x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA

Metal body for Samsung Galaxy S4 would have meant delay

Posted: , by Alan F.

Tags :

Metal body for Samsung Galaxy S4 would have meant delay
The latest report from inside Samsung is that some employees of the Korean manufacturer are beginning to get the message that the "plasticky" look and feel of its flagship handsets are not enjoyed by everyone. Even within the Android family, the HTC One is said to be catching the eye of many who would normally go right after the Samsung Galaxy S4. With an aluminum unibody design, the HTC One takes a backseat to no one when it comes to looks. When it comes to software, Samsung feels that it is way ahead of the competition.

The Samsung Galaxy S4 uses the same old plastic

The Samsung Galaxy S4 uses the same old plastic

While Samsung was hoping to raise the "Wow!" factor on the Samsung Galaxy S4 by adding a metal body to its construction, the bottom line is that this would have delayed shipping the device. Not wanting to hold off launching its next flagship model, Samsung decided to continue to use the S.O.P (Same Old Plastic) on the phone.

What is interesting is the report that for the Samsung GALAXY Note III, the phablet will be made of something other than the lightweight plastic that has now come to be associated with the manufacturer. Until we see it, we will have to take this speculation with the proverbial grain of salt. Still, it is something for Samsung fans to look forward to because if it works on the GALAXY Note III, the new sturdier design should find its way onto the Samsung Galaxy S5. Samsung is said to be concerned with how its phones stack up in the looks department, so expect a focus there in the next year.

source: SamMobile via RedmondPie

190 Comments
  • Options
    Close






posted on 13 Apr 2013, 21:28 44

1. JojoGo101 (Posts: 211; Member since: 17 Dec 2012)


Honestly I dislike the plastic on the S3 but it didn't feel cheap... I think that was most important.

posted on 13 Apr 2013, 21:52 28

8. Note2waitingonNote3 (banned) (Posts: 87; Member since: 19 Mar 2013)


Plastic or aluminum/metal just doesn't matter to me what so ever. The Htc One looks great yes it does but better than my Galaxy Note 2 it's definitely not. Either way i will be purchasing the Galaxy Note 3 regardless.

posted on 13 Apr 2013, 23:31 11

45. PostalJim (Posts: 46; Member since: 01 Sep 2011)


At an alleged 6.3" I'll have to pass and get the S4. My SIII is the perfect size and the S4 will be almost ientical in size. Perfection.

posted on 14 Apr 2013, 02:27 8

93. MobileJunkieJr (Posts: 46; Member since: 15 Mar 2013)


The thing is, Samsung could have made the polycarbonate finish with a bit more finesse. The glossy feel added to the "cheapness" the claim but Samsung could've "matted" it up.

posted on 14 Apr 2013, 08:17 2

132. PhoenixWright (Posts: 102; Member since: 11 Feb 2013)


I don't like shinny finishes on phones. Just hated it.
But performance counts more than looks so I got the Note II.

I find the iPhone, Xperia Z, S2, and Lumia 920 still better looking than the S3/Note II/S4. Heck, S1 Looks better.

Anyway, Performance Vs Design. Performance wins me over.

posted on 14 Apr 2013, 10:11 1

148. ebubekir26 (Posts: 323; Member since: 21 Dec 2012)


you just exaggerated on the second alinea -_-
but I agree with you on choosing performance over design

posted on 14 Apr 2013, 19:40 1

180. taz89 (Posts: 2014; Member since: 03 May 2011)


Lol really s1 looks better let's not over exaggerate..the s4 is the best looking of all the galaxy devices so far as its the most refined of them but I agree wish they would stop with the plastic back and go with the matte or more s2(international) like back cover.

posted on 13 Apr 2013, 22:50 17

21. Mxyzptlk (Posts: 14309; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)


I disagree. It does feel kind of cheap. With a billion dollars in sales, I'm pretty sure they could have came up with something.

posted on 14 Apr 2013, 10:19 4

150. tedkord (Posts: 12312; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)


They could have made it out of Platinum, and you'd have said it was cheap, because it's a Samsung. If Apple came out with a polycarbonite phone, you'd call it premium.

Here's the thing - if I'm unhappy with the plastic battery cover on my S3, in two days via Amazon I can have any type of cover I want - matte poly, aluminum, carbon fiber... If I'm unhappy with the glass or aluminum back of the iPhone, well tough luck.

posted on 14 Apr 2013, 12:12 1

164. GTR722 (Posts: 261; Member since: 20 Oct 2012)


So...what is the freaking iphone doing in this post ?? ah samsung fanboys...

posted on 13 Apr 2013, 22:50 10

22. Mxyzptlk (Posts: 14309; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)


I disagree. It does feel kind of cheap. With a billion dollars in sales, I'm pretty sure they could have came up with something.

posted on 13 Apr 2013, 23:37 22

50. zackdbassist (Posts: 22; Member since: 15 Mar 2013)


You may call it cheap but it outlasts any other material when it comes to durability. That day, I was reading a review on pocketnow and they said even after a year's use the s3 continues to look like new. While that is not how it is with the others, so called premium looking phones.
Ps- Before correcting others correct what you write. Could and came cannot be used in a same sentence.

posted on 14 Apr 2013, 05:16 1

114. Slimshadytwo (Posts: 3; Member since: 14 Apr 2013)


nokia phone are cheap plastic old specs phones with limited software.
I need apps and gemas !!!

posted on 14 Apr 2013, 13:52

173. umadden (banned) (Posts: 90; Member since: 14 Apr 2013)


it's true

nokia lumia 920's cheap plastic:

youtube.com/watch?v=pzt4SPAkuSA

posted on 14 Apr 2013, 06:59 5

121. papss (unregistered)


