So Apple got a 4" screen correct?/Samsung Galaxy S3 mini [Merged]

[macness]

Samsung Galaxy lll mini- lol

So much for Samsung and Android users clowning on iPhone screens:
http://reviews.cnet.com/smartphones/samsung-galaxy-s3-mini/4505-6452_7-35484855.html

 

[KeepCalmPeople]

I think it's a shrewd move by Samsung. It eliminates the excuse that many people have that an S III is just too big to use with one hand or put in your pocket.

 

[AFDoc]

I say what the heck, why not. If they have the $$ and don't mind losing some of it why not produce something they think might compete with the i5?

 

[aziatiklover]

Next is the galaxy note II mini with a 5" display! with samsung there is always a size for that! From 2.8" to 10.1

 

[AppleFan91]

Honestly, I think it's their main competitor for the iPhone 4 and 4S price range. The S3 competes feature for feature with the 5, but for the low price and mid price area, they needed something with a strong name, or mini version of their best phone

 

[monkor]

I think it's a shrewd move by Samsung. It eliminates the excuse that many people have that an S III is just too big to use with one hand or put in your pocket.

Pretty much. It isn't a bad move at all moving into a market they were performing badly in (users who prefer a 4-inch screen) with a presumably good phone.

It's no different than Apple saying "3.5 is perfect!" And then shortly thereafter saying "4.0 is perfect!" Same story.

 

[XboxMySocks]

"including one that keeps the screen lit when you glance at the camera"
What? That doesn't make sense... You have to look at the camera to make the screen viewable? What about looking at the screen to make the screen viewable :s

 

[jkim3691]

Aren't the hardware specs completely nuked on the mini S3? It would be intriguing if it had the same power as the regular S3...

 

[smellysox8]

So much for Samsung and Android users clowning on iPhone screens:
http://reviews.cnet.com/smartphones/samsung-galaxy-s3-mini/4505-6452_7-35484855.html

Does Apple have a 4.5" + iPhone? Guess Apple.is still getting clowned

 

[Peace]

I find it eerily creepy that they are even calling it a "mini".

 

[Lindsford]

They always do this. Make a smaller version of a good phone and make the specs meh. Is it that difficult to build a powerful 4inch phone?

 

[jaysen]

I agree with everyone else... Good move on samsungs part to compete with those who complain the s3 is too big

 

[KieranDotW]

wow I thought this was a joke... but I wonder where the tall but not wide 4" screen came from

 

[ixodes]

I think it's a shrewd move by Samsung. It eliminates the excuse that many people have that an S III is just too big to use with one hand or put in your pocket.

Well said.

Many have greatly underestimated how serious Samsung is about the smartphone sector.

 

[pgiguere1]

The Galaxy SIII mini is basically a Galaxy S Advance in disguise to fool customers into buying a low-end phone thinking they get a miniaturized version of Samsung's flagship.

It also helps with media attention to call it Galaxy S III mini. See how we're discussing about this but not the Galaxy S Advance just because it's (rightfully) associated with the 2 year old Galaxy S line.

The Galaxy SIII mini doesn't really compete with the iPhone 5. Since it's basically a modified version of the original Galaxy S, it's more of an iPhone 4 competitor. See the specs list and you'll understand why.

Sure it runs the latest version of Android, which is cool for a low-end Android phone, but you shouldn't always have to buy new hardware to get the latest version of an OS anyway.

 

[maccompatible]

They always do this. Make a smaller version of a good phone and make the specs meh. Is it that difficult to build a powerful 4inch phone?

Apple did it.

 

[TM WAZZA]

800x480

Enough said

 

[xraydoc]

So much for Samsung and Android users clowning on iPhone screens:
http://reviews.cnet.com/smartphones/samsung-galaxy-s3-mini/4505-6452_7-35484855.html

Very low res. screen (800x480 pentile AMOLED), slow processor, no LTE, downgraded camera. Isn't really a Galaxy S3 now, is it?

While the specs aren't really that bad for a mid-range device, the GS3 is supposed to be a high-end device. I guess they were unable to simply make an S3 with a 4" screen.

Makes you wonder if the reason Samsung is making 4.8" phones is to cover up the fact that they can't cram it in to a smaller package.

 

[F123D]

So much for Samsung and Android users clowning on iPhone screens:
http://reviews.cnet.com/smartphones/samsung-galaxy-s3-mini/4505-6452_7-35484855.html

Considering Samsung is calling a 4" screen a "mini", sounds like the iPhone is still being clowned on.

 

[Dmaynard83]

I think this just shows that Samsung failed at compressing the Galaxy S3 while maintaining/improving specs the way the iphone 5 did.

5MP camera - downgrade from 8MP
VGA frontfacing camera - downgrade from 1.9MP
1GHz processor - downgrade from 1.5GHz (that still was outperformed by i5)
No LTE - LOL, they better do something about this before putting this in US
Smaller battery
Still plastic

This phone is a joke and should be distanced from the Galaxy S3 as much as possible.

And I think saying this phone is meant for emerging markets is just marketing's way of putting a spin on this because they made a ****** product and want to make a buck.

 

[monkor]

I think this just shows that Samsung failed at compressing the Galaxy S3 while maintaining/improving specs the way the iphone 5 did.

5MP camera - downgrade from 8MP
VGA frontfacing camera - downgrade from 1.9MP
1GHz processor - downgrade from 1.5GHz (that still was outperformed by i5)
No LTE - LOL, they better do something about this before putting this in US
Smaller battery
Still plastic

This phone is a joke and should be distanced from the Galaxy S3 as much as possible.

And I think saying this phone is meant for emerging markets is just marketing's way of putting a spin on this because they made a ****** product and want to make a buck.

Have you even used it yet?

Specs wise, it sounds like a piece of junk, sure. But specs wise the iPhone 4S sounded like crap too compared to other phones out. With an underclocked 800mhz dual core processor and skimpy RAM, no specs person was getting a chub. Guess what? It runs like the after effects of a laxative, which is to say very smooth and fluid.

Who is to say this phone won't? The camera is only 5MP, but dont play the MP game, not worth it. The phone either takes good pictures or it does not. And it's not out in the US right now, so why add LTE? LTE isn't out in lots of other countries.

 

[Dmaynard83]

Have you even used it yet?

Specs wise, it sounds like a piece of junk, sure. But specs wise the iPhone 4S sounded like crap too compared to other phones out. With an underclocked 800mhz dual core processor and skimpy RAM, no specs person was getting a chub. Guess what? It runs like the after effects of a laxative, which is to say very smooth and fluid.

Who is to say this phone won't? The camera is only 5MP, but dont play the MP game, not worth it. The phone either takes good pictures or it does not. And it's not out in the US right now, so why add LTE? LTE isn't out in lots of other countries.

Your comparing apple processor's which are optimized and use their own customized processors to Samsung's, who are known for pumping higher power processors (which do not always equal faster as is the case of s3 to i5). In this case Samsung downgraded (and don't use their own optimized/customized processors), so its a moot point.

Apple released a phone that is just as small or smaller than the mini, WITH LTE and all around better specs (not to mention better OS).

I guess Samsung will have to continue to releasing big-ass phones like the Galaxy Note II and S3 to get higher power.

 

[TM WAZZA]

Have you even used it yet?

Specs wise, it sounds like a piece of junk, sure. But specs wise the iPhone 4S sounded like crap too compared to other phones out. With an underclocked 800mhz dual core processor and skimpy RAM, no specs person was getting a chub. Guess what? It runs like the after effects of a laxative, which is to say very smooth and fluid.

Who is to say this phone won't? The camera is only 5MP, but dont play the MP game, not worth it. The phone either takes good pictures or it does not. And it's not out in the US right now, so why add LTE? LTE isn't out in lots of other countries.

Umm apple is different. iPhone is made to run on iOS optimally. Android isn't. It's one for all. Which is why you see apple's dual core beating quad cores.

Now, the mini is android and with the underwhelming specs you can bet it will be a underwhelming experience too

 

[monkor]

Your comparing apple processor's which are optimized and use their own customized processors to Samsung's, who are known for pumping higher power processors (which do not always equal faster as is the case of s3 to i5). In this case Samsung downgraded (and don't use their own optimized/customized processors), so its a moot point.

Apple released a phone that is just as small or smaller than the mini, WITH LTE and all around better specs (not to mention better OS).

I guess Samsung will have to continue to releasing big-ass phones like the Galaxy Note II and S3 to get higher power.

I'm not comparing processors, I'm stating that specs aren't the be all end all. For people who love specs, yes. But I've used that Android 4.1 on a phone with the same specifications, and an older processor, and I can tell you first hand that having lower specs really isn't going to be noticeable.

If this phone was running 4.0 I would agree it might be a mess. But there's an enormous leap in functionality between the two, and 4.1 is much easier on processors than older OS. I mean, you cite benchmarks and that's fine, but look at an SIII running 4.1 and it beats the i5 in raw numbers. Still, I can argue that the iPhone 5 is just as smooth or smoother than an SIII running anything.

I'm not even sure the mini can be considered a flagship phone like the SIII can.

----------

Umm apple is different. iPhone is made to run on iOS optimally. Android isn't. It's one for all. Which is why you see apple's dual core beating quad cores.

Now, the mini is android and with the underwhelming specs you can bet it will be a underwhelming experience too

I'm a betting man, so I know bets aren't always right. Underwhelming specs do not equate poor experience at all. As I said in response to another poster, you can assume, but it is not a certainty. Android 4.1 does a lot with a little. It isn't on many devices, but it is on this one. The end experience may very well be enjoyable.

 

[TM WAZZA]

I'm not comparing processors, I'm stating that specs aren't the be all end all. For people who love specs, yes. But I've used that Android 4.1 on a phone with the same specifications, and an older processor, and I can tell you first hand that having lower specs really isn't going to be noticeable.

If this phone was running 4.0 I would agree it might be a mess. But there's an enormous leap in functionality between the two, and 4.1 is much easier on processors than older OS. I mean, you cite benchmarks and that's fine, but look at an SIII running 4.1 and it beats the i5 in raw numbers. Still, I can argue that the iPhone 5 is just as smooth or smoother than an SIII running anything.

I'm not even sure the mini can be considered a flagship phone like the SIII can.

----------



I'm a betting man, so I know bets aren't always right. Underwhelming specs do not equate poor experience at all. As I said in response to another poster, you can assume, but it is not a certainty. Android 4.1 does a lot with a little. It isn't on many devices, but it is on this one. The end experience may very well be enjoyable.

lol. even the android forums are bashing Samsung for not doing the Galaxy name justice.

just accept it, this is a midrange phone it's not supposed to run like a high end android