I love the idea of a proper foldable screen, but sadly, I’m not surprised.
I remember thinking they’d have issues with material fatigue, what with the screen being on the small side of the bend radius. Then their demo showed a visible line of different brightness along the fold and figured it’d be a low-volume launch.
(Hope they figure it out eventually, though. Far be it from me to chastise someone for taking the stuff of R&D labs and selling it in an actual product.)
I would like to see this is a low end disposable phone. Bear with me on this, but there are many cameras on this phone, it could have just average cameras front and back, good enough for sending WhatsApp messages etc, not winning photography awards. Then the screens. If there was a low-res screen that folded with no extra outer screen then that would be a lot cheaper.
Then if the hinge is little more than two screens held together by a screen protector then you could replace the screen protector bit every year or so depending on use.
One side could be that large battery a lot of people still want and the other side could be the normal phone gubbins with SD card slot, plastic cover and a lame but capable processor.
For people who just want a big screen and don't care for having it 4K it would be great. It could even be at a $250 price point and be affordable in countries that don't have reliable electricity.
In posh countries it could be 'disposed' after three years and be engineered for that type of lifespan, in more resourceful places it could work with the hinge screen protector missing or if one side does not work.
> the hinge is little more than two screens held together by a screen protector
Yes, but that would be rubbish. Big black bar across the video you're trying to watch. What Samsung actually built was the genuinely folding screen with pixels all the way across, which would be amazing if it works and didn't cost $2,000.
> even be at a $250 price point and be affordable in countries that don't have reliable electricity.
That seems rather high compared to the $50 tablet market.
I would say it's amazing if it works even if it costs $2,000. I mean, it's too much for my blood, but if you have the money and you want a tablet that can also fit in your pocket...
- 2 failed due to a removal of a "polymer coating" that essentially looks like a screen protector. This is not supposed to be removed, but several reviewers did (or tried)
- 1 failed due to supposed ingress into the hinge mechanism. I'm sure failure analysis is currently going on at Samsung
> failed due to a removal of a "polymer coating" that essentially looks like a screen protector. This is not supposed to be removed, but several reviewers did (or tried)
I bought a LG TV a year and a half ago, and last week saw some spots on it that looked like a film coating which had air bubbles in it. At the edge of the screen there is a gap where you can fit a nail, and it does feel as if something can be removed.
I tried for a few minutes to peel it (carefully, wondering how I'd possibly missed that for a year and a half). Then I gave up and got a wet cloth, and it turned out it was just a mark on the screen.
It reminds me of shops and bars that have TVs, but leave all the marketing stickers on that are just for when it's displayed in a showroom. Manufacturers should do a better job of marking what should (and shouldn't) be removed.
I always wondered if the plastic removal instructions on Canon ink cartridges were excessive or genius.
There are literally 3 or 4 plastic parts that need removing. They are numbered and bright orange (the rest of the cartridge is black).
Even if the Fold has some problems, I commend them for being bold with their design and ambitions. It may be safer to wait for the next generation of that phone, but many recent developments in the hardware space have been lacking in ambition. Kudos to Samsung
The absolutely most important aspect of this $2000 device is failing within days. The only way this could be worse is if they started exploding, too.
I'm exciting for neat ambitious devices also, but they have to be more than paper weights. If these are all failing so soon, either there was no QA whatsoever, or some QA manager within Samsung was ignored...
> The only way this could be worse is if they started exploding, too.
Give it a few months.
This is like a 1980s plastic lunch box. The moulded hinge always snapped in half after about 3 months regardless of what you did. Cue optimus prime letting your lunch out all over the floor.
I think they are failing because it was a fucking stupid idea.
Edit: If anything I want NO mechanical components on any handheld device I own because in the last 40 years of my life everything has broken mechanically eventually. Home buttons, volume controls, connectors, battery holders everything.
It's a valid point, if a bit grumpy: The big deal about smartphones is that in various different ways, they were able to replace the mechanical with the electrical, and replace physical design with software-based design. (Don't like where that button is? Tweak the code. Type of thing.) Adding a hinge is in some ways a step backward. I also agree with your grandparent comment though, that it's a bold idea and a neat gimmick. (EDIT: ...if it worked!)
