Samsung ATIV S Neo Review
Callers were not impressed with the ATIV S Neo, saying that call quality was acceptable but not great. They described us as nasally, hollow and with somewhat of an echo. They rated us a 7/10 and said it was in the lower echelon of devices we’ve tested. The news was a bit better on our end, with natural voice reproduction and good volume.
The ATIV S Neo employs a 2000mAh battery, which Samsung claims delivers 15 hours of talk time and nearly 11 days of standby. Off course screen-on time pays a large role in this, so if you are watching a lot of videos or browsing the web for hours at a time that number will go down significantly. Still, these are very good numbers for a smartphone and will get most all users through the day without any need to top off.
With all Windows Phones running nearly identical software and Microsoft employing strict hardware minimums it can be challenging for manufacturers to differentiate their products. Nokia has already chosen to focus on the camera, and HTC is producing their typical top-notch hardware. Samsung’s Android approach has been to include an excess of niche software customizations, but with the less open Windows Phone platform they are not able to do this. They seem to be struggling to find their niche, and instead are just trying to impart the Galaxy S design and hope familiarity will lure customers. Unfortunately, the phone’s good but not great performance makes it poor choice for Windows Phone customers, and makes it especially hard to justify the switch from another smartphone ecosystem.
OS Version 8.0.10328.78
Firmware revision number: 2216.13.07.6
- Large 720p display that performs as well as it looks
- Poor call quality
- Uninspired design
- Performance issues at times
1. sriuslywtf (Posts: 34; 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: 603; 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: 1658; 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: 1390; 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: 4219; 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: 1658; 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: 100; 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: 153; 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: 459; Member since: 21 Sep 2012)
Hope they'll make flagships running WP, some time.
11. iluvsonynokia (Posts: 36; 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: 560; 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: 118; 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