Samsung Galaxy S II Plus and S III mini rumoured

Samsung Galaxy S II Plus and S III mini rumouredSamsung continues unabated on its quest to serve a colossal range of Galaxy smartphones (and tablets) to cater for any and all needs. Hey, it’s a tactic that’s clearly paying off.

Not content with the 197 new Galaxy smartphones already launched in 2012, the rumour mill is hearing tales of something called the Samsung Galaxy S II Plus, and – yes, there’s more – the Samsung Galaxy S III mini.

Starting with the smaller guy, the Samsung Galaxy S III mini is, as the name suggests, a bit like the Samsung Galaxy S III, ‘cept, er, smaller.

However, while “mini” used to imply something in the 3in arena (the original Samsung Galaxy mini was 3.14in), the Samsung Galaxy S III mini is thought to have a 4in WVGA Super AMOLED display. Not so "mini" after all.

With other Samsung Galaxy S III mini specs tipped to include a dual-core processor (probably something Exynos-flavoured) and 5MP rear camera, it’s starting to sound a heck of a lot like the Samsung Galaxy S Advance.

Meanwhile, Chilean carrier VTR has let slip details of the Samsung Galaxy S II Plus. It’s said to rock a 4.5in AMOLED display, dual-core 1.5GHz processor, 1GB of RAM, 16GB internal storage, an 8MP rear camera, and Ice Cream Sandwich (Android 4.0).

It’s not clear if either of these chaps is destined for the UK, but it’s probably fair to say that you fiends are more interested in the Samsung Galaxy Note 2, right?

via: Pocketnow

Read more about: Android

Add a comment
13 comments

JanSt / MOD  Aug. 21, 2012 at 13:32

So, lemme get this straight: The SGS3 "Mini" is a lot smaller, has a different cpu, a crap camera? Anything else that means it has NOTHING to do with the SGS3? Ridiculous, Samsung!
Nevermind that no flowchart in the world can help me keep your many many tablet models apart, but this inflationary release of Galaxies is not helpful. See where it led HTC?!

Pondlife  Aug. 21, 2012 at 17:52

Well it's just rumour rather than fact isn't it? But yeah neither seem to get it right if accurate. Though the cpu could be the same as in some markets? US has dual core already?
A smaller S3 would seem like a good idea though.

JanSt / MOD  Aug. 21, 2012 at 18:14

Well it's just rumour rather than fact isn't it? But yeah neither seem to get it right if accurate. Though the cpu could be the same as in some markets? US has dual core already?
A smaller S3 would seem like a good idea though.

Yes, a smaller S3 would be nice. I find 4 - 4.3 inches ideal. And I'm NOT saying it's bad if it's only dual core.
My point was rather: how many changes can you implement and still call it the SGS3 Mini?
It's like Apple calling the iPod Touch "iPhone Minus" :p

Pondlife  Aug. 21, 2012 at 18:38

I know but was just saying in some markets it could be the same processor rather than a change.

I agree keeping as much of it the same as possible while shrinking somewhat would be better.
Maybe pitch the size the same as the S2 and rest of specs as S3 and make it the S2.5 ;)

JanSt / MOD  Aug. 21, 2012 at 18:47

+1

matt101101 / MOD  Aug. 21, 2012 at 19:56

I know but was just saying in some markets it could be the same processor rather than a change.

I agree keeping as much of it the same as possible while shrinking somewhat would be better.
Maybe pitch the size the same as the S2 and rest of specs as S3 and make it the S2.5 ;)

Won't happen for one simple reason; it'd outsell the S3.

Pondlife  Aug. 21, 2012 at 20:11

As long as it helped Samsung to outsell iphone 5 in combination with the S3 I think they'd grin and bare that.

smecky01  Aug. 22, 2012 at 01:42

Samsung really just throw hundreds of random ideas at a wall and see which ones stick, don't they?

matt101101 / MOD  Aug. 22, 2012 at 01:44

Samsung really just throw hundreds of random ideas at a wall and see which ones stick, don't they?
Yup, seems so :p.

JanSt / MOD  Aug. 22, 2012 at 07:10

pondlife,
correct me, but Samsung haven't outsold the iPhone 4S, have they? Not with ONE model, I mean? Are there figures?

JanSt / MOD  Aug. 22, 2012 at 07:21

...I mean, the reason (1 reason) for Apple's ridiculous profits and overall well-being is that they have a small number of devices. All successful.
Yes, overall Samsung sell more phones, but they don't make dozens and dozens of models at no cost.
Same, only worse goes for Sony, HTC etc...

But anyway... Is it even possible to compare two handsets' sales? They would have to be launched at exactly the same time, in exactly the same markets with the same contracts etc etc for there to be a chance to really compare the success. It's kind of pointless.
Anyhoo... Samsung have always churned out curious amounts of phone models. It served them well. Different strategies. Similar results, smaller profits since they have more devices to support with software updates, hardware parts, PR etc etc...

Pondlife  Aug. 22, 2012 at 11:30

pondlife,
correct me, but Samsung haven't outsold the iPhone 4S, have they? Not with ONE model, I mean? Are there figures?


Nope, never said they did. But if the s2.5 combined with s3 helped them do that with the ip5 I think they'd be rather happy, no?

Pondlife  Aug. 22, 2012 at 11:40

But anyway... Is it even possible to compare two handsets' sales? They would have to be launched at exactly the same time, in exactly the same markets with the same contracts etc etc for there to be a chance to really compare the success. It's kind of pointless.
Anyhoo... Samsung have always churned out curious amounts of phone models. It served them well. Different strategies. Similar results, smaller profits since they have more devices to support with software updates, hardware parts, PR etc etc...


So you don't think we can compare the sales of any two phones unless they launch at the same time etc. So the Nokia Lumia 900 could be as successful as the iphone 4s then?

Would say the smaller profits has as much to do with having inevitable lower margins on the low end phones than support and marketing.

Email:

You don't need an account to comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

Comment: