People crave a premium Galaxy S IV that's made of metal, but Samsung wouldn't listen
0. phoneArena 11 Mar 2013, 06:14 posted on
Samsung's smartphones are definitely among the better ones on the market, but there are certainly not top performance when it comes to style and design. The white versions of "nature-inspired" products like the Galaxy S III and Galaxy S III Mini may be suitable for women, but it's obvious that the male part of society desires something a bit more aggressive...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
1. No_Nonsense (Posts: 826; Member since: 17 Aug 2012)
You see PA, metal is not exactly what people are craving for. Samsung has a a tendency to get the hardware right, but the design and quality of materials used feel rubbish. Say, like the Z10, One X, 920 look and feel like a flagship, the S3 and Note 2 don't. They can use a high grade polycarbonate and people won't complain.
23. hung2900 (Posts: 956; Member since: 02 Mar 2012)
I have repeated it 1000 times already: Samsung has used polycarbonat since Galaxy S2. But the srupid choice of glossy cover made they feel rubbish.
And you cannot have as good build quality as a unibody device with removable back cover, but many want both. So ignorant.
And I felt cheap build quality with Z10 also
26. No_Nonsense (Posts: 826; Member since: 17 Aug 2012)
"You can't have as good build quality as a unibody device with removable back cover, but many want both. So ignorant." Bingo, various phones have a removable battery and a better design/build quality than the S3 ex: 808, the Xperia Neo.
69. ph00ny (Posts: 1246; Member since: 26 May 2011)
I think you're confusing perceived quality vs actual quality. I don't know how much better you can do then add a magnesium chassis under the plastic shell. These so called flimsy "cheaply" made devices are pretty solid in terms of structural rigidity
36. MC1123 (Posts: 1255; Member since: 12 Nov 2012)
actually Z10 isnt xheap looking device... you might be deceive by the outside but it is a solid device... and i really think its WAY BETTER LOOKING than S3, and its removable back is quite impressive and it looks like a single polycarbonate body that you might think that its not removable unlike on the s3
30. EXkurogane (Posts: 863; Member since: 07 Mar 2013)
I agree on the fact metal is not what people are craving for. If HTC and Nokia and give you solid quality while still using plastics, i dont see why Samsung cant. My personal guess is Samsung is doing all it can to keep the weight of their devices down.
On people telling me 'all plastics are the same' and 'Samsung also uses Polycarbonate', that is utter nonsense. It's like telling me your smartphone plastic is the same as plastic used to make phone back covers. Nokia or Samsung or whoever it is can give whatever name they want to the material they use, but it is obvious Samsung's 'polycarbonate' quality is below average and not rigid enough, probably the difference in composition of various molecules at the molecular level of the polymer - it affects tensile strength, weight, and various factors.
The choice of matte or gloss finish doesnt matter, the Lumia 920's gloss doesnt feel cheap, it feels very rigid although the corners are still prone to chipping if it lands on the corner when dropped.
34. MC1123 (Posts: 1255; Member since: 12 Nov 2012)
totally agree, those devices you mention is a worthy flagship coz they are well built plastic..while S3 and note2 looks really cheap! samsung just need to make something very hard plastic like on the lumia 920 coz if s4 will have the same quality of plastic that is found in the s3, i think better buy some chinese device coz it is a bit worthy for its price (i mean 1080p screen on a $300 below phone?!) rather than what will samsung offer
37. PhoneArena. (banned) (Posts: 28; Member since: 11 Mar 2013)
Samsung just dosen't listen when it comes to materials; I mean look at there phones back 2009, it use to use aluminum and steelmixed, and now they just love plastic. The build of the oneX is really nice, even the design is superb.
2. ama3654 (Posts: 295; Member since: 27 Nov 2012)
Yeah we dont want metal/aluminium, proper polycarbonate or carbon fibre is way better, the iphone 5 has too many design flaw with aluminium
61. JC557 (Posts: 1547; Member since: 07 Dec 2011)
Anyone that wants to feel premium polycarbonate just check out a high end Shoei or Arai motorcycle helmet. People want everything without compromises, something that doesn't really work in the real world.
When I saw the iPod Touch 5th gen there was an unbelievable amount of chipping on the body and despite being fully cared for, my 7th Gen iPod nano is showing some chips near the headphone jack and LIghtning connector area.
