Samsung, Google to scale back giant screen sizes on new Android phones

[TommyA6]

You sound like an Apple commercial.



Galaxy S3 to S4. The S4 is thinner, better battery life, larger screen, plus benchmarks put it at about twice as fast. Camera on the S4 is leaps and bounds better than anything Apple has put out. The 4S and 5 basically have identical cameras. Nothing improved.

Geekbench
S3: 1398
S4: 3172

Both US variants with Snapdragons.

That part is not true.

 

[2298754]

That part is not true.

Again, unless you actually own both phones, and have experience with them, you really can't comment.

Yes, the S4 has a fantastic camera. No, the beloved iPhone5's camera isn't that good anymore.

 

[mattopotamus]

Again, unless you actually own both phones, and have experience with them, you really can't comment.

Yes, the S4 has a fantastic camera. No, the beloved iPhone5's camera isn't that good anymore.

I have owned both, and no, the camera itself is not leaps and bounds better. The camera software on the other hand is. I may be wrong, but if I remember the iphone 5 scores around 20k and the s4 around 28k....that is no where near double on benchmarks.

 

[mib1800]

.

Let's not forget iPhone 5 is 18% thinner, 20% lighter and 12% less overall volume than 4S. Thickness is not the only figure that counts. The S4 is only 3g (roughly 2-3 paper clips) lighter (134g vs 130g) than S3. It's only about 0.8mm x 0.7mm smaller in volume (which is not even 1% of overall volume). And 8.2% thinner. Comparing S3 to iPhone 5 (S4 JUST came out so it's unfair to compare that with 5), iPhone 5 had better performance in almost EVERY single category/test done by AnandTech. It had better battery life too. All of this in a phone that is smaller than 4S in volume, thinness, lightness. And the 4S is significantly smaller than S3/S4. No comparison at all.

If you look at weight or screen area per unit volume then s3/s4 are much better than iPhone5. With such big screen the s3 or s4 size is much more optimize than iphone5 with smaller bezel.

My source: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6324/the-iphone-5-performance-preview

TLDR: Samsung's still doesn't have a phone that is iPhone 5-sized that can even match iPhone 5's performance. S3 was BIGGER in every dimension than iPhone 5, yet offered significantly and noticeably poorer performance.

Synthetic benchmark sometimes has no correlation with real world performance. In this browser test even though s3 has lower benchmark but it achieve faster page loading time (see the time with Flash plugin disabled).

http://www.phonearena.com/news/Web-...vs-Galaxy-S-III-vs-One-X-vs-Lumia-900_id35164


This comparison of boot up time shows s3 to be faster as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmB-8vRjhVw


This one shows tethering/hotspot speed is better with s3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQ55SeHl9OE

 

[cnev3]

If you don't believe me, id love to see some counter evidence.

LOL.

I cant provide any evidence so i'll just give my objective opinion, and if you cant refute it then my opinions are fact!

Please humor me, and snap a picture of your iPhone 5 in front of my post. I know it sounds silly, but just humor me a bit. I'd like to see a pic from the S4 for comparison.

 

[slu]

Non-story. Samsung has always offered choice. That is how they win market share. If Apple offered choice, I would still be an iPhone user. The 4.7 inch screen in the Nexus 4 suits me just fine.

 

[adder7712]

Where are you?

And what carrier had them?

There's no good reason that specs weren't the same though, don't call it an s3 mini if it isn't the same

I live in Malaysia and carriers don't sell phones so virtually all phones are unlocked.

 

[TommyA6]

If you look at weight or screen area per unit volume then s3/s4 are much better than iPhone5. With such big screen the s3 or s4 size is much more optimize than iphone5 with smaller bezel.





Synthetic benchmark sometimes has no correlation with real world performance. In this browser test even though s3 has lower benchmark but it achieve faster page loading time.

This comparison of boot up time shows s3 to be faster as well.

