I was expecting a high-end Galaxy S III mini, not this downgrade, low spec’d device. It’s not even a GSII, worse than it. 5 MP camera and Pentile display. I think they had a good idea in making a smaller version: however, they left way too much out in terms of features.
I can’t argue there. I have the S3 and I wouldn’t buy it but my point is that not everyone needs a super phone like the Note II or the GS3. The Galaxy S III mini is targeted at a different market to iPhone 5, i.e., those who want an entry level 4′ smart phone. It’s for those who want a nice looking phone without spending fortunes.
Samsung Galaxy S III mini Specs:
- 4-inch Super AMOLED screen with WVGA resolution
- 1GHz dual-core processor
- 5 megapixel camera with autofocus and LED flash
- VGA front-facing camera
- 8GB or 16GB of internal storage
- microSD slot that supports up to 32GB
- WiFi, GPS, NFC, Bluetooth 4.0
- 1,500 mAh battery
- FM Radio (RDS)
- Android 4.1 Jelly Bean OS
- Network: HSPA 14.4/5.76 900/1900/2100 EDGE/GPRS 850/900/1800/1900
- Connectivity: WiFi a/b/g/n, WiFi HT40 GPS/GLONASS NFC Bluetooth? 4.0(LE)
- Dimensions: 121.55mm (4.79in) x 63mm (2.48in) x 9.85mm (0.39in), 111.5 g (3.93oz)
I think Samsung missed the boat on this one. If your going to call it the SIII Mini then give it the same specs (or at least as close as you can) to the original (what is with the downgraded display and processor). That is the device I wanted to buy (an S3 that fits in one hand (and pocket) comfortably). This device is nice but should have not carried the SIII name. Instead maybe the Samsung Galaxy ‘Lite’ or something. People have expectations from a device that carries the SIII name.