Skip to main content

No, the $1000 Samsung Galaxy S20 isn't overpriced

Samsung Galaxy S20 Series All Three
Samsung Galaxy S20 Series All Three (Image credit: Android Central)

Ever since Samsung announced its trio of Galaxy S20 phones, there's been a lot of talk about these steep new four-figure price tags. It's well-warranted; the baseline S20 runs $100 more than last year's Galaxy S10 at launch, and that's not even factoring in the cheaper and more compact S10e — for which there's no sequel. This new pricing structure puts the S20 right in line with Apple's iPhone 11 Pro, but pricier than most other Android options.

So what's the rationale behind this price hike? And why should you buy the Galaxy S20, let alone the even more expensive S20+ or S20 Ultra, when you can get a phone like the OnePlus 7T (opens in new tab) (one of my favorite releases of 2019) for quite literally half the price?

First off, it's definitely expensive

Samsung Galaxy S20

Source: Andrew Martonik / Android Central (Image credit: Source: Andrew Martonik / Android Central)

5G is largely to blame. The Galaxy S20 series ships with Qualcomm's latest Snapdragon 865 chipset, which features more powerful image processing, a new fifth-generation AI Engine, better power efficiency, basically everything you could ask for in a mobile processor — except a modem.

Mandatory 5G drives up the cost of the S20 and any other 865-powered phone.

Without an onboard modem on the 865, the Galaxy S20 doesn't have a way of connecting to even 4G networks without the addition of the X55, Qualcomm's first 5G-capable modem. This means that all Galaxy S20 models — save for some international variants that use Samsung's own Exynos processors instead — are 5G-capable, whether you want it or not. That's great if you live in one of the few cities where 5G is currently available (assuming your carrier and plan support it), but for everyone else it's an unnecessary added expense.

Of course, 5G isn't the only factor; the cameras undoubtedly also help drive the price up a bit. Each phone features considerably larger sensors than on the S10 lineup, and particularly with the S20 Ultra's massive periscope-style telephoto camera, that requires quite a bit more material.

Without any kind of Galaxy S20e, the new lineup is certainly a harder sell than Samsung's previous generations of phones, particularly because the majority of U.S. cities still don't have an established 5G network for that to even part of the conversation. The camera improvements are great, but the S10 series already took perfectly good photos for most people's needs — and with the recent update to Android 10 and Samsung's One UI 2, the S10's software is largely identical to that of the S20.

Samsung is lifting one of Apple's best practices

Samsung Galaxy S10+

Source: Andrew Martonik / Android Central (Image credit: Source: Andrew Martonik / Android Central)

But that's exactly what makes the S20's pricing work. When Samsung announced the S20 series at its Unpacked event earlier this week, it also revealed new reduced pricing for last year's S10 series, which the company will continue to sell, presumably until next year when the S20's successor is available.

This has long been one of Apple's most successful strategies with the iPhone, and it's largely dependent on the kind of extended software support that notoriously escapes Android phones, particularly those made by companies other than Google. In the last year, though, we've seen Samsung ramp up the frequency at which it updates its phones, with every variant of the Galaxy S10 already running Android 10. Combined with hardware that still feels incredibly sleek and futuristic, the S10 feels every bit as new today as it did this time last year.

By keeping the Galaxy S10 alive, Samsung has effectively doubled its 2020 lineup.

In that way, the Galaxy S10 has become the cheaper S20 that Samsung is otherwise lacking. The S10e now starts at just $599, and you can even grab the Galaxy S10+ for just $849 — $150 shy of the baseline Galaxy S20. You won't get 5G support or the newer cameras, but the experience is for all intents and purposes indistinguishable otherwise.

Here's the thing: value is contextual, and compared to other $1000 phones, I think the Galaxy S20 has a lot to offer. The iPhone 11 Pro is priced identically, but doesn't feature 5G support of any kind — to be clear, the $1000 S20 only supports sub-6 networks, while the S20+ and S20 Ultra also support mmWave. If Apple adds 5G support to its next iPhones, they're only going to get more expensive; meanwhile, Samsung's phones typically see a number of price reductions within even just the first year.

I'm not personally in the market for a 5G phone yet, but it's nice to know that the S20 already has support built in, which will continue to grow more useful as these networks develop into something more fully-fledged. If you aren't at all interested in 5G or 120Hz displays, or you understandably just don't want to shell out $1000 for a phone, the S10 series is still absolutely worth buying.

If anything, I'd argue that this is the most complete lineup Samsung has ever had: there's now a flagship-tier phone available at nearly every physical size and price point from $600 on up, and you can still get the most up-to-date Samsung experience without diving into 5G right away. Believe me, the S10 will still serve you just fine.

Hayato was a product reviewer and video editor for Android Central.

87 Comments
  • Will these phones have the Galaxy buds plus with them🤔🤔
  • Yes if you preorder, well thats the case in the uk and an extra £100 off your trade in phone.
  • Yes. Every one of these phones are expensive and not worth it. It's getting to be like buying a new car. Overpriced and as soon as you buy it depreciates in value by 25%. Complete rip off for early adopters. Always best to wait for a kknth or so after release then get the best deal. The bigger issue is Samsung almost never releases a phone with the most current OS. You always have to wait and then you dimish the time for stable updates. Apple does it right and at least supports thier phones for 5 years. If Google did the same I'd consider sticking with Android. I am considering moving to Apple from Samsung with my next phone upgrade... At least iPhones retain resale value better than any Android phone.
  • Lots of people don't sell their phones, so any depreciation (which is quite natural, actually) is not relevant.
    Value is what you ascribe; if you feel a much better camera is not worth the extra 400,- then yes, it's too expensive. Otherwise the price may be just fine.
    The S20 series comes with the latest Android version...?
  • The reason the prices are the way they are is because we have seen a small price increase year after year until we're seeing phones at $800+ as the norm. If consumers refused to pay this much, prices would drop.
  • Sure, but consumers obviously ARE prepared to pay the price, so it's just basic market mechanisms...
  • I feel customers just look at the monthly payment and are "OK" with the payment. Forget they are paying on the phone for 3 entire years now (to keep it below the 35 or so a month magic figure). Depreciation is a real factor. When someone breaks there phone after a year and a half and realize they still owe 650 bucks on it, it hurts them. Also hurts if they want to upgrade. They'll simply go deeper and deeper in debt thanks to phone payments. This is a problem with modern america really. Forget that the used car costs 25 grand. Just finance it for 8 years and the payments are alright!
  • I can't say much since I upgrade after every galaxy so I only pay around $450
    But soon enough most phones will cost 1000 so what's the fuss.
  • In two months, when sales are low because of how damn expensive they are, Samsung will lower the price by a few hundred bucks. They always do.
  • We've been steadily heading towards a thousand bucks for years, and now people are shocked that we've arrived? What, did you honestly think you going to keep getting upgraded components year after year at the same price? Even the mid-range price has crept up to 500-700.
  • Yes. That's exactly what I expect. Technology improves and gets cheaper. I just built a new gaming PC. It's far more advanced, faster and more capable in every way to my old machine. And it cost less to build. I own a Note 9. I like it but honestly, I don't think it was worth a grand. Neither is the S20. I used my mom's 250 dollar Moto G7 power and it really seemed damn near as nice. Yes, my note 9 is better in all ways but the Moto did most everything nearly as well for a quarter of the price
  • Apples and oranges. Name brand electronics will always raise prices year after year.
  • How do you explain my name brand TV then? Better in everyway to my last one. And bigger. And yet, it's the cheapest flat panel I've bought costing 1200. Last Samsung TV was only 1080p and only 55in. Cost 1650.
  • Wait... So your example your giving costs 1200 and 1600 dollars? It's supply and damand. TVs aren't nearly the necessity and obsession that smartphones are. Smartphones with 8k technology and 16g of RAM, and your think you're not going to pay for that?
