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

Discussion in 'Alternatives to iOS and iOS Devices' started by gadget123, Oct 10, 2012.

  1. macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2011
    Location:
    United Kingdom
  2. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2011
    #2
  3. macrumors 65816

    master-ceo

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2007
    Location:
    The SUN
  4. macrumors Nehalem

    GoCubsGo

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    #4
    As long as there is choice, I would think 4" would be the max screen size I'd want in a phone. Therefore, I think in that respect they got it right.
     
  5. macrumors 65816

    Dave.UK

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2012
    Location:
    Kent, UK
    #5
    How do you work that one out? Just because YOU dont want a bigger screen, dosent mean its not what everyone else wants - otherwise explain the success of the Galaxy S3, Galaxy Note and Galaxy Note 2?

    Apparently 4" was too big not that long ago, then Apple said its ok and now everyone loves the 4" screen!
     
  6. macrumors 65816

    Dave.UK

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2012
    Location:
    Kent, UK
    #6
  7. macrumors Nehalem

    GoCubsGo

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    #7
    Wow that is very cool. I do love the SGS3 but it is so large. This is probably perfect.
     
  8. macrumors G4

    Chundles

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
    #8
    So by "won't have sawn off specs" they mean "WILL have sawn off specs"??

    800x480
    1GHz unknown (not Exynos) processor
    5MP camera

    http://www.engadget.com/2012/10/10/samsung-galaxy-s-iii-mini/

    It's €399 which converts to ~A$500 or a little more than iPhone 4 money.

    So it's a cheap Galaxy, not a mini Galaxy S III.
     
  9. macrumors 68000

    GroundLoop

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2003
    #9
    At first, I was excited...then I was disappointed. I think that Samsung is truly trying to mimic Apple...even down to the hype not living up to reality.

    GL
     
  10. MRU
    macrumors demi-god

    MRU

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2005
    Location:
    Ireland
    #10
    Was really excited to read this "Samsung says that although it'll be smaller, it won't have sawn-off specs", and then I read the specs. :(

    See I if this had actually had the specs of the GSS3 (ok maybe slightly smaller resolution screen granted) I would have sold my One X in a heartbeat and snapped one of these up straight away, without hesitation.

    But at moment doing so would be a major step down. :(

    Disappointed, as a 4" flagship android would suit me so much better and addressed most of my issues with using my android handset, , so for me this isn't so much flagship now as 'sadship' :( :(
     
  11. MRU
    macrumors demi-god

    MRU

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2005
    Location:
    Ireland
    #11
    Sadly the 4" SGS3 Mini is contrary to Samsung's assertions, cut down a heck of a lot in specs. :( (no quad core, no HD screen, reduced camera to 5mp etc..) otherwise for me it would have replaced my 4.7" One X, which I find a little too wieldy for me personally.

    There is no right and wrong for screen size, its all subjective and is what the consumer feels comfortable with. Samsung just realise there was a gap for a 4" flagship model (much like how HTC had the One X & One S) I just wish that they hadn't slashed the specs alongside the screen size. :( That is there only mistake as far as I'm concerned as I would have dropped the € straight away on a 4" SGS3.
     
  12. macrumors 603

    Oletros

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Location:
    Premià de Mar
    #12
    Like the ones that exists now?
     
  13. macrumors 604

    cynics

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2012
    #13
    I predicted people would think Apple was a trend setter with a 4" screen.

    Firstly there have alway been 4" Android devices. LG Lucid, Motorola Droid 4, Pantech Breakout, Sony Xperia Play and even (drum roll), Samsung Stratosphere. So how exactly can there be a flood of 4" screen phones on a market that's already flooded with them?

    Secondly, People want small phones, not small screens. Take the Razr M for example. It's similar in size to the iPhone 4/4S however it has a 4.3" screen. Why couldn't apple do this? Instead they make the phone bigger and the screen only slightly bigger.
     
  14. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2012
    #14
    Just a 4in screen with no HD?

    iPhone 5 kills it then. Ive got the GS3. There is no way I would accept a 4in android phone with no HD display. Id rather look at boring iOS on the iPhone 5 or 4s.
     
  15. daveathall, Oct 10, 2012
    Last edited: Oct 10, 2012

    macrumors 68000

    daveathall

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2010
    Location:
    North Yorkshire
    #15
    I agree with the above that people want smaller phones rather than smaller screens. I have posted this elsewhere but the iPhone 5 is not a great deal smaller than a SGS3.

    Iphone 5 on top of a SGS3.

    [​IMG]


    But the screen size difference is startling.

    [​IMG]
     
  16. macrumors 6502a

    tmanto02

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2011
    Location:
    Earth
    #16
  17. macrumors 604

    cynics

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2012
    #17
    I predict. "Omgz S3 mini is TOO small to use with one hand!" Since its overall dimension will likely be less then the iPhone 5.

    Get over it people! Samsung has been making 4" screen phones for OVER 2 YEARS with the Galaxy S (June 2010).
     
  18. macrumors 603

    Oletros

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Location:
    Premià de Mar
    #18
  19. macrumors 6502a

    tmanto02

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2011
    Location:
    Earth
    #19
    Yes however this is not a Galaxy Ace or another basic Samsung phone, it is their flagship device
     
  20. macrumors 604

    cynics

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2012
    #20
    It's crazy isn't it? The 5 has so much going for it but people will try to find more even if its totally off the wall stuff.

    The next phone that is as thin or thinner then the 5 will be labeled as a "copy cat". Never mind there were phones thinner then previous iPhone versions. Saying the iPhone copied thinner phones does not compute, but vice versa and its a wannabe.
     
  21. macrumors 604

    cynics

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2012
    #21
    When those phones were released years ago they were flagship devices. Not sure about the Ace but the S was.
     
  22. MRU, Oct 10, 2012
    Last edited: Oct 10, 2012

    MRU
    macrumors demi-god

    MRU

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2005
    Location:
    Ireland
    #22
    You picked my post to demonstrate your theorem ;) !! yay



    Here are same shots but with my One X & iPhone 5 for size comparison


    photo 1.JPG

    photo 2.JPG

    photo copy.jpg
     
  23. macrumors 68020

    pgiguere1

    Joined:
    May 28, 2009
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    #23
    This is basically a Galaxy S Advance in disguise to fool customers into buying a low-end phone thinking they get a miniaturized version of their 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.
     
  24. macrumors 68000

    daveathall

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2010
    Location:
    North Yorkshire
    #24
    And there I was thinking that I was being subtle.:eek: so good I had to read it twice.:)


    Back to the drawing board.:)
     
  25. macrumors 603

    Oletros

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Location:
    Premià de Mar
    #25
    The Galaxy 3 Mini flagship device?

    Whit its specs it is a low-mid range device
    Exactly
     

Share This Page