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

Samsung’s Foldable Phone Is the $1,980 Galaxy Fold

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 204 posts

Re: Samsung’s Foldable Phone Is the $1,980 Galaxy Fold

#181

Post by rchaud »

malshe wrote: post #176
Rallen89 wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> On the other hand the number of students using macs ranges from 5% to 80% depending on the type of the class (undergrad, full time masters, executive masters, PhD) and the country Did you see a trend with the type of class, did the PhD classes have a Different distribution or was it other factors that affected it

I see most PhD students in business management with Windows computers. There Macs have 5%-10% incidence rate in my experience. I work with a few CS profs and their students and all the profs use Macs and their students use either Windows or Linux (I think) machines :) I spoke with two of them who use new MBPs before buying mine and they strongly recommended buying it. In some executive teaching in Europe I have seen…

Anyone in a business-focused program will suffer with a Mac as Excel for Mac is very much a second-class citizen. Forget not having PowerPivot and PowerBI, the lack of keyboard shortcuts alone will slow your work to a crawl.

Re: Samsung’s Foldable Phone Is the $1,980 Galaxy Fold

#182

Post by rchaud »

manmal wrote: post #14
coryfklein wrote: post #2

More like a foldable tablet that can make phone calls. What I like is it eliminates one device you may be carrying around. If you previously had a $900 phone and a $1100 tablet, you could essentially have both for the same price and fit them in your pocket.

I find it hard to believe that this ~7“ device with a strange aspect ratio and without a foldable keyboard can replace a $1100 tablet like a Surface Pro or a 12.9“ iPad Pro.

The aspect ratio is only slightly narrower than that of an iPad Mini, so I doubt videos or games would be affected. Responsive design means websites wouldn't be affected at all, but you might get the "16:10 tablet" layout as opposed to the "4:3" iPad layout.

Re: Samsung’s Foldable Phone Is the $1,980 Galaxy Fold

#183

Post by rchaud »

franciscojgo wrote: post #3

That just seems gimmicky at best IMO. No ecosystem. I expect it will sell for 2-3 years and then die off and have them lose money on it. What type of niche market actually needs a phone that can display 3 apps at once and fold down to a brick sized phone? It's good that companies take these leaps of fate but they sort of seem reaching. Why not wait and keep pushing the tech until it's worth releasing a beautiful prod…

> Why not wait and keep pushing the tech until it's worth releasing a beautiful product that can capture actual market share?

I can only speak for myself, but I have been waiting. Since 2011, to be precise, which is when Sanyo and I believe Sony came out with 4.3 inch phones that folded out into 7-inch tablets.

If there's any company that can invest properly in this form factor, it's Samsung, so I'm glad they're doing this.

Certainly not going to buy it at that price point though!

Re: Samsung’s Foldable Phone Is the $1,980 Galaxy Fold

#184

Post by rchaud »

mcphage wrote: post #30

I guess smartphones getting too expensive isn't a thing anymore?

It's not. I had a Nokia X6 w/ 64GB storage and 6GB RAM shipped to me from HK for US$300. Lots of good deals on devices from Xiaomi and Huawei as well.

Samsung sells smartphones from $50 to (now) $2000. You are taking the highest possible price point and using that to push an argument about phone prices in general.

Re: Samsung’s Foldable Phone Is the $1,980 Galaxy Fold

#185

Post by llampx »

megy wrote: post #140
voltagex_ wrote: post #135

$2,747.35 AUD if it was going to be a 1 to 1 conversion (which it won't). I'm being priced out of high end smartphones, and I have a well paying job. This does not feel good.

WTF? If you have a high paying job, this is a couple of days work, and it is tax deducible in oz if you work in the industry.

A well-paying job... I don't know if I'd call $168/hr a well-paying job or use some other superlative.

Re: Samsung’s Foldable Phone Is the $1,980 Galaxy Fold

#186

Post by tinus_hn »

ksec wrote: post #175

Both the Samsung S10 Series and the Fold are technical Marvel. Even if you are an Apple user one should appreciate how Samsung's technology are improving. The OLED is 1200 nit, while the reporting numbers are always off to actual testing results, it is still an amazing achievement to have 1000+ nit. Purely from a Hardware Perspective, this is the best you can buy with no Trade oFfs. Apart from a slightly slower Singl…

My iPhone has a screen and I’m fine with it. And it isn’t even the top model! I don’t need a solarium display.

Apple will release phones with foldable displays when they invent a real use case for it. Apple wouldn’t be able to rely on iOS if they released shitty phones. But they don’t.

Re: Samsung’s Foldable Phone Is the $1,980 Galaxy Fold

#187

Post by mcphage »

rchaud wrote: post #184
mcphage wrote: post #30

I guess smartphones getting too expensive isn't a thing anymore?

It's not. I had a Nokia X6 w/ 64GB storage and 6GB RAM shipped to me from HK for US$300. Lots of good deals on devices from Xiaomi and Huawei as well. Samsung sells smartphones from $50 to (now) $2000. You are taking the highest possible price point and using that to push an argument about phone prices in general.

> You are taking the highest possible price point and using that to push an argument about phone prices in general.

Is that the highest possible price? I see the article says "starting at $1,980" but I don't know where it goes from there.

Re: Samsung’s Foldable Phone Is the $1,980 Galaxy Fold

#188

Post by rrix2 »

jshevek wrote: post #138
rrix2 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you access the kindle when you're not at home?

Based on the voting pattern at this point, I think several people may have misunderstood his last comment. He is the original person to post in support of a better phone based reading experience, not the Kindle advocate. So he prefers to carry one device, and uses his phone to read.

Yeah, I'll admit I didn't notice that. My apologies.
Post reply on HN