04-12-2015 12:27 PM
42 12
tools
  1. smooth4lyfe's Avatar
    Not upset at all .. I think you took my post the wrong way... .

    Simply saying .. if people want to say it sucks .. I simply want to ask valid reasons as to why a company can't brand their own product when .. all others do and no one complains.

    That is it .
    I don't have an issue with the branding... I was just saying I personally wish the placement was in another position, or even if the text was smaller... But the phone looks fine with the branding on it... It's their product I don't have an issue with how they do it
    03-26-2015 11:25 PM
  2. Almeuit's Avatar
    I don't have an issue with the branding... I was just saying I personally wish the placement was in another position, or even if the text was smaller... But the phone looks fine with the branding on it... It's their product I don't have an issue with how they do it
    And thank you for explaining. You didn't before so ... that is why I questioned it. You have explained so all good .
    smooth4lyfe likes this.
    03-26-2015 11:27 PM
  3. dmlv's Avatar
    i did the same thing...went to my local att corp store and the staff (all were great) let me play with both versions. they were really into it as well as all were big big time android users joking with each other as to who is going to be the one to get the company one when it is available for them.

    anyway..wow...these devices are gorgeous! just like the tech sites like AC mentioned in videos from MWC. And yes, i was disappointed in the logo vs "samsung" on the back but it is minimalistic. stores will have only the blue (edge) and white for display.

    These were already to hit the floor for pre-orders tomorrow and had the device demo software loaded. reps let me try and uninstall some of the att and samsung bloatware but in the settings it would only allow "disable". could be because of the demo software which they said resets back to defaults if customers change things.

    So bottom line, I can live w the small logo but no way will i purchase if the carriers block the ability to uninstall apps...not just hide. They actually agreed w me but said we'll have to wait for the real units to see.

    also...one rep showed me the Next pricing and they were pretty fair. if i remember, about 27 ish for 24 month for the s6. the edge is priced like the iph 6 plus. $100 retail more for each size and a few $'s more on Next.

    last thing..i took a few pics and the thing is snappy fast....incredible quality outcomes! will be the best android camera to date (imo).
    03-26-2015 11:57 PM
  4. Haalcyon's Avatar
    Just be thankful the branding is on the back, and not on the front.

    Wasn't there a device with the Verizon logo on the home button?
    The Note 2. Shameful.

    ♻from the n.3 controller🍶🍭
    03-27-2015 12:28 AM
  5. doctordwaynewilliams's Avatar
    The Note 2. Shameful.

    ♻from the n.3 controller🍶🍭
    What made it worse was that the Verizon model was the only Note 2 variant that had branding on the home button.
    03-27-2015 04:08 AM
  6. The_Newtype's Avatar
    Lots of interesting talk here. My opinion:

    1) AT&T, Verizon, etc do NOT own the phone; it is not "their" device. They did not design it. They did not manufacture it. Everyone who says so is absolutely incorrect. Samsung is who designed and created the device. They did not design it with an ugly carrier logo on the back.

    2) Some analogies are incorrect. If you buy an appliance and it says "Whirlpool" on it, that is one thing. Whirlpool created the appliance. What if you bought a Whirlpool appliance from Sears, and, on the front, it had a large Sears logo. Or Best Buy logo? Etc? How would you feel about that? Best Buy did not make the appliance... they just sell it. AT&T sells the phone; they did not make it.

    3) Carriers who put their own branding on a device are absolutely sleezy and are using you as a walking advertisement for their company. They will continue to do this because people continue to condone it.

    I cringe whenever I see a nice, shiny new car and there is a dealer logo on the back. Your car is a Honda, BMW, etc; not the dealer's name. I always force the dealer to remove their logo from my vehicle before I drive it off the lot.

    Don't be a walking billboard for these corporations. It's disgusting.
    04-11-2015 03:55 PM
  7. Haalcyon's Avatar
    Lots of interesting talk here. My opinion:

    1) AT&T, Verizon, etc do NOT own the phone; it is not "their" device. They did not design it. They did not manufacture it. Everyone who says so is absolutely incorrect. Samsung is who designed and created the device. They did not design it with an ugly carrier logo on the back.

    2) Some analogies are incorrect. If you buy an appliance and it says "Whirlpool" on it, that is one thing. Whirlpool created the appliance. What if you bought a Whirlpool appliance from Sears, and, on the front, it had a large Sears logo. Or Best Buy logo? Etc? How would you feel about that? Best Buy did not make the appliance... they just sell it. AT&T sells the phone; they did not make it.

