Buying a smartphone today is all about small details given the number of manufacturers and models that exist. In my humble opinion, it’s always lucky to have such a variety, even if it’s also gibberish. Choosing between one model or another is a matter of details and precisely in this area, I think I have four winners.
I believe that, to a greater or lesser extent, absolutely every specification of a smartphone is important. Of course, also the price. However, there is four aspects that I consider essential and in which we have precisely several leading companies in it.
Samsung for its update support
Samsung Galaxy A34 5G (Image: Xataka Android)
Having a longer life in a mobile does not always go hand in hand with the number of updates it receives. Even less on Android if we take into account that in the end the important thing comes in the updates of Google Mobile Services. However, I don’t think anyone likes to go receive full system updates and that the layer itself incorporates the latest security patches.
Well, here Google was the one that did the best job until Samsung took over the throne. And although those of Mountain View have a very good update policy, not releasing more than three mobiles per year and focusing on the high and medium-high end makes Samsung the queen. For some years, The range of the Samsung does not matter as it will be updated for sure.
Although there are manufacturers that offer very good update support in certain ranges, Samsung generally reigns supreme. Even their cheap mobiles are guaranteed at least two years of updates As they have been able to confirm to us on several occasions, having up to four years of complete updates and one with security patches in the high range and in many mid-range.
Google for exquisite photo processing
Google Pixel 7a (Image: Xataka)
It’s a fact that a camera’s megapixels aren’t everything. Indeed, there are some mobiles in the economic range with a higher resolution than others in the premium range. Lens type or sensor size are ultimately keys to determining quality. And today more than ever too software processing.
A process that obviously requires hardware and in which Google has been the queen for some years, courtesy of an Apple that has always had good results here and an OPPO that has improved a lot (although it says now goodbye to its MariSilicon chips). . Here those of Mountain View manage to even their mid-range phones look like high-end results. You just have to see what the Pixel 6a and Pixel 7a are capable of to verify it.
Nothing for its bold (and imitated) designs
Only one exhibitor won Nothing for captivating me with their design idea. The Nothing Phone (1) offers what for me is a differential element in today’s smartphones: offer a different aesthetic. For the tastes the colors, it is clear. Some people think the transparent design with LED lights is awful, for others it will be somewhat indifferent and I am one of those who love this design (the only downside is that I hate flat edges).
The fact is that nothing it remained with this essence to offer a differential design Since its first product, the Nothing Ear (1), it has kept it in the aforementioned smartphone, in the Nothing Ear (Stick), in the Nothing Ear (2) and everything indicates that the Nothing Phone (2) will follow the same path. And that aesthetic, of course, has already caused some smaller manufacturers to follow suit. To a lesser extent, even the Realme GT 3 drinks some of its inspiration.
I insist on the fact that this is a very personal point for everyone, it is not for nothing that I focus this article on the first person. However, I think we can all agree that In the end, having a mobile whose design you like is essential. It is possible to choose a mobile according to its specifications, even if its design puts us off, but I think it is not the most common. neither sensible
Realme for its advances in fast charging
Realme GT Neo 3 (Image: Xataka)
Between Xiaomi and Realme they are fighting to have the mobile with faster charging, although in general it is the seconds that tend to spend the longest time on the podium. Currently, the aforementioned Realme GT 3, which in China is the Realme GT Neo 5, which wins the award with 240W of power capable of recharging the battery from 0 to 100% in 9 minutes.
Of course, all is not perfect. The first thing because to achieve it tends to sacrifice autonomy, something logical. After all, the higher the capacity of the batteries, the slower the charging speed can be, regardless of the added power. However, from my own experience, I can say that In Realme this balance is much balanced and the autonomy of this type of smartphones is not so far behind other competitors with higher capacities.
The other downside is battery deterioration. No one will be surprised by the claim that using such high charging powers ends up deteriorating battery health before. However, this is starting to change and not only Realme, but also other manufacturers are trying to make it more and more energy efficient and affect the batteries as little as possible.
We’re at a point where there’s still work to be done and they’re on the right track, so Realme deserves all my appreciation in this case. Because it is not only the ‘GT 3’ and its 240 W which is in question, but also They also stand out in the mobiles of the economic range. The best example is the Realme C55 and its 33W, something unusual in entry-level phones and even bettering flagships like the Samsung Galaxy S23, which falls below with its maximum power of 25W.
It is rare that I recommend to a friend or relative the purchase of a mobile that is not part of these brands.
So, based on my experience in this industry and the number of mobile phones I have tried, whenever I have to recommend a mobile, I try to base myself on these four points. It also always depends on the public profile and if you are looking for something very specific, but in the end, the occasion in which I do not recommend a device from these four brands is rare.
Cover Image | xataka
In Xataka Android | The best “value for money” Android phones
Table of Contents