Folding screens can certainly enabled more software based design. Its obviously a really exciting new form factor considering how prominent folding screens have been in sci fi. We all really want to have Westworld level tech. Even though we are still a ways away, its awesome to know that its becoming possible.
> "Edit: If anything I want NO mechanical components on any handheld device I own because in the last 40 years of my life everything has broken mechanically eventually."
your anecdote seems to suffer from cognitive bias. screens are non-mechanical (except in this galaxy fold) and yet they're still the most broken component in a phone.
We can pick conceptual holes in an argument until the universe implodes but lets consider that in normal use you won't break your phone screen. Until Samsung came out with this, which is the problem.
A rock was kicked up on the interstate the other day and hit my windshield. It now has a delightful spider web pattern, but everything else about the car still operates perfectly.
Breaking the glass (a superficial and expected eventuality) is very different than the screen no longer functioning or responding to input (a mechanical failure).
> Edit: If anything I want NO mechanical components on any handheld device I own because in the last 40 years of my life everything has broken mechanically eventually. Home buttons, volume controls, connectors, battery holders everything.
Yes, but how have the electronic components fared over that time? I've definitely had devices where the mechanical components failed, but never a reasonable-quality device where the mechanical components failed first. For example, compare the times you've tried to input something on a dodgy public touchscreen versus the times you've tried to input something on a public physical keypad—I'll bet there're way more failures on the first than on the second; certainly that's been my experience.
> For example, compare the times you've tried to input something on a dodgy public touchscreen versus the times you've tried to input something on a public physical keypad—I'll bet there're way more failures on the first than on the second; certainly that's been my experience.
Well, anything with glass is prone to vandalism. A metal keyboard is hard to vandalize, a touchscreen needs only a piece of random rock or other debris to shatter.
Not even clear he's talking about vandalized glass. Sounds like maybe he's referring to those squishy resistive-touch displays found in ATMs and POS terminals and other kiosk-type applications, and early consumer devices. Did those ever work well, even when new?
I can’t count the number of times I’ve used some big impressive digital map kind of thing at a mall or airport only to find it completely frozen (software), insanely laggy (potentially both, but likely software if a RPi could run it), and/or infuriating to use because I have to touch very hard exactly on the center of the icon, taking into account what I think the angle of the display is so that I’m hitting it exactly where the screen thinks it is, not where I see it through a layer of glass as being (most definitely software).
All of those complaints have applied to one degree or another to stupid tableside ordering apps that are running on an iPad or my own phone too, so I don’t think the hardware was ever to blame.
Yeah, this seems like a design mistake. People stick their phones in their pockets and bags. Over time a lot of dirt and dust is going to get under that top film. If peeling/removing that film causes the screen to die, I assume garbage gettng under it won’t be good either.
This has been done by other Android manufacturers before Samsung as well but I think it boils down to launch schedules. Apple doesn't launch new iPhones until September so, even if innovative functions are planned, they always appear to be added later than the rest of -or in response to- competitors.
That, and other manufacturers are individually and collectively throwing more features at the wall than Apple ever would.
Whether they’re well thought out and will be supported on the next generation appears to be beside the point: they attract attention and serve as a differentiator.
Apple has neither the desire nor the luxury of throwing half-baked ideas into their phones.
Apple’s innovation is and always has been on the manufacturing side. The fact that they can make such well designed devices AND manufacture millions of them that meet such precise tolerances and high quality is what really sets them apart. Apple has been doing this for over a decade, while other manufacturers have only (possibly) caught up recently, if at all.
I’m sure someone will chime in about the butterfly keyboard or something else, but the number of those issues is small compared to all the devices they create.
maybe there is not need for such ambition. Seems like cell phone companies are developing for the sake of development because they're dependent on the release cycle to make money.
There is no "innovation" whatsoever if the technology doesn't work. Apple and other makers have been playing with the technology and understood the risks of putting this device out there. Samsung ignored these risks for the sake of press, and now the customer pays the price.
To be fair: anyone buying a smartphone with literally never-seen-before technology for $2000 knows what they're up to.
Same with buying a Tesla back when they started. You invest in these kind of things only with the f..k-you money and for fun purposes, not with the money you need to survive or as the car you need to get to work.
That's because Apple would have spent the last 2 years saying that no one would ever need that feature, then pretend to invent it saying it was the most amazing thing ever, then remove some functionality that everyone loved to make room for it while still staying thinner than anyone cared...
When it quit working after 2 days they'd tell you you shouldn't have held it that way.
This is Apple’s bread and butter: they let competitors go to market too early, and then they come in when the tech is stable enough for a polished experience
I don't think that's true. If Apple released some samples to reviewers, and they had problems, two things would have happened:
- Apple would have NDA'd the problems out.
- People would excuse the pre-production state of these devices.
Mostly we don't care because it's not something people are seriously considering buying. It's a flashy thing that's crazy overpriced. It's like reading about Bugatti reliability problems. Boo hoo.
Flip phones are "innovative" now? They've been around for ages. The one aspect of Samsung's design that's supposedly innovative is making a single display that extends across the hinge - that's also the part of their design that doesn't actually work.
I am sure all of those people with broken phones are appreciative of how "bold" Samsung has been in releasing this phone early.
Personally I prefer the Apple approach with new products e.g. iPhone, iPad, Watch which is to have largely perfected the hardware before shipping but release it with MVP software which they aggressively improve.
You mean like that time the iPhone lost a significant amount of signal when you held it to make a call? Or how the vast majority of Apple computers struggled with heat related issues until the past 5ish years?
The whole AntennaGate was overblown. Apple continued selling the same unmodified GSM iPhone for four years with little controversy after the first four to six months.
How is it "being bold" to release a product that costs $2000 and that has a high failure rate? Yes I realize the same can be said about the MacBook keyboards and I wouldn't disagree.
Same way as how removing feature is being bold and coragous. Phone makers are just playing a game of how utterly stupid they can be and still market it as something amazing.
Of course. The problem with Samsung is that they don't seem to care about proper execution, they care about being able to print fantastic features on the abck of the box, regardless of how well they actually work.
This comment reads like an application for a Samsung PR position.
The review period has lasted nearly four days and despite the boldness in design and ambition, the folding phone situation has developed not necessarily to Samsung's advantage.
Let's be honest, this isn't "some problems", this is easily one of the two worst smartphone launches of all time, the other one being a phone that fucking exploded.
I also commend them, but if these problems are widespread, Samsung is going to have issues selling this product, regardless of how "commendable" it may be.
There is also a risk that they will endanger the future of the entire "foldables" market by releasing a product which should still be in the prototype stage.
Just wondering about the actual statistics here...
Is this a higher failure rate than average phones? Or is there a extremely large focus on all of these devices because of what they are, and therefor problems are more "visible" (there's probably an English word for the phenomenon)
The phone is supposed to release 26th.. "Just review" models can't be much different from the final devices. Also, why would Samsung risk giving high profile reviewers inferior "just review" models? I would give them the best QAd devices i'd got.
Sounds like a lot of people are wishful thinking this isn't going to be a release disaster. My bet is Samsung will pull the plug and not release it at all (this year).
The issue here is that being review units, Samsung has supposedly pre-tested them and discarded “bad from the start units”. If 4 of them have failed in 2 days, their MTTF is pretty low.
Can't understand the appeal of a foldable screen - it looks like shit (big crease down the middle and thick when folded) and for that I get a marginal improvement on idle surface area consumption.
Would love to be proven wrong but I think it's going to be a monumental flop in regards to sales.
My guess is it helps people who don't like large phones (in terms of surface area) in their clothes pockets. Sure it'll be thicker, and maybe some people have an issue with that, but it would potentially fit better in some situations while still unfolding to a larger screen size for regular use.
If the size in the pocket is the problem, surely the extra thickness makes it more cumbersome? It would be like carrying one of those Anker battery packs around all day (the non-travel/portable ones) would it not?
I guess compare forcing an iPad Mini or Nexus 7 in your pocket versus an original iPhone, which was much thicker than what we've had the past few iterations.
For comfort in pockets, volume might be a better measure. The Samsung Fold is a bit less than twice the volume of an iPhone XS Max, which itself falls pretty solidly in phablet territory from the perspective of people who don't like large phones.
My guess is that it's for people who want "phablet" to be a realistic description of their phone instead of a hyperbolic one.
At current rates of phone growth, I will someday dislocate my hip by sitting down too quickly with my phone in my front pocket. I don't know how people who buy the oversized phones don't hurt themselves.
The numbers aren't public yet, but it's probably low. I don't think they are dumb enough to expect this device to sell anywhere near the Galaxy S10 or an iPhone.
It may not be a huge sales success, but apparently it's above Samsung expectations.
My guess is the main goal is to recoup R&D prior to a proper consumer launch. And you know what, I'm fine with that. Personally, I'm holding out for gen 2-3 of this form factor when the price comes down to Earth. But smart of them to get it into people's hands where they can get real testing as to what works and what doesn't for consumers.
That might be some, I think for many it's just being able to buy "a piece of the future today".
Whether or not it ends up truly being practical, it's a phone that looks and does things that are radically different from most mainstream phones.
People will think their fancy future folding phone is cool, and other people will probably see it and think it's interesting and want to talk about it or see it work.
Kind of like paying $600 plus a 2-year contract for an iPhone in 2007 with a slow processor, no 3G, no MMS, no copy-and-paste, etc.
Having been a very happy owner of a 2013 Nexus 7 until I lost it about a week ago at a cafe, the appeal is basically having "one" device that does everything I need (sans a laptop, obviously). I used my phone for all communication and my tablet for e-reading, because the larger screen and form factor was welcome. But having that tablet meant one more device I had to lug around and keep track of, and as I can attest, that made it easier to lose or forget somewhere. If the phone folds out into "tablet" mode, it means I've got it with me at all times.
For me, the biggest barrier right now is price. Having it all in one device is convenient, but for me it would easily be cheaper to just have a year-old phone and a year-or-two old tablet. Hell, given that I paid $400 for my Galaxy S8+, $200 or so for my Nexus 7 (like five years ago), and about $800 for my laptop, I could have all three for less than the cost of this thing.
I certainly see the value in a more hybrid device - this just feels like a bit of a technical "pissing contest" if you will rather than a consumer focussed device.
Again, I'd be happy to be proven wrong - and I do appreciate the engineering involved in making a consumer grade foldable screen.
> this just feels like a bit of a technical "pissing contest" if you will rather than a consumer focussed device.
Even if that's the case I think that's fine. It should help push innovation at Samsung and its competitors. Sure, they should be more consumer focused _in general_ but I think moon-shots like this have their place.
I'm not interested in a fold-able phone. But I'd love to see them get really good.
It's funny, I had the opposite experience. I loved my Nexus 7 and used it every day for reading and such - until I got my first Galaxy Note (a Note 3).
The screen was nearly as big as the Nexus 7 and fine to read on, in a much smaller overall form factor thanks to the smaller bezels. The Note 3 served all the same needs as the Nexus 7, and it still fit in a front pants pocket like my old phone (which the 7 didn't).
I went from there to a Note 4 and Note 8 and never used another 7" tablet.
What seems weird to me about the Note Fold is that the folding display isn't all that much bigger than the Note 8 - 7.3" diagonal vs. 6.3", albeit in a more square aspect ratio.
OTOH, if anyone on the SF Peninsula buys a Note Fold, let me know and I will buy you lunch at some very nice place just so I can play with the phone. I promise I will try not to break it!
In that sometimes you only have your phone with you. Outside of the normal status-y nature of high end phones, I could see this being valuable to an exec/management as this would allow them to review Excel documents and PDFs on the fly when in situations where booting up a work laptop isn't ideal or possible (laying in bed, at an airport waiting on flights, etc.). In that particular scenario it is putting a gun to the head of work/life balance, but it is a scenario I could see it used.
I'm interested in the form factor mostly for consolidation: with eGPU, I've consolidated my laptop and gaming desktop into just a laptop that plugs into the eGPU when at home and this form factor would negate a real need for a tablet for reading, video consumption, or what have you.
I personally prefer the Chinese ones where the bend is on the outside (mostly because the Galaxy Fold closed seems like an absurd waste of real estate), but I'm glad Samsung and others are working on this. It isn't a problem really, but it eliminates the need for so many different types of electronics if 2 bigger ones are consolidated into one device.
"It isn't a problem really" - I think that's my problem with it - of course I appreciate the engineering involved in producing a consumer grade foldable screen but I just can't figure out who the target audience is.
Do you mean for this particular tech demonstrator device or for a future ideal folding screen device?
I think the latter is easy to see a market for, anyone who currently uses both a phone and a tablet or e-reader who would prefer a single device that fits in a pocket.
