PDA

View Full Version : Yet an other Galaxy S3 v.s. iPhone Thread




Oracle1729
Sep 28, 2012, 04:51 PM
Go ahead switch.

Done as soon as my contract is up in October. It's not because of the map app tho, it's mainly the dinky low-res screen, ****** build quality, and out of date tech. But also Timmy's "screw you" attitude which is so obvious in pulling the google app prematurely.

MODERATOR NOTE
All posts starting this thread were originally Off topic posts within the Apple Launches New App Store Feature Section for Alternative Maps (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1457271) News article.



ravenvii
Sep 28, 2012, 04:55 PM
Done as soon as my contract is up in October. It's not because of the map app tho, it's mainly the dinky low-res screen, ****** build quality, and out of date tech. But also Timmy's "screw you" attitude which is so obvious in pulling the google app prematurely.

#notsureifserious

VanityBonet
Sep 28, 2012, 04:58 PM
Done as soon as my contract is up in October. It's not because of the map app tho, it's mainly the dinky low-res screen, ****** build quality, and out of date tech. But also Timmy's "screw you" attitude which is so obvious in pulling the google app prematurely.

the reason i do not leave the iphone is because i invested so much into these games but somebody stated i can use some app in the android store to bring my purchases/game levels to a android device if its available in the android stores

apolloa
Sep 28, 2012, 05:35 PM
Done as soon as my contract is up in October. It's not because of the map app tho, it's mainly the dinky low-res screen, ****** build quality, and out of date tech. But also Timmy's "screw you" attitude which is so obvious in pulling the google app prematurely.

I'm curious, what out of date tech are you referring to then? The SOC that kicks the crap out of any Android or Windows device? The screen with one of the highest, if not the highest DPI on the market and that you can actually read outside? The thin size? The great camera made by Sony? The 2.4 and 5ghz WiFi? The LTE?

Or are you simply stating as the phone lacks wireless charging, and NFC then it's a total tech flop?

As for the build quality, some peoples have scratches, yeah, but if you drop it the screen won't crack as proved by Android fan you tube videos. The S3 on the other hand destroys itself because it's plastic crap.

sinsin07
Sep 28, 2012, 05:42 PM
I'm curious, what out of date tech are you referring to then? The SOC that kicks the crap out of any Android or Windows device? The screen with one of the highest, if not the highest DPI on the market and that you can actually read outside? The thin size? The great camera made by Sony? The 2.4 and 5ghz WiFi? The LTE?

Or are you simply stating as the phone lacks wireless charging, and NFC then it's a total tech flop?

As for the build quality, some peoples have scratches, yeah, but if you drop it the screen won't crack as proved by Android fan you tube videos. The S3 on the other hand destroys itself because it's plastic crap.

To further add to that...

From the lab: Lumia 920 low-light shootout with Nokia 808, iPhone 5, HTC One X and Galaxy S III
"The 920 took the cake, without question, but the iPhone didn't fare too poorly itself, snatching up nearly as much light as the Nokia device. The 808 PureView also performed quite well, but the HTC One X and Samsung Galaxy S III yielded unusable results."
Engadget 9-26-12 (http://www.engadget.com/2012/09/26/lumia-920-low-light-shootout/)

sazivad
Sep 28, 2012, 06:05 PM
(1) Every other high end smartphone is 720p with a larger screen. (2) The iPhone 5 feels cheap and flimsy in your hand… What does the iPhone 5 give you that the iPhone 4 didn't 28 months ago besides (3) Siri, (4) a slightly better camera, (5) a bigger screen that's crappy compared to the competition, and (6) LTE, which Apple is years behind on.
1. Article (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/09/24/displaymate-rates-iphone-5-screen-as-best-smartphone-display-theyve-seen/): DisplayMate Rates iPhone 5 Screen as "Best Smartphone Display" They've Seen
2. To you, perhaps.
3. Siri was arguably the main selling point of the iPhone 4S (http://allthingsd.com/20111011/iphone-4s-demand-strong/).
4. The competitor's offerings are about the same as the iPhone 5's.
5. Measured by what metric? Size? Or, maybe, the ability to use it one-handed (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1Rc4MDmr8o)?
6. There's a reason why they didn't introduce LTE with the 4S. That reason is battery life (http://cl.ly/image/263j2S160P31).

Oh, and you forgot the A6, built on Apple's custom architecture.

apolloa
Sep 28, 2012, 06:21 PM
Every other high end smartphone is 720p with a larger screen. The iPhone 5 feels cheap and flimsy in your hand.

And as far as old tech, what does the iPhone 5 give you that the iPhone 4 didn't 28 months ago besides Siri, a slightly better camera, a bigger screen that's crappy compared to the competition, and LTE, which Apple is years behind on. That's a pretty small list for 28 months of innovation, and the competition has been busy in that time.

Wow, really? Apple are YEARS behind everyone else on LTE is it then? So just WHEN was the first LTE enabled phone on sale in America? was it YEARS ago or a year ago?
As for the rest of us, well we mostly don't even have ANY LTE networks yet. The camera is much improved, the phone does NOT feel cheap, that is utter FUD. It is light, has a brilliant screen.

You seem to like trying to talk FUD about the iPhone 5, meh I feel like I'm just feeding the troll with this reply. Go back to your precious plastic fantastic S3, just make sure you never drop it, or you could put a case on it just to add to it's already massive width!

sinsin07
Sep 28, 2012, 06:29 PM
Wow, really? Apple are YEARS behind everyone else on LTE is it then? So just WHEN was the first LTE enabled phone on sale in America? was it YEARS ago or a year ago?
As for the rest of us, well we mostly don't even have ANY LTE networks yet. The camera is much improved, the phone does NOT feel cheap, that is utter FUD. It is light, has a brilliant screen.

You seem to like trying to talk FUD about the iPhone 5, meh I feel like I'm just feeding the troll with this reply. Go back to your precious plastic fantastic S3, just make sure you never drop it, or you could put a case on it just to add to it's already massive width!

Good one. The Galaxy S2 and S3 are the epitome of cheap feel. It's like Samsung put Lipstick (the internals) on pig.

Oracle1729
Sep 28, 2012, 09:37 PM
I'm curious, what out of date tech are you referring to then? ... The screen with one of the highest, if not the highest DPI on the market and that you can actually read outside? The thin size? The great camera made by Sony? The 2.4 and 5ghz WiFi? The LTE?

I answered most of that for someone else on the thread....but the iPhone 5 display is very low res and the only phone pretending to be high end that isn't 720. That pos screen on the iPhone is a crappy resolution and horrible picture quality compared to the competition. Thin size is ********. The 4S is a very thin phone already, give me a large phone with a decent battery life and decent durability. LTE is last year's tech, the fact they finally included it is a second-rate game of catch-up.

Or are you simply stating as the phone lacks wireless charging, and NFC then it's a total tech flop?

See above...I'm talking about core features that every vendor except apple has offered for years and apple still doesn't offer.

As for the build quality, some peoples have scratches, yeah, but if you drop it the screen won't crack as proved by Android fan you tube videos. The S3 on the other hand destroys itself because it's plastic crap.

It feels so damn flimsy it's like a cheap fisher price toy. The scratches are just another nail in the coffin. Calling the S3 plastic crap just shows you're ignorant and won't even look beyond the apple store.

Oracle1729
Sep 28, 2012, 09:48 PM
1. Article (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/09/24/displaymate-rates-iphone-5-screen-as-best-smartphone-display-theyve-seen/): DisplayMate Rates iPhone 5 Screen as "Best Smartphone Display" They've Seen
2. To you, perhaps.
3. Siri was arguably the main selling point of the iPhone 4S (http://allthingsd.com/20111011/iphone-4s-demand-strong/).
4. The competitor's offerings are about the same as the iPhone 5's.
5. Measured by what metric? Size? Or, maybe, the ability to use it one-handed (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1Rc4MDmr8o)?
6. There's a reason why they didn't introduce LTE with the 4S. That reason is battery life (http://cl.ly/image/263j2S160P31).

Oh, and you forgot the A6, built on Apple's custom architecture.

1. Wanna bet DisplayMate takes money from Apple?
2. To anyone open minded enough to actually hold both phones.
3. So because apple marking says it's all you need, you need look no farther. Talk about being ignorant.
4. Comparing smartphone cameras since some fanboi would. imo all smartphone cameras are garbage, but then I'm a professional photographer, if you can't print a perfect 16x20, don't press the button, so this is a non-issue for me.
5. That it's the smallest screen and only one that doesn't do 720p.
6. And the battery-life on the 5 is even worse because Timmy has a hard-on for skinny, skanks and can't make it the same thickness with a decent battery.

If you want to compare the A6 to anything else on the market, Apple may as well close the company and go home. Sheep like you say it's about the experience, not processor specs so I didn't mention it, but Apple doesn't come close to competing there.

clibinarius
Sep 28, 2012, 10:02 PM
This is trolling 101! That's all you got?

This is macrumors, not macfans. I'm often a critic of Apple. Yes, there are people who are obvious fans here, but sometimes, we check in to see tech news. And voice our opinions.

1. Wanna bet DisplayMate takes money from Apple?
2. To anyone open minded enough to actually hold both phones.
3. So because apple marking says it's all you need, you need look no farther. Talk about being ignorant.
4. Comparing smartphone cameras since some fanboi would. imo all smartphone cameras are garbage, but then I'm a professional photographer, if you can't print a perfect 16x20, don't press the button, so this is a non-issue for me.
5. That it's the smallest screen and only one that doesn't do 720p.
6. And the battery-life on the 5 is even worse because Timmy has a hard-on for skinny, skanks and can't make it the same thickness with a decent battery.

If you want to compare the A6 to anything else on the market, Apple may as well close the company and go home. Sheep like you say it's about the experience, not processor specs so I didn't mention it, but Apple doesn't come close to competing there.

1. Prove it.
2. People think plastic feels cheap-even when its not. You can't drive that out of people without people equating high grades of plastic with quality. Western Society is yet to do that, despite plastics being used for many advanced purposes and far better than other materials. Its a matter of taste.
3. No disagreement here.
4. Apple's Camera is great, perhaps the best in a smartphone, perhaps not. But the quality is sufficiently good that it simply doesn't matter much to me. I'm satisfied with my old flip phone's camera, which was 1 megapixel back in the day.
5. 720p really isn't a big deal on a small screen, and some people like small screens. I don't, and I'd love choice, but my hands are really big. The reality is I was watching it without issue before, and things look fine.
6. The battery life for the 5 is about the same. I wish it was better and thicker, but not my choice, and frankly, unlike the iPhone 4S on Verizon getting terrible 3G in the New York area for the last few months, the 5 blazes. That's true with most android phones, but it is especially nice when you're upgrading from a 3G phone to see no hit in battery life whatsoever.

Oracle1729
Sep 28, 2012, 10:05 PM
The LTE chip in the iPhone is a great chip. They seemed to expect it to be ready last year around October-that's probably why the iPhone has the fall cycle now-but Qualcomm couldn't do it for a year.

So apple engineering messed up the iPhone 4S by using chips that didn't exist yet. Okay.

(screen size is an argument for papering over the engineering for the radios and battery-I like the bigger screens, but let's be realistic, they HAD to include them to make the phone look not like a bad joke).

And yet the dinky low-res apple phone makes it the bad joke instead.

It does feel light (the iPhone 5) and very cheap, but the materials are incredibly strong and durable at holding the thing together (Aluminium is a GREAT building material)-it is far stronger than an iPhone 4/4S. Yes, it scratches, get a darn case.

So you agree it fees light and cheap but argue apple goes for something that looks pretty. Then you say the quality is so crappy we should hide it in a case?

Do you really not see how stupid that argument is? The iPhone 5 is built like a piece of **** and you have to put it in a case to hide and protect it. Score one for Timmy.

The S3 is a great device, but nonetheless, I got the 5, I have my reasons, and you calling it a cheap fisher price toy is about the same as someone calling the S3 "Plastic Crap."

Yet people do call the S3 plastic crap when it's a nicer, more solid build and design than the iPhone 5 and has a better 720p screen to boot.

Would I have loved a 720p screen? Absolutely. My fingers are huge, I could use the extra space. But you know what? I was watching a downsized 720p movie over LTE, and it looked perfectly fine and perfectly watchable.

Bottom line, every other company in the world gives you that choice. Apple you take their **** and don't complain. Well apple users really must be idiots then.

Oracle1729
Sep 28, 2012, 10:15 PM
1. Prove it.
2. People think plastic feels cheap-even when its not. You can't drive that out of people without people equating high grades of plastic with quality. Western Society is yet to do that, despite plastics being used for many advanced purposes and far better than other materials. Its a matter of taste.
3. No disagreement here.
4. Apple's Camera is great, perhaps the best in a smartphone, perhaps not. But the quality is sufficiently good that it simply doesn't matter much to me. I'm satisfied with my old flip phone's camera, which was 1 megapixel back in the day.
5. 720p really isn't a big deal on a small screen, and some people like small screens. I don't, and I'd love choice, but my hands are really big. The reality is I was watching it without issue before, and things look fine.
6. The battery life for the 5 is about the same. I wish it was better and thicker, but not my choice, and frankly, unlike the iPhone 4S on Verizon getting terrible 3G in the New York area for the last few months, the 5 blazes. That's true with most android phones, but it is especially nice when you're upgrading from a 3G phone to see no hit in battery life whatsoever.

1. Always take 3rd party reviews with a grain of salt, I learned that with video games growing up and it's true of all products, I don't have to prove it there's a good chance it's true, but either way the article means very little.
2. Only seems to affect apple fanboys who won't even touch an android and use plastic as an insult, most of the world doesn't seem to have an issue with high quality plastic just the zealots here.
4. I agree with you. My point was just how little Apple has given in the last 28 months. Especially compared to Android.
5. It's a matter of opinion, and at lesat everone else gives you choice. People make such a big deal of apple's super retina magic screen when it's really one of the worst out, but they won't look at anything else. It's like a religious cult where you're not allowed to look at the other group's sacred text.
6. Every time you say you wish...but it's not your choice. In android it is your choice. Take the iPhone 5, make it the size and weight of the 4S with a solid case and larger battery and it would be a much better phone. But Apple is all about sacrificing performance for thin.

clibinarius
Sep 28, 2012, 10:22 PM
So apple engineering messed up the iPhone 4S by using chips that didn't exist yet. Okay.

They were unwilling to use present LTE chips on the market, and thus, released it without LTE. That's Qualcomm's fault and Apple's choice.

And yet the dinky low-res apple phone makes it the bad joke instead.

For the size, it is a high resolution screen. I can't complain about the ppi at all, and calling it a low resolution, as opposed to low functioning, screen is just ridiculous. Its very high resolution for its size, and do Android phones go above 720p? No? Then I don't see the big deal. Plus, Pentile still has issues and an AMOLED screen is a few years away from getting genuinely good high density screens without going for Pentile at the yields and price that makes sense to put in a phone. Again, its a matter of taste. I have no problem with the iPhone 5 type LED/LCD and I don't think any sane person would, either.


So you agree it fees light and cheap but argue apple goes for something that looks pretty. Then you say the quality is so crappy we should hide it in a case?

If you're that defensive about scratches, I'd say, absolutely, put it in a case. If you don't care, then no different. I think it feels a bit light and cheap but that's simply because I'm used to steel and glass and aware of the materials. This phone is MUCH tougher built than the previous one, but it doesn't feel that way. Marketing bias.


Do you really not see how stupid that argument is? The iPhone 5 is built like a piece of **** and you have to put it in a case to hide and protect it. Score one for Timmy.

Yeah, sure. Make it so people can't see the Apple branding, score one for Timmy. And it isn't build like a piece of star star star star, its built pretty well. Its your bias against lightweight metals.



Yet people do call the S3 plastic crap when it's a nicer, more solid build and design than the iPhone 5 and has a better 720p screen to boot.


I've generally defended the S3 several times on this forum against the "plastic crap" argument. Its a solid, well built phone. You can get away with aluminium easier than plastic in our society.


Bottom line, every other company in the world gives you that choice. Apple you take their **** and don't complain. Well apple users really must be idiots then.

Apple users do take things and complain, but for most users, it gets the job done. The iPhone is very easy to use, and you don't have to really pay much attention to it. Problem? Take it to the Apple Store, they'll restore it for free, maybe even replace it for free, or otherwise, show you how to use it/not hold it wrong. Android makers don't really have that option at this time. I buy Apple not because I'm enamored with the quality but I simply don't feel like constantly tweaking my phone and paying attention and because I know I can get to the store and be intelligent enough to explain the problem and get whatever my problem is replaced for free on any device, and that is in my opinion a service I pay for with the "Apple Tax"-yes, you can get better deals, if you're willing to put in the time and effort. But I do know I had to baby my WebOS phone into doing anything I wanted, and while Android is good, first, I have personal reasons why I don't buy Android, and second, it does require a bit more of a brain to use. Not much more, but a bit more. And I spend enough time at my job and at the gym and socializing to know I don't feel like necessarily putting the extra 5 minutes a month into it when I can take it to an Apple Store and they can treat it like a disposable object.

----------

1. Always take 3rd party reviews with a grain of salt, I learned that with video games growing up and it's true of all products, I don't have to prove it there's a good chance it's true, but either way the article means very little.
2. Only seems to affect apple fanboys who won't even touch an android and use plastic as an insult, most of the world doesn't seem to have an issue with high quality plastic just the zealots here.
4. I agree with you. My point was just how little Apple has given in the last 28 months. Especially compared to Android.
5. It's a matter of opinion, and at lesat everone else gives you choice. People make such a big deal of apple's super retina magic screen when it's really one of the worst out, but they won't look at anything else. It's like a religious cult where you're not allowed to look at the other group's sacred text.
6. Every time you say you wish...but it's not your choice. In android it is your choice. Take the iPhone 5, make it the size and weight of the 4S with a solid case and larger battery and it would be a much better phone. But Apple is all about sacrificing performance for thin.

Agreed with all, except I do think the average consumer associates plastic with cheap, unaware that plastic makes their high quality stuff usually work. As far as the review goes, people are fanboys when they write. Its hard to get an unbiased review, no matter if they're on the take or not. I guess, read the reviews of people who have similar taste.

I find it funny that people here refer to me as an Android fanboy for simply defending the SIII and especially its performance on Jelly Bean. The SIII has a better chip than the iPhone 5, but ICS was killing its performance. New Benchmarks on the new OS beat the A6 processor.

Technarchy
Sep 28, 2012, 10:23 PM
So apple engineering messed up the iPhone 4S by using chips that didn't exist yet. Okay.



And yet the dinky low-res apple phone makes it the bad joke instead.



So you agree it fees light and cheap but argue apple goes for something that looks pretty. Then you say the quality is so crappy we should hide it in a case?

Do you really not see how stupid that argument is? The iPhone 5 is built like a piece of **** and you have to put it in a case to hide and protect it. Score one for Timmy.



Yet people do call the S3 plastic crap when it's a nicer, more solid build and design than the iPhone 5 and has a better 720p screen to boot.



Bottom line, every other company in the world gives you that choice. Apple you take their **** and don't complain. Well apple users really must be idiots then.

You people need to come to terms with the fact that the Galaxy S3 display is absolute ****.

clibinarius
Sep 28, 2012, 10:26 PM
You people need to come to terms with the fact that the Galaxy S3 display is absolute ****.

How is it absolute quadruple star, Techarchy? I'm curious. I think its a fine display...though I take issue with pentile making it feel oddly dull. Unlike the iPhone, the filter does not create the color (LED/LCD) but the screen itself lights up the colors. LCDs are passive, LEDs are active, and I think that LED is the technology of the future (and everyone would agree) and, like LCD has had time to mature, LEDs will catch up to the resolution on RGB within the next three years, as well as price. And will you still be bashing those displays when in 2-4 years, Apple releases their liquidmetal iPhone solution complete with RGB OLED display?

Of course not.

Oracle1729
Sep 28, 2012, 10:31 PM
You people need to come to terms with the fact that the Galaxy S3 display is absolute ****.

Wow, what a fine articulate and well thought out response. You should definitely be a spokesperson for apple fans everywhere.

msandersen
Sep 28, 2012, 10:31 PM
How is it absolute quadruple star, Techarchy? I'm curious. I think its a fine display...though I take issue with pentile making it feel oddly dull. Unlike the iPhone, the filter does not create the color (LED/LCD) but the screen itself lights up the colors. LCDs are passive, LEDs are active, and I think that LED is the technology of the future (and everyone would agree) and, like LCD has had time to mature, LEDs will catch up to the resolution on RGB within the next three years, as well as price. And will you still be bashing those displays when in 2-4 years, Apple releases their liquidmetal iPhone solution complete with RGB OLED display?

Of course not.
AMOLED is a technology to watch, but currently it is immature. LCD TV screens were originally panned, Plasma fans deriding its technical qualities. Now that LCD has matured, you don't find many, if any, Plasmas around. Apple has chosen the right technology for the current state of play, in the future when Amoled's colour balance, oversaturation, and power consumption issues are dealt with, Apple will presumably adopt it if they judge it to be a better or as-good for cheaper alternative. The iPhone 5's screen is superb, and Apple has properly calibrated the colours, unlike the Galaxy 3's display which is uncalibrated and badly oversaturated. Which is not a reflection of the display's potential.

faroZ06
Sep 28, 2012, 10:45 PM
And yet the dinky low-res apple phone makes it the bad joke instead.


