“Samsung is rumored to be just weeks away from introducing a larger version of its flagship Galaxy S6 Edge smartphone, featuring a 5.5-inch display that would match Apple’s iPhone 6 Plus, and may even use the same ‘Plus’ moniker,” Katie Marsal reports for AppleInsider.
“The alleged ‘Galaxy S6 Plus’ name was attributed to reliable sources by Italian website HDblog.it on Tuesday,” Marsal reports. “It’s expected that the larger smartphone will be a larger version of the Galaxy S6 Edge, which features a curved display on its left and right edges.”
“It’s been said that the so-called ‘Galaxy S6 Plus’ will feature a Super AMOLED display sized at either 5.4 or 5.5 inches,” Marsal reports. “In comparison, Apple’s iPhone 6 Plus has a 5.5-inch display.”
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Why not just call it “iPhone 6 Plus by Samsung” and be done with it? The damage Samsung has already done to their brand with their rampant IP theft and blatant trade dress infringement is incalculable and yet they seem unable to wake up and stop destroying themselves. Go, Karma, go!!!
SEE ALSO:
Apple’s indomitable iPhone 6/Plus sales unfazed by Samsung’s anemic Galaxy S6/Edge – June 2, 2015
iPhone 6, killer: Beleaguered Samsung’s Galaxy S6 sales are a total disaster – May 22, 2015
Beleaguered Samsung reports 30 percent decline in operating profit – April 28, 2015
Samsung Galaxy S6 phones suffer weaker than expected sales in South Korea homeland – April 22, 2015
15 percent of Samsung Electronics execs quit amid profit slump – April 2, 2015
Significant Android to iPhone switching weakens market for Samsung Galaxy S6 – March 24, 2015
Apple iPhone takes smartphone market share from Android around the world – March 4, 2015
Poor man’s iPhone: Android on the decline – February 26, 2015
Study: iPhone users are smarter and richer than those who settle for Android phones – January 22, 2015
Why Android users can’t have the nicest things – January 5, 2015
iPhone users earn significantly more than those who settle for Android phones – October 8, 2014
Yet more proof that Android is for poor people – June 27, 2014
More proof that Android is for poor people – May 13, 2014
Android users poorer, shorter, unhealthier, less educated, far less charitable than Apple iPhone users – November 13, 2013
Shoot me in the head with this originality.
Samsung is stuck between the low cost smart phones and iPhones at the top end and can’t find a way to make a decent nickel.
The future? More heads will roll at Samsung.
Why buy the best phone money can buy, when you can buy an inferior alternative for the same price?
SO according to MDN, Samsung is copying Apple by making a bigger phone? Really? Say what you want about them , but size is their introduction, though they don’t own size.
By copying “6 Plus” and the frame designs.
Are we really going to be discussing “rounded corners”? Apple doesn’t own those either. You’ll notice I did not accuse Apple of “slavishly copying” the phablet form factor they previously ridiculed.
It’s true that Apple has copied a “tree” or two from Android and Samsung. But Android, and particularly Samsung, have copied the whole damn forest, and even the CONCEPT of a forest, from Apple.
Plus, to be fair, HTC was the first to make serious push into bigger screen smartphones. And while bigger screen concept is not patentable, of course, Apple and HTC are friendly for years already since they have cross-licensing agreement. Most importantly, Apple has made bigger screen phones only after inventing a way to control it in one hand (doubel tap on Home button).
Apple has ridiculed phablet only because by that time double-tap-to-pull-down-the-screen function was not invented yet, so all competitor devices were unusable in one hand. Apple solved this and added big screen only after that.
Apple’s standard operating procedure — introduce something when it can be done well. (Applies most of the time.)
Actually, learn from other’s mistakes and fix them. Smart, but not first.
Actually, the Android os is easier to use with one hand because of the dedicated back button. Apple’s back button is in the most inaccessible location… the top left corner. In addition, The Galaxy Note added several features to improve accessibility with one hand, included a special mode called one-handed. Simply put, Android’s OS is easier to use one-handed.
I like Apple, but they promoted the importance of one-handedness for a long time as a competitive advantage, while in reality… people using phablets use two hands for most operations.
