Samsung makes 5-inch Galaxy Grand official: affordable phablet with 8MP camera and dual-SIM option

5. phljcnth posted on 18 Dec 2012, 03:15 29

Senseless when you already have a high-end one. It is a different case for those who consider affordability. At least Samsung is giving us another choice in phablet market.

14. eisenbricher posted on 18 Dec 2012, 04:17 34

All you people don't get it, right? World isn't only in US, where you get every device so cheap on Contract.

Let's forget about contracts, assume that you are buying every phone at its international unlocked price, plus also assume that your annual salary is less than $5500, and you'll see the significance of price. And I'm just mentioning typical 'fairly good' salary in the developing countries. Grow up people don't start bashing.

If it doesn't seem good, it's not for you. But certainly for some class of people.

21. rf1975 posted on 18 Dec 2012, 04:46 0

May be you are right, If this (s**t) priced at half of Nexus 4 price.
Otherwise this is a another way of cheating customers.
http://www.gsmarena.com/compare.php3?idPhone1=5162&idPhone2=5048

• This comment is posted in response to #14 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #14 Hide

32. T.... posted on 18 Dec 2012, 06:25 4

Opera mini browser (or any other browser for that matter) would look perfect on this :) -- no need to zoom in beyond 100%, sharp pictures guaranteed when browsing the web, with very legible text :D

• This comment is posted in response to #14 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #14 Hide

35. taz89 posted on 18 Dec 2012, 06:38 5

exactly some people think its all about the US market only...this phone is for people who want a large screen like the note but cant afford it..since when giving someone a choice become a bad thing.

• This comment is posted in response to #14 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #14 Hide

22. redmd posted on 18 Dec 2012, 04:49 4

if you could access the nexus 4 at the playstore that is. because outside the playstore the nexus 4 costs around 600 USD.

67. subasreenivasan posted on 19 Dec 2012, 01:20 1

ya really changing some of the features and the apps in the mobile introducing the new model, now this is the trend to the mobile companies

20. rf1975 posted on 18 Dec 2012, 04:42 3

Yeah....Same boring design. Hey Samy better try to copy some Chinese Android manufacturers. They have some good design & spec than this paper weight.

39. MeoCao (unregistered) posted on 18 Dec 2012, 06:47 3

for a midranger this design is ok, but hopefully GS4 will have a beautiful design.

30. sid07desai posted on 18 Dec 2012, 06:02 4

It is a literal copy of Micromax Canvas 2 A110.

41. dragonscourgex posted on 18 Dec 2012, 06:57 3

After looking up the phone you stated, I would have to believe your claim is the other way around. Given the S3 was released July were this phone was released around October-November. How can Samsung copy a phone that was not out? Please stop making baseless claims. They bring nothing to the site accept misinforming people.

46. anirudhshirsat97 posted on 18 Dec 2012, 07:50 0

You are the misinformed here The above phone is not S3 its the Grand. I mean common its RIGHT there in the title! And he was referring to the GRAND, NOT THE S3.

• This comment is posted in response to #41 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #41 Hide

48. brokenchains posted on 18 Dec 2012, 09:23 2

The Galaxy Grand uses the same design, meaning probably the same molds/casings/etc as the S3 dude. THE SAME DESIGN. It's right there in the photo! CAPITAL LETTERS. RAH RAH RAH.

• This comment is posted in response to #46 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #46 Hide

50. sid07desai posted on 18 Dec 2012, 11:39 3

I wasn't referring to the design solely. I was referring to the idea of the mid-range phone. The micromax phone was a huge hit and a lot of people who can't afford the high-end versions bought this one (around 200$). So Samsung thought, "Why not release a similar phone with a Samsung tag?" I'm saying they copied the market strategy along with the phone.

• This comment is posted in response to #48 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #48 Hide

52. anirudhshirsat97 posted on 18 Dec 2012, 12:13 1

my point exactly.

• This comment is posted in response to #50 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #50 Hide

53. anirudhshirsat97 posted on 18 Dec 2012, 12:16 0

here
S3 quadcore processor 4.8 HD screen, Canvas dual core processor wvga 5 inch screen, grand dual core wvga 5 inch screen. Geez look it up before commenting

• This comment is posted in response to #48 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #48 Hide

62. dragonscourgex posted on 18 Dec 2012, 14:26 0

Yes go figure, they use similar parts to keep in the price point they were aiming for.

• This comment is posted in response to #53 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #53 Hide

61. dragonscourgex posted on 18 Dec 2012, 14:25 0

Sorry, I should have been more clear. The Grand use the exact same design as the S3 just a little bit bigger. So, my original point still stand that they did not copy the phone from Micromax. You can not copy an "idea of a mid-range" phone. To make such a claim is just silly. So again, your claim that Samsung copy Micromax is not valid. Samsung is trying to compete in all price range, this is how business works.

It's most likely more along the line that Micromax used a similar design to the Galaxy line cause of the hit sucess

68. rusticguy posted on 19 Dec 2012, 04:19 2

Yes i have ordered A110 canvas 2 for replacing my wife's ageing phone. $180 is not a bad price for A110 Canvas 2.

43. networkdood posted on 18 Dec 2012, 07:15 0

poor, poor widdle ole Shino...aka strikercho

7. smartphone posted on 18 Dec 2012, 03:45 4

Yes, its a poor man galaxy note but making it look like a flagship undermines the flagship device but samsung's strategy is to make a great high end device and then makes some cheap knockoff of it and cash the popularity.
Galaxy s3 mini , ace , s duos , galaxy R etc are examples of this.
its great for sales but it dilutes the flaghship.

15. eisenbricher posted on 18 Dec 2012, 04:20 2

you shouldn't even bother to look at this phone, because you live in US. No need at all, get Note II and be happy.

19. garz_pa posted on 18 Dec 2012, 04:40 2

KingKuroji, didn't you read the first paragraph?

25. KingKurogiii posted on 18 Dec 2012, 05:40 0

yeah. why?

23. redmd posted on 18 Dec 2012, 04:56 2

don't get this is you already have the Note 2.

listen people, nexus 4 is not all that cheap outside the playstore and not everyone gets access to the playstore. Stop that comparison already.

26. KingKurogiii posted on 18 Dec 2012, 05:43 1

oh, thank god you stopped me. i was right there at the checkout when i decided to come and refresh this page. :P

get it from ebay, that's everywhere isn't it?

45. eisenbricher posted on 18 Dec 2012, 07:19 1

Last time when they had stock of N4 it was priced at $600 for 16GB version.

• This comment is posted in response to #26 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #26 Hide

56. KingKurogiii posted on 18 Dec 2012, 14:13 1

that'll go down once the demand isn't so swollen and Google can keep a supply of it.

• This comment is posted in response to #45 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #45 Hide

44. networkdood posted on 18 Dec 2012, 07:17 1

you are missing the point - this one is cheaper and in many countries, it will sell...kind of like the N4, but maybe not quite as good quality-wise...not sure.
If you live in the U.S., then you get the Note 2 - otherwise, get a copycat from Samsung, Huweii, or whoever. Google heavily subsidizes the N4.

58. KingKurogiii posted on 18 Dec 2012, 14:18 0

all i'm saying is that to justify itself over the Note II it would have to be dirt, dirt cheap at an unsubsidized rate. i don't believe in immediately buying trash just because i have the money to, i believe in saving up for something that's actually good.

10. adelta90 posted on 18 Dec 2012, 03:52 4

well, not all of us can afford 5 inch phones with 1080 display
i might consider this phone if the price is acceptable

28. someones4 posted on 18 Dec 2012, 05:47 1

I think a qHD or a 720p screen isn't too much to ask.

36. adelta90 posted on 18 Dec 2012, 06:43 1

samsung doesnt do qHD and 720p would defeat the purpose of a budget phone

• This comment is posted in response to #28 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #28 Hide

59. KingKurogiii posted on 18 Dec 2012, 14:19 0

they do too have a qHD Display. Motorola markets it as the Super AMOLED Advanced display. the Motorola Razr, the HTC One S and the Samsung Galaxy S Advance use it.

• This comment is posted in response to #36 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #36 Hide

33. redmd posted on 18 Dec 2012, 06:25 0

I think you won't be asking for more if the price is much lower.

60. KingKurogiii posted on 18 Dec 2012, 14:20 0

then get up the money to. i don't think anyone is twisting your arm into buying a smartphone now is there?

11. blingblingthing posted on 18 Dec 2012, 03:54 1

What is the point of more specs if this is a budget device? You have a GS3 or note 2 for high end. How about a cheap 5 inch phone?

24. KingKurogiii posted on 18 Dec 2012, 05:32 0

does it really matter? it's still being used within the rightful, contextual parameters in which Apple has set for the terminology. it should really be a universal term anyway.

31. AppleConspiracy posted on 18 Dec 2012, 06:05 1

Yes, it does matter actually. Terminological accuracy always matter, especially in out time of illiterate population. However, you are right. There is no real terminological substitute for high-density screens except "high-density screen". Values under Retina moniker have became referential grounds for evaluating all screens, which only confirms the theory that Apple created this whole industry. I'm OK with that, because it has, just don't accuse Apple for not being revolutionary. Apparently, even if screen has 1000 ppi of density, it wouldn't still be revolutionary, only evolutionary, because it is based on same premise Apple established.

55. KingKurogiii posted on 18 Dec 2012, 14:10 0

technically Apple didn't revolutionize anything in the field of screen tech. LG made Apple's first "Retina" display. Apple just came up with a term based on it's immense pixel density and marketed it. just because Apple came up with a term doesn't mean that every real pixel dense display is because of Apple. get real. it's just a name.

• This comment is posted in response to #31 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #31 Hide

63. AppleConspiracy posted on 18 Dec 2012, 15:38 0

Retina display was concieved by Apple and they gave LG request to produce it with exact specifications and conditions LG had to meet. It's Apple's invention, LG is just manufacturer, and no, they didn't have it before Retina (although high-denisty diplays from others were available before).

However, this is not the point. The point is that Apple were first to make significance out of high-density screen, It was never a issue of producing it.

• This comment is posted in response to #55 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #55 Hide

64. KingKurogiii posted on 18 Dec 2012, 16:24 0

LG had the technology before Apple even came to them. Apple just modified it for themselves. the idea of a pixel dense display wasn't exactly so far fetched as to say that Apple is completely responsible for the use of higher resolution displays on Mobile products today, they were just the first to market with it and so what?

• This comment is posted in response to #63 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #63 Hide

65. AppleConspiracy posted on 18 Dec 2012, 18:13 0

You still don't know what I'm talking about... Apple completely designed Retina screen, and gave LG specifications, then LG used its tech, but it's not about tech, it's about design.

And BTW, they weren't first. Toshiba, SonyEricsson and others had "retina" qualified screens before Apple... so it's not about technology, it's about way using it. But I give up. It's evident that you are quite unable to understand this.

• This comment is posted in response to #64 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #64 Hide

66. KingKurogiii posted on 18 Dec 2012, 18:48 0

i know what you're saying. designing the display isn't really such a huge accomplishment especially since LG's display technology is what made it possible at the time. i'll give Apple credit for their Retina philosophy but they don't deserve credit for every high definition display on a smartphone or tablet. the technology was moving in that direction without Apple's help, just look at Samsung.

oh, okay then let me rephrase that since you couldn't get out what i was trying to say. Apple was the first one with a RELEVANT retina display in the smartphone market. it is about the technology because without the technology there would be no design for it done by anyone. the technology matters and the design aspects matter. LG made it possible for Apple to create a truly impressive display but i'm just saying that Apple isn't automatically entitled to being credited 100% as "revolutionists" in this field just because displays have gotten better and the "Retina" term applies to them now. Apple just gave us a brilliant way to describe a real pixel dense display. i understand just fine, your complex just blinds you.

• This comment is posted in response to #65 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #65 Hide

37. techspace posted on 18 Dec 2012, 06:44 1

if a 4.7 inch phone is okay with you, then its better to get a nexus 4 shipped from usa to malaysia from myus.com, through dhl....
this phone will not cost less than $500 in your country, on the other hand, you can get a high end 16gb nexus 4 for less than $400 if you get it shipped from usa

40. Arthurhkt posted on 18 Dec 2012, 06:55 1

Is it? I did't know about that, thanks for the info bro, will check it out right now :D