This one shows tethering/hotspot speed is better with s3

You can always find one video of a device being faster than another one. The thing is, I've seen plenty of videos showing iPhone 5 being faster than the s3 (much much more than the s3 being faster than iPhone 5). Actually there are lots of videos showing iPhone 5 being faster than the S4 and HTC one...
Not to mention the gpu in iPhone 5 is more powerful than the gpu in htc one or the s4.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3pD8gwBfCY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8SycwJAOJY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2QAixCC0EM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPT-YQfjuPg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqK8vBcU7Sk

this last video sums it up pretty well. iPhone 5 is faster than galaxy s3 and is actually faster than the new galaxy s4!

 

[SnowLeopard2008]

If you look at weight or screen area per unit volume then s3/s4 are much better than iPhone5. With such big screen the s3 or s4 size is much more optimize than iphone5 with smaller bezel.





Synthetic benchmark sometimes has no correlation with real world performance. In this browser test even though s3 has lower benchmark but it achieve faster page loading time (see the time with Flash plugin disabled).

http://www.phonearena.com/news/Web-...vs-Galaxy-S-III-vs-One-X-vs-Lumia-900_id35164


This comparison of boot up time shows s3 to be faster as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmB-8vRjhVw


This one shows tethering/hotspot speed is better with s3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQ55SeHl9OE

I don't even understand what point you're trying to make. Are you saying there's more screen/unit area/unit volume? Or performance/unit area/unit volume?

Synthetic benchmarks (especially JavaScript ones) do have some impact on real world performance. That is how you gauge battery life, browser performance, etc. It's not the entire picture, but it's the best way to gauge different devices with a standardized testing method. Otherwise, everything is subjective.

Boot times are not correlated with real world performance either. You don't boot your phone every day. Most people leave them on in standby when not in use. So I'm not really sure what you're getting at.

Tethering/hotspot speed depends on the carrier's network. I'm pretty sure everyone (except you) can agree on this. It's not like Samsung's network chips are significantly faster than iPhone 5 (in regards to S3). Even so, tethering (in the US) is "prohibited" and you risk getting charged some fee.

 

[SnowLeopard2008]

It isn't a proven fact that the iPhone 5 takes better photos than the 4S, and again you come off as rude and condescending, call me ignorant? Having a lens made of a different material isn't going to drastically change the image quality, but you go off and make assumptions, I used to have a D300 and know about lenses, I did photography as part of my college course too. You seem to have bought into the marketing blurb because you keep quoting it as though fact. Yes on paper it should do way better than the 4S in every regard, but most of the time it produces identical or slightly different colored shots, the front facing camera is leagues above the 4S admittedly, but I'm taking about the rear camera. And of course they look better on the iPhone 5 screen, but I upload mine to the internet, take the iPhone screen out of the equation and they look the same. I'm trying to have a reasonable exchange with you but that's twice you've gone off on your high horse and made childish assumptions about me with no evidence. My argument is full of holes? You tried to justify saying the iPhone 5 has a better camera because the photos look better because of the more vibrant screen?

I'm not the only one to notice it.

iPhone 5 vs 4S

Earlier on you said "No android device can claim to have gotten smaller and faster" like the iPhone 5, and then you admit the GS4'S volume is less "barely". But it is still less.

Actually, I never made the claim that the lens is different. You did. I just said there's a lot of different (and better) silicon involved with the camera that are much improved.

The ISP, filters, noise reduction, etc. is not a marketing blurb. It was on a slide during the keynote, but these are actually pieces of silicon, algorithms, software, etc. that do improve the camera. Not to mention, the actual sensor is not the same.

But most of the time, you mean in your experience? I notice a difference. Is it like as dramatic as iPhone original to iPhone 5? Heck no. Is it noticeable to the average person? Probably not. But is there a difference? Yes.

I have not made any unreasonable claims, you keep claiming the lens is different (it's not) and the sensor is the same (it's not). These are proven facts. It's not "Oh I think this looks better" or "Oh it looks the same to me". It's actual pieces of physical hardware.

I should clarify. By smaller/faster, I mean significantly smaller/faster. I don't know about you, but I have worked for many Fortune 500 tech companies and each define "significant" as 5% or more increase in performance while being the same size/power draw/etc. So for better or for worse, that has become my definition of significant, and it's 100% subjective. Btw, I made a typo in my OP. It should 133 to 130, not 134 like I wrote.

----------

Hopefully you have learned by now that this is dark corner of MacRumors. You're never allowed to say anything good about iPhones/iPads and you're never allowed to say anything bad about Androids. The second you violate either one of those unwritten rules here, someone will inevitably jump all over you.

But for the most part, I agree with most of what you have said in this thread so far. Personally I have grown tired of arguing with people on this section of MacRumors. You can't have a debate with someone who won't listen to logic. So now I just wait for someone else to do it and then watch everyone jump on them

Sorry for the rant. But hopefully you too have noticed that expressing an opinion that is even remotely anti-Android or pro-Apple will attract people like crazy. Just a friendly heads-up

----------



Off topic I know, but I sold my 12-core Mac Pro earlier this year and built my own workstation. Best decision I ever made. Now I finally have full control of my hardware. Plus when in my pro applications, it feels no different.

It's not the dark corner. It's the ignorant corner. But yes, I have long known that people are fanboys on either side.

As a voice of reason, you (and hopefully more than just you) have clearly seen that no one has jumped on me. A poorly conceived "counter-argument" (a shame to the word) can't compete at all with logic, reason, and objectivity.

Thanks for the heads up though!

 

[Tinmania]

It's not the dark corner. It's the ignorant corner.

I don't have anyone in my ignore list. After reading some of the over-the-top, overly opinionated, drivel you have posted lately I think I might have a contender.

Carry on.

Michael

 

[sentinelsx]

I wouldn't mind a 4.3-4.5 inch screen "flagship".

4 inch is way too low however.

Problem is once a certain screen size becomes "hot", all resources are directed there. If a 4 inch screen becomes the standard, then say goodbye to bigger screen flagships and say hi to 4.5 inch screen "midrange" devices.

Equal consideration should be given to both IMO.

Although, if everyone starts pushing the padfone concept, it will be much better. Smaller screen for phone

 

[SnowLeopard2008]

I don't have anyone in my ignore list. After reading some of the over-the-top, overly opinionated, drivel you have posted lately I think I might have a contender.

Carry on.

Michael

I'm glad that you consider AnandTech sources as drivel. I like how this section (Android) seems to think that facts are just stuff you pull out of your rear end and will to be true.

I don't give half a **** you ignore me. You are entitled to do whatever the heck you want.

 

[Oletros]

Found this news bit, thought it interesting in the midst of some clamoring to increase the iPhone's screen size.



Full article here:

Samsung, Google to scale back giant screen sizes on new Android phones

No, please, don't post a Daniel Eran Dilger "article". I don't know anyone more out of reality and biased than him

My God, Samsung, HTC or Motorola have had different screen sizes since the beginning

----------

Posting an article by AppleInsider is the equivalent to posting one from a tabloid magazine. Not only is it written with an overly slanted Apple bias, it is a misleading and little more than a "fluff" piece to justify Apple's tiny screen.
A.I. tries to make it seem like Samsung, and to a lesser extent Motorola, are moving to smaller screens for their high end devices. This is not true. It is not even semi-true. The "mini" devices launched are nothing more than low end to middle of the road phones for lower income and unsubsidized markets. And this is nothing new. Samsung has been doing this long before Apple even had a phone.

AppleInsider and its forums are one of the most pathetic places to get any information. If they were just a news aggregate that would be one thing, but they cherry-pick quotes/text, edit and slant articles to push their bias. This is a prime example. I am amazed by the sheer amount of crap that gets published there. It pisses me off, because AI used to be a great site.

I can't agree more. If you want to know first hand what a blind fanboy is, you just have to read its forums

 

[Technarchy]

Funny thing about screen sizes...

I got to carry the LG Optimus G pro for about 40 minutes yesterday. Actually felt much more svelte than the paper specs would have you think.

When I went back to the office and picked up a friend's GS4 it felt damn small...funny how conditioning works with use.

 

[onthecouchagain]

Funny thing about screen sizes...

I got to carry the LG Optimus G pro for about 40 minutes yesterday. Actually felt much more svelte than the paper specs would have you think.

When I went back to the office and picked up a friend's GS4 it felt damn small...funny how conditioning works with use.

Try going back to an iPhone. It's comically and uncomfortably small, especially the 4/4s.

 

[3282868]

No, please, don't post a Daniel Eran Dilger "article". I don't know anyone more out of reality and biased than him

Got it. See post #28.

 

[SlCKB0Y]

The one glaring problem with the S4 mini is the storage. 8GB is ridiculously small. People buying a lower cost smart phone are probably intending to hold on to them for a while. I could fill up 8GB tomorrow with just songs and photos.

Breaking news just in - technology companies have released a new invention called an "SD Card". This magical new product can be inserted into consumer electronics in order to expand the data storage capabilities of the device!

 

[cnev3]

Breaking news just in - technology companies have released a new invention called an "SD Card". This magical new product can be inserted into consumer electronics in order to expand the data storage capabilities of the device!

To be fair, it's running out of space for Apps, not media, that's a concern for most. Especially with many apps being over a gig now.

 

[thehustleman]

Breaking news just in - technology companies have released a new invention called an "SD Card". This magical new product can be inserted into consumer electronics in order to expand the data storage capabilities of the device!

Can't put apps on it though.

Android has made progress by implementing apps 2sd, then they went back on their progress and ruined it

 

[SlCKB0Y]

Can't put apps on it though.

And what fraction of users in the worldwide smartphone market do you think would use 8GB just for apps? I'd be willing to bet a lot it is an absolutely minuscule percentage.

And if you need more than 8GB just buy one of the other 200 phones which provide more than 8GB.

And I think you'll also notice that the user I was responding to did not mention apps, they mentioned "songs and photos".

----------

Android has made progress by implementing apps 2sd, then they went back on their progress and ruined it

I don't really think it was "progress". It was more of a workaround for the time when most smartphones had anywhere from 500MB - 2GB for apps based on the internal memory at the time and the size dedicated to the app/data partition.

In reality it was unreliable and buggy and largely made redundant by increases in internal storage.

 

[RMXO]

The Galaxy Note series sells very well. No way they scale back in screen size. Offering different sizes yes but no to scaling back.

 

[Assault]

And what fraction of users in the worldwide smartphone market do you think would use 8GB just for apps? I'd be willing to bet a lot it is an absolutely minuscule percentage.

And if you need more than 8GB just buy one of the other 200 phones which provide more than 8GB.

And I think you'll also notice that the user I was responding to did not mention apps, they mentioned "songs and photos".

----------



I don't really think it was "progress". It was more of a workaround for the time when most smartphones had anywhere from 500MB - 2GB for apps based on the internal memory at the time and the size dedicated to the app/data partition.

In reality it was unreliable and buggy and largely made redundant by increases in internal storage.

Storage is never "not needed" or "redundant" unless you have been conditioned by Apple to think this way. Having the flexibility of an external sd card for extra storage, transferring files to and/or from various media, pc or mobile devices in a quick and secure manner, regardless of file size or to simply use it for full backup purposes without the need for wifi or signal (going against most data caps if you need to do this). Sure, you could use iCloud for some storage (of certain file types Apple "approves"), but as we have seen in their multiple failures in 2 step verification and inability to keep the servers functioning in a consistent manner, the iCloud is neither as secure or reliable as it should be.

Extra memory storage is valuable. Always has been and always will be. That's the bottom line.

 

[SlCKB0Y]

Storage is never "not needed" or "redundant" unless you have been conditioned by Apple to think this way.

Again, you have issues keeping on topic.

But I'll play. Given that extra memory costs extra money, yes, there most certainly is a point at which storage is "not needed" in a cost to benefit sense.

I know what my requirements are and I would never spend the extra money to get a 64GB phone (if no SD card) or more than 16GB with an SD Card. I don't need or want extra storage regardless of the cost for no other reason than "just because I can".

Also, I'm not sure why you're talking about Apple or Apple streaming services - this thread is not about them and I do not use them - but i've had a flawless experience with Google Music so far.

 

[Dontazemebro]

I wish people would stop saying you can't put apps on the sd card. If the developer hasn't coded the app to be moved, then yes you can't, but that's not Google's fault.

If you don't know then please educate yourself

Pitfall 43mb app size before move

Developer has coded app to be moved, hence the 'move' button is highlighted

612kb after the move