Hi everyone. I have been closely following all the rumours of the LG G3 and of course it now has been officially unveiled. There has been MASSIVE hype of this LG flagship and the hype has continued with it's official release.
I have a few thoughts to share on this but I will say straight off the top, my thoughts run contrary to all the tech press.
Firstly,the benefits of a quad HD display are dubious at best. Considering the potential of decreased battery life. In this respect, LG have gone, on paper at least, backwards. The LG G2 has a 3200mAH battery in a full HD display. The G3 now has 200mAh less in a display with a ton more pixels. You do the math on this. I am very doubtful that any improvements in processor will offset this by that amount. When I look at the display of the Galaxy S5, I cannot fathom why anyone would want anymore pixels for all the potential downsides.
This is really the only feature of this phone that beats all others (non Chinese manufacturers anyway). A feature that few will barely be able to realize the difference. The camera is the same as the G2, 13MP with OIS. Again, a much lauded feature is laser focusing. The Galaxy S5 doesn't need a laser for low light shooting, it instead has a high end dedicated camera feature of contrast phase detection for very fast and accurate focusing. There has not been any mention of actual improvements and developments in imaging quality, unlike the Galaxy S5 with its ISOCELL technology.
The rest of the phone, whilst definately being high end specification, do not stand out. Dual tone flash, knock code, quick circle cover, wireless charging etc are features on other phones too. A correction to this post. The rumors were correct in having 2 versions, 16 and 32GB with 2 and 3GB RAM with Snapdragon 801. So this is one area where it beats Samsung and HTC.
Seriously, I cannot see someone buying this over a Galaxy S5 for that quad HD display, which is by far the most lauded feature. I would much prefer the Galaxy because it has a fingerprint scanner which I can really conveniently make PayPal payments with. Now that to me far trumps the quad HD display.
I for one think the G3 is yes, an excellent high end phone, no doubt about it. But I also think it has been way over hyped to the point where I am actually a bit disappointed. It is not a Galaxy S5 killer by any stretch of the imagination and I think when people see the display in the stores next to the Galaxy, they will quickly move on and compare the rest of the features. In that respect, and especially with the far more affluent and popular "Samsung" brand name, I do think this LG phone will suffer. After all the hype, I was expecting "revolutionary" and IMO, it is not. Quad HD is not revolutionary if the average person won't be able to tell the difference. The only truly revolutionary item is the laser focusing.
And also, all the smartphones are now doing water resistance and the LG doesn't. Interestingly, Sony have stated that for their Z3 Xperia, they will refuse to go down the road of quad HD and instead focus on other performance factors. Well done, a voice of reason. And also, no fingerprint scanning which is a feature that will be continued on by Apple, Samsung and no doubt others.
These are my thoughts on the LG G3.
Also, a final thought. Did not it ever occur to LG that they actually have to give their flagship phone a cool and catchy name? Seriously? What the hell do the marketing guys at LG do all day? Other phones are named "iphone", "Galaxy", "Lumia", "Xperia" etc. I'm sorry ,but "G3" does not have the same memorable and inspiring factor. I cannot believe that LG have not figured this out yet. They should have started afresh with a cool catchy name like everyone else.
LG, don't call your next one "G4".
It's easy to be a critic. So what would I have done differently? Well firstly, what LG did right.
Offering a 32GB variant with a class leading 3GB RAM.
Laser autofocusing. Whether it's any better than the Galaxy's contrast phase detection I don't know, but it's unique and a great selling point.
The concierge feature and greatly improved keyboard features.
The cool looking flip covers and quick circle features.
The quad HD? Time will tell if this is a major attraction or not. Now these are the things I would have done differently.
Firstly, I think having a quad HD display with a plastic fake metal finish does not compute. Look at all the flak Samsung have received for their plastic backed S5. I would have gone down the HTC road but with a twist-premium metal finish backed that is removable. Offering the best of both the Samsung and HTC worlds.
A larger battery, not going backwards from the G2. If the G2 had 3200mAh battery, then at least 3300mAh. And also some quick charging technology. A great selling point would be charging in short time, similar to what the Oppo Find 7 offers.
Camera. Offer OIS but also digital stabilisation. So in really difficult shaky circumstances, you can use both in conjunction for class leading photos and videos. And beat Samsung by offering at least 20MP sensor. And equal HTC with a 5MP sensor for front camera. Plus a xenon flash.
Water and dust resistance. And a class leading fingerprint sensor that can be customised to do a variety of activities. Allow also different fingerprints to have all access or restricted access. So for eg, a child or friend can use the phone but not access the gallery, etc.
I have a few thoughts to share on this but I will say straight off the top, my thoughts run contrary to all the tech press.
Firstly,the benefits of a quad HD display are dubious at best. Considering the potential of decreased battery life. In this respect, LG have gone, on paper at least, backwards. The LG G2 has a 3200mAH battery in a full HD display. The G3 now has 200mAh less in a display with a ton more pixels. You do the math on this. I am very doubtful that any improvements in processor will offset this by that amount. When I look at the display of the Galaxy S5, I cannot fathom why anyone would want anymore pixels for all the potential downsides.
This is really the only feature of this phone that beats all others (non Chinese manufacturers anyway). A feature that few will barely be able to realize the difference. The camera is the same as the G2, 13MP with OIS. Again, a much lauded feature is laser focusing. The Galaxy S5 doesn't need a laser for low light shooting, it instead has a high end dedicated camera feature of contrast phase detection for very fast and accurate focusing. There has not been any mention of actual improvements and developments in imaging quality, unlike the Galaxy S5 with its ISOCELL technology.
The rest of the phone, whilst definately being high end specification, do not stand out. Dual tone flash, knock code, quick circle cover, wireless charging etc are features on other phones too. A correction to this post. The rumors were correct in having 2 versions, 16 and 32GB with 2 and 3GB RAM with Snapdragon 801. So this is one area where it beats Samsung and HTC.
Seriously, I cannot see someone buying this over a Galaxy S5 for that quad HD display, which is by far the most lauded feature. I would much prefer the Galaxy because it has a fingerprint scanner which I can really conveniently make PayPal payments with. Now that to me far trumps the quad HD display.
I for one think the G3 is yes, an excellent high end phone, no doubt about it. But I also think it has been way over hyped to the point where I am actually a bit disappointed. It is not a Galaxy S5 killer by any stretch of the imagination and I think when people see the display in the stores next to the Galaxy, they will quickly move on and compare the rest of the features. In that respect, and especially with the far more affluent and popular "Samsung" brand name, I do think this LG phone will suffer. After all the hype, I was expecting "revolutionary" and IMO, it is not. Quad HD is not revolutionary if the average person won't be able to tell the difference. The only truly revolutionary item is the laser focusing.
And also, all the smartphones are now doing water resistance and the LG doesn't. Interestingly, Sony have stated that for their Z3 Xperia, they will refuse to go down the road of quad HD and instead focus on other performance factors. Well done, a voice of reason. And also, no fingerprint scanning which is a feature that will be continued on by Apple, Samsung and no doubt others.
These are my thoughts on the LG G3.
Also, a final thought. Did not it ever occur to LG that they actually have to give their flagship phone a cool and catchy name? Seriously? What the hell do the marketing guys at LG do all day? Other phones are named "iphone", "Galaxy", "Lumia", "Xperia" etc. I'm sorry ,but "G3" does not have the same memorable and inspiring factor. I cannot believe that LG have not figured this out yet. They should have started afresh with a cool catchy name like everyone else.
LG, don't call your next one "G4".
It's easy to be a critic. So what would I have done differently? Well firstly, what LG did right.
Offering a 32GB variant with a class leading 3GB RAM.
Laser autofocusing. Whether it's any better than the Galaxy's contrast phase detection I don't know, but it's unique and a great selling point.
The concierge feature and greatly improved keyboard features.
The cool looking flip covers and quick circle features.
The quad HD? Time will tell if this is a major attraction or not. Now these are the things I would have done differently.
Firstly, I think having a quad HD display with a plastic fake metal finish does not compute. Look at all the flak Samsung have received for their plastic backed S5. I would have gone down the HTC road but with a twist-premium metal finish backed that is removable. Offering the best of both the Samsung and HTC worlds.
A larger battery, not going backwards from the G2. If the G2 had 3200mAh battery, then at least 3300mAh. And also some quick charging technology. A great selling point would be charging in short time, similar to what the Oppo Find 7 offers.
Camera. Offer OIS but also digital stabilisation. So in really difficult shaky circumstances, you can use both in conjunction for class leading photos and videos. And beat Samsung by offering at least 20MP sensor. And equal HTC with a 5MP sensor for front camera. Plus a xenon flash.
Water and dust resistance. And a class leading fingerprint sensor that can be customised to do a variety of activities. Allow also different fingerprints to have all access or restricted access. So for eg, a child or friend can use the phone but not access the gallery, etc.
Last edited:
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram