While the HTC Evo 4G is all set for a June release in America, Samsung has been mum about the arrival of its super sexy Google Android-powered Galaxy S. A Samsung marketing rep would only confirm that it is coming to America in 2010; no specific date or carrier partner has been confirmed. Like the Evo 4G, the thing that stands out most about this phone is its screen. It’s not as big as the Evo 4G’s, but it uses “super” AMOLED technology. And yes, it’s super…thanks for asking. The picture is noticeably crisper and it supposedly doesn’t suffer from the poor outdoor viewing problems of OLED screens.
The form factor is straight out of Apple’s playbook. It’s smooth and curvy in all the right places (sorry, I just wanted to throw that line in). It looks like a slightly longer and thinner version of the iPhone 3GS. However, it’s feels lighter, despite having a beefy 1,500 mAh battery. I love the way the phone looks and greatly prefer its style to the Evo 4G’s.
The interface has some interesting features. There’s a social network hub, similar to the one featured on Motorola’s Blur interface, that collects your Facebook and Twitter messages. There’s a “daily briefing” app that collects local news and weather reports. In general, the interface isn’t as smooth as HTC Sense or Motorola Blur. I am not a fan of Samsung’s TouchWhiz interface, but the Galaxy S’ implementation of Android seems better than prior efforts. It’s just not as good as what HTC and Motorola are doing.
Although the Galaxy S’ 5MP camera is a lower resolution than the Evo 4G’s, I think it offers better images (at least from a totally scientific three-minute test). Samsung has a strong record with camera phones while HTC has been mediocre in this department.
If I had to choose between the Evo 4G and the Galaxy S, I’d lean towards the Galaxy S. The big “if” is the carrier it ends up on. I’ve been burned by Sprint in the past, as has RPadholic thejedirevan. I really don’t like AT&T. There’s a rumor that T-Mobile will be getting this phone, which would make me incredibly happy. Verizon, which has the HTC Incredible, doesn’t seem to need it. Where will it end up? I have no idea, but I wanna know now!!!
looks like Iphone OS
@Smartguy
That is probably the point. Make it look like its leading competitor and hope it sells more.
@sandrock
Yeah I'm sure that is a large part of it. It brings up a good question though…can someone really make a cheap phone that is viable in the data age? Not calling this phone cheap, but for devices that tend to be clones or knockoffs, such is usually the case. The reason I bring up the question is that the carriers charge you $30 for data regardless of the device capabilities and still charge a premium for voice and text on top of the data. Would at least the average consumer realize they are not going to be able to utilize the knockoff the way the real mccoy operates? I need to think on this for a bit.
@Smartguy
Wait, the average consumer thinks?!
@Sandrock
Lol, you would hope some synapses are firing off when they are looking to make a purchase and consider the yearly cost or in most cases the cost over the life of the contract. Or if the device merits the charge.
Example….about 2 years ago I needed to upgrade from my Blackberry. I really wanted to get the Bold. Well ATT charged the same for data service on that device as the Iphone. I chose the Iphone at first simply because it had the better web browser and justified the premium data connection. In all honesty, had the BB been only 15 per month…I'd have bought the BB.
@smartguy I answered your question in March. T-Mobile has the Nokia Nuron. It's inexpensive, fairly capable, and can be used with the "cheap" data plan.
https://rpad.tv/2010/03/08/nokia-5230-nuron-for-t-…