Linked by Alexey Eromenko on Fri 1st Feb 2013 21:52 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless Many people think that all Androids are equal and it's a race to the bottom where the cheapest vendor wins. This could not be farther from the truth. For me, it all began half-a-year ago, when I bought the Samsung Galaxy S III and was absolutely stunned by it, then exploring and comparing it with other Androids. Now that Google has fired a shot across the bow with its low pricing for the unlocked Nexus 4, where does that leave Samsung and its flagship handset?
Order by: Score:
Huh.
by gloucestershrubhill on Mon 4th Feb 2013 18:41 UTC
gloucestershrubhill
Member since:
2010-08-10

I want to read that. My eyes won't let me. Formatting?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Huh.
by Alexey Technologov on Mon 4th Feb 2013 20:40 UTC in reply to "Huh."
Alexey Technologov Member since:
2007-03-16
Not just "Samsung Android"
by phoenix on Mon 4th Feb 2013 19:18 UTC
phoenix
Member since:
2005-07-11

LG does the same with their version of Android 4.1.2:
- QSlide apps are multi-window (browser, video, memo, calculator, calendar)
- Wise Screen: screen stays on as long as the front camera can see your face
- QMemo: allows you to take a screenshot and draw on it directly, without leaving the app
- Keyboard: includes handwriting recognition

There's probably others. But, this isn't an issue, really.

The way Android works, is that the OEMs do all the testing, tweaking, and implementing new features. Then Google takes the best implementations and incorporates them into AOSP so that everyone gets access to them.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Not just "Samsung Android"
by bentoo on Mon 4th Feb 2013 20:33 UTC in reply to "Not just "Samsung Android""
bentoo Member since:
2012-09-21

The way Android works, is that the OEMs do all the testing, tweaking, and implementing new features. Then Google takes the best implementations and incorporates them into AOSP so that everyone gets access to them.


You're saying that Samsung, LG, HTC, etc. give Google their proprietary source? Really?

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Not just "Samsung Android"
by JAlexoid on Mon 4th Feb 2013 21:02 UTC in reply to "RE: Not just "Samsung Android""
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Differentiating features - no. Common improvements - yes.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Not just "Samsung Android"
by phoenix on Tue 5th Feb 2013 02:52 UTC in reply to "RE: Not just "Samsung Android""
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

No, Google takes the best ideas and implements them in AOSP.

Reply Score: 2

bentoo Member since:
2012-09-21

No, Google takes the best ideas and implements them in AOSP.


So Google steals their ideas then?

Reply Score: 1

WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

"No, Google takes the best ideas and implements them in AOSP.


So Google steals their ideas then?
"

It's not stealing per se, it's copying or imitating. And besides, is that wrong? Is it really wrong to implement some feature that someone else has also done? We would still be in the stone ages if imitating other people or their work was denied. Also, take a look at all the other manufacturers, too: name a SINGLE manufacturer that has never done that, can you do it?

Reply Score: 2

bentoo Member since:
2012-09-21

"So Google steals their ideas then?


It's not stealing per se, it's copying or imitating.
"

Tell it to the judge. ;)

Edited 2013-02-05 17:39 UTC

Reply Score: 1

I'm selling my S3 for a N4
by FunkyELF on Mon 4th Feb 2013 19:36 UTC
FunkyELF
Member since:
2006-07-26

The N4 is thicker, doesn't have an SD card slot, no removable battery, and has less memory (I have the 32Gb S3).

Yet... I'm still going to sell my S3 because I prefer CM and CM is horrible on the S3.

I love Smart Stay but that is the only feature of the S3 that I care about and I'd be willing to let it go for PhotoSphere, and the fact that I'll likely be able to go to Key Lime Pie (and whatever new apps come with it) the day it comes out.
Who knows... perhaps it'll even have something similar to Smart Stay.

Reply Score: 2

RE: I'm selling my S3 for a N4
by _txf_ on Mon 4th Feb 2013 20:00 UTC in reply to "I'm selling my S3 for a N4"
_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

Yet... I'm still going to sell my S3 because I prefer CM and CM is horrible on the S3.

Samsung promised to support CM with aosp compatible binaries etc. but didn't come through.

PhotoSphere

Not that impressive once you see it in action.

and the fact that I'll likely be able to go to Key Lime Pie (and whatever new apps come with it) the day it comes out.
Who knows... perhaps it'll even have something similar to Smart Stay.

Yup, timely updates, and no BS reasons for deprecating hardware are clear winners...

