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

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.


"So, I think the same thing of the music industry. They can't say that they're losing money, you know what I'm saying. They just probably don't have the same surplus that they had." -- Wu-Tang Clan founder RZA














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