I don't need it to be metal but they are by far the worst fit and finish... It can be polycarbonate just take it up a few notches. My l920 is plastic but it doesn't feel near as cheap..it doesn't flex or creak in my hand and certainly doesn't look uninspiring. SS put all the love inside and zero effort into the feel of the phone.

posted on 14 Apr 2013, 10:23 4

151. tedkord (Posts: 12312; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)


I'm sorry, but how it looks is a matter of opinion. To my eyes, Nokia's WP phones are the ugliest, most uninspiring on the market. With the gaudy colors and oversized thickness, they look like Fisher Price toys. I don't find my S3 to be a looker (not that I care because I value performance over looks, and I'm throwing it in a tough case anyway), but I find it infinitely better looking than the 920.

posted on 14 Apr 2013, 00:10 1

56. martycota (Posts: 28; Member since: 15 Jun 2009)


Yes, because all of the stuff they put inside is cheap, so they should just not sell these things for any profit whatsoever.

posted on 14 Apr 2013, 00:17 6

59. HDShatter (Posts: 1021; Member since: 17 Jan 2013)


Funny the amoleds that samsung uses are the most expensive screens used in smartphones. To buy just the digitzer/screen for the s4 it would cost you around $200.

posted on 14 Apr 2013, 03:48 3

99. maier9900 (Posts: 272; Member since: 17 Dec 2011)


Most expensive and the worse screen of all. Colors are not even colors. Black is not black and white is gray. Red is orange and yellow is green. Change the f**kkkkingggg screen SAMSUNG. - you worthless piece of shhhht. Gimme something valuable.

posted on 14 Apr 2013, 04:49 8

108. nhocnho (Posts: 3; Member since: 14 Apr 2013)


The black color on Super Amoled is real and deep black (this screen shows the best black color, you can't see it on others one), the white is slightly green, but you can change the option to Adobe RGB!

posted on 14 Apr 2013, 09:34 2

145. KParks23 (Posts: 639; Member since: 13 Oct 2010)


I agree the Samsung screen is not that great the one X screen was better than the s3 and the dna currently blows anything samsung has on the street right now out of the water the color reproduction on amoled screens is garbage the only color that looks really good is black but the white tends to look terrible to me and the green looks kinda yellow the lcd screen is way better maybe not back in the day but as of right now it is and to say otherwise ur either blind or a complete brain dead fan boy and there seems to be alot of butt hurt samsung fanboys on here

posted on 14 Apr 2013, 10:40 2

157. SleepingOz (unregistered)


I agree that the One X screen was better than the one on the GSIII but "dna currently blows anything samsung has on the street right now out of the water the color reproduction on amoled screens" is an ignorant statement.
You should check the in-depth screen comparison that GSMArena recently carried. It has all the technical details.

"Winner: Samsung Galaxy S4. The Samsung flagship takes this one, as its screen is bigger, with better sunlight legibility, while still offering you the option to have accurate colors thanks to Adobe RGB mode. The HTC One screen is impressive, too, but the higher pixel density can't really make up for the lower native contrast and slightly inferior sunlight legibility."
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_s4_vs_htc_one-review-913p3.php

http://blog.gsmarena.com/samsung-galaxy-s4-vs-htc-one-vs-apple-iphone-5-display-test-confirms-amoleds-can-finally-do-accurate-colors/

posted on 14 Apr 2013, 15:27 2

175. KParks23 (Posts: 639; Member since: 13 Oct 2010)


I stand by my statement the s4 is not even out yet so the dna and lcd does blow anything samsung has away and has so for over a year now.. I'll wait to compare the screens when i see them first hand but yea I would assume that after a year samsung would come with a slightly better screen after trailing for so long.. But I'm sure slcd4 will be coming out before long or something!

posted on 15 Apr 2013, 00:12

192. true1984 (Posts: 825; Member since: 23 May 2012)


I read that review. The One's screen is more reflective but it did have better color reproduction. Gotta give it to Samsung though this is pretty good on them

posted on 14 Apr 2013, 10:25 4

152. tedkord (Posts: 12312; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)


Black is not black? You're talking out your ass. AMOLED has the blackest blacks in screen tech. The rest of the credo about colors is overblown. I'd take an AMOLED over most other screen tech any day.

posted on 14 Apr 2013, 19:19

179. oister85 (Posts: 499; Member since: 27 Apr 2012)


@ maier9900. Then don't buy samsung phone's is simple

posted on 13 Apr 2013, 23:21 6

35. nanbanda (Posts: 17; Member since: 30 Mar 2013)


I am ok with the look too, after all a metal or alumnium were to be used it would only add to the weight of the phone.esp for my N2 which is bulky in size and weight, i am greatful that they went with it, also a metal body would have dent marks in a fall but plastic wouldnt sometimes we need to sacrifice somethings for bette things..

posted on 13 Apr 2013, 23:38 2

51. Wiki_jaan (Posts: 704; Member since: 24 Jun 2012)


check this out...
http://www.sammobile.com/2013/04/13/weekend-special-samsung-worried-about-their-build-quality-galaxy-note-iii-to-have-a-new-design/

posted on 14 Apr 2013, 10:26 1

154. tedkord (Posts: 12312; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)


The rumors had the S4 with design changes, too. Take all of this with a grain of salt.

posted on 14 Apr 2013, 08:31 5

136. Feanor (Posts: 733; Member since: 20 Jun 2012)


Honestly, what bothered me in this article was not the material of choice but the excuse; 'we couldn't wait a couple of months longer out of fear of the improving competition, so we prefered to push to our customers an inferior design'. Sorry, but with their great sales figures, im sure Samsung could afford to delay the S4 until late May (that would be exactly one year from S3 release) and bring a better design. That sounded like a lame excuse.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories