Anonymous, 22 May 2011"Super slim body has poor grip when taking pictures"
Sorry folks, I love your rev... moreThe point is that there are devices with solid grip for taking a picture and they are not "dedicated digicams". If GSMArena mentioned that, it's because it really has poor grips compared to other devices, if you don't use your phone too much to taking pictures, than you shouldn't care about it, but there are people who does use so the disadvantage have to be mentioned.
Also, I think that everything got a limit, I really don't see the point of a device being so slim, it's only useful for it to be fashionable... Normally extremely slim devices are not really nice to handle.
Looks like Samsung is trying to fooling american users to they think that this phone got the same hardware as Galaxy SII...
"Super slim body has poor grip when taking pictures"
Sorry folks, I love your reviews but I can't understand why you keep saying that a slim body is a disadvantage on your recent reviews. I don't see how a smarphone company can create a device capable of being slim as a phone but when used as a camara inflates. In this case we have to prioritize and because the main purpose of the device is being a phone, I'd want it slim. If I wish a solid grip for taking pictures, I'd buy a dedicated camara instead. My 2 cents only.
the dialer has no video call button, so this phone do not support 3G video call.
that means that this phone is actually positioned as mid-level phone, below the Galaxy S and its variants.
because, all variants of Galaxy S are capable of performing 3G video call.
I don't understand the need for a screen bigger than 4". I mean, if you want to use a phone to watch a movie, then it's impractical, as the screen is too small (even at 4.3" and SuperAMOLED) and you have to hold the damn thing close to your face. A netbook or laptop is more feasable.
Had this phone for 3 days returned it to AT&T, after a full overnight charge, unplugged it at 0645 turned off th wifi gps and shut down all apps running in the background the phone died around 1600 that day. Here is a break down of the usage, talktime around 25 mins. checked email twice, sent 3 messages on facebook, listened to 7 songs using the headphones browsed the internet for about 4 minutes and the brightness of the screen was turned down to its lowest. All in all i liked the handset but the performance of the battery was unacceptable, not sure if the one i got came with a faulty battery.
I liked the way this review was written. Probably some different author wrote this. There were plenty of different screenshots which I liked and the camera samples were really well taken of real life scenarios. Not every one of us wants synthetic benchmarks. Those are for enthusiast only in my opinion.
where is the point of bringing these large displays to "cellphones"? Is it to more easily dial the numbers? if it was for this reason, why not building a clamp with a physical phone pad and a 3" screen w/ VGA resolution?
With this thing I could buy as well a tablet if i want a larger screen. Now put this in your pcoket...
I'm a constant reader of GSMArena and for the first time I have been disappointed wih their review. Obviously, this review is patterned after the S II's review with some of the parts being copied. The author even forgot to change the name of the phone (Samsung Galaxy S II instead of Samsung Infuse 4G) in some parts. After reading the whole review, I felt that the Editorial in the first part should have been about them using the S II's review as a pattern.
I might be taking this a bit seriously but I was just expecting something better from GSMArena.
You wrote "One odd thing we noticed is that the Samsung Galaxy S II cannot display SIM contacts" on page 4 and "The Samsung Galaxy S II uses the standard TouchWiz music player." on page 5...
I'm not sure but did you mean Infuse 4G? Nice reviews though!
hmm...looks good.. all fresh looks.. inclusion of metal at the body could have done better.. processor isnt slow.. its ARM cortex relative.. not snapdragon...