There are some phone ranges that always generate buzz - every time a new iteration of the iPhone or the Samsung Galaxy S is released, you can expect a star-spangled unveiling, a marketing blitz and a plethora of posts springing up on every tech blog you visit. Though it may not quite have reached those levels yet, the popular 'phablet' Galaxy Note series is still guaranteed to prick people's ears up. And since the Galaxy Note III is rumoured for a release sometime in the autumn, we thought we'd collate the most popular rumours so far!
Above: A render of one possible look for the Galaxy Note III, created by designer uva7 dance.
As far as release date goes, details are still fairly hazy; if Samsung follow their usual yearly routine, we can expect the Note III to be announced sometime around the annual IFA show in Berlin, which for previous iterations has meant an August announcement and September release. This is savvy marketing, since it enables Samsung to both dominate an event and be well-positioned for the Christmas rush, increasing both visibility and sales potential.
Specifications are also murky, though the Note III is likely to be even larger than its predecessor, the Note II, which was an eyebrow-raising 5.5 inches. Preliminary reports suggested a massive 6.3 inch screen, but we think this is unlikely - the recent unveiling of the enormous, mid-range Samsung Galaxy Mega 6.3 suggests Samsung view that end of the market as a niche, and unlikely to yield significant sales for a top-end phone like the Note. We think something in the upper range of 5 inches is more likely; 5.7 would place it alongside the ZTE Grand Memo, while 5.9 would make it around one inch larger than the current flagship Samsung Galaxy S4.
Above: Another render of the Note III, with a metal chassis, also by uva7 dance.
As far as internal specs, we'd like it if Samsung could utilize the octa-core processor seen in the international version of the Galaxy S4. This would ensure both power and increased battery life, as the two quad-cores - one tailor-made for raw power and one designed to be power-saving - trade off depending on what's needed at the time. The chipset is likely to be either the upcoming Snapdragon 800, or possibly a refresh of the Exynos seen in the recent Galaxy S4. 2GB or more of RAM would be necessary to wring the most out of these top-end specifications. The camera is likely to retain the 13 Megapixels that are currently fashionable amongst top-end handsets - though the upcoming "S Orb" panorama feature, which was rumoured to debut on the Galaxy SIV, is now said to be making its first-time appearance on the Note 3. Battery life is expected to expand from the 3100 mAh provided by the Note II up to something in the 4000 mAh range, which would certainly be enough to power a full HD display and keep an octa-core processor in good stead. How such a large battery would impact slimness remains to be seen, though.
Above: Google Maps are created using panorama-capturing software - similar to the rumoured "S Orb".
Since Google's yearly I/O event is in May, most pundits are expecting the search giant to unveil the latest version of Android, 5.0 - long-rumoured to be named Key Lime Pie. If they do this, Samsung will be perfectly positioned to make use of it on the Note 3, which will be an excellent way of setting it apart from the competition, especially since Samsung have a good habit of getting the most recent iterations of Android onto their flagship phones as soon as possible. Since Key Lime Pie is probably not an incremental upgrade (unlike Jelly Bean), it may take Samsung software engineers a little more time to tinker with it, so we wouldn't necessarily expect Android 5.0 to be on the phone at release.
There are also some recent rumours that the Galaxy Note III is going to feature an aluminium frame: this places it in stark contrast to previous Samsung handsets, which tended to favour polycarbonate bodies. If they opt for a unibody aluminium phone, they may be alienating customers who enjoy the microSD card and removable battery of the Note 3, which have always been chief selling points for Samsung's handsets; but given the critical acclaim that the unibody HTC One has been receiving, Samsung may have decided to push the boat out and try something new with the Note series. This would be a fairly wise way of testing the waters, since a radical overhaul of the ultra-popular Galaxy S series in this late stage of the game might cause a serious dent in their sales, assuming the change does not pan out.
Above: the aluminium unibody HTC One, praised in most reviews for its sleek and attractive exterior.
