OnePlus 13: The Flagship That Fixed Everything… Except Ambition

Nadia Malik Leave a comment

The OnePlus 13 is the best OnePlus phone in years — and still not the Android flagship it should have been.

After a wave of breathless “just buy it” long‑term reviews and YouTube love letters, you’d think this thing rewrote the flagship playbook. It didn’t. What OnePlus actually shipped is a very fast, very durable, very power‑efficient phone that plays it surprisingly safe in all the places that matter long‑term: cameras, display strategy, and software support.

Design and Durability: Finally Grown-Up, But Late to the Party

Credit where it’s due: this is the first time in a while a OnePlus design genuinely feels premium and distinct, not just “cheaper Samsung.”

You get a 162.9 x 76.5 x 8.5mm body at 210g, with either glass or a microfiber vegan leather back. The blue “Midnight Ocean”‑style microfiber option has been praised across multiple long‑term reviews for grip and durability, even after 9–12 months of daily, mostly caseless use. The circular camera island still screams OnePlus, and the aluminum frame with polished edges manages to feel solid without turning into a brick.

The real headline, though, is durability: IP68 and IP69. That’s dust‑tight, submersion down to 1.5m for 30 minutes, plus resistance to high‑pressure 80°C water jets. On paper, that beats the iPhone 16 line, Galaxy S24 series, and Pixel 9 phones, which all stop at IP68. Reviewers have thrown around washing‑machine demos and shower usage stories; you don’t need any of that, but for once you can buy a OnePlus flagship without mentally adding an asterisk next to “water resistance.”

The annoying bit? OnePlus has form when it comes to inconsistent IP certification across regions and carrier variants. The IP69 flex is great, but if you’re outside OnePlus’s core markets, don’t assume you’re automatically getting the exact same rating until your local spec sheet says so.

Display and Performance: Fast, Bright Enough, and Weirdly Conservative

On paper, the OnePlus 13’s screen looks stacked:

  • 6.82-inch LTPO AMOLED (LTPO 4.1)
  • 1440 x 3168 resolution, 510ppi
  • 1–120Hz variable refresh rate
  • HDR10+, Dolby Vision, Android Ultra HDR
  • Peak brightness advertised at 4,500 nits

In reality, it’s slightly less impressive than the marketing — and the competition. Lab testing from GSMArena pegs typical auto brightness at just over 1,200 nits, with ~800 nits manually. That’s fine, but nowhere near the latest ultra‑bright panels from rivals like the related Realme GT 7 Pro, Pixels, or Samsung’s top devices. Outdoors, reviewers say it’s absolutely usable and looks great, but it’s not the brightness king some early hype implied.

Then there’s refresh rate handling. The panel is capable of 120Hz and can drop to 1Hz, but high‑fps Android gaming remains the usual ColorOS/OxygenOS mess: many popular titles are still stuck at 60fps despite the hardware. OnePlus 12 occasionally broke that pattern; the 13 regresses back to inconsistent support. If you’re buying this as a competitive gaming phone, you’re relying on game‑by‑game whitelisting, not raw capability.

Performance, on the other hand, is not the problem. The Snapdragon 8 Elite (SM8750-AB) with its 4.32GHz Oryon V2 big cores, Adreno 830 GPU, LPDDR5X RAM, and UFS 4.0 storage is exactly as fast as you’d expect. Benchmarks put the OnePlus 13 comfortably ahead of Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 devices and well above Google’s Tensor G4, with reviewers noting zero slowdowns even with dozens of Chrome tabs and heavy games.

Thermals are good, not class‑leading: a 9,925mm² vapor chamber keeps CPU and GPU throttling around the 60–63% mark in torture tests. That’s average for passively cooled flagships. You’re not getting gaming‑phone stability, but you’re also not cooking your fingers.

Battery and Charging: OnePlus Shows Everyone How It’s Done

This is the one area where OnePlus didn’t just catch up, it actually embarrasses some bigger names.

The OnePlus 13 packs a 6,000mAh silicon‑carbon (SiC) dual‑cell battery — a meaningful upgrade from the OnePlus 12’s 5,400mAh pack. Across multiple reviews and long‑term tests, you see the same story repeated: 8–11 hours of screen‑on time in mixed use, two‑day battery life for normal users, and even heavy users getting through a full day without anxiety.

GSMArena’s new Active Use Score sits at 15:28h, with:

  • Excellent web browsing endurance
  • Strong video playback
  • Mediocre but acceptable gaming runtime

Then comes charging. If Samsung and Google are still pretending 45W and 37W are “fast,” OnePlus is quietly lapping them:

  • 100W wired (SuperVOOC) – 0–100% in ~35–40 minutes with a proper OnePlus/Realme/Oppo brick
  • ~50–55% in 15 minutes in testing
  • 50W wireless (with AirVOOC Magnetic Charger)
  • 10W reverse wireless, 5W reverse wired

Even with third‑party 65W PD chargers, reviewers saw 0–100% in ~51 minutes and 86% in 30. And long‑term owners are still reporting 100% reported battery health after 9–12 months of daily use, with no babying, charge caps, or smart‑charging toggles.

Meanwhile, Google and Samsung are bragging about AI while shipping 5,000mAh batteries that take over an hour to charge and don’t last as long. In this category, OnePlus isn’t undercutting the big guys — it’s exposing them.

