Samsung Quad-core Galaxy S III Reportedly Just 7mm Thick

[Bloob]

I agree with the people saying battery > thickness. Actually too slim a phone is bound to have a weaker camera and be annoying to use on longer calls.

 

[junixophobia]

My wife is complaining already about Galaxy Note dying in just over 5 hours... 3g enabled and skype running in background and some occasional video chat but not that much...

A friend of mine told me he replaced his SII with bigger battery and it lasted for 3 to 4 days... are we going to end up like this in SIII...buying another bigger battery..?

 

[Guest]

will they also provide UPS/inverter with the phone??

 

[darkchazz]

can't wait to see that Super AMOLED Plus HD, none of that pentile crap on the nexus and the note.

 

[house70]

[citation][nom]adventchild[/nom]@house70, whats wrong with the Motorola Razr's screen?[/citation]
Pentile technology just doesn't look that good in a large screen (individual pixels show up). On a side-by-side comparison, the SGS2 has a better looking screen than a razr/razr maxx.
Of course, this is a subjective thing until you look really close. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder...

 

[torque79]

Battery life > thinness.

 

[9_breaker]

the article says android 4.0 and ice cream sandwich .

 

[bboysil]

I really hope it is a ~2Ghz dual core then a slower quad core... most of the mobile applications don't take advantage of the extra cores nowadays.. but a faster core almost always translates to better performance.
On the other hand I am not sure about power consumption in a dual core 2Ghz vs a quad core 1.5 ghz...

 

[torque79]

Anyone know where we can provide feedback to Samsung directly? I looked around their site but cannot find a place to provide feedback on their products. Instead of complaining on the forum of tom's hardware, it would be nice to have a method to voice our opinions to Samsung directly.

 

[fulle]

[citation][nom]torque79[/nom]Anyone know where we can provide feedback to Samsung directly? I looked around their site but cannot find a place to provide feedback on their products. Instead of complaining on the forum of tom's hardware, it would be nice to have a method to voice our opinions to Samsung directly.[/citation]

You're that guy who dials the wrong number, and then asks the person on the other line what the correct number was. Aren't you?

 

[blackened144]

Will someone just release some new worth while phones please? I thought there were supposed to be like 10 new Tegra3 based phones out by now.... My iPhone contract has expired and Im extremely bored with iOS.. Unless they completely revamp iOS for the iPhone5 launch, Im jumping ship.. And these new ICS quad core phones are very tempting..

 

[Yuka]

I rather a million times more the same thickness of my S2 if they pack a bigger battery inside!

Come on Samsung, 6h for a full 3G day is a POS nowadays! Give me 24h or more. I'm sure you can adding more battery to it and 99% of the people won't mind the extra thickness or weight.

Cheers!

 

[back_by_demand]

The real contact details however are here,

http://www.samsung.com/uk/info/contactus.html

1 click away from the homepage

 

[03flat4]

I agree with the consensus, the S2 is thin enough. Even that one(which I own) is borderline too thin and almost dfficult to handle. Battery life ftw. I agree, make it 9mm with great battery life and a great camera, and not 7mm with crap battery life.

 

[jaber2]

Why dosen't a S III tested forget one of those in a San Francisco bar?

 

[gm0n3y]

Thin is great and all, but I'd rather have one the same thickness as the SII and have better battery life.

 

[Vladislaus]

I fail to see the point in the phone being 7mm thick. I think it would have been better that the phone was 10mm and they filled that extra space with a battery.

 

[fractalsphere]

Make it a couple millimeters thicker (EVO and EVO3D are like 12-13 mm) and cram the rest of that thickness with battery - I won't mind! =)

 

[irh_1974]

[citation][nom]Vladislaus[/nom]I fail to see the point in the phone being 7mm thick. I think it would have been better that the phone was 10mm and they filled that extra space with a battery.[/citation]
Samsung have always endevoured to have thinner phones, even in the dumbphone era, I used to own a Samsung U100, 5.9mm thin and it was brilliant. Sure the battery sucked compared to other phones and the camera was rubbish, the media features laughable, but at the time I only needed a phone to do 2 things, call people or text.
Things have moved on a bit and now people expect their phone to make them a cup of coffee in the morning, wash the car and take the dog for a walk, but the race for thinner and lighter has been entered by everyone including Apple, Nokia and Motorola.
Next stop is the phone like the one Tony Stark has in Iron Man 2.

 

[Thunderfox]

7mm thick with 10 minutes of battery life. Honestly, I don't care how thick it is. I just don't want to have to charge it every 12 hours.