phones: Your thoughts on the Galaxy S III

[Peterg2]

Originally Posted by onthecouchagain

Which part of "I" in all the "I realize" or "I'll take" fails to imply these are my preferences, and anything derived from those preferences are my opinions?

Simply, you do not respect the notion that people have different preferences and choices. You demean their choices. You find someone believing that certain new features are over the top while they place more emphasis on build quality which you deem "superficial". Hey, some people find "new features" superficial too and perhaps they are! Build quality for some people is important. Some like Timex Ironman watches (I have one) and others like Patek Philippe watches (I have one too). Don't tell me that a Patek Philippe is just something superficial (other than the cost).

For some people, build quality is more important than some individual feature or features. Recognise it without denigrating their opinions.

[onthecouchagain]

Originally Posted by Peterg2

Simply, you do not respect the notion that people have different preferences and choices. You demean their choices. You find someone believing that certain new features are over the top while they place more emphasis on build quality which you deem "superficial". Hey, some people find "new features" superficial too and perhaps they are! Build quality for some people is important. Some like Timex Ironman watches (I have one) and others like Patek Philippe watches (I have one too). Don't tell me that a Patek Philippe is just something superficial (other than the cost).

For some people, build quality is more important than some individual feature or features. Recognise it without denigrating their opinions.

I do see your point. Fair enough.

Yet, it must be said...

I don't understand how build quality is more important than features that would actually enhance the user experience (like the aforementioned eye-tracking; and even quad-core. Sure, nothing really uses it now, but having quad-core will future-proof to some degree when developers start making games/apps that utilize the extra processors).

Build material equates to aesthetics and a sense of value. That sounds objectively more superficial than features.

[Peterg2]

Originally Posted by onthecouchagain

I do see your point. Fair enough.

Yet, it must be said...

I don't understand how build quality is more important than features that would actually enhance the user experience (like the aforementioned eye-tracking; and even quad-core. Sure, nothing really uses it now, but having quad-core will future-proof to some degree when developers start making games/apps that utilize the extra processors).

Build material equates to aesthetics and a sense of value. That, to me, is more superficial than features.

And I see your point here more clearly and I will acknowledge that.

For myself, the problem is the cost of the phones and signing away 3 years (in Canada it is 3 as opposed to 2 years in the US). Unless one buys the phone outright at some $650 or so. With Android - and I am OS agnostic - let's say that there are reasonably large developments in the period of 6 months. With Apple it is essentially 1 year and perhaps longer (4S to 4 was nothing major *for me*).

So in the space of 6 months with Android your phone is essentially surpassed and most definitely in 1 year. Unless you change phones every year - which I don't - I want there to be something residual - build quality and great feel. I bought my girlfriend an HTC Amaze - yes, quite bulky, relatively speaking. However, it looks so good and feels so good in the hand (I play with it a lot). It is now yesterday's news but I still like it a lot. Performs pretty well and it still feels and looks great.

Glad we have reached an amicable understanding.

[onthecouchagain]

Originally Posted by Peterg2

Glad we have reached an amicable understanding.

Likewise. Appreciate the convo.

[grahamnp]

I think the phone is impressive on paper, it is really competing with the HTC One X right now and it has it beat with more built in storage as an option, removable storage and a bigger and still removable battery. The screen is disappointing, I was hoping for an SAMOLED+ screen if I were to switch to a Samsung but I think the GNex's screen is okay and this is supposedly better.

The phone seems pretty ugly to me and is unfortunately made from the same kind of materials as the other Samsungs. I'm sure it is every bit as durable as the other top tier Android devices and put together superbly but it is not going to feel as well built. Not the most important thing about a phone but when you use it every few minutes every day for 1 or 2 years, it adds up.

Was surprised to see the Qualcomm S4 as an option. This probably means that the Exynos SoC still does not have LTE built in. I would have thought that Samsung, having complete control over design and manufacture, would have been able to design one version of the phone with all the features they wanted to put in.

[Walter Bell]

Anyone else shocked by couch and peters convo? I wish all forums worked that way.

[trinitrotolu3ne]

I'm not going to compare the S3 because it's improved over the S2 and I don't need to. So instead watch this video comparing the latest iPhone to the now outdated Galaxy S2 and extrapolate this to the S3. It think this says a lot!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIlv2_lpTng

[cynics]

Originally Posted by Peterg2

And I see your point here more clearly and I will acknowledge that.

For myself, the problem is the cost of the phones and signing away 3 years (in Canada it is 3 as opposed to 2 years in the US). Unless one buys the phone outright at some $650 or so. With Android - and I am OS agnostic - let's say that there are reasonably large developments in the period of 6 months. With Apple it is essentially 1 year and perhaps longer (4S to 4 was nothing major *for me*).

So in the space of 6 months with Android your phone is essentially surpassed and most definitely in 1 year. Unless you change phones every year - which I don't - I want there to be something residual - build quality and great feel. I bought my girlfriend an HTC Amaze - yes, quite bulky, relatively speaking. However, it looks so good and feels so good in the hand (I play with it a lot). It is now yesterday's news but I still like it a lot. Performs pretty well and it still feels and looks great.

Glad we have reached an amicable understanding.

But you have an Apple vs Android mentality. A lot of us group them all as smart phones.

I use a 4S but I'm not fooling myself saying "well it hasn't been surpassed because Apple has made a better phone". For me it was surpassed by quite a few other (non apple) phones already. Do you see a feature you like on a Android phone an are happy Apple doesn't have that feature on a newer phone?

Seems a little odd to me unless I'm misunderstanding you.

[apollo1444]

Originally Posted by Lindenhurst

The S3 is ugly???? I think some would disagree on that.

people with bad taste exist

[cynics]

Originally Posted by apollo1444

people with bad taste exist

Thankfully people with varying opinions and just as importantly people that can appreciate those opinions also exist.

[apollo1444]

Originally Posted by cynics

Thankfully people with varying opinions and just as importantly people that can appreciate those opinions also exist.

that's what I said, I said people with bad taste exist duh

[0m3ga]

Originally Posted by apollo1444

that's what I said, I said people with bad taste exist duh

Kettle, meet pot.

[Walter Bell]

Originally Posted by cynics

But you have an Apple vs Android mentality. A lot of us group them all as smart phones.

I use a 4S but I'm not fooling myself saying "well it hasn't been surpassed because Apple has made a better phone". For me it was surpassed by quite a few other (non apple) phones already. Do you see a feature you like on a Android phone an are happy Apple doesn't have that feature on a newer phone?

Seems a little odd to me unless I'm misunderstanding you.

How are you not comparing Apple vs Android also? Sure they all belong to the same pool of technology, but does it just stop there? Do you put all pieces of metal on 4 wheels in the same category as cars? Or do you further classify them as cars, trucks, ford, dodge?

Since your comprehension ability is below average at best, let me see if I can make it simple for you to understand.

Peter doesn't buy a new phone every year. Android phones update faster than iPhones. Because of this, Peter wants to make sure that any Android phone he does buy can last him 2+ years. The build quality of the GS3 looks like absolute **** compared to other high end devices. Therefore he is unwillingly to buy the phone as he is unsure if it will last him 2+years.

[Vegastouch]

Originally Posted by Walter Bell

How are you not comparing Apple vs Android also? Sure they all belong to the same pool of technology, but does it just stop there? Do you put all pieces of metal on 4 wheels in the same category as cars? Or do you further classify them as cars, trucks, ford, dodge?

Since your comprehension ability is below average at best, let me see if I can make it simple for you to understand.

Peter doesn't buy a new phone every year. Android phones update faster than iPhones. Because of this, Peter wants to make sure that any Android phone he does buy can last him 2+ years. The build quality of the GS3 looks like absolute **** compared to other high end devices. Therefore he is unwillingly to buy the phone as he is unsure if it will last him 2+years.

Not sure why you felt the need to say that. As for build quality, ...sure, the wrap around glass phone has been steller when dropped from 2' . You know, i rarely see a broken Android phone. I see broken iPhones all the time so who has the better build quality?

Ive never heard anybody complain about the build quality of their Android either. Its usually just an excuse used in here as to why they dont like it even though they have never owned one.

Ive had my Vibrant two years (in June) and yes it has a case on it but it isnt a real good protective case, its just one of these mesh cases just pretty much is used for a better grip and its been on the whole time ive had it and yes the case has a few dings and a corner is broke but my phone has never broken even when i dropped it face down on asphalt from 4" up.

What it looks like to YOU and how it has held up is a different story.

[WeegieMac]

If I wasn't so heavily invested in iOS, I'd be sorely tempted to give the S3 a try.

I watched the keynote on YouTube, some of it was a bit cheesy (orchestra intro, etc), but the device does come across as one very nice piece of kit. Ok, Samsung have mirrored some features of the iPhone and iOS such as Siri (S-Voice), iCloud (S-Cloud), Scan & Match (iTunes Match), and a HDMI equipped dongle to display content on an LCD television (AirPlay), but the phone is a very nice looking bit of kit.

The whole "it watches you" aspect is kind of creepy, to think your phone is watching you for when you're awake and asleep is weird, but there are some nice features and it's definitely the first Android phone that's made me sit up and go 'ok ...', as well as watch a full keynote unveiling.

Edit: just returned to see me 'marked down' ... I forgot that unless the praise for Android is excessive, gushing, and over the top, any form of positive posting is viewed as derogatory by those I wish would get off these forums and go mingle with their own kind.

[Walter Bell]

I think part of the problem that people fail to grasp is that BUILD QUALITY is not indicative of how a device will hold up from everyday ACCIDENTAL ABUSE.

My Gnex got a a small scratch on its screen within 48 hours of ownership. My iPhone has yet to have ANY scratches on the phone after 6 months of use.

Does this mean the Gnex is made from ****** materials further allowing us to deem the device suffers from bad Build Quality?

Moreover, BUILD quality is determined by the actual quality of the parts that were used to construct the phone. Take the plastic used in the GS3 vs the plastic used on the HTC X for example. While they both share the origination of materials (plastic) one device uses a more advanced form of technology that further increases the quality of a device while the other uses older technology that is unable to produce the same level of quality.

Now differences of opinion arise due to the subjective nature of quality which is why we are having this debate in the first place.

Whether a phone survived a 6 foot fall or not does not depend on build quality.
For example the materials used to construct my 6 year old dumb phone are vastly inferior to that of my iPhone, but I can guarantee if I drop both from height of 6 feet, I can guess with 99% accuracy which one will break and which one won't.

Posted from my shattered back iPhone 4S

[jeffe]

This is a terrific point. One must define build quality and what it means. Many said my Galaxy S that was made out of plastic felt like a toy. I guess you could say that was true as most of it was plastic but I was also able to treat it as a toy.

After two years of ownership, I have only one small scratch on the gorilla glass screen after countless drops on tile, concrete, etc.

Every IPhone I have touched has felt solid and I'm sure it was made of nicer materials. I think I probably would had to been much more careful with it than my Galaxy S.

Originally Posted by Walter Bell

I think part of the problem that people fail to grasp is that BUILD QUALITY is not indicative of how a device will hold up from everyday ACCIDENTAL ABUSE.

My Gnex got a a small scratch on its screen within 48 hours of ownership. My iPhone has yet to have ANY scratches on the phone after 6 months of use.

Does this mean the Gnex is made from ****** materials further allowing us to deem the device suffers from bad Build Quality?

Moreover, BUILD quality is determined by the actual quality of the parts that were used to construct the phone. Take the plastic used in the GS3 vs the plastic used on the HTC X for example. While they both share the origination of materials (plastic) one device uses a more advanced form of technology that further increases the quality of a device while the other uses older technology that is unable to produce the same level of quality.

Now differences of opinion arise due to the subjective nature of quality which is why we are having this debate in the first place.

Whether a phone survived a 6 foot fall or not does not depend on build quality.
For example the materials used to construct my 6 year old dumb phone are vastly inferior to that of my iPhone, but I can guarantee if I drop both from height of 6 feet, I can guess with 99% accuracy which one will break and which one won't.

Posted from my shattered back iPhone 4S

[B777Forevar]

Touchwiz looks better now, but it is one ugly phone.

[roxxette]

Well ive only been a iphone user and have zero exp.with android phones or either the OS to the point that i never hold one in my hands but i always think about switching for a while what holds me is im soooooo used to iOS that fear of regret because unlocked iphones are hard to get around here (no apple store).

