backtop


Print 58 comment(s) - last by wordsworm.. on Jun 18 at 1:55 PM

A new Samsung flagship is reportedly in the works

When the rumors about the Samsung Galaxy S5 first started raining down upon us, we were pelted with hopes of a metal body and a gorgeous QHD display. When the smartphone was officially announced, we were greeted with what was more evolution than revolution — that meant a slight bump in screen size to 5.1 inches, the same 1080p resolution, and a body that was still constructed primarily of plastic.

 
We’re now getting a few more glimpses of the next Samsung “flagship” with specs matching what people were first expecting with the Galaxy S5. The so-called Galaxy F will reportedly be announced in September according to serial leaker @evleaks.

 
Reports suggest that the Galaxy F will come equipped with a QHD (2560x1440) display like the LG G3, and will actually sport a full metal back (unlike the faux-metallic G3). There are also reports that a Qualcomm Snapdragon 805 processor will be onboard to provide not only faster processing speeds to fuel the QHD display, but also a fast onboard modem courtesy of the 225Mbps LTE-A Qualcomm MDM9635.

Source: Evleaks



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

So it has come to this now?
By quiksilvr on 6/16/2014 9:37:10 AM , Rating: 2
Remember when Motorola launched the DROID and then less than 6 months later the DROID MAXX came out, which had an infinitely better battery life?

Have we really reached the point where a flagship is going to come out every six months?




RE: So it has come to this now?
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 6/16/2014 9:46:18 AM , Rating: 5
Unless you're one of those people that must have the latest and greatest of everything, should it really matter how often new flagships get announced?

My current smartphone is nearly 2 years old and gets the job done.


RE: So it has come to this now?
By FITCamaro on 6/16/2014 9:51:48 AM , Rating: 2
Exactly. I think the vast majority of users needs for a smartphone has been met for at least 2 years. The only reason for new phones is better battery life. More speed really isn't necessary for 95% of people out there.


RE: So it has come to this now?
By tng on 6/16/2014 9:58:23 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
More speed really isn't necessary for 95% of people out there.
Really don't need the phone to be all that powerful, it is the network that I wish were faster. No new processor is going to help that.


RE: So it has come to this now?
By Reclaimer77 on 6/16/14, Rating: -1
RE: So it has come to this now?
By djc208 on 6/16/2014 11:32:39 AM , Rating: 3
I most people aren't getting the speeds they're supposed to be getting with their current modems. The weakness isn't usually the phone end, it's the provider end, this modem is like 802.11ac, pointless if the router you are connected to is only 802.11n (or worse).

And the network is going to change far slower than your phone.


RE: So it has come to this now?
By Spuke on 6/16/2014 11:40:25 AM , Rating: 2
If they made a Google Play edition of the F, I'd pick one up. Oh that's right I'm on Verizon.


RE: So it has come to this now?
By Monkey's Uncle on 6/16/2014 12:49:23 PM , Rating: 2
I actually have an 802.11ac 1900 wireless router in my house. My network doesn't change all that slowly ;)


RE: So it has come to this now?
By ritualm on 6/16/2014 2:04:25 PM , Rating: 2
The WiFi-AC specification requires network adapters to be a minimum of two-stream (2x2:2), instead of the single-stream that permeated over 95% of consumer electronics during the WiFi-N era. Nope, the OEMs are still using single-stream for AC.

Net result: those WiFi connections continue to suck.


By Monkey's Uncle on 6/17/2014 9:55:53 AM , Rating: 2
Good point. However when dual band/dual stream adapters become more mainstream, this will change.


RE: So it has come to this now?
By Reclaimer77 on 6/16/2014 3:06:03 PM , Rating: 1
That's just the way wireless works. Nobody can guarantee throughput, too many factors can inhibit a good connection that's out of the providers control. I know people who bi*ch when they're in an elevator and can't get 4G or a call gets dropped, I mean come on!

And yeah I was being cute by referencing this modem change, but what exactly does he want? This is a massive country and frankly I'm proud that we have major carriers competing for your business on such a large scale.


RE: So it has come to this now?
By ritualm on 6/16/2014 3:10:46 PM , Rating: 2
Only South Korea has LTE-Advanced right now. By the time USA gets onboard, the Asian country is already knee-deep into 5G.

No, that is not a feature.


