Samsung-Galaxy-Range

Samsung Galaxy family

The Samsung Galaxy S was a phenomenal success. It sold 10 million handsets in seven months, and created one of the biggest names in the market. So what do you do when you have a successful brand? Protect it, like the iPhone, releasing only newer and better phones? Or water it down with a series of lower-powered spinoffs? Uh-oh.

Samsung-Galaxy-Range

Enter the Galaxy Family, four new smartphones joining the Galaxy S: Ace, Fit, Gio and the mini.

Samsung Galaxy Ace

It’s tough to understand why something with a smaller, 3.5-inch screen and a slower 800MHz processor is called “Ace”. Still, at least the 5 megapixel camera (with flash) and voice search options are present. The screen takes a serious resolution drop as well, falling to a very average 320×480. The “Ace” may still be a good phone, but it’s definitely giving less than the “S”. Available from March 2011.

Samsung Galaxy mini

Small mobiles are great – but they’re usually underpowered. Luckily, with a 600MHz processor inside, the mini should work okay. It’ll still pale in comparison to the original Galaxy S’ 1GHz, though.

The 3 megapixel camera and 320×240 screen are also compromises, but we’re glad to see Google Voice actions made the transition, along with the Galaxy Family-standard HSDPA (7.2Mbps internet), SWYPE typing and Android 2.2 Froyo operating system.

The Samsung Galaxy mini will be available in the UK from March 2011.

Samsung Galaxy Fit

We thought being “Fit” meant looking nicer than other people – the 3.31-inch QVGA (240×320) display certainly doesn’t live up to it. There’s an impressive 5 megapixel camera, though, and a 600MHz processor. Its 1350mAh battery matches the Ace, which means you can go for longer than on the mini’s 1200mAh.

With the big battery but slower processor, the Fit should give the longest battery life of the entire range. March 2011.

Samsung Galaxy Gio

A 3.2-inch HVGA (320×480) display, 800MHz processor, and 3 megapixel camera puts the Gio in a strange position. It’ll take worse photos than the Fit, but has a much nicer screen to display them on. Strange. If you don’t need a camera, this is probably your best bet.