Samsung Galaxy Victory 4G LTE Review
0. phoneArena 21 Sep 2012, 08:52 posted on
Samsung’s Galaxy lineup is headlined by the S III and Note II, but there are many other phones in the family, the newest of which is Sprint’s Galaxy Victory 4G LTE. While the Galaxy Victory may not offer the same specs as the Galaxy S III, it still features a solid spec sheet. Can the Galaxy Victory 4G LTE find a place in Sprint’s lineup, and more importantly your pocket? Read on to find out...
This is a discussion for a review. To read the whole review, click here
1. Nathan_ingx (Posts: 2957; Member since: 07 Mar 2012)
Brian...is it that my browser is having a problem or you forgot to mention about the video playback and codec supported by the phone?
Looks nice though chubby...and what's different here, a thing that i liked, is the absence of the Samsung signatured rectangular physical home key...was wondering when Samsung would keep that button away.
2. XPERIA-KNIGHT (Posts: 2384; Member since: 08 Aug 2012)
HAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA...............8? an 8??? and to think i just got done reading Daniels review on the Xperia T and he gave it an 8 as well...........i just wanna say this, these reviews by PA are just as opinionated as our very own reviews......to blatanly give this "low" end phone a 8 (yes low end, 4 inch "W" VGA not even qHD screen, bad design, and 5 mp shooter) REEEALY goes to show you that it does indeed boil down to wether "YOU" like and are satisfied with the phone of your choice....My only problem is when you do this, give opinionated reviews, and then rate it unjustly, it makes people SHY away from the device because they feel its not enough or they can do better........not trying to be rude, but their is no way in hell you are going to give this particular phone an 8, while great phones like the Photon Q, the Xperia T, and even the Galaxy S Relay, An 8 and UNDER! this phone should have gotten what some one here gave the Photon Q.......A 7! or to be honest......A 6.5.......based on bad design, under par screen, and low pixel density alone........good day phone arena
3. g2a5b0e (Posts: 1793; Member since: 08 Jun 2012)
You're looking at it entirely wrong. You can't compare high-end devices to low-end devices. If that was how it was done, then all low-end devices would receive scores in the 1-3 range compared to the Galaxy S3s of the world. Devices receive scores based only on how other devices in their own range perform. That's the way it's done.
4. g2a5b0e (Posts: 1793; Member since: 08 Jun 2012)
Now, that being said, the review score for this phone certainly does seem a little high.
5. XPERIA-KNIGHT (Posts: 2384; Member since: 08 Aug 2012)
lol......there are NO catergories as far as i know.....the ratings seem to be an "overall" rating for every phone here....
6. Nathan_ingx (Posts: 2957; Member since: 07 Mar 2012)
Can i blame it on the Galaxy SIII-esque look of it?? Just a question...
7. g2a5b0e (Posts: 1793; Member since: 08 Jun 2012)
I only say that because I remember specifically reading it somewhere on this site after thinking the same thing a few times. It makes sense when you think about it. There's just no way to review a phone like this on the same scale as a top of the line, flagship device. I tried to find where I read it, but I couldn't. :-\
9. XPERIA-KNIGHT (Posts: 2384; Member since: 08 Aug 2012)
yea i agree it makes sense but just know that if it confused people like you and me, then its doing it to others as well.....
10. KFear (Posts: 135; Member since: 06 Feb 2012)
I agree too. They don't rate them on the same scale as the big daddies. For a mid-range device, aside from it's size and weight, it's pretty gosh darn good!
11. g2a5b0e (Posts: 1793; Member since: 08 Jun 2012)
13. Doakie (Posts: 724; Member since: 06 May 2009)
You know I read your comment and tried to view things your way, but I just don't see the logic. You're fully dismissing this phone due to "low screen resolution" and a 5 MP shooter... If you compare this to Sprints closest offering from Apple, last years iPhone 4S the Galaxy Victory isn't really that bad. Let's go down the list, this is a feature/spec comparison. I'm not going to argue which voice assistant or video chat is better, simply if it has certain features.
Price: Victory (Victory $49 at Amazon vs iPhone $99 at Sprint)
Overall size: iPhone
Screen size: Victory
Screen resolution & technology: iPhone
Battery: Victory (User swappable vs fixed)
Processor/RAM: Tie (Both run smooth, neither is overly laggy)
Storage: Victory (User swappable vs fixed)
Video chat: Tie (Google Talk vs FaceTime)
Voice Assistant: Tie (S Voice vs Siri)
The Galaxy Victory isnt a bad device for sub $100. In fact it gives you plenty of new tech features for a price that is cheaper than last year's tech. I agree that the Photon Q should have gotten a higher score, but to dismiss the Victory due to low PPI and a design you deem as bad seems very close minded.
8. satanrules (Posts: 19; Member since: 22 Sep 2012)
Samsung's back cover's never fail to disappoint.
15. mzhelaineous (Posts: 1; Member since: 03 Dec 2012)
The problem with these so-called reviews, is that the feedback is more confusing than the review! I just ordered this phone as it was a "free" phone on the Sprint plan for a Christmas
special. I live on a very limited income so I got what I could afford. The reviews aren't sparkling, but as a free phone, I didn't expect it to be a phone equivalent to a high-end phone. However, I started reading the feedback, and to my horror, I now wonder if this phone will even be functional when I get it. I hope people who leave feedback can be more sensitive to other consumers with limited incomes who get these phones because we "have" to rather than want to and perhaps offer some positive feedback occasionally.
Just my humble opinion.