Jump to content

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


twospirits

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.


  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • The March Play System Update that PythonFan referred to in the S24 thread is also out for S22
    • Has anyone checked Verizon n77 in areas with more than 100MHZ active? This spectrum has been fully available since August of last year.  Of course they are not typically using SA.
    • I updated my other s21 ultra factory unlocked to the latest firmware... It behaves like the S24 Ultra n38 or n41 depending on 80 or 100MHz or their nr- arfcn.
    • I see everything correct. The two ARFCN's you mentioned earlier and they idenitify as n-41.  using 4.832b SCP. Only using one TM SIM.
    • I posted this in the Nebraska Premier thread last week, but just wanted to share in this thread the progress that T-Mobile has made in filling in the great coverage gap known as Nebraska. Between late last year and this year, they have added 28 new expansion sites filling in the coverage hole, plus 11 Sprint site conversions in eastern Nebraska and far western Iowa. Notably, in the last month n41 coverage was added on over a dozen expansion sites in western Nebraska that were added to the network last year. For comparison, here is the very first map that I created in October of 2022 after we noted expansion sites outside of Sprint conversion in Lincoln and Omaha. It doesn't show any western parts of the state, but just know there was nothing besides roaming coverage and a little B12 coverage leaking down from South Dakota to the west of Valentine, NE.
  • Recently Browsing

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