If the Samsung Galaxy S20 Fan Edition doesn't make you a fan, we don't know what will
- Reference: 1601640908
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2020/10/02/first_look_samsung_galaxy_s20_fan_edition/
- Source link:
To recap: In 1991, under the direction of then-CEO John Sculley, Apple began licensing Mac OS 7 to third-party manufacturers in a desperate bid to regain market share. In some cases, these "Mac clones" were cheaper and better than the genuine article. Apple effectively cannibalised its hardware sales.
The Galaxy S20 FE is intended to be a cheaper version of Samsung's entry-level flagship. And it's excellent. So good, in fact, I don't know why anyone would pay extra for the top-drawer article.
[1]
But before I plough on, I want to make one thing clear: this article isn't a review. I've had less than a week with the Galaxy S20 FE. That's hardly enough to write a definitive appraisal. That'll come later. Instead, take this as a "first look".
Specs appeal
The Samsung Galaxy S20 Fan Edition comes in two flavours: 4G and 5G.
The former is, obviously, the cheapest, with a starting price of £599.99. This uses Samsung's own Exynos 990 chipset. If you want the latest and greatest in connectivity, you'll have to stump up a further £100. The 5G variant comes with a Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 platform.
Both flavours have the same basic RAM and storage configuration: 6GB of LPDDR4x and 128GB of UFS 3.0 respectively. There's also room for expansion, thanks to the inclusion of a microSD slot.
These aren't exactly ground-breaking figures. 6GB RAM is the base of what you should expect in a device over the £400 mark. Nonetheless, this is more than enough for day-to-day usage. Apps and games loaded swiftly, with little perceptible lag, and multitasking felt fluid.
Battery life is respectable. The 4,500mAh battery proved capable of lasting 36 hours between charges. The Galaxy S20 FE supports 25W fast charging – although the charger in the box is only rated to 15W. Fortunately, I had an sufficiently nimble alternative charger on hand, allowing me to get full juice in less than an hour.
Display
But the real star of the show is the gorgeous 6.5-inch display. It's tall, with a 21:9 aspect ratio, making it suited for busywork like reading emails and browsing the web.
[2]
Colour fidelity is good, and it's bright enough for outside usage on particularly sunny days – although, given we're entering the cold autumnal months, this isn't much of a problem.
With this device, Samsung has opted to include a 120Hz display. Higher frequencies are often flogged at gamers looking for lag and ghosting-free gameplay. However, for day-to-day use, they make all the difference, and animations felt buttery smooth. The difference compared to a 60Hz device is like night and day.
Happy snapping
Samsung has avoided the temptation of a high-megapixel primary sensor in the Galaxy S20 FE. Instead, you get three 12MP sensors: a wide, telephoto, and ultrawide. The result is a competent all-rounder.
While its optical zoom lengths aren't the best we've ever seen, there's still a lot to love. It's surprisingly competent at night-time photography, producing images with scant noise and distortion. Sunlit shots feel vibrant and distinguished.
In short, it's pretty much everything you want in a phone, with a price tag that's easy to swallow. There are so few compromises to be found and nothing that would frustrate routine usage. Again, it's hard to think of a reason why anyone would opt for the full-fat Galaxy S20 over this.
But don't take my word for it just yet. We'll be publishing a comprehensive review in the coming days, so keep an eye out for that. ®
Get our [3]Tech Resources
[1] https://regmedia.co.uk/2020/10/02/galaxys20fecolours.jpg
[2] https://regmedia.co.uk/2020/10/02/galaxys20fefront.jpg
[3] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
A 600£ or 700£ price is now considered not hard to swallow? For a phone?
They have trained you well.
It's like threatening to hit you senseless with a hammer then saying they'll only use their hands to beat you up.
Oh thank you, how lucky I am to be treated like that!
Re: A 600£ or 700£ price is now considered not hard to swallow? For a phone?
*Hands you an extra tall pint*
Beat me to saying it.
*Taps rims in toast*
Drink up & try not to choke on the ££££ price tag as "reasonable".
Re: A 600£ or 700£ price is now considered not hard to swallow? For a phone?
Yes, I'm firmly in grumpy old man territory on this but still, what does this do that a Xiaomi phone costing less than a quarter of the price can't, in terms of screen size, resolution, memory, camera pixels etc.
I'm not an Apple fan but I accept if you can only live with iOS then you have to pay their rates, but if you're in the Android ecosphere then what's the benefit of paying extra, when it won't have any different user experience or capability?
Re: A 600£ or 700£ price is now considered not hard to swallow? For a phone?
"I'm not an Apple fan but I accept if you can only live with iOS then you have to pay their rates, but if you're in the Android ecosphere then what's the benefit of paying extra, when it won't have any different user experience or capability?"
You otherwise get a like, but... Current minimum entry cost to iPhone is £419 for the 64GB SE. The phone software will receive frequent updates for some years to come. I don't personally like the old 6/7/SE format, but looking at this and the base level iPad I think it's safe to say Apple are getting interested in getting people into their ecosystem vs excessively high hardware margins.
As for the subject of this article. Meh! I'm happy with my 3aXL and, lets face it, the 4a 5G will probably smoke this Samsung as the camera you always have with you.
Re: A 600£ or 700£ price is now considered not hard to swallow? For a phone?
Generally, the extra money buys you a better screen and and better cameras, wireless charging and waterproofing - a faster SOC isn't always noticeable in many day to day tasks. Having had an OLED screen on my phone for a couple of years I'm a convert, though it's increasingly available on cheaper phones. And without waterproofing, my total cost of phone ownership would be multiples of what it actually has been.
My relatively bulky Panasonic LX-7 can take better photos than my Galaxy S8, but not by such a margin that I always carry it with me.
There's nothing currently on the market that tempts me to upgrade from my Galaxy S8, and I'll run for as long as possible. I'm not sure that would be true if I'd bought a phone that was half the price.
confused
How is that screen ratio remotely sensible? Either you're getting three words per line or three lines visible at once. It's going to hurt your eyes trying to read the damn thing from the bad layout :(
Privacy
Since this is a Samsung phone, privacy is a concern. Are you required to accept monitoring/access to contacts before using, for example, wallpaper on the home screen? Are you given the option to refuse or do you just get the option to be nagged again later until you either surrender or swear never to buy Samsung again?