lol Royole FlexPai already claimed that title... the reviews are pretty bad though, I’m sure Samsung’s is better than Royole’s.
Last edited:
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Samsung Unveils New $1,980 Galaxy Fold Smartphone
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Agree, and two to three years might be just about the time Apple releases their foldable. If history is any indication, they’ll nail it.
Apple doesn’t value being first, so they’ll just keep it in development until they’re satisfied with it. Who knows, could be five years away. But it’ll likely be an excellent product when they finally do release.
Last edited:
Wow I can’t believe how horrible the seam mark at the fold looks. Really? Who wants that running up and down the entire length of their display? Not even for $200, let alone $2,000.
And what’s going on at the top (circled in red)? It looks like it’s already falling apart. I guess the trim is delaminating.
Did they really bring their best one? Maybe this is the one they used for their 200,000 fold durability test.
If you can’t even make one good one, it’s pretty much just a half-baked prototype. This thing doesn’t look like it’s anywhere near ready for mass production. This is no more innovative than the Royole FlexPai introduced a few months ago.
Can’t unsee.
Thanks for posting the pix @fullauto
Last edited:
their keynote slogans tell a different story. Plus there's no guarantee they'll ever get it right (see Homepod etc.). There's a reason why they slipped from 1st place on the innovation rating to place 17 within less than 2 years.
That’s the thing I don’t understand when I see people trumpeting its specs, such as the sheer number of cameras it has, or the dual battery arrangement, or whatever.
I am not paying for specs, I am paying for you, the company, to put them together in a manner which gives me a great user experience.
It doesn’t matter whether your costs is anywhere near the final price of the device, or is much lower. What matters is that the product works great for me. If you can accomplish that at a lower cost (which in turn means higher margins, good for you. If you can’t, then too bad.
And from what I have seen so far, it hardly looks like a $2000 experience to me. In what bizarro world is getting an iPhone and iPad the cheaper option?!?
Are you confusing new product introductions with something else?
Was Apple the first to release an MP3 player? Smartphone? Tablet Computer? Smart Watch? Bluetooth headset? Did they rush any of these out the door so they could pat themselves on the back and yell “FIRST”??? Or were they “late to the party” as the Apple-hate crowd likes to say, with iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch and AirPods? But then, didn’t they proceed to absolutely own the product space where they staked their belated claim?
Where is their device with folding display? Their AR glasses? Their autonomous driving tech? Still purportedly in development, needing more work before Apple’s ready to release it. And note: no one else has done any of those right yet.
So now you understand what it means to keep a product in development until it’s ready to be released—and then to nail it when they finally do release.
I hesitate to quibble with your post, because you make an excellent point - - however, one of those things is not like the others. The iPhone was clearly the first true modern smartphone that broke open a whole new device category, that was copied by all other manufacturers, and decimated all that came before it.
I'm a little slow this morning... so help me understand some things.
Everyone keeps saying "it's just the first generation" meaning they expect it to get better in the future.
But what sort of things can they improve?
The first thing I think of is thickness. But you're still folding something in half on top of itself. So you're still doubling whatever thickness it is. But you can't make it too thin because you still need a lot of battery.
I guess they could make the screen film tougher so it won't have the lumps in the crease. But it's still flexible plastic. We've been so spoiled with Gorilla Glass for about 10 years. I'm not sure I could go back to plastic.
These problems are inherent to what this device is.
It's kinda like saying "the biggest problem with VR is you have to strap goggles to your face"
Well yeah... that's exactly what you do. There's no way around that.
Sorry I haven't had my coffee yet. I was just trying to think of problems... and possible solutions.
What do you think Gen 2 or Gen 3 will offer?
Everyone keeps saying "it's just the first generation" meaning they expect it to get better in the future.
But what sort of things can they improve?
The first thing I think of is thickness. But you're still folding something in half on top of itself. So you're still doubling whatever thickness it is. But you can't make it too thin because you still need a lot of battery.
I guess they could make the screen film tougher so it won't have the lumps in the crease. But it's still flexible plastic. We've been so spoiled with Gorilla Glass for about 10 years. I'm not sure I could go back to plastic.
These problems are inherent to what this device is.
It's kinda like saying "the biggest problem with VR is you have to strap goggles to your face"
Well yeah... that's exactly what you do. There's no way around that.
Sorry I haven't had my coffee yet. I was just trying to think of problems... and possible solutions.
What do you think Gen 2 or Gen 3 will offer?
Last edited:
Someone else made a brilliant comment earlier in this thread, and that these ranking list are generally frivolous, why? Consumers don’t care about business rankings in the sense of where a company currently stands, because they don’t pay attention to things like that, the fact is, they have their own personal ranking of where a company stands based on {customer service, hardware quality standards and services offered}, those are three key elements that Apple executes at any given time, which speaks volumes about why they are successful in the execution of a business model they practice and preach.
Oh, and your HomePod example, that’s really _not_ necessarily a product I think that is trying to compete with the aspect of these other voice assistants from Google and Amazon, being that the HomePod is really more trying to produce quality sound as Music player over anything else, anyone that has owned or uses a HomePod, knows exactly what they’re purchasing.
lol ok point taken. I actually had originally written cell phone, but changed it to smartphone when I was proofing. Which, yeah, doesn’t even really make sense historically.
[doublepost=1550837631][/doublepost]
re: thickness, it’s actually quite a bit thicker than double... there’s a pretty large gap when it’s closed. Looks more like about 3x its tablet thickness after it’s folded into the phone config, maybe even 3.5x. It’s kind of hard to tell, exactly. (This is the pic posted by @ctyrider in post #736 above.)I'm a little slow this morning... so help me understand some things.
Everyone keeps saying "it's just the first generation" meaning they expect it to get better in the future.
But what sort of things can they improve?
The first thing I think of is thickness. But you're still folding something in half on top of itself. So you're still doubling whatever thickness it is. But you can't make it too thin because you still need a lot of battery.
I guess they could make the screen film tougher so it won't have the lumps in the crease. But it's still flexible plastic. We've been so spoiled with Gorilla Glass for about 10 years. I'm not sure I could go back to plastic.
These problems are inherent to what this device is.
It's kinda like saying "the biggest problem with VR is you have to strap goggles to your face"
Well yeah... that's exactly what you do. There's no way around that.
Sorry I haven't had my coffee yet. I was just trying to think of problems... and possible solutions.
What do you think Gen 2 or Gen 3 will offer?
But apropos your point about improving follow-on models, I’m not sure if they could actually fold the two sides together until they touch each other flat. It might cause a lot of scuffing of the plastic display from the two tablet halves rubbing together.
Last edited:
Mayhaps not the phone for you then. I don't think there are any laws saying you have to buy it.
This is about Samsung testing new ground and getting it out there for hard core tech enthusiasts that have $2000. They don't know what will happen with it and where it will go yet. User experience drives that. It's also not the only device they launched.
Oh and please point me to a V1 product that actually launched as a perfect device without any flaws, rough edges etc. Especially one that pushes the boundaries.
Of course, feel free to throw you knickers on the stage when Apple release a slightly thinner iPad in Rose Gold for $500 extra.
Ohhhh... thanks for the pic. I never noticed the gap.
You're right... it can't fold completely flat for a variety of reasons:
1. Scuffing (it's plastic!)
2a. Permanent creasing
2b. That's why the gap is there... to maintain the radius
3. Did I mention it's plastic?
These are physical problems. Big hurdles. Not easily solved by more time.
This isn't like waiting for a processor to get smaller/faster/efficient or adding better cameras...
I don’t think anyone expects a perfect device, I mean the original iPhone had its shortcomings as well. But I think the difference is Apple didn’t try to charge $2,000 for it.
Looking at that crease on the display, I can’t imagine even the most diehard Samsung fan being ok with that. Yes it’s a v1.0, but if they want to charge $2,000, maybe they should’ve waited until they had something worth charging $2,000 for. It looks rushed, like they set a deadline and just decided to go with what they had, no matter the flaws.