In other words, for large phones, it just isn’t that big a deal. Reachability is just Apple trying to compensate for an OS that was optimized for use as a small screen.
This would be easy to demonstrate with a video, if it were true. Got a comparison video showing this?
You’re more than welcome to make one. However, it stands to reason that having a dedicated back button next to your thumb on the bottom of the device is certainly more “reachable” than the soft back button present in the standard Apple interface guidelines.
That’s assuming the programmer even followed the UI guideline of placing it in the upper left corner. With Android EVERY program supports the back button because it is a standard OS feature. It would be more difficult to try to disable the ‘back’ button..
I agree, this is true. It’s really just a different UX that Android has. I know people on MDN crap on Android, but it’s just different, that’s all. It has its strengths.
On iOS, the back button is also the home button. Often times, it’s just easier to exit the app and start over if the developer put in a crappy back UI.
That’s somewhat an oversimplification of what the back button does on Android.. There is a separate ‘home’ button for going back to the ‘home’ screen(s). The back button will function like the ‘home’ button when you try to ‘back’ from the ‘first card’ which is in most cases the first non-splash screen of an app. At all other times it returns the user to the previous ‘card’ of the app, each ‘card’ being a screen you have drilled down in the App or ‘called’ via an intent (e.g. entering the camera via Facebook when inserting a photo you will take immediately). Should you have gone immediately to the ‘home’ screen via the home button and then later resume the App you have left you can press the ‘back’ button to continue to a previous ‘card’ for that app session.
I don’t find myself needing a “back button” often enough to wish I had a hardware back button.
If you are talking about reachability it is a joke. If you had ever used the even bigger screened Note you would find out that there are many hardware and software features that make it far easier to use one-handed than the iPhone 6+. The difference between the two is the Note was designed to accommodate a larger form factor. The 6+ is just a stretched iPhone5S.
There’s different software features available in the 6 Plus that aren’t in the 5S. I have owned both and can assure you that it’s not merely a “stretched 5S” although even that would be fine by me, I like the larger screen with more room to view content.
Each company has stolen ideas from the other; however, Samsung does take it to a ludicrous extent. The display was copied initially, now the case is constantly copied (first square sides then rounded, no antenna line then added after Apple did), and of course the British accent guy in the Galaxy S6 commercial. At some point, you have to quit saying they aren’t slavishly copying; while the courts have decided it isn’t actionable, the moral bankruptcy of absolute imitation is startling.
Oh yes. There is not doubt that Samsung SLAVISHLY copies from Apple. It has been a long term trend that obviously continues to this day. Forget ye not that, despite the significant level of tech illiteracy in modern US courts, Samsung LOST a massive lawsuit to Apple specifically over ripping off Apple IP.
Then please explain to me how they could have SLAVISHLY copied Apple, yet still manage to suck. Wouldn’t they BOTH suck then?
Samsung only copied what they could get away with. The rest they tried to invent. See how that turned out?
Even the obvious stuff they messed up so badly that their phones are routinely ranked inferior by most tech reviews.
Now do you get why their phones suck?
So then the copying was somewhere below “slavish”, wasn’t it…
My thesaurus has an entry for slavish. It gives an example:
slavish copying: UNORIGINAL, uninspired, unimaginative, uninventive, imitative.
What does your thesaurus say?
slavish – blindly imitative; “a slavish copy of the original”
I cannot answer whether the current Galaxy build quality is any good or not; I have never used one. Initial ones were very cheap plastic. The primary problem with Samsung is the underlying operating system: Google stole Apple’s concepts without providing any security or upgradability within Android.
No. There is the actual, then there is the imitation. How good is the mimicry? In this case, it sucks. But you apparently are hobbled in your senses, especially taste, to the point where you can’t tell the difference between a hamburger and the turd that results after eating a hamburger. I’m sorry for you.
Ah, yes, the taste card. Since I’m devoid of taste I bet my car sucks too.
“Since I’m devoid of taste I bet my car sucks too.”
Yes. And your clothes, too. And your girlfriend. Go play with your Samsung devices…
Way to live up to your name! Love it!
It is like putting a Porsche body on a Vokswagen…
Apple never claimed to patent “rounded corners”. This phrase was excerpted from the opening section describing Apple’s devices; it was not part of the patent request.
It was Samsung’s _lawyers_ who claimed Apple tried to patent ’rounded corners’. They did this to belittle Apple and cast doubt on Apple’s valid Intellectual Property claims for many other aspects of its product designs that were openly stolen by Samsung.
It does not say much for most people’s critical thinking abilities that they are still saying Apple tired to patent rounded corners. This includes people who should know better, like you, Applecynic, and journalists, juries, and Federal judges.
Go read the patent filing if you want. It is not a debate. It is a matter of fact.
Hence my use of quotes. Design patents are BS. Software patents too. These should be covered under Trade Dress and Copyright.
Slide to unlock? Bounce?
Implementations are patented, not abstract concepts. So if Samsung cribbed how Apple did this stuff, then ya: they stole Apple’s IP.
PS. You are a maroon.
Listen Bugs, I think you made the wrong turn at Albuquerque.
It used to be you could only patent a physical thing. In the ’90s software patents, and business practice patents became allowed. Remember Amazon’s one-click? Congress passed a bad law.
applepsycho, or apple cynic, or whatever.
No, you are wrong. derss said “by copying …frame designs”. And you said: “Are we going to discuss ’rounded corners'” to put dress down.
Yet Samsung’s copying of Apple IP goes well beyond the bullshit claim of “rounded corners”. You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. But neither side knows what it is talking about.
Please leave and never come back.
That would be a negative.
Well, MDN is not really wrong here. Samsung was the one to start making large phones of various sizes, but here what we have is a phone that is called ‘xxx plus’, and has exact same size and shape as iPhone 6 plus. Samsung hasn’t even tried to disguise it — they are purposely calling it a plus.
This reminds me of those knock-off brand names from the early 90s: Panasoanic (desk phones), SONI (portable stereos)… The “brands” were displayed with the same typeface as the original, and were clearly trying to (and often succeeding) dupe the ordinary consumers into believing they’re buying a real thing (not in America, though; in non-English speaking world).
Samsung may have made some success with phablets when Apple didn’t care about the market segment. As soon as Apple entered, Samsung had no choice but to imitate once again.
I think they used the image of a Samsung S6 instead of the S6 Edge which would be the actual shape of the S6 Plus according to the article.
Not copying size – copying EVERYTHING.
If you want to be Mr. Cynic, at least base it on accuracy and facts, such as judge holding up two tablets in court and asking Samcopy lawyer which is Apple’s and which is Samcopy’s. The lawyer – just ten feet away – couldn’t tell!!!
When NFL announcers stop calling the Surface an iPad, you might have a point…
I’ve always thought that particular argument was rather weak. As any student learning science can attest, you need a ‘control’. In this case a simple toy that was similar in shape and color to also show and see if a difference could be discerned. Besides it was the the Apple lawyer that asked the question of the Samsung lawyer. The judge is not allowed to pose questions himself other than to manage the proceedings of the court.
Phablet phones were NOT a Samsung invention. They ripped off that idea too, just not from Apple in that case.
Don’t put me in a position to defend Samsung. I’m being critical of your gushing. I’m not a fan of anyone.
Personally I remember the original Note as the first one, but I can be wrong. So what?
Thank you for writing!
Should try it sometime…
Ran rings around you. <–I love feeding trolls and watching them break their teeth. But back to more intelligent things…
Don’t break your arm patting yourself on the back. If anyone is a troll it’s the trash you write about other’s while blindly appreciating Apple. Just be prepared to be called on your bull.
You said you’re not a fan of anyone. OK I believe you. But the language and tone of your posts are indistinguishable from many bona fide troll attacks here over the years… How can you blame us simpletons from getting confused?
It’s called discourse. Disagreement and skepticism are not trolling. It’s not my fault if one gets upset. I’ve called no one any names, or insulted anyone’s intellect.
Anyway, why would being cynical on Apple upset anyone?
I think it’s called “farting in the elevator just to jack others off”
I thought the term “Phablet” was coined either by the media or Samsung to describe the first Galaxy Note as being mid-sized between the sizes of the existing smartphones and tablets at the time.
