People crave a premium Galaxy S IV that's made of metal, but Samsung wouldn't listen
0. phoneArena posted on 11 Mar 2013, 06:14
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 posted on 11 Mar 2013, 06:18 16
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 posted on 11 Mar 2013, 07:26 9
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 posted on 11 Mar 2013, 07:36 3
"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 posted on 11 Mar 2013, 18:37 0
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
75. Urgency posted on 12 Mar 2013, 22:17 0
36. MC1123 posted on 11 Mar 2013, 08:22 1
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 posted on 11 Mar 2013, 07:51 5
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 posted on 11 Mar 2013, 08:20 0
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) posted on 11 Mar 2013, 08:25 0
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 posted on 11 Mar 2013, 06:21 13
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 posted on 11 Mar 2013, 12:43 0
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_ posted on 11 Mar 2013, 06:26 7
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 posted on 11 Mar 2013, 12:19 0
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) posted on 11 Mar 2013, 06:29 10
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 posted on 11 Mar 2013, 09:37 0
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 posted on 11 Mar 2013, 06:29 10
"People crave a premium Galaxy S IV that's made of metal, but Samsung wouldn't listen" says Ray.S
6. No_Nonsense posted on 11 Mar 2013, 06:34 4
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.
8. ilia1986 posted on 11 Mar 2013, 06:37 12
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 posted on 11 Mar 2013, 06:51 5
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 posted on 11 Mar 2013, 07:01 6
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 posted on 11 Mar 2013, 08:44 0
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 posted on 11 Mar 2013, 08:55 0
Custom GPU, a processor that does not have to as much as a high-end Android...of course it will benchmark well.
43. ilia1986 posted on 11 Mar 2013, 09:03 0
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. :)
53. donfem posted on 11 Mar 2013, 10:47 0
Very sure "you can't see the light"
76. Urgency posted on 12 Mar 2013, 22:26 0
Sammy offers one of the best(if not the best) in that aspect.
I wonder why apple sued sammy?
9. timtimity posted on 11 Mar 2013, 06:40 0
I don't want a phone made out of a material that scratches easily. I want something that's durable and feels nice in the hand. An S4 with the same back cover as the HTC 8X would be awesome.
10. feres13 posted on 11 Mar 2013, 06:44 3
I'd pick a premium unibody design with a non-removable back over a cheap shinny plasticky ugly, fingerprint magnet, "hyperglaze" finnish, put a huge battery like the razr maxx and no one would complain about a non removable battery, and we can still have an SD slot even if the phone is unibody, like the xperia z.
Samsung has to realise that the Galaxy S series is the "Flagship" android phones, they have to give it a flagship design, flagship materials. For me if this is the GS4, it's not a flagship phone.
11. djoscar4u posted on 11 Mar 2013, 06:51 3
here we go again with another samsung plastic design phone....I'll stick with iphone 5
13. Furbal posted on 11 Mar 2013, 06:56 5
I'd rather have better reception and a removable back panel than metal
17. nikenturd (unregistered) posted on 11 Mar 2013, 07:06 0
AMEN TO THAT.....aesthetics is soo Apple, besides once cloaked with a protective case, it really doesnt matter anymore. To buy a premium phone without slapping at least a protective outer shell layering is just stupid.
78. dimil11 posted on 13 Mar 2013, 22:36 1
But it is also stupid to pay a premium price for a phone which is plastic. In the country where I live there are no subsides. An iPhone5 16 GB is 800 US d and a GS3 16GB is 700 US d. The iPhone 4s is actually cheaper than GS3. 700 for something which is plastic... I think it's arrogant. And by the way, I have a transparent shell so it doesn't hide anything from my iPhone.
18. pookiewood posted on 11 Mar 2013, 07:07 1
Lumia 920 user but I feel it doesn't matter that much. The most GS3s I see are in a case. The should keep the thin plastic they use because it is light and when it is in a case the device doesn't get much heavier. That is unless they go with a harder plastic where you don't necessarily need a case like the 920.
19. nlbates66 posted on 11 Mar 2013, 07:10 2
metal doesn't automatically make it better, that primitive thinking perhaps has just come from the apple side after all the aluminium crapbooks :P perhaps some other material like polycarbonate etc etc.
21. sunny131089 posted on 11 Mar 2013, 07:22 2
Why are all mixing d good design part wd premium materials.....i dont give a rats ass for metal but a design a decent design will that stop ur economiws of scale Samsung obv it wont so stop fooling by bringing up metal whenevr market asks for a decent design!
24. rusticguy posted on 11 Mar 2013, 07:35 4
What great fun is a so called metallic premium phone clasded in casing? It's the casing that matters and Samsung knows that well ... every phone gets cladded in some casing or the other wo why we crib about aluminium? Just because Apple does it?
METAL production has a higher CARBON Footprint as compare to PLASTICS right? If yes then why be hypocritical ... let's talk GLOBAL Warming before we talk Metallic phones :D
25. georgeromo12 posted on 11 Mar 2013, 07:36 0
Guys Try Hammerit.in it is cool place to compare..
28. xperiaDROID (limited) 5 days ago posted on 11 Mar 2013, 07:37 1
Let's just face it guys, what can we do? But, if the GS4 is made of metal, no NFC is included right? So, plastic isn't a bad idea.
