by Andrew Grush, 8 months ago
Rumors of a smaller version of the Galaxy S3 have been floating around for a while now. Recently, Samsung officially confirmed the Galaxy S3 Mini existed, but they were short on the details. All we…
We've just been emailed a press photo of the blue version of Samsung’s recently announced Galaxy S III Mini. Until now we've only seen this device in white. We think the white version is more attractive to be perfectly honest, but we know that not everyone agrees. In case you're not familiar with the GS3 Mini, it's a shrunken down GS3 with specifications that leave a lot to be desired. The screen measures 4 inch across, but only delivers a resolution of 800 x 480 pixels. The processor inside made by ST-Ericsson is a dual core chip, with each core clocked at 1 GHz. As for the camera, forget about taking sharp 8 megapixel photos, this baby only does 5 megapixels. And the worst part is the battery. Can 1500 mAh to last anyone an entire day?
We wouldn't have a problem with this device if it wasn't for the fact that it was called the Galaxy S III Mini. That name is an embarrassment to the the original Galaxy S III. But wait, things get worse. The Mini is priced at roughly the same cost of the year old Galaxy Nexus. You'd have to have a serious problem with large screen phones in order to pick the Mini over what's arguably a superior device in every way possible.
Looking forward, we're hoping that Samsung does something different in 2013. They should have two versions of the Galaxy S IV. One with a larger screen, one with a smaller screen, both with the exact same internals, except for the size of the battery of course. From a logistical perspective it might be a pain to manage all that inventory, but we think giving customers a choice is the best thing Samsung can do to attract prospective buyers.
So what do you guys think, is blue nice or is it an eyesore?