We use cookies on our websites. Information about cookies and how you can object to the use of cookies at any time or end their use can be found in our privacy policy.

Galaxy S4 with Bigger Screen and Better Camera to Launch in February

Galaxy S4 with Bigger Screen and Better Camera to Launch in February

The Samsung Galaxy S4 is coming soon and  it's rumored to be the first Samsung flagship model to crack 5-inches.

The Galaxy S3 was announced just a wee bit ago, but it seems Samsung is already scheming how to get back into our wallets. Rumors point to the Galaxy S4 having a February 2013 debut at Mobile World Congress in Barcelona.

This news comes to us from the Korea Times, which claims to have an exclusive source at a local Samsung supplier. Other rumored specs are what you'd expect; a quad-core Exynos or Snapdragon processor, LTE-compatible radio and perhaps a flexible display (which will make the device thinner, but not actually flexible).

While we don't know what kind of camera the Samsung Galaxy S4 will have, we're betting Samsung will unveil a phone with a 13-megapixel camera soon, which they were expected to introduce in the Galaxy Note 2 before LG monopolized the company's camera supply chain with their own sensors for the Optimus G. I think it's a pretty safe bet to say that the Galaxy S4's camera will be able to take at least 12MP shots. 

According to Korea Times's source, Samsung's timetable was agreed upon three days after Apple's iPhone 5 event last week. Timing-wise, it's a smart bet for Samsung to to reveal the Galaxy S4 so soon after the Galaxy S3 release as they may be able to scoop up even more disillusioned Apple fans.

Source: Korea Times

Recommended articles


Write new comment:
All changes will be saved. No drafts are saved when editing
Write new comment:
All changes will be saved. No drafts are saved when editing

  • Apple Conspiracy... you my friend...are a f**king champion!

  • @ Steven

    I will answer to you question by question, but not in order of appearance, but theme.

    - the fact that Samsung is already percieved as more innovative than Apple is not my opininion but result of observing the current trends in the global mobile/It mediasphere. It does not however reflect the opinions of "everyday" people not involved in technological discourse, and that brings us to another answer...

    - that Samsung need more of cult following precisely because of that. Cult following is usually asociated with fanboys, and while we could that there is a large amount of Samsung's fanboys out there, it doesn't mean that Samsung has a cult dimension on a larger scale like Apple has.

    This larger scale of cult dimension means that the brand as a sign has reached people who are not interested in technology, only using it. This is the area where Apple dominates and it is a textbook example of high culture values penetrating to mass culture.

    So, finally, the question of method.

    - Apple's method is not beyond comprehension, but it is certainly very difficult to understand and even more difficult to utilize. In fact, the mechanisms inolved in creating what Apple is now are so complex that I firmly believe that even Steve Jobs didn't fully understand it. They are also partialy dependent on historical context that cannot be easily, or at all, reproduced. But, Samsung and competition in general should work more on this understanding. I see that they don't. They are copying some superficial methods of Apple, but they are not very succesful. Samsung is the only one with success of some kind, though, but thanks to something they don't actually control, and invloves signification.

    In short, to understand Apple's methods they need to focus on something not familiar to marketing and technology experts. They need to focus on cultural theories, media theories, visual studies, philosophy of society and sociology, theory of politics, psychology, theoretical pyschoanalysis, social antrophology, iconology and semiotics. Only here, in interdisciplinary approach, can they understand it.
    But most companies don't work on this level. Now they are seeing the price of that. Because Apple did work on this level. Even if they were not fully aware of it.

    Now to the question of innovation...

    - when I said Apple was never innovative, I mean that they never wanted to be., even in 2007. They only wanted to take existing technologies and make something that actually works. The effect of innovation on large scale, ie mobile Revolution, is actually a collateral effect of solving existing problems of convergence between mobile industry and IT industry. In 2007, iPhone opened a new paradigm, but that event, this paradigm shift, is not to be ascribed to iPhone itself, but to the effect of iPhone being an substantial "upgrade" of existing concepts in a typical Apple manner, not new concept itself. Smaller innovations did however occur in ways that this solutions have been implemented, but globally the concept itself was not new (touchscreen app-centric OS-based smartphone).

    And now, when you mentioned design. I agree design is very important and that Apple is cultivating superb design for their products. But, Apple's products are now non-visual. They are turned into a sign, an icon, transparent in their physical appearance. We are trying to decode their visual language but that has no sense at all - they are ethereal and basically we are looking at nothing. There is nothing to actually see in Apple's products. Their meaning has nothing to do with design, and as long as they are cultivating this transparent iconic approach, that is "no design" approach, Apple will be totally non-visual.

    To see something visually, you must destroy the signification projected on it. And Apple's products are extremely signified. Therefore, their objective qualities are not visible.