I found a history table in the Wikipedia article (if WordPress will let me post another link!):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phablet
In tracing the 10 earliest devices in the history of the phablet concept, PC Magazine called the 1993 AT&T EO 440, “the first true phablet”, followed by the following devices:
2007 HTC Advantage (5.0 inch screen)
2007 Nokia N810WiMAX Edition (4.13″ screen)
2009 Verizon Hub (7.0″ screen)
2010 LG GW990 (4.8″ screen)
2010 Dell Streak (5.0″ screen)
2011 Dell Streak 7 (7.0″ screen)
2011 Acer Iconia Smart (4.8″ screen)
2011 Samsung Galaxy Player 5 (5.0″ screen)
2011 Pantech Pocket
2011 Samsung Galaxy Note (5.3″ screen)
I stand corrected. 😀
BTW: The EO, the ‘first true phablet’, was purchased, not invented, by AT&T. It was called a phone and a tablet because it offered a cellular modem, rather remarkable for the time. The Apple Newton Messenger, which had been demoed by Apple the previous year, did not offer a cellular connection and therefore did not qualify.
Seems that the term was coined more recently.. The earliest mention of the word was in 2010 in an article at todd carother’s blog then used here and there. Finally becoming part of the larger social consciousness with the Galaxy Note: http://toddcarothers.com/2010/08/phablet-my-predication-is-fail/
Your research beats anything I could find. The earliest reference to ‘phablet’ I found was 2011.
Which one of those phones became popular and lead the way to larger phones being the size for all major suppliers including Apples to market their flagships. Yes the Note.
Who were the most vocal in lambasting the Note and larger screened phones saying they would never catch on …… iPhone fans including a lot of people on this site!
You can also come up with a list of phones that preceded the iPhone to be the first true smartphone.
That’s a fun game. But pretending Samsung has ever been much of an innovator is silly. I can take the Note and point directly back to the Palm PDAs, then back before that to… The Apple Newton. Surprise.
You can’t find a list of phones before the iPhone which pushed every single other smartphone in existence to copy them, nor which completely drove the industry into mainstream acceptance.
I would think the clamshell design was one that was copied by a lot of companies when it first appeared as one example. You could say it was inspired by the Star Trek communicator, but if you go that route you’d have to admit that all PDAs and tablets were inspired by PADDs too..
So how is it that the rumored larger S6 is copying Apple again?
Do you feel the manipulation yet?
Look at you all smart and smug. You haven’t even touched me.
On a string!
Are you going to answer the question?
Up and down!
Tuesday.
I don’t recall apple asking any question, what is samsung responding to?
The reality here is that sansung is not “responding”, they are just doing what they do best, to fool its clients making them believe they came out with all that while leaving them in the past.
Wana have the phone of the future you samsung sheeps? Buy an iPhone.. And not even the latest one, buy the iPhone 4s and you will still ahead of the rest of the Samsung users.
Samsung is “responding” to its own failed Galaxy S6, introduced only a couple of months ago. In Samsung’s world, if a product fails, just hurry up and introduce a new one with some changes to the spec sheet, and by golly, THAT will solve the problem!!! /s
Besides, how else is Samsung supposed to push out software updates?
Tired all about this Samsung junk
Lol … They created bricks generation….
Samsung is now just pathetic in their attempts to recapture the glory they never really owned.
💤💤
I think it’s funny they think they just got their most recent attempts wrong and now at last a new 5.5″ model “will make all the selling competitive difference,” instead of just adding to the already unsold sizable Galaxy landfill.
To be fair, those Galaxy S6 units are NOT in a landfill, they’re in a filled-up warehouse (but which still count as “shipped” units).
There ought be a law saying “sold units or nothing.” This “shipping” nonsense needs to end. It means nothing but overly-optimistic sales anticipation, especially in Slamdung’s case.
I laughed my ass off so hard at this story that now my ass is MIA.
Lucy Koh would approve MDN’s suggestion.
I think ScamSkunk has the right strategy. By producing the Galaxy S 6 Plus they will lose money faster. In order to cut their losses they will have to fill half of the phone boxes they ship with rocks. Remember; tech anal-it’s count units shipped, not units sold. Shipped phone boxes filled with rocks count! 🖖😀⌚️
Everyone missing the original phablet and calling Samsung made first big screen?
What about Dell streak which came year before Note and other phones?