    3) Carriers who put their own branding on a device are absolutely sleezy and are using you as a walking advertisement for their company. They will continue to do this because people continue to condone it.

    I cringe whenever I see a nice, shiny new car and there is a dealer logo on the back. Your car is a Honda, BMW, etc; not the dealer's name. I always force the dealer to remove their logo from my vehicle before I drive it off the lot.

    Don't be a walking billboard for these corporations. It's disgusting.
    Keep in mind that phones need to have a carrier's service to work out in the real world. The carrier wants to reflect that they're the one that's allowing your phone to function when you're not on WiFi. Not all carriers have all devices so they want to remind you and potential customer's that they're the one who has that slick Note Edge that works on their great network that their competitor doesn't offer. That is why there is a Death Star on the back of my phone.

    📐He who controls the Spice controls the universe. The Spice must flow. n.Edge
    04-11-2015 07:45 PM
  8. bhatech's Avatar
    Lots of interesting talk here. My opinion:

    1) AT&T, Verizon, etc do NOT own the phone; it is not "their" device. They did not design it. They did not manufacture it. Everyone who says so is absolutely incorrect. Samsung is who designed and created the device. They did not design it with an ugly carrier logo on the back.

    2) Some analogies are incorrect. If you buy an appliance and it says "Whirlpool" on it, that is one thing. Whirlpool created the appliance. What if you bought a Whirlpool appliance from Sears, and, on the front, it had a large Sears logo. Or Best Buy logo? Etc? How would you feel about that? Best Buy did not make the appliance... they just sell it. AT&T sells the phone; they did not make it.

    3) Carriers who put their own branding on a device are absolutely sleezy and are using you as a walking advertisement for their company. They will continue to do this because people continue to condone it.

    I cringe whenever I see a nice, shiny new car and there is a dealer logo on the back. Your car is a Honda, BMW, etc; not the dealer's name. I always force the dealer to remove their logo from my vehicle before I drive it off the lot.

    Don't be a walking billboard for these corporations. It's disgusting.
    Well said I explain it similar way but someone will say still need service for the phone to work. Sure that's why I'm paying monthly service to the useless carriers. May be they should give some discount to carry their ugly logo like amazon sells their kindle with ads or no ads but on software.

    Either way I'm more mad with Samsung that we don't have the option to buy carrier free unbranded phones from their US online store. No I don't want to import from some useless 3rd party site or 3rd party seller on amazon and pay crazy price. And more over the radios are all not compatible. I know the useless carriers will not change and have no shame but at least Samsung can sell it online like HTC, Moto does.

    Posted via the Android Central App
    04-11-2015 07:57 PM
  9. redsoxfan26's Avatar
    Does anyone know if the Sprint version has their branding on it?
    04-11-2015 08:02 PM
  10. bhatech's Avatar
    Does anyone know if the Sprint version has their branding on it?
    T-Mobile and Sprint no logo on the back.
    04-11-2015 09:22 PM
  11. mwboost's Avatar
    Never any branding on Australian version phones which is sweet. Unless it's telstra.
    04-11-2015 11:09 PM
  12. scuba_steve's Avatar
    Is the VZ logo under the glass or silk screened on it (and potentially removable)? My wife hated the logo on her last VZ Galaxy and I had to buy a replacement back just for that reason. I may be getting her a VZ S6 soon, but that logo may be a deal killer...believe it or not.
    04-12-2015 01:56 AM
  13. bhatech's Avatar
    Is the VZ logo under the glass or silk screened on it (and potentially removable)? My wife hated the logo on her last VZ Galaxy and I had to buy a replacement back just for that reason. I may be getting her a VZ S6 soon, but that logo may be a deal killer...believe it or not.
    Nice good for her on hating that ugly logo, nice to know few other people hate that thing. Unfortunately you are out of luck, that think looks etched inside the glass panel. Don't think that comes off with out replacing the entire glass back.
    04-12-2015 03:25 AM
  14. Haalcyon's Avatar
    I have to admit the Death Star logo doesn't bother me at all.
    Attached Thumbnails Samsung Galaxy S6 Carrier Branding with Glass Back?-1428837714295.jpg  
    04-12-2015 06:22 AM
  15. The_Newtype's Avatar
    Keep in mind that phones need to have a carrier's service to work out in the real world. The carrier wants to reflect that they're the one that's allowing your phone to function when you're not on WiFi. Not all carriers have all devices so they want to remind you and potential customer's that they're the one who has that slick Note Edge that works on their great network that their competitor doesn't offer. That is why there is a Death Star on the back of my phone.

