Goose On The Loose · 27 Jan 2017 at 12:11

I hope the speakers don't suck.

Bootlooping issues are presumably a given.

mdaw · 27 Jan 2017 at 12:48

No removable battery . That's what made my decision to get a G5. Hate the fact batteries become crap after a year and wanted the option to change it.

insane200 · 27 Jan 2017 at 12:57

rounded corners look different, quite a nice style phone, but LG !! never liked the software on it.

kona786 · 27 Jan 2017 at 12:59

Looking good. Bezel ratio is spot on and no silly curved screen in sight. Just a shame it won't sport an OLED.

ebilcake · 27 Jan 2017 at 13:33

Looks okay, but it's effectively DOA with SD821.

Grrrrr · 27 Jan 2017 at 13:35

Only having a Snapdragon 821 is a bit pants. It's basically not an upgrade over the G5.

That aside I hope LG stick with the dual camera set up. The wide angle camera is a revelation. I use it all the time.

kefan77 · 27 Jan 2017 at 13:38

I suspect if this comes with 821, in 3 months there is an updated version with 835. maybe called Pro or something. Already feel for anyone that buys this at launch only to find out that later.

glenimp617 · 27 Jan 2017 at 13:42

Looks nice!

biron_w · 27 Jan 2017 at 15:12

Grrrrr said:
That aside I hope LG stick with the dual camera set up. The wide angle camera is a revelation. I use it all the time.

Apparently it will have a dual camera again but there's no actual specs yet.

Smeghead · 27 Jan 2017 at 23:33

I do really like that design, but no removable battery is a no-go for me.

Rimsy · 28 Jan 2017 at 00:49

Design looks great, waterproofing a must have but non oled screen and last year's soc? Hmm...

Dangerous · 28 Jan 2017 at 11:44

Having removable batteries shouldn't be an issue, have you lot heard of Anker?

kona786 · 28 Jan 2017 at 11:48

Dangerous said:
Having removable batteries shouldn't be an issue, have you lot heard of Anker?

More about the longevity of the sealed unit. Normal deteriorates after a year or 2

Dangerous · 28 Jan 2017 at 11:54

kona786 said:
More about the longevity of the sealed unit. Normal deteriorates after a year or 2

Ah maybe so for some. I haven't had removable battery since my S3. Though generally not had a phone longer than 12 months either.

S3,Z1,Nexus 4,Nexus 5, OnePlus 1,Nexus 6,Nexus 6p <<-- only phone I've kept longer as the Pixel is meh

kefan77 · 28 Jan 2017 at 11:56

my phone ownership is usually <12 months too, so don't care about battery being removable.
if you want to carry spare, you might as well carry a battery bank.

on the other hand, I want it to be decent capacity and quality. 2300mAh non-removable in some phones...wouldn't be too happy.

Dangerous · 28 Jan 2017 at 12:06

kefan77 said:
my phone ownership is usually <12 months too, so don't care about battery being removable.
if you want to carry spare, you might as well carry a battery bank.

on the other hand, I want it to be decent capacity and quality. 2300mAh non-removable in some phones...wouldn't be too happy.

3000mAh+ would be the min these days.

Smeghead · 28 Jan 2017 at 13:42

Dangerous said:
Having removable batteries shouldn't be an issue, have you lot heard of Anker?

For me, the convenience is too good to give up. No matter how fast this new "super ultra rapid fast charge" technology gets, it still won't beat going from 0 to 100 in less than a minute, and this fast charging tech will inevitably heat up the battery more, which will in the long run kill the battery quicker.

Plus I find particularly on holiday/out of town, where I might be looking at my phone a lot for maps/GPS, that kind of stuff wears the battery down super quick, and I'd rather be able swap batteries and put the drained battery in my bag to charge with my powerbank, than have to put my phone in my bag to charge (or a large coat pocket). Either way you're having to tether your phone to your power bank for a good 1-2 hours.

I just don't like the way the industry has headed towards non-removable battery. I don't see what advantage it brings the consumer other than being able to waterproof a phone, but how often have you dropped your phone in the toilet vs. been in a situation where your battery is low? I would think the latter scenario is far more common than the former.

413x · 28 Jan 2017 at 19:11

Smeghead said:
For me, the convenience is too good to give up. No matter how fast this new "super ultra rapid fast charge" technology gets, it still won't beat going from 0 to 100 in less than a minute, and this fast charging tech will inevitably heat up the battery more, which will in the long run kill the battery quicker.

Plus I find particularly on holiday/out of town, where I might be looking at my phone a lot for maps/GPS, that kind of stuff wears the battery down super quick, and I'd rather be able swap batteries and put the drained battery in my bag to charge with my powerbank, than have to put my phone in my bag to charge (or a large coat pocket). Either way you're having to tether your phone to your power bank for a good 1-2 hours.

I just don't like the way the industry has headed towards non-removable battery. I don't see what advantage it brings the consumer other than being able to waterproof a phone, but how often have you dropped your phone in the toilet vs. been in a situation where your battery is low? I would think the latter scenario is far more common than the former.

I take my phone out kayaking so it's lovely to have. And I'm guessing for manufacturers it does encourage you to upgrade as battery starts to fade. If possible removable would be ideal. But I'd choose waterproof.

And Quick charge is the best thing in quite some time.

Internal battery may be 3000+. In fact I'd want ideally 3500 =
And I'd happily sacrifice 2mm and weight for 4000

413x · 28 Jan 2017 at 19:17

ebilcake said:
Looks okay, but it's effectively DOA with SD821.

Disagree. I really don't get the SoC being the latest requirement. The efficiency helps. But not speed

****LG G6****

Mobster

LG G6