backtop


Print 35 comment(s) - last by MZperX.. on May 13 at 12:23 PM

Plastic-loathers rejoice, your new phone may be night

So far most of the leaks and renders we've seen of LG Electronics Inc.'s (KRX:066570)(KRX:066575) flagship G3 smartphone have shown a plastic-backed device, similar to LG's domestic arch-rival Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd. (KRX:005930) (KRX:005935) Galaxy S5.

But that might have changed, or perhaps there's two variants of the device -- one plastic, one with a brushed-metal back.  Top Twitter leaker @evleaks decloaked the upcoming phone in a post:
LG G3

Brushed metal or matte metal is a look that many people enjoy, both aesthetically and its better resistance to fingerprints than polished metals or glossy plastics.  HTC Corp. (TPE:2498) has earned critical praise for incorporate that design style into its first generation and second generation HTC One smartphones.  Apple, Inc.'s (AAPL) premium iPhone 5S employs a matte finish metal unibody.

Now it appears the LG G3 -- which is also is expected to pack the first quad-HD (2560x1440 pixels) display in a device headed for American shores -- will also pack a metal finish to its chassis.

Source: @evleaks on Twitter



Comments     Threshold


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

RE: Drool.
By Reclaimer77 on 5/11/2014 8:30:09 AM , Rating: 0
It's a common misconception that removable batteries are all about "swapping" batteries. Most people use their Galaxy phones without ever swapping batteries for more battery life.

The thing is, smartphone batteries don't last forever. They begin to degrade in performance after only a year in a lot of cases. Two, depending on charging practices.

So use the phone just like you would a captive-battery phone. It's just pretty cool to have the option of changing your own battery when it fails.

There's no point in arguing against added value. Having a phone with removable batteries and SD slots is value added. In fact I would go as far to say this should be a standard practice for all smartphone makers.


RE: Drool.
By karimtemple on 5/11/2014 7:20:29 PM , Rating: 2
But thinner-and-lighter is a value prop as well, so really the argument isn't Added Value vs. Nothing, it's -- all else held equal -- Removable Battery vs. Thin-And-Light. Personally, I prefer the latter.

e.g. Removable battery tablets are generally 1.6 lbs. Samsung Pro/Note 2014 and iPad Air? 1.0 lbs. Even between the usual 1.3 lbs tablet (which doesn't even have a removable battery), the difference from 1.0 lbs in-hand is astounding.

The difference isn't so dramatic on phones, but it's there. Not always, as manufacturers don't necessarily take advantage of what's afforded them by going nonremovable/unibody. But I have a 5.2" 2013 phone that's 8.9mm thick with the smallest bezel to date and a 3000mAh battery. If you think anyone could've done that in 2013 or 2014 with a removable battery, I've got a bridge to sell you.

The problem with the "batteries wear down" argument is that in two years, I will have spent two whole years with a sexier phone that's better in-hand while you waited for a part to fail. Then when our parts fail, yours costs $30 and mine includes labor (let's say I'm not a do-it-yourselfer) so it's $70 instead of $30. Congratulations on your two-year adventure to save $40. You've certainly earned it.


RE: Drool.
By retrospooty on 5/11/2014 11:05:34 PM , Rating: 2
It's really not complicated. There are different phones with different features for different needs. Some people want and or need removable battery. Going on extended business trips flying all over the place from company to company when you're in a particular town not knowing when you'll be able to plug it in, it's great to have a removable battery. Most people don't need it especially if the battery life is decent, some do so good. People can just buy the one that suits their needs and everyone's happy... except why is no one happy? people that don't want a removable battery are pissed at phones that have one. People that want one are pissed at phones that don't have them. Just but the one that suits your needs and let the OEM's keep giving us options.

is it just me or is everybody way over complicating this issue? its like complaining that your car company makes SUVs when you want a compact car. Just buy the compact car since that's what suits your needs. Simple.


RE: Drool.
By Reclaimer77 on 5/12/2014 1:47:32 PM , Rating: 2
Except there's no correlation between thin and light and batteries being replaceable or not.

I don't know who started that talking point, but it's completely invalid. There's no logical reason why a phone would be bulkier or thicker simply by allowing the user to replace his battery.


RE: Drool.
By atechfan on 5/12/2014 12:07:48 PM , Rating: 2
Why are reclaimer and I getting rated down for wanting to be able to replace our battery?


RE: Drool.
By Reclaimer77 on 5/12/2014 1:42:32 PM , Rating: 2
I kinda consider it being a badge of honor here, so don't let it get to you.

The rating system is basically there for people too stupid to debate you intellectually, since you cannot post AND vote on the same subject.

Or those so cowardly they create alternate accounts so they can vote you down after losing an argument straight up.

Either way, I consider it a victory.


RE: Drool.
By atechfan on 5/12/2014 2:00:29 PM , Rating: 2
Well, you've probably guessed by now I'm not too cowardly to argue.

I'm not particularly worried about the downrating, just curious that such a seemingly non-controversial stance was rated down. I fully expect some of the other things I say to get down rated.


RE: Drool.
By retrospooty on 5/12/2014 2:24:03 PM , Rating: 2
"just curious that such a seemingly non-controversial stance was rated down"

I have often wondered that myself. It must be the same type of bottom feeders that think every phone made should be designed for them. If it doesn't have the features I personally want it must be poorly designed. If it has features I personally don't need, its "just a gimmick" and/or "hype".


"The Space Elevator will be built about 50 years after everyone stops laughing" -- Sir Arthur C. Clarke














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