Metal body for Samsung Galaxy S4 would have meant delay
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
132. PhoenixWright (Posts: 99; 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.
148. ebubekir26 (Posts: 311; Member since: 21 Dec 2012)
you just exaggerated on the second alinea -_-
but I agree with you on choosing performance over design
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.
21. Mxyzptlk (limited) (Posts: 3510; 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.
150. tedkord (Posts: 4734; 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.
164. GTR722 (Posts: 236; Member since: 20 Oct 2012)
So...what is the freaking iphone doing in this post ?? ah samsung fanboys...
22. Mxyzptlk (limited) (Posts: 3510; 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.
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.
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 !!!
173. umadden (banned) (Posts: 90; Member since: 14 Apr 2013)
nokia lumia 920's cheap plastic:
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.
151. tedkord (Posts: 4734; 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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
145. KParks23 (Posts: 448; 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
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."
175. KParks23 (Posts: 448; 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!
192. true1984 (Posts: 589; 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
152. tedkord (Posts: 4734; 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.
179. oister85 (Posts: 396; Member since: 27 Apr 2012)
@ maier9900. Then don't buy samsung phone's is simple
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..
51. Wiki_jaan (Posts: 702; Member since: 24 Jun 2012)
154. tedkord (Posts: 4734; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
The rumors had the S4 with design changes, too. Take all of this with a grain of salt.
136. Feanor (Posts: 304; 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.
194. jsdechavez (Posts: 702; Member since: 20 Jul 2012)
Samsung can't do metal. Faux metal (aka brushed/chrome on plastic) maybe.
2. papss (unregistered)
They need to... They have the worst choice of matereal for their phones..
24. Mxyzptlk (limited) (Posts: 3510; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
I think you mean "material" but I agree.
119. papss (unregistered)
I'm blaming my iPad. ;) I would never take the blame for such an oversight
171. umadden (banned) (Posts: 90; Member since: 14 Apr 2013)
yeah sure kid, the letters e and i are nowhere near each other on a keyboard
123. SleepingOz (unregistered)
Worst material? LMAO! Seems like your beloved nokia also use this same "worst matereal" for their phones.
125. papss (unregistered)
Does my Nokia flex or creak? No..SS uses the thinnest layer of polycarbonate and then paints it with what appears to be Walmart grade spray paint and says there now my sheep will think its great and you do.. It's hilarious.. Like a donkey and carrot
126. SleepingOz (unregistered)
Still is the same polycarbonate as your nokia, which nullify your previous claim.
The back cover is thin because it's removable. I have the option to replace the battery and to expand the memory with a memory card. Can't tell the same about nokia though..
127. papss (unregistered)
I don't have to put a cover on my beautiful phone while you do... Just saying... And I've yet to need to replace a battery or wish for more storage.. I'd rather have a solid phone that doesn't need a cover. For HD movies why not just use my iPad for that.
128. SleepingOz (unregistered)
Well, up to you..
But most people seem to prefer flexibility and choice over sturdier build.
Anyway, just wanted to point out the bs of your "worst matereal" claim.
130. papss (unregistered)
Well me as a consumer will never support lazy design and corner cutting. I vote with my dollar twice a year on phones and until SS gets that part right they will not get my money. I spend a lot of money on electronics so one day they will want or need me as the consumer
153. SleepingOz (unregistered)
Lazy design you said?
To fit a 5" screen, more sensors and a 13mp sensor in a fairly small body is quite a prowess if you ask me. No fugly fat bezels whatsoever. Not to mention that the "corner cutting" make it easier to hold. The HTC, which accomodate a smaller screen is actually bigger.
Well, based on their massive sales, to think that they'll need you as customer to be sucessful, is plain stupid and kinda pretentious.. lol
155. tedkord (Posts: 4734; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
They seem to be getting along just fine without your support so far. And, come to think of it, Nokia doesn't seem to be benefiting from it so much...
166. umadden (banned) (Posts: 90; Member since: 14 Apr 2013)
lazy design and corner cutting? nokia's been reusing their n9 design for countless phones. that's lazy and corner cutting
181. taz89 (Posts: 2014; Member since: 03 May 2011)
So putting a bigger screen and battery in a smaller and thinner body and still allowing the flexibility of removable battery and storage is lazy design... Lol ok
165. umadden (banned) (Posts: 90; Member since: 14 Apr 2013)
Oh look, nokia lumia 920's cheap plastic creaking
168. papss (unregistered)
Oh did I hurt you blind Samsung blowers? It's alright if you want to pretend that Samsung didn't get lazy with this half designed blob of a phone..and yes there is nothing more important than ME as the consumer...
169. umadden (banned) (Posts: 90; Member since: 14 Apr 2013)
look at you going completely off tangent when i post a video about nokia lumia 920's cheap plastic creaking LOL what's wrong? can't even defend your precious nokia? you're the one who's so blind and butthurt that you're spewing your retardation all over this site haha your anus must be really sore from riding nokia's dick
papss: "hey it's okay when nokia gets lazy! but when samsung is, it's not! durrrrrrr!"
178. NokiaFTW (Posts: 2005; Member since: 24 Oct 2012)
Thats cuz Samsung is the market leader, unlike Nokia and they should listen to peoples demands. Nokia has nothing to loose even if they use cheap grade plastic cuz their phones are good but not that popular. However, if Samsung continue designing such un-inspiring phones, then they might loose market share. I dont care if I get thumbed down but I wrote the truth.
170. umadden (banned) (Posts: 90; Member since: 14 Apr 2013)
here's another butt-devastating truth for you:
nokia: gets microsoft to write wp8 for them and just slap it on their phones like a sticker
android manufacturers: rewrite everything from android's framework to kernel, set their own ui and add features
3. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5593; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)
shoot, i think the delay would've been quite acceptable in this case...
111. Plesman (Posts: 11; Member since: 19 Feb 2013)
Exactly! A delay for a metal body + the all devices with octa-core Exynos + LTE. That would be perfect!
4. moroninc (Posts: 178; Member since: 14 Jul 2012)
only add a metal body if your willing put in a 4000Mah battery, none of that unibody $hit at a cost. still buying the GS4
61. HDShatter (Posts: 1021; Member since: 17 Jan 2013)
The HTC one is 2mm thicker than the s4 but it has a worse battery and weighs more too, sad.
102. feres13 (Posts: 306; Member since: 23 Dec 2011)
Honestly i think unibody phones are something i'd like to see more in smartphones, i think expandable storage isn't a big deal to me since performance is poor and it's unreliable (all of my pictures taken on my S3 and all of my music stored on an SD card dissapeared misteriously!). The HTC One isn't heavy or thick, The One tapers down to 4 mm on the edge, witch is all what you feel! Also i always breaked the back cover of my Gnexus or S3, but i never cracked the back of my iPhone 4/4S or scratched my iPhone 5. There is something unique and noticeable about a premium, well built smartphone! But if the S4 had to use plastic, it should've been a matte, thicker plastic, this "Huyperglaze" crap is a cheap glossy shinny flimsy flexible fingerprint magnet! But i'd still prefer the feel of unibody aluminium anyday!
174. lpratas (Posts: 99; Member since: 09 Nov 2011)
It's because you used a defective card that you have buyed in ebay or in a store of less confidence. In respect to the back cover that you broken it mean that you wasn't much cleaver. The polycarbonate back cover it seem fragile but it is very resistent much more resistent to the scratches than metal.
5. Galen20K (Posts: 512; Member since: 26 Dec 2008)
Well I would hope they would make the switch, but I seriously doubt it... I thought they'd do it last year w/ the GS3 and we all know how that turned out.
6. Taters (Posts: 2942; Member since: 28 Jan 2013)
I hope they don't use metal. I would rather have glass like the Nexus 4 or Optimus G or Xperia Z.