I would pay more for Samsung with stock Android. Well I would have in the past now I can just buy a Pixel.
GrapheneOS works wonderfully on the Pixels.
Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previous Galaxy A52s
131–140 of 151 posts
Re: Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previous Galaxy A52s
#132Just like my Galaxy S10 Plus with 512gb (2019) feels identical to my new and expensive Sony Xperia 1 III (2021)
Sony Xperia is one of the most intriguing phones to me. Im currently on an iphone 8 still kicking. If it had a removable battery I would buy it in a heartbeat, I dont think Ill ever need to replace my phone as long as it has good battery health. Problem is, there are almost no phones on the market that do have one. Last one I had was a LG G3.
Nah, they really dropped the ball with updates. 2 years of security updates for a 1200€ phone?? Note the clock starts ticking as soon as they announce the phone, and it takes ages before it is actually available, resulting in about 1.5 years of security updates. This is laughable for a flagship and should result in a boycott.
Re: Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previous Galaxy A52s
#133I 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…
> Does anyone know why their software is just so so bad?
I have never heard of any software developer in the US aspiring to work at Samsung. I assume their pay to quality of life at work ratio is pretty bad.
Re: Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previous Galaxy A52s
#134The exynos vs snapdragon issue is a long standing issue with Samsung. There's also very significant differences between the flagship phones like the S22 ultra sold in EU (exynos) and the ones sold in the US or Asia (snapdragon) Getting an Exynos galaxy means more thermal throttling, lower performances and is just not competitive with other brands for the budget.
It also alternates between versions. Sometimes Exynos is better, and sometimes Snapdragon is. Somehow, this also has a massive impact on picture quality.
This nonsense made me go out of my way to buy a Pixel 5 (in 2022) instead of an S22. Those are the only two reasonably-sized phones I could find.
Re: Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previous Galaxy A52s
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
I will continue buying refurbished LG V35s until they either become impossible to find, or carriers stop supporting 4G LTE. Not that I've needed to buy a refurbished LG V35 yet- it's going on 3.5 years without missing a beat. The only bloatware was LG's personal fitness app, and a handful of carrier stuff that was easily uninstalled or disabled. My old V20 was similarly durable, besides OLED burn-in after about 3 yea…
>I will continue buying refurbished LG V35s What's so good about them?
Battery life is very good, minimal bloatware, good display, adequate camera, wireless charging, headphone jack, noticeably superior audio chipset (which is great for my big headphones), fits in my hand, snappy UI responses, fast charging support, new enough OS to support all the apps I use.
It is still more than enough phone for me, 4 years after it was released. It's showing no signs of slowing down, either.
Re: Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previous Galaxy A52s
#136The exynos vs snapdragon issue is a long standing issue with Samsung. There's also very significant differences between the flagship phones like the S22 ultra sold in EU (exynos) and the ones sold in the US or Asia (snapdragon) Getting an Exynos galaxy means more thermal throttling, lower performances and is just not competitive with other brands for the budget.
I thought both samsung and qualcomm dropped their custom cores for exynos and snapdragon at this point. So is there still such a huge difference between the two? Aren't both of them using the best arm licensed core? I get that for some reason apple sillicon like performance won't happen but this is just sad from samsung. Also samsung seems to be doing something fishy with benchmark results. It seems like exynos has b…
Snapdragon 888 vs Exynos 2100 is great comparison because they use same process and almost same Cortex core. https://www.anandtech.com/show/16463/snapdragon-888-vs-exyno...
I wish I could read this review in 8 Gen1 vs 2200, but the writer took apart from Anandtech.
Re: Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previous Galaxy A52s
#137I 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…
Samsung tend to install bloats, but also there's a history that stock Android lacks features and Samsung implement it and ported to AOSP. I still miss some big features on AOSP that available on OneUI/MIUI/whatever.
Re: Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previous Galaxy A52s
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
I will continue buying refurbished LG V35s until they either become impossible to find, or carriers stop supporting 4G LTE. Not that I've needed to buy a refurbished LG V35 yet- it's going on 3.5 years without missing a beat. The only bloatware was LG's personal fitness app, and a handful of carrier stuff that was easily uninstalled or disabled. My old V20 was similarly durable, besides OLED burn-in after about 3 yea…
>I will continue buying refurbished LG V35s What's so good about them?
[deleted]
Re: Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previous Galaxy A52s
#139If the Note 9 is any indication, it's not the hardware, it's the bloody software - Samsung is seemingly terrible at it! The North American Note 9 used a Snapdragon 845 SoC while the European version used Samsung's own Exynos 9810. The Exynos consistently benched lower, had worse battery life and ran hotter. The upside was that the Exynos version has an unlocked bootloader, which is huge imo. With a custom kernel made…
> Sadly, flashing a custom ROM on it involves tripping an eFuse and losing some Samsung functionality, but if you don't care about Samsung Pay and whatever other "secure" garbage they offer, it's worth it. It's not just Samsung Pay you'll lose. Blow the eFuse and you'll play constant cat-and-mouse with Google Pay, Netflix and a shitload of banking apps. It's really sad that we have to choose between rooting our devic…
Oh, the other stuff is just because of root access. Tbh, the only inconvenience for me is banking apps, but fortunately no one canceled the browser + websites yet.
As for Netflix and others, I don't understand why they accept Widevine (the daft DRM on phones, unlocking Samsungs leads to 720p max resolution or something instead of 4K). It's not like it curbs piracy lol
Re: Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previous Galaxy A52s
#140This is similar to my experience when S22 was launched and I've got down voted for that [1]. In my case, my two years old (two gen older) S20 entry level smartphone has actually more RAM and better display screen resolution compared to the newly launched S22.
[1] Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra: