Don't Buy X, wait for 'Galaxy S9'

[DeepIn2U]

I want the 6 GB of RAM but not with the price tag of the Note 8. Guess that's why I'm okay with waiting. I keep jumping on a new device and end up not getting what I want out of it.

I need to ask ... what on EARTH are you doing or Android OS doing on a daily where you NEED or WANT to have 6GB RAM over 4GB/3GB? Android seemed to be running like butter back in OS 6.x with swiping/scrolling through running app windows. That's all I ever see anyone say on Android why they need to have such a high amount of RAM on their device ... to quickly jump between 10-15+ apps many of which they never goto again within the same hour! So I need to understand beyond show and tell what benefits are you seeing or requiring daily to have that RAM?

In my mind 6GB on a mobile OS device it should be your ONLY computing platform - DEX inclusive.

 

[Michael Goff]

I need to ask ... what on EARTH are you doing or Android OS doing on a daily where you NEED or WANT to have 6GB RAM over 4GB/3GB? Android seemed to be running like butter back in OS 6.x with swiping/scrolling through running app windows. That's all I ever see anyone say on Android why they need to have such a high amount of RAM on their device ... to quickly jump between 10-15+ apps many of which they never goto again within the same hour! So I need to understand beyond show and tell what benefits are you seeing or requiring daily to have that RAM?

In my mind 6GB on a mobile OS device it should be your ONLY computing platform - DEX inclusive.

There are a few types of people who want 6-8gb of RAM:
The PhoneBuffs: These are the types that watch a certain speed test and see that 6-8gb of RAM makes the phone win the test.
The FutureProofers: They imagine the next three years will cause their device to slow down if they don’t have enough RAM.
The ValuePeople: Why not want 6gb or more if they can get it? Wouldn’t that just make it a better phone overall. And I mean RAM isn’t that expensive.
The Improvements: Some people just want the easy way to show the new phone is better than the last, and RAM is an easy way to show it.

 

[KingslayerG5]

I want all those features except on the Pixel 3 or next Essential if they ever make another one.

Samsungs in the North American market -

Snapdragon 845 when their Exynos are generally better.

Carrier bloat, boot animation, and branded.

Samsung bloat.

Usually locked if not Verizon.


Pixel -

No bloat except from Google's.

Unlocked (Verizon or Google Store).

Better photography.

Excellent battery life.

Smoother software experience.

24/7 customer support.

Perhaps not all-glass rear.

Longer software updated up to three years.


S9/Note9 will be great no doubt and it has headphone jack, expandable storage, and Samsung Pay which Pixels all lack. But when it comes down to the nitty-gritty and true basics of a smartphone, I prefer to stay on the Pixel line for life similar to certain Apple users staying loyal to iPhone for life. Pixels are the iPhones of the Android world.

Hate bloat, skinned Android, and locked devices.

 

[LIVEFRMNYC]

I need to ask ... what on EARTH are you doing or Android OS doing on a daily where you NEED or WANT to have 6GB RAM over 4GB/3GB? Android seemed to be running like butter back in OS 6.x with swiping/scrolling through running app windows. That's all I ever see anyone say on Android why they need to have such a high amount of RAM on their device ... to quickly jump between 10-15+ apps many of which they never goto again within the same hour! So I need to understand beyond show and tell what benefits are you seeing or requiring daily to have that RAM?

In my mind 6GB on a mobile OS device it should be your ONLY computing platform - DEX inclusive.

It's not just about how many apps you can keep in the background at once.

It's also about the x amount of time an app stays in the background.

I've noticed Android phones with more ram, apps stay in the background for a much longer time. Even if you just have 2-3 apps in the background.

For example: With just 2-3 apps open on a 4gb ram, they will refresh after a shorter x amount of time, compared to a 6gb ram. So there is a greater chance you can go days with an app in the background not refreshing the more ram there is.

This is especially note worthy for users like myself, that pin certain apps in the recents.

And it's even more necessary on Samsung phones, with their proprietary services running.

 

[DeepIn2U]

It's not just about how many apps you can keep in the background at once.

It's also about the x amount of time an app stays in the background.

I've noticed Android phones with more ram, apps stay in the background for a much longer time. Even if you just have 2-3 apps in the background.

For example: With just 2-3 apps open on a 4gb ram, they will refresh after a shorter x amount of time, compared to a 6gb ram. So there is a greater chance you can go days with an app in the background not refreshing the more ram there is.

This is especially note worthy for users like myself, that pin certain apps in the recents.

And it's even more necessary on Samsung phones, with their proprietary services running.

Um not sure if I understand.

TO me, an application refreshing in the background means there is headless-processes running since the app requires updated data (send/receive) or maybe cycles running to complete non-user actioned tasks (such as a sprite living out its day in SIMS game).

The state an application remains in the background ... running or not is up to the OS' management of available RAM. Should the user not access an application for say a very long time and other apps have data recently accessed, the oldest application (from being accessed) will probably get killed.

In both my understandings above ... yes some apps are best to be using RAM ... however I'd rather have a MUCH faster cpu, cache, and storage to rapidly launch/re-launch an application on a mobile device should I ever require to do so. Yes I understand Android and iOS are completely two different animals in terms of RAM, applications, processes etc ... but to the end user ... if you can launch an application faster than loading it from a background state would that not be ideal? The background launcher toggle allows for frequently launched apps to be accessed much faster than goign into the app drawer of course.

I'm still curious as to the power Android user needing or wanting an Android phone to have 6GB RAM what applications are USING so much?
Games - yeah they always use the bulk of RAM
Browser (with multiple tabs) - usually next in line

yet what else?
Office Documents - not likely unless you're a glutten for punishment with a 50MB+ Excel document; yet I still don't see mobile Excel having to run any or complex Macros like the desktop version and in over 10yrs various mobile smartphone platforms I've yet to see anyone try to run Excel on a smartphone that has data linked to other spreadsheets on a corporate file share. Sure the early days this was just impossible yet today ... never seen anyone brave enough to attempt let alone require it. But that would work for sake of my inquiry confusion on this topic of RAM.

anything else??
- OS Navigation, complex UI animations/data on home screen by Nova Launcher complications - yet how much RAM would this consume, really?


PS: Notice I still get more generic answers vs more real world specific use cases? That's what I'm curious the want/need for this is coming from.

 

[LIVEFRMNYC]

Um not sure if I understand.

TO me, an application refreshing in the background means there is headless-processes running since the app requires updated data (send/receive) or maybe cycles running to complete non-user actioned tasks (such as a sprite living out its day in SIMS game).

The state an application remains in the background ... running or not is up to the OS' management of available RAM. Should the user not access an application for say a very long time and other apps have data recently accessed, the oldest application (from being accessed) will probably get killed.

In both my understandings above ... yes some apps are best to be using RAM ... however I'd rather have a MUCH faster cpu, cache, and storage to rapidly launch/re-launch an application on a mobile device should I ever require to do so. Yes I understand Android and iOS are completely two different animals in terms of RAM, applications, processes etc ... but to the end user ... if you can launch an application faster than loading it from a background state would that not be ideal? The background launcher toggle allows for frequently launched apps to be accessed much faster than goign into the app drawer of course.

I'm still curious as to the power Android user needing or wanting an Android phone to have 6GB RAM what applications are USING so much?
Games - yeah they always use the bulk of RAM
Browser (with multiple tabs) - usually next in line

yet what else?
Office Documents - not likely unless you're a glutten for punishment with a 50MB+ Excel document; yet I still don't see mobile Excel having to run any or complex Macros like the desktop version and in over 10yrs various mobile smartphone platforms I've yet to see anyone try to run Excel on a smartphone that has data linked to other spreadsheets on a corporate file share. Sure the early days this was just impossible yet today ... never seen anyone brave enough to attempt let alone require it. But that would work for sake of my inquiry confusion on this topic of RAM.

anything else??
- OS Navigation, complex UI animations/data on home screen by Nova Launcher complications - yet how much RAM would this consume, really?


PS: Notice I still get more generic answers vs more real world specific use cases? That's what I'm curious the want/need for this is coming from.

Speaking for my personal usage ONLY .... Coming from the S8+(4GB) to the Note 8 (6GB).

If an extra 2GB of ram can keep the Bixby Panel from refreshing every time I swipe to it. Keeps my browser from refreshing for days. Can keep a game from refreshing longer than 6 hours with heavy phone usage. And etc. Then the extra 2GB is highly worth it for me.

I might not need the extra ram all the time, but it's there when I do need it. It's not as complicated of a need that your making it sound like, but worth it.

And for those that keep their phones for years, it's defiantly a plus in future proofing.

Also, on the Note 8(6gb). I don't have the occasional redrawing of the home screen like I did with previous Android phones of any make.

And when phone's cost as much as they do nowadays. You want the best of the best.

 

[5105973]

Vivo will beat everyone to in display fingerprint scanner: https://www.androidcentral.com/display-fingerprint-sensor-launching-first-vivo-phone

 

[jamezr]

Speaking for my personal usage ONLY .... Coming from the S8+(4GB) to the Note 8 (6GB).

If an extra 2GB of ram can keep the Bixby Panel from refreshing every time I swipe to it. Keeps my browser from refreshing for days. Can keep a game from refreshing longer than 6 hours with heavy phone usage. And etc. Then the extra 2GB is highly worth it for me.

I might not need the extra ram all the time, but it's there when I do need it. It's not as complicated of a need that your making it sound like, but worth it.

And for those that keep their phones for years, it's defiantly a plus in future proofing.

Also, on the Note 8(6gb). I don't have the occasional redrawing of the home screen like I did with previous Android phones of any make.

And when phone's cost as much as they do nowadays. You want the best of the best.

The extra ram really helps in post image processing as well

 

[LIVEFRMNYC]

The extra ram really helps in post image processing as well

True I didn't even think about that. Would the rumored ability of HDR recording for the S9, benefit from more ram as well?

 

[jamezr]

True I didn't even think about that. Would the rumored ability of HDR recording for the S9, benefit from more ram as well?

yes...it should. Google has shown us all that post image processing can make such a difference in image quality. I can see more and more OEMs trying to emulate that success. They will need more ram to do that post image capture processing.

 

[Zwhaler]

Recent reports state that the S9 will have no breakthroughs in design. My prediction is better camera, processor, fingerprint scanner moved to the middle, and not much else. I was hoping for slimmer bezels on the top and bottom, but looks like the nixed that for the S9.

 

[The Game 161]

sounds like iris scanner improvement will be their focus.

 

[Makayla]

Don't like the notch on the X and don't like it on the S9/S9+.

Please don't copy Apple on this one.

 

[Macalicious2011]

Don't like the notch on the X and don't like it on the S9/S9+.

Please don't copy Apple on this one.

I agree. A "bezel" at the top doesn't bother me a bit. Furthermore the "full screen" experience on the X and S8 are a bit of a con as the area which would normally be occupied by a chin or physical buttons is now replaced by software ones. This is especially noticeable when browsing.

I'm keen to replace my phone next year and am leaning on Samsung to impress me once more but I'm open to the Pixel 3, X Plus or anything else for that matter. The leap from my existing phone must be big enough for me to justify the money, especially when I''m currently out of contract and am paying just £7.5/month for 15GB, unlimited roaming in EU and US + Free BT Sport.

 

[Daum]

Been an iPhone user since day 1 but the iPhone 6sss designs got really boring so I switched over to the s8 this year and loved it. Now I have the note 8 which in my opinion is a lot more elegant in terms of design compared to all the weird stuff iPhone x has. Ugly camera hump and notch is not very apple like but it's 2018 and apple has changed.

I hear people complain about accidental taps on the edge screen on the new Galaxy phones but I never really had that problem unless I'm holding it above me in bed and you can solve that by adding a case like.

I also love some of the Samsung features like the edge apps and the HEADPHONE JACK! please don't remove them Samsung!

So I'm sticking with Galaxy for now until apple releases and all screen iPhone SE.

 

[The Game 161]

So will the fingerprint scanner be under the display for S9?

 

[jamezr]

So will the fingerprint scanner be under the display for S9?

I think it will be just under the camera. If these images are right....i wish it was just a little lower and round....

http://www.mirror.co.uk/tech/samsung-galaxy-s9-s9-revealed-11789033

 

[Puddled]

I think it will be just under the camera. If these images are right....i wish it was just a little lower and round....

http://www.mirror.co.uk/tech/samsung-galaxy-s9-s9-revealed-11789033

Perhaps the FP scanner needs to be where it is to keep the structural integrity of the back (glass) intact.
Having two holes close to each other on the back (rather than one) would introduce a significant weak spot between the two (not to mention waterproofing)

Probably explains why it isn't round as well as you would have to much wasted space taken up by filler between the camera and the Sensor.


It makes sense to me if the S9 is to have a glass back...

 

[jamezr]

Perhaps the FP scanner needs to be where it is to keep the structural integrity of the back (glass) intact.
Having two holes close to each other on the back (rather than one) would introduce a significant weak spot between the two (not to mention waterproofing)

Probably explains why it isn't round as well as you would have to much wasted space taken up by filler between the camera and the Sensor.


It makes sense to me if the S9 is to have a glass back...

You might have a point about the glass back. There are tons of phones with round FPS in the middle of the back of the phone. But can't think of any with glass backs....

 

[The Game 161]

Perhaps the FP scanner needs to be where it is to keep the structural integrity of the back (glass) intact.
Having two holes close to each other on the back (rather than one) would introduce a significant weak spot between the two (not to mention waterproofing)

Probably explains why it isn't round as well as you would have to much wasted space taken up by filler between the camera and the Sensor.


It makes sense to me if the S9 is to have a glass back...

Can’t see any of these flagships not to be glass backs due to wireless charging

 

[Aneres11]

You might have a point about the glass back. There are tons of phones with round FPS in the middle of the back of the phone. But can't think of any with glass backs....

V30?

 

[LIVEFRMNYC]

I'm glad they didn't separate it from the camera module. That would mean back cases would need two cut outs instead of one.

 

[jamezr]

V30?

Nice! Forgot about that one!
[doublepost=1515170895][/doublepost]

I'm glad they didn't separate it from the camera module. That would mean back cases would need two cut outs instead of one.

I wish it were just a little lower tbh. I could see myself still hitting the camera and smudging it...

 

[JediZenMaster]

Can’t see any of these flagships not to be glass backs due to wireless charging