Excited for Galaxy Note 3 announcement tomorrow...

[Red Storm]

It's a compromise when you HAVE to use a different gallery. Again, you may be fine with that, but not everyone will be.

If it were PERMANENT then maybe, but it's not, it's a bug.

1. LG didn't do it for the G2.

2. It was Brian and he didn't actually test it. He just suggested the phone should go into to max mode anyway so the effect of the benchmark boost should be minor:


However, Ars actually tested it, and proved Brian's assumption to be incorrect.

Anand responded to people in the comments, which is where I got that bit of info from:

We've been struggling with how to deal with this one for a little while now. Unfortunately this optimization is far more widespread among Android OEMs and not limited to Samsung or the Galaxy Note 3. We hinted at it in our original international SGS4 investigation and tried to get other OEMs to stop back then as well but with little success.

 

[Eug]

Ok, but I'm pointing out not all the OEMs do it. LG specifically didn't for their latest and greatest. Maybe Samsung felt the need to compete against them, which is stupid since the geeks who would care already know it runs the same CPU.

Or perhaps they wanted to reduce the performance delta vs. the iPhone.

 

[thedosbox]

If it were PERMANENT then maybe, but it's not, it's a bug.

/facepalm - the poor performance of the app is a bug. Having to use an alternative app is the compromise.

 

[dawheat]

/facepalm - the poor performance of the app is a bug. Having to use an alternative app is the compromise.

One thing I think we can all agree on is that it's not a benchmark...

 

[Dari]

Same. As far as I'm concerned the Note 3 isn't just Samsung's flagship, it is the Android flagship. No other phone has it all.

Not really...

 

[Ns1]

Not really...

So what is the Android flagship then?

 

[Puddle Jumper]

Not really...

For power users the Note 3 is not only the Android flagship it's also in a league of it's own. Not only does it have the fastest processor and most ram you can get in a smartphone it also has arguably the best screen and the only viable stylus implementation. Plus on the software side it has real multitasking and the ability to run multiple instances of the same app which is incredibly useful for business.

 

[shortylickens]

brians review was good. Made me wanna turn in my Note 2.

 

[thedosbox]

One thing I think we can all agree on is that it's not a benchmark...

Does the gallery crash when loading one image? It doesn't? PASS!

OMG, best phone EVAR! Take my money!

 

[Red Storm]

For power users the Note 3 is not only the Android flagship it's also in a league of it's own. Not only does it have the fastest processor and most ram you can get in a smartphone it also has arguably the best screen and the only viable stylus implementation. Plus on the software side it has real multitasking and the ability to run multiple instances of the same app which is incredibly useful for business.

Completely agree. It's not enough to just make a big phone, for some reason only Samsung seems to understand this.

 

[Zaap]

Irrational fear of the Note 3 is building, leading to desperate 'arguments' mounted hastily against it.

Yep.

i sense a new KING of all smartphones in the making...

 

[Eug]

If I were to crown an Android flagship, it'd be the S4 (unfortunately, since I don't like TouchWiz).

I predict Note 3 sales will be good, but I also predict the S4 sales will far outpace Note 3 sales.

 

[Dari]

So what is the Android flagship then?

For power users the Note 3 is not only the Android flagship it's also in a league of it's own. Not only does it have the fastest processor and most ram you can get in a smartphone it also has arguably the best screen and the only viable stylus implementation. Plus on the software side it has real multitasking and the ability to run multiple instances of the same app which is incredibly useful for business.

Completely agree. It's not enough to just make a big phone, for some reason only Samsung seems to understand this.

Earlier there was discussion about Samsung cheating on benchmarks and RS claimed he didn't buy phones based on benchmarks. Then comes the litany of arguments in favor of a spec-king, of which he "completely agree." Twist and turn until the argument fits the narrative. And I laugh at "power users" on a phone. Not sure what you guys are doing besides watching videos, playing silly games, browsing the web and, uh, benchmarks for the phone to warrant 3GB.

Things don't get any better on the software side. The "multitasking" gimmick is just that. I have it on my phone where multiple apps can run, but only those selected by the OEM (namely, calculator, note-taking and some other low resource apps)

Anyway, to answer NS1's question, it really depends what you want in a phone. If you want massive screens, you have SONY, Samsung, and others in the far east. If you want the best camera, you have SONY. If you want the best music, you have HTC(arguably). I work in the financial district and I see a lot of Galaxy Notes. But people like it mainly for the screen size, nothing else. No one is taking notes with it. They have an iPad for that.

 

[WelshBloke]

Earlier there was discussion about Samsung cheating on benchmarks and RS claimed he didn't buy phones based on benchmarks. Then comes the litany of arguments in favor of a spec-king, of which he "completely agree." Twist and turn until the argument fits the narrative. And I laugh at "power users" on a phone. Not sure what you guys are doing besides watching videos, playing silly games, browsing the web and, uh, benchmarks for the phone to warrant 3GB.

Wanting the best hardware is not mutually exclusive with saying that benchmarks are pointless.

Things don't get any better on the software side. The "multitasking" gimmick is just that. I have it on my phone where multiple apps can run, but only those selected by the OEM (namely, calculator, note-taking and some other low resource apps)

Which phone are you using? Even on the S3 there's a much greater variety of apps that will run in multi window than that.

Anyway, to answer NS1's question, it really depends what you want in a phone. If you want massive screens, you have SONY, Samsung, and others in the far east. If you want the best camera, you have SONY. If you want the best music, you have HTC(arguably). I work in the financial district and I see a lot of Galaxy Notes. But people like it mainly for the screen size, nothing else. No one is taking notes with it. They have an iPad for that.

Sony in no way has the best camera. They might make some of the best camera sensors but that's not the same thing because A) they sell those sensors to everyone. B) they somehow manage to make them shitty when they put them in their own phones.

 

[Red Storm]

Earlier there was discussion about Samsung cheating on benchmarks and RS claimed he didn't buy phones based on benchmarks. Then comes the litany of arguments in favor of a spec-king, of which he "completely agree." Twist and turn until the argument fits the narrative. And I laugh at "power users" on a phone. Not sure what you guys are doing besides watching videos, playing silly games, browsing the web and, uh, benchmarks for the phone to warrant 3GB.

Things don't get any better on the software side. The "multitasking" gimmick is just that. I have it on my phone where multiple apps can run, but only those selected by the OEM (namely, calculator, note-taking and some other low resource apps)

Anyway, to answer NS1's question, it really depends what you want in a phone. If you want massive screens, you have SONY, Samsung, and others in the far east. If you want the best camera, you have SONY. If you want the best music, you have HTC(arguably). I work in the financial district and I see a lot of Galaxy Notes. But people like it mainly for the screen size, nothing else. No one is taking notes with it. They have an iPad for that.

No I don't buy based on benchmarks. The Note is the only flagship phone to give me a stylus, replaceable battery, mSD slot, 1080P screen, great battery life, etc. There is no other phone that offers a package as complete as the Note 3. Why exactly should I spend the same amount of money on other phones that have less RAM, less onboard storage, no mSD slot, no replaceable battery, less battery life, no stylus, etc.?

And LOL @ taking notes on an iPad, or any other non-wacom (and similar) enabled device for that matter.

Take your irrational Samsung hate elsewhere.

 

[WelshBloke]

If I were to crown an Android flagship, it'd be the S4 (unfortunately, since I don't like TouchWiz).

I predict Note 3 sales will be good, but I also predict the S4 sales will far outpace Note 3 sales.

I don't think sales should designate which is the flagship. It certainly doesn't in most other areas (**warning** crappy car analogy coming ***warning***).

 

[dawheat]

http://www.displaymate.com/Galaxy_S4_ShootOut_1.htm

I'll wait till I've gotten my phone but the screen did seem pretty impressive in store. In movie mode things looked pretty natural. It also was clearly brighter than the Note 2, though I didn't get to experience this outdoor overdrive.

 

[Red Storm]

If I were to crown an Android flagship, it'd be the S4 (unfortunately, since I don't like TouchWiz).

I predict Note 3 sales will be good, but I also predict the S4 sales will far outpace Note 3 sales.

I've never heard of anyone using sales numbers to determine what makes a flagship.

 

[thedosbox]

So what is the Android flagship then?

A PC running the Android emulator. Lots of cores, lots of memory, plenty of giggyhertz, lots of pixels on a massive screen.

 

[Puddle Jumper]

Earlier there was discussion about Samsung cheating on benchmarks and RS claimed he didn't buy phones based on benchmarks. Then comes the litany of arguments in favor of a spec-king, of which he "completely agree." Twist and turn until the argument fits the narrative. And I laugh at "power users" on a phone. Not sure what you guys are doing besides watching videos, playing silly games, browsing the web and, uh, benchmarks for the phone to warrant 3GB.

Things don't get any better on the software side. The "multitasking" gimmick is just that. I have it on my phone where multiple apps can run, but only those selected by the OEM (namely, calculator, note-taking and some other low resource apps)

Anyway, to answer NS1's question, it really depends what you want in a phone. If you want massive screens, you have SONY, Samsung, and others in the far east. If you want the best camera, you have SONY. If you want the best music, you have HTC(arguably). I work in the financial district and I see a lot of Galaxy Notes. But people like it mainly for the screen size, nothing else. No one is taking notes with it. They have an iPad for that.

Lol @ Sony phones having the best camera, I suppose that's why the exact same sensors perform better in Samsung phones than they do in Sonys own products.

 

[Eug]

I've never heard of anyone using sales numbers to determine what makes a flagship.

Not just sales numbers. Also the fact that the S4 is the definitive mainstream phone for Samsung. The Note 3 is aimed at a somewhat different population.

 

[Red Storm]

Not just sales numbers. Also the fact that the S4 is the definitive mainstream phone for Samsung. The Note 3 is aimed at a somewhat different population.

Mainstream != flagship. Ultra high end video cards are targeted at a much smaller market, but they are without a doubt the flagship product in the line. The Note 3 has everything the S4 does but with even better specs, hence it is the flagship.

 

[Puddle Jumper]

Mainstream != flagship. Ultra high end video cards are targeted at a much smaller market, but they are without a doubt the flagship product in the line. The Note 3 has everything the S4 does but with even better specs, hence it is the flagship.

Exactly, the Note 3 is the GeForce Titan of phones.

 

[Eug]

OK, whatever. That's fine.

It's just semantics anyway. Both are very powerful phones and both are defining phones for Android.

And I betcha Google both at the same time loves the sales numbers and hates that such a different version of Android is number one.

 

[WelshBloke]

OK, whatever. That's fine.

It's just semantics anyway. Both are very powerful phones and both are defining phones for Android.

And I betcha Google both at the same time loves the sales numbers and hates that such a different version of Android is number one.

As long as it runs Google services I doubt that they care.

If they are happy to provide apps for iOS then I wouldn't think a slightly different skin of android would bother them.