  • The phones are like TVs though. My Hi Sense 65" cost me $350. My neighbor has a 65" samsung he paid $2500 for. Sure the picture is a bit better but I have 0 idea what justifies that huge of a price difference for a slightly better picture.
  • Except these phones don't need that. 8k video (even at the likely paltry bitrates samsung will record it at) will eat storage like crazy. No one will wanna use it. Pros know to use something better anyway. And 16GB of ram. They are bragging about the phones ability to save multiple games in ram at once. WTH? Who keeps MULTIPLE games running at one time!? Specs are amazing. But useless for 99.9% of people who buy it. And they offer no cheaper alternative. S10 is not alternative to me because anyone who pays the still high price for it not only gets 1 years of updates. That's insane. I'm a power user. I love nice specs. I've ALWAYS bought flagship phones. But I am calling it done with my Note 9. I spent a grand on this on launch day and after a few weeks I was honestly wondering why I spent the money. It was really nice, but I struggled to find a grand worth of value out of it. Even now, Samsung will only give me 300 bucks for trade in. Thats not even what I still owe on the device. If companies offered longer support (and possibly reasonably priced battery replacement programs) I'd invest in it. As it is, we would be spending a grand and a half for a device that is end of life and obsolete after 24 short months (and they are now doing 36month payments, so you'll still be paying on a phone thats no longer receiving ANY support!!!)
  • The 8K out of this phone will be poo compared to the 4K out of a Cinema Camera that costs less than the Ultra. I"m not even sure why anyone cares about this. You need a super computer to even edit that kind of footage, so what you going to be using it for? If you're the type of person who cares about video quality, than the value proposition for a "new" smartphone is even less than those who only shoot pictures. You can get a Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K for less than this phone, and the video quality will blow it away 100x over. No one with a clue gives a sh*t about poo quality mega-lossily-compressed 8K out of a tiny sensor and mediocre lens, with oversharpening and a bad color profile. The people without a clue likely don't have a PC can even think about editing this footage (without some serious proxying), with many not even having PCs that can play this stuff back due to the lack of Hardware Decoding for these raster sizes.
  • Sure, but if you just want that nice crisp photo...! Honestly, it's all down to the camera in my opinion; everything else is negligible to a certain degree. My last two phones have been tier two devices, and my photos show it; I'll probably be getting the Ultra just to get those great photos that I've missed out on for the last three years...
  • I paid $1250 for an iPhone 11 Pro Max without an insultingly meager storage capacity. Another $150 for everything the S20 Ultra offers over the iPhone? No-brainer.
  • So the iPhone will take a 1TB SD card?
  • There's a lot of things the iPhone doesn't have, but why worry about usable features.
  • Exactly what features would you be missing that you need from having an iphone?
  • Remember when she said "everything the S20 ultra offers over the iPhone"?
  • @fuzzy Thank you. Some people read what they want to read, and not what's written, I guess.
  • How dare you say that? Why don't you but an iPhone if you hate Android so much
    😏
  • I guess it depends on what you use your phone for. I use mine for calls, texts, browsing the web, facebook, a few mobile games, and checking email. I used to spend a bunch on phones and then purchased a motoz4 on special for $250 and it did absolutely everything I needed that the latest galaxy phones were giving me but for a fraction of the cost.
  • All three models offer 12gb's of ram which is overkill but I would rather have it than not, another reason for the price hike?
  • I don't think they are overprice. In my opinion
    the Ultra is price right. you are getting a hell of a device for $1400.
    I'm not ready to let go of my S10 yet, but when I do I will not mind
    paying the high premium for a device that has everything I want and more.
    Like the Author said this phone is not for everyone. The S10+ is still
    and amazing device and well worth the $850 if you are in the market
    for a device under 1k
  • For 1400 dollars I expect more than 2 years of support. Full stop. That's far too much money for the manufacturer to say "ok, were done, device is EOL, no more bug fixes or updates" after 24 months, and that's assuming you buy on launch day. I have a laptop from 2013 running windows 10. It still has latest drivers and OS updates. And that laptop cost LESS MONEY.