It's worth noting that Samsung previously announced they would replace for customers any Galaxy Fold with screen issues. Also all Galaxy Folds are covered under Samsung Care+ which includes accidental damage. It's still a risky first gen device but at least you're getting some protection.
I think the concept of a scroll device, as in RUBY might be a more interesting approach than a true foldable. I do hope they're able to work through this... but given the pricing, seriously doubt I want to be an early adopter for this ride.
A screen between collapsible grips is nice design and it comes round again and again. But has to work one-handed once folded out, and be strong enough unfolded.
It doesn't seem like it'd be THAT different than the fold design, but could be done with less extreme bends... would just need a lock when open option.
The main grip could hold the actual battery, and the screen part would only need to be the screen. It could be like a micro tablet.. when used as a phone, it could be collapsed to something reasonable to hold against your head... open for video/chat etc.
> The phone comes with this protective layer/film. Samsung says you are not supposed to remove it. I removed it, not knowing you’re not supposed to (consumers won’t know either). It appeared removable in the left corner, so I took it off. I believe this contributed to the problem.
Displays often come with a plastic film attached so it doesn't get scratched during transport. Maybe they assumed it was like that, and that Samsung was being overly cautious?
...and removing it breaks the display! Not like leaves some weird residue that makes it unpleasant to use... it makes large swaths of pixels stop working...
I work in phone repair so I see lots of broken phones and many rather... uh, not that bright of individuals.
This will 100% be a problem for consumers. It's easily recognizable as a screen protector, but it isn't = instant problems. Especially on a 2000$ device.
The film looks exactly like the protective plastic sheet on new phones that you are supposed to peel and doesn't cover the screen right to the edges so I think it was a pretty ok assumption to be made given the circumstances.
Electronics, especially with displays, are very commonly shipped with protective, removable plastic coatings. How is this at all surprising? Seems like an honest mistake on the part of the user, combined with a bit of design (and documentation) fault on the part of the manufacturer.
I bet the engineers even warned internal testers NOT to remove the coating. And I further bet someone in QA told them they were a pack of idiots and they didn't listen.
If a non-removable coating has air gaps or loose edges that invite peeling, that's a manufacturing defect.
Not sure if I’m in the minority but I would prefer two separated clamshell screens to one bendy screen. At least until the bendable tech is 100%.
Two separate screens would still allow great multitasking when necessary. When not used perhaps it can completely fold behind the device for a traditional smartphone experience.
In case anyone hasn't seen it already - Planet Computers have built an android device explicitly inspired by old Psion devices and by the same industrial designer as the Psion Revo - https://planetcom.squarespace.com/
By most accounts its a brilliant device. If it came with a stylus like the Note or the old Psion 5, I would probably have bought one already.
IMO, the primary issue is the seam will be right in the center of the screen, at the middle of your FOV. If you were only ever using the screen real-estate for multi-tasking, that would be one thing, but people want to watch videos and stuff.
...I wonder if a triptych of three screens would work better...
.... this is like saying "why do you need a second monitor for your PC? just buy two PC's"
A two-screen smartphone is something I'd love to have, if bendable screen smartphones end up tanking. Multi-tasking is something that would be so much more convenient (say, writing notes while looking at a certain website, or discussing something with a friend while referencing a website, or ... etc). These are things that I already do with my smartphone, but it's just a huge pain in the ass because of the single screen.
Imo Smartphones and tablets in general werent ever made because someone starting from 1st principles thought this was a good design.
Its was just, heres some cool gizmo we can flog to people.
Huawei previously mentioned that they started with the same concept as Samsung, but ditched the idea after they found numerous drawbacks. Looks like this might be that
I wonder how well Xiaomi’s version of this will turn out durability-wise. The Mi Mix3 was pretty well-engineered with its slider and out of all of these foldables their version looks the most appealing (and is rumored to be the cheapest)
> Samsung told Quartz that the Fold is supposed to be durable enough to withstand being folded at least 200,000 times, which would equate to about 300 unfolds every day for two years. (The average person checks their phone between 80 and 300 times each day.)
I wasn't expecting these screens to hold up very well over time, but that number seems shockingly low to me. I don't like the idea that the screen is expected to fail under normal use conditions well before the other hardware in the phone will be considered outdated. I also imagine that it will start showing some signs of damage as you approach the rated 200k folds.
Even at 300 phone checks a day, you're probably not unfolding the phone each time. it has a screen you can get to without unfolding it, so many of the quick phone checks you do can be done without unfolding it.
158 comments
[ 5.0 ms ] story [ 231 ms ] threadI remember thinking they’d have issues with material fatigue, what with the screen being on the small side of the bend radius. Then their demo showed a visible line of different brightness along the fold and figured it’d be a low-volume launch.
(Hope they figure it out eventually, though. Far be it from me to chastise someone for taking the stuff of R&D labs and selling it in an actual product.)
Then if the hinge is little more than two screens held together by a screen protector then you could replace the screen protector bit every year or so depending on use.
One side could be that large battery a lot of people still want and the other side could be the normal phone gubbins with SD card slot, plastic cover and a lame but capable processor.
For people who just want a big screen and don't care for having it 4K it would be great. It could even be at a $250 price point and be affordable in countries that don't have reliable electricity.
In posh countries it could be 'disposed' after three years and be engineered for that type of lifespan, in more resourceful places it could work with the hinge screen protector missing or if one side does not work.
Yes, but that would be rubbish. Big black bar across the video you're trying to watch. What Samsung actually built was the genuinely folding screen with pixels all the way across, which would be amazing if it works and didn't cost $2,000.
> even be at a $250 price point and be affordable in countries that don't have reliable electricity.
That seems rather high compared to the $50 tablet market.
- 4 review units have failed (a day or two in)
- 2 failed due to a removal of a "polymer coating" that essentially looks like a screen protector. This is not supposed to be removed, but several reviewers did (or tried)
- 1 failed due to supposed ingress into the hinge mechanism. I'm sure failure analysis is currently going on at Samsung
- 1 screen failed with no apparent causes.
Marques Brownlee remove the protective cover, and Mark Gurman had his first unit where he removed the protective cover.
I bought a LG TV a year and a half ago, and last week saw some spots on it that looked like a film coating which had air bubbles in it. At the edge of the screen there is a gap where you can fit a nail, and it does feel as if something can be removed.
I tried for a few minutes to peel it (carefully, wondering how I'd possibly missed that for a year and a half). Then I gave up and got a wet cloth, and it turned out it was just a mark on the screen.
It reminds me of shops and bars that have TVs, but leave all the marketing stickers on that are just for when it's displayed in a showroom. Manufacturers should do a better job of marking what should (and shouldn't) be removed.
And this is a replaceable part!
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/11/30/tech/samsung-china-tech-t...
The absolutely most important aspect of this $2000 device is failing within days. The only way this could be worse is if they started exploding, too.
I'm exciting for neat ambitious devices also, but they have to be more than paper weights. If these are all failing so soon, either there was no QA whatsoever, or some QA manager within Samsung was ignored...
Give it a few months.
This is like a 1980s plastic lunch box. The moulded hinge always snapped in half after about 3 months regardless of what you did. Cue optimus prime letting your lunch out all over the floor.
I think they are failing because it was a fucking stupid idea.
Edit: If anything I want NO mechanical components on any handheld device I own because in the last 40 years of my life everything has broken mechanically eventually. Home buttons, volume controls, connectors, battery holders everything.
your anecdote seems to suffer from cognitive bias. screens are non-mechanical (except in this galaxy fold) and yet they're still the most broken component in a phone.
Breaking the glass (a superficial and expected eventuality) is very different than the screen no longer functioning or responding to input (a mechanical failure).
Yes, but how have the electronic components fared over that time? I've definitely had devices where the mechanical components failed, but never a reasonable-quality device where the mechanical components failed first. For example, compare the times you've tried to input something on a dodgy public touchscreen versus the times you've tried to input something on a public physical keypad—I'll bet there're way more failures on the first than on the second; certainly that's been my experience.
Well, anything with glass is prone to vandalism. A metal keyboard is hard to vandalize, a touchscreen needs only a piece of random rock or other debris to shatter.
I can’t count the number of times I’ve used some big impressive digital map kind of thing at a mall or airport only to find it completely frozen (software), insanely laggy (potentially both, but likely software if a RPi could run it), and/or infuriating to use because I have to touch very hard exactly on the center of the icon, taking into account what I think the angle of the display is so that I’m hitting it exactly where the screen thinks it is, not where I see it through a layer of glass as being (most definitely software).
