Advantages of Ativ S over Lumia 920

[3migo]

This the second time I've heard this. Where is this coming from? Has any carrier claimed to be getting this phone?

Carriers haven't even mentioned the Ativ S at all, these are all just pure rumor. I imagine that At&t will get it especially, since At&t has carried every single Samsung Windows Phone device to date, that no other carrier has gotten.

 

[socialcarpet]

Now that the initial dust has settled and the passions have calmed, let's talk calmly and objectively about the competing WP8 flagships. The Lumia 920 has gotten a lot of hype for bringing some new features (OIS, glove-friendly touchscreen, etc) to the table. But that doesn't mean it's the right choice for everyone, and I also believe that Samsung isn't exactly bringing a knife to a gunfight. What are solid reasons for choosing the Ativ S over the 920?

The ones I thought of are:

bigger screen
lighter weight (about 2/3s the weight, i think)
expandable memory

Others?

Bigger screen with less resolution. You can scratch "bigger screen" off your list as an advantage. 4.5" is more than big enough. I wish Nokia had made the phone smaller and gave us that resolution in a 4.3".

A bigger screen isn't an advantage if you get fewer pixels.

 

[socialcarpet]

The ATIV is a fantastic device and it comes from proven hardware. It represents the best hardware samsung had until the Note II.

Also it has huge advantages (practical ones) over the competition.

Better black levels on the screen.
Huge screen
720P actually gives you more screen real state.
Beautiful device, just stunning. In a different way than its colorful competition.
Super slim
Crazy light
One of the best cameras in the market.
Biggest battery size
Removable battery
SD card support.

Can't go wrong with the ATIV S. You just can't.

Sounds like it might be the best phone you've never touched/used or seen.

I always look forward to reading your decisive critiques of phones you have never used, very entertaining stuff.

 

[futurix]

Better black levels on the screen.
Huge screen

Yeah, keep in mind that AMOLED screens have horrible colour reproductions, they have bad burn-in - and ATIV S has pentile pixel layout - which makes the text and fine details look a bit ****.

 

[freestaterocker]

I've got a Samsung Omnia 7 so my natural upgrade would have been the ATIV S, however support for the Omnia has been dreadful and Samsung don't give two hoots about Windows Phone. So I'm not buying this, it will be a Nokia or HTC phone for me.

I have the same complaints about my HD7. Which is a shame, cuz the 8S and 8X are both really nice but I already vowed to never buy HTC again...

 

[Stig]

I have an Omnia 7 which I love so much that I'm still not sure I need to upgrade to a WP8 phone.

If Nokia made a slightly smaller thinner version of the 920 (basically a WP8 version of the Lumia 800) I would probably be all over it. The Lumia 820 doesn't have a curved glass screen or gorilla glass so that's not an option.

However, I like the styling of the ATIV S. I like the removable battery and expandable storage. I love the super bright colours and deep blacks of AMOLED screens. I like the price: the unlocked version is only slightly more than the HTC 8X and a lot cheaper than the Lumia 920.

Tough choices.

 

[deuxani]

I have used the ATIV S last week at a Microsoft conference for about 20 minutes and I have to say it did not disappoint. It felt less plasticky than the S3, it's really thin and light (in comparison to the 920) and the blacks of course look a lot darker than on the non AMOLED Phones available. It also felt speedier than the other Windows Phones, which seems rather strange. I guess it was an illussion because of the screen being larger and the animations looking more in your face and the colors more popping. Also the built quality felt really good. The Galaxy Nexus is horrible if you ask me, but this felt a bit above the S3. It also looks much more manly in comparison to the S3.

I personally was going back and forward between waiting for the ATIV S and buying the 920. I decided to get the 920 as, after almost a year, with the Galaxy Nexus, I thought the ATIV S looked boring and "done before" to me. Also, I am afraid of the support Samsung will be giving this device. It almost looks like they made this Phone just to have a Windows Phone, not because they want to make this Phone a hit.

 

[Ruined]

Yeah, keep in mind that AMOLED screens have horrible colour reproductions, they have bad burn-in - and ATIV S has pentile pixel layout - which makes the text and fine details look a bit ****.

If AMOLED is so terrible why did NOKIA use it on the 82x? IMO I think Nokia would have used it on the 920 too if it Samsung hadn't virtually cornered the high end market in that display tech.

Pentile at HD resolutions also is much less noticeable, and reportedly greatly reduces chances of burnin as they are more able to make pixel wear even by using uneven subpixel sizes.

Color may be less accurate but I wouldn't say horrible, and given how much of WP8 revolves around staring at tiles, AMOLED is really ideal for those tiles to pop in particular.


The areas I think Nokia will have Samsung beat no matter how hard they try is: Camera quality, and audio recording quality - mainly because both are above and beyond anything else out there on the 920.

 

[broughshane]

Love the looks of the Samsung Ativ . But !! Only thing that puts me of this phone will be support for it. We all know wp8 is hit and miss with bugs . So if this phone comes bug free it stand a good chance in market sales . After all the Samsung focus running wp7 was the top dog not all that long ago..

 

[mdameron]

Bigger screen with less resolution. You can scratch "bigger screen" off your list as an advantage. 4.5" is more than big enough. I wish Nokia had made the phone smaller and gave us that resolution in a 4.3".

A bigger screen isn't an advantage if you get fewer pixels.

Not everything is about packing more stuff onto a screen. Bigger screen with same pixels = easier on old eyes and fat fingers.

 

[mashuri lambana]

Accessories, since this is based on the famous S3 layout therefore you can find many good cover or casing in the market compare to other models

 

[Stig]

Accessories, since this is based on the famous S3 layout therefore you can find many good cover or casing in the market compare to other models

That would be risky as its a slightly different size and layout.

 

[Brenetics]

Amoled should make WP8 really POP. (I personally prefer AMOLED as well)
Same great camera from the S3.
Expandable storage is HUGE imo.
Big 2300 mAH battery plus AMOLED(should be more efficient since there's a lot of black in WP8) should equal better battery life.

 

[Yamishi]

I find myself quite conflicted on this, too. On the one hand, I love the better battery capacity (which is critically important to me, because I'm home very rarely and sometimes can't plug my phone in for long stretches) and expandable storage. I work in a warehouse cooler and get extremely poor reception in there, PLUS my data plan is very tight. I could probably get by on the 920, but I really, REALLY want to see some real-world battery comparisons. Does the larger screen impact battery life dramatically? Did Nokia use more energy-efficient components? These are answers I need before I decide.

Also, I do wear a collared shirt on many days, so the thinner-and-lighter would be a bonus for me. Also, with the AMOLED vs PureMotion+ (or whatever it's called), I guess I'll have to see them both in motion before I decide.

 

[rmichael75]

Winterfang is anti nokia. he will do anything to support non nokia phones. First it was 8x. now Ativ.. lets see when Attiv lands.

 

[tomatoes11]

The main advantages are the bigger battery, way thinner and lighter profile(much nicer to handle), bigger screen,
and deeper blacks.

The funny thing about all this though is that for all the people whining about the build quality of Samsung phones is that if the Ativ S is anything like the Galaxy S3, it runs circles around the HTX 8 X and Nokia Lumia 920 in true build quality.

No overheating problems, reboots, creaks at the top of the phone, raised screens in one corner, power buttons that get flush after a few weeks, rattling volume rockers or other parts, light leakage through buttons and micro usb ports. Plastic yes but perfect clearance and precision engineered plastic that is tightly packed. Of course this won't go down well homers like Socialcarpet but it is true and anyone that has owned any Samsung mobile product knows it. Of course some claim they owned a GS3 and hate it but they are just full of crap usually.

 

[ammarmalik2011]

If AMOLED is so terrible why did NOKIA use it on the 82x?

Maybe because it's a lower end phone? They used an IPS display on their flagship. HTC used an IPS on their flagship but went with AMOLED on lower end models like One S. Motorola is using IPS displays on new RAZR phones. Apple is using IPS displays too.

 

[tomatoes11]

Maybe because it's a lower end phone? They used an IPS display on their flagship. HTC used an IPS on their flagship but went with AMOLED on lower end models like One S. Motorola is using IPS displays on new RAZR phones. Apple is using IPS displays too.

I really doubt that for a few reasons.

One, Nokia already said why they used that screen in an interview and they mentioned something about it being ridiculously fast, which is consistent with OLED displays.

Two, Samsung and Sony are display veterans and Sony's best medical surgery monitor is OLED and Samsung chooses OLED displays for their high end phones despite having amazing LCD options like the one on the Galaxy camera. However, they do use LCD for most of their tablets including the amazing Nexus 10 display.

Third, there are plenty of nice LCD screens they could have used for their lower end phones. HTC for example could have used the Rezound or Sensation screen for the One S. Besides, I wouldn't call the One S that much lower than the One X since they used the same internals and aluminum for the One S. Nokia could have used the Lumi 710 screen for their lower end models. Also, Nokia used AMOLED for their high end 2011 models like the N9, Lumia 800, and Lumia 900 and they used the LCD for the lower end 710 and 610. So I highly doubt they suddenly pulled a 180 after one year.

 

[Etyrnus]

The main advantages are the bigger battery, way thinner and lighter profile(much nicer to handle), bigger screen,
and deeper blacks.

The funny thing about all this though is that for all the people whining about the build quality of Samsung phones is that if the Ativ S is anything like the Galaxy S3, it runs circles around the HTX 8 X and Nokia Lumia 920 in true build quality.

No overheating problems, reboots, creaks at the top of the phone, raised screens in one corner, power buttons that get flush after a few weeks, rattling volume rockers or other parts, light leakage through buttons and micro usb ports. Plastic yes but perfect clearance and precision engineered plastic that is tightly packed. Of course this won't go down well homers like Socialcarpet but it is true and anyone that has owned any Samsung mobile product knows it. Of course some claim they owned a GS3 and hate it but they are just full of crap usually.

Counter argument: Samsung focus flash-overheated, proximity sensor locked the phone up consistently, came apart if you looked at it wrong. I had one, I know. So don't claim "any" Samsung product.

 

[gsquared]

I had a Sammy Focus and though it was a great phone it had issues just like every other device out there. It got very hot during calls. With Sammy being late to WP8 launch they are in a tough position on this platform. They are bound to loose money on this device.