  • Tyler Sep 17, 2012 Link to comment

    If they get rid of that stupid home button I would consider this phone. My contract doesn't end next June so as of right now I'm still waiting to see what Motorola puts out and what the new Nexus phones hold in store.

  • Nice. My contract runs out in February so hopefully I can get the S3 for free!!

  • Nobody is discrediting Apple for what they did, as I have repeatedly said that without them, our Android phones would still look like Blackberrys. That being said, I won't credit them for something they simply did not do.

    Again, as I also stated in the comment I made earlier, the iPhone's design is certainly very impressive. But what you consistently seem to ignore is that the design they used was inspired by another design, which is exactly what Samsung and multiple Android OEMs have done as well. Nobody here is attacking the iPhone, yet you make it out to be like people are. Apple deserves credit in their designs, and they did a great job making IOS a consumer friendly mobile operating system.

    Apple present themselves as if they invented the smartphone. Period. They didn't. If I create the most sexy looking jet design in the world, it doesn't mean I created the jet. That's what Apple has done and deserve credit for: inventing an extremely slick design for a smartphone, and a user friendly operating system (that was inspired by previous operating systems before it).

    Of course Apple should be credited for their designs, but they are NOT inventions. They are alterations. They talk like they were never inspired by anything, which is complete BS. Were it not for Microsoft and the groundbreaking work they did with computers in the first place, Apple wouldn't exist. The iPod wouldn't exist without the thousands of MP3 players that came to the market before it. The Macbook wouldn't exist without the hundreds of laptops that Dell, HP, ect came out with before it.

    And that dovetails directly into my next point: There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. Apple did a fantastic job, but at the same time, they attack companies for doing exactly the same thing that they have repeatedly done in the past. Remember what Steve Jobs said in "Triumph of the Nerds"? I quote:

    "We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas".

    You should really think about Steve's words before you give him credit for things he simply didn't do. That's not saying he accomplished nothing, as to say that would simply be ignorant. But giving him credit for the modern smartphone is just as ignorant to do, which is something that Apple indirectly attempts to make consumers believe.

  • Oh, and just one more thing: if you give me a super fast phone with tons of crapware and an ugly UI, or a phone that's designed beautifully with a slightly slower processor, I'm going to pick the second model and -- outside the modding community --- I think many people would do the same.

  • Eric, What is more important for a smartphone manufacturer than to be good at design? Design affects everything. from the look of a homescreen, to the placement of icons, to the way the phone feels in your hand, to the way it takes pictures....EVERYTHING. So to say, sort of flippantly, that the ONLY thing Apple improved upon was design is kind of like saying, "well the only thing NASA improved upon was flying to Mars" (ie, they actually pulled it off).

    I'm not a huge Apple fanboy, but I don't believe you need to discredit and discount what Apple did for the smartphone in order to be a fan of the Android OS.

    Everything else I agree with you: if customers were to actually look at specs, rather than just have a knee-jerk "I NEED THAT" reaction to everything Apple produces, the market would be a much fairer place. But as it stands, Apple has such a good track record, that many people are willing to buy whatever they put out.

    But the fact is, that might all be changing. Apple may be on its way towards a slow decline. They have become too big to take risks, and I think that could negatively affect the future of the company.

    ...which still doesn't mean you need to attack the first iPhone. Design, after all, is incredibly important to consumers, as it should be, and the first iPhone improved the design of the smartphone so enormously that it deserved its success.

  • @Steven - I gotta go with Apple Conspiracy here, and here's why:

    The first iPhone, while an innovative product, was certainly nothing new. They, like Samsung, simply took an existing concept, added a better (and very impressive at that) design, and marketed the f**k out of it. The real "innovation" (which was also inspired from an existing concept) that came from Apple is the operating system (IOS) itself. Again..Apple didn't invent the smartphone...they simply popularized it. They were by no means the first to create such a concept, and I''d be willing to bet money they would have never gotten the idea had it not been for existing concepts. Same applies to Windows/IOS and laptops/Macbooks: See existing product, slap our own design on it, and market it like there's no tomorrow. The only thing that Apple is TRULY innovative at is design.

    Samsung needing more a cult following is the only thing holding them back from being the most popular smartphone company in the world (not the one who sells the most). It's that cult following that keeps iPhone users returning to these slightly updated products, and Samsung gets that, which is why you see the massive surge in the amount of Sammys advertising.

    Fact of the matter is, Apple users DON'T care about actual technology. If they did, a big portion of them would be on Android, as Android moves technologically faster than Apple does in terms of chips, memory, displays, and more. While Samsung's newest attack ad isn't the way to do it, Apple users who become more aware of what Android has to offer will play a huge part in getting them to consider Android.

  • Apple Conspiracy:

    "Samsung is already positioned as more innovative than Apple. "

    Says who? You? I don't get it..