  • Then buy something else. That's not going to change the rise in pricing.
  • And you use it less, likely...
  • Well you do get more than 2 years.
    Officially Samsung supports their flagships for at least 3 years and even after it doesn't get OEM support anymore the Google portion of the OS(which is quite big) is still updated regularly.
  • The google portion of the OS is just the apps. The OS is supported by samsung. Google does'nt update anything with the OS on a samsung device. It's not googles firmware, it's samsungs. You get 2 years of feature updates and 1 year of security updates (at a less frequent schedule). If you guys are OK with spending a grand or 1400 bucks on a device that's EOL so quickly, then be my guest. I think it's ridiculous. I am a power user that's bought high end flagship devices for nearly 10 years now. But even for me, these large price increases that only give me marginal benefits are no longer sustainable.
  • Yes, they are all overpriced until Samsung gives more than 2 years of software support.
  • There are other factors at play in determining the price of a phone besides the cost of components. Companies charge what the market will bear. Samsung routinely charges 2 or 3 hundred extra for their premium phones simply because Samsung is stamped on them. If that weren't true they couldnt offer those huge trade in allowances and very creative discounts. They would like you to think they are only making a couple of bucks on each handset.
  • Well Samsung is a huge company that also has a lot of overhead to account for. Marketing, wages, distribution costs etc.
  • Well certainly all costs must be met but Samsung is big enough to take advavtage of economy of scale. Therefore they should be able to sell much cheaper than their smaller competition. Instead it's the other way around. It's my considered opinion that Samsung is super profitable
  • Except Samsungs sells phones that range from 300 to 2000 dollars. So they cover every niche of the "market".
  • The problem is all the updated specs don't create a dramatically different user experience. The Pixel 4 XL is $500 at T-Mobile and at Best Buy for the Verizon version. The user experience is excellent. Rums fast and smooth. Is always updated. No bloatware. Camera and screen are excellent. It's nice having an extra $500 to $900 in my wallet.
  • You should wait for the pixel 4a as the price will be better and Google really only makes good mid-range phones
  • Mid range phones that do everything the high end phones do for a fraction of the cost.
  • I had a pixel 4 xl for a few months so I could see what the fuss is all about. I only had it for a few months because compared to my note 10+ it was a joke of a crap phone. I felt like I went back to a galaxy s6. I can't believe the pixel even sells
  • The pixel sells because it's a good phone that for the majority of the population takes care of their needs for a fraction of the cost as the note.
  • The Pixel doesn't sell in any amount that actually matters.
  • Agreed. Every single day, no matter where I am, I'm looking at what other people are using. I'm always surprised whenever I see a Pixel. Outside of Android blogs, Pixels are practically non-existent.
  • Wait... you've seen a Pixel in the wild?!
  • Over priced, I've never paid over $700 for a Galaxy Note and there are no deals on the S20 series. I also don't have 5G in my market and probably won't for another year or two. So 5G is worthless to me, actually anyone that lives rural right now.
  • Yeah, it IS overpriced.
  • Not overpriced?. I can buy three touchscreen laptops fo a $1,000.00.
  • Try fitting one of your laptops in your pocket, let alone three of them.
  • The S20 series is extremely overpriced.
  • My main issue isnt the price it's the lackluster support you get in terms of updates. You will get maybe 2 years worth of support and that's it. And even Google lags behind Apple for long software support.
  • Won't be buying a Samsung phone again.
    I love my Note9 but it launched with oreo (pie was already released) so it was out of date. Android 10 is almost certainly its last major OS update. That means I paid 1100 euro for a phone with 18 months of software updates,excluding security updates.
    Really not good enough.
    My partner has an iPhone 6 plus and still that gets the latest IOS. I prefer Android over IOS but I am starting to think IPhone is a better option long term. Expensive yes but if you consider how long they are updated they start to appear better value in the long run.
  • I just got an iPhone 11 Pro today. Replacing my Note 9. I'm with you. Samsung phones pretty much dont' exist to me, moving forwards. These new cameras don't attract me at all, largely because they're attached to a Samsung Galaxy S phone. If Google had released that on a Pixel, I'd probably have waiting and gotten that. But I'm not touching a Samsung again. Probably won't go back to Android anymore. I'm tired of moving ecosystems. It's monetarily wasted since you end up having to throw away money on Apps, iAP, etc. when you go from one to the other. I'm done with this madness.
  • Interesting take. I'll counter. Yes, yes they are. By alot.
  • All these 1000 dollar and up phones are overpriced. I'm waiting for this bubble to burst in a few years. A phone costing half the price gives you 90 percent the same experience.
  • People said the same thing at 500 dollars 4 years ago, then 700 3 years ago, then 800 2 years ago, then 900 last year. The bubble has already burst and guess what happened? Companies just added more price points. Now you can buy a phone in just about every price range, with little compromise. But... Just like cars, there will always be a market demand for premium products with top specs. That will never change. Visited a Disney park lately?
  • It's funny you say that as I just purchased a lincoln after my mercedes was totaled out. Lincoln was half the cost and just as nice as my mercedes.
  • You can indeed get 90% functionality at half the price. The question is are those last 10% worth the extra price for you specifically? Personally, I want the best camera I can get, so I'll probably be getting the Ultra; if not for the camera, I could probably make do with a 2019 mid-ranger, but the camera is worth the extra asking price for me...
  • I also like better cameras. However, if the great cameras is all the Ultra can offer me over something much cheaper, its FAR better to take the grand saved and go buy a Nikon DSLR or something similar. Those style cameras blow the doors off ANY smartphone camera. The S20 Ultra included. And it'll last you much longer than 1 to 3 years. I spent coin on a high end Panasonic camera about 11 years ago. It still takes better photographs than most smartphones. It was only recently with my Note 9 that I think they come close (except in low light, my panasonic still shines there).
  • You can buy a Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K for less than the Ultra and record far better video. People raving about the cameras are kidding themselves. The sensor is bigger, but the resolution is huge resulting in tiny noisy pixels. You're going to need pixel binning to get good image quality out of hte camera, and you still have to hope Samsung has developed better algorithms for Auto-Exposure, Auto-White Balance, HDR, Noise Reduction, Sharpening, Saturation, etc. Samsung has always had decent camera HARDWARE in their phones. Where they fail is in the software component of it. Yes, features galore... but I don't care about the features when the resulting images have laughably boosted saturation, oversharpening, smudgy shadows from aggressive noise reduction, yellow tint from lackluster white balance algorithms, and are consistently shot "too bright" - because we're still in 2012 and think that we MUST make the pictures as bright as possible because "brightness is all that matters." Right? You can look at the images of an iPhone 8, X, Xs, and 11 - there is a definite evolution (in a good way) with the image quality of those phones. Each generation is refined, and gets better. This wasn't the case for Samsung. From the S7 through the Note 9, the cameras were pretty much teh same, with not much difference moving forwards. They were stagnant there, and Samsung sold the phones based largely on marketing and design (I do not know how curved edge screens ever became a positive marketing point, considering how terrible they are to use in practice).
  • Until Samsung provides OS updates for minimum 4 year's my old S3 will be last Samsung. I like the hardware but software is what makes the difference so I stuck with Apple and Google as much as I would like more options that's what I am left with.
  • Wow I had the s3 my first sammy device I'm on the s10+ now.
  • Yes sure , it's an expensive phone but I consider it worth for what it offers.
  • I make a six figure salary with enough PDI to buy a $1,000 month every month and I still think paying $1,000 for a tech product with a maybe three year lifespan is not smart. I rely on my phone primarily for in car navigation, music and calls and messaging. I certainly don't need a $1,000 worth of phone for that. Notice I said "I" and not "you". I am definitely speaking for myself. For me, it's not about affordability but value over time. I bought my unlocked S9+ for $500 and it's been great. I kept the $500 it cost (as well as the $500 I didn't spend on the S10) in my investment account because I bought it with interest free financing. No more payment plans on $700+ phones I only end up under water on (*cough* S7 Edge). Cheap and unlocked from this point forward.
  • RenoD2010: Your comments are spot on, “...I rely on my phone primarily for in car navigation, music and calls and messaging. I certainly don't need a $1,000 worth of phone for that...”, and “...it’s not about affordability but value over time...”; excellent comments. Purchasing a new flagship phone gives one bragging rights for less than one year; whoopee. Also, spending that amount of money for a phone will not increase my productivity, my life, nor my income. Though retired I too can afford a phone a month as well, yet I am smart enough not to spend $1,000 for a phone.
  • I want the Note phone next that's the only sammy device I've not tried. I have to say the s10+ I've had since release date has been brilliant not had one problem with it and its had plenty of updates and I've only fully wiped it once and that was last week after the 10 updates.
    The Note 20+ is going to be a massive money muncher if going by the s20 ultra. Note+ ultra is incoming and price will be $1.600.
  • Sorry, but yes these devices are overpriced. This is laptop price territory and completely rediculous.
  • It's also laptop-level tech, so no surprise there...
  • Do people know why these cameras, oopps, meaning to say phones have gotten so expensive because Apple, Samsung, etc... are investing so much in the cameras/photography on the phones. These phones are becoming very expensive compact cameras. Do people realize how expensive good cameras and lenses are? If you don't go to Sony's website and you will see. I spent $1K on lens for my Sony A7. Every year the critics put so much emphasis on the camera/ photos (shootout), and who has the best camera. Apple, Samsung, etc. are listening to the critics by adding what the critics are wanting by adding end highend lenses/features, which are making phones more expensive. They probably have to pay camera manufacturers like Sony, Olympus, Canon etc... royalties for their patents/work. A true photographer like myself would know this....Therefore, either stop putting so much emphasis on the camera to keep costs down, or learn the true costs of cameras/lenses and accept the costs, and move on....Trust me you will pay a lot of money for a good DSLR/compact camera (Nikon, Canon, Sony, Olympus, etc..)along with good lenses...
  • Apple supports the phone so long that you can legitimately keep it for 4-5 years and it will work fine. Their SoCs (CPU and GPU) are also so much better than QC and Samsung that they are legitimately 2 years ahead of them... so the performance trail-off is not nearly as high as with Android devices. I have much less of an issue paying $1,000 for an iPhone than for an Android phone. They are supported better. The support ecosystem is in a completely different stratosphere. They also hold their value significantly better than Samsung phones, so you get more for 2 year old iPhones than for 1 year old Samsung phones, almost without fail. This includes trade-ins (to anything but the company who manufactured it) and open market sales. I don't honestly think Samsung and Apple are in teh same category when it comes to price-to-value ratio. Also, Apple has definitely done a lot more work on their cameras than Samsung has, so I'm rejecting the notion that Galaxy devices are expensive because of the cameras. The cameras were sh*t for half a decade. OBVIOUSLY worse than iPhones, and even the Pixel came out of the gate with far superior photography. The more expensive these phones get, the better Apple looks in comparison to their competitors. When teh iPhone was $200 more expensive (with a storage upgrade, cause no mSD) than a Galaxy S, it was easy to pick Samsung - even given Apple's advantages elsewhere - because of the price differential and the then-lower prices of devices. Samsung and others pushed their prices up to compete in the same market as Apple. The devices aren't supported as well, and in many cases aren't as good, but not competing in the same price bracket makes your device seem less premium to some people. It gives the impression that they are high end and you are just above mid-range.
  • Way too expensive...
  • Let's be honest: If it was another company besides Samsung, you would not be defending it.
    If they were not overpriced, you would not be writing articles defending the price. Performance is about the same as the Note 10+.
    Fingerprint sensor is still finicky for some people, depending on their fingers.
    Bland design.
    Face unlock that can be fooled by a pencil sketch.
    Mediocre speaker performance.
    Camera optical zoom is about 4.5x, which is good, but the "Lossless 10x Zoom" is marketing speak.
    100x Astro Zoom results are impressive... to a grade schooler.
  • What was the S10 last year in The States? Because the S10 was £800 ($1000) just like the S20 is now. It's not been price hike. Maybe because we were being ripped off earlier :D.
  • Not overpriced..... Will you put down the crack pipe...
  • Samsung needs to support it's phones for more than 2 years in order to justify these price points. PERIOD
    It is not only bad business, poor customer service, but also terrible for our environment. Products needs to come with longer support cycles with a minimum of 4 years of OS updates -- they're is no technical reason why this can not be done on today's premium phones which ship with plenty of RAM, storage and providing power.
  • Note 9's on Android 10 are using 3.5-4GB of average RAM for just existing and being turned on. If you think they're putting the RAM to future proof the phones beyond 2 years, you're not paying attention. The RAM increases on their phones are necessitated by the amount of RAM their bloated software engulfs when you boot the phone up. Google Pixel phones functioned just fine with 4GB, and the only reason they increased it was because the tech heads complained too much. iOS 13 still going strong on devices with 2GB RAM. IMO, this obsession with RAM has more to do with marketing and lazy programming than "future proofing." By the time Android legitimately requires 6-8GB RAM (Android, not Android bastardized by a wave of bloatware from OEMs), none of these phones will be supported. IMO, one of the biggest issues with Android is software developers acting like platform developers. Just because you can develop an Email or Contacts App does not mean you are fit to take an Operating System/Distro and start mucking around with it. None of the companies that originated their platforms (Google, Apple, Microsoft... even RIM) needed tons of RAM on their devices for them to function well. This phenomenon is exclusive to Android OEM who use heavily modified Android distros. Samsung's Android Distro is like Google's Android with an entire second layer of Google running on top of it. That is how much functional duplication and redundant (in terms of function) resident services are shoved into there.
  • I was just trying to state that there is no RAM issue preventing future OS upgrades as there was in the past.
  • Hello Jfreiman: They’re is short for they are. You wanted there’s or there is, hope that helps you.
  • This was a double post
  • This article paid in part by Samsung
  • I don't know why Android Central seems so hung up on Samsung "still selling the S10" this cycle. You can still buy an S6 from Samsung! Heck there's even a Sprint S4 on their site. Of course they charge wayyyyy too much money for their old phones. $589 for an S8+???
  • I'd be more ok with buying an S10 today if Samsung guaranteed OS updates for 2 more years from now. As it stands, you're only getting 1 more OS update for the S10.
  • That's the problem I ran into, when they removed features from the Note 9 and said they were looking into adding it back, I was hopeful. Now on its last update and this feature isn't here, along with them advertising it as a major feature on the S20... I'm out.
  • Just to make sure, the US S20 ultra with its new snapdragon Can connect to 4g lte networks? (I understand it has a separate modem now but it can do 5g and 4g?)
  • Unless I'm getting iPhone-level support from Samsung, the phone isn't worth $1,000. I gambled on the Note 9, and all they did was nerf the battery life in the Android Pie Update and Remove a Major Feature that got me to buy the phone in the first place (Pro Mode for Video). Never again. Got an iPhone 11 Pro this afternoon, and not regretting it. These prices and level of support may be fine for people who lease their phones, but for those of us who actually pay the money up front for them... Samsung just isn't delivering in the overall experience to get me as a repeat-repeat customer. I will never buy a Galaxy device again, unless they up the ante.
  • Every $1000 phone is overpriced.