Samsung: our smartphones will get thinner, more premium, and with higher display resolutions
2. AlikMalix (Posts: 5836; Member since: 16 Jul 2014)
Woohhooo, are you ready for 8K baby, it will be awesome...!!!
11. UglyFrank (Posts: 1649; Member since: 23 Jan 2014)
They won't use it 8K for like 4/5years and Apple won't use it for about 20
22. AlikMalix (Posts: 5836; Member since: 16 Jul 2014)
I hope that no device I'm interested in use anything above 400ppi Just no point other than drain battery and slow down the OS... I look at my 5S and I couldnt care less if there's more pixels crammed in...
76. j2001m (Posts: 2941; Member since: 28 Apr 2014)
Does not drain battery on oled screens and the cpu can easy deal with 2k on samsung phones,
88. TechieXP1969 (limited) (Posts: 10115; Member since: 25 Sep 2013)
I disagree. The first 4K smartphone will likely appear within 2 years with 8K coming within 4. Just watch.
make sure you remember this post.
We are already using 2K displays on phones, well at least some us us are.
27. seven7dust (unregistered)
typical useless gimmicks. 8k makes sense on Tvs not on phones.
30. AlikMalix (Posts: 5836; Member since: 16 Jul 2014)
I think 4K is pointless.. I was being sarcastic..
36. mat87 (Posts: 4; Member since: 12 Mar 2013)
It is...unless You take into consideration incredible possibilities of VR technology. I think that this is the point why Samsung want to add ppi to displays. Right now You can have 3d cinema at home. I was shocked when I put this on with my Note 4. Incredible quality!!!!
42. AlikMalix (Posts: 5836; Member since: 16 Jul 2014)
That makes sense... I haven't tried anything VR.. but maybe that's the future.
69. miket1737 (Posts: 2541; Member since: 17 Mar 2013)
No the real reason why Samsung keeps adding PPI is because of the Pentile effect; the higher PPI you go the less Pentile you see , Note 4 has PPI of 517 for white and green subpixels but only 368 PPI for blue and red subpixels, which is below the illstrurious 400+ PPI mark, raising PPI mitigates that a ton
77. j2001m (Posts: 2941; Member since: 28 Apr 2014)
It all good upping the the res on oled screens as it does nothing to the battery
4. Captain_Doug (Posts: 997; Member since: 10 Feb 2012)
Thinner? How about same with larger battery?
10. engineer-1701d (unregistered)
the soc will go down so small it will take a 1/4 of the phone and the rest will be battery and display, wider battery same juice
17. TheStanleyFTW (Posts: 244; Member since: 20 Feb 2013)
WHY DO COMPANIES NOT UNDERSTAND THAT WE WANT LOOOOONG BATTERY LIFE??? Fast charging is good but not if my battery dies every 5 hours...GOD. My mothers Xperia Z3 Compact got beast battery life, yet the only thing they could do to make the successor better is faster charging (And even better battery life?) :)
78. j2001m (Posts: 2941; Member since: 28 Apr 2014)
Sorry the most selling phone I.e. IPhone as a crap battery, s6 is smaller amd as a bigger battery and the battery lasts a long time over it,
18. phljcnth (Posts: 485; Member since: 30 Apr 2012)
I think there's something more in creating a thinner device other than for ergonomics and aesthetics purposes. Samsung could be gunning for a foldable device that fits in the pocket. A tri/bifoldable tablet-cum-phone should be 3-5mm thin and so Samsung must work on new tech that will fit in that chassis. This is just a theory though.
5. promise7 (Posts: 877; Member since: 03 Jul 2013)
I would certainly hope so, but that's a given. All manufacturers will improve their phones every year.
13. galanoth (Posts: 425; Member since: 26 Nov 2011)
As technology progresses and components get more power efficient, battery life will improve.
16. MrET1 (Posts: 110; Member since: 29 Jan 2015)
Samsung knows what they are doing. The screen in the S6 for example has 77% more pixels than the one in the S5 and still uses 20% less power. The whole 'higher resolution display kills battery life' thing is only true for LCD, Amoled doesn't have that issue.
24. bodzio1809 (Posts: 356; Member since: 28 Aug 2013)
Still you are loosing a lot of performance.
28. seven7dust (unregistered)
agreed , still don't get this trend of going for more pixels and getting less performance and less battery life
when most reviews say that it's pointless and makes no difference , I personally can't see the difference at all between 2k, 1080p and 900p , it's a freaking 4-5" screen for gods sake.
33. bodzio1809 (Posts: 356; Member since: 28 Aug 2013)
People love numbers. They will keep telling to themselves that they see difference. The truth is that they can notice difference only when they stare from very small distance and they look for pixels. They just want to justify buying device with too high resolution.
It's like Apple users fingers get bigger. Number lovers are getting much better vision with time. In future they will see difference between 4k and 8k screen on 5' smartphone :-)
41. drunkenjay (Posts: 887; Member since: 11 Feb 2013)
they will if you use gear vr. which was the main reason for the quad hd displays.
45. bodzio1809 (Posts: 356; Member since: 28 Aug 2013)
Gear VR should use separate screen. Even QHD on 5.1' screen could be not enough.
49. MrET1 (Posts: 110; Member since: 29 Jan 2015)
You won't notice a performance hit either since most of the rendering except for UI and benchmarks happens in 1080p. Games you play on a 1440p phone are rendered in 1080p and then stretched to fill the screen. And the UI and webpages only require 2D rendering which for 1440p is not much more demanding than for 1080p. Actually the only 3D applications that run in 1440p are 3D benchmarks.
This same thing happens on early 1080p phones like the S4 and One M7, they render demanding games in 720p and then stretch it to fil the screen. All of this is done for the sake of fluid gameplay on >30fps. Game developers don't want your phone to run a game in low framerates since that would be bad for the ratings on their games.
79. j2001m (Posts: 2941; Member since: 28 Apr 2014)
Nope as all there score even with 2k kill the dev 810
89. bodzio1809 (Posts: 356; Member since: 28 Aug 2013)
Imagine new Exynos with "only" fullHD screen. Much better performance and 1-2 hours more screen time. Also check graphic onscreen tests. They doesn't look so good.
20. frankg (Posts: 152; Member since: 14 May 2014)
Thinner and higher resolution, they are going to loose me... I want thicker, thus getting better battery life and a flush camera!
21. SonyPS4 (Posts: 344; Member since: 21 May 2013)
Prefer bigger storage and battery rather than more resolution and thinner. I really want smartphone with a week battery
25. Biernot (unregistered)
Higher resolution than reality ^^
29. seven7dust (unregistered)
when will they get it, more pixels is a gimmick it's just numbers on a spec sheet , makes zero difference in real world use.
They need to focus on battery-life and maintain performance not pixels.
40. XaErO (Posts: 319; Member since: 25 Sep 2012)
These changes are welcome .. but only with stronger long lasting batteries !!
I guess, long lasting phones are always preferred over thin ones !! People will love to see these in flagship phones !!
43. LittleGaGaKiller (Posts: 283; Member since: 19 Jan 2015)
in other words : we will follow Apple wherever they go, Apple is our P!MP
44. Switch00 (Posts: 472; Member since: 04 Sep 2013)
booooring! put a physical camera button on them instead, some various detachable (extra) camera lens and quality well designed earphones in the box. This better display and thinner phones are so yesterday.
48. rotkiv3451 (Posts: 84; Member since: 07 Jan 2015)
Complaining about battery life is pointless if you still end up buying the phone. Please people DON'T buy the S6 with its small battery, if it doesn't sell they will be forced to release phones with bigger batteries.
51. nctx77 (Posts: 1959; Member since: 03 Sep 2013)
But why does Apple keep going thinner? Wait....this is Samsung. It's ok!
61. willard12 (Posts: 1677; Member since: 04 Jul 2012)
But why does Samsung keep increasing screen size? Wait...this is Apple. It's ok!
80. j2001m (Posts: 2941; Member since: 28 Apr 2014)
Samsung is thinner than iphone but with a way bigger battery, I am lost, samsung made there phone bigger and added bigger battery on the s5 over the s4 and what happens, oh yes,no sales, hm, that works NOT, if Apple starts making there phones bigger and they start to sell more get back to me....
93. ngo2dd (Posts: 896; Member since: 08 Jul 2011)
It thinner when you have a huge camera humps there
100. mrochester (Posts: 549; Member since: 17 Aug 2014)
The Galaxy S6 is also taller and wider than the iPhone 6.
52. xperian (Posts: 322; Member since: 10 Apr 2014)
What about 720p flagship phone with latest hardware? Imagine the speed and battery life.
82. j2001m (Posts: 2941; Member since: 28 Apr 2014)
Not going to happen as the oled screens look crap at that res, as per samsung did that last year, the screen was crap and it did not sell
99. xperian (Posts: 322; Member since: 10 Apr 2014)
If they made it RGB amoled or even IPS it wouldn't look bad. Alpha's display was crap because it was pentile
55. cmpunk (banned) (Posts: 88; Member since: 27 Jan 2015)
Innovation has no limit. Don't just make assumption yet because we really don't know what will happen in the next decade. Maybe high resolution is not seen as much useful for now.
64. drunkenjay (Posts: 887; Member since: 11 Feb 2013)
as long as the battery improves and you can grip the phone, i dont mind
70. Spedez (Posts: 450; Member since: 29 Aug 2014)
Too late. I hate my ex-SG4. I switched that to Nokia XL which is better. No lag! Too bad it only has so little disk space. Waiting for the new Nokia device with installable Google Play store.
72. amasog (Posts: 346; Member since: 22 Aug 2013)
higher resolution??? for what? haha!
oh & its what the gullible fandroids want even not necesssary. haha!
81. TechieXP1969 (limited) (Posts: 10115; Member since: 25 Sep 2013)
To justify their own misplaced priced tag?
At $650 for the Galaxy S, find another phone at the same price that offers even half of the same capabilities and features.
In fact show me a flagship device for $650 that even spec'd like a Galaxy S. Because I know as a fact Motorola doesn't have one and neither does Sony and HTC is the only one fairly close, but their devices don't do what the S does.
Show me IP67 certified flagship for $650
Show me a Flagship that is $650 that has multi-window, smartstay, microSd card support and MHL 2.0.
Show me a flagship device at $650 that has 1080p (S5) or even 1440p like the S6 is going to have.
Show me a $650 flagship device with 1080 recording from both cameras .
The HTC M8, the Moto X, the Sony Xperia Z3, the LG G3 and the iPhone 6 all are lesser when it comes to the Galaxy S5, no less the S6.
Do any of those phones use 6061 rated Aluminum which has magnesium and other metals to make it stronger yet stay light? Do any of them have dual lens with 1.9 Aperture? Do any of them have a camera that is ready to shot in 07 secs? So any of them have DDR4 RAM? Do any of them have the fastest internal storage? DO any of them have an Octacore processor? Do any of them have the best colour accurate display?
Need I go on? Look at the Note 4. It retails for $699. Show me another phone with a top rated QHD display and has 8 hours of battery-life, when the screen is on 100% of the time.
Show me a $699 device with a digitized stylus with 2048 pressure sensitivity. Show me another flagship that is $699 that has multi-window, and has the ability to have as many as 15 app bubbles for aps standing by for use. Show me a 699 flagship with a 3.7MP 120 degree front facing camera. Show me a flagship where the hear rate sensor doubles as a camera button. Show me a phone that is $650 or 699 that has 2K and 4K recording.
Sure, Samsung devices have gimmicky features too, but many of them are very useful to many and no other phone has them. Show me another flagship with one-handed mode where you still have access to 100% of what is on he screen.
83. TechieXP1969 (limited) (Posts: 10115; Member since: 25 Sep 2013)
Samsung has the perfect pricing. At leats they don't charge you $100 to go from 32GB to 64GB in storage. At least they don't charge you $100 because they made the phone bigger. At leats for their price they offer you the latest in hardware innovation vs giving you a phone full of hardware from 2012.
$749 for an iPhone that still has a 720p shooting 1.2MP camera which was a standard camera in 2004. That's what you call misplaced pricing. Selling you a device with 1GB of RAM, 750P display that sucks up more battery than the Galaxy S5 with a larger 1080p display. Where their dualcore sucks more power than an Quadcore.
Show me a flagship phone that charges 50% of the battery in 30mins and fully charges from 0% in just 90mins. Several of those phones have smaller batteries vs the Note 4 and still take 3 hours to charge. Show me a $650 flagship that charges from 0% to enough juice for 4hrs.
Show me another device with Ultra Power Saving mode that even with 20% battery will still give you several more hours of usage.
Misplaced pricing? The only problem with Samsung is they have to many phones. To many phones that carry the Galaxy name when their should only be 2 of them.
The problem with Samsung isn't because they didn't use metal on the casing. Many people would prefer a durable phone made out of the best possible materials, but not sacrificing durability and longevity in the process.
The problem with the S5 and why it sold short or equal to the S4 was because the upgrade was said to be to minimal. Maybe because Android fans expect more because other OEM's like Apple's upgardes from one model to another were even more minimal. In fact the iPhone 6 uses the exact same hardware at the 5S. That wasn't even an upgrade. All that changed was the size.
But sites like PA don't blast Sony, or Apple or any other OEM like they do Samsung. Samsung struggled on the low and mid-ranged phones, the Galaxy S and Note still have the same amount of sales as they've had before.
Show me another OEM who sells 82M phones per quarter for more than 2 years. That's right, their isn't one. Show me another OEM that has sold 300M phones in a year. That's right their isn't one.
Show me another company who spends billions in R&D and actually makes their own sh*t. NAME ONE. That's right, there are none. What Samsung charges for heir phones to me is perfect for what they offer because no other device on this planet can do what theirs do at the same price point. In fact Samsung selling price should be higher but they aren't price gouging fakers like some OEM's.
90. mrochester (Posts: 549; Member since: 17 Aug 2014)
I absolutely agree that it's great that Samsung make so much of their own hardware. However, hardware isn't where the battle for the smartphone market lies, it's in the software. And unlike Apple, Samsung simply uses an off the shelf operating system and then skins and adds a few proprietary extras to it. This doesn't sufficiently differentiate Samsung from the competition, which leaves punters questioning why they should spend more for a Samsung Android device when they can buy an equally functional Xioami Android device for half the cost.
What Samsung now needs to figure out it how to get away from being seen as just another Android box maker; they need something on the software front that's truly different to what the competition offers.
94. JohnK (Posts: 117; Member since: 03 Mar 2015)
Samsung was on the right path until S4 by adding more unique functions to Touchwizz each time. With S5 they started removing them, hope they didn't remove too much from S6. Since i'll order S6 Edge mostly thanks to its design out of this world, i'll know soon enough.
Very nice posts TechieXP1969, many people lack that thinking about smartphones market.
98. mrochester (Posts: 549; Member since: 17 Aug 2014)
Sadly far too many posters lack the critical thinking skills required to have a proper, decent discussion in forums and comment sections. I'm always left wanting as far as quality of discussion is concerned.
102. TechieXP1969 (limited) (Posts: 10115; Member since: 25 Sep 2013)
I understand your point.
But in my humble opinion, when compared to all the Android OEM's, Samsung was the least popular phone OEM. Sony has a name we've all known for quite a few decades.
Yes I am aware for example the S4 did suffer significant lag issues do to Samsung packing way to many features into TouchWiz and optimizing it very poorly. My wife had the S4 and we both had the S3 prior, but I moved to the Note 2 from the S4 so I have no idea how bad it really was for her. I did get tired of her complaining, so I rooted it and install a custom ROM that still had all the same features, but ran much better.
But TouchWiz is what sets Samsung's phones apart from anyone else's. It is one of the reasons they have high sales. TW bring a wealth of useful features and yes some gimmicky one and yes I do agree they could remove the ones no one really uses or hog to much CPU power and makes the device suffer some lag.
But this hasn' been a problem on the S5 when they did tone done those features. My wife loved her S5 though she loves her Note 4 even more.
The downside to TW is the software runs as a layer on top of Android which is a virtual machine. Android itself is poorly designed due to the fact it doesn't run on top of the hardware like Windows Phone and iOS does. So yes both Microosft and Apple have some advantage here. But that advantage is small whn you compared what Android devices can do vs the locked down overpriced iPhone and the locked down cheap Windows Phones.
Samsung makes their own hardware and TW software. They are a fairly large company for 300,000 employees with their own factories stamping out products. Samsung spends way more money that Apple because Samsung actually innovates it own products. Samsung certainly incurs far more cost than Apple due to so many phone models, so many distribution channels and so many more carriers to feed. Samsung also had far more customers than Apple and nearly all OEM's combined.as far as smartphones.
They all can improve and Samsung is no exception and I realize hardware isn't the full issue. However what makes a phone premium is not what it is made out of and that si where people are fool.
I will speak the rest below.
114. mrochester (Posts: 549; Member since: 17 Aug 2014)
Well I think it's clear that Samsung have been the MOST popular Android OEM, hence they've been obliterating the competition in the Android market until recently. It's just that Samsung's popularity has now started to slip due to
1) bigger iPhones
2) cheaper and more capable Android competitors
I think the assumption you make that the advantages of Android outweigh the disadvantages is where your argument falls down. I disagree. I think your assumption is probably based on the notion that what YOU want to do with your phone is less than or equal to what others want to do with their phones. The very fact that you've mentioned rooting and romming your devices indicates that to me. Normal people do not do that sort of thing therefore you need to discount any sort of modding, flashing or romming ability when you're assessing the needs and wants of the smartphone market.
The big issue with Android is that it isn't different enough; one manufacturers Android is essentially just the same as another manufacturers Android, with skin deep, superficial differences. iOS and Windows Phone on the other hand are fundamentally different experiences. And when manufacturers can't make products that are different enough, those manufacturers suffer financially and potentially go out of business. That is very BAD for consumers.
Sadly, we are probably now too far down the road for these Android OEMs to ever reverse course and change their software strategy to something more sustainable. As consumers, we just have to sit and wait for the inevitable stalling and decline of once major brands in the smartphone market. Goodbye Sony, goodbye HTC, your demise is a textbook example of how not to execute a software strategy.
85. tokuzumi (Posts: 961; Member since: 27 Aug 2009)
"Our phones will get thinner"
Oh look how stupid you are