    "Actually, the whole thing about Apple being innovative is that we know it isn't. But, we also don't know that it NEVER WAS."

    Never? Really? Are you trying to tell me the first iPhone wasn't innovative?

    "But when they upgraded for the first time (iPhone of 2007), it was INTERPRETED as innovation. "

    So, the first iPhone was an upgrade of what? The Palm Pre? The LG Prada? If so, I agree. There are numerous instances of prior art (like the evidence the court in the Samsung v. Apple trial threw out for no apparent reason). But calling it an "upgrade" is not really the insult you think it is. Actually, upgrading is what every technological innovation technically is. If you were to look at things from a certain vantage, you could call every single innovation an upgrade. Microwaves = an upgrade for ovens! Chairs = an upgrade from sitting on boulders. Etc., Etc. So it's really not an insult to call the first iPhone an upgrade.


    "Samsung needs more of cult following. "

    Actually, I'm pretty sure there are plenty of Android and Samsung fanboys out there. If you look at the top posts in Android's Reddit page, you'll see more defensive posts about Apple than in Apple's forum.

    "But, to gain true popularity of Apple - that is, in a mass market - among people who don't care about technology, they would need something stronger - and there is no stronger method than the one that Apple is using."

    What method? Are we talking about marketing here? Yes, Apple is quite strong in marketing their products, but how would you suggest Samsung market their own products? Personally, I feel the attack ads are getting stale. In any case, it's quite easy to tell Samsung they need something "stronger," but you've got to be specific here. How?

  • @ Stefan

    Well, it proved that the whole successfulness of the product almost entirely depends on signification and not technicalities. Of course, technicalities are neccesary "alibi", a base for signifiers. But it's not about that.

    @ Steven

    Samsung is already positioned as more innovative than Apple. Actually, the whole thing about Apple being innovative is that we know it isn't. But, we also don't know that it NEVER WAS. They were always just upgrading. But when they upgraded for the first time (iPhone of 2007), it was INTERPRETED as innovation. Now, they are still upgrading, but is isn't interpreted in the same way.

    So, being innovative has nothing to do with successfullness just like technical specs don't..

    Samsung needs more of cult following. And I think it goes in the right direction. There are already thousands of people on every portal that look like Samsung fanatics. It is also reflected on stronger sales every year.
    But, to gain true popularity of Apple - that is, in a mass market - among people who don't care about technology, they would need something stronger - and there is no stronger method than the one that Apple is using.

  • Well, a 5 inch smartphone with ABSOLUTELY NO bezel would be about of the size of my SII, but that's still science fiction :P

  • Anna, if they work on decreasing the bezel, the size of the actual phone should stay pocket-able while still rocking a slightly larger screen.

  • No, bumping specs won't draw the Apple faithful away from chapel but, if I'm a good representative of the target, features can go a long way.

  • Stefen yes your right what I meant was the lack of a hardware menu button meant you lost a Lot of the screen, in a lot of apps including there launchers I like

  • One of the reasons I bought the Galaxy S2 last year was the fact it had a physical button. It rocks. Period.
    I would never buy a 5 inch phone no matter who manufactured it or how many awesome new features it has. I don't know about you guys, but I don't carry around any bags or purses so I always carry my phone around in my pocket. I was worried my SII wouldn't fit but thankfully it does. So how would I put a 5+ inch phone in my pocket??

  • The One X does have hardware buttons - capacitive buttons are not part of the screen. And with newer firmware, you don't get that navigation bar with just the menu button anymore, I read - they offered the mapping to have long press app switch button to menu button. I wish the S3 would at least work that way, I HATE long pressing home key.

  • Apple Conspiracy...I don't know if it will change anything, but if they unveil even more outstanding features (which I'm sure they will), it will position Samsung as a far more innovative player than Apple, especially since the iPhone 5 barely added anything new to the table. Specs and feature-wise, we don't really know anything right now, but if this is released in February, I think that's good timing.

  • No way there best thing about the s3 is the hardware buttons. The one x has no hardware buttons and you lose the screen space to menu buttons on the screen. The s3 keeps the same size screen clear because off the buttons

  • Well, the iPhone 5 is basically just bumping up specs, and it seems to be selling well. Who proved what where?

    I just hope Samsung makes the leap to get rid of hardware keys. With 5" and a software navigation bar you'd have about the same screen space for normal apps as the S3 (which is plenty) and for certain things where you can never have enough (like videos) you'd have more. Do it, Samsung, do it now!

  • "Timing-wise, it's a smart bet for Samsung to keep to reveal the Galaxy S4 in such a short time as they could provide a very compelling alternative to the newest member of the iPhone family"

    Isn't Galaxy SIII already compelling alternative to iPhone 5? Do you think bumping up specs AGAIN will change anything? It's already proven that they won't.

Write new comment:
All changes will be saved. No drafts are saved when editing