If this prototype is representative of the production model, this thing is a flop. Maybe they’ll have better luck with v2.
Last edited:
I have no issue with them charging whatever they want for it.. This will be for hard core tech people with that sort of cash to throw around (and there are plenty of those on the planet).
If say, Samsung went on stage and said, "This is our new phone and we are ditching all previous models - starting price $2000", I could see an issue.
But they didn't. they released a whole range of phones at different price points.
If this pushes the rest of the industry forward and eventually results in an awesome product I'm all for it.
If it fails and becomes the next GoogleGlass, who cares?
I'll take my hat off to anyone willing to push tech forward and, "Think different".
Here's the thing - Apple V1 products have never been perfect out of the gate either, but Apple has this knack for still managing to get the core experience just right, to the point where users find that that one defining feature is worth giving up every other feature combined.
The first gen iPad had crappy specs, but it got the core experience expected of a touchscreen tablet right. Enough that it was able to still offer a great user experience despite (and in some cases, because of) its many limitations.
Airpods were expensive, had mediocre sound quality and zero noise cancellation, but won consumers over with their seamless and intuitive user experience.
What exactly is the unique core experience the Galaxy Fold is trying to offer here? It's thick, it's expensive, it looks horrible when used as a smartphone and the tablet aspect looks awkward when you are expected to unfold and fold it every time you have to take it out of your pocket.
It’s not clear why someone would want to carry a small tablet that folds into a suboptimal smartphone instead of just carrying a much better smartphone.
It feels like the equivalent of someone paying a small fortune to eat gold-plated ice cream not because there is any benefit to doing so, but just so they can brag that they have had the experience they know few others would have had.
At this point, the Galaxy Fold doesn't even feel like it is being marketed at hard-core enthusiasts.
Not quite. It was the first smartphone by Apple. That was enough to catapult it into the spotlight coming off of their success of the iPod. Any other company producing that device at that time would've gone down in flames.
I owned smartphones years before the iPhone was released. When it was first released is was extremely limited compared to the alternatives.
Well I hear what you’re saying, but hard core tech people can be pretty demanding and hard to please. I think the people who will drop $2k without batting an eye are the ones to go after. Those folks won’t bother returning it if they don’t like the display crease, they’ll just toss it in the garbage and move on.
I guess my overall point is they could still push the tech forward by continuing to develop it in house. They don’t have to bring v1.0 to market now. They could wait until v2.0 is ready, whether that’s two months or two years from now. I just don’t see this thing as something they can be proud of, and from the vibe of the presentation, it seems like they kind of know that.
I think you hit the nail on the head with that one. Same reason some people paid through the nose to get a solid gold V1 Apple Watch.
Some people just want to show off.
Because maybe one day in the near future it will be the best of both worlds in your pocket. I'm not blinkered enough to see this as a bad thing.
Also, at this point, how much better can a smart phone get?
If someone had sat down and said, we're keeping to two devices, laptop and tablet, there are no alternatives, I wouldn't carrying around a Surface Book.
Took a long time to get to this point but now it's here I couldn't be happier.
The unique experience is that you get a useable screen size that unfolds to a much bigger one. The concept is great, it will be interesting to see it in person.
I'd happily have a much more refined version of this. I love the size of my iPhone SE and Apple's whole offering is too large for me. I can deal with thickness, and I assume these will get slimmer and better as the tech advances.
This is obviously a very early version of the tech. And how are you an expert on how good it is to use without using it?
The interview with the Samsung guy was more about wanting to see how people use this device. You can only keep it in development for so long. Sometimes it needs to be released (even in it's current state) to see where to go next.
Again I have no issue with this. It's not something I'd buy. It's something I'd like to try out.
It took 3 iterations of the Surface Pro before I jumped on board and I've not looked back.
I can agree with most of that, and I think you said it well. It’s just a difference in approach; I think Apple would have kept working on the flaws and used a couple hundred or couple thousand employees as beta testers if they wanted to collect data on how people would actually end up using it.