    ������He who controls the Spice controls the universe. The Spice must flow. n.Edge
    Yes, that is how the carriers feel, but I still believe the entire system is backwards:

    1) This would be like your cable company selling the service and then pretty much forcing you into buying your TV or PC from them (they force the TV/PC company to make a version for their network to "optimize" it. If the manufacturer doesn't comply, your cable company won't sell their product. In essence, they are the gate-keepers as to which devices we, the public, can use, etc.) This sounds absolutely absurd that we would EVER sign up for cable TV or high-speed internet and then go pick out a lovely TV from the cable company's selection of PCs and TVs, but that is EXACTLY what the carriers are doing.

    2) Certain carriers do not have all phones because carriers want to have the device exclusivity. Why? Because, here in the States, historically, they do not want to try to win customers by the service alone; AT&T will offer you the Note Edge, but, strangely, it's absent from some other carriers. Wouldn't it seem reasonable that all carriers would want the device? Wouldn't that create true competition? It's a tool to offer people a reason to switch (or stay) with them. It's a shortcut. They do NOT want to win customers on quality of service alone, because that would force them to upgrade their networks. Not going to happen. We have the worst service in the developed world, but pay the most.

    (Digression: Further, when the service is superior, they gouge and resort to playing dirty with their branding and your privacy (Verizon). Where else are you going to go if you need the coverage they offer? No where? You're stuck. There is just a lack of competition, and they know it)

    3) Carrier's services are required for all cellular devices to work, yes. The issue is that they don't want to be seen as simply a dumb pipe that gives you data and communication services. They want to control the experience from start to finish. SIM cards were created to allow just this idea. You place the SIM card in a device, because, technically, that's all that should be needed to connect your mobile device to a network. AT&T/etc does NOT need to do anything to the device outside of programming the proper APN settings (even this is not necessary as most modern devices can automatically load such settings), but they literally go as far as to force carriers to create customized firmware for the phones to run on. Slow updates, sluggish phones and nasty bloat are the thanks we end users get for giving AT&T the pleasure of taking our money.

    To refer back to my whirlpool example, this would be like your utilities company (which are far worse... ZERO competition) signing you up for water service in your neighborhood, and then forcing you to purchase your dishwasher and washing machine from them -- with their hideous logo on it of course. And you may want the Newtype 8000 washing machine, but, oh, too bad... only the other utility company has that model, but you are zoned for them. You are stuck getting whatever model your utility company thinks you would buy.

    Sorry for the wall of text, everyone.
    04-12-2015 08:05 AM
  16. The_Newtype's Avatar
    Well said I explain it similar way but someone will say still need service for the phone to work. Sure that's why I'm paying monthly service to the useless carriers. May be they should give some discount to carry their ugly logo like amazon sells their kindle with ads or no ads but on software.

    Either way I'm more mad with Samsung that we don't have the option to buy carrier free unbranded phones from their US online store. No I don't want to import from some useless 3rd party site or 3rd party seller on amazon and pay crazy price. And more over the radios are all not compatible. I know the useless carriers will not change and have no shame but at least Samsung can sell it online like HTC, Moto does.

    Posted via the Android Central App
    You nailed it. It is one of my biggest frustrations with Samsung and some other OEMS.

    You and I are the minority, as most people will NEVER pay $650+ for a cell phone. The thing is, they actually are paying much more for their phones, but the carriers, like auto dealers, have people buying phones they can't really afford.

    These things are expensive; they should be expensive. They are ridiculously complicated to make. The materials are getting better and better. The phones are getting more and more reliable. They are worth the premium. That cost is hidden to the customer.

    HTC, Sony, Motorola, and Blackberry sell their devices directly to consumers, but, things will never change unless Samsung follows.
    04-12-2015 08:05 AM
  17. ZephyrsDream's Avatar
    Does anyone know if the Sprint version has their branding on it?
    I can also confirm that the there is no Sprint branding on the back of my phone. Was surprised actually since my GS3 had it on the back.

    Sent from my Sprint Galaxy S6 using Tapatalk
    04-12-2015 12:27 PM
42 12

Similar Threads

  1. Galaxy S6 lease program question
    By Joten in forum Sprint
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-08-2015, 11:31 AM
  2. Samsung Galaxy gi-i9305, debrick file?
    By AC Question in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-29-2015, 12:08 PM
  3. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-28-2015, 07:00 PM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-27-2015, 08:54 AM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-27-2015, 07:53 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD