Pick up the phone and it’s hard not to see where the design comes from on this one. We’ve heard a few words tossed around for this phone, with “brave” and “bold” mentioned, but we’re more likely to go with “familiar”, as Samsung has improved the material choice, but not necessarily tried something bold or exciting with regards to design.
Indeed, it is very easy to compare Samsung’s Galaxy S6 to Apple’s iPhone 6, with a similar front and a damn near identical bottom edge, but there’s more to the S6 than merely an iPhone clone.
In fact, it wasn’t until we saw someone using a Galaxy S4 on a bus before the S6 came out that we realised the new phone is more of a refinement of that model, with softer edges improved with metal instead of the plastic Samsung has been using for ages.
So the Galaxy S6 appears to be a cleaned up S4, though it’s a modern take at what a smartphone should look like, meaning it’ll probably look like everything else out there including the iPhone, and possibly a few other handsets.
In fact, the back reminds us of the LG Optimus G and Samsung’s Galaxy S5, making us wonder if there were only a few ways to keep this phone looking simple, which is more or less what Samsung has done.
Basically, it’s a modern smartphone, though we wish the rear camera didn’t extrude slightly, as it makes the 6.8mm profile look a little like it’s levitating on a table when we know all too well the camera is propping the phone up.
In the hands, this design is comfortable and solid, evoking the feeling we’ve always wanted from Samsung when we asked, pleaded, and wondered incredulously why Samsung was still sticking with plastic rather than making its products feel just that much better with metal or glass.
At 138 grams, the phone is very light, and thanks to its slim design, barely makes an impression in the pants, which can only be a good thing.
Samsung hasn’t also had to rebuild the wheel, with the buttons in the right place — power on right, volume buttons on the left, home at the bottom flanked by soft buttons for menu and back — resulting in a familiar and comfortable hold, something previous Galaxy owners will appreciate.
Switch the phone on with the right-side power button and you’ll see the screen come to life, and wow, what a screen it is.
We’ve seen Samsung improve over the years with regard to screen quality, and it was one of the first companies to embrace the whole 1080p screen thing, charging ahead of Apple and its claim of a Retina-grade screen with more pixels pack in per inch, but the latest screen manages to trounce Retina once and for all with the highest amount of pixels packed into a smartphone per inch ever.
From a technical point of view, Samsung is relying on a 5.1 inch Super AMOLED display like no other, showing the 2560×1440 resolution and revealing roughly 577 pixels per inch.
If that makes no sense, the better way of understanding this is that the human eye is comfortable at roughly 300 pixels per inch, not looking for pixels and what not, with Apple’s Retina clocking in on the iPhone 6 at 325ppi (pixels per inch).
Curious as to how different the screen clarity is between the Apple iPhone 6 and Samsung’s Galaxy S6? Drag the slider above to see the difference in our interactive comparison!
Samsung’s Galaxy S6 is over 200 higher than this, and even clocks in at a higher pixel count than LG’s G3, which at one point compared its similarly impressive high-resolution screen to the viewing of art books, suggesting that this is as good as looking at a piece of art in a book, or a photo in a book.
The reality is Samsung’s screen isn’t far off that level of beauty, with a screen that looks phenomenal no matter where it is when it’s switched on, and a brightness that makes it usable in pretty much any environment.
We can only imagine how beautiful this screen will be when viewed up close and with Samsung’s Galaxy S6 Gear VR viewer, because with even more pixels packed in than the Galaxy Note 4, your eyes will be in for a treat.
Wondering what the difference is between the screen on the Galaxy S6 and the Galaxy S5? Drag the slider above to see what they look like on the pixel level…
Fortunately, the excellence continues when you get down to using the Galaxy S6, because it’s a little different from previous Samsung phones, and that can only be a good thing.
Always find the GG phone reviews most enlightening and enjoyable to read. Nevertheless, for those of us that live in rural low signal areas, actual reception abilities are rarely, if ever, addressed. As a consequence, the reviews, while entertaining, are not really helpful. GG (and most other reviewers), seem to forget that the original reason for mobile phones was to make calls!
Always look forward to GG news.
It’s a valid point, but the topic of reception is a complicated one not just based on mobile phone choice alone.
Generally, reception woes come from a lot of factors, such as topography, tower position and reception, with building materials also a part of the equation. Mobile phone design does come into it, but much of the argument on improving reception can also be handed off to telcos rather than phone manufacturers, making this a very complicated topic to deal with.
In Sydney — where GadgetGuy’s phone reviews are handled — reception only rarely gets a mention because it is generally quite good, and that’s probably part of the reason why other reviewers in Australian don’t tackle it, as most publications are based in large cities where reception is fairly consistent across the board.
That being said, there are known black hole areas that no phone, regardless of manufacturer, can really deal with. One of the places this reviewer used to live in was such a place, and it didn’t matter how well made the phone was, or what telco you relied on, you could not get much of a signal to penetrate the home, making reviewing a little difficult.
Options like a femtocell can improve this just a little, but they are fairly technical and generally not cheap, so not ideal for all affected by reception issues. Again, the reception factors from before — topography, towers — can affect how gadgets like these work as well.
There are certainly instances where telcos are doing things to make rural reception a little better, such as the Blue Tick program by Telstra which assigns phones a rating of the “Blue Tick” if the phone meets Telstra’s guidelines for the handset working better in rural Australia, but that’s the only one we’re currently aware of, with no such system that we know of for either Optus, Vodafone, or any of the other telcos.
Unfortunately, we just don’t have the time to test all phones with every telco to find out if there are any major differences with regards to reception because, simply put, there probably won’t be a lot, and it would likely require more phones and time than we have.
In these situations, it’s best to contact your telco and ask the people there if they have any information on handsets made for your area, as well as tower position and likely results.
This should improve with time and technology, mind you, but it’s not always something we can test for reviews.