Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previous Galaxy A52s

comparedial.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 151 posts

Re: Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previous Galaxy A52s

#61

Post by mardifoufs »

the_snooze wrote: post #31
Darmody wrote: post #15

I can't believe how bad Samsung has become. You pay them extra to avoid "Chinese brands" and you get ads everywhere, bloated devices with very bad performance. I'm still using a Galaxy Note 10.1 2014 Edition and even if it's slow, it still works pretty well. It has some stuff in it that I can't get rid off but overall is a great tablet. I've used countless Samsung devices ever since and I only see the quality going d…

Does anyone know why their software is just so so bad? I have Samsung phones for testing and development work, and I don't understand why anyone would ever use these things. They're loaded down with so much half-assed knockoff shovelware of common services, some of which have ads, and nearly all of which keep issuing out useless notifications. It's like Samsung forgot that phones serve people, not the other way aroun…

One UI is pretty good. Probably the best version of android especially w.r.t consistency. But yes the camera software is... okay at best. The sensors are great but the software processing makes it impossible to have iPhone-tier pictures. The only other problem with One UI is that it often has one google app and one samsung app for doing the same thing, but I guess that's just necessary due to google policy.

The galaxy store is useless too, but the new optional samsung apps that you can get from there can be awesome. The Sound Assistant app has been a game changer and it's only available on the galaxy store

Re: Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previous Galaxy A52s

#62

Post by bee_rider »

the_snooze wrote: post #31
Darmody wrote: post #15

I can't believe how bad Samsung has become. You pay them extra to avoid "Chinese brands" and you get ads everywhere, bloated devices with very bad performance. I'm still using a Galaxy Note 10.1 2014 Edition and even if it's slow, it still works pretty well. It has some stuff in it that I can't get rid off but overall is a great tablet. I've used countless Samsung devices ever since and I only see the quality going d…

Does anyone know why their software is just so so bad? I have Samsung phones for testing and development work, and I don't understand why anyone would ever use these things. They're loaded down with so much half-assed knockoff shovelware of common services, some of which have ads, and nearly all of which keep issuing out useless notifications. It's like Samsung forgot that phones serve people, not the other way aroun…

Suspicion: Samsung sees itself as a hardware and component company first, and doesn't prioritize the quality of these user-facing apps.

Re: Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previous Galaxy A52s

#63

Post by criddell »

tpmx wrote: post #32

Fight me: Single-core performance is still much more important than multi-core performance for most things you do on a phone, including web browsing.

I think you underestimate how many games people play on their phones.

Re: Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previous Galaxy A52s

#64

Post by bee_rider »

duxup wrote: post #59
the_snooze wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does anyone know why their software is just so so bad? I have Samsung phones for testing and development work, and I don't understand why anyone would ever use these things. They're loaded down with so much half-assed knockoff shovelware of common services, some of which have ads, and nearly all of which keep issuing out useless notifications. It's like Samsung forgot that phones serve people, not the other way aroun…

>Does anyone know why their software is just so so bad? Is Samsung "good at software" at all? I'm wondering if maybe Samsung's skill set as a company just doesn't include software / they don't have the people who know how to manage software development / products / teams and etc? I remember ages ago I had a Samsung phone and their software started to trickle out and I thought "woah they're just getting started it see…

Their hard drives are pretty reliable as far as I've seen, which would seem to indicate that they don't regularly mess up the drivers I guess.

Re: Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previous Galaxy A52s

#65

Post by ssully »

lkxijlewlf wrote: post #8

Day to day, anything past an iPhone 6s or 7 and phones pretty much feel the same speed. If you game or edit pics or anything else that needs a faster proc, sure, you'll notice not having the fastest phone. But if you email, reddit, HN, twitter, etc, you're really not going to notice much. Rumors are the iPhone 14 will have the same A15 and only the Pro will get the A16. I think you'll see a bunch of people freak out…

I don't keep up on phone rumors. Do you think the 14 will stick with the A15 to get the regular iPhone lower in price compared to the Pro?

Re: Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previous Galaxy A52s

#66

Post by Sohcahtoa82 »

gruez wrote: post #9
lkxijlewlf wrote: post #8

Day to day, anything past an iPhone 6s or 7 and phones pretty much feel the same speed. If you game or edit pics or anything else that needs a faster proc, sure, you'll notice not having the fastest phone. But if you email, reddit, HN, twitter, etc, you're really not going to notice much. Rumors are the iPhone 14 will have the same A15 and only the Pro will get the A16. I think you'll see a bunch of people freak out…

>reddit, [...] twitter Probably not the best examples because they have bloated webapps that are pretty slow/laggy.

If you're using reddit on mobile, use any app besides the official one. Personally, I use Bacon Reader.

If you're on desktop, use the old reddit layout, and install RES if you can.

Nearly every complaint I see about reddit's UX is because of people using the official app (Seriously, how is the official app the worst one?) or the new reddit UX.

As for Twitter, I've never felt its website or app to be slow on mobile.

Re: Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previous Galaxy A52s

#67

Post by rejectfinite »

TonyTrapp wrote: post #57
the_snooze wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does anyone know why their software is just so so bad? I have Samsung phones for testing and development work, and I don't understand why anyone would ever use these things. They're loaded down with so much half-assed knockoff shovelware of common services, some of which have ads, and nearly all of which keep issuing out useless notifications. It's like Samsung forgot that phones serve people, not the other way aroun…

For what it's worth, even outside Android their software is horrible. Check out Samsung Magician, their SSD tool [0]. That UI just doesn't make any sense. Samsung is a hardware company (and they're great at that), can't remember any good software from them, ever. [0] https://i.imgur.com/lbqdn8i.png

That looks like the old interface.

Here it is on my machine, latest version

https://i.imgur.com/dg9JOr2.png

Not saying this is better :D

Re: Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previous Galaxy A52s

#68

Post by Tade0 »

I was just thinking that Samsung's recent chip manufacturing capabilities appear to look somewhat disappointing on paper. Didn't expect a confirmation right away.

I used to buy their products, because back in the early 2010s they we're successful as an alternative to Apple - in terms for bang/buck ratio at least.

I won't be switching anytime soon because my Galaxy S8 is holding up decently, but news such as these here will make me think twice about choosing them again.

Post reply on HN