The Samsung Galaxy Player 3.6 is the low tier version of its older sibling, the Galaxy player 4.2. Their completely identical with exception to the screen real-estate, which you can refer to in their product names.
The Galaxy player series since its birth has tried to compete with Apple’s Ipod touch and thus far hasn’t really done much in putting in a dent in Apple’s sales. At first glance, you would think a media centric device running Android being priced at $150 (3.6) and $200 (4.2) could do a little damage in this particular ecosystem of devices. Let’s see whether this is the case for Samsung’s second generation of Galaxy players.
The Galaxy Player 3.6 Is Lazy Design By Samsung
This is where Samsung has done itself a great disservice in making head way for its Galaxy player series. To put it frankly, the Galaxy player 3.6 is rehashed miniature version of Samsung’s Galaxy S ll line of smartphones. Minimize the screen size, take away the search button, and downgrade the camera quality a bit and BAM!, you have your Galaxy player 3.6. This has led me to believe that even tho Samsung is going out of it’s way to make a media/music centric device, intentions are solely having their hands in the same pot as Apple. Samsung is historically known for “borrowing” ideas from Apple, so it wouldn’t surprise me in the least bit if that was the case.
Galaxy Player 3.6 Has Decent Performance But Nothing Spectacular
To add to the displeasure, the overall quality of the device is severely lacking. The 3.6inch screen as an embarrassing 480 by 320 pixels and the digitizer isn’t even close to the glass screen, so viewing angles are non existent to say the least. Being 0.38 inch thick, it’s bigger than the new Galaxy S III smartphone (which has a thickness of 0.34 inch).
Internal spec’s resemble the first Galaxy S with a 1ghz Scorpion processor (which runs smoothly on the device), the increasingly scarce MicroSD card slot, as well as 8gb of onboard storage. On the rear you get a 2 megapixel and front facing VGA camera.
In the future, I believe companies such as Samsung should just omit the camera entirely if their going to make them awful to begin with. It would speed along production as well as significantly drop the price of the device, thus increasing your target demographic. Just my 2 cents tho.
You have your 3.5mm headphone jack, micro usb port , 802.11b/g/n, Bluetooth 3.0, GPS, and even a built-in FM radio.
Gingerbread 2.3 runs the device, and as I’ve stated before, the 1ghz processor helps apps and everyday use move along quite smoothly. Being able to use the Google Play Store in its entirety is also a big help as it expands the capabilities of what the device can be used for on a software level.
Samsung gives you a generous 1500mah battery which they say will offer 30 hours of continuous music playback and 5 hours of video playback. In my personal use, I found Samsung’s numbers to be just as generous.
I got about 25-27 hours of non-stop music playback and a less than stellar 3.5 to 4 hours of video playback. All in all, it’ not bad for a device priced at $150.
Not A Bad MP3 Player but the Galaxy Player 3.6 Isn’t Beating The Competition
I see the Galaxy player 3.6 as a solid gift for a child. Other than that, I can’t really recommend it over the likes of the Apple Ipod touch or other similarly priced media devices. The screen resolution will frustrate you to no end, the cheap looking industrial design will leave you wanting more for the money, and an ominous feeling of why you even bought the device may come about. Every Android smartphone on the market today can do what the Galaxy player 3.6 can, plus more, so setting aside $150-$200 towards Samsung’s half ass attempt in making a competitive product wouldn’t be very wise.