Source: Tom's Guide | Keywords: samsung, tmobile, behold | Themes: Smartphones
- 1. Who's the Target Audience?
- 2. Lame Browser, Killer Camera
- 3. Design Flaws and Good Sound
1. Who's the Target Audience?
The Samsung Behold is an aspiring smart-phone in search of an audience. It has done everything right—decked itself out with a big, beautiful camera, a responsive touch-screen, and 3G data service—so why isn’t it making waves and becoming a star like the iPhone, or even the G1 Android phone?
Because it’s just not good enough for the part, that’s why. A million features, done sloppily, don’t amount to much if they’re not well-designed and integrated. So, what kind of person would go for the Behold despite its lack of star quality?
For starters, he’d be a T-Mobile customer. The carrier is the smallest of the U.S.’s big four, with only about 18% of all mobile revenue and customers. That’s somewhat of a niche market to begin with. Nobody would switch to T-Mobile just for the chance to buy a Behold, since rather similar phones are available on Sprint (Instinct), Verizon (Omnia), and AT&T (Eternity).
Then, he’d have to be looking for a petite touch-screen phone, if he’d be willing to pass up the vaunted Google phone, also a T-Mobile exclusive. The Behold is quite a bit smaller and somewhat lighter than the Google phone. It is hard to argue that pricing would make a difference—with a contractual discount, the G1 is only $30 more than the Behold ($180 versus $150), and at the full retail price the two phones cost the same amount ($399).
- Next page Lame Browser, Killer Camera
This handset doesn't have Windows Mobile, you even said that it's not a "real" smartphone. The Omnia is a smartphone, this is not.
Hey Nitrous,
Are you saying a phone has to have Windows Mobile to be considered a real smartphone in general?
Rachel Rosmarin, Editor, Tom's Guide
cool
http://www.dpbolvw.net/click-3267951-10392042
use this code j0GcZFXb77XHY
This is a horribly written article from a journalistic standpoint. It's obviously heavily biased, the writing style does nothing but insult the product (Whether it deserves it or not), and the few positives about the product are written off as "it has this...buttttt.......".
Very unprofessional, hardly objective and if I got paid to write things like this I could slander just about any product up and down.
For the record I'm not saying the complaints about the phone are bad, by all means seeing pictures of where the SD card slot is makes me surprised, but they're just brought about poorly.
Yes, actually I am. A dumbphone like this is not nearly as flexible or customizable as a smartphone with a real OS. Sure, you can get a Voyager and use email on it for example, but it's not going to be as good as a Windows Mobile phone, Blackberry or iPhone. Plus a real smartphone can run applications instead of just little apps from the Get it Now store for example. The "iPhone killer" dumbphones like the Voyager and Instinct look really useful on the outside, but aren't going to be quite as versatile.
This is a horribly written article from a journalistic standpoint. It's obviously heavily biased, the writing style does nothing but insult the product (Whether it deserves it or not), and the few positives about the product are written off as "it has this...buttttt.......".Very unprofessional, hardly objective and if I got paid to write things like this I could slander just about any product up and down.For the record I'm not saying the complaints about the phone are bad, by all means seeing pictures of where the SD card slot is makes me surprised, but they're just brought about poorly.
Claimintru,
I appreciate that you noticed the different style of this article, even if you didn't like it. I experimented with a shorter review style, and used a more casual tone. I would argue that the article is not biased, since as a reviewer I look at many phones and offer my opinion on their merits. My objective with this review was to try to determine who would buy it (whose needs does it meet?). I came away thinking that there are not many people for whom this phone would be ideal. Also, I don't think it is technically possible to slander a cell phone
Thanks for reading,
Rachel Rosmarin, Editor of Tom's Guide
I've yet to see or use a phone that makes me want to trade in my XV6700.
Except maybe the XV6800.
first of all , this phone is for people switching from a regular cell phone to a better interface. second, t-mobile does not require you to join a 40$ a month data plan. you can simply get a regular plan and pay just phone charge and use the calander, music player, games etc...just no email and internet. (that's 2000$ of saving compare to iphone)..if you want the extra internet , you can get a $24 3G data plan...way cheaper than ATT and verizon.
the phone is small...it rings loud and call quality and reception is good. (unlike iphone...my reception is really bad)...it does well on it's primary function...a phone.
As for browser..yes, all samsung phones use the same crappy browser that slows down the 3G connetion. (I had samsung instinct on sprint and it's the same bad browser on a fast network...GPS downloads quick on that phone...so it's the browser problem).
however, you can download a third party browser to use on this phone...your experience will be much better...
screen is small ...not as good as iphone but you get a small phone to carry around.
my wife has this phone and after comparing with my iphone, I think it's as good as it get for this price range and without the killer
contract price with ATT or Verison.