Samsung Galaxy Beam review: stay for the projector, but nothing more | Hacker News Reader

Samsung Galaxy Beam review: stay for the projector, but nothing more

engadget.com

24 pointsredDragon25 comments

> The firmware isn't going to help convince you to purchase a Galaxy Beam either, since it's running Android 2.3 Gingerbread.

Why Samsung why?

Software and a cheaper device seem to be the biggest problems here. I mean it is a little niche but this project has really been given a lot of disadvantages that have nothing to do with the projector.

If they took a Galaxy SIII for example and added on the projector, I would be interested in it. I mean I would have to see how big it was and how much it weighed in that configuration but it has potential as a concept.

Clearly, Samsung is testing the market.

Not a shocking verdict. Honestly I'm shocked that it's as well constructed as it is, considering its niche. However, I do disagree with this line:

>There is no logical reason this phone should be running Gingerbread.

There's an entirely logical reason. The kernel extensions and related drivers for that projector aren't exactly rolled into the android open source project. Samsung has had more pressing priorities to keep track of (The GS3, Note 2, 10.1 Note, and all of the Windows 8 shenanigans) rather than porting the likely overly complex proprietary modules and such required to make the projector work on 4.1 on this niche, low-volume device.

Had this been by Apple, it would now be called "Revolutionary", irrespective of the hardware specs - Sad state of tech journalism. Because, I honestly think that a projector inside a phone is actually revolutionary. Remembered, the iPhone 5 was rumored to have this and ended up with a few inches of extra screen and a new processor, and now this Samsung phone actually has this. Bravo Samsung, for actually being innovative and not just on marketing terms!

Apple would never release something like this because its an absolutely ridiculous concept. The design compromises that had to be made to make this phone would be absolutely unacceptable for apple to accept(just read the reviews). There are already small accessory projectors for iPhone. Why would you want to carry a projector in you pocket all the time, making you phone 2x heavier than it should be?

This thing will be doa. Talk about fragmenting a brand, Samsung will make anything, I can't imagine there any market for a 2 year old android phone with a projector. This just screams of a project being shoved out the door with inadequate r&d resources.

This concept has been rolling around in various companies R&D departments since at least 2005, when The Island included a scene with a projector phone.

Are we to applaud innovation for the sake of innovation, regardless of whether or not it produces a good product?

Apple made a new phone with a few inches of extra screen and a new processor because that's what they needed to make their phone better. No reason to start attaching gimmicks for the sake of being a little different.

The fact that you probably don't have a use for a projector phone doesn't mean that nobody does. That's the nice thing about a company that makes more than one product: you have options. Making fun of, say, a traveling salesman for liking a projector phone is about like making fun of a construction company for owning a full-sized truck.

Exactly. A very niche early adopter device. There will be a market for this device, but its not big enough to interest Apple. As the technology gets more advanced/cheaper/smaller that could definitely change, but right now its early.

Apple still make Mac Pros... a very niche product... there are probably more people into projector phones than mac pros.

I'll be curious if all the Apple fan boy's retract what they say when the iPhone gets a projector added to it. I suspect they'll argue the: "The market it ready for it now!" line :P

Apple makes tons of money on the MBP, even if this business is dwarfed by the iOS devices they sell.

Who cares? Apple will release what makes them tons of money; that is just how they work. If they can fit it into a good product, they won't care what Apple fan boys or Apple haters said in the past, its completely irrelevant to them.

I didn't say MBP, I said Mac Pro (as in their Tower product).

I didn't mean, what will apple think of fan boys or haters. I was questioning the consistency of view of the fan boys, of course its rather moot, as fan boys are of course not consistent at the level of discussion, but instead company.

Apple don't release things that make them tons of money, they market things that make them tons of money. It was pretty clear the iPod (1st generation) was not a fantastic product, but Apple marketed the crap out of it, to the point it would seem like the only option to some people.

Sorry, ya, the tower used to be less niche than it is, the world has moved on mostly to laptops and the desktop market is stagnant. Even Apple sees no future there.

The iPod V1 was a great product back then, unless you are reinforcing Cowboy Neal's position that it was lame compared to a Nomad? Also, Apple spends very little money on marketing, and that was especially true back then. Apple's recipe for success has been to package the right technology at the right time into a package that is very well designed. Those who attribute their success to fanboyism or marketing are just deluding themselves with bias.

Back in the 1990s there were a few companies that introduced laptops with integrated bubblejet and thermal printers. A few pundits crowed that every printer would have one builtin because it was so useful.

Since then, every couple of years a company introduces a new one and usually sells a few hundred and discontinues it.

A projector phone might be like a construction company owning a full-sized truck, but it might also be like a construction company buying a Toyota Prius with a builtin dumpster attachment

Someone has to make products that suck to show everyone what not to do before we get good (i.e. refined) products. Resistive touchscreen phones and tablets sucked, but lead to capacitive touch screen devices which we probably all agree are much better.

I don't think there are many examples of products that were perfect on the first attempt to make them, or even the first few goes. Projector phones might seem compromised now, but if some company thinks hard enough about them, we might get something really nice. It won't be innovative, but it will be refined.

This sounds very trollish. When pico projectors are smaller and provide more of a mass consumer experience, Apple might decide to use them. This is a rustic early adopter device in the sense that the pre-iPhone smartphones were.

Projector in smartphone is not new, so Samsung is not innovative by my definition, more like following the "Same"sung tactic. They are clearly testing the market, just like they release an Android based camera. I would not call it innovation by slapping two products together to create a hybrid product. Do you call a fridge that has a 10" LCD dashboard running Android Jelly Bean innovative?

So what is innovative by your definition, then? A few inches of extra screen and a dual-core processor?

I am a little proud to say, I suggested this in 2005:

"There has to be at least one unique feature. I suggest some sort of projection display that allows you to project (for maybe 5 seconds at a time) what is on your screen to any reasonably flat surface like a wall. This would allow you to show your buddy or boss a document or a picture. An inexpensive LED bulb or two plus the ability to project 640×480 if that, is all that is needed."

Comment #6, here: http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2005/09/23/could-a-mobile...

Most things are independently conceived many many times before finally having an implementation that sticks. TI has been working on the DLP picoprojector tech that's in this phone for a while, and as I mentioned elsewhere, The Island (2005) included a scene with a projector phone (I believe Microsoft consulted for that movie).

Too late to edit my post - but I would like to say I do not claim credit for it, it would be silly of me to do so. Now I have to go rent The Island :-)

If you aren't familiar with The Island, don't read the synopsis or back cover. I think that movie was much more entertaining going into it without any expectations.

I keep hoping for something like this to be successful. I expect that the cross over point is at 25 - 50 lumens (I've got a WXShow picoprojector and it is great camping, not so great anywhere else :-) but there is something to be said for showing stuff to others 'larger' than the 4" screen on the phone. (or iPod :-)

The way to do this properly would be to have a separate device that also has WiFi and have a way to stream video to it. The device would have no screen.

This already exists: first DLNA and later Airplay. Wifi streaming is laggy and prone to compression artifacts; HDMI, possibly wireless HDMI, would seem to be a better choice in the long run for such a device.

Of course, if you do a lot of impromptu presentations, there's something to be said for the convenience of having your projector, phone, and presentations all in one device.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com