Obviously, all of the above hypotheses should be taken with a pinch of salt - we'll no doubt see a gradual trickle of rumours filter down to us as we get closer and closer to the release date of the Galaxy Note III. But often, it's possible to filter out some wheat from the chaff and get a clearer picture of how a smartphone will ultimately turn out - and, hopefully, our collection of rumours has helped you do this!
View/Leave Comments
Surprisingly given the great complexity of the case, the nine juror-strong contingency took a mere three days to reach a decision; and that decision was simple – that Samsung had infringed upon six of the seven Apple patents that were in dispute, with five of the six constituting wilful infringement. Though the South Korean conglomerate counter-sued, asserting that Apple had wilfully infringed upon five of its patents (which largely pertained to wireless internet access standards, in lieu of the more subjective design patents levied by Apple), the jury ruled against these assertions, allowing Apple to escape the legal tussle unscathed. This stands in stark opposition to the Seoul ruling a mere week ago, in which the judge ruled that Apple had infringed upon Samsung’s wireless patents, and that the mitigating factor of prior art (design precedent set within the industry) was enough to say that the similarity in appearance between Samsung’s Smartphone and tablet ranges and Apple’s iPhone/iPad was coincidental – or at least coincided with the shift in design across the entire industry.
However, as a professor based in Singapore correctly pointed out, the South Korean standards of intellectual property are significantly less strict than in the US; there’s a long tradition of ‘borrowing’ ideas, and given Samsung’s history of manufacturing their designs in bulk as swiftly as possible (a tradition which has allowed them to supersede Apple in overall global sales, if not profit), it’s likely the South Korean chaebol was not able to vet their designs as comprehensively as an American company like Apple. Statements like this represent the sense of resignation that people now have regarding these Smartphone patent struggles; while Samsung has vowed to appeal the decision, and while the disputed devices have yet to be banned (a court case is set in December for this particular detail), a precedent has now been set, and it doesn’t bode well for Android manufacturers of any stripe, whether it be Sony or HTC.
Apple has long insisted that the Android operating system is a spit in the face of their longstanding Smartphone iOS, and Steve Jobs’ famous declaration to “go thermonuclear” on Google, its godfather, has become a virtual holy war for the Cupertino-based company. While the design patents levied against Samsung (and concurrent court cases with companies such as HTC and Motorola) may have validity, most people versed in the topic now accept that Apple is waging a proxy-war – going for the appendages of the hydra before they tackle the beast itself, in the form of Google Inc. And with this precedent now set, Apple has a much greater chance of succeeding in a legal tussle with the search and software giant. But what does this mean for Samsung? Well, it may not mean that much, to be honest – while a $1 billion payout may have crippled many lesser Android manufacturers, Samsung are currently ranked as the top manufacturer globally, and even with a significant stock hit from the decision (7.5%, or over $12 billion) they’re unlikely to be going anywhere anytime soon, considering their vast diversification into fields such as chipset, TV and tablet manufacturing. Their flagship device, the Samsung Galaxy S3, was exempt from the case, and its features are generally regarded to be distinct enough from Apple’s iPhone to not warrant any kind of sanction – a few tweaks here and there, a little time to cleanse the palate of the consumer, and Samsung should be back to doing what they’ve always done.
But the significance of Apple’s victory shouldn’t be underestimated, nevertheless. Now that they have proven their mettle in court against their biggest manufacturing foe, they possess the tools needed to go head-to-head with their foe in the arena of software. We here at Mobile Madhouse confidently expect a dramatic showdown between Apple and Google to occur within the next year or so, an impression bolstered by Google’s recent decision to attack Apple in the form of subsidiary company Motorola Mobility. And rest assured, we’ll keep you up-to-date with all aspects of this trial, should it indeed break out!
The Seoul court reached the conclusion on Friday that Samsung did not infringe upon the designs of the iPhone or iPad, with the judge stating that “these similarities had been documented in previous products”, which constitutes a tactic confirmation of Samsung’s ‘prior art’ defence. The judge went on to note that it would be difficult for consumers to mistake the products, as Apple had claimed, owing to the branded company logos and the significant differences in operating systems, applications, prices and contract services between the two, which also jibes well with Samsung’s defence of consumer intelligence (with a Samsung attorney in the flagship U.S court case protesting that “consumers demand more choice, not less”). Nevertheless, Samsung were fined 25 million Won (approximately £12,000) for infringing upon Apple’s “bounce-back” function in regards to scrolling, and face a ban of ten products, including the Samsung Galaxy S and Galaxy SII.