3. _Bone_ (Posts: 2154; Member since: 29 Oct 2012)
It's not the plastic but the shiny feel that is our problem. The Lumia 920's plastic body is by far the most abuse-proof of any non-rugged flagship, but at the cost of heavy coating and non-removable. Aluminum body is good for slim design and premium looks but doesn't take hits and dents well, nor hot and cold weather in your hand, plus it's slipper and doesn't allow wireless charging. Glass is solid looking but doesn't take hits well either, and usually disallows battery swap.
All things considered, removable battery, easily replaceable flexible back panel, slim light design and wireless charging abilities do make plastic a good compromise - it's the LOOKS that should change, but then that's Samsung's own way of branding I'm afraid.
59. akki20892 (Posts: 3901; Member since: 04 Feb 2013)
agree.........and samsung have to make phone that we can feel superior and high quality feel........!!! one thing is note: we can buy HTC one, Xperia Z, and Motorola X........!!!
4. nikenturd (unregistered)
If you dont like it, then dont buy it...simple as that.
Plastics + removable battery anyday over a non replaceable unibody aluminium. Yep, most consumers dont realize that this is the primary trade off.
47. remtothemax (Posts: 260; Member since: 02 May 2012)
i can see how having a removable battery would be awesome for power users
but honestly as someone who mostly uses their phone just to keep in contact, not play games or watch movies or something
i honestly would much much much rather have a more durable and more aesthetically pleasing phone than one with a removable battery
because even when i have had phones with removable batteries, i have never bothered to invest in a second battery
so the design compromises were all negative with no benefit
at least for me
5. wendygarett (unregistered)
"People crave a premium Galaxy S IV that's made of metal, but Samsung wouldn't listen" says Ray.S
6. No_Nonsense (Posts: 826; Member since: 17 Aug 2012)
Well, I see that you've now gone from an Apple lover to a pathetic-mindless Samsung troll like many of the others. See, you don't add anything meaningful to the discussion, it'd be better if you got out of the herd mentality and made a meaningful statement. Obviously, if you are the old wendy not some new account made by someone else.
22. bobolicious (Posts: 19; Member since: 20 Jan 2013)
haha very true, short and to the point.
8. ilia1986 (unregistered)
Who cares what the phone looks like? As long as it's lightweight, comfortable to use, has killer specs, an awesome screen and awesome battery life you won't care.
You won't see it without your cover\pouch\case and the screen protector for more than 2 minutes: 1 Minute when you buy it before you put on the case and another minute when you sell it to someone and show them that the SD card slot and the Sim card slots work.
12. henrickrw (Posts: 408; Member since: 16 Sep 2011)
I Agree Bro. Lot's of people only complaint on the looks of Samsung handsets saying it's cheap plastic. I will continue to get them as soon as they perform well, have a good battery life & put the competition out of business.
There is HTC & Apple, metal frame & they lack innovation and performance.
16. CanYouSeeTheLight (Posts: 1116; Member since: 05 Jul 2012)
You must be kidding? Apple lacks performance? That's probably why the iPhone 5's GPU killed the Galaxy S3's and Note's ones?
Also HTC? Do you remember the One X, also known as underdog, which now beats the Galaxy S3 in many benchmarks?
39. iushnt (Posts: 1752; Member since: 06 Feb 2013)
I never see benchmarks before buying.. It just matters to geeks. You can see many reviews between gs3 and one X.. One X is not even close in terms of real life performance, productivity and multitasking..
You are right.. Ip5 has better graphics. But that's it.. Nothings else is better there.. What to do with better graphics in tiny screens?
40. networkdood (Posts: 6330; Member since: 31 Mar 2010)
Custom GPU, a processor that does not have to as much as a high-end Android...of course it will benchmark well.
43. ilia1986 (unregistered)
If by "performance" one means "how quickly can one do things" then the iphone's performance is indeed horrible compared to any aandroid phone - due to the latter having widgets, sidebars, cuztom launchers and what not - all of which allow you to do more stuff - quicker.
But of course - we already know that. :)
76. Urgency (Posts: 11; Member since: 26 Feb 2013)
Sammy offers one of the best(if not the best) in that aspect.
I wonder why apple sued sammy?