better get insurance

[rumblee1]

I went into Verizon today to get the galaxy s3. I left without one though. The phone was great. Fast, up to date on all aspects. But when will samsung put build quality into their phones. I went from a moto original DROID to the X now bionic. I've dropped my phones a few times with no problem. But I got to tell you, if you drop your s3, it's going to demolish. I'm waiting for the RAZR hd. Samsung, I'm disappointed.

[huskur]

Disappointed? Most of the time you drop any device it will be damaged. That is why its important to have a little protection on it. It's no different really than any other model. A friend of mine has a RAZR and his fell off his desk at work and hit the floor with commercial carpeting and his entire screen shattered.

Isolated incidents occur. It is what it is.

[rumblee1]

But the whole phone was just cheaply made, especially the back. Let's put it this way, there's a reason most DROID sites rate moto phones as the best build quality followed by HTC.

[huskur]

I am not saying that Samsung doesn't need to improve the build of their phones. The reason the back is flexible is because the entire phone is flexible to an extent.

The SG3 has second generation Gorilla Glass which is superiorly polished and flexes. With rigid back on the SG3 flexing would not be possible.

Moto and HTC have great builds.....no doubt about that.

[bsweetness]

I'm going to disagree with this as well. Sure the S3 feels cheap because it feels so light. But the fact is that the polycarbonate materials used for the body are actually quite forgiving in a drop, and will hold up far better than you think it will just from holding it in the store. As far as the screen goes in a drop, the Gorilla Glass 2 should fair better than standard Gorilla Glass. And as huskar said, this type of body can help in possibly preventing some damage to the screen by flexing a bit. A metal or harder plastic like Motorola uses won't allow for the same type of flexibility and forgiveness. All of that said, husker was right in his first post - things happen. Any device, no matter how strong it is, has the chance of being broken in a fall depending on how it falls and where it falls. One person could drop a device 100 times without any major damage, and then another person could drop the exact same device once and essentially total it.

Personally, I prefer the build quality of Motorola devices, and I think Samsung has a lot of room for improvement. That said, your snap judgement based on a brief time with the device in the store doesn't take everything into account. Samsung wouldn't put out a major device like this if it was going to "demolish" every time it gets dropped. It feels much cheaper than it actually is.

[rumblee1]

You have a point. But after careful consideration, I've considered build, that 3300 mha battery. So km going to stay with the moto.

[skennelly]

I was worried about ordering the SG3 sight unseen because I thought the Nexus felt very plastic and cheap. I was pleasantly surprised by the quality of the SG3. I have owned Moto phones and I like this one better than any Moto phone.



*Sent from my Galaxy to yours through tapatalk

[rfranken]

Love the build of the SGS3 (coming from DX)
this thing slides in and out of my pocket sooo nice in comparison.

really like how the screen runs up to the end of the phone. Not sure how to word that. no ridge on the edges. It just seems well thought out.

[Moulton]

I think I am the only person on the planet who is not and was never impressed with Motorola. The boxy design leaves much to be desired. Horrific camera in all their devices. And I've never been satisfied with how their phones handle the hand off for 3G / 4G... slow.

[TatDroid]

It's very natural to associate light weight with cheaply built. (after all, how could an S3, with a 4.8" screen (133 grams) weigh less than an iPhone 4S with just 3.5" screen (140 grams)?). Sometimes that association may turn out to be true - but sometimes not. So many factors to consider.