I'm on an S4 right now, and it may be my last Samsung product - the bait and switch of the 64GB S4 has soured me on Samsung.
When the S4 was released, Samsung took heat for the memory capacity: The S4 was more expensive than the iPhone 5, but the 5 had 64GB while the S4 had 16GB. Samsung was likely peeved, since the S4 beats the iPhone on pretty much everything else, but critics blasted them for the memory - which was a fair criticism, see below.
Samsung relented and indicated 32GB and 64GB variants would be available, created spec sheets, even put some into the hands of reviewers.
But try buying one. Samsung and its carriers are convinced that 16GB, max 32GB, is all most people will need, which, for the carriers, is self-serving, because the less room you have on your phone, the more data you use - and carriers ding for data.
Apple understands storage requirements, primarily because of iTunes: Your music, etc., are local, and synced. Consumers with music collections are largely on iPhone; Samsung and Google want to differentiate themselves, somehow, but don't have a full clue. Google wants you to stream everything, so they believe you can live with less space.
Yeah, maybe in downtown NYC, but try streaming in rural or even semi-rural Ontario sometime.
So Samsung is playing bait and switch. Part of me is pissed beyond all reasonable belief. My choice came down to the Nexus 5 (32GB, no bloatware, no external SD card) and the S4 (64GB, bloatware up the wazoo like you wouldn't believe, external SD card, but WTF it has 64GB!!!).
I chose based on storage - knowing it would take me hours to disable all the bloatware. But knowing I wouldn't have to muck with external SD cards anymore.
My admin orders the phone, a 16GB arrives, I say "whoa, what's up", she does some research, I am gobsmacked, I do some research, validating hers and leading to the above rant.
Lying bastiches.
My next phone will be a decent Android phone with 64GB of internal storage - 64GB available to me, not 8GB sucked up by the OS thank you Samsung - and no bloatware. Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?
(Too bad I cannot stand the iPhone - used one for two months while waiting for my S4, and couldn't abide the kindergarten level of one-click-at-a-time-a-tude.)
I'm happy to see that Samsung has stuck with the design philosophy of its previous Galaxy S-series flagships.
In a world where other manufacturers of high-end mobile devices have adopted a unibody, no-replaceable battery, no-storage expansion approach, it's nice that Samsung sees the value of a device that works for users who like expansion possibilities and who don't really care about the added expense of shiny metal. They're serving a huge market that other mobile device designers are increasingly ignoring.
Last week, in fact. I replaced my Sony Xperia V's battery. The phone feels like new again. Smartphone batteries wear out.
On a side note, I had the Samsung S3 before the Sony. Died from moisture problems. From then on I vowed to stay with waterproof phones only. Samsung evidently clued up with the S5.
I think the better question to ask would be what percentage of people do that. I am really really interested in that question. I have never had spare battery in 17 year I've been using mobile phones.
Samsung, unfortunately, seems to formulaically try to stuff new hardware and gimmicky features into an otherwise thoughtless, without taking much time to design it to run well and look good. Their skinned version of Android is hideous, and I can't imagine their build quality has improved much.
Sorry, I'm just grumpy and unimpressed and needed to rant.
When the S4 was released, Samsung took heat for the memory capacity: The S4 was more expensive than the iPhone 5, but the 5 had 64GB while the S4 had 16GB. Samsung was likely peeved, since the S4 beats the iPhone on pretty much everything else, but critics blasted them for the memory - which was a fair criticism, see below.
Samsung relented and indicated 32GB and 64GB variants would be available, created spec sheets, even put some into the hands of reviewers.
But try buying one. Samsung and its carriers are convinced that 16GB, max 32GB, is all most people will need, which, for the carriers, is self-serving, because the less room you have on your phone, the more data you use - and carriers ding for data.
Apple understands storage requirements, primarily because of iTunes: Your music, etc., are local, and synced. Consumers with music collections are largely on iPhone; Samsung and Google want to differentiate themselves, somehow, but don't have a full clue. Google wants you to stream everything, so they believe you can live with less space.
Yeah, maybe in downtown NYC, but try streaming in rural or even semi-rural Ontario sometime.
So Samsung is playing bait and switch. Part of me is pissed beyond all reasonable belief. My choice came down to the Nexus 5 (32GB, no bloatware, no external SD card) and the S4 (64GB, bloatware up the wazoo like you wouldn't believe, external SD card, but WTF it has 64GB!!!).
I chose based on storage - knowing it would take me hours to disable all the bloatware. But knowing I wouldn't have to muck with external SD cards anymore.
My admin orders the phone, a 16GB arrives, I say "whoa, what's up", she does some research, I am gobsmacked, I do some research, validating hers and leading to the above rant.
Lying bastiches.
My next phone will be a decent Android phone with 64GB of internal storage - 64GB available to me, not 8GB sucked up by the OS thank you Samsung - and no bloatware. Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?
(Too bad I cannot stand the iPhone - used one for two months while waiting for my S4, and couldn't abide the kindergarten level of one-click-at-a-time-a-tude.)