The Galaxy Alpha might have been among the best phones Samsung ever produced — it's certainly the prettiest — if it weren't for a couple of stumbles: the battery didn't last long enough and its full flagship price forced it to compete against better-rounded rivals. Now, just a few brief months after its introduction, the Alpha is reportedly being supplanted by its successor Galaxy A5, which will take over as the leading Samsung handset for the mid-range market.
ET News reports that the Galaxy A5, which launched in China last month, is being brought over to South Korea as part of Samsung's effort to "take the bull by the horns" and reorganize its slumping smartphone division. The 5-inch A5 is a continuation of the Alpha's design philosophy, emphasizing thinness and higher-quality metal construction, though it opts for a tamer spec sheet that will allow it to be priced at a more competitive 400,000 won (roughly $360). The report states that the A5 will be arriving in Samsung's home country in January or February, while the Galaxy Alpha will be phased out as production ramps down once the current inventory of materials is exhausted.
MKBHD Video: Samsung Galaxy Alpha Review (October, 2014)
Comments
The Alpha was a step in the right direction.
Good to see the build/design will continue in the A5.
By Chaz_UK on 12.29.14 4:20am
I don’t understand this obssesion with design. In design terms, most modern phones are basically a screen. Most of the times you won´t even be noticing the bezel. I would understand a real concern about ergonomics, but the looks of the small frame around the screen should not matter at all to the vast majority of users.
The fact that people are paying so much attention to design proves that most buyers think about their phones more as a status symbol than as a genuinely useful or necessary device.
By dburstin on 12.29.14 9:07am
…or people don’t like to own ugly things
By alvareo on 12.29.14 9:15am
Design is a pretty damn important feature of a phone or any electronic device for that matter. If you have to look at it, it should look good simple as.
I don’t understand why you think a phone shouldn’t be designed well?
By Arfan Arif on 12.29.14 9:22am
How ugly can a screen surrounded by a thin bezel be? Not to mention that most of the time that the device is not in your pocket, the bezel will be hidden by the palm of your hand and your fingers. You don´t really look much at any part of your phone other than the screen (unless you are kind of obsessed with the thing.).
I don´t deny that some phones look better that others, I just think it´s crazy to pick a phone under the "form over function" premise.
By dburstin on 12.29.14 9:27am
you could say the same about a watch, its rarely ever looked at, and only serves one function, but you wouldnt want to wear an ugly one just because you only need to see the time…
By jnrbshp on 12.29.14 9:53am
No, you cannot compare phones and watches in this scenario. I am not saying you are wrong in general, but a watch is jewelry and a very unfair comparison, given the point he is trying to make.
The fact that Samsung outsells with it’s "ugly" flagship phones does show that the average person either does not agree with you about design, or actually likes the design of the Samsung phones. I believe the latter, but everyone is ententitled to their opinion.
By SteveJamesBurton on 12.29.14 10:03am
One can argue that a phone is now jewelry. How "jewelry" is a G-Shock watch? It’s a fashion statement and ever since the iPhone and some predecessors like the Prada, etc. the cell phone has become as much a fashion statement as a utilitarian device. You carry it around with you all the time why not get something with style.
Samsung outsells because it’s cheap and they have a huge range of products not because people aren’t conscious of a good looking phone. Also you imply that the Samsung phones are ugly and that people are choosing it over a better designed phone. Samsung phones are cheaply made but they aren’t ugly by any stretch. If you had said build quality is less important than design I may take your point (even though I don’t agree).
Samsung’s have beautiful vibrant screens that attract people to the device, the actual phone itself is pretty striking to look at. The alpha was about addressing build quality not necessarily design imo. how the phone works is another matter.
By apoclypse on 12.29.14 10:17am
Just a whole mess of no. Just because we have ‘smartwatches’ does not automatically lump them in with regular jewelry watches And no a phone is not jewelry, it’s main function wiwill never be style.
I never implied Samsung phones are ugly, other people did, that is why I put it in quotes. I don’t think average people think Samsung phones are ugly. I think people buy them BECAUSE they like the looks. If you finished the rest of my "ugly" paragraph that should have been painfully obvious to you. But whatever.
By SteveJamesBurton on 12.29.14 10:22am
The gold colored iPhone 5S was most definitely jewelry. The 6 is ugly in comparison and its one of the first iPhones I put a case on day one as a result.
By briancalhoun on 12.29.14 10:49am
I have that phone. It is gorgeous/stylish/etc but it is not jewelry.
By SteveJamesBurton on 12.29.14 11:39am
So taking Samsung are we implying the Touchwiz is so superior that it is "function over form"?
By FollowTheMoney on 12.29.14 10:02am
Just look at any Samsung phone to get your answer.
By escan on 12.29.14 12:03pm
Compare the Sony Xperia Z3 (with the huge bezels, especially along the top and bottom) and the LG G2 (or even the G3). Screen size is roughly the same, yet the Z3 is huge compared to the other two. And just look chunky and blocky; which makes it very hard to use one-handed.
The G2 has a 5.2" screen, yet it’s just barely larger than phones with a 4.7" screen, all due to the time and effort put into the design (small bezels, rounded back, button placement, colour, etc).
You don’t pick a phone based on the look alone; and the look shouldn’t be the first item in your wishlist. But the look and feel of a phone most definitely matter when you are picking between similar phones.
By phoenix_rizzen on 12.29.14 1:18pm
"How ugly can a screen surrounded by a thin bezel be?"
Have you actually looked at the Fire Phone?
By LegalizeGayPot on 12.29.14 3:24pm
Design is also how it feels in the hand during use. You’re only focusing on looks. Though considering how prevalent bezels still are you’re still wrong there.
By Dustbin on 12.29.14 4:28pm
i prefer bland squres like g watch or s2
gimme that and best specs and quality
By jgalvez21 on 12.29.14 9:42am
"The fact that people are paying so much attention to design proves that most buyers think about their phones more as a status symbol than as a genuinely useful or necessary device."
Well, duh.
They’re consumer items, not sold strictly to the enterprise like the early smartphones were. Of course, consumers, including teenagers, soccer Moms and the like, care about good design.
By JimmyIsTheOne on 12.29.14 9:24am
Wow. What an absolute load of shite of a comment.
To appreciate beauty and aesthetics, is something simply a part of human nature. Whatever it might be in your case, is entirely dependent on your taste.
By Mesmerise on 12.29.14 9:27am
Why can´t we just exchange our thoughts in a civilized manner?
I appreciate beauty where it matters. For instance, in my furniture or in my clothing. In a gadget that spends most of the time in my pocket, I prioritize function over form.
By dburstin on 12.29.14 9:33am
Why would anyone go for function over form when you can get function in a beautifully packaged form – as is very much the case these days i.e. the best of both
By vahbmas on 12.29.14 10:00am
Sorry but function and form are on equal playing field these days. An iPhone or Galaxy Note are equally great functional phone and look great.
By Slyone on 12.30.14 8:46am
The reason I wrote that is simply because your comment reeks of arrogance and pretentiousness.
Here’s your reasoning. Why is the look of your furniture important? Do you look at your couch while you’re sitting in it? It’s function is to sit on it. You’re probably spending most of the time looking at your TV. Why not use something comfortable that looks like dog shit?
By Mesmerise on 12.31.14 7:01pm
Does it really spend most of the time in your pocket though? When it comes to devices like phones, I appreciate understated designs like the Moto X 2013. That dimple on the back was a DESIGN decision, and it actually supported the ergonomics of the piece. Sure, it’s a ‘black slab’ screen device, but what they did to it is what counts. Samsung, however, provides devices with less understated design cues. The Alpha was heading in the right direction. Soft-touch back, nice lines, beautiful screen, fantastic weight and size.
By chasen54 on 01.07.15 11:15am
My friend and I were comparing the IPhone 6+ and Note 3 without cases. It was at that point I realized what a rip off Samsung’s phones really are if you take design into consideration. The fact that they were painting plastic to look like metal or using fake leather but charging premium prices is nuts. It’s no wonder they had to step up their game in China.
If you are paying $900 for a phone then guess what – it better look like $900.
By FollowTheMoney on 12.29.14 10:01am