Reply Score: 2

RE: I'm selling my S3 for a N4
by Soulbender on Tue 5th Feb 2013 06:59 UTC in reply to "I'm selling my S3 for a N4"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Ok, as an new Android user here's what I don't get: why should I use CM?
I've looked at this at quite some depth but I can't find a single compelling reason. Heck, I can't find a reason to even root my device.
(No, in this case "for the fun of it" does not qualify as compelling)

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: I'm selling my S3 for a N4
by WereCatf on Tue 5th Feb 2013 08:34 UTC in reply to "RE: I'm selling my S3 for a N4"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Ok, as an new Android user here's what I don't get: why should I use CM?


Well, CM generally gets rid of the carrier-applied crap and the crap the manufacturer has added. In case of Samsung's TouchWiz getting rid of that is already enough of a reason to go for CM. Aside from that, well, the answer depends. CM is often faster and more stable than official ROMs and gets security-updates faster.

Heck, I can't find a reason to even root my device.


You obviously don't do anything with it that'd require rooting, then. And if you don't do anything like that then why do you care? It's not like you're expected to root your device even if you have no use for that.

I, personally, use several apps that require rooting, and originally my phone came with Gingerbread -- it was buggy, slow and outdated -- so I rooted my phone and installed a leaked ICS ROM on it to get better battery-life, speed and stability. That's a useful use of the root - capabilities. On the other hand, if I didn't have any apps that require root or didn't need the ability to use custom ROMs then I wouldn't bother rooting, either.

Reply Score: 2

Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Well, CM generally gets rid of the carrier-applied crap and the crap the manufacturer has added.


Ah well, it's not a carrier phone so it came with blissfully little crap. Maybe there's one or two apps I can see getting rid off but not enough to bother with the process of rooting and installing CM.

CM is often faster and more stable than official ROMs and gets security-updates faster.


I do't think Gingerbread gets any more updates ;)

You obviously don't do anything with it that'd require rooting, then


Yes, I guess not. I read somewhere that you needed root for BT tethering, wifi hotspot and stuff like that but I have that without being root. Maybe that's the bliss of non-carrier, cheapo phones.

Edited 2013-02-05 08:47 UTC

Reply Score: 2

WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Yes, I guess not. I read somewhere that you needed root for BT tethering, wifi hotspot and stuff like that but I have that without being root. Maybe that's the bliss of non-carrier, cheapo phones.


AFAIK it's a standard feature of Android atleast ever since ICS came around. I haven't been paying much attention so I am not certain, but it probably wasn't a standard feature on earlier versions.

Reply Score: 2

Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Out of curiosity, what are the apps you use that require root?

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: I'm selling my S3 for a N4
by cdude on Tue 5th Feb 2013 13:35 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: I'm selling my S3 for a N4"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

StickyMount and any app transparently mounting stuff into the filesystem. Uninstaller that allows to uninstall all apps including pre-installed ones. Autostart-Manager to edit app-events. User-manager to share/deshare apps between users. 3th party device-encryption. Update the device to latest CM nighly requiring open bootloader via shutdown-dialog with one click. Extend device administration and a dozend others manipulating the system in more or lesser offensive ways.

Point is you can do everything. No limits. Just like with my PC. Its finally my device.

Edited 2013-02-05 13:42 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: I'm selling my S3 for a N4
by BushLin on Tue 5th Feb 2013 09:25 UTC in reply to "RE: I'm selling my S3 for a N4"
BushLin Member since:
2011-01-26

CM was compelling when it had built in controls over app permissions to revoke things like internet access to a simple off-line app.

After CM 7.2 (Gingerbread) they removed this key feature and I no longer see the point of installing.
Quiet hours is one of a few nice touches but no deal breaker.

7.2 has a fairly big security hole in it which could do with patching but the CM team have moved on. Wonder how many users they have to lose before smelling the coffee.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: I'm selling my S3 for a N4
by jabbotts on Tue 5th Feb 2013 18:35 UTC in reply to "RE: I'm selling my S3 for a N4"
jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

Some apps can provide additional desirable features after you root. Change Hostname if you are frequently on wifi networks (android-jklfadk2qlk3212 sucks as a default hostname). Avast AV can provide better remote control and wipe with root access. Busybox shell environment needs root for full functionality.

There are a number of benefits. One has to decide for themselves if those benefits outweigh the negligable risk.

As for reasons to use CM; if it gets updates more promptly than your vendor-Android distribution fork then it should be a no-brainer. My personal bias towards Nexus devices is specifically because updates come in promptly after Google ships them not when a vendors decides to maybe update there Vendor-Android distro fork.

Granted, I'd drop Android in a heartbeat for a proper general purpose *nix distro.. We'll see how Ubuntu Phone works out though a Debian based firmware i could run against Nexus bare metal ... without a second though.

Reply Score: 2

WTF
by _txf_ on Mon 4th Feb 2013 19:44 UTC
_txf_
Member since:
2008-03-17

Shortcut to screen brightness in 2 clicks (this is simple to implement, very small, yet super-useful feature, as I tend to change screen brightness very often, and this is super-easy with the S III)vWhy hasn't Google done it? Because Samsung UI team does a better job of human User eXperience (UX) testing. This is why I value it so highly, and can easily justify another $20 or so on this feature alone. [+4]

bombastic user experience claims aside, there have been power toggles since froyo, or the market, since forever...

Better icons (TouchWiz UI theme) [+3]

I find them hideous. Too colourful and don't fit well with most third party icon palettes.

Launcher: Samsung clearly divides between applications and widgets. Much easier to navigate and start applications (than vanilla Google Android 4.0). [+3]

Has this guy even used vanilla? There IS a tab separating them....

Samsung gestures (screen-shot, double tap, ...) [+3]
I can swipe my hand over Galaxy S III screen, like a scanner, and it will take a screenshot. This is very cool!

Most people don't need to take screenshots that often. However all sorts of roms have incorporated this and JB has the capability.

Extra codecs : *. wma, *. wmv (Microsoft Windows Media Audio/Video; I'm surprised, that Samsung intervened so deeply in the OS. Sadly none of the Androids support the older MPEG2 format, *.mpeg ) [+3]

Who even uses wmv,wma these days?

S Beam - I call it "The Kiss of the Galaxy!" It allows transferring pictures, videos and music between Galaxy S III phones simply by touching them, in several seconds.

how about non galaxy-sIII? wifi-direct?

If you don't believe me, just use the Samsung Galaxy S III for a month, then try the vanilla Google Android for a few days. You will understand the difference very quickly. You will not want to go vanilla.

I don't, because I have done so, and feel completely the opposite way

CPU Quad-core +1 (potential of HEVC/WebM2 decoding, future-proof)

Seeing as even quad core ARM cpus choke on 1080p h.264, HEVC is definitely not going to happen (not to mention the battery drain)

Edited 2013-02-04 19:55 UTC

Reply Score: 5

RE: WTF
by Hatts on Mon 4th Feb 2013 20:13 UTC in reply to "WTF"
Hatts Member since:
2013-02-04

I think it's pretty clear the author did not actually have a N4 to compare it against, the article is full of inaccuracies.

He says the N4 doesn't have corning Gorilla glass, but it does, it has Corning Gorilla Glass 2.

He talks about the N4 running 'vanilla Android 4.0' when it's actually running 4.2. I don't know why he's calling it 'Samsung Android 4.0' instead of TouchWiz, it's actual name.

He counts 50GB of storage from dropbox as a plus and ignores the 50gb of storage N4 users get from box.

Having a quad core processor is a +1 for the S3 but not for the N4.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: WTF
by bentoo on Mon 4th Feb 2013 20:17 UTC in reply to "RE: WTF"
bentoo Member since:
2012-09-21

No bias here. ;)

BTW, can someone explain how leaving the screen ON (Smart Stay?) save battery power?

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: WTF
by Alexey Technologov on Mon 4th Feb 2013 20:48 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: WTF"
Alexey Technologov Member since:
2007-03-16

BTW, can someone explain how leaving the screen ON (Smart Stay?) save battery power?


This is simple, Watson.
On Google Android, to have comfortable reading you *HAVE* to put screen timeout to 5 min, while on Samsung 1 min does the trick. It auto-refreshes as long as you look at it.

If you put on Google 1 min screen timeout, you will get nowhere, because it will just power off in the middle of reading.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: WTF
by bentoo on Mon 4th Feb 2013 20:57 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: WTF"
bentoo Member since:
2012-09-21

"BTW, can someone explain how leaving the screen ON (Smart Stay?) save battery power?


This is simple, Watson.
On Google Android, to have comfortable reading you *HAVE* to put screen timeout to 5 min, while on Samsung 1 min does the trick. It auto-refreshes as long as you look at it.

If you put on Google 1 min screen timeout, you will get nowhere, because it will just power off in the middle of reading.
"

Thanks. That makes some sense. How you worded it in your article didn't.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: WTF
by leos on Tue 5th Feb 2013 05:35 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: WTF"
leos Member since:
2005-09-21


This is simple, Watson.
On Google Android, to have comfortable reading you *HAVE* to put screen timeout to 5 min, while on Samsung 1 min does the trick. It auto-refreshes as long as you look at it.


I seriously doubt this saves battery. Having the camera on all the time, and constantly doing some DSP on the image to detect a face just to save a minute the odd time when someone leaves their phone lying around but doesn't turn off the screen? No way in hell that gives you a net power saving.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: WTF
by Savior on Tue 5th Feb 2013 08:51 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: WTF"
Savior Member since:
2006-09-02

"BTW, can someone explain how leaving the screen ON (Smart Stay?) save battery power?


This is simple, Watson.
On Google Android, to have comfortable reading you *HAVE* to put screen timeout to 5 min, while on Samsung 1 min does the trick. It auto-refreshes as long as you look at it.

If you put on Google 1 min screen timeout, you will get nowhere, because it will just power off in the middle of reading.
"

I find this explanation a bit of a stretch. Unless you are reading very, very slowly, one minute should be more than enough to read a pageful of text. And when you scroll down to see the rest of the text, the timer is reset.

Also, there is a permission in Android called "prevent phone from sleeping". If an app, e.g. the one you use for reading has that, the screen won't turn off. Finally, there's always the power button. I set my screen timeout to 30 seconds, but usually don't wait that long, just turn off the screen manually.

And I agree with one of the replies to your comment in that I can hardly believe that having a camera and a face recognition program turned on constantly (or on-off once every few seconds) saves any power.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: WTF
by cdude on Tue 5th Feb 2013 13:47 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: WTF"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

Look at the battery-stats. Display is something like 90% of all. A camera-shot and app doing some progressing every now and then can help getting that down and so it can pay out. Same for ambient dimming.

Edited 2013-02-05 13:48 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: WTF
by pashar on Tue 5th Feb 2013 08:54 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: WTF"
pashar Member since:
2006-07-12

On my Galaxy S1 with CM 10.1 I set screen timeout to 30 seconds and still manage to read just fine. In most cases I read a screenful of text in less than 30 seconds, or I just touch a screen periodically. Samsung's feature is nice to have, but definitely not must.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: WTF
by Alexey Technologov on Mon 4th Feb 2013 20:51 UTC in reply to "RE: WTF"
Alexey Technologov Member since:
2007-03-16

I think it's pretty clear the author did not actually have a N4 to compare it against, the article is full of inaccuracies.


I think I made it pretty clear, that the comparison was vs. Galaxy Nexus (with Google Android 4.0), not the Nexus 4.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: WTF
by Hatts on Mon 4th Feb 2013 21:10 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: WTF"
Hatts Member since:
2013-02-04

I don't think it's clear at all, you mention the Nexus 4 at least 3 times by my count, including in your lead paragraph. Furthermore you often refer to 'the nexus' without specifying whether you mean the galaxy nexus or the nexus 4 in that specific instance.

Now that Google has fired a shot across the bow with its low pricing for the unlocked Nexus 4, where does that leave Samsung and its flagship handset?


You seem to be comparing the S3 against the Galaxy Nexus, the Nexus 4 and some nebulous group of 'chinese phones'. You pick and chose which phone to compare the S3 against for each point to give the best arbitrary score to the S3. Comparing the S2 to the Galaxy Nexus and the S3 to the Nexus 4 are probably more fair comparisons, and undisclosed 'chinese phones' should probably be left out entirely.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: WTF
by JAlexoid on Mon 4th Feb 2013 21:12 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: WTF"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

I think I made it pretty clear, that the comparison was vs. Galaxy Nexus (with Google Android 4.0), not the Nexus 4.


No. You did not. Your references to the $350 Nexus 4 make it all muddy. You do know that Galaxy Nexus was also $350 before Nexus 4 became available, right?

Also, implying that Galaxy Nexus glass is unfortified. It's the same as Gorilla Glass, but generic.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: WTF
by David on Tue 5th Feb 2013 05:58 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: WTF"
David Member since:
1997-10-01

Sorry, it was an error in editing that's responsible for the confusion. I'll try to clear it up in the article. The author did the comparison with the Galaxy Nexus, and I wanted to bring the article up-to-date with the newly released Nexus 4, and that difference is where the confusion lies.

Reply Score: 1

RE: WTF
by Alexey Technologov on Mon 4th Feb 2013 20:44 UTC in reply to "WTF"
Alexey Technologov Member since:
2007-03-16

"Launcher: Samsung clearly divides between applications and widgets. Much easier to navigate and start applications (than vanilla Google Android 4.0). [+3]

Has this guy even used vanilla? There IS a tab separating them....
"

Yes, and the separation in Google Android is not complete. You still can cycle between Apps and Widgets on Google, which is confusing, but not on Samsung. Sammy made this right.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: WTF
by _txf_ on Mon 4th Feb 2013 21:05 UTC in reply to "RE: WTF"
_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

" [q]Launcher: Samsung clearly divides between applications and widgets. Much easier to navigate and start applications (than vanilla Google Android 4.0). [+3]

Has this guy even used vanilla? There IS a tab separating them....
"

Yes, and the separation in Google Android is not complete. You still can cycle between Apps and Widgets on Google, which is confusing, but not on Samsung. Sammy made this right. [/q]

you can turn it off. But either way it really isn't that big a deal. Not something that can make you proclaim that one launcher is so much better...

Edited 2013-02-04 21:08 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: WTF
by Lobotomik on Tue 5th Feb 2013 10:20 UTC in reply to "WTF"
Lobotomik Member since:
2006-01-03

Completely agree! I have a Nexus 7 and a Galaxy Note 2 and I like plain Jellybean a lot better.

Reply Score: 2

rklrkl
Member since:
2005-07-06

It seems to me that a lot of these S3 plus points can be replicated with free or cheap apps added to a vanilla Android 4 phone. Or if you're technical, a rooted phone with a custom ROM actually provides a lot of these and a *lot* more configurability than the S3 does.

For me, the perfect phone or tablet is:

* Rooted running CM 10.1. The configuration options blow every other mobile OS away. If you're using CM on a tablet, the Paranoid Android variant goes even more berserk with custom phone/phablet/tablet modes not only globally, but also per app if you want. +50 points for the flexibility of CM over anything else.

* NOT running any manafacturer's custom launcher/skin. None of these custom layers provide an enhanced experience, so I'd give -50 points immediately to any device not running vanilla Android.

* Not costing hundreds of dollars more than rival top-end phones. S3 may be top of the hill in terms of hardware specs, but the Nexus 4's introduction with only slightly worse specs has shown it up to be overpriced for those specs.

There you go - the stock S3 now scores 100 points less than a rooted vanilla Android 4 phone :-) Guess what? Samsung have been *awful* with the CM devs for the S3 phone, showing that the S2 giveaway to devs was a pure publicity stunt. Things are so bad with CM on the S3, that devs are now telling people not to use it on the S3 (too many things broken because of Samsung's lack of co-operation)!

Reply Score: 2

WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

It seems to me that a lot of these S3 plus points can be replicated with free or cheap apps added to a vanilla Android 4 phone. Or if you're technical, a rooted phone with a custom ROM actually provides a lot of these and a *lot* more configurability than the S3 does.


Exactly. For me, a fully-loaded custom ROM gives a lot more value than NonSense, Bloat-o-blur, etc. Plus, when Keylime Pie is announced in May and starts rolling out to Nexus devices, those of us who own these devices can upgrade to it immediately, or whenever we want. If you're using a FrankenAndroid device like the S3, you're going to be stuck with 4.x until at least January 2014, and you'll probably be lucky to ever get anything greater than 4.2. I really wouldn't mind much of vendors would give people the OPTION of sticking with stock and quick upgrade paths, but most don't.

So, yeah... you can have your shitty vendor bloatware. I'll stick with unlocked vanilla, thank you very much ;)

One thing I WILL agree with him on is the gimped hardware on the Nexus devices. (No SD card slot, no removable battery, no LTE, etc) Google really needs to step it up and give people more options in the hardware department. Can I get a Nexus 7 with HDMI out, PLEASE??

Reply Score: 2

_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

One thing I WILL agree with him on is the gimped hardware on the Nexus devices. (No SD card slot, no removable battery, no LTE, etc) Google really needs to step it up and give people more options in the hardware department. Can I get a Nexus 7 with HDMI out, PLEASE??


-Blame MS for lack of SD
-Blame the consumer for lack of removable battery
-Blame the carriers, and economics for lack of LTE

Seriously, if you want these things you're welcome to go to those phones whose manufacturers have paid the respective extorsion fees. I'm quite happy with the cheap Nexus 4, thank you very much.

Seriously what is it with people and LTE? It is only a way to eat more battery and hit your download limits more quickly. The other points I can understand griping about...

Reply Score: 2

WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

Seriously, if you want these things you're welcome to go to those phones whose manufacturers have paid the respective extorsion fees. I'm quite happy with the cheap Nexus 4, thank you very much.


Well, that's my point... if you want the stock Android experience and updates as they come out, you do not have an option, other than what Google sells. Thus, they need more variety in their catalog.

Seriously what is it with people and LTE? It is only a way to eat more battery and hit your download limits more quickly..


It does not hit your download limit more quickly... it makes your data connection faster. If you download a 40MB podcast, it's still the same amount of data, whether it took 1 minute or 15 to download it. And the cool thing is, you can toggle back to 3g when you don't need it, saving battery life. Even still, the battery drain isn't quite as severe on newer devices/LTE chipsets.

As for the necessity of it, that depends on how fast your HSPA connection is. a 2mbps, HSPA connection (what I was initially getting) can b quite miserable, vs 15mbps+ on LTE. Obviously, the difference isn't always that dramatic... just depends on where you are, and how well you have tuned your APN settings ;) Personally? I'd rather have the option of turning it on when I wanted to, vs not having it.

Just last week, I was happy when I tweaked my APN settings and got 13mbps outsie. A friend of mine, who has an unlimited plan on Verizon, put up a screenshot of his 28mbps speed test. Between the two? I would rather have the latter ;)

Edited 2013-02-05 04:19 UTC

Reply Score: 2

WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Seriously what is it with people and LTE? It is only a way to eat more battery and hit your download limits more quickly.


What download limits? Where? I must have missed them entirely!

Reply Score: 2

bentoo Member since:
2012-09-21

-Blame MS for lack of SD


What!? This I HAVE to hear.

Reply Score: 1

_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

"-Blame MS for lack of SD


What!? This I HAVE to hear.
"

Yeah, highly unsubstantiated, but I suspect google does not want to pay the extortion fees for the FAT patents that ms is "licensing" hence no FAT based storage, which then means no reason to bother with SD support (FAT is a pile of crap anyway).

Reply Score: 2

bentoo Member since:
2012-09-21

Yeah, highly unsubstantiated, but I suspect google does not want to pay the extortion fees for the FAT patents that ms is "licensing" hence no FAT based storage, which then means no reason to bother with SD support (FAT is a pile of crap anyway).


Nice try. Nexus devices have native FAT/FAT32 support. (At least the Nexus 7 and 10 which I've used with USB OTG.)

Edited 2013-02-05 19:49 UTC

Reply Score: 1

_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

Nice try. Nexus devices have native FAT/FAT32 support. (At least the Nexus 7 and 10 which I've used with USB OTG.)


Well then, I'm wrong...

My next theory then is that google wants people to use the cloud? Judging from the demand for Nexus ( 4 in particular) devices most people don't seem to mind.

There is something to be said about not using FAT for permanent storage. I had a device with an sd card and the fat got corrupted (as it does) and I lost all sorts of stuff...

Edited 2013-02-05 20:38 UTC

Reply Score: 2

zima Member since:
2005-07-06

If only the fat got corrupted, then the files themselves were likely still intact and recoverable (even by something like the free Recuva).

Reply Score: 2

Article riddled with problems
by saso on Mon 4th Feb 2013 22:07 UTC
saso
Member since:
2007-04-18

I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to be rude.

First the author notes that Samsung has taken Google's Android and expanded upon it, and then proceeds with a pointless enumeration of said extensions, decrying why Google doesn't have them at almost every step. Newsflash dude, you just said it yourself: Google gives away their system. If Samsung were to open-source their variant and allow others to build upon it (like Google does), then you'd have a valid comparison. Until then, you're just crying over one company giving away their crown jewels for free, while the other builds upon it and is charges you hefty bucks for the result.

Some of your criticisms are simply childish, such as:

Shortcut to screen brightness in 2 clicks ..

Drag down quick settings panel, tap on "Brightness", done.

Why hasn't Google done it? Because Samsung UI team does a better job of human User eXperience (UX) testing.

They have, you just haven't used a non-TouchWiz-infected device in a long time. Also, your jumping to conclusions about Samsung doing better UX research based on your personal experience, well, that's just rich.

Better icons (TouchWiz UI theme)

A matter of taste (TouchWiz icons make me puke).

Samsung clearly divides between applications and widgets

WTF kind of a complaint is this?

Why doesn't Google include every codec imaginable?

Because, kiddo, you apparently have never heard of a thing called codec licensing fees...

Note, that Google still pays patent royalties for other non-free codecs

... oh wait, you did, but you just wanted to an excuse to bash Google.

What substance there is in the article is completely drowned out by a sea of childish imaginative hypothesizing about why his favorite cell phone company is "teh greatestz".

Reply Score: 2

I still can't believe...
by gan17 on Mon 4th Feb 2013 23:22 UTC
gan17
Member since:
2008-06-03

... that there are actually people who like Samsung's TurdPiss. Seriously, wtf are they smoking?

Reply Score: 2

What Droid battle?
by SonicMetalMan on Tue 5th Feb 2013 02:39 UTC
SonicMetalMan
Member since:
2009-05-25

Dude, I hate to say this but you come across sounding like a serious fanboy. The customizations only serve to fragment the Android universe and give Samsung free reign to orphan devices more quickly. It also keeps the fanboys upgrading to the next Galaxy XXXXI or whatever.

I think you missed the point of Android. Why not use Windows Phone 8 or Bada devices if you don't like vanilla Jelly Bean?

And Touchjizz? Really?

Reply Score: 1

Comment by ilovebeer
by ilovebeer on Tue 5th Feb 2013 05:25 UTC
ilovebeer
Member since:
2011-08-08

Producing the Galaxy S III hardware costs Samsung a little more over producing the Galaxy Nexus (my rough estimate is around $220 vs $210 per handset),

Your rough estimates based on what exactly? It's okay to say you just pulled those numbers out of thin air and don't actually have any clue what it costs Samsung to make the phones.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by grahamtriggs
by grahamtriggs on Tue 5th Feb 2013 06:44 UTC
grahamtriggs
Member since:
2009-05-27

Not only are there an awful lot of inaccuracies (as has already been pointed out), not only is it ridiculous to make a comparison between S3 and "Android 4.0" (when S3 is already on 4.1, the Galaxy Nexus was always 4.1 and has been upgraded to 4.2, and the Nexus 4 was always 4.2)...

But in the MicroSD comparison (which, yes, is an advantage as the Nexus doesn't have one), it's stated that he would *still* give a small advantage to the S3 even if the Nexus had a MicroSD slot. WTF? That would make them *identical*.

Yes, there are things that separate the S3 from a Nexus, and for some people they may warrant purchasing an S3. We all have different requirements. But this article smacks of desperation.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by grahamtriggs
by Soulbender on Tue 5th Feb 2013 07:22 UTC in reply to "Comment by grahamtriggs"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

fanboi logic: Oh they're identical? That means mine's better!

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by grahamtriggs
by nej_simon on Tue 5th Feb 2013 13:54 UTC in reply to "Comment by grahamtriggs"
nej_simon Member since:
2011-02-11

Not only are there an awful lot of inaccuracies (as has already been pointed out), not only is it ridiculous to make a comparison between S3 and "Android 4.0" (when S3 is already on 4.1, the Galaxy Nexus was always 4.1 and has been upgraded to 4.2, and the Nexus 4 was always 4.2)...


Galaxy nexus was in fact on 4.0 when it was released, similar to the S3.

Reply Score: 2

Ugly ttabloid journalism at OSnews
by 1024 on Tue 5th Feb 2013 08:14 UTC
1024
Member since:
2013-02-05

With this article full of opinions and wild claims, OSnews now approaches a new market: tabloid journalism.

Sadly, this means it loses old readers.

Edited 2013-02-05 08:16 UTC

Reply Score: 1

David Member since:
1997-10-01

I can understand why you might disagree with the author's conclusions. I expected that many people might. However, I'm curious as to why giving a Samsung fan a platform to make his case is "tabloid journalism."

Personally, I would only buy an Android device that ran vanilla Android, and I always considered carrier-modified Android versions to be something that "low-information consumers" had foisted on them. I was intrigued to learn that there are some consumers who think that Samsung's version, at least, is an actual improvement. It seemed like a worthy topic of debate for OSNews. I'd like to hear why you disagree.

Reply Score: 1

Sir, you have balls
by Lava_Croft on Tue 5th Feb 2013 10:20 UTC
Lava_Croft
Member since:
2006-12-24

I wouldn't dare to write an article that applauds the horrible things Samsung has done to vanilla Android and then put the article full of things that are simply not true.

Respect.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Sir, you have balls
by Alexey Technologov on Tue 5th Feb 2013 10:55 UTC in reply to "Sir, you have balls"
Alexey Technologov Member since:
2007-03-16

I wouldn't dare to write an article that applauds the horrible things Samsung has done to vanilla Android and then put the article full of things that are simply not true.


Except, that everything *is* True. Tested and verified.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Sir, you have balls
by WereCatf on Tue 5th Feb 2013 11:44 UTC in reply to "Sir, you have balls"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

I wouldn't dare to write an article that applauds the horrible things Samsung has done to vanilla Android and then put the article full of things that are simply not true.


I don't really see any out-right lies there, but as I don't own any device with vanilla Android I may have missed something. Would you please point the lies out for me? I'd say it's just mostly a misguided opinion piece, not an attempt at spreading lies. I certainly don't agree with the article myself.

Edited 2013-02-05 11:55 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Sir, you have balls
by _txf_ on Tue 5th Feb 2013 12:42 UTC in reply to "RE: Sir, you have balls"
_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

I don't really see any out-right lies there


Inaccuracies count as not truth. I doubt the OP implied that the author intended to lie.

Reply Score: 2

Upgrades!
by IndigoJo on Tue 5th Feb 2013 11:13 UTC
IndigoJo
Member since:
2005-07-06

One reason people prefer vanilla Android over Samsung's (or any other manufacturer's) version is that you can get upgrades easily. I had a Samsung Galaxy S and Samsung refused to upgrade that to ICS, let alone Jelly Bean, because its additions *and* the new OS would take up too much memory to be viable. Yet, JB on its own (Cyanogen Mod 10) worked a treat and was much smoother and more responsive than Gingerbread (possibly because apps were coming out that were optimised for the new OS). Let's see how long Samsung keeps supplying OS upgrades for the GS2 or GS3, or do they just want us to get new phones every couple of years?

(I posted a longer response at http://www.blogistan.co.uk/blog/mt.php/2013/02/05/google-versus-sam... .)

Edited 2013-02-05 11:14 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE: Upgrades!
by Alexey Technologov on Tue 5th Feb 2013 12:30 UTC in reply to "Upgrades!"
Alexey Technologov Member since:
2007-03-16

Let's see how long Samsung keeps supplying OS upgrades for the GS2 or GS3, or do they just want us to get new phones every couple of years?


Do you think the Nexus series is supported forever ? Think again. The answer is: Nope. Two years max. And "Nexus S" (from 2010, two generations ago, before Nexus 4 and before the Galaxy Nexus) will not get official Google Android 4.2 either.

And the Galaxy S2 recently got official Samsung Android 4.1.2 upgrade, which probably completes it's 2 year support cycle. I don't expect to see official 4.2 ROMs on it. Custom ROMs via manual install surely can enlong the useful life of the devices in question.

In the real life, 3rd party web browsers (such as "Firefox for Android") may allow to use even outdated Android 2.x devices for way longer than originally intended. (due to supporting new web standards and fixing critical security issues at the browser level)

-Alexey

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Upgrades!
by _txf_ on Tue 5th Feb 2013 12:45 UTC in reply to "RE: Upgrades!"
_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

And the Galaxy S2 recently got official Samsung Android 4.1.2 upgrade, which probably completes it's 2 year support cycle. I don't expect to see official 4.2 ROMs on it. Custom ROMs via manual install surely can enlong the useful life of the devices in question.


Yeah but at least the updates aren't horribly delayed. Only recently got 4.1 not 4.2....

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Upgrades!
by cdude on Tue 5th Feb 2013 13:57 UTC in reply to "RE: Upgrades!"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

The difference is that all firmware is made available for Nexus and so Nexus is usually very good supported with CyanogenMod but also runs eg WebOS as parallel-boot install. Such flexibiliy makes it way more actractive and hacker-friendly what leads to nice community-support far beyond Android. Its also a hacker-device and not only a consumer-device like Samsung's are.

Edited 2013-02-05 13:58 UTC

Reply Score: 2

I disagree with your view on TouchWiz
by nej_simon on Tue 5th Feb 2013 15:00 UTC
nej_simon
Member since:
2011-02-11

My recommendation: If you don't believe me, just use the Samsung Galaxy S III for a month, then try the vanilla Google Android for a few days. You will understand the difference very quickly. You will not want to go vanilla.


I don't have a S3 but my tablet is a Note 10.1 with TouchWiz running on Jelly Bean. I was ok with the UI until I tried vanilla Android on a nexus tablet. It's a lot nicer and more consistent than TouchWiz and I'm currently following the development of CyanogenMod for my tablet mostly to be able to switch to a more vanilla UI.

I don't see how you can say that samsung does more UX studies. What's that claim based on? Various apps that samsung bundles on the same have different UX styles, some of which are horribly ugly (just look at the skeuomorphism in S planner or S note: http://www.pocketables.com/images/2012/08/s-note-1-608x357.jpg) and integrates badly with the other.

P.S.: Arguably Samsung Android 4.0 is better not only than Google Android 4.0, but also wins vs. Google Android 4.2 in most areas, and on tablets Samsung's advantage is even greater, due to the introduction of world's first window manager for Android, allowing you to have multiple windows floating around, just like on MS Windows desktops. Just look at Samsung Galaxy Tabs and you will understand what I mean.


The integration of a window manager is nice but it's hackish and often doesn't work properly. For ex. in facebook the multi window-button is placed right over the send button in a chat window and the UI doesn't respond properly unless you run the app full screen. Other apps have various issues.

Reply Score: 2

Horse Droppings
by tekairangi on Tue 5th Feb 2013 22:20 UTC
tekairangi
Member since:
2007-11-18

The article is a love letter to TouchWiz.
Which is fine, but don't try and make out that it's a comparison.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Horse Droppings
by mattymoo on Wed 6th Feb 2013 04:33 UTC in reply to "Horse Droppings"
mattymoo Member since:
2011-12-29

I agree.

It could have been an simple overview of interesting SIII features, or a comparison against a direct competitor, but instead it is a nebulous comparison against a combination of:

- cheap chinese phones (what this has to do with a comparison of software features is beyond me)
- older versions of the nexus
- the current version of the nexus
- CM, or AOSP in general

depending on what makes Samsung look good in that particular aspect.

Reply Score: 1