Apple, meanwhile, were found guilty of infringing upon two of Samsung’s wireless technology patents, and face a fine of 40 million won (approximately £22,500), as well as an embargo of four of their products – including the iPad 2 and iPhone 4. Fines of this size are peanuts to the two companies, who regularly boast revenue above 10 billion USD per year, but even given the modest size of the market in South Korea, those sales bans are bound to sting a little, even if they don’t eat into the profit margins significantly. However, it’s a bad omen for both companies: the much-touted U.S patent trial reached the point of deliberation on Wednesday, with nine jurors currently discussing the high-stakes patent battle between the two. Apple is demanding a staggering $2.5 billion in damages, along with a ruling that Samsung’s ‘infringing’ products face a permanent ban; Samsung, meanwhile, demands $422 million, claiming that Apple have violated several of its wireless technology-related patents.
While both companies face significant loss of face depending on which way the pendulum swings in the US trial, the results could be far worse for North American consumers; if Apple win, Samsung may be forced to pay them significant royalties on every Smartphone they ship, which may result in rising costs (in addition to the distinct possibility that several products – including some of the flagship Galaxy range – are banned). If Samsung wins, Apple may face a similar royalty rate; but far more importantly for the company that prides itself upon ingenuity and originality would be the loss of face incurred through such a ruling. Such a ruling may tarnish their reputation in their coveted North American marketplace, and result in a significant loss of sales from the traditional Apple faithful. And if a similar conclusion to that of the Seoul trial is reached, everyone loses – except the lawyers and expert witnesses, who will pocket a pretty penny for their involvement in what’s fast becoming the technology trial of the century.
For our part, we echo Judge Lucy Koh’s optimism, and hope that both companies manage to reach an understanding in the future. When companies like Samsung and Apple cease focusing on their superb products in lieu of focusing upon litigation, everybody loses – whether that loss is in money or dignity remains to be seen.
Our Samsung Galaxy S3 mesh hard cases consist of a hard plastic underlay, with a silicone gel mesh back. While the plastic innards provide stability and durability, the soft outer portion provides a sturdy surface for grip, with the fringe benefit of making your new SIII look even more attractive. If you thought you were the envy of your friends when you purchased Samsung’s flagship mobile, you’ll see raw lust in their eyes when they gaze upon your pick of the Samsung Galaxy S3 mesh hard cases selection! But it’s not just a fashion accessory – whichever colour mesh case you choose to opt for, you’ll gain a superior degree of protection from the daily wear-and-tear faced by any Smartphone, whether it is scratches, dents, casing chips or even drop damage.
Our Samsung Galaxy S3 mesh hard cases are convenient and easy to use: simply slot your Galaxy SIII into the interior portion of the mesh case, ensure it’s firmly in place, and you’re good to go. With cut-outs around all of the salient ports and jacks of your Galaxy S 3, the mesh hard case never has to be removed in order to access any of the features of your device, meaning it will possess shielding from harm even when you’re charging or listening to music! You’d probably expect to be facing a pretty hefty price tag for a case with as many features as this, but you’d be mistaken – all of our Samsung Galaxy S3 mesh hard cases are priced ultra-competitively, and completely at odds with their wide range of features, ensuring that the consumer has no reason not to opt for this superb new range of case covers!
The other lawsuits occurring around the world are less clear-cut, however. The Federal court in Australia is currently mediating between the two disparate parties, over a lawsuit first launched in July 2011 regarding alleged infringement of the iPad by the Galaxy Tab. Samsung launched a countersuit, claiming that Apple had infringed upon three of the 3G patents that Samsung owns, which Samsung states are infringed upon in the iPhone 4, iPhone 4S and iPad 2. The case has faced significant delays, however, since Apple have so far refused to disclose the technical specifications of their devices: Steven Burley, of Apple’s legal counsel, actually stated that the onus is on Samsung to prove the infringement case, and that Apple has no impetus to help them. Apple has also been poring over a number of legal affidavits, which were provided by legal experts to help the trial along, which suggests that they’re attempting to stall the trial until they have an exhaustive enough command of information to counterpoint any argument.
