[Rumors] Galaxy S5 Will be Water & Dustproof; 1080p First & QHD Later; Coming March

[dgstorm]

Here's a big helping of Samsung mashed potatoes and gravy this morning. A bevy of rumors have hit the web regarding the Galaxy S5.

Here's a breakdown:

• The Galaxy S5 will be both waterproof & dustproof
• The first Galaxy S5 to launch will use a 1080p display, but a QHD 2K (2,560×1,440 res) display version is coming later
• This first model will be unveiled on February 24th at MWC (which is on Monday)
• The device will launch to retail store shelves sometime in early March
• The Galaxy S5 will come with an improved version of the 16MP camera found in the SGS4
• It will also include a Fingerprint scanner in the Home button that only requires a swipe to work
• Because of all of these specs and features, Samsung will skip the Active version of the Galaxy S5 (which makes sense, because the waterproofing/dustproofing was the primary purpose of the SGS4 Active)

How's that for a Wednesday morning Samsung filled breakfast?

Source: UnWiredView

 

[johnomaz]

To me, they are focusing on stuff that I personally don't care about except for being water/dust proof. I've never dropped my phone in any kind of liquid and the wettest its gotten is in my pocket if its raining. The display at 2K resolution is silly let alone changing the resolution later if that actually happens. The fingerprint scanner is annoying and probably won't be used by most people. Putting a case on your phone defeats that purpose. I use a tempered glass protector on my Note 3 and on my wife's S4 and it comes with a riser for the home button so its not recessed under the screen protector. I think it'll be another feature thats there, its a great marketing point but will rarely ever be turned on. As for the camera, I have my DSLR at home that I use if I want to take a picture. I use my phone's camera mostly at work to take pictures of damaged equipment or something for my boss. Maybe a quick candid that I won't look at again too. Oh well, on to next year's rumors I guess.

 

[cybertec69]

Today's phones are already so advanced, as it does not make logical sense to buy a new device every year, or even every two years, unless you're phone is in shambles.

 

[GAstorino]

If they are going to make a flagship phone don't make 4 layers of memory come out with the 128gb first off. These companies i.e. Apple have been found to charge exorbitant fees for the incremental cost of the memory which is cheap especially when you are buying millions of units. I do use the camera a lot especially when on trips because its just easier to have one item in my pocket. If you are going to strengthen anything should be camera lens, speed and lighting. Also upgrade antenna to get better reception overall. I would love to see better sound coming from the unit like my music. Why can't Samsung put dual speakers like some other phones. The screen is cool but once you hit certain level it becomes non-consequential.

 

[Hugh Jass]

Today's phones are already so advanced, as it does not make logical sense to buy a new device every year, or even every two years, unless you're phone is in shambles.

Yea, my G2 looks to have no problem holding off the need for a new device for a couple of years, had it since release and it still feels brand new to me. We've finally reached precipice I think and the market will begin to shrink in the US sharply with minor incremental updates to unnecessary features and overblown marketing technique. Looks to me the days of instant obsolescence are just about over.

 

[GAstorino]

Also cut back on models of phones. I phone succeeds because generally they only have one phone for the year not 10 or 20 models to deal with every 6 months and app designers don't have a million variations of the firmware to handle. I understand continued development but some things are crazy. Also wish the carriers would release the updates more then once per year. I have Verizon and still don't have Kit Kat. Stop putting all your garbage on the phones so that we can get updates on a consistent basis then we might not need the new phone as soon to get the update.

 

[hotice]

Display

I'm pretty sure that info is wrong. It would be really stupid to put a resolution that high on screen that small. Wasted storage for native resolution files, wasted cpu/gpu to generated visually irrelevant pixels, wasted battery to generate all those useless pixels, lower frame-rates, etc. There is no point at all. An argument could be made that the same is true for 1080p on 5" and smaller displays.

I think it's much more likely that the camera will be 1080p out of the box and, with a software update, it will be able to record QHD resolution video. That would make a lot more sense.

The chances are good that there was a bad translation some information or just some bad communication.

 

[Dusty]

I'd say the likelihood of a 2K screen is high. My reasoning is that they don't want to be caught without a "gotcha" spec like they did when iPhones went 64-bit.

As far as the camera goes, I don't carry my NEX-6 with me everywhere I go. And like they say, the best camera you have is the one in your hand. A phone with a great camera is just a plus for every user regardless of whether or not you need it.

 

[hotice]

I'd say the likelihood of a 2K screen is high. My reasoning is that they don't want to be caught without a "gotcha" spec like they did when iPhones went 64-bit.
As far as the camera goes, I don't carry my NEX-6 with me everywhere I go. And like they say, the best camera you have is the one in your hand. A phone with a great camera is just a plus for every user regardless of whether or not you need it.

"64-bit" is an Apple spec, not a gotcha spec at all. It's an Apple spec because it's a marketing spec, not a practically useful one. Especially for Apple. It's a joke because it forces software development to account for a new cpu architecture for no benefit. In 99% of the situations the benefit of 64-bit is being able to address 4GB of RAM directly, not speed. Since Apple doesn't have any mobile devices with more than 1GB of RAM it's pretty useless. It's only another example that Apple has no clue what they're doing with mobile devices and that's one reason why iOS is losing ground to Android. In fact, that's most likely the cause of crashes and reboots they had initially with the iPhone 5S. Apple was paying for that foolish marketing decision. At Apples rate of innovation they probably won't need 4GB of RAM for another 20 years.

They're already at 2K screens (1920x1080). QuadHD (2560x1440) is what's in question and there's no logical reason to have that on a screen that small but there are a number of logical reason to actually NOT have it. Storage, bandwidth, CPU/GPU usage, RAM/frame buffer, frame-rates, and battery life are some of them given there would be no perceivable benefit, at that screen size between HD and QuadHD. We'll see what happens.

 

[Dusty]

That's what a the term "gotcha" means. It's something useless or insignificant that is highlighted as important when the competition doesn't have it or isn't aware of it.

Apple essentially rolled out a 64-bit chip, puffed out their chest, and yelled "Gotcha, Android! Do you have this? No? Well you should, it's very special. Blah blah blah...".

 

[dgstorm]

"64-bit" is an Apple spec, not a gotcha spec at all. It's an Apple spec because it's a marketing spec, not a practically useful one. Especially for Apple. It's a joke because it forces software development to account for a new cpu architecture for no benefit. In 99% of the situations the benefit of 64-bit is being able to address 4GB of RAM directly, not speed. Since Apple doesn't have any mobile devices with more than 1GB of RAM it's pretty useless. It's only another example that Apple has no clue what they're doing with mobile devices and that's one reason why iOS is losing ground to Android. In fact, that's most likely the cause of crashes and reboots they had initially with the iPhone 5S. Apple was paying for that foolish marketing decision. At Apples rate of innovation they probably won't need 4GB of RAM for another 20 years.

They're already at 2K screens (1920x1080). QuadHD (2560x1440) is what's in question and there's no logical reason to have that on a screen that small but there are a number of logical reason to actually NOT have it. Storage, bandwidth, CPU/GPU usage, RAM/frame buffer, frame-rates, and battery life are some of them given there would be no perceivable benefit, at that screen size between HD and QuadHD. We'll see what happens.

You might not think there is a logical reason to put a 2K screen on a tiny device (and you'd be right technically), but the point is that technology moves forward. If Samsung develops the tech, you better believe they will put it in their phones for pure bragging rights, whether it is a useful feature or not. Right now the smartphone manufacturers are all struggling to get us excited about any new devices because the phones have matured so much. It's irrelevant to Samsung whether the 2K display is useful or not... it gives them a perfect PR and marketing gimmick, which is all the 64-bit chip from Apple really was. Samsung has already issued their roadmap for mobile displays, and they have made it clear they intend to bring 2K displays to smartphones. It will happen... it's just a question of when.

 

[IIGood]

...wait...10 posts and nobody's screaming about whether it has an SD card slot yet? *passes out*

 

[combatmedic870]

i couldnt care less as long as they have a 32GB and 64GB model. Or a 32 64 ans 128. Id get a 64GB model. 64GB is enough for me

 

[kodiak799]

Storage is (should be) cheap...I'd much rather pay a few extra bucks then take the time to decide which content to include on my device. Paying for more pixels (camera and display) does absolutely nothing for me.

I think the main reason we don't have better choices for ram and storage are those are the two main drivers of obsolescence at this point. So "pixels" are an easy way to give consumers a perceived upgrade while relative lack of "memory" will still force them to upgrade in a few years.

"hey, check out my awesome 2k display....I'll just download this high-def movie....oh, shoot, I don't have enough storage space nor do I have enough data allowance to stream it from the cloud - guess I'll have to upgrade".

Same thing with the camera. You COULD save storage space taking lower res photos, but then what would the point of a 16mp camera be?!?

So along those lines, also expect a push to higher-quality MP3's (or whatever format). Already starting to see that with 320kbps...My entire music library is 320, which the average song takes about 8megs. Sure, I could keep make lower quality for my phone, but why bother to maintain two libraries of different quality?