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's New Galaxy S III Phone Offers 4.8-Inch Screen, Siri-Like 'S Voice' Feature
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
...well, slightly over half of them are, anyway.
And remember, people. No one would ever want to watch video on an iPod.
Impossible to quantify as there are many factors not JUST screen size when people decide which smartphone to purchase. But you can have your dream
My plan is to see what WWDC brings. If there's a new iPhone (doubt it) I'd jump into fanboy mode and buy it. If iOS 6 looks like its something good/different then I'll wait. If it looks like things aren't going to be changing much, I think I'd be pretty happy with the Galaxy S III.
Agree both human and technology always evolve. Consumers want bigger screen in their mobile, sounds make sense. But the point is......How is the current LCD display technology suitable for applying into the bigger screen mobile devices since its size is hard? It may not be the best solution out there. Any other alternative technology which can be used? flexible LCD display, foldable dual screens method, screen projector or even transplanting an electronic eye to replace an eye (it is not joking and maybe happen in one day!). if none of these alternatives are not ready and only hard-size LCD display available, then considering how big of the use of LCD size in mobile device is the prime for the balance both consumers' needs, human factors and user experience.
Last edited:
I'm not going to argue the quantification of popular. But based solely on # of devices that are greater than 3.5" and how many have been purchased collectively - I think that's enough "proof" that people want larger screens and that 3.5" isn't the "perfect" size.
Forget about operating systems, etc. If 3.5 was optimal - larger cell phones would not be selling. Period.
Forget about operating systems, etc. If 3.5 was optimal - larger cell phones would not be selling. Period.
Its clear that they made the phone bigger to fully attract all the consumers who want that big screen.. All they are doing is hitting an entirely different side of the market. These two phones aren't even comparable.. look at them. This would never attract the same consumer to either phone in my opinion. Two opposite spectrums of what a phone is. Maybe if I was a woman with a purse I would have that. But I dont wear a fanny pack either, and that won't fit in my pocket. iPhone all day.
Well, projection phones were tried the last couple of years and they didn't take off. Too non-private.
I think flexible screens will be the next big innovation in mobile phones. Visualize a phone that unrolls (or even unfolds like a tri-fold wallet) to the side to become a widescreen phablet. Pretty handy for maps, videos, web surfing and even multiple app windows at once (which is the coming Next Big Thing).
What I would love is for phones to be separated from their display. That is, keep the smarts and radio in a small box in your pocket or purse or belt loop, while a nano-network lets you use any display and input device you want... a watch, a bracelet, a flexible screen, augmented reality sunglasses, or a traditional slab phone touch display. You could separately update each part.
Siri - remind me to check posts on MacRumours from AirZoom after Apple releases the 4.3" Iphone.
There are many posts here from Iphone owners who are looking with lust at Android phones with larger screens.
Any other company would make 3.5" phones for people who like tiny, and 4.5" (or more) phones for people who want more screen. Apple, however, does not like choice.
Not really. It is more it shows people are very willing to buy the iPhone because it is made by Apple and is iOS.
I have never once heard "I got an iPhone because it had a smaller screen" Instead I read the leaving the iPhone for a larger screen.
Now the screen size debate people tend to want seems to of settle around the 4.3-4.5in range. now they are doing the edge to edge LCD and dumping physical buttons to get screens sizes up to 4.7 with out increasing the size of the device.
Based on your logic, the fact that PCs are more then 80% of the latest US sales in computers is proof that people are rejecting Macs.
"The brand is synonymous with ubiquity, but not quality."
Sorry, but I want my phone to fit in my pocket. I could not imagine carrying that monstrosity to a Twins game.
"From fridges to cameras to TVs, people buy Samsung gear not because they love or trust it, but because its spec sheet ticks the right boxes. The brand is synonymous with ubiquity, but not quality."
How Samsung broke my heart
http://www.theverge.com/2012/5/4/2998464/how-samsung-broke-my-heart
Sorry, but I want my phone to fit in my pocket. I could not imagine carrying that monstrosity to a Twins game.
"From fridges to cameras to TVs, people buy Samsung gear not because they love or trust it, but because its spec sheet ticks the right boxes. The brand is synonymous with ubiquity, but not quality."
How Samsung broke my heart
http://www.theverge.com/2012/5/4/2998464/how-samsung-broke-my-heart
Last edited:
Sorry, but I want my phone to fit in my pocket. I could not imagine carrying that monstrosity to a Twins game.
"From fridges to cameras to TVs, people buy Samsung gear not because they love or trust it, but because its spec sheet ticks the right boxes. The brand is synonymous with ubiquity, but not quality."
How Samsung broke my heart
http://www.theverge.com/2012/5/4/299...broke-my-heart
you link is bad
I know that the user experience is subjective, but it's easy to tell when it's different.
You don't need a fast internet connection for an iPhone. HD video streaming wasn't even that available in 2006 at all. I still don't even use it. People would have been fine without mobile data because all they really need is a phone, SMS, and a few apps and stuff that they can download at home. Actually, they had cellular data in 2006, and it was good enough for viewing webpages that are mostly text. Think about all of those iPod touch users who don't have any kind of cellular data, too.
And I'm pretty sure that broadband was pretty available in 2006. Actually, DSL is not bad either. My grandparents have 6mbps download in Arizona's Quest network. The apps are only a few megabytes, and a lot of them don't even use the internet. WiFi was also not too new back then, and the cards weren't that bulky. Even iMac G3s sometimes had Airport cards in them. Wireless-N was available in 2006, which shows that it was not too new (because a, b, and g were earlier versions of wifi).
Of course, the iPod already was a jukebox, and everything else was old news. The technology was there. I'm fine with my 2006 computers, too.
Somewhat correct!
Now, the PDAs of the time, even as far back as 2003 did have internet access broadband, a rudimentary app store, (nothing like you have with Android and iOS but it was available through your PC), at reasonably priced storage up to at least 512MB, (good by 2003 standards) email, MS Office doc creation and editing, Bluetooth printing, and others and still managed to have at least three things the iPhone STILL doesn't have
1) Wireless syncing via Bluetooth (and in later versions WiFi)
2) Wireless file transfer via Bluetooth/IR (which didn't involve just emailing it)
3) File hierarchy and functionality as a USB drive
Now, that's not to say that I don't disagree with you 155% The biggest thing holding Palm back wasn't the features of their smartphones or even the form factor. It was that god awful Palm OS which hadn't changed much in almost 6 years straight . . . . . . kind of like iOS.
Now, I also agree that the technology for much of what we have in smartphones today had already been established in 2003. Even large smart devices like the Palm TX and the Palm LifeDrive were being pushed heavily. It was Apple that gave it a good package (albeit with crippled features). Now, all we seem to be doing is refining and streamlining it.
This is EXACTLY what I'd take from Apple. An edge-to-edge screen up to 4.5-4.7" with a not shatter-able case.
Well . . . . . . yes! The Windows PC marketshare is perfect proof that new computer buyers are walking into a Best Buy, looking at the PC and the Mac, and then saying, "I'll take that HP 17" beast of a computer for $899 please!" Not that I would by any stretch of the imagination, but the majority of the world still runs Windows 7, MS Office, Firefox, and Android.
I wish the rest of my life was so good that only a corporation could break my heart over a product I haven't touched yet.
Sorry, but I want my phone to fit in my pocket. I could not imagine carrying that monstrosity to a Twins game.
"From fridges to cameras to TVs, people buy Samsung gear not because they love or trust it, but because its spec sheet ticks the right boxes. The brand is synonymous with ubiquity, but not quality."
How Samsung broke my heart
http://www.theverge.com/2012/5/4/299...broke-my-heart
Let's talk about Samsung quality. Tell us who has better TVs than Samsung. Maybe you do not know this but Samsung has come to dominate TV market and their TV sets are considered to be the best right now. And apparently, so are their RAM chips, LCD panels, OLED panels, ARM chips. Obviously we can add phones to this list. Ater all Galaxy SII was named Best Smartphone of 2011 by Mobile World Congress 2012 (iPhone held this title in 2010).
Yes, Samsung dominates the LCD TV market and also its Ram chips has famous brand and excellent quality. But if you take a close look on its recent quarters earning reports, you will find both LCD TV and Ram are losing money even they have gained a large market share and built an excellent quality. So what does it imply? It implies Samsung is a losing player both in TV and Ram markets even thought it has advanced technology and excellent quality. But I do agree Samsung is one of winning players in the existing mobile phone market.
Last edited:
The development of Samsung is very similar to the Sony history. Sony was the most famous brand before which dominated most of consumer products market. It had a wide product range including walkman, discman, headphone, mp3 player, TV, console, PSP, DC, video/cam recorder, notebook, desktop computer as well as some highly professional products. Sony generated a lot of profit and spent almost 5% revenue on R&D every year. However, the lack of the focus and too diversified on its products leads Sony falled from the hill, hard and even never catch up again anymore. Hope Samsung will never be the 2nd Sony.
Wow, strong feelings about screen sizes.
If consumer feedback is anything like the mixed feelings in this thread then it would be logical and smart for Apple to offer an iPhone in two screen sizes.
Obviously screen size is a very personal choice. This is maybe one of the best examples of where Apple should surprise us and offer options. They surprised us with the MacBook air 11 and 13 inch screens maybe and hopefully they'll do the same with the next iPhone.
It sure would make things a lot more peaceful in here
If consumer feedback is anything like the mixed feelings in this thread then it would be logical and smart for Apple to offer an iPhone in two screen sizes.
Obviously screen size is a very personal choice. This is maybe one of the best examples of where Apple should surprise us and offer options. They surprised us with the MacBook air 11 and 13 inch screens maybe and hopefully they'll do the same with the next iPhone.
It sure would make things a lot more peaceful in here