Too Thin.
Double the thickness, and fill it with battery.
Then you might actually be able to use it for more than an hour or so before you start lloking around nervously for a power socket.
I’ve found life is so much easier if one sticks to three simple rules. Never drive a Volvo car, never buy a Samsung phone, and always grind your own coffee. However, I might have to rethink one of those – and it isn’t the coffee. Samsung Galaxy S6 Samsung's Galaxy S6 flagship handset Samsung can’t do anything without a …
"The market has clearly signalled, at this end of the price range, that many buyers don’t regard the omission of a flash slot as a deal-breaker"
Who paid you to write this nonsense?
Could only be Google really, they probably got Tony Blair to call your editor to insist on the inclusion of this statement or else get people fired...
Without MicroSD card slot, there's especially no reason to buy Samsung.
But Samsung noticed already, hence the S6 PRO is coming with MicroSD card slot and user replaceable battery. Maybe even 4G reception.
So quit applauding this fashion victim of a phone, trying all together too hard to be metallic and thin.
And I've never heard anyone else bitch about Samsung's plastic but media pundits. Users were pretty happy with the high quality, near indestructible polycarbonate Samsung used.
What do you want to do with your MicroSD anyway? Google has neutered that Pup, since the beginning of Kitkat? As to what its good for outside of storing Read-Only *.mp3's? Well I'm stymied? Perhaps you could shed some light on this? I for One do not need a 400€ 200GB MicroSD Card when I can now dump what is it? 50,000 Songs on Google Music. In the event that I need to fly somewhere I'm sure my old 40GB iPod has all the Music I might ever need.
Concur. Battery life is laughable. My Xperia SP manages several days on average with WiFi, Bluetooth on, SIP client running. So moving to this (if I was mad to do it) will be a downgrade.
The iPhonesque insistence on no-flash cards allowed is also quite annoying (to say the least).
Can't imagine spending £600 on a phone. I thought what I spent on the Nexus 5 was a large price increase over the Nexus 4. When I see people at work spending £40-£50 a month on a 24 month contract just to have an iPhone 6, it always strikes me as a bit mad. I'd rather spend up to £300 on a phone off contract and £15 a month on a SIM only deal myself- just makes more sense to me. Over a similar 2 year period the monthly cost would still top out at well under £30, and lets face it phones are getting cheaper with better features away from the flagship end of the market.
>>When I see people at work spending £40-£50 a month on a 24 month contract just to have an iPhone 6, it always strikes me as a bit mad.
Eh. New iPhone costs $650 and is current for 3 years. At the end of 3 years, it can be sold for $200-$250.
So as long as the phone doesn't break, you're paying $150 per year for a device that you will use (probably) pretty frequently every single day for any number of tasks. Or $0.41 per day.
Usually I hate these sorts of "per-day" cost calculations but I consider it valid for a modern smart phone, considering how many functions they serve and how much use I get out of mine. Phone, email, IM, maps, calendar, GPS, podcast/music player, pedometer, camera, blah blah blah. You know the list.
I use my phone more than I use my laptop, and my phone is cheaper. I don't mind too much.
As the unhappy keeper of a new works Galaxy Ace 4 (one of Samsung's bargain basement cheapy all plastic models) I've found that it too has absolutely atrocious reception compared to preceding Samsung models on the same networks in the same places, to the tune of "one to two bars of displayed reception". Previously I've found S2, S3 and S3 mini models all to offer acceptable standards of reception.
This extremely limited and unscientific survey may suggest that the problem is linked to something other than an aluminium chassis, and maybe down to some other SOC, antenna or signal processing problem that has arisen because Samsung have forgotten that they're making phones.
What is the experience of other users with recent Sammy handsets, such as the Galaxy Alpha, Galaxy Core Prime?
I too started rolling my eyes at the mention of bars, but there is convincing evidence that the thing has a problem:
"At various spots near Hampstead Tube station, the Galaxy S6 had dropped back to 3G, while an iPhone 6 (also on EE) registered one to three bars of 4G. This was on EE’s network, and I had two other EE SIMs running at the same time showing three bars – so it wasn’t the network."
"Does it drop calls? "
Referring to the Galaxy Ace 4, yes. And it has no connection where previous handsets did, so that it won't pick up data signals (eg work email) when I know from the wired broadband account that emails have been sent. As this is well away from the frontiers of 4G, that's not the issue either.
Maybe Korean mobile coverage is so good that they don't need to major on sensitivity, but if that's the case then they could perhaps withdraw from the UK market, where weak signals are the norm.
My Galaxy S3 and S5 phones both have fine reception - significantly better than any of the iPhones. These work well in areas where the Apple things can't detect a signal at all. The sample S6s I've seen work just the same as the S5, so perhaps you've got a damaged one!
This is the second Andrew O article where he says that Android 5 is incredibly buggy, without any substantiation. I've been on it almost since launch (Nexus 5) and cant say I've noticed it being any more buggy than its predecessor - isn't it time we had some examples? Play Music in particular seems to have carried over all its pre-existing bugs intact. Random playlists and Voice control not working, so I'd be interested in knowing what is actually new if anything.
This post has been deleted by its author
Not noticed any burn in here. Had my Note 3 for about 6 months now. But do always use power saving mode so the screen is not overbright. If it's up to 100% it does look too bright for the display...
PS, it is the risk of AMOLED screens. Go for a LCD screen phone instead. It's horses for courses as they are less bright and may use more battery power up, but last a little longer. AMOLED is possibly at the 2 year plus lifespan, but not the same extended lifespan of LCD.
People just aren't gonna use it. And this from a wireless evangelist - I loved wireless charging on my Pre 3 and I love wireless charging on my Lumia. In fact people probably won't even know it's there, and if they do there is no way 90% of those people will bother ponying up even a tenner for a charging plate.
No, people will start raving about wireless charging when Apple's marketing juggernaut starts talking about it...much as I hate to admit it.
Nice thing to have though for those who can arsed, props to Samsung
It won't do, as batteries no longer need topping up with distilled water at regular intervals any more. I too had an irrational hatred of non-removable batteries until I got one. They last long enough for the phone to be completely out of date/scratched to pieces, and the world is full of neat portable battery packs if you need to recharge them on the move.
My rationale is that I still use older phones (I'm still using my Sammy S2) and I prefer a larger battery as I live in a poor signal area. In fact, I used the extended battery for the S2 to make it a bit chunkier in my hand. It magically became much nicer to hold when I had a better grip on it and had a little more weight to it.
I really can't stand these super slim, slippery, light as a feather phones. I also have an external battery pack, but it's a real pain to walk around with the battery pack cabled to the phone in my jacket pocket. Cramps the style somewhat :-)
... as I'm due an upgrade of my work mobile later in the year, buck sucky reception, no SD card slot and lack of a removeable battery come together to make a dealbreaker.
Shame really as I think my S4 is really very good (have had iPhones and Blackberries in the past) and I may be the only person in the entire world who quite likes Touchwiz and didn't find the S4 plasticky.
What annoys me more is that there is no longer a flagship android with a removable battery - using this as a work phone (with some games & podcasts added for my commute) I swap batteries more often than you would imagine and having to wander round the office talking on the phone while an external power pack is dangling away off the phone will annoy me.
Yes, yes, I should remember to charge it while I'm at my desk or bring my charger to meeting rooms etc, but I'm sometimes too busy and forget. A quick battery swap is easily the most convienient option, now sadly not available if/when i upgrade and choose a flagship android phone.
Interesting that this review claims the S6 isn't the fastest phone you can buy when all of the other reviews and benchmarks that I've seen show it as noticeably faster than anything else out there. Is there any evidence to support the claim that the HTC One m9 is actually faster?
@AC You are reading the wrong websites then. The most scientific of the technical review websites are Anandtech (these guys are serious silicon boffins and have always given the most detailed breakdown of silicon capabilities of any site out there).
The reality is these measures mean increasingly little to real world use, however Samsung are still beaten by Apple in almost every category. Pretty impressive For Apple, since they have been out for the better part of a year now and showing that when systems need to be tuned for lower power consumption, a greater number of cores is not a synonym for better performance.
@werdsmith, great answer
This post has been deleted by its author