RE: So it has come to this now?
By Reclaimer77 on 6/16/2014 3:26:55 PM , Rating: 1
What if he's posting from South Korea? Huh, smart guy :)

Of course it's a feature. People are going to be stuck with this phone for 2+ years, carriers are ALREADY rolling out LTE Advanced!

http://www.droid-life.com/2014/03/06/att-lte-advan...

OOOOPS!!!!!!


RE: So it has come to this now?
By tng on 6/16/2014 12:20:29 PM , Rating: 2
Well to be fair, only 90% of my issues come from the network. Sometimes it is lighting fast, other times it is just slow.

Also I do note that sometimes the network is fine, but the server my phone is talking to is slow. Sometimes it is hard to tell the difference between the two. There is no phone that can account for that.


RE: So it has come to this now?
By hughlle on 6/16/2014 11:48:18 AM , Rating: 2
My only issue might be that the more phones a company is offering, then this could effect the level of support and updates available. Not sure what samsung are like with supporting the older models, but there are certainly other comp[anies who had more products than they seemingly had manpower in the support department and just gave up on them in favour of the latest offerings.


RE: So it has come to this now?
By zephyrprime on 6/17/2014 10:47:05 AM , Rating: 2
You should get a new phone dude. I was using a nexus galaxy which was about 2 years old and then moved to a nexus 5 and it was a huge improvement.


RE: So it has come to this now?
By SeaLurk on 6/16/2014 10:05:01 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Have we really reached the point where a flagship is going to come out every six months?

Sony officially announced that their flagship Xperia Z will get refreshed every six months.


RE: So it has come to this now?
By retrospooty on 6/16/2014 10:51:39 AM , Rating: 3
This is a good thing. I cant understand anyone that thinks faster better stuff at a faster release rate is a bad thing.


RE: So it has come to this now?
By inighthawki on 6/16/2014 11:12:08 AM , Rating: 1
It's just a lame attempt for people who buy them to try and pretend like they're important for a longer period of time by living in denial about how quickly computing technology evolves. Once something becomes outdated you can't go bragging to your friends about having the latest and greatest hip thing.


RE: So it has come to this now?
By retrospooty on 6/16/2014 10:08:55 AM , Rating: 2
I am not sure what you are getting at. This model was kind of rumored for a long time, and many were let down when the S5 came out and it was just a normal phone. As for Flagships every 6 months or more (dont forget the Note series), whow does a newer better phone take away from your existing phone? There is always going to be newer better tech out, that is the way it works.


RE: So it has come to this now?
By Reclaimer77 on 6/16/2014 10:16:32 AM , Rating: 1
I could understand someone having a problem with flagships taking too long to refresh, but to complain about them coming out TOO often?

I don't understand..what exactly is the problem here? This isn't like the Droid/Droid MAXX at all. This isn't a Galaxy S5 refresh, it's an entirely different model line.


RE: So it has come to this now?
By quiksilvr on 6/16/2014 11:13:36 AM , Rating: 2
Considering that most carriers are still using the two year contract model it is rather annoying waiting for a flagship only to have it outclassed in the same year.

At the very least, it would be nice to know ahead of time what is to come instead of just being surprised that the problems with the flagship you purchased is fixed in a matter of months.


RE: So it has come to this now?
By Rukkian on 6/16/2014 12:16:50 PM , Rating: 2
There is always something better on the horizon, either from the same company or another. If you must have the latest greatest, you will need to buy it (either financed or outright). There is no real way to stay up to date in any other way.

That is the way computing works, especially in a relatively new class of computing, like smartphones.

Make the most educated decision you can when you want to buy, and either be prepared to live with it when (not if) it is no longer the best device out there.

I have my LGG2 and love it. Would I love an LGG3 even more? Sure, but not enough to pay the extra money at this point.


RE: So it has come to this now?
By Spuke on 6/16/2014 12:42:10 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I have my LGG2 and love it. Would I love an LGG3 even more? Sure, but not enough to pay the extra money at this point.
I have a G2 also and am perfectly happy with it. Not sure I want the G3 even if my contract was up.


RE: So it has come to this now?
By retrospooty on 6/16/2014 3:22:21 PM , Rating: 2
I have a G2 and am getting a G3 for sure... But only because I get one every year on our corp account and Verizon knocks it down to every 10 months.

If it were my own 2 year contract, I would be fine with waiting. The G2 is a great phone today and will still be great through 2015. The G3's existence simple doesn't affect it.


RE: So it has come to this now?
By Spuke on 6/16/2014 5:02:30 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I have a G2 and am getting a G3 for sure... But only because I get one every year on our corp account and Verizon knocks it down to every 10 months.
That's a sweet deal!


RE: So it has come to this now?
By retrospooty on 6/16/2014 6:16:56 PM , Rating: 2
Ya, it is... I am not sure if its on all corp accounts or what, we aren't a huge company with any special perks. We have 600 total people so I assume its for all corp accounts...

Anyhow, on our Verizon portal, when we buy a phone we get the standard 2yr contract at the standard price ($199 for starting high end phone) For an extra $20 we can change the contract terms from 2 to 1 year. Then by default Verizon always shaves 2 months off. So the 1 year is now 10 months before I am eligible for upgrade. My G2 costed $219 for a 10 month contract... Now in July its up and my G3 will also be $219 and I will be eligible in May '15. Whoot!


RE: So it has come to this now?
By retrospooty on 6/16/2014 1:04:00 PM , Rating: 2
"At the very least, it would be nice to know ahead of time what is to come instead of just being surprised"

OK, consider this your notice. Any phone you ever buy will be outclassed by it's successor and its competitors very quickly, usually withing months. Just buy a phone that suits your needs. Newer phones with faster CPU's and whatever else they add on doesn't remove functionality of your current phone. If it suits your needs today, then this new one coming out doesnt change that next month...

If you are that concerned about having the latest at all times then get on a jump plan or competing offer and pay a bit extra and get a new phone every 6 months or so. It's really not complicated.


RE: So it has come to this now?
By quiksilvr on 6/16/2014 3:50:59 PM , Rating: 2
My concern is for the people locked into a two year contract that can only upgrade annually (or pay even more fees for faster upgrades) and are given no indication that the "flagship" they settled with is going to be outclassed in such a short time frame. Sure annually is fine, but LESS than six months and people finally get a metal Galaxy phone with an actual upgrade to the processor...and weren't told that such a device even existed?

I get that we have this notice NOW. It just begs the question why wasn't this flagship announced for the significant market of people that wanted these features but had to settle due to the limitations of their contract? Being aware of the choice and options would have sufficed.

I am not arguing that you should simply get what works for you and that you shouldn't be worried about the latest and greatest. And I am also aware of no-contract plans that make upgrading super easy (just sell the phone). Hell, I'm no contract and I had my Galaxy Nexus for two years without issue. But if you're tied to a contract and you're only window of opportunity is once every 1-2 years, you want to be sure you aren't simply "settling" for the year only to see that the phone is upgraded within months. It's a low blow against loyal users and bad business, just like with the DROID and DROID MAXX.


RE: So it has come to this now?
By Reclaimer77 on 6/16/2014 4:23:04 PM , Rating: 2
Sooo Samsung or whoever should formally announce they are working on a newer phone model?

Can we say "duh"? That's a given!!

Some of you here are just ridiculous, sorry. I can't even believe what I'm reading.


RE: So it has come to this now?
By Spuke on 6/16/2014 5:04:47 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Some of you here are just ridiculous, sorry. I can't even believe what I'm reading.
Like I said before, some people here are just weird.


RE: So it has come to this now?
By retrospooty on 6/16/2014 4:26:44 PM , Rating: 2
OK, I get your point, but then where do you draw the line?

The Galaxy S5 was announced a few months back... What if they announced it earlier? What if they announced this new metal one earlier? Then people that bought a few months before that would be in the same boat. There are always better phones and always will be. It's a given and like I said, if you or anyone else is concerned with it, they should pony up the extra $10 a month to get on their carriers jump/next whatever plan so they can upgrade more often.


RE: So it has come to this now?
By quiksilvr on 6/16/2014 7:02:32 PM , Rating: 2
I guess in 2015 this is a non-issue once we know the summer season is when the "pro" version of their spring flagship phone is released.

I was just hoping for a more clear cut schedule on this beforehand so consumers wouldn't get screwed this year.


By Monkey's Uncle on 6/17/2014 10:06:48 AM , Rating: 2
The galaxy F is a hardware update from the S5. The S5 would have had to come first to set the baseline.

But I wonder if you guys realize the aluminum part is nothing more than a flimsy little battery cover? Aluminum battery covers have been around on ebay for a while now for the S4 for about $5 each.

All it would really take is to buy an aluminum battery cover and *presto changeo* instant Samsung Galaxy F look-alike.


RE: So it has come to this now?
By atechfan on 6/16/2014 5:01:28 PM , Rating: 2
Better stuff will come out, get over it. MS was just slammed by some people for releasing the Surface Pro 3 so soon after Surface Pro 2 as well. Samsung was obviously planning something else when they released the S5, seeing as so many people were disappointed with how little it advanced from the S4. I figured there was a new flagship in the works.


By haukionkannel on 6/17/2014 3:13:43 AM , Rating: 2
The main and IMHO the only problem with many, many models is that it takes for ever to get upgrades to your phone.. sometimes you never get new vesion of the operation system, if the phone is not the most popular model... Samsung is one of those phone makers who has so many models that they don't have time to customize the phone os to every posible model they manufacture...
But as an upgrade to 5s this is ok. Just one more model to allready too big catalogy...


no more Samsung
By wordsworm on 6/16/2014 11:25:08 AM , Rating: 2
I don't like all the unnecessary glass on Samsung phones. It makes the whole thing vulnerable to critical damage from falling on a corner when a plastic or rubber edge could protect it from cracking. My HTC is still running fine. They used to use plastic from the screen's edge out, so you could drop the thing and it'd keep going. Samsung seems to have deliberately made their phones vulnerable to be easily damaged.

The fact that all these smart phones from Apple and Samsung, you have to dress it up in $100 worth of armour.

The thing that gets me is how these manufacturers do those 'critical updates' which come with an overheating trojan to make their old phones quickly become useless. They probably learned how to do that from Microsoft which did that for 10 years with XP.




RE: no more Samsung
By ritualm on 6/16/2014 2:00:00 PM , Rating: 2
My next phone definately will not be a Samsung, after learning what transpired 6 years ago: the company basically crashed the consumer flash market and used the intentionally depressed prices to kill one of its top competitors. It's not cutthroat business, it smacks of predatory, anti-competitive behavior from South Korea Inc.

http://www.dailytech.com/SanDisk+Steps+up+Flash+Da...


RE: no more Samsung
By Reclaimer77 on 6/16/2014 2:51:21 PM , Rating: 2
Then I guess you'll just have no smartphone. Because it's not like Samsung is the only company with blood on it's hands.

But I honestly can't believe you're this upset that six years ago Samsung lowered the prices of something.

So it's a crime to flood the market with cheap goods and drive the price down on something? Wtf is wrong with your head?

Once again we see Jason Mick taking an event and wrapping it in a malicious conspiracy theory to make it sound like more than it was. And you've fallen for it.


RE: no more Samsung
By ritualm on 6/16/2014 3:08:36 PM , Rating: 1
What makes you think you have a leg to stand on here?
quote:
I honestly can't believe you're this upset that six years ago Samsung lowered the prices of something.

They flooded the market so prices drop and put a lot of companies in financial trouble. Then they used that event as an excuse to forcibly buyout one of their biggest competitors and monopolize the market.

That is besides all the sh1tty things they've done (referring to the Vanity Fair article about the company).
quote:
So it's a crime to flood the market with cheap goods and drive the price down on something?

Samsung's tactic: flood the market with cheap product, drive prices down, make a lot of companies fold, buyout some of them, then raise prices back up because there is less competition around.

In simpler terms, you fully support Samsung's antitrust practices. You're an idiot.


RE: no more Samsung
By Reclaimer77 on 6/16/2014 3:21:45 PM , Rating: 2
Vizio has flooded the market with cheap LCD TV's and have, by your logic, driven competitors to close their display divisions.

Does that mean Vizio was evil? Consumers don't see or care about the marginal benefits of spending hundreds more for a "better" set when the Vizio is cheap and "good enough".

I'm just trying to ascertain how you equate competing on price as a nefarious deed that has earned your scorn.

I think you're being a drama queen. You should buy the phone that best suits you, not because someone competed better than someone else years ago. You're being childish.

In closing you call someone an idiot when you clearly have no understanding of "anti-trust" law or even what qualifies. Nobody but you is even claiming this was an anti-trust issue.

quote:
Samsung's tactic: flood the market with cheap product, drive prices down, make a lot of companies fold, buyout some of them, then raise prices back up because there is less competition around.


I still believe in that quaint notion of innocent until proven guilty. This is a fine theory, but unless you can produce some evidence or proof, I'm skeptical. Especially given how Samsung was being bullied by others trying to manipulate the same market.

http://appleinsider.com/articles/09/11/30/apple_ac...

Flash prices rose, not because of Samsung, but because Apple twice caused NAND flash shortages to DELIBERATE manipulate prices.


RE: no more Samsung
By ritualm on 6/16/2014 4:31:34 PM , Rating: 2
Oh classic Reclaimer77, moving goalposts:
quote:
Vizio...

Vizio has nowhere near Samsung's market share for TVs. Your comparison - and therefore, your entire rebuttal - falls flat on its face.
quote:
I think you're being a drama queen.

Your mantra is "Do what I say, not what I do." And whenever you start losing, you quickly change the subject and move the goalpost in a vain attempt to win.

Now you're accusing me of being a drama queen, because you hate losing. LOL
quote:
You're being childish.

Says the guy who uses his less-than-elementary school education knowledge to claim something that isn't.
quote:
In closing you call someone an idiot when you clearly have no understanding of "anti-trust" law or even what qualifies. Nobody but you is even claiming this was an anti-trust issue.

It smacks of antitrust. What else do you call it?

Oh right, you suck so much Samsung e-peen that you can't see how it's acting maliciously against every company it competed with.
quote:
unrelated article

How can we have a meaningful and fair discussion when you keep changing goalposts and subjects?

You give every childish retard in this world a bad name.


RE: no more Samsung
By Reclaimer77 on 6/16/2014 4:49:25 PM , Rating: 2
I love how you criticize me for insulting others, then come up with the most ridiculous insults and accusations to hurl at me.

The only thing you've proven here, is that you're all too willing to sink to whatever level you accuse me of swimming in.

I might not agree with someone, I might hurl the occasional insult their way, but I rarely if ever take EVERY opportunity to hurl hate at them as you've done here. You're coming off really petty and childish sounding. Believe me, if you think your amateurish campaign is even making a dent in my resolve, I should tell you that you aren't even in the top 100.

Back on topic, Apple on multiple occasions ordered millions and millions more NAND modules from Samsung than they EVER intended on actually purchasing. To get a good price. Samsung was left holding the bag, with millions of NAND flash units they then had to move.

You can call this anti-trust and a deliberate effort to hurt their competition. But until you or Jason Mick can provide a court ruling stating as such, or some internal memo proving this agenda, I'm calling it sensationalist bunk.

Oh just a tip, you should really look up what "moving goalposts" means. Your posts here are the epitome of taking a solid phrase, and turning it into a worthless meme.

Explaining to you why Samsung had way more NAND on-hand than they ever intended thanks to Apple, is not "moving goalposts".


RE: no more Samsung
By themaster08 on 6/17/2014 1:58:11 AM , Rating: 3
Funny how you support Samsung's anti-competitive practices, yet you slam Micrsoft's past behaviour. You can't support one and be critical of the other. They're both anti-competitive and damaging to the market and end user.

Get your head out of Samsung's ass and your arguments might have at least a modicum of credibility.


RE: no more Samsung
By Reclaimer77 on 6/17/2014 9:49:50 AM , Rating: 2
I don't know that what Samsung did was "anti-competitive". And nobody has provided evidence that it was.

When you hold onto a believe in the face of all evidence, then you become a zealot. I have proven beyond a doubt that Apple manipulated the NAND market and left Samsung holding the bag. Samsung never intended to have that much a surplus of NAND on-hand.

The fact that all of you, even ritualm, has blatantly ignored this point and blindly presses on with the 'Samsung is teh evils' speeches, tells me you have an agenda.

quote:
They're both anti-competitive and damaging to the market and end user.


And as soon as you guys show me a single shred of evidence showing specifically how Samsung hurt consumers (we all know how much consumers HATE lower prices...) and the market, I'll listen.


RE: no more Samsung
By atechfan on 6/16/2014 4:58:50 PM , Rating: 2
You can't deny that Samsung has been guilty of anti-competitive practices. They have been found guilty of that more that once. But really, who cares? If I were a shareholder, and those anti-competitive practices raised my share prices, I would cheer them on. The global market isn't some pre-school playground where everyone is supposed to share and play nice. It is cut-throat, and those who can't be big enough pricks to bury a competitor won't last long.

When I buy a Samsung LCD, it is because they are offering me what I want, not because they are the nicest kid on the playground. Same with Intel. My next build will most likely have an Intel CPU, even though Intel is one of the most dirty companies in the tech industry. Why? Because I care about me, not competitors to the company whose products I am looking at.

That said, you hardly have a leg to stand on. You are calling him a drama queen, yet you stated in the past that you will never forgive MS for what they supposedly did to Google.


RE: no more Samsung
By Spuke on 6/16/2014 5:29:33 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You can't deny that Samsung has been guilty of anti-competitive practices. They have been found guilty of that more that once. But really, who cares? If I were a shareholder, and those anti-competitive practices raised my share prices, I would cheer them on. The global market isn't some pre-school playground where everyone is supposed to share and play nice. It is cut-throat, and those who can't be big enough pricks to bury a competitor won't last long.
DAMN!!! I actually agree with this.


RE: no more Samsung
By Reclaimer77 on 6/16/2014 5:37:45 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
yet you stated in the past that you will never forgive MS for what they supposedly did to Google.


Uhh, that just doesn't sound like something I would say. I still buy MS products, I JUST bought a copy of 8.1. I'm not being all like "omg boycott MS because" whatever like he is being.

I agree with the rest of your post. The idea that Samsung is evil-bad because they LOWERED prices, thus you wont buy their products, is just stupid talk.

We have companies like Google giving stuff away for free in order to gain marketshare. Is that evil-bad too? Where do we draw the line?

Seems like ritualm is advocating Economic Communism, even if he doesn't realize it.


RE: no more Samsung
By bug77 on 6/16/2014 3:54:48 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I don't like all the unnecessary glass on Samsung phones. It makes the whole thing vulnerable to critical damage from falling on a corner when a plastic or rubber edge could protect it from cracking


Funny how the mention of metal right in the title has managed to elude you.


RE: no more Samsung
By retrospooty on 6/16/2014 4:22:05 PM , Rating: 2
That and I am not sure what glass he is referring to on any Samsung phone. Samsung is well known for plastic phones. Of course the front is gorilla glass, but so are all phones. How does Samsung differ in this from any other phone maker?

The iPhone 4 and 4s has glass backs I think, but I am not aware of Any Samsung that had that.


RE: no more Samsung
By wordsworm on 6/18/2014 1:55:50 PM , Rating: 2
I'm talking about the front. By making it glass corner to corner, even in areas where you don't interface with the phone, it makes a corner drop deadly for the phone. So, you damage the corner glass and the whole screen is broken. The glass on my older HTC ends where the interface ends, giving almost 1cm of plastic between the corner of the screen and the corner of the phone. So, dropping it on the corner means it won't break the screen. All Samsung, new HTC, iPhones, that I have seen, have this flaw of corner to corner glass even over non-interface areas. That is my problem with a lot of current out-of-the-box smart phones: they are made to break easily.


How much?
By bug77 on 6/16/2014 10:53:35 AM , Rating: 2
Considering the S5 already costs an arm and a leg, how much is this supposed to set you back?




RE: How much?
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 6/16/2014 11:01:27 AM , Rating: 2
And arm, a leg, and a kidney.


RE: How much?
By retrospooty on 6/16/2014 11:11:25 AM , Rating: 2
I would bet the S5 drops and this takes its place at the $199 w/ 2yr contract spot. Maybe $299 at release and $199 within a month or two at the worst.


RE: How much?
By momorere on 6/16/2014 2:56:45 PM , Rating: 1
We finally switched to smart phones Saturday. GS5s for both of us. $99 with a 2 year contract. Funny thing that EVERY person (literally) that walked into Verizon picked up a GS5. Only heard iPhone mentioned from my coworkers wife constantly bitching about it to the sales rep.


RE: How much?
By retrospooty on 6/16/2014 3:18:30 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, it's happening where I work too. 2011 and 2012, it was all "iPhone iPhone iPhone" 2013 started to shift and now, everyone wants bigger screens period. Not even that they weren't happy with their iDevices, or how they operated, they just want bigger screens to take advantage of all todays smartphones can do.


Oculus Rift
By okashira on 6/16/2014 2:09:23 PM , Rating: 2
a 5" QHD screen is actually great news for the Oculus Rift. Would be perfect for the consumer version. Hopefully it can also do 120Hz using display-port.




RE: Oculus Rift
By ritualm on 6/16/2014 2:28:20 PM , Rating: 2
No, if you want to use these smartphone displays for virtual reality gaming, you're waiting another 5+ years minimum. These QHD displays are only good for 60Hz.


"Intel is investing heavily (think gazillions of dollars and bazillions of engineering man hours) in resources to create an Intel host controllers spec in order to speed time to market of the USB 3.0 technology." -- Intel blogger Nick Knupffer














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki