x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Options
    Close






Samsung Galaxy S III: disappointment, gimmicks, or good ideas?

0. phoneArena 04 May 2012, 16:34 posted on

We had planned to do this writeup yesterday, but everything felt too fresh. The Samsung Galaxy S III announcement created a tidal wave of news and we didn't want to just post a knee-jerk analysis of what had been announced...

This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here

posted on 04 May 2012, 16:37 57

1. PhoneArenaUser (Posts: 5498; Member since: 05 Aug 2011)


Not bad device, but I'm a bit disappointed. :\

posted on 04 May 2012, 17:19 44

12. cheetah2k (Posts: 1599; Member since: 16 Jan 2011)


My disappointments:
1. I thought it was going to be ceramic, not plastic.. meh
2. Quad core Exynos performance is similar to the One X Tegra 3, albeit clocked 100Mhz slower than the One X...
3. Pentile SAMOLED...
4. Similar chassis construction to the SGS2.
5. The brushed metal with gloss looks cheap.
6. No black version (blue and white.. meh)
7. Its huge. Would have rather had 4.3" and 1280x720 resolution

posted on 04 May 2012, 17:25 14

16. PhoneArenaUser (Posts: 5498; Member since: 05 Aug 2011)


"1. I thought it was going to be ceramic, not plastic.. meh"

Samsung Galaxy S III back is Polycarbonate (thermoplastic polymer) the same as Nokia Lumia 900 and HTC One X.

posted on 04 May 2012, 17:37 11

21. Mario1017 (Posts: 336; Member since: 04 Sep 2011)


Difference between the two is that the Sammy is glossy, making it look very cheap. Another thing that makes it look cheap is the stupid chromed plastic casing. They should have made it metal like the EVO LTE

posted on 04 May 2012, 17:43 9

22. PhoneArenaUser (Posts: 5498; Member since: 05 Aug 2011)


"Difference between the two is that the Sammy is glossy..."

It is called "Hyper Glazeā€ coating.

posted on 04 May 2012, 19:17 10

52. Phullofphil (Posts: 801; Member since: 10 Feb 2009)


You can polish a turd and call it any thing you want but it still looks like sh** and kinda cheep. It's weird to me that how awesom this phone is along with the fact Samsung is adopting a little bit of apples bis unless model from the iPhone and iPad but the outer casing is still not built with quality materials like what are in the iPhone. The other thing is plastic can be made to look les cheap that's where I am disappointed. Another thing I am worried about is my galaxy nexus seems to lack the quality in other hard ware parts such as speaker phone and radio for LTE and such. I really wish Samsung and Motorola would make a phone together. My other concern is for all android phones. What's with the micro USB being universal it's where's out. The walls on the inside of the plug and the connectors need to be made alot stronger mine keeps wearing out. I guess I am kind of on the fence on this phone. It's not that much better than my galaxy nexus too be exiteded. I really like it and might get it but the exenos chip is not as dominating as last years chip was. I think it could be from programs and maybe the bench mark deals us all of the cores in the quad core efficiently yet. Probaly not though bringing me back to maybe I will wait to see if Motorola has anything to offer in the next couple months befor the sg3 comes out on Verizon wich I hope Verizon don't get a special lamer model than the rest

posted on 05 May 2012, 01:27 11

90. Ivan6479 (Posts: 250; Member since: 26 Jun 2011)


"the outer casing is still not built with quality materials like what are in the iPhone."

Listen to you. Lol The only thing on the iPhone that is a quality material is the metal frame around the phone. Try dropping an iPhone and see what happens. (It will most likely shatter.)

I have dropped my Galaxy S II numerous times (glass side down also) and I don't have any special case and all I have is a few minor scratches. If it were an iPhone I would be s--t out of luck!!

posted on 05 May 2012, 06:39

109. PhoneArenaUser (Posts: 5498; Member since: 05 Aug 2011)


I don't express anything, I just say how it is called!

posted on 05 May 2012, 11:36

138. AndroidShiz (Posts: 154; Member since: 08 Nov 2011)


It's funny how the iPhone was plasticky before the i4, but it was top notch materials and everyone praised it. Now Samsung uses even better plasticky materials and they are considered cheap, even though it's much more durable than glass. Maybe the Apple Tv will be all glass with no plastic. Because plastic instantly just makes it cheap. Need to have all the plastic removed from my car too. Metal and glass is the way it should be. Probably would do much better in crash reports.

posted on 04 May 2012, 19:35 13

57. Mario1017 (Posts: 336; Member since: 04 Sep 2011)


I know what it's called, that is a very stupid name anyways lol, hyper glaze?? at least HTC used actual names and processes with micro arc oxidation.
Just like Phullofphil said, you can take a turd and polish it, still just a shiny turd.
The S3 looks even cheaper being glossy.

posted on 05 May 2012, 06:39

108. PhoneArenaUser (Posts: 5498; Member since: 05 Aug 2011)


I don't express anything, I just say how it is called!

posted on 05 May 2012, 14:33

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


so if the gs3 plastic is ''turd'' then so it htc one x as they are both polycarbonate lol just one is matte and one is shiny..some people like shiny some dont...i find it funny that some htc one x owners and future buyers diss the s3 plastic not knowing that the htc uses the same

posted on 05 May 2012, 15:11 1

159. Mario1017 (Posts: 336; Member since: 04 Sep 2011)


i know they are both poly. but my argument was that making it shiny, makes it look even more like cheap plastic even tho it might not be. and a difference between the S3 and X is that the X is one solid piece of poly. the S3 is only poly on the back (then they "hyper glazed" it), has a cheap looking plastic chrome strip around the side, and the glass on the front doesn't look good at all, especially in blue.

posted on 05 May 2012, 15:41

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


the glass is gorilla glass 2 which is much stonger and scratch resistance than the old gorilla glass that is being on the one x..personally i would much rather have a removable battery...i see your point that shiny can make it look but hey some actually like shiny stuffs

posted on 08 May 2012, 18:49

201. PhoneArenaUser (Posts: 5498; Member since: 05 Aug 2011)


"the glass is gorilla glass 2 which is much stonger"
Actually they are the same just 2 is thinner.

posted on 06 May 2012, 13:04 1

189. medicci37 (Posts: 1288; Member since: 19 Nov 2011)


PA is starting to get carried away with their hide comnent BS. Just because PhoneArenaUser's comment lost the popularity contest, doesn't mean it needs censoring.

posted on 04 May 2012, 18:21 2

38. ph00ny (Posts: 1268; Member since: 26 May 2011)


2. Quad core Exynos performance is similar to the One X Tegra 3, albeit clocked 100Mhz slower than the One X...

Are we looking at the same benchmarks?
Samsung didn't just use a better underlying hardware but they've also optimized the software (ie browser)

posted on 04 May 2012, 18:25 6

41. abhishek48 (Posts: 164; Member since: 19 Feb 2012)


"2. Quad core Exynos performance is similar to the One X Tegra 3, albeit clocked 100Mhz slower than the One X..."
Have u even see the benchmarks,
161k browserkmark, over 100k of one x, 103 fps glbenchmark over 60 of one x.
Right now this is the most powerfull device, but only for 3 months note 2 will take the crown.
pentile matrix is the only real problem

posted on 04 May 2012, 22:00 4

71. TimTebow (Posts: 70; Member since: 14 Feb 2012)


Have you seen antutu, cf-bench, quadrant, smartbench..... not that powerfull...

sunspider/browsermark are more browser dependent anyway.

2.5 ghz quad core Krait will probably rip Sammy's ass.

posted on 05 May 2012, 15:42 1

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


by then samsung will have there own a15 chips so that will be the real competition and not the current exynos 4

posted on 05 May 2012, 23:26 2

175. abhishek48 (Posts: 164; Member since: 19 Feb 2012)


Of course i have seen, it has 20% in all benchmarks... GLBENCHMARK 103 FPS(GS3) vs 60 FPS(Onex) . its the GPU which makes diference MALI 400, Its the gpu in ipad 3 due to which apple is jumping and selling.... so the gpu is way more powerfull here.. the cpu cores in SoC are same so its the integration optimizations which brings 20% more. and above all
1. we know the legendary browser of gs2, it runs flash as if its nothing and pinches and zooms at 80-100 fps.. simply the best browser on any mobile.. where htc sensation and evo 3d were laggy s**ts.. infact most droids browsers lag some whatwith heavy flash.... but gs2's browser was exception it has not been able to port it to other devies.. SO THE GS3'S BROWSER IS EVEN BETTER.
2. Laggy video recording in HTC onex just 23 fps when camera is moving.. s**t... no fix yet.

SO GS3 IS MOST POWERFULL MOBILE YET,
when quadcore krait will come with aderano 320..
EXONYS 5250 with mali t604.. 6 time the powe of mali 400 will smoke it... BIGTIME

posted on 07 May 2012, 12:05

198. BenCjamin (Posts: 80; Member since: 13 May 2011)


If it ever comes out. By that time Samsung will have a octa-core by the time qualcomm gets quad-core. lol

posted on 06 May 2012, 13:36

190. babyk (Posts: 313; Member since: 03 Nov 2011)


correction only gpu won

posted on 04 May 2012, 19:30 1

56. dallas90733 (Posts: 36; Member since: 06 Mar 2011)


I agree with everything you said!, except number 7. IMHO this is the ONLY thing ( Screen size) that might help it sale a lil better; but if you compare this to the HTC E4G LTE, well HTC is the better phone

posted on 04 May 2012, 19:44 3

59. CX3NT3_713 (Posts: 2283; Member since: 18 Apr 2011)


Why would you want a 4'3" screen??? Yuck

posted on 04 May 2012, 20:23 4

61. nnaatthhaannx2 (Posts: 820; Member since: 19 Oct 2011)


My opinion:
1: Glad it's lightweight, but I actually care about build quaity and the weight being symetrical so it FEELs right when you hold it. I could care less about the actual material.
2. Who said that? I have a feeling that it easily surpasses it.
3. Agreed, but at least we got 720p....
4. Not too much wrong with that, keeps the iconic look
5. I (personally) could care less
6. Yeah, black ones usually are better.
7. 10000+% AGREED the bezel isn't that small, and a small bezel isn't good for cases sometimes, but 4.3-4.5 would of been the ideal range in screen size. Makes me mad that they went this big.
I am assuming they did this due to the success of the Note, but still, 4.8 is just too big, no matter the bezel.

posted on 05 May 2012, 00:00 2

85. akshaye.shenoi (Posts: 24; Member since: 16 Apr 2012)


Should've been glass.

Agreed it is fragile but GOD it looks sweet.

posted on 05 May 2012, 02:36 2

93. chriski333 (Posts: 22; Member since: 05 May 2012)


wow man u need to chill dont like it dont buy it i for one think it will be a great phone also this will be my first galaxy phone and im very excited for it

posted on 05 May 2012, 13:56 1

149. MEeee (Posts: 353; Member since: 19 Oct 2011)


Bunch of crying babies. The design is nice and I'll buy it when it comes out. Move on with your life and if you don't like it, then go buy something else. Why bitching?

posted on 05 May 2012, 14:03

150. MEeee (Posts: 353; Member since: 19 Oct 2011)


Samsung Galaxy S3 gallery
http://www.androidcentral.com/samsung-galaxy-s-iii-gallery

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories