Jump to content

Samsung Galaxy S6 Preview Thread (was "Samsung Galaxy S6 Edge pre-order page up.")


twospirits
 Share

Recommended Posts

True, the battery has less capacity, but the screen technology and chipset power consumption has been vastly improved.  I wouldn't be surprised if the GS6 has better battery than the GS5.

As long as the edge has the same or similar battery life as my m8 then I will be very happy.  

 

 

Damn, I still can't believe I am this excited for a samsung device.  I feel like I need to go and take a shower after saying that.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Samsung ends up using their own chips for the US versions, do we know who will make the modem? I'm guessing probably Samsung's in house version but I kind of would like to see an Intel one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Samsung ends up using their own chips for the US versions, do we know who will make the modem? I'm guessing probably Samsung's in house version but I kind of would like to see an Intel one.

 

 

It could be the MDM9635M, or the MDM9645 (which is what the 810 has integrated inside it as far as baseband goes.) 

 

Personally I want Exnyos to be inside the Sprint version as far as SoC goes simply due to the fact that Qualcomm has become increasingly fat and lazy due to their baseband dominance. The problem is that the 810 sucks, it has thermal issues on the G Flex 2 that some have detected, and then when you compare AnTuTu between the Exynos in the S6 and the 810 in the One M9 it's pretty clear who's ahead here. 

 

Anything that further breaks down the Qualcomm Empire is good in my book. Apple already pawned Qualcomm with the A8 now I'm guessing it's Samsung's turn. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It could be the MDM9635M, or the MDM9645 (which is what the 810 has integrated inside it as far as baseband goes.) 

 

Personally I want Exnyos to be inside the Sprint version as far as SoC goes simply due to the fact that Qualcomm has become increasingly fat and lazy due to their baseband dominance. The problem is that the 810 sucks, it has thermal issues on the G Flex 2 that some have detected, and then when you compare AnTuTu between the Exynos in the S6 and the 810 in the One M9 it's pretty clear who's ahead here. 

 

Anything that further breaks down the Qualcomm Empire is good in my book. Apple already pawned Qualcomm with the A8 now I'm guessing it's Samsung's turn. 

You know better than to compare using AnTuTu. I guess I forgot that even if they use their own SoC that they can still have a Qualcomm modem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know better than to compare using AnTuTu. I guess I forgot that even if they use their own SoC that they can still have a Qualcomm modem.

I know benchmarks can be manipulated, but by 20,000 points? I doubt that sort of gap is due to simple manipulation. Besides, all Android vendors are in on the manipulation game at this point.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know benchmarks can be manipulated, but by 20,000 points? I doubt that sort of gap is due to simple manipulation. Besides, all Android vendors are in on the manipulation game at this point.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My problem is not that it could be manipulated, it's that it was never a good benchmark. Unless things have changed, it's basically just an arbitrary number.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My problem is not that it could be manipulated, it's that it was never a good benchmark. Unless things have changed, it's basically just an arbitrary number.

I'd have to look deeper once Anandtech does a structural compare of Exynos 7 series to the 810, but I'm guessing that there's structural advantages with Samsung implementing BIG.little.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd have to look deeper once Anandtech does a structural compare of Exynos 7 series to the 810, but I'm guessing that there's structural advantages with Samsung implementing BIG.little.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, AT should pretty definitely conclude if Samsung made the right choice in ditching Qualcomm (for now). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It could be the MDM9635M, or the MDM9645 (which is what the 810 has integrated inside it as far as baseband goes.) 

 

Personally I want Exnyos to be inside the Sprint version as far as SoC goes simply due to the fact that Qualcomm has become increasingly fat and lazy due to their baseband dominance. The problem is that the 810 sucks, it has thermal issues on the G Flex 2 that some have detected, and then when you compare AnTuTu between the Exynos in the S6 and the 810 in the One M9 it's pretty clear who's ahead here. 

 

Anything that further breaks down the Qualcomm Empire is good in my book. Apple already pawned Qualcomm with the A8 now I'm guessing it's Samsung's turn. 

Not sure what the issues are with the flex 2 but the m9, based on what I know, hasn't been experiencing those issues at all.

 

I just came across this article a few minutes ago:

 

http://www.gsmarena.com/htc_mwc_2015-review-1215p3.php

 

 

I know benchmarks can be manipulated, but by 20,000 points? I doubt that sort of gap is due to simple manipulation. Besides, all Android vendors are in on the manipulation game at this point.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, benchmarks are so 2010.  Look at galaxy s devices versus one devices over the last few years.  On average the s devices in most cases would easily have better benchmark scores compared to the One device of that same year yet when it came to real world use the One devices blew the galaxy s devices out of the water when it came to responsiveness.  So I could care less who has extremely high scores or not, its all about real world use. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ascertion and the lack of waterproofing and the fact that the phone actually has less battery than before and...

 

I'm massively dissapointed as well. Ive been a Samsung smartphone user since my first one, but this looks like it might be the end of the line for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm massively dissapointed as well. Ive been a Samsung smartphone user since my first one, but this looks like it might be the end of the line for me.

I'm disappointed that they are still making carrier specific models, especially with the new unlocking policies. Why would anyone buy a six hundred dollar phone that can only be used on a certain carrier's LTE network. All manufacturers should be following the iPhone 6 and Nexus 6 and support all domestic LTE bands.
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm disappointed that they are still making carrier specific models, especially with the new unlocking policies. Why would anyone buy a six hundred dollar phone that can only be used on a certain carrier's LTE network. All manufacturers should be following the iPhone 6 and Nexus 6 and support all domestic LTE bands.

Well, the at least the good thing about the Sprint variant is that it is essentially fully compatible with AT&T and T-Mobile's networks (except a couple of minor things: the lack of UMTS1700 which I would no longer consider a concern and VoLTE which hopefully Sprint will some day enable in the S6 via a firmware update).

Edited by GoWireless
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the at least the good thing about the Sprint variant is that it is essentially fully compatible with AT&T and T-Mobile's networks (except a couple of minor things: the lack of UMTS1700 which I would no longer consider a concern and VoLTE which hopefully Sprint will some day enable in the S6 via a firmware update).

No band 17 on the Sprint variant. Not compatible with AT&T.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm disappointed that they are still making carrier specific models, especially with the new unlocking policies. Why would anyone buy a six hundred dollar phone that can only be used on a certain carrier's LTE network. All manufacturers should be following the iPhone 6 and Nexus 6 and support all domestic LTE bands.

 

No, that last statement is not true.

 

The iPhone 6, for example, is not compatible with Lower 700 MHz band 12 nor WCS 2300 MHz band 30 -- both of which are included in the just recently disclosed AT&T variant Samsung Galaxy S6.  And the Nexus 6 supports band 12 but not band 30.  Additionally, both the iPhone 6 and the Nexus 6 lack BRS/EBS 2600 MHz band 41 carrier aggregation -- though they support carrier aggregation for other bands.

 

In the end, there are simply too many bands and too many carrier aggregation combinations in use -- and continually expanding -- for a single SKU to rule them all.  Maybe that will happen someday, just do not expect it for several years.  So, an unlocked handset may possess base capabilities for use on any domestic network, but it probably will not be truly a jack of all trades.  It will be missing certain bands or carrier aggregation capabilities that are needed for an optimal network experience.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, that last statement is not true.

 

The iPhone 6, for example, is not compatible with Lower 700 MHz band 12 nor WCS 2300 MHz band 30 -- both of which are included in the just recently disclosed AT&T variant Samsung Galaxy S6. And the Nexus 6 supports band 12 but not band 30. Additionally, both the iPhone 6 and the Nexus 6 lack BRS/EBS 2600 MHz band 41 carrier aggregation -- though they support carrier aggregation for other bands.

 

In the end, there are simply too many bands and too many carrier aggregation combinations in use -- and continually expanding -- for a single SKU to rule them all. Maybe that will happen someday, just do not expect it for several years. So, an unlocked handset may possess base capabilities for use on any domestic network, but it probably will not be truly a jack of all trades. It will be missing certain bands or carrier aggregation capabilities that are needed for an optimal network experience.

 

AJ

The iPhone 6 and Nexus 6 do leave out what you mentioned but they do however, support the current core technologies of all domestic carriers which allows you to take your phone to any domestic carrier and have a pleasant experience.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The iPhone 6 and Nexus 6 do leave out what you mentioned but they do however, support the current core technologies of all domestic carriers which allows you to take your phone to any domestic carrier and have a pleasant experience.

 

And that experience evolves and morphs every quarter.  The crux of his point.  Right now AT&T customers have a good experience without B29 and B30, but that will not be true in another quarter or two.  And new AT&T devices support them.  Also, there will come a time that B41 CA will be quite necessary on the Sprint network.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, an unlocked handset may possess base capabilities for use on any domestic network, but it probably will not be truly a jack of all trades.  It will be missing certain bands or carrier aggregation capabilities that are needed for an optimal network experience.

 

AJ

 

I wonder how marketing and PR teams from each carrier are going to handle customers who want to take thier unlocked phones from carrier to carrier.

I can see that being a big mess leaving the customer confused and angry - most definately placing the blame on their current carrier rather than on thier phone.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The iPhone 6 and Nexus 6 do leave out what you mentioned but they do however, support the current core technologies of all domestic carriers which allows you to take your phone to any domestic carrier and have a pleasant experience.

 

A "pleasant experience" is an ambiguous term.  It has variable meanings to different people at different times, present and future.

 

Also, the unlocked handset street tends to be one way -- away from Sprint.  A Sprint handset may provide a "pleasant experience" for some on other operators.  But another operator's handset generally provides a zero experience or notably compromised experience on Sprint.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • T-Mobile has been building out new rural sites for the last 6-8 months. It may not be as noticeable elsewhere, but we have had 40+ new sites come online in Nebraska. There have been new builds in Iowa, Kansas, and Missouri as well. If you change the site data to display hex values on Cellmapper, look for sites that begin with 05D, or 062 - 063. Those are new sites in the last 6 months.
    • New Vertical Bridge site built for Tmobile near Red River Gorge area.  Maybe T-Mobile is starting to build out new sites and colos in rural areas now...   https://imgur.com/a/Tv3Ge0w
    • I would say it is as "safe" as any typical beta release at this point. There are some things I am still ironing out, but nothing that severely hinders normal usage of the app.
    • Mike, are you still recommending that this beta only be used on on dual psim/esim devices or should it now be basically safe for all devices (with usual beta risks)?
    • A new SignalCheck Pro beta is rolling out right now with LOTS of bug fixes.. and some new features. The full changelog is in the app or on the website. In addition to many bugfixes, there are some notable new options: Colorize location display to indicate low accuracy (yellow when Trail Logger is enabled) or outdated timestamp (red). This is enabled by default. Enable/disable display of location coordinates with location accuracy and the location timestamp.. so now each value can be individually enabled/disabled. Configure the maximum age of location data before Location Service is restarted; the default remains at 10 minutes but can now be configured as desired. Limit max number of neighbor cells to display (including 0, if you only want to see the summary line). Some users are seeing LTE or NR data persist after a connection is lost. I made some minor changes, but I wanted to get this release rolled out before continuing to dig deeper into that issue since I made so many other changes that may or may not impact this bug. One thing that users can try is to disable the option under Preferences > Display Settings > Show Hidden Data -- that may resolve the issue. Looking forward to feedback! Thanks..
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...