[Moccasin]

I remember making a similar point on some other thread. Build quality is certainly related to durability but relates more (in my mind at least) to the attention to detail in design and construction.

For those who change their phones every few months for the latest and greatest, then pure specs/bells and whistles are more important. For me, knowing I will keep a phone for 2 years or more, then a phone that I can rely on and be confident that it will last that time is more important.

What many on these forums apparently fail to grasp is that everyone is entitled to their opinion and preferences.

With Apple too, I also know that if something goes wrong I will be able to take it to the Apple store and have it fixed, either free or for a relatively small charge and walk out with the phone within minutes. Again FOR ME, that is important

The SG3 seems to me to be trying too hard. Some good things on it for sure. I'd be interested to know what this eye tracking malarkey does for battery life! In the unlikely event that Apple drops the ball on the next gen iPhone, it would not be my choice. Though who am I kidding really ... Apple would need to seriously mess up!

Originally Posted by Walter Bell

I think part of the problem that people fail to grasp is that BUILD QUALITY is not indicative of how a device will hold up from everyday ACCIDENTAL ABUSE.

My Gnex got a a small scratch on its screen within 48 hours of ownership. My iPhone has yet to have ANY scratches on the phone after 6 months of use.

Does this mean the Gnex is made from ****** materials further allowing us to deem the device suffers from bad Build Quality?

Moreover, BUILD quality is determined by the actual quality of the parts that were used to construct the phone. Take the plastic used in the GS3 vs the plastic used on the HTC X for example. While they both share the origination of materials (plastic) one device uses a more advanced form of technology that further increases the quality of a device while the other uses older technology that is unable to produce the same level of quality.

Now differences of opinion arise due to the subjective nature of quality which is why we are having this debate in the first place.

Whether a phone survived a 6 foot fall or not does not depend on build quality.
For example the materials used to construct my 6 year old dumb phone are vastly inferior to that of my iPhone, but I can guarantee if I drop both from height of 6 feet, I can guess with 99% accuracy which one will break and which one won't.

Posted from my shattered back iPhone 4S

[St. Germain]

Originally Posted by B777Forevar

Touchwiz looks better now, but it is one ugly phone.

You knows it's ugly when Android sites are saying its ugly.

"So there you have it. A darn-near perfect explanation of the GSIII design. Sure, it’s butt ugly, but it’s also 100% (well maybe 90%) lawyer approved. An amorphous, unsymmetrical blob that doesn’t come in black, with a non-permanent dock and non-square icons. There’s no way Apple can add this design to their Samsung lawsuit."

http://daringfireball.net/linked/201...xy-s-3-lawyers

[Vegastouch]

Originally Posted by St. Germain

You knows it's ugly when Android sites are saying its ugly.

"So there you have it. A darn-near perfect explanation of the GSIII design. Sure, it’s butt ugly, but it’s also 100% (well maybe 90%) lawyer approved. An amorphous, unsymmetrical blob that doesn’t come in black, with a non-permanent dock and non-square icons. There’s no way Apple can add this design to their Samsung lawsuit."

http://daringfireball.net/linked/201...xy-s-3-lawyers

Your calling that an Android site?

I dont see whats so ugly about it. Maybe someone can be more specific as to what is so ugly? Because it doesnt come in black? Hec that for me is a plus. Everyphone ive had except for one has been black. Not to mention, there are a thousand black cases i can put on it if i want to.

[cube]

Originally Posted by Vegastouch

Your calling that an Android site?

I dont see whats so ugly about it. Maybe someone can be more specific as to what is so ugly? Because it doesnt come in black? Hec that for me is a plus. Everyphone ive had except for one has been black. Not to mention, there are a thousand black cases i can put on it if i want to.

It is ugly because it is pebble shaped. Rounded back is not ugly, rounded footprint is.

[cube]

The new Sony's look really nice in pictures, but they are either too small or have no memory slot, so no go.

[Vegastouch]

Originally Posted by cube

It is ugly because it is pebble shaped. Rounded back is not ugly, rounded footprint is.

So your saying this isnt ugly? It is rounded both ways, and the corners are even more rounded on the iPhone (i know this isnt an official picture)but....i forgot, it has a Apple logo on it so it is beautiful