The high-profile U.S trial, on the other hand, is a veritable circus of publicity. The back-and-forth barbs are reaching farcical levels. For example, one ruling was obtained by Apple to suppress details of pre-iPhone devices made by Samsung; angered by this, and firmly stating that the pre-iPhone designs would provide conclusive proof that there was no infringement to be found, Samsung sent out information about the devices to a number of reporters, along with a catty paragraph suggesting that jurors should know “all the facts” before reaching a decision. When an angry, presiding Judge Koh summoned one of Samsung’s lawyers for a dressing-down over this publicity stunt, one of Apple’s attorneys promptly suggested the trial be ruled in Apple’s favour immediately as a consequence. In short, both companies have shown that they’re willing to fight dirty in order to protect their interests. But is that really a good thing?
After all, no matter who wins in these bitter legal wrangles, it’s the consumer who’s going to bear the brunt of the impact. If Samsung manage to obtain the level of royalties they seek for the alleged 3G patent infringements, Apple have to make up the lost income somehow – and it’ll undoubtedly be recouped through increased prices. If Apple manage to prove that Samsung have infringed upon their patented touchscreen technology, it’ll necessitate a rewrite of the software of devices like the Galaxy Tab and Galaxy SIII, which will cause significant delays for other software improvements as they scramble to fulfil the changes in time. Worse, it will set a precedent that will allow Apple to pursue lawsuits with other Android Smartphone manufacturers: the best-case scenario for Apple is a foot in the door which allows them to go for the jugular of Google itself, fulfilling the late Steve Jobs’ promise that Apple would “go thermonuclear” on their biggest rival in the Smartphone arena. In short, no matter who wins, it’s the consumers who lose. So we can’t help but wonder how the two manufacturing giants are going to deal with the fallout of their multi-billion dollar lawsuits; not in terms of legal wrangles, but in terms of the goodwill which they are, increasingly, squandering.
For the uninitiated, Windows RT is a stripped-down version of Windows 8 designed to run on devices using ARM-based processors, such as tablets. The OS is sold only to developers, for the express purpose of preloading onto their devices; it is not intended as a standalone product for consumers. So why have Samsung opted to follow Microsoft’s lead, and release a new tablet to coincide with the release of Windows 8, when they’ve traditionally been associated with Android? Surely it would make more sense for the South Korean chaebol to utilize Google’s upcoming Android 4.1, Jelly Bean – or even wait for their much-anticipated Chrome OS, which is ultimately expected to homogenize the Google user experience and act as a bridge between laptops, tablets and Smartphones.
There are a number of explanations. The most obvious is the notion that Samsung have already established themselves as a force to be reckoned with in the Android market: they’re exceeded only by Apple as the premier provider of Smartphones (at least in terms of profits). It would make sense to try and diversify their market with a tablet utilizing a new OS, rather than stick to the same, tired iterations of Android. More ominously, this could signal a sea-shift in Samsung’s attitudes towards Google. Many have hypothesized that Samsung are attempting to distance themselves from Google, recently - though Google make a show of support for all adopters of their Android OS, Samsung has recently made the decision to utilize the Tizen operating system on their lower-spec Smartphones, despite the surfeit of older versions of Android (such as Froyo and Gingerbread) that are perfectly suited for this task. Samsung clearly want a little more autonomy in terms of software; or perhaps they’re just uncomfortable with putting all of their eggs in Google’s basket.
Whatever the case may be – whether diversifying their market share, or radically shifting dimensions into a new one entirely – Samsung’s tablet is slated for release in October, which will coincide with the release of both Windows 8 and Microsoft’s Surface tablet. They’ll have a lot of work ahead of them; with both a new OS to tinker with, and a hardy market opponent in the form of the Surface, diversifying into the Windows tablet market will be an uphill struggle. But assuming they can overshadow their Microsoft competition, Samsung stand to gain substantial profits from this move!