All of those complaints have applied to one degree or another to stupid tableside ordering apps that are running on an iPad or my own phone too, so I don’t think the hardware was ever to blame.
It's reported Apple will be adding that into the iPhone 11; wirelessly charge your watch or another phone with a charged or charging iPhone.
And Samsung isn't innovating faster they are releasing faster. Big difference.
I hope Apple adds that Wireless PowerShare feature as the ability to use my iPhone as a charging mat to charge other devices would be handy!
Whether they’re well thought out and will be supported on the next generation appears to be beside the point: they attract attention and serve as a differentiator.
Apple has neither the desire nor the luxury of throwing half-baked ideas into their phones.
I’m sure someone will chime in about the butterfly keyboard or something else, but the number of those issues is small compared to all the devices they create.
Samsung’s $2000 phone breaks in two days? Kudos to them for being bold and brave.
Smh.
There is no "innovation" whatsoever if the technology doesn't work. Apple and other makers have been playing with the technology and understood the risks of putting this device out there. Samsung ignored these risks for the sake of press, and now the customer pays the price.
Same with buying a Tesla back when they started. You invest in these kind of things only with the f..k-you money and for fun purposes, not with the money you need to survive or as the car you need to get to work.
Once again, imagine Apple releasing this.
When it quit working after 2 days they'd tell you you shouldn't have held it that way.
Samsung: phone breaks two days after use. Kudos to them, bravo.
See?
IIRC Samsung also had its own antennagate, nobody batted an eye.
- Apple would have NDA'd the problems out.
- People would excuse the pre-production state of these devices.
Mostly we don't care because it's not something people are seriously considering buying. It's a flashy thing that's crazy overpriced. It's like reading about Bugatti reliability problems. Boo hoo.
So tired of this in both politics and tech. Yes. There is always uproar from the haters. Both sides.
Anyway, Genesis does what Nintendon't.
Personally I prefer the Apple approach with new products e.g. iPhone, iPad, Watch which is to have largely perfected the hardware before shipping but release it with MVP software which they aggressively improve.
[1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dx8J125s4cg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTguywiC9aw
http://www.iphone4settlement.com/
About half of Apple products have serious hardware design flaws.
It's probably one of the few remaining ones that just keep humming along.
Imagine just how incredibly reliable Samsungs are considering the fact I still have a single running S1!
If this was Apple, I wonder what your comment would be?
The review period has lasted nearly four days and despite the boldness in design and ambition, the folding phone situation has developed not necessarily to Samsung's advantage.
Let's be honest, this isn't "some problems", this is easily one of the two worst smartphone launches of all time, the other one being a phone that fucking exploded.
Is this a higher failure rate than average phones? Or is there a extremely large focus on all of these devices because of what they are, and therefor problems are more "visible" (there's probably an English word for the phenomenon)
At this point these are just review models—the phone itself hasn't been release yet.
> Or is there a extremely large focus on all of these devices because of what they are, and therefor problems are more "visible"
There's a large focus on these devices, because the people who got them were given them for that purpose.
Sounds like a lot of people are wishful thinking this isn't going to be a release disaster. My bet is Samsung will pull the plug and not release it at all (this year).
Would love to be proven wrong but I think it's going to be a monumental flop in regards to sales.
My guess is that it's for people who want "phablet" to be a realistic description of their phone instead of a hyperbolic one.
Belt clips. Cargo pockets. Purses. Bras. Sufficiently deep front pants pockets. Jacket pockets. Etc.
The numbers aren't public yet, but it's probably low. I don't think they are dumb enough to expect this device to sell anywhere near the Galaxy S10 or an iPhone.
It may not be a huge sales success, but apparently it's above Samsung expectations.
My suspicion is that it's people interested in the engineering of the screen rather than consumers who've identified a personal use case for it.
Whether or not it ends up truly being practical, it's a phone that looks and does things that are radically different from most mainstream phones.
People will think their fancy future folding phone is cool, and other people will probably see it and think it's interesting and want to talk about it or see it work.
Kind of like paying $600 plus a 2-year contract for an iPhone in 2007 with a slow processor, no 3G, no MMS, no copy-and-paste, etc.
For me, the biggest barrier right now is price. Having it all in one device is convenient, but for me it would easily be cheaper to just have a year-old phone and a year-or-two old tablet. Hell, given that I paid $400 for my Galaxy S8+, $200 or so for my Nexus 7 (like five years ago), and about $800 for my laptop, I could have all three for less than the cost of this thing.
Again, I'd be happy to be proven wrong - and I do appreciate the engineering involved in making a consumer grade foldable screen.
Even if that's the case I think that's fine. It should help push innovation at Samsung and its competitors. Sure, they should be more consumer focused _in general_ but I think moon-shots like this have their place.
I'm not interested in a fold-able phone. But I'd love to see them get really good.
The screen was nearly as big as the Nexus 7 and fine to read on, in a much smaller overall form factor thanks to the smaller bezels. The Note 3 served all the same needs as the Nexus 7, and it still fit in a front pants pocket like my old phone (which the 7 didn't).
I went from there to a Note 4 and Note 8 and never used another 7" tablet.
What seems weird to me about the Note Fold is that the folding display isn't all that much bigger than the Note 8 - 7.3" diagonal vs. 6.3", albeit in a more square aspect ratio.
OTOH, if anyone on the SF Peninsula buys a Note Fold, let me know and I will buy you lunch at some very nice place just so I can play with the phone. I promise I will try not to break it!
In that sometimes you only have your phone with you. Outside of the normal status-y nature of high end phones, I could see this being valuable to an exec/management as this would allow them to review Excel documents and PDFs on the fly when in situations where booting up a work laptop isn't ideal or possible (laying in bed, at an airport waiting on flights, etc.). In that particular scenario it is putting a gun to the head of work/life balance, but it is a scenario I could see it used.
I'm interested in the form factor mostly for consolidation: with eGPU, I've consolidated my laptop and gaming desktop into just a laptop that plugs into the eGPU when at home and this form factor would negate a real need for a tablet for reading, video consumption, or what have you.
I personally prefer the Chinese ones where the bend is on the outside (mostly because the Galaxy Fold closed seems like an absurd waste of real estate), but I'm glad Samsung and others are working on this. It isn't a problem really, but it eliminates the need for so many different types of electronics if 2 bigger ones are consolidated into one device.
I think the latter is easy to see a market for, anyone who currently uses both a phone and a tablet or e-reader who would prefer a single device that fits in a pocket.
I do like that accidental damage is covered, though.
The main grip could hold the actual battery, and the screen part would only need to be the screen. It could be like a micro tablet.. when used as a phone, it could be collapsed to something reasonable to hold against your head... open for video/chat etc.
How do you even?
This will 100% be a problem for consumers. It's easily recognizable as a screen protector, but it isn't = instant problems. Especially on a 2000$ device.
I bet the engineers even warned internal testers NOT to remove the coating. And I further bet someone in QA told them they were a pack of idiots and they didn't listen.
If a non-removable coating has air gaps or loose edges that invite peeling, that's a manufacturing defect.
Two separate screens would still allow great multitasking when necessary. When not used perhaps it can completely fold behind the device for a traditional smartphone experience.
I don’t think most people want to multitask - the want one big app or video.
By most accounts its a brilliant device. If it came with a stylus like the Note or the old Psion 5, I would probably have bought one already.
I'd never buy one because they just aren't going to be as good at security as Google or Apple, but the design is good.
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-47352129
...I wonder if a triptych of three screens would work better...
https://www.engadget.com/2011/02/07/sprints-kyocera-echo-dua...
Honestly I don't know why it exists. You could just buy a case and then buy two phones.
A two-screen smartphone is something I'd love to have, if bendable screen smartphones end up tanking. Multi-tasking is something that would be so much more convenient (say, writing notes while looking at a certain website, or discussing something with a friend while referencing a website, or ... etc). These are things that I already do with my smartphone, but it's just a huge pain in the ass because of the single screen.
https://www.businessinsider.com/huawei-prototyped-folding-ph...
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/11/30/tech/samsung-china-tech-t...
I wasn't expecting these screens to hold up very well over time, but that number seems shockingly low to me. I don't like the idea that the screen is expected to fail under normal use conditions well before the other hardware in the phone will be considered outdated. I also imagine that it will start showing some signs of damage as you approach the rated 200k folds.
(Pulls the fucking screen off) I think this may have contributed to my screen not working