Samsung

Samsung has diversified its product portfolio even further by launching four new smartphones running Android 4.4 KitKat that are geared toward budget consumers.

The new additions to the Galaxy lineup includes the Galaxy Core II, Galaxy Ace 4, Galaxy Young 2 and the Galaxy Star 2. All smartphones feature Samsung's TouchWiz Essence skin, which is essentially a lightweight version of the standard TouchWiz user interface.

The Galaxy Core II, as the name indicates, is the second-generation handset in the Galaxy Core line, and comes with a 4.5-inch screen (resolution hasn't been mentioned, but it is likely a WVGA display), 1.2 GHz quad-core CPU, 768 MB RAM and 4 GB internal memory (microSD slot up to 64 GB). The dual-SIM toting handset also comes with a 5 MP camera at the back, a 2,000 mAh battery and will be offered in white and black color variants.

Oddly enough, Samsung seems to have trimmed down the hardware on the Galaxy Core II from the original model, as the first-gen Galaxy Core featured 1 GB RAM, 8 GB internal memory and the same 1.2 GHz quad-core CPU. Samsung hasn't provided any details for the move, but it is likely that this device will be targeted at an even lower price point.

Galaxy Core II

While the Galaxy Core II is a 3G-only handset, the Galaxy Ace 4 will be offered in both 3G and LTE versions. The 3G model has a dual-core 1 GHz CPU, 512 MB RAM and a 1,500 mAh battery, while the 4G variant features a 1.2 GHz CPU, 1 GB RAM and an 1,800 mAh battery. The rest of the hardware is the same, which includes a 4-inch WVGA screen, 4 GB internal memory along with a microSD slot that can accommodate 64 GB of storage, 5 MP camera and a VGA front shooter.

Galaxy Ace 4

For those looking for smaller form factor devices, the Galaxy Young 2 and the Galaxy Star 2 offer a 3.5-inch display, single-core 1GHz processor, 512 MB RAM, 4 GB storage, microSD card slot, 3 MP camera (2 MP on the Galaxy Star 2) and a 1,300 mAh battery.

Galaxy Young 2

Galaxy Star 2

Samsung hasn't announced pricing or availability details for these handsets, but considering the hardware, these models will likely be offered in emerging markets. It is strange that Samsung hasn't decided to roll out an affordable handset with better hardware specs, seeing as how devices like the Moto E and Moto G are getting a lot of consumer attention in emerging markets.

What do you think of Samsung's new products? If you're looking for a budget handset, would you be interested in any of these handsets?

Source: Samsung Tomorrow

 

Reader comments

Samsung launches four entry-level devices, Moto E competitor not in sight

50 Comments

I think they will sell a load of them just because of the brand name. But if I was the buyer, it'd be one of Moto phones

When did Moto phones sold more than Samsung? You're making it sound as if Moto is the highest seller. Moto is not even top 5. I am sure Samsung doesn't need to learn anything from Moto about marketing and product placement. if this was the case, Moto wouldn't be tossed around every 2 years..

The writter of the article never stated Moto was the top seller. However if you venture to sites like amazon Moto has been the top seller for unlocked phones for some time with the moto G in various countries. This is the US link (http://www.amazon.com/unlocked-cell-phones/b/ref=wl_nav_left_cpa_400?ie=...)

They may not need to learn from moto in the high end spectrum but sureley motos lower end offering beats out the competition in numerous standpoints. If you prefer Samsung for the brand then that is fine but in terms of specs and price, moto is doing quite well at offering consumer/budget friendly devices that work well.

They have plenty to learn but because of people like you they feel they don't have to and get away doing great hardware with crappy software.

Posted via Android Central App

I wouldn't call Samsung hardware great anyday beside the camera, all their phones are cheap plastic, very light and fragile, and ugly design. In term of internal hardware performance, it's nothing special either, all the other manufacturers have phones just as fast, but actually faster since they lack Touchwiz.

The question is about SALES. If you don't have the patience to read the comment properly, don't waste your time replying. I have not used low grade Samsung or Moto to make any comparison.

Moto is making a killing with their affordable handsets. Samsung would be wise to learn from them, because as developed markets mature, the areas for growth will be the places where moto is doing well.

Posted via Android Central App

KitKat is optimized to run on 1 GB RAM at least or so I thought. With Samsung's skin on top - some of those phones sound like they could be really sluggish.
The people who tend to get them or who are recommended them often don't know a lot about smartphones and they will blame any poor experience or any frustrations on Android. So, to sum it up, not brilliant and not impressed, even budget devices should have decent and acceptable standards.

Posted via Android Central App on my Motorola XT890 RAZR i

Kit Kat is optimized to run on as little as 512mb RAM. The original test devices were stripped down Nexus 4s with 1Ghz processor and 512mb RAM.

Posted via Android Central App

Thanks, that's fair enough I wasn't sure. Even so I don't think performance of these phones will be very good even if TouchWiz is a lighter, pared down version.

Posted via Android Central App on my Motorola XT890 RAZR i

They all look extremely meh. 3.5 inch screen? Did I read that right? I'm not sure anyone wants a screen that size anymore. Weak battery's too. The prices will tell if these actually sell. I'm sure they will be cheaper than Motorolas. Its just why would you buy one when for just a little bit more you would get so much more value for money

Posted via Android Central App

People want all kinds of sizes. Much bigger and much smaller than what you prefer. Don't be obtuse.
Posted via Android Central App

I never said "nobody wants a screen that size" I said " I'm not sure anybody wants a screen that size anymore." Don't know why you're calling me "obtuse". The only people I see with screens smaller than 4.5 inches these days are the people who use pre 2004 released phones. Usually people who have no interest in smartphones. Just my personal experience. I don't know how a personal experience makes me "obtuse".

Posted via Android Central App

once again on this site morons argue when someone just makes a small logical point. people see what they want to see. nothing pleases a moron more than arguing about technology. this site is turning into dog shite because people wont stop attacking people

The small screen and lower pixel count takes much less batter to power it. Doesn't need a bigger battery, and it will very likely last longer than a flagship with one charge.

I would buy a 3.5' phone, it would fit better in my women's pockets. Only if they put 2 gb of RAM and better specs, though.

Yeah thats my big problem. You can buy cheap phones with 1gb of ram. Why would anyone settle for less? The screen is a preference I get that. Once again I never claimed that no one wants a smaller screen. I find 4.5 inch easy to use with one hand fits fine in my pockets but then again its a preference

Posted via Android Central App

You did claim that no one wants a smaller screen, but whatever.
"3.5 inch screen? I'm not sure anyone wants a screen that size anymore. "

I said "not sure" not "nobody wants..." I explained myself replying to the other person anyway. Not sure why multiple people have attacked me over that

Posted via Android Central App

I originally did not attack, but volunteered that I would be one to buy a small screen. Then you felt you still had to defend yourself, so once you had I pointed out that your choice of words did imply that no one would want a phone that small.

Sorry I didn't say you attacked a couple others did but they deleted the comments. I agreed with your point on screens. Preference is preference. I personally don't see why people are debating me but then again its probably just my wording didn't get across what I was trying to say

Posted via Android Central App

i too prefer a smaller screen. mainly because im a clumsy idiot but you cant deny that people seem to prefer a bigger screen. im the only person in my work place with a 3.5 inch screen. its an old samsung galaxy young. everyone else has a big 5 or a 4.5 inch screen. its nice to see a new 3.5 inch i will probably pick one up

you are an idiot. why would you say that nobody ever in the history of our planet who could see other modern day phones would ever take a 3.5 inch screen?

Ace 4 3G: 1,500 mAh (not "1,50 mAh")

Posted via Android Central App on my HP TouchPad (Schizoid PAC-ROM 4.2.2)

it is stated that samsung has weakened in the current quarter in low to mid range phones so they must price these phones very competitively so as not to lose that market

Samsung either sells a crapton of these in other countries or they don't care much to make devices to go up against Nexus, Moto G and Moto E in terms of internals and price. There are some better chipsets that Qualcomm has that would be good for a mid-range $200-300 Galaxy Mega type phone if Samsung would see the potential value in such a device.

Throwing even more devices to market, why not just make 1 or 2 good low spec devices instead of 20 with so many names you forget.

Posted via Android Central App

these phones are not for you, you should know that by know and this strategy will help them gain some of their market share in the low end market

Ummm, he never implied that the devices didn't have a place in the market or that they shouldn't be offered. But, before you get all defensive, actually read what he is saying: you don't need 20 different models of budget smartphone to cater to individuals in those markets. It's overkill, plain and simple.

who says we dont need 20 different models for budget smartphones? they could be for different countries with different needs as well. its not overkill when it doesnt affect people who are not going to buy them anyway

They're all absolutely terrible! They'll sell like hot cakes though simply because of the brand. People love 'em some Samsung!

Posted via Android Central App

Terrible specs yet will sell like hotcakes in emerging markets due to brand popularity.

Posted via Android Central App

Everyone deserves a device they can use on all levels most manufacturers can't do that Samsung has.

From my Galaxy Note 3 via Android Central App

Don't know why they are going for this market range. They would be so much better off going for the middish range. Like 300 euro range

Posted via Android Central App

A budget-conscious 4" phone sounds nice but 3.5"? Not only that, they're single-core, with low storage (having a huge microSD doesn't always help), and very low MP camera. Even if they're sub-$50 phones I don't see how they can stand up to modern software and lifestyle demands.

In the modern world oems should just stop making phones with less than a gig of ram and a small quad core. And how about a lil extra battery power instead of barely enough. With the state of technology a decent usuable phone should be available for $129 or less. Not exactly state of the art but ok. Time for minimum standards!

Not interesting. Those are not better than Ace 3. Better if Samsung release Galaxy series that have specification the same like Mototorola Moto G 16 GB. or better. For a company like Samsung, I think they can give better specification. For example, create Samsung Galaxy S4 Neo with RAM 2,5 GB and 32 GB memory with expandable memory slot but give the price USD 290 only unlock wihout term and conditions and in all countries. This device would be exciting to be chosen.

Get a HTC Sony or moto just looks like Samsung know there sales are down on s5 and trying anything to try and save themselfs but with Moro g & Sony m2 these rubbish handsets will just gather dust rip samdung

These are all pieces of Samsung shit. Too bad the masses will still blindly purchase them. It's worse than Apple fans, because at least the iPhone will receive classy support and updates.