29. imkyle posted on 11 Mar 2013, 07:48 0
When I had my Galaxy Nexus and my S II, I had no problem with the back being plastic. In fact I liked it better. I dropped mine several times on the hard plastic and nothing happened.
31. Leo_MC posted on 11 Mar 2013, 07:52 0
If "stupid" is not a good word to caracterise the people that buy plastic phones and then complain about their build quality, I don't know what is.
As a conclusion to what I have said, when looking at S3 sales (a phone made of bad plastic) one can use the same word to characterise its buyers.
So who wants a good quality phone buys Nokia and Apple while marketing influenced-manga liking-low educated consumers buys the rest of the phones.
50. Leo_MC posted on 11 Mar 2013, 09:51 0
I use a aluminium HTC and, although it's the only Android phone maker I would use, it needs a pouch to keep it's paint on (and all the aluminium phones - either the new One, either iPhone 5 - needs that).
I touched a S3 and "threw" it away when I felt that s**t*y build quality and I saw it's cartoonish UI; I bought another Samsung (one with flowers) for my niece and now I regret doing it; meanwhyle I looked at numerouse Sonys and LGs which are rather ugly when looking at their UI.
On the other hand Lumia 800 is a beautiful, great build (except the buttons) phone, 900 is the same; WP and it's live tiles are the future (HTC copied them, Google did it to with G+, Flipboard - you have an entire article on phonearena).
I had an E71, 1100, 6100, 5110, i still have a 1110, 8800 - they don't die, ever.
Apple 4 and 4S are beautiful designed, premium build, great materials, buttery smoth os (not even JB can compare to it).
So, please laugh and buy sh*t; I prefer to pay for premium build Nokia and Apple.
55. EclipseGSX posted on 11 Mar 2013, 11:19 0
HAHAHA "premium" pffff
62. networkdood posted on 11 Mar 2013, 13:27 0
Again, last sentence...funny...I have a droid RAZR...excellent build there....and my captivate had an excellent build and is very unique looking, when looking at the newer models. Nokia does intrigue me. As for Apple, by the looks of how they market their products, they live in the past, running on fumes.
71. KingKurogiii posted on 11 Mar 2013, 23:29 0
the Captivate was certainly the exception from Samsung's camp...
73. Leo_MC posted on 12 Mar 2013, 09:26 0
Please let me know when did Samsung released the RAZR; even if it would have been the strongest truth, it wouldn't have any relevance in a topic about shi*ty Samsung build quality phones and their buyers.
Your logic is like saying Ace should cost 10k euro because Vertu also uses Android...
I remembered Ericsson T28: great plastic and there was also a titanium built model.
So sorry to see Ericsson out of mobile phones market.
Eclipse: 4S is glass+corrosion free/scratch resistent metal; too bad 5 has that stupid alluminium crown.
32. dragonscourgex posted on 11 Mar 2013, 07:58 0
Man, I still love that design. It just stands out I think. I don't see why they use the same method as they did with the Samsung Captivate...I loved that phone. It felt sturdy with the metal back. I drop my captivate so many time too...still no major cracks on it. Actually, I think there's no real scratches on the screen ether.
35. dexter_jdr posted on 11 Mar 2013, 08:22 0
"INSPIRED BY NATURE" is for S3.
"INSPIRED BY SPACE" would be cool for S4 with that design
38. JunitoNH posted on 11 Mar 2013, 08:30 0
By the Samsung, nature didn't inspire you, liars. Nature wants you to use biodegradable materials. What is she supposed to do when all that plastic lands in the landfill three years from now?
42. networkdood posted on 11 Mar 2013, 08:59 0
I still really like the feel and build quality of my Captivate and Droid RAZR...never stray from th edd classics.
65. BattleBrat posted on 11 Mar 2013, 14:56 0
I love my RAZR too... I'm looking at either the GS IV, The HTC One (currently in a tie with the..) Iphone 5s (yes, I'm considering buying another iPhone) and the Moto X, I keep phones for two years, so I gotta be happy with it!
44. talon95 posted on 11 Mar 2013, 09:06 3
When i voted for #1 I thought it WAS plastic.
I have no problem with plastic, it doesn't change color when scratched, it bends without yielding, it is impact absorbing, light, has color options, and is tougher than steel as a wear surface. The fact that it is cost effective doesn't make it cheap, it is an ideal material for consumer products.
I think the quality of the design is what gives it a premium feel, and while material is a part of that, I think plastic can also be premium.
Slide your aluminum unibody across your garage floor once and see how it fairs. (use a case you say) well now that you've completely covered every ounce of quality in truly cheap plastic cover I don't even know why you care to bring up quality in the first place. I want a phone that's tough enough to survive without a case, or a very minimal clear one at most.
45. procopiojose posted on 11 Mar 2013, 09:10 0
well... based on sales of 2012 flagship android devices.. the phone with "cheap plastic" wins by how much again?
10 devices? no?
100? 500? 10,000? 50,000?
is this "the more you hate, the more you love" thing?
funny how people bash a device they are yet to see.. smh..
we can say iphone5 is a piece of sh** cause we already see and hold it with our two hands.. but gs4?? nah.. sip it till march 14..