I’m put off by how Samsung monetise every data source they’re trusted with though. E.g. TV viewing, phone data, Samsung Pay, forced analytics, etc.
As a brand they don't seem to have any restraint when it comes to user privacy.
I'd like a foldable but not so much to pay $1300 for the Razr.
AT&T doesn't have low end Motorolas so I bought an unlocked, guaranteed to work with AT&T, sub $300 one directly off motorola.com and took it to the AT&T store.
So far it's left me alone.
I'd to see some evidence for this claim. It seems to be a ridiculous offhand claim to make in this era of late stage capitalism. Flagship phones owners are wealthier, their data is more valuable for customer acquisition. Why in god's name would those penny pinchers leave that kind of money on the table? It makes no sense. It's not like flagship phone owners can track whether their data is being sold any better than low end phone owners.
They might make it harder to turn data collection off in low end phones, but that says nothing of their desire to be able to sell the data of flagship phone owners.
Out of all the companies, Google and Samsung are by far the most secure companies in terms of breaches and the magnitude of those breaches.
Of course, not going to that next step would be ideal, but at least you have some control over your choice on security.
You don't think those vulnerabilities are going to leak out during the 4 months that OEMs have them before patches are pushed out?
Google has chosen to sacrifice security for marketing.
It starts with Samsung's app icons. They all feel like a cheap knockoff of either Apple or Google to me.
I don't want to get a device where the UI looks like this.
Other than that, the Z-Fold 7 looks like a great device. I hope Google catches up.