Manufacturer | HTC Corporation |
---|---|
Series | HTC TyTN |
Compatible networks |
Quad band GSM 850/900/1800/1900, GPRS, EDGE Tri band UMTS 850/1900/2100, HSDPA, HSUPA aGPS |
Availability by country | September 2007 |
Discontinued | September 3, 2009 |
Predecessor | HTC TyTN |
Successor | HTC Touch Pro |
Form factor | Slider |
Dimensions | 112 mm (4.4 in) H 59 mm (2.3 in) W 19 mm (0.75 in) D |
Weight | 190 g (6.7 oz) |
Operating system | Windows Mobile 6.1, 6.5 (unofficial); Android (unofficial) |
CPU |
Qualcomm 7200 ARM 400 MHz GPU: Qualcomm Q3Dimension |
Memory | 128 MB RAM 256 MB ROM |
Removable storage | microSDHC, up to 32 GB |
Battery | 1300 or 1350 mAH Lithium-ion polymer battery, user accessible |
Data inputs | QWERTY keyboard and touchscreen |
Display | 240x320 px, 2.8 in (71 mm), 65536 color LCD, 3:4 aspect ratio |
Rear camera | 3.1 megapixel |
Front camera | 0.3-megapixel |
Connectivity |
USB Mini-B Wi-Fi (802.11b/g) Bluetooth 2.0 + EDR |
The HTC TyTN II (also known as the HTC Kaiser, the HTC P4550, and the HTC 8925) is an Internet-enabled Windows Mobile Pocket PC smartphone designed and marketed by HTC Corporation of Taiwan. It has a tilting touchscreen with a right-side slide-out QWERTY keyboard. The TyTN II's functions include those of a camera phone and a portable media player in addition to text messaging and multimedia messaging. It also offers Internet services including e-mail, instant messaging, web browsing, and local Wi-Fi connectivity. It is a quad-band GSM phone with GPRS, EDGE, UMTS, HSDPA, and HSUPA.
Soon after its release to market, reviewers and end users reported the TyTN II's graphical performance was below par. Both 2D and 3D graphics were affected, with notable symptoms being poor video playback and severely low frame-rates when running 3D applications and games. The hardware platform (Qualcomm 7200 chipset) suggested that the device was capable of high graphical performance, however the device was consistently outperformed by older HTC devices.
A community of enthusiast developers investigated the cause of the poor performance and concluded that DirectDraw and Direct3D applications were running in software rendering mode only. No hardware acceleration was taking place, and the drivers required to take advantage of the ATI Imageon hardware appeared to be missing.