x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Hidden picShow menu
  • Home
  • News
  • Galaxy S5 might sport metal chassis, as Samsung enters its Design 3.0 phase next year

Galaxy S5 might sport metal chassis, as Samsung enters its Design 3.0 phase next year

Posted: , by Daniel P.

Tags :

Galaxy S5 might sport metal chassis, as Samsung enters its Design 3.0 phase next year
Upon the release of the Galaxy S4, a group of analysts were saying that this will be the last Samsung flagship "in the shadow of Apple", meaning that the Galaxy line followed a certain design paradigm since it was conceived as a direct response to the initial iPhone success.

Next year, they iterated, all indicators pointed towards a major overhaul of the flagship phone that literally catapulted Samsung to where it is now. As if to back this up, Samsung official stated recently that they've been taken a bit by surprise by the ever-growing demand for their top Galaxy phone, and went with chassis material that does the job, yet can be quickly produced in multimillion copies in a short period of time.

Now an alleged insider from Samsung has reportedly confirmed that the company is indeed working on an aluminum-clad Galaxy S5, like the concept render depicted in the thumb image, which would be more akin to what HTC did with the One, than the plastic Galaxy tradition. Of course, at this point the S5 is still a twinkle in the design department's eyes, so a lot of things might change between now and the eventual next spring unveiling. 

The more premium materials for the Galaxy phone chassis seem to be a part of the new direction Samsung is rumored to take with the outer appearance of its Androids, called Design 3.0. Plasticky feel is the main gripe pundits have had with Samsung's flagships, so addressing that would be imperative next time, given that the competition has really woken up already.

source: Android.gs

  • Options

posted on 12 Jun 2013, 04:17 15

1. MartianMe (unregistered)

About time!!!...But i hope they live the front simple i don't like anything in the front ...just pure tru black glass.

posted on 12 Jun 2013, 04:40 14

13. _Bone_ (Posts: 2155; Member since: 29 Oct 2012)

Plastic is OK as long as it's not glossy, the S4 active looks swell. In the end polycarbonate is still better against everyday damage than thin metal or glass, and the flexible screen itself will be plastic. So finish, thickness of plastic and form factor should matter for Design 3.0, not material.

posted on 12 Jun 2013, 12:30

74. CellularNinja (Posts: 306; Member since: 27 Sep 2011)

Should I be ashamed at how much sheer joy I felt after reading the title of this article?

posted on 12 Jun 2013, 05:09 7

19. yahoo29 (Posts: 71; Member since: 15 Sep 2012)

For me I more like polycarbonate than metalic, the thing that I really dont like Build is Glass back or glossy back cause it easy to slept away.

posted on 10 Nov 2013, 20:22

92. superdave25 (Posts: 2; Member since: 20 Jul 2012)

I agree, every phone I had, I got the shiny silicon rubber case and it kept the plastic from scratching and the glass screen from cracking when I dropped it

posted on 12 Jun 2013, 07:32 1

44. mafiaprinc3 (Posts: 575; Member since: 07 May 2012)

at the rate they are going compared with the competition, they should be in design 10.0 phase. seriously the galaxy line design s1,s2,s3,s4 especially the s3 and s4 looks really lame. the best looking of the galaxy line is the samsung captivate followed by the s2

posted on 12 Jun 2013, 08:30 5

57. gustavoace (Posts: 187; Member since: 13 Nov 2012)

I like plastic the better. I had my Nexus S for 2 years, dropped it a lot and it was looking great by last december, when I sold it. When I see some pics of these "premium build" phones with aluminum, I feel sorry for them.

But this news comes in EVERY year after samsung releases its new Galaxy S line, and every year, they came with plastic again.

posted on 12 Jun 2013, 22:07

80. najib1312 (Posts: 154; Member since: 08 May 2013)

Then u shud look for Xperias...........not galaxies

posted on 12 Jun 2013, 04:19 12

2. WHoyton1 (Posts: 1635; Member since: 21 Feb 2013)

These are the things I'm expecting from sammy in design 3.0:
Metal chassis
Flexible Screen
Un breakable screen

posted on 12 Jun 2013, 05:21 5

22. TROLL (banned) (Posts: 4851; Member since: 13 Apr 2012)

Or Ceramic back or Carbon Fiber sides, or all Dragontrail glass

Exynos5420 2.3Ghx
Pvr SgxRouge Gpu

posted on 12 Jun 2013, 06:32 1

29. polrt (banned) (Posts: 73; Member since: 04 Dec 2012)

The S5 will receive the like iOS7 UI?

posted on 12 Jun 2013, 07:51

47. sergiobr (Posts: 713; Member since: 25 Feb 2013)

60fps movie record and dust and water proof !

posted on 12 Jun 2013, 08:13

49. Jack58221 (Posts: 157; Member since: 23 Feb 2013)

60fps recording? I want to see 240-300 fps... shouldn't we be able to watch friends to dumb stuff in real slow motion? play back at 30fps would give us 1/8th to 1/10th normal speed.

posted on 12 Jun 2013, 10:07

69. Daftama (Posts: 619; Member since: 03 Nov 2012)

They r trying to make unbreakable screen its own line up

posted on 12 Jun 2013, 04:19 7

3. theminolaboy (Posts: 128; Member since: 18 May 2013)

And then there will be Galaxy S5 mini, Galaxy S5 zoom, Galaxy S5 waterproof, fireproof, dustproof, shockproof and so on and so forth..

posted on 12 Jun 2013, 06:57 4

36. InspectorGadget80 (unregistered)

Fireproof sounds awesome.

posted on 12 Jun 2013, 07:25 2

40. tashreef (Posts: 476; Member since: 24 Nov 2012)

Forget about all these "Proofs".... first let them make a "Durable" device.

posted on 12 Jun 2013, 04:21 4

4. SonyXperiaNexus (Posts: 374; Member since: 01 Oct 2012)

I really have no problem with plastic, its just that the plastic should feel premium and solid, i dont like it glossy. Metal is okay too if you dont compromise signal strength but still aluminium gets scratches. so my preference would be non glossy plastic and then metal.

posted on 12 Jun 2013, 04:30

8. flynfree (Posts: 374; Member since: 09 Jun 2013)

+1 to that!

posted on 12 Jun 2013, 04:46

14. EXkurogane (Posts: 863; Member since: 07 Mar 2013)

I agree aluminium gets scratches easily, my Nokia N8 is one example. But it has crashed onto all kinds of surfaces including road and pavement, and got baked in my car under sunlight (left it in my car and forgot about it since i use its FM transmitter for my car audio) and it's still working.

posted on 12 Jun 2013, 04:49

15. SonyXperiaNexus (Posts: 374; Member since: 01 Oct 2012)

well, nokia is nokia :) same here with my C7. I really wish there was a good android phone with FM Transmitter, its probably the most frequently used feature for me.

posted on 12 Jun 2013, 04:21

5. EXkurogane (Posts: 863; Member since: 07 Mar 2013)

Metal chassis, but same design. Just wait.

posted on 12 Jun 2013, 05:55 1

25. Jason2k13 (Posts: 1310; Member since: 28 Mar 2013)

millions of people loved the S3 and S4 design, now making it with aluminium would make it alot better looking, but for me i prefer matte plastic as it looks decent and keeps the weight down.

posted on 12 Jun 2013, 08:18 1

50. maxican16 (Posts: 364; Member since: 29 Sep 2011)

Hah, probably right. Personally I'm hoping they ditch the home key, but I know there's about a 0.5% chance of that actually happening.

My dream: on screen buttons that could be configured without flashing a custom ROM. (The back button on the right is just... wrong.)

posted on 12 Jun 2013, 08:48 2

61. Taters (banned) (Posts: 6474; Member since: 28 Jan 2013)

Physical home button is much better. Only argument that you can really make against one is that it might eventually wear out faster than a capacitive one which isn't even an argument considering you would have a new phone before it wears out.

The 3 HUGE advantages of the physical home button is

- You can use it to wake up your phone. This is especially important for phones with the power button on the top
- Physically feel where the button actually is without looking for it
- No chance of accidentally pressing it

As for the other methods, they are full of glaring flaws with not one advantage. I guess with on screen buttons it will rotate along with the landscape but who actually cares about that? If a screen rotation actually throws you off on the button configuration you have serious issues. It definitely does not make up for the smaller screen real estate.

As for the back button, call me crazy but that config makes more sense to me. If the back button is on the left, then there is technically nothing to go back to because the left is already the beginning. If it starts from the right, you can go back to the home screen. It is just better continuity and besides being not what you are used to, it doesn't affect usage in any way where it is located because both the settings and back button are equal distance apart. Of course this only makes sense to cultures like ours where everything starts from left to right. If another culture starts from right to left, which I don't think exists, then the back button location on the right would be messed up.

The HTC One config though where the home button is where the recent app/options button is, now that is just wrong.

posted on 12 Jun 2013, 09:14

64. maxican16 (Posts: 364; Member since: 29 Sep 2011)

There are definitely cultures that go right to left. And those advantages are your opinion. There are plenty of advantages to onscreen buttons as well, especially when it comes to customization. Google's standard is to have the back button on the left because, as you said, for /most/ cultures, things move left to right.. where left is the beginning. Hence the back button that you use to go towards the beginning is on the left. Makes perfect sense to me.

posted on 12 Jun 2013, 10:18

70. Taters (banned) (Posts: 6474; Member since: 28 Jan 2013)

You can't go back. because the far left is already as back as possible....

You can go "back" to the home screen if you already moved ahead to the right though. If you are already on the far left, the back button technically doesn't move you anywhere.

posted on 12 Jun 2013, 15:55 1

78. maxican16 (Posts: 364; Member since: 29 Sep 2011)

What the heck are you talking about?? Haha, I have no idea, so we'll just agree to disagree. =)

I like GOOGLE'S standard and you don't. That's ok.

posted on 14 Jun 2013, 09:30

84. skyguy7567 (Posts: 148; Member since: 17 Nov 2012)

Not a single problem with the orientation. If you are thinking of the chances of accidentally pressing it, well, it's just the same as you on your home screen and accidentally launching an application on the hotbar. If you're saying that you don't want to accidentally press anything, go with the Nokia 3310. 'You can just feel where it is without looking for it' Is it the case that you can't feel where the leftmost side, rightmost side and the middle of you phone is? Perhaps you're new to smartphones? Don't you know in many cases the bar hides itself and only shows up until you click the bottom? Just double tap quickly and you're out on the home screen. Without the layout like the on screen buttons, you need to long press the home button to get to the 'clear applications' section. In the case of Samsung, there's S Voice blocking you. Pressing that a fraction of a second longer and the S voice launches. Many of the people I know are actually pretty mad at that. One tap and... Slide slide slide slide slide and you're done clearing the applications. It also enables you to switch between applications much much more faster and gives room for a layout for Small Apps. The 'culture' you are saying actually states back when the first smartphones are out. Nokia and Sony Erricson have the back-home-options function. That is the culture of smartphones. I'm getting everything wrong when I'm using samsung phones.

posted on 14 Jun 2013, 09:21

83. skyguy7567 (Posts: 148; Member since: 17 Nov 2012)

Samsung is still going with boring designs. Time for on-screen buttons or cool buttons like the HTC one and windows phones. On screen buttons offer a huge advantage that you can just scroll up to Google Now wherever you are, on a website or reading. Just swipe up and see all the traffic and travelling time. I depend heavily on that. If you tell me to open that without that slid function, I would be looking for it for quite some time. Just cause it doesn't say 'Google Now' but just 'Google'

* Some comments have been hidden, because they don't meet the discussions rules.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories