Samsung ATIV S Neo Review
Samsung has included a run-of-the-mill 8 megapixel camera on the ATIV S Neo. It performed acceptably, but was not a standout. Outdoor images were the best; the ATIV S Neo had good color reproduction and photos looked natural viewed at web-friendly sizes. Blown up to full resolution details were not as crisp as we’d like, and there was definite noise. Indoors produced the same good color reproduction, but noise was significantly increased even without artificial lighting. Even in strong outdoor lighting the ATIV S Neo had some troubled with shadows causing darker than expected images or focus issues, as seen in the pink wall sample.
The Windows Phone camera interface is nice and clean, and one of the nice features of Windows Phone is that you can wake the phone directly to the camera by holding the shutter key. Still, even with that shortcut it took about 6 seconds to snap a photo from sleep. For comparison, we were able to wake our Nexus 4, slide over a screen, open our camera app (which is within a folder) and snap a picture in about the same amount of time. Taking a second picture with the ATIV S Neo took another 2 seconds, as the camera had to refocus even though we were shooting the same object and nothing had moved. Though the software is well designed, it has little in the way of extra features and is much slower than it should be. The MangaCamera app is preloaded, which adds frame and stylization options to your shots.
Samsung ATIV S Neo Sample Images Fullscreen
More popular slideshows
Samsung Galaxy Note 3 vs Samsung Galaxy Note 2
14 Oct 2013, 05:28
LG G Pro 2 vs Samsung Galaxy Note 3
07 Mar 2014, 09:06
LG G Pro 2 Review
04 Mar 2014, 09:00
Apple iPhone 5s vs Samsung Galaxy S4
27 Sep 2013, 05:59
Samsung Galaxy S4 vs HTC One
26 Mar 2013, 06:51
Samsung Galaxy Note 3 vs Samsung Galaxy S4
15 Oct 2013, 05:44
Google Nexus 5 vs LG G2
11 Nov 2013, 06:01
Sony Xperia Z1 Compact Review
23 Jan 2014, 09:22
Apple iPhone 5s vs Samsung Galaxy Note 3
03 Oct 2013, 06:30
Samsung ATIV S Neo Sample Images
The ATIV S Neo records video at 1080p and allows you to snap pictures while recording. Video quality was quite acceptable for a smartphone, but videos turned out darker and shakier than we'd like. It did transition well between dark and light areas, and for the most part motion was captured smoothly. The mic was also a bit sensitive, as you can hear the wind noise prominently in our demo video even though it was not a windy day.
The ATIV S Neo does not have any standout multimedia features like the BoomSound speakers found on HTC’s 8XT, but the 720p screen made the ATIV S Neo much more amenable to watching video. It did not have any issues playing our test files, although like other Windows Phone devices it was unable to display all of our album art. The Samsung Link app is the front end for DLNA connection to stream media to other connected devices.
1. sriuslywtf (Posts: 48; Member since: 09 Jul 2013)
WP + GS3 = Samsung ATIV S
Nice formula Samsung!
In near future there would be:
WP + GNote2 = Samsung ATIV "put any letter here"
3. Edmund (Posts: 634; Member since: 13 Jul 2012)
Seriously guys, how about reviewing a smartphone based on how well it performs instead of your own ridiculous bias against an operating system ???
PA rated this phone a 6.5, which leaves me bewildered if you consider that it's the same score awarded to the galaxy pocket neo - a feature phone with a 3" qvga (320x240; 133 ppi ; 256K colour) , 832mhz single core processor , 2mp rear camera (no ffc), no lte etc..
6. Shatter (Posts: 1751; Member since: 29 May 2013)
Specs are not the only thing that go into a review. Another huge factory is the price.
The pocket Neo is $130 unlocked on Amazon.
The Galaxy Ativ S Neo will be somewhere between $400-$500 most likely.
Completely different classes of phones in range and price.
8. g2a5b0e (Posts: 1805; Member since: 08 Jun 2012)
Yeah, dude. Shatter is right. You can't compare "entry-level" phones to flagships & mid-rangers. If they were all lumped together in the same category, all "entry-level" phones would deserve ratings in the 1-3 range.
4. PapaSmurf (Posts: 6013; Member since: 14 May 2012)
6.5 is too harsh... 7.5 seems about right. Samsung uses the same design language and it's a con? Every OEM does it now.
7. Shatter (Posts: 1751; Member since: 29 May 2013)
Yup they all do and only Samsung and Apple get hate for it.
Sony(worse than Samsung):http://www.phonearena.com/phon
16. gigaraga (Posts: 103; Member since: 29 Mar 2013)
With Sony looking especially ugly. Ugh~ their design is played out ..and it looks more like a clone army compared to Samsungs.
5. aco96 (Posts: 167; Member since: 12 Oct 2012)
My ATIV S is much better than this piece of junk. Stupid Samsung ruined ATIV S' beautiful design >_
10. XperiaFanZone (Posts: 738; Member since: 21 Sep 2012)
Hope they'll make flagships running WP, some time.
11. iluvsonynokia (Posts: 49; Member since: 27 Aug 2013)
more win os phone by samsung means, Nokia gonna release better phones
I think this phone deserve 7/10
14. lsutigers (Posts: 622; Member since: 08 Mar 2009)
Agreed, it does have the largest screen on any Windows Phone to date and it has the highest resolution available on WP today, 720p.
As far as processor goes, you don't need more than a dual core to run WP smoothly, similar to iOS and unlike Android.
12. quentin (Posts: 1; Member since: 29 Aug 2013)
I have to disagree with parts of this review. I own this phone and have had none of the lag/performance issues that the reviewer did, nor was my call quality poor at all. I asked people I called, and they all unanimously said that my call quality was great, better than my older phone for sure.
