Samsung Galaxy 5 Review
0. phoneArena 04 Nov 2010, 11:12 posted on
The hardware of the Samsung Galaxy 5 is low-end, but don’t be fooled by that – it masks a device with all modern connectivity options and Android 2.1 for a rock bottom price. Hopefully this will lure you enough to read on if you are interested in a name-brand Android handset for tight budgets…
This is a discussion for a review. To read the whole review, click here
1. rizalhanafi (Posts: 1; Member since: 29 Nov 2010)
Used this phone for almost a month before giving it to my wife and buying a Galaxy S.
Pros: A very good phone despite its small size and price too. Very snappy phone, better processor speed(600MHz) when compared to HTC Wildfire(528 MHz). Better functionality when compared with a more (30%) expensive Nokia C6 owned by a flabbergasted friend who bought it at almost the same month. Responsive capacitive touch screen is a plus. Adequate 256mb of Ram (good for non-memory intensive apps). The GPS is way better than the Galaxy S. Decent battery/power/usage time. A standard 512 MB Rom Memory. SD memory up to 16G, this should come in handy if using AP2SD on a froyo update. Solidly built.A good good speaker max volume for its size. A well equip connected phone with bluetooth 3.0, 8011g, HSDPA 7.2.
Con: Small application space 140MB (froyo where are you), crammed onscreen keyboard, lowly 2 MPixel camera. No pinch-zoom (asking too much?)
This phone make me drool endlessly for a full Android capable phone. It is a good introductory Android phone. I even completed the Angry Bird game using this phone despite the minor lag cause by the ad. Buy this for your kids or use it as a backup. It even trumped the S with its way better GPS.
2. Perseus (unregistered)
just bought these last week and it was AWESOME!!! btw im a 12 yr old in Philippines and bought it for like 222USD = 10,000 pesos
3. thenflux (unregistered)
Bought this phone about 1 week ago.
i could say galaxy 5 is good. but could be better. here are my pros and cons for the phone. its pretty much like rizalhanafi's post.
fast processor (600mhz)
great memory capacity (16gb)
very, very responsive touch screen
high quality built-in speakers
great response times and fast and well polished graphics makes this great. you can play songs with very nice quality at full volume
POWER HUNGRY especially when wifi is on (lasts only about 3-5 hours with wifi, 10-12 hours without)
cant handle big apps (well, games that is)
small screen (for me, cause i have big fingers)
as what rizalhanafi said, it has a small screen. not for those who are used to QWERTY phones cause it is very cramped. you cant go anywhere without having an extra battery or getting that ol' wallcharger/car charger thing(i dont know what its called) to keep your phone 96% powered up. every 10 mins takes about 1% of your battery life and when reaches 50%, it begins to power save (slightly dims, performs slower)
other than all of that, if you are upgrading from a low-end phone to mid-range, get this phone and love it cause its the best you can get for your $200(or less).
if you want them android 3.0, iOS, win7 phones or BB phones, which costs about 105% more, the Galaxy 5 is NOT a phone for you.
4. galacticnomad (unregistered)
I just returned my Samsung Galaxy S. It was a beautiful phone, easy to figure out and use. I had it for a couple of weeks. however, I live in an area that does not have a fast network so the phone was running quite slow here. I also decided that although I travel, I am mostly at home near my laptop or in my office near my pc, so I really need a mobile phone, not a mini touch screen computer. The thing was an absolute hazard on the road as well; a minimum of three steps to answer and four steps to phone out, too much time looking at and touching the fancy phone and not looking at the road. My current phone is one step and the call is live. Also, I did not at all like the radio wave/microwave radiation of the phone. All smart/android phones emit these powerful waves. If you look at the manufacturer's literature there are warnings out the wazoo; even the manufacturer says that the phone should always be a minimum of 25 mm (one inch) from the body. For me in my life, I am not interested in microwaving my brain or my reproductive organs (having the phone in my pocket). This technology is somewhat alluring and slick, but really people, how necessary is it and at what expense are we subjecting ourselves to it? With three phone numbers, two computers, various emails, websites, international biz, etc etc, I am going to stick with my reliable, low tech, low radiation phone & headset and keep it simple. I don't want or need the additional complication and potential brain scrambling.
5. Sean (unregistered)
lol, enjoy your "low radiation phone"
6. Amarise (Posts: 1; Member since: 06 Jan 2012)
Actually, research has shown that your average 'low tech' phone has WAY more radiation than the majority of smartphones, expecially the old, outdated 'brick' /you/ are probably using.
Nothing wrong with that, its fine if you just want to call people and send messages, but in this era where the newest technology is vital to success, if you don't stay up to date, you'll be left behind.