You're calling a retina display "low-res"? You must be joking or trolling.

Oracle1729
Sep 28, 2012, 11:19 PM
You're calling a retina display "low-res"? You must be joking or trolling.

This is exactly what I mean about the apple fanbois who won't even look at what's out there. Every other high end smartphone on the market is 720p. Apple is the only one left with low-res crap.

Retina is meaningless apple marketing BS from 2010 and everyone else is way beyond it.

lilo777
Sep 28, 2012, 11:21 PM
You're calling a retina display "low-res"? You must be joking or trolling.

"Retina" has nothing to do with "resolution". 2x2 pixel display may be retina but definitely not a high resolution.

skunnykart
Sep 28, 2012, 11:23 PM
This is exactly what I mean about the apple fanbois who won't even look at what's out there. Every other high end smartphone on the market is 720p. Apple is the only one left with low-res crap.

Retina is meaningless apple marketing BS from 2010 and everyone else is way beyond it.

I agree that the term "Retina" is marketing BS but the retina displays are pretty stunning.
Calling it "low-res crap" is taking it a bit too far don't you think?

Technarchy
Sep 28, 2012, 11:25 PM
How is it absolute quadruple star, Techarchy? I'm curious. I think its a fine display...though I take issue with pentile making it feel oddly dull. Unlike the iPhone, the filter does not create the color (LED/LCD) but the screen itself lights up the colors. LCDs are passive, LEDs are active, and I think that LED is the technology of the future (and everyone would agree) and, like LCD has had time to mature, LEDs will catch up to the resolution on RGB within the next three years, as well as price. And will you still be bashing those displays when in 2-4 years, Apple releases their liquidmetal iPhone solution complete with RGB OLED display?

Of course not.

Fine by what standard?

The brightness sucks
Color reproduction is horrible
Clearly visible pentile artifacts
Burn in artifacts
Bluish green tint
Lousy power consumption
Wretched outdoor visibility

Really, what exactly does the GS3 display do right?

clibinarius
Sep 28, 2012, 11:25 PM
AMOLED is a technology to watch, but currently it is immature. LCD TV screens were originally panned, Plasma fans deriding its technical qualities. Now that LCD has matured, you don't find many, if any, Plasmas around. Apple has chosen the right technology for the current state of play, in the future when Amoled's colour balance, oversaturation, and power consumption issues are dealt with, Apple will presumably adopt it if they judge it to be a better or as-good for cheaper alternative. The iPhone 5's screen is superb, and Apple has properly calibrated the colours, unlike the Galaxy 3's display which is uncalibrated and badly oversaturated. Which is not a reflection of the display's potential.

Ever hear of yellow tint? By that standard, Apple ships a good bunch of uncalibrated ones.

Its not uncalibrated and badly oversaturated, but actually quite fine in my opinion-if you're used to it, I know people who hate LCDs who are used to CRTs still.

Fine by what standard?

The brightness sucks
Color reproduction is horrible
Clearly visible pentile artifacts
Burn in artifacts
Bluish green tint
Lousy power consumption
Wretched outdoor visibility

Really, what exactly does the GS3 display do right?

Brightness sucks? Are you joking? You do realize the screen itself lights the display, not the other way around. Subsequently you can get more colors, and people complain of oversaturation for that reason. Power consumption also is task dependent. The power consumption is nominally worse, and will actually be better fairly soon.

Technarchy
Sep 28, 2012, 11:36 PM
Brightness sucks? Are you joking? You do realize the screen itself lights the display, not the other way around. Subsequently you can get more colors, and people complain of oversaturation for that reason. Power consumption also is task dependent. The power consumption is nominally worse, and will actually be better fairly soon.

Yes, the brightness sucks, flat out, no getting around it.

Lie to yourself if you need to, but the the brightness of the GS3 is abysmal.

lilo777
Sep 29, 2012, 12:02 AM
Yes, the brightness sucks, flat out, no getting around it.

Lie to yourself if you need to, but the the brightness of the GS3 is abysmal.

As if this was somehow relevant. Nobody keeps their screens anywhere near the maximum brightness. And when it comes to visibility under the Sun OLED screens have huge advantage because they have infinitely higher contrast. Brightness is not everything.

subsonix
Sep 29, 2012, 12:10 AM
"Retina" has nothing to do with "resolution". 2x2 pixel display may be retina but definitely not a high resolution.

Resolution is meaningless without screen size, and we have gone full circle.

clibinarius
Sep 29, 2012, 12:12 AM
Resolution is meaningless without screen size, and we have gone full circle.

This whole discussion has nothing to do with the topic of Apple Maps sucking...

Technarchy
Sep 29, 2012, 12:12 AM
As if this was somehow relevant. Nobody keeps their screens anywhere near the maximum brightness. And when it comes to visibility under the Sun OLED screens have huge advantage because they have infinitely higher contrast. Brightness is not everything.

That's some nonsense for people that never owned a phone with an AMOLED screen.

You end up with a screen so dim and hard to see that you have to crank up your brightness to use your device, but now you've got power consumption issues, so you eat your battery alive.

There might some suckers that still fall for the AMOLED spin, but those that have been there certainly know better.

The GS3 screen is not good.

Oracle1729
Sep 29, 2012, 12:14 AM
I agree that the term "Retina" is marketing BS but the retina displays are pretty stunning.
Calling it "low-res crap" is taking it a bit too far don't you think?

Well since I can get a nice big 720p screen from any other high end vendor, I'd say it's pretty accurate. Maybe for 2010 it was a decent screen but my calendar says 2012...apple is literally years behind.

lilo777
Sep 29, 2012, 12:14 AM
Resolution is meaningless without screen size, and we have gone full circle.

It is not. Resolution determines exact amount of information the picture delivers. Pixel density on the other hand is meaningless without knowing the viewing distance.

lilo777
Sep 29, 2012, 12:22 AM
That's some nonsense for people that never owned a phone with an AMOLED screen.

You end up with a screen so dim and hard to see that you have to crank up your brightness to use your device, but now you've got power consumption issues, so you eat your battery alive.

There might some suckers that still fall for the AMOLED spin, but those that have been there certainly know better.

The GS3 screen is not good.

That's just your biased opinion. Now let's see what experts say about SGSIII display. GSMArena (http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_i9300_galaxy_s_iii-review-761p2.php):

"Sunlight legibility is splendid too - the HD Super AMOLED isn't the brightest around, but its reflectivity is so low that even outside in the brightest day, you'll still be able to see what's on the screen quite clearly. As a matter of fact, the Galaxy S III managed to top our sunlight legibility charts."

subsonix
Sep 29, 2012, 12:22 AM
It is not. Resolution determines exact amount of information the picture delivers. Pixel density on the other hand is meaningless without knowing the viewing distance.

We know the viewing distance of a phone more or less no?

Note that for broadcast television standards the use of the word resolution here is a misnomer, though common. The term “display resolution” is usually used to mean pixel dimensions, the number of pixels in each dimension (e.g., 1920 × 1080), which does not tell anything about the pixel density of the display on which the image is actually formed: broadcast television resolution properly refers to the pixel density, the number of pixels per unit distance or area, not total number of pixels.

iPhone 5 326 PPI
S3 306 PPI

Yes, the S3 has more pixels, but the screen is larger. Anyway, calling the iPhone 5 display lo-res is just stupid.

theineffablebob
Sep 29, 2012, 12:28 AM
That's some nonsense for people that never owned a phone with an AMOLED screen.

You end up with a screen so dim and hard to see that you have to crank up your brightness to use your device, but now you've got power consumption issues, so you eat your battery alive.

There might some suckers that still fall for the AMOLED spin, but those that have been there certainly know better.

The GS3 screen is not good.

I've used phones with LCD screens, I've used phones with AMOLED screens. They're both fairly equal in viewability in sunlight. No sane person could tell the difference without looking side-by-side. Both are perfectly viewable in sunlight.

And you're insanely biased for saying the GS3 screen is not good. Every review says it's a great screen, even though it's no longer at the top of the pack (that honor goes to the HTC One X and iPhone 5 screens). I've seen the screen myself and it's bright, vivid, sharp, and overall a great display.

lilo777
Sep 29, 2012, 12:33 AM
We know the viewing distance of a phone more or less no?



iPhone 5 326 PPI
S3 306 PPI

Yes, the S3 has more pixels, but the screen is larger. Anyway, calling the iPhone 5 display lo-res is just stupid.

iPhone 5's resolution is not that low (although Android phones have 27% higher resolution). It's main problem is a weird shape. It's just too long and narrow. It's OK for movies (but who watches movies on the phone?) but it's sub-optimal for reading, games etc.

subsonix
Sep 29, 2012, 12:37 AM
iPhone 5's resolution is not that low (although Android phones have 27% higher resolution).

Not for a proper definition of resolution, which does refer to pixel density, which broadcast television use, per the quote above. How does Android (an operating system) guarantee 27% more pixels btw, surely that comes down to the handset and it's screen.

lilo777
Sep 29, 2012, 12:45 AM
Not for a proper definition of resolution, which does refer to pixel density, which broadcast television use, per the quote above. How does Android (an operating system) guarantee 27% more pixels btw, surely that comes down to the handset.

SmartPhone is a computer and not a TV set. Why would you bring broadcast TV terminology in this discussion? n computer terminology, pixel density is just that - density. Resolution refers to the absolute number of pixels in two dimensions which the Wikipedia page that you referenced explains quite clearly.

Dolorian
Sep 29, 2012, 12:46 AM
The GS3 screen is not good.

Sorry but can't take you seriously here. The S3 has a fantastic screen, as very much every review from reputable publications agree. Is is the best there is? No, but to say that it is garbage or not good is nonsense and just reeks of bias.

subsonix
Sep 29, 2012, 12:56 AM
SmartPhone is a computer and not a TV set. Why would you bring broadcast TV terminology in this discussion? n computer terminology, pixel density is just that - density. Resolution refers to the absolute number of pixels in two dimensions which the Wikipedia page that you referenced explains quite clearly.

Because, the reference make note of the fact that the broadcast standard properly refer to pixel density. The amount of pixels doesn't tell you anything about image quality, if you do not also mention the area.

lilo777
Sep 29, 2012, 01:03 AM
This is absolutely without a doubt the fault of the media and its scramble for headlines. Apple Maps works fine. No it's not as refined as Googles maps but it's also brand new. The problem is... no one has any patience especially these younger kids. And they are the most vocal.

Apple is smart enough to counter the allegations directly and swiftly. It's smart Public Relations and they will be JUST fine in a few months.

The problem here is that Apple is not producing its own map data. They use data from Tom Tom which in 2008 acquired Tele Atlas. Tele Atlas is the company behind map data. Tele Atlas has been in map data business for much longer than Google (since 1984). While they do have decent road/street data they do not have the wealth of information that Google has. They have not been able to collect this data since 1984. How long do you think it may take them to catch up with Google? Forever?

----------

After what I just experienced, I feel bad that Tim Cook has had to apologize.... because Apple Maps are EXCELLENT! -- well, at least here in Toronto.

I just had the best GPS experience ever, hands down.

I got called to a job out of the downtown where I live to an area where I had no idea where the heck I was going. It's nighttime and didn't know the area I was going to.

I got in the car, put the iPhone 5 to my ear and Siri prompted me to speak: "I need to get to xxxx St. Clair Avenue". Siri said: "Here are the directions to..."

The directions were clear and the visual UI was super simple, free of clutter and designed to be read at a glance when driving. Upcoming cross streets are clearly marked and the 3D view makes it easy to understand where you're headed. Instructions came with enough time to get in the proper lane. Distance to your next turn is measured super accurately. I was mere metres away from a turn and the next turn sign indicated that. I also purposefully made a couple of alternate turns and Maps adjusted my route.

When I was at a stop light, I tapped "Overview to see how far along I was and was able to look at the remaining route without cancelling my current directions. The light turned green, I hit resume and was on my way.

Maps took me right to the front door of this brand new restaurant that hasn't been added to any mapping service. Amazing iOS Maps indeed.

Except for the voice commands, that is something we have been able to do do with Smart Phones for about a decade now. No reason to get too excited. Since then we've come to expect way more from Maps applications.

Obviously with Google Maps (non Android) you can do all this and muuch more. For example, when stopped at the intersection you can tap a StreetView icon and the phone will show you the view of the next intersection on your route where you have to make a turn. I helps to know in advance what to expect in unfamiliar places.

lilo777
Sep 29, 2012, 01:09 AM
Because, the reference make note of the fact that the broadcast standard properly refer to pixel density. The amount of pixels doesn't tell you anything about image quality, if you do not also mention the area.

"Properly" in this context only refers to the original meaning of the word "resolution". The amount of pixels tells you how much bits of information the picture delivers. Density is absolutely irrelevant. You can reach any density you need by choosing the viewing distance.

----------

"The problem here is that Apple is not producing its own map data. They use data from Tom Tom which in 2008 acquired Tele Atlas. Tele Atlas is the company behind map data. Tele Atlas has been in map data business for much longer than Google (since 1984). While they do have decent road/street data they do not have the wealth of information that Google has. They have not been able to collect this data since 1984. How long do you think it may take them to catch up with Google? Forever?"

And Google gained the majority of its data through Apples installed user base on iOS.

So... not long.

And I thought they did it by keeping 7100 workers on their map team, the fleet of Google cars, paying for quality satellite info, developing software that can scan and interpret the imagery obtained by Google cars. It turns out I was wrong. It was those pesky iPhone users who did the job for Google :confused:

subsonix
Sep 29, 2012, 01:11 AM
"Properly" in this context only refers to the original meaning of the word "resolution". The amount of pixels tells you how much bits of information the picture delivers.

Yes, but we know that the S3 which was used as an example here earlier has a larger screen. It would be pretty bad if you could not view more on a larger screen.


Density is absolutely irrelevant. You can reach any density you need by choosing the viewing distance.

Which in a phone means the ability to chose the length of ones arm.

Anyway, I hope we can quit this, both have hi-res screens no matter how you chose to interpret 'resolution'. I mainly felt like comment due to the "lo-res" talk here earlier.

msandersen
Sep 29, 2012, 01:48 AM
It is not. Resolution determines exact amount of information the picture delivers. Pixel density on the other hand is meaningless without knowing the viewing distance.
The confusion seems to stem from you referring to Display Resolution (physical dimensions in pixels), where many in the graphics field like me would think of it as pixel density. 326 ppi and a display size of 1136x640 px is not exactly low-res for a phone, is it? The iPhone gains "retina" status at 10.2", where the Pentile display of the SIII requires 15.9".
I answered most of that for someone else on the thread....but the iPhone 5 display is very low res and the only phone pretending to be high end that isn't 720. That pos screen on the iPhone is a crappy resolution and horrible picture quality compared to the competition. Thin size is ********. The 4S is a very thin phone already, give me a large phone with a decent battery life and decent durability. LTE is last year's tech, the fact they finally included it is a second-rate game of catch-up.

See above...I'm talking about core features that every vendor except apple has offered for years and apple still doesn't offer.

It feels so damn flimsy it's like a cheap fisher price toy. The scratches are just another nail in the coffin. Calling the S3 plastic crap just shows you're ignorant and won't even look beyond the apple store.
Most of that is trolling, but basically as I'm sure you already know the iPhone 5 screen is the best around, producing far better images than the SIII, as the iPhone has a properly-calibrated screen and the SIII doesn't; the colours are off and over-saturated. As a photographer you should appreciate that.
Claiming it has a worse screen than the competition is flying in the face of reality; it has better colour, better contrast, better brightness than the SIII, produce sharper images, and has less reflectiveness than any other handheld device. It is a quality screen by any measure regardless whether you prefer another phone. Calling 1136x640 pixels "low-res" for a 4" screen shows your lack of objectiveness. If we were talking about a Tablet, I'd agree that not having 720p would be bad, but we're not; this is a phone. Unlike things like a Galaxy Note, it isn't trying to pretend to be a tablet. It's designed to be a phone that can be operated by one hand and fits easily in a pocket.
Certainly the race to thinness that phones had for decades is questionable at the current level, companies always want something to brag about like the Razr and thinness, just as cameras had the Megapixel race or computers the Megahertz race, none of which had much to do with quality. But there's something to be said for a small light phone that is also a powerhouse. In the case of the iPhone, they have sacrificed battery life, I'd wish for it to be better and I would gladly sacrifice an amount of thinness and weight for it.
Not having LTE before now is hardly an issue as it is only really coming online now to any extent and more specifically the power-efficient chips have only now become available. Same for NFC; it is currently in its infancy and not much used anywhere, so having it is no great benefit. Some had hoped that having it in the iPhone would have kick-started its adoption. Having magnetic coils only makes your phone larger, and personally I hope they don't adopt it as I don't like the idea of another magnetic field being placed near my head, there are enough questions about longterm exposure to phone radiation (microwaves) causing cancers as it is. I don't like the idea of phones becoming wallets either.
As for durability, as I'm sure you know various sites have done drop tests and the iPhone 5 has proven to be extremely durable, tougher than the SIII.
I'm personally not in a hurry for a new phone and will look at what is available in a few years; my 4s serves me well for now.

faroZ06
Sep 29, 2012, 01:52 AM
"Retina" has nothing to do with "resolution". 2x2 pixel display may be retina but definitely not a high resolution.

If a 2x2 screen is retina, it's as high-res as it has to be for a human to not be able to see the pixels at regular viewing distance.

1080p is low res on a 100-foot diagonal display.

----------

steve will never do something like this.
tim you're totally doing a mess in apple.

Well, Steve gave me an iMac that fell apart and ran very slow after a couple of years. He also sold me The Search for Spock on iTunes but refused to let me play it once I bought it. Oh, and let's not forget Ping.

faroZ06
Sep 29, 2012, 01:54 AM
This is exactly what I mean about the apple fanbois who won't even look at what's out there. Every other high end smartphone on the market is 720p. Apple is the only one left with low-res crap.

Retina is meaningless apple marketing BS from 2010 and everyone else is way beyond it.

Bigger displays have to have more pixels, and the other smartphones have huge displays compared to the 4" iPhone. If you think 720p is so good, how about you view a 720p video projected onto a 16000x9000-inch canvas while sitting 5 feet away. It won't be pretty despite how great you seem to think 720p is.

There is important context that you are missing, as you can see. You need to take screen size and viewing distance into account when you're talking about "high/low res". The iPhone is already high-res enough so that it's at the point where adding more pixels while keeping the same screen size would not look any better at normal viewing distance (which is called "retina", and I suggest you look it up before calling people names).

If you want some statistics, the iPhone 5 has 326PPI, and the S3 has 306PPI. And here's a tidy list of the Apple competitors' screen pixel densities: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_displays_by_pixel_density

If you want me to buy a high-end Android device for some reason, you should be boasting the upgradeable storage capacity, not the lower-res (in context) screens.

Here, you can read more about meaningless market BS: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retina_Display

clibinarius
Sep 29, 2012, 02:19 AM
The confusion seems to stem from you referring to Display Resolution (physical dimensions in pixels), where many in the graphics field like me would think of it as pixel density. 326 ppi and a display size of 1136x640 px is not exactly low-res for a phone, is it? The iPhone gains "retina" status at 10.2", where the Pentile display of the SIII requires 15.9".

Most of that is trolling, but basically as I'm sure you already know the iPhone 5 screen is the best around, producing far better images than the SIII, as the iPhone has a properly-calibrated screen and the SIII doesn't; the colours are off and over-saturated. As a photographer you should appreciate that.
Claiming it has a worse screen than the competition is flying in the face of reality; it has better colour, better contrast, better brightness than the SIII, produce sharper images, and has less reflectiveness than any other handheld device. It is a quality screen by any measure regardless whether you prefer another phone. Calling 1136x640 pixels "low-res" for a 4" screen shows your lack of objectiveness. If we were talking about a Tablet, I'd agree that not having 720p would be bad, but we're not; this is a phone. Unlike things like a Galaxy Note, it isn't trying to pretend to be a tablet. It's designed to be a phone that can be operated by one hand and fits easily in a pocket.
Certainly the race to thinness that phones had for decades is questionable at the current level, companies always want something to brag about like the Razr and thinness, just as cameras had the Megapixel race or computers the Megahertz race, none of which had much to do with quality. But there's something to be said for a small light phone that is also a powerhouse. In the case of the iPhone, they have sacrificed battery life, I'd wish for it to be better and I would gladly sacrifice an amount of thinness and weight for it.
Not having LTE before now is hardly an issue as it is only really coming online now to any extent and more specifically the power-efficient chips have only now become available. Same for NFC; it is currently in its infancy and not much used anywhere, so having it is no great benefit. Some had hoped that having it in the iPhone would have kick-started its adoption. Having magnetic coils only makes your phone larger, and personally I hope they don't adopt it as I don't like the idea of another magnetic field being placed near my head, there are enough questions about longterm exposure to phone radiation (microwaves) causing cancers as it is. I don't like the idea of phones becoming wallets either.
As for durability, as I'm sure you know various sites have done drop tests and the iPhone 5 has proven to be extremely durable, tougher than the SIII.
I'm personally not in a hurry for a new phone and will look at what is available in a few years; my 4s serves me well for now.

NFC has been around for years. Its only new to iPhone users, and is used quite a bit, outside of the US. A lack of it in my iPhone 4S proved to be a bit annoying in Denmark, but that's aside from the point.

malcolmffc
Sep 29, 2012, 02:35 AM
I answered most of that for someone else on the thread....but the iPhone 5 display is very low res and the only phone pretending to be high end that isn't 720.

The fact that you think 720p matters on a tiny screen says volumes about you.

swagi
Sep 29, 2012, 06:01 AM
Fine by what standard?

The brightness sucks
Color reproduction is horrible
Clearly visible pentile artifacts
Burn in artifacts
Bluish green tint
Lousy power consumption
Wretched outdoor visibility

Really, what exactly does the GS3 display do right?

Just curious...what is your exact experience with the display? And what have you done about that in the settings?

The SG3 offers various color tone setting (to be exact 4) and every preset will cater to someone out there, e.g. I find the "video" preset oversaturated, but YMMV.

Second by default the SG3 uses very little power due to a setting of "Automatic Tone correction" where the phone analyses the pic and then decides how to display the content. Sometimes it's really annoying on text-heavy web pages to have the white so toned down...

...but nevertheless I can go at least two days on a charge in typical use. Hope you can say that for your phone

sazivad
Sep 29, 2012, 10:12 AM
1. Wanna bet DisplayMate takes money from Apple?
2. To anyone open minded enough to actually hold both phones.
3. So because apple marking says it's all you need, you need look no farther. Talk about being ignorant.
4. Comparing smartphone cameras since some fanboi would. imo all smartphone cameras are garbage, but then I'm a professional photographer, if you can't print a perfect 16x20, don't press the button, so this is a non-issue for me.
5. That it's the smallest screen and only one that doesn't do 720p.
6. And the battery-life on the 5 is even worse because Timmy has a hard-on for skinny, skanks and can't make it the same thickness with a decent battery.
7. If you want to compare the A6 to anything else on the market, Apple may as well close the company and go home. Sheep like you say it's about the experience, not processor specs so I didn't mention it, but Apple doesn't come close to competing there.
1. No (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retina_Display#Criticism). You can believe that, though.
2. So, you're going to speak for everyone who hasn't held both an iPhone 5 and a Galaxy S III? Is this issue not a matter of personal preference?
3. What I should've said is, "Siri was the main selling point for the iPhone 4S, which brought Apple in a lot of revenue." It's likely that the main feature of a product would greatly affect the sales of that product, yes?
4. Are you saying that only "fanbois" compare smartphone cameras?
5. For smallness, see this (http://gizmodo.com/5944598/when-did-small-phones-become-crappy-phones). For 720p, does it really matter, as long as the screen looks good? If I have a 720p screen, and an iPhone 5 screen, and there's no discernible difference between the two, apart from the number of pixels, should it matter? Again, personal preference, but I'm inclined to think it shouldn't. Probably because I'm an iSheeple who has a temple to Jobs in my house.
6. You're saying the iPhone 5 battery life is worse than the 4S? I'm not sure about that (http://www.cultofmac.com/190093/how-good-is-the-iphone-5-battery-life-way-better-than-the-iphone-4s-iphone-5-event/).
7. If my Samsung Galaxy S III (http://browser.primatelabs.com/android-benchmarks) LTE with a quad-core Samsung Exynos 1400 MHz performs worse than my iPhone 5 (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/09/16/iphone-5-benchmarks-appear-in-geekbench-showing-dual-core-1ghz-a6-cpu/) with a "mere" 2 core, 1 GHz processor, then it shouldn't matter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megahertz_myth) what the raw specs are.

zbarvian
Sep 29, 2012, 10:56 AM
My god:

iPhone 5 has better build quality, better screen quality, great internals, great camera, and solid battery life.

Samsung has larger display, good internals, good camera, poor materials, bad design (you can't say the S3 has a better physical design). AND IT'S LACKIN WIRELESS CHARJING DUDEZ..

Get a clue. NFC has tiny real-world utility right now. The iPhone 5 is the better overall device, but many people will still be drawn by the huge screen of the GS3.

HTC One X has always been better than the GS3, IMO.

cynics
Sep 29, 2012, 01:48 PM
I think the physical design (shape) is too much opinion to make one better then the other.

Overall I wish the iPhone 5 had:

2 antennas so you could do voice and data on Verizon's network.

NFC, plenty of places I go support it. McDonald's, Home Depot, CVS, Walgreens, etc

And had a bigger screen. If Motorola can put a 4.3" screen in a Razr M which is about the size of an iPhone 4/4S then why did apple have to make the 5 even bigger to only get a 4" screen on it?

If the 5 had those 3 things I would have waited in line for one. But until then I'll stick with my 4S. I wish I could make my own phone, it would be a Razr M with a bigger battery and vanilla Android.

Things like a barometer I don't really need or at least I don't think I do (my Xoom has one). I could even do without NFC but I think it would have been neat.

Dave.UK
Sep 29, 2012, 02:00 PM
Samsung has larger display, good internals, good camera, poor materials, bad design (you can't say the S3 has a better physical design).


Personal opinion.

I'll probably be the only one on here, but I actually like the look and feel of the Galaxy S3.

mackinmike
Sep 29, 2012, 05:44 PM
I have both the s3 and the ip5 and I can say the screen size of the ip5 is tiny. Quality of the display goes to ip5 tho but I think its because images look sharper on smaller screens.

I use the s3 more than my iphone. Lets just say iPhone doesn't have the edge anymore.

Oracle1729
Sep 29, 2012, 06:51 PM
The fact that you think 720p matters on a tiny screen says volumes about you.

It mattered a hell of a lot when apple had the higher res screen. You hypocrites with blind faith are hilarious.

----------

Bigger displays have to have more pixels, and the other smartphones have huge displays compared to the 4" iPhone. If you think 720p is so good, how about you view a 720p video projected onto a 16000x9000-inch canvas while sitting 5 feet away. It won't be pretty despite how great you seem to think 720p is.

1300 foot wide screen 5 feet away, I think it's wider than my field of view....nothing else you said makes any sense either.

DanteMann
Sep 29, 2012, 07:16 PM
My god:

iPhone 5 has better build quality, better screen quality, great internals, great camera, and solid battery life.

Samsung has larger display, good internals, good camera, poor materials, bad design (you can't say the S3 has a better physical design). AND IT'S LACKIN WIRELESS CHARJING DUDEZ..

Get a clue. NFC has tiny real-world utility right now. The iPhone 5 is the better overall device, but many people will still be drawn by the huge screen of the GS3.

HTC One X has always been better than the GS3, IMO.

So let me get this straight. You think NFC is useless and don't care to have it, but you would want wireless charging. The iPhone has neither of these. To be honest, NFC is a bigger deal than wireless charging. We can already charge our phones, and wireless charging still requires something to be plugged in. And for the most part its a dock that will stay in one place as it would be too big to keep moving around. But a simple charger can be taken anywhere in the house/outside as it's much smaller than a dock. Yeah, NFC is definitely the better feature to have to future proof your phone.
That being said, where did you hear that GS3 doesn't have wireless charging? It does.
We all know how the blind loyalist love all the features the iPhone has, and hate or don't care for any feature it doesn't have. How you guys enjoying the new 4 inch sceen? Remember how you all felt 4 inch displays were stupid and too big? How are you guys liking the new thinness of the phone? Remember how you thought all those thin android phones were too thin? How do you guys like the new lightness of the iPhone? Remember how you blind followers called the Galaxy S2, S3 and all other high end Android phones too light and just didn't have the heft of a premium device?
You see, you blind followers are so predictable. Any feature Apple doesn't have is bad, and any feature it does have is amazing. Just come to the realization that the iPhone isn't the envy of users you think it is. Just enjoy your iphone for what it is, a nice little phone with a very elementary OS. And there's nothing wrong with that, because gosh darn it people love it.

lavrishevo
Sep 29, 2012, 07:24 PM
I think the physical design (shape) is too much opinion to make one better then the other.

Overall I wish the iPhone 5 had:

2 antennas so you could do voice and data on Verizon's network.

NFC, plenty of places I go support it. McDonald's, Home Depot, CVS, Walgreens, etc


Just FYI. Neither Verizon nor AT&T are supporting Google Wallet. So yeah, phones with NFC on their network are greatly hindered by this. If anyone knows of an alternative I am all ears.

3bs
Sep 29, 2012, 07:26 PM
Personal opinion.

I'll probably be the only one on here, but I actually like the look and feel of the Galaxy S3.

You're not, I do too!

zbarvian
Sep 29, 2012, 08:26 PM
So let me get this straight. You think NFC is useless and don't care to have it, but you would want wireless charging. The iPhone has neither of these. To be honest, NFC is a bigger deal than wireless charging. We can already charge our phones, and wireless charging still requires something to be plugged in. And for the most part its a dock that will stay in one place as it would be too big to keep moving around. But a simple charger can be taken anywhere in the house/outside as it's much smaller than a dock. Yeah, NFC is definitely the better feature to have to future proof your phone.
That being said, where did you hear that GS3 doesn't have wireless charging? It does.
We all know how the blind loyalist love all the features the iPhone has, and hate or don't care for any feature it doesn't have. How you guys enjoying the new 4 inch sceen? Remember how you all felt 4 inch displays were stupid and too big? How are you guys liking the new thinness of the phone? Remember how you thought all those thin android phones were too thin? How do you guys like the new lightness of the iPhone? Remember how you blind followers called the Galaxy S2, S3 and all other high end Android phones too light and just didn't have the heft of a premium device?
You see, you blind followers are so predictable. Any feature Apple doesn't have is bad, and any feature it does have is amazing. Just come to the realization that the iPhone isn't the envy of users you think it is. Just enjoy your iphone for what it is, a nice little phone with a very elementary OS. And there's nothing wrong with that, because gosh darn it people love it.

Relax, jeez. The wireless charging bit was a joke. I honestly don't care about wireless charging or NFC right now. If they were both adopted and implemented on a big scale then sure, but neither are really useful at this point. And that last barrage of questions and accusation doesn't apply to me, go look elsewhere.

JonL12345
Sep 30, 2012, 05:46 AM
I don't get this "wireless charging is useless" argument. "You still have to plug something in." Yes, once, rather than everyday! You don't have to be a genius to work that out. But I think its something Apple said at a conference and its been spread around like confetti. Don't people think anymore?

Over a 3 year lifespan, plug your phone in a thousand times or just the wireless base once.

What is easier than just dumping your phone on a pad?

zbarvian
Sep 30, 2012, 07:15 AM
I don't get this "wireless charging is useless" argument. "You still have to plug something in." Yes, once, rather than everyday! You don't have to be a genius to work that out. But I think its something Apple said at a conference and its been spread around like confetti. Don't people think anymore?

Over a 3 year lifespan, plug your phone in a thousand times or just the wireless base once.

What is easier than just dumping your phone on a pad?

...

What if I need to charge somewhere else? That thing is way more big and clunky than a wired connector. Not to mention wireless charging doesn't charge as quick, and you can't really operate much of the phone when it's on a dock.

JonL12345
Sep 30, 2012, 07:35 AM
Most people will charge just once a day. Put the charger there. Is that the best you can come up with?

Take the phone off the dock if you need to use it and then put it back after. Better than tethered.

These arguments are really desperate attempts to say that wireless charging is not better. It simply is and accept that. The iPhone will certainly get it one day. Only then perhaps will you see the light, because Apple tells you its good.

zbarvian
Sep 30, 2012, 07:47 AM
Most people will charge just once a day. Put the charger there. Is that the best you can come up with?

Take the phone off the dock if you need to use it and then put it back after. Better than tethered.

These arguments are really desperate attempts to say that wireless charging is not better. It simply is and accept that. The iPhone will certainly get it one day. Only then perhaps will you see the light, because Apple tells you its good.

I really don't think you understand wireless charging and/or charging habits. The only way wireless charging would be worthwile would be if it was adopted everywhere, and Nokia was trying for that to a small degree for the 920, but they don't have the clout like Apple does.

aznguyen316
Sep 30, 2012, 07:49 AM
Just FYI. Neither Verizon nor AT&T are supporting Google Wallet. So yeah, phones with NFC on their network are greatly hindered by this. If anyone knows of an alternative I am all ears.

Root (unlock bootloader if on VZW) flash new rom. Modify build.prop, flash google wallet. Set up wallet. Restore build.prop. Go wow people at the cash registers.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1810040
Pretty much along these lines, the top part. I am on Jelly bean via CM10 (paranoid android).

I set mine up a month ago and got the free $10 from google (they no longer offer this) and have used it a couple times now, twice at a CVS which both times the cashiers were pretty funny - "wow I saw that in an episode of fringe, literally last night" and another time an the airport at the water/pop vending machine where they had the mastercard paypass thing.

No I don't use NFC everyday but it's really nice to have and I can see its uses - forgot your wallet somewhere but have phone..I've done this before. Kinda like find my iPhone, don't use it much but when you need it, it's invaluable.

Also voice & data simultaneously is cool, though I don't call often, but I have wanted to send stuff while on the phone.

JonL12345
Sep 30, 2012, 07:50 AM
I notice you have ignored all my points. How convenient!

What specifically don't I understand about wireless charging and habits that you seem to?

Dolorian
Sep 30, 2012, 08:00 AM
I'll probably be the only one on here, but I actually like the look and feel of the Galaxy S3.

I like it too.

zbarvian
Sep 30, 2012, 08:08 AM
I notice you have ignored all my points. How convenient!

What specifically don't I understand about wireless charging and habits that you seem to?

Because wired connection is significantly faster than wireless, the dock is bigger and less portable, I can use both hands (typing) and talk on the phone without interrupting the charging. Wireless charging isn't better in any way besides the "cool" and minor convenience aspect. If it was in widespread use, then sure, but it's not.

JonL12345
Sep 30, 2012, 08:19 AM
Lets be clear, some people may use it, some won't. I for one will use it. I work for myself and to have my phone on a wireless dock or pad or however they do it will be very convenient. There will be many people who recharge their phone once per day, maybe at night. To have a dock next to your bedside can be very handy for those people.

To suggest a dock has to be portable is silly. If you need to charge it away from your dock then use a cable. It is irrelevant if something is widespread or not. How on earth does that help? I really don't think you have thought this through.

One thing is for sure, it is better to have the option to use wireless charging than not.