Sure, it may not have the out there and flashy design that other Windows Phones have, but that's not Samsung's modus operandi. They don't make flashy phones. They, as the reviewer mentioned, make phones with more of a standard, business-like look to them. I feel like too many points were docked on this phone for the physical aesthetics alone.
Spec-wise, it's extremely close to any of the Lumia 92X devices, and performs just as well.
I don't know why they recommend the HTC over this for Sprint customers - the screen on the HTC compared to this is lower res, and has half of the amount of internal storage.
This device has a removable battery and a micro SD slot, both major wins for any Windows Phones. No Nokia Lumia has those features.
From my week+ using the phone, I'd honestly give it an 8... nothing that will blow your socks off, but certainly not bad in any respect. It's the best Windows Phone device you can get on Sprint. This 6.5 is certainly too low.
15. apocalypsebc (Posts: 146; Member since: 07 Dec 2010)
I totally agree! I give the Samsung Ativ S Neo an 8. This is a big upgrade from the HTC Arrive. I don't really care about the beats audio but I do like the HD LCD Display on the 4.8" screen and 16 Gigs of internal memory. I laughed at the part about the lag on the phone because I haven't had any problems or lag on my phone. That's not to say that there isn't any lag on any phone. They all will eventually lag or have a glitch here and there but Windows Phone is known for their smooth as butter OS. The call quality has been great on both ends as well. Overall, this phone is well appreciated on Sprint. Sprint has always been late when it comes to Windows Phone. I don't really see any Android, Apple, or Windows Phone users using Scout. Nokia's "HERE DRIVE" GPS Navigations is Superior to Scout. You can even download the maps to navigate without cellular data. The 6.5 score is a little bit low for this device. In my opinion, it deserves an 8. I believe the coverage in phonearena's area was terrible and the device was defected or a dev device.
17. dexterity (Posts: 2; Member since: 01 Sep 2013)
This device has a removable battery and a micro SD slot, both major wins for any Windows Phones. No Nokia Lumia has those features. ???
for your information:
Nokia Lumia 520, 620 and 820 , removable back and battery, Micro SD card slot
Nokia Lumia 625 removable back, not the battery but Micro SD slot
18. theo14461 (Posts: 125; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
I've owned almost all the top shelf Windows Phones. Focus, Focus S, Nokia 920, HTC 8X. I currently have been using this ATIV NEO S since launch date on Sprint, and it is NO worse than any other WP8 device out there!! NO performance issues, NO call quality issues!! I rate this device at least an 8.
19. dexterity (Posts: 2; Member since: 01 Sep 2013)
good review here
youtube.com/watch?v=zX6Ufp1e8EY ( cannot put the entire link as i am new to phone arena)
just add the three w with a dot
20. 2muchSNO (Posts: 1; Member since: 16 Dec 2013)
Got this phone 2 weeks ago. I had WP 7.X and was hooked. I am average user and needed a balance of camera, storage, size, battery, speed, aesthetics. WP 8.1 is doing just fine for APP availability. You could spend all day comparing this APP that APP. How many do you really need?
Outlook & skydrive are seemless. Live tiles work great.
We have Iphone and Android in the house with the kids but they really picked their phones because the girls had Iphones and the guys had Android. Not saying that they are wrong, but they wouldn't even look at the WP. Too bad. its a great option in this really nice phone. 8/10.
21. NeverAgain23 (Posts: 1; Member since: 11 Feb 2014)
BUYER BEWARE!!! This phone looks nice but there are a few flaws that make this phone just a piece of crap.
1. The voicemail message indication system is anything but a message indication and I sometimes find that I have voicemail messages days old that I never even knew were left.
2. Unlike all previous phones I've had, voicemail messages are automatically deleted after about 10 days after retrieving whether you like it or not.
3. Initially in the first three months of having the phone, it charged beautifully in about 3 hours (top to bottom fully charged i.e. 0-100%). Now after just just 3 months my phone takes more time to charge than an elephant in labor after and purchasing a new battery for no reason other than that being the advice of the service provider I have the same probelm charging my phone.
What used to take 3 hours now takes days to fully or even 50% charge, I put my phone to charge from a 35% battery life on Sunday, February 9th, 2014 @ 11:15AM and it is now Tuesday, February 11th, 2014 9:18PM and the phone is still not charged fully, in fact, it is now only at 91%. Now mind you I left the phone at home all thesse days and used my son's phone through this ordeal. What CRAP is this?
4. Forget about the MS office applications I have yet to get them to actually work properly and this feature was my reason for buying this phone.
I WILL NEVER AGAIN TRUST ANOTHER WINDOWS PHONE AND WILL NEVER AGAIN WASTE MY MONEY ON A WINDOWS PHONE!!
If you want to be stress out waiting for your phone to charge, BUY THIS PHONE
If immediate voicemail messages from your boss, clients, spouse, children, parents, and colleagues especially in emergency situations are unimportant to you, BUY THIS PHONE
If you have no need to open documents from work, your children's school etc. BUY THIS PHONE.
DON'T WASTE YOUR MONEY!!!
|Display||4.8 inches, 720 x 1280 pixels (308 ppi) TFT|
Qualcomm Snapdragon 400 MSM8930AA, Dual core, 1400 MHz, Krait 300 processor
1024 MB RAM
|Size||5.33 x 2.72 x 0.36 inches|
(135 x 69 x 9 mm)
5.08 oz (144 g)
|Battery||2000 mAh, 15 hours talk time|