http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/ Engadget Comments for Samsung Wave: 3.3-inch Super AMOLED, Bluetooth 3.0, and new Bada OS (updated) http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/Feb 14th 2010 1:22PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/smexy! :)
nice specs! :D but how many ram and rom?]]>Feb 14th 2010 1:29PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/Feb 14th 2010 1:40PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/Feb 14th 2010 1:48PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/Feb 14th 2010 2:40PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/
Also, the super AMOLED live up to its name for providing a brighter luminance even under the sun. More: http://bit.ly/samsung-wave-s8500-opinions]]>Feb 16th 2010 1:22PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/
Disappointed though at the lack of multitouch. And which network is this coming to?]]>Feb 14th 2010 1:24PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/Feb 14th 2010 1:29PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/Feb 14th 2010 1:30PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/
Actually you meant neither. This list has no North American 3G bands. ]]>Feb 14th 2010 1:32PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/Feb 14th 2010 1:24PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/Samsung leaves alot of essentials off of their phones. Samsung phones look amazing on paper and in screen shots...They always have the best displays, cpus, ram, etc...and they make claims that no other devices have such as 720p video recording.

However, Just like the OmniaHD (which has A LOT of similar features to this Wave device that was released last year), I predict this device will ultimately have the same outcome for the end user...which is frustration, lack of support and updates, and bugs galore in the software that will _never_ be fixed, no matter how blatantly obvious they are. You see hardware is only a small portion of the smartphone experience for the end user. Sure, fast cpus and alot of ram are great, but if you don't have the software and support to back those things up, then it's not going to matter at all.

Now I can't say for absolute certainty that this will be another OmniaHD, but nothing Samsung has done since the release of the OmniaHD has told me otherwise. Their lack of support and unwillingness to fix bugs and even advertise features that are broken or just plain do not exist is plain old disgusting.

If this phone REALLY can do 720p video recording with decent sound quality and doesn't drop frames all over the place (like ALL of their other phones -- including the HD, and they know about this and responded that it cannot be fixed), I'll eat my hat.

Samsung should stick to featurephones; that's what they do best.
They do not have the necessary resources and plain old skill to compete with companies like HTC, Apple, and even Nokia when it comes to Smartphones. Their support after you buy the product is disgusting, across the board.

Oh and if one person who reads engadget has ever used touchwizz and actually LIKES that UI and thinks it's superior to HTC\Nokia\Apple\Whatever, I would really like to know. TouchWizz is the most useless, laggy, non-functional UI I have _ever_ seen. ]]>Feb 14th 2010 1:33PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/The last Samsung phone I had would ring when it was on vibrate, distorted through the voice speaker instead of the ringer speaker. This was the replacement phone for the one I returned because it shut itself off randomly when I wasn't using it regardless of the battery level.

Their software is just bad all around and I'd never trust them again.]]>Feb 14th 2010 1:59PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/DoctarPeppar, i couldn't agree with you more. Samsung, though they have amazingly spec'd phones, well...they're OS/software plain stinks. This is why is i were ever to get a Omnia II or Omnia Pro, go to modaco, root it, loud sense 2.1 or touchflo3d...and be done with it. Touchwhiz is one of the worst interfaces i've ever seen. ]]>Feb 14th 2010 2:19PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/
Lets wait an see what Eldar says, he usually on the money and due to release a review today.]]>Feb 14th 2010 2:31PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/Feb 14th 2010 1:28PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/Feb 14th 2010 2:02PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/Feb 14th 2010 1:28PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/
How is it not?]]>Feb 14th 2010 1:36PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/
I guess that depends on what Bada is. It sounds like a touchscreen dumbphone with media features to me. I wouldn't consider it to be a smartphone unless it has a public SDK that anybody can use to extend its functionality.]]>Feb 14th 2010 1:40PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/
Smartphone =/= open source. ]]>Feb 14th 2010 1:43PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/
Public SDK =/= open source, either.

I'm not talking about open source, I'm talking about the ability to write your own applications. Every dumbphone out there has downloadable applications from developer partners, only smartphones give you the power to write your own.]]>Feb 14th 2010 2:19PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/=/= ≠ ≠.
alt + 8800 = ≠]]>Feb 14th 2010 2:25PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/Feb 15th 2010 4:31AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/Feb 14th 2010 1:28PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/..to release a killer phone. ]]>Feb 14th 2010 1:41PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/Feb 14th 2010 1:28PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/Feb 14th 2010 1:29PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/
16/9= 1.777
800/480= 1.666

Therefore, this is under 16:9 and by your definition would be considered pretty. ]]>Feb 14th 2010 1:45PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/

it would be considered, in his definition "not ugly", not pretty.]]>Feb 15th 2010 2:11AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/
]]>Feb 14th 2010 1:30PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/
The irony being that your avatar is an apple logo.]]>Feb 14th 2010 1:52PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/Feb 14th 2010 2:12PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/Where'd my comment go explaining I'm and Android user? :(]]>Feb 14th 2010 2:45PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/Feb 14th 2010 1:34PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/It's probably either a snapdragon, or more likely one of their own Hummingbird CorTex A9 CPUs.]]>Feb 14th 2010 2:04PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/Cortex A8]]>Feb 14th 2010 2:04PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/Feb 14th 2010 2:13PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/Feb 14th 2010 1:35PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/Feb 14th 2010 1:37PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/Feb 14th 2010 1:55PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/Feb 14th 2010 1:35PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/
Bada-Bing? Oh I said it out loud. ]]>Feb 14th 2010 2:12PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/Feb 14th 2010 1:38PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/
Seems like everybody expects every new smartphone to have multi-touch or in other words "pinch to zoom" which is not even a standard feature, its just personal preference.]]>Feb 14th 2010 1:57PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/
Multi-touch-pinching-to-zoom is the new niche today, and if Samsung wanted to make this phone a hit, they would have introduced multitouch.

Unless they're pulling an "Apple" by introducing a phone lacking in feature to be able to sell them in future iterations of the same product.

Then again, no one is Apple but Apple.]]>Feb 14th 2010 2:27PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/Feb 14th 2010 2:31PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/Feb 14th 2010 2:55PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/
Samsung announced it, but then was like "well its not a smartphone OS, its like an extra layer"

What does that mean? ]]>Feb 14th 2010 1:39PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/14/samsung-wave-3-3-inch-super-amoled-bluetooth-3-0-bada-but-no/IMHO Bada is nothing more than a clone of Symbian. The UI looks almost exactly the same as S60v5. There IS a public SDK and there are developer forums and tools, etc. on Samsung's innovator website. Whether or not this OS will take off -- don't know, but my own instincts tell me that it will fail hard. BTW it is an OS; it's linux based. It's not a layer or anything like that; and it's supposedly owned and created by Samsung.]]>Feb 14th 2010 2:06PM