This is just the latest imbroglio in Apple’s crusade against Samsung (and, indeed, Android Smartphones as a whole). Following Steve Job’s famous pledge to “go thermonuclear” on Android devices – which he claimed massively infringed upon Apple’s intellectual copyright – Apple have launched attack after attack on companies ranging from Google to Motorola. But some of their most famous clashes have been with Samsung, and for good reason, as the South Korean conglomerate is currently their biggest rival in the Smartphone market: together, Apple and Samsung account for over 50% of Smartphone sales, and over 90% of Smartphone profits.
However, the importance of banning sales of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 is largely symbolic. The newer iteration of the device – the Samsung Galaxy Tab 2 10.1 – is still on the marketplace; in fact, the Tab 2 was created specifically in order to circumvent a similar ban faced by the original Tab in the German marketplace. The scope of Apple’s design patent is fairly narrow, meaning by differentiating the Tab 2 just enough from the iPad, Samsung barely had to alter the specifications of the new device. So the banning of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 amounts largely to petulance on behalf of Apple; the real battle to retain Samsung’s Smartphone supremacy begins on July 30th.
This isn’t a particularly substantial rift in the two company’s fortunes. While Bada has the potential to steal some of Android’s thunder (and thus risk diluting the essential two horse race between the iOS and Android), the fact it’s designed with budget Smartphones in mind means that it will essentially act as a ‘gateway’ OS to draw in new customers, who may not be attracted to expensive, high end tour de forces like Samsung’s Galaxy S3. Samsung are also considering combining the base Bada system with the open-source Tizen OS; as another system which is not intended to upset the balance between Android and iOS (and as one which attracts third party developers courtesy of its freely-distributed nature), Tizen should add the muscle which Bada has so far sadly lacked.
It’s a savvy business decision from Samsung; they won’t be upsetting the proverbial apple cart, but simultaneously they’ll be setting the groundwork for a day when their own operating system is poised to take a chunk of the market. And with Tizen’s developers on board (along with the developers who helped develop the MeeGo system, swathes of which were appropriated for Tizen), Samsung are guaranteed at least some success in the arena of third party development, ensuring a healthy library of applications on launch. We’re fairly confident that Samsung will be launching at least one Bada/Tizen Smartphone this year; though the cost of developing software like this may be prohibitive under normal circumstances, Samsung’s healthy financial future means that it’s impossible to rule it out entirely!
For example, the company was busy developing three separate designs for the Galaxy S3 at any one point, to throw sleuths off the trail. That doesn’t mean there were two dummy designs and a real one, with only the real one facing upgrades – all three designs faced the same periodic updates, ensuring that even the engineers working on them couldn’t differentiate the truth from the lies! These prototypes were locked in secure cases even when carried to an adjacent developer’s room, guaranteeing that passers-by couldn’t get a glimpse of the device. And such transportation was a necessity, because reproducing images of the S3 prototypes were strictly forbidden. Engineers couldn’t snap a photograph or even take a sketch of the components, and were instead forced to describe the nuances of the design out loud when requesting items from Samsung’s procurement department, to avoid even the grainiest photograph or the roughest sketch from leaking into the public domain.
And of course, that’s not mentioning the usual security measures established in a situation like this – a team of elite engineers and developers who are the only ones permitted to view the device; a separate working area from the rest of the development staff; sophisticated security technology like retinal scanners, fingerprint identifiers, etc to avoid drop-ins… as staff have acknowledged, the security measures were often incredibly tedious, and were described by one engineer as “tiring and frustrating”. They were forced to lie to even close family members in order to ensure that no “loose lips sink ships” scenarios came to the fore. One engineer denied his involvement with the Galaxy S3 to his precocious young son, who had (correctly) guessed that his prior work on the Galaxy S and S2 would lead to a similar position on the S3’s design committee. Others had to repudiate allegations from curious wives and parents, bound to a non-disclosure agreement that was valid until the 3rd of May (the eve of Samsung’s gala event in London, at which the S3 was introduced to the public).
Ultimately, all of their preparation paid off: despite a few grainy photographs managing to leak online, the disparity between the three “prototypes” reduced their veracity, and nobody managed to view the complete design prior to its grand unveiling. The engineers deserve a lot of credit for their efforts; not only on the development of the device, but the incredible lengths they went to in order to keep it under wraps. The lack of publicity meant that the introduction of the S3 was that much more special – and could certainly account for a portion of their record-breaking 9 million pre-orders!
She can hardly be blamed; nowadays, Apple seems to communicate mainly via lawsuits and summonses instead of marketing communiqués. Their closed-source software policy appears to have spread to their public service department, which has remained clammed up about their legal tussles with companies ranging from Samsung, to HTC, to chief rival Google. And their publicity is suffering accordingly – many Android stalwarts are up in arms about their tactics, accusing them of bullying rivals and attempting to monopolize the Smartphone industry via legal harangues, instead of the quality of their products. Even many of Apple’s fans are beginning to turn against them: type in “Apple lawsuit videolog” into YouTube and you can peruse a selection of rants from disgruntled ex-customers, many of whom turned to Android devices to spite Apple, rather than any legitimate desire to own a One S or Galaxy S2. Apple’s traditional strategy of high emotional engagement with their established audience, at the expense of non-users (thus building a brand sourced on perceived elitism, allowing its users to feel elevated against ‘outsiders’), is beginning to work against it; they are alienating potential customers with their high-handed tactics.
All of which might be acceptable if there was any basis for these lawsuits, but many of the concepts Apple claims they have patented are absurdly broad. They claim, for example, the Samsung Galaxy S3 has breached the patent for Apple’s Siri software because it contains a voice input system. They claim similar things about the S3’s unlocking mechanism, because you have to slide your finger across the screen ala the iPhone. It’s hard to empathize with Apple on this; it wouldn’t really have made a difference if the S3 was unlocked via touchscreen tap, or a dedicated button – how does the S3 possessing a slide unlock damage Apple’s potential sales? Is it truly possible to patent the concept of voice activation input, particularly on a system developed completely separately from Siri? Were patents ever really intended to be “gamed” like this, used as weapons for the purpose of defeating competitors, rather than protecting original intellectual copyright? But their legal tussles with Samsung could just be the beginning of a slippery slope; similar lawsuits with HTC and Google risk making Apple a target for exclusion by all of their competitors. There may be a pre-existing flimsy alliance between Google and many Smartphone manufacturers (courtesy of its Android OS, which they utilize), but can you imagine the damage they could do to Apple if they put aside their differences and formed a full-on alliance to crush the technological giant that is fast becoming their common foe?
Currently, this is all hypothetical – Apple have yet to alienate their market to that extent, and they still possess substantial advantages over their competitors, such as a more unified operating system and a stronger, more cohesively marketed brand than Android. But the longer they persist in doggedly suing competitors rather than creating the groundbreaking products that made their name, the more and more distrust they will engender. It’s not hard to see a bruised and demoralized Apple overtaken by Android in the year 2014 or 2015. So here’s hoping that Mr Cook can rein in his legal lapdogs and focus on his R&D division before it’s too late!
Anticipation for the S3 has been high for quite some time. Its predecessor, the Samsung Galaxy S2, was the high water-mark for Samsung’s burgeoning Smartphone expansion in 2011 – the device which afforded them record highs in their ongoing struggle against Apple, the market-dominating behemoth responsible for the ubiquitous iPhone.
For the first time, Samsung showed market growth exceeding that of Apple: more than 80% comparative to Apple’s roughly 50% gain. So the follow-up to the S2 was regarded as something of a Holy Grail for those disgruntled with Apple’s comparative supremacy; the device finally capable of knocking the iPhone from its coveted pedestal.
But the excitement reached fever-pitch on May 3rd, when Samsung unveiled the device and its many possibilities at an ultra-glitzy launch event at Earl’s Court in London. A mobile which, up until that point, had been regarded as some mythical ideal was painstakingly demonstrated in full – and, somehow, failed to disappoint.
Features such as the touted eye-tracking (preventing the phone from switching off while you observe the screen), the smart voice control (allowing greater utility when busy with other tasks) and expansive Cloud-based storage (courtesy of a partnership with digital storage company Dropbox.com) whipped up Samsung loyalists into a veritable frenzy of anticipation.
Now that the phone has finally been released, all of Samsung’s market goals have been confirmed: the S3 has had the most successful launch out of any Samsung product to date. In fact, not only has it marked Samsung’s most successful launch to date, but also the most successful launch for any Android phone, boasting more than nine million pre-orders – a heady figure, considering the comparatively lacklustre performance of the iPhone 4S (just over 4 million).
With that said, there was a fairly large issue on launch – despite promising the definitive capacity to meet every pre-order issued, an issue with the manufacturing process of the “pebble blue” coloured devices means that they have been delayed. They will now hit the market more than two weeks late; even the casual Smartphone user can see how this would alienate a significant proportion of Samsung’s user-base, especially in the light of their prior guarantee.
g~~60_35__82946.JPG "The Pebble Blue Samsung Galaxy S3")
For the time being, then, the Galaxy S3 is the Smartphone of the moment, a title it richly deserves due to its power, utility, and clever marketing. But the year is only half over; and with Apple’s annual WWDC just around the corner, the iPhone 5 (or “The New iPhone”, as the case may be) is almost certain to make its own debut before the end of the year. Samsung enthusiasts may be hoping that their chosen developer pulverises Apple effortlessly… but if we know anything about their company, it’s that the iPhone giant unlikely to go down without a fight!
Making its debut in early April, the HTC One X carved out a place in a Smartphone marketplace dominated by Apple’s iPhone, by emphasizing raw power over Apple’s trademark usability. That doesn’t mean it lacks utility, though; as one of the premier slate phones on the market, the One X is incredibly intuitive to use. Utilizing Android 4.0.3 (the Ice Cream Sandwich OS) as a baseline, it overlays HTC’s proprietary HTC Sense GUI for increased attractiveness (and better market branding in relation to similar HTC devices), guaranteeing a unique browsing experience for the user. In addition, it boasts a range of fringe features for the enthusiast, including geo-tagging, simultaneous HD picture-taking and video recording, and both face and smile detection, allowing you to perform feats like locking your phone unless you are present in person.
But how does it stack up against the Samsung Galaxy S3 in terms of specifications? Let’s find out:
With that said, it comes down to a matter of choice. The two devices are so similar in most other respects that it’s difficult to make a definitive choice between them. Brand loyalists on either side will have an easy time of it – but for the rest of us, there’s precious little to differentiate the S3 and the HTC One X. And as more software updates are released for the two devices, the gap between the two is likely to shorten even more, in addition to greater equalization in pricing.
So, ultimately, it comes down to your own personal allegiance – are you a Samsung or a HTC kind of person?
Essentially, the notion behind the Galaxy Pocket (so named for its miniature frame) is that it provides the features of an entry-level Android Smartphone without being excessively expensive. As an entry-level Smartphone, it is designed as the next rung on the ladder for feature-phone users to climb: powerful (or at least powerful compared to its lesser kin), but much more competitively priced than something like the S3. Things like this have been attempted before – Samsung themselves have made a stab at it prior to now, with the Galaxy Mini 2. But the envelope has never been pushed further than it has with the Samsung Galaxy Pocket. Its hardware features are startlingly austere for a Smartphone: a 2.8 inch screen pulling in 143 ppi; a 2 Megapixel camera; a 1200 mAh battery; 3GB of internal storage; Bluetooth and Wi-Fi connectivity; and, promisingly, an extraordinarily light weight of 97g. You can expect an ultra-competitive price-tag when the device debuts in the UK – though we haven’t been given a date yet, it’s a fairly safe bet that the Galaxy Pocket will put you back less than £150, considering its modest specifications.
But, of course, there are some drawbacks for a competitively priced mobile that attempts to run Android competently. First off, the capacitive touchscreen input. While it’s comfortable and user-friendly on mobiles with larger screens (the HTC One X is a particularly excellent example of touchscreens done right), anyone with larger-than-average fingers is going to struggle to input on the Samsung Galaxy Pocket with any degree of speed or accuracy. Additionally, the smaller screen can make browsing a pain, which isn’t a very attractive notion for a Smartphone that boasts Bluetooth and Wi-Fi connectivity as some of its flagship features. Any kind of lengthy browsing session could result in a headache and eyestrain.
The modest CPU (a processor running less than 840MHz) and low resolution mean that you will get noticeable time-lag when running anything even remotely graphically intensive, making the Galaxy Pocket’s compatibility with Android’s app store seem like a hollow proposition when even a simple game like Angry Birds can slow your device to the very brink of unplayability. Without the capacity to run Android’s current OS (Ice Cream Sandwich), the Galaxy Pocket is also restricted to a re-skinned version of the earlier Gingerbread OS - which, to its credit, remains a competent operating system with many useful fringe features (albeit with significantly less utility than its bigger brother).
With all of that said, however, the Galaxy Pocket was never an exercise in creating a specification-mad monster; the Galaxy S3 fulfils that particular niche in Samsung’s catalogue of devices. While Smartphone enthusiasts will find little to love here, it’s always a noble sight to see a company genuinely interested in expanding their market by appealing to the younger and less experienced consumer. The Samsung Galaxy Pocket is guaranteed to make less than one tenth of the money of the leviathanic S3, but the good-will it will engender in first-time Smartphone customers is sure to make it all worthwhile in the long term.
Released in October, the iPhone 4S swiftly became renowned as Apple’s most inventive and versatile Smartphone yet. Its prime directive is fluidity: the user interface is designed to be as intuitive and functional as possible. It’s a smart way of doing things; by ensuring that different hand motions such as swiping, tapping and pinching the screen become inextricably linked with the concept of iPhone interaction, Apple have, in essence, created a brand based on the users own synergistic experience with the device – a brand which has been expanded by identical touchscreen interaction with the iPad. In terms of raw specifications, the 4S utilizes the iOS 5.1.1, Apple’s most recent variant on their proprietary operating system. It’s capable of acting as an internet hotspot, diversifying its internet connection over WiFi, Bluetooth and USB and permitting access to Apple’s famed app store while on-the-move.
Its most unique and talked-about feature is probably Siri, however. An automated voice control system, Siri is unique among such software in that it permits near-total control over every aspect of the device, from weather reports to appointments. This means it’s much easier for somebody busy with a different task – such as exercising in the gym, or driving a car – to check things on their phone without compromising their own safety. It recognises three languages on launch – English, French and German – with plans for more languages to be added as the system matures. Because the 4S is a slate-style touchscreen (eschewing excessive buttons in favour of a streamlined design), its keyboard is virtual, meaning greater functionality for inputting in a range of different languages across the board – ensuring a broad market saturation.
Apple, then, are clever marketers - that much is obvious to anybody who has paid a modicum of attention to their advertising campaigns. But for a raw comparison of the respective specifications of the iPhone 4S and the Samsung S3, you need only check out the table below.
But when you get right down to it, that’s not what this fight is about. Apple has never claimed to put out the strongest products on the marketplace: their claim to fame has always been sleek functionality combined with relentless, saturation marketing. For Samsung to stand a chance of beating out Apple in the long run, they’re going to need to spend a lot of money building up an aesthetic brand as recognisable as the classy, minimalistic sheik of the iPhone. The Samsung S3 may well be the Smartphone that drives the iPhone 4S off its precarious position as most-touted Smartphone, but will its follow-up be able to go toe-to-toe with the iPhone 5, or will it stand to become just another flash-in-the-pan contender for Apple’s crown?
Only time will tell.
1000.jpg "Samsung Galaxy S3 Black S-Line")
1000.jpg "Samsung Galaxy S3 Pink Flip")