Cameras and AI: Good, But Not “Why You Buy This Phone” Good

This is where the skepticism kicks back in. OnePlus hyped the Hasselblad partnership, new sensors, and AI camera features; the result is… a solid but unremarkable triple‑camera system.

Rear setup:

  • 50MP main – Sony LYT-808, 1/1.43″, f/1.6, OIS, multi-directional PDAF
  • 50MP ultrawide – Samsung JN5, 1/2.76″, f/2.0, 120°, PDAF
  • 50MP 3x telephoto – Sony LYT-600, 1/1.95″, f/2.6 periscope, OIS, PDAF

Front:

  • 32MP selfie – Sony IMX615, 1/2.74″, f/2.4, fixed focus

Daylight from the main camera is genuinely strong: wide dynamic range, accurate white balance most of the time, detailed textures without insane oversharpening, and pleasant skin tones. The ultrawide is one of the standouts — sharp for an ultrawide, with consistent color matching to the main and good HDR.

The telephoto is where the compromises show. At 3x, detail is good, colors are consistent, and portrait compression looks great. But the minimum focus distance is roughly 50cm, which kills close‑up telephoto shots and any hope of decent tele‑macro. OnePlus keeps leaning on big, high‑res sensors and AI zoom instead of giving you the kind of versatile close‑focusing tele module vivo and others are shipping.

Low light is mixed:

  • Main: very good, with clean detail and restrained noise reduction, though it occasionally misjudges warm lighting.
  • Ultrawide: surprisingly capable, with good detail and controlled noise.
  • 2x digital crop: usable but visibly processed.
  • 3x/6x: fine for sharing, soft at the pixel level, and nowhere near the best Periscope implementations from the competition.

Selfies are the sore thumb. Despite a 32MP sensor, the fixed focus and heavy processing mean you get big files with middling detail. Several reviewers explicitly called this out as underwhelming next to much cheaper phones with AF front cameras.

Video is more encouraging: 8K30 on the main, 4K60 on all rear cameras and the selfie cam, Dolby Vision support, and generally stable, detailed footage in good light. Night video is decent but not class‑leading; telephoto and ultrawide both soften up.

On the AI side, two things are worth separating: Google AI and OnePlus AI.

Google’s side:

The OnePlus 13 supports on‑device Gemini Nano via Android AICore after its first OxygenOS 15 update. That unlocks offline use for things like Magic Compose in Google Messages, and potentially multimodal Gemini Nano features down the road (the Snapdragon 8 Elite can handle it). Circle to Search and the Gemini assistant are here too.

OnePlus’s side:

You get:

  • AI Summary / AI Speak / AI Writer in the sidebar and Notes
  • AI photo tools: Detail Boost, Eraser, Unblur, Reflection Eraser
  • AI Reply in messaging apps

Reviews are consistent: these tools are fine when they work, but they feel bolted on and inconsistent. The object eraser and reflection remover can be impressive in the right scene, but often leave artifacts. The 4K upscaler and Unblur tend to produce oversmoothed, artificial output. Note‑taking and summarization work, but they’re confined to OnePlus apps instead of being deeply integrated into the system like on Pixel and Galaxy phones.

If you care about AI as more than buzzwords, Google and Samsung still lead. OnePlus is playing catch‑up here, and it shows.

Software, Updates, and the Gemini Nano Surprise

The OnePlus 13 runs OxygenOS 15 on top of Android 15. Translation: this is ColorOS 15 with a different font, red accents, and a OnePlus logo.

The good news: it’s fast. Multiple long‑term users say it feels smoother than some Pixels and competitive with Samsung’s One UI 7 in day‑to‑day fluidity. Animations are snappy, app launches are instant, and the ultrasonic fingerprint reader is hilariously quick.

You also get a bunch of actually useful UX features:

  • Smart Sidebar with recent files and AI shortcuts
  • Icon pulldown / reachability mode that shrinks on‑screen content toward your thumb
  • Live Alerts (a Dynamic Island‑style pill for timers, music, etc.)
  • Open Canvas‑style multitasking borrowed from the OnePlus Open

The bad news: OnePlus is still not taking software longevity as seriously as the big three.

The update promise is:

  • 4 years of Android version updates
  • 6 years of security patches (up to January 2031)

That’s fine, but it’s not competitive with 7+7 from Google, Samsung, and now even some of the Chinese OEMs. When you add in the fact that the 13 is no longer a true bargain — $899 / £899 / €1,049 — the shorter OS support window becomes a real downside. Long‑term value is not just about initial price anymore.

On the AI front, the first big OxygenOS update quietly flipped on Android AICore and Gemini Nano support. That’s a win: it means the OnePlus 13 can run some of Google’s on‑device AI workloads, not just cloud calls. But even there, Google’s own Pixel 9 series already ships a newer, multimodal Nano build with extra tricks like on‑device screenshot understanding. OnePlus is capable, just behind the curve.

Pricing, Competition, and the Missed Opportunity

OnePlus isn’t the scrappy “flagship killer” anymore. The 13 starts around:

  • $899.99 in the US (12/256GB)
  • $999.99 (16/512GB)
  • £899 in the UK, with promos matching 16/512GB to 12/256GB at launch
  • €1,049 in parts of Europe

That’s ~10% cheaper than a Pixel 9 Pro XL or Galaxy S25+ class device — not nothing, but also not enough to wave away shortcomings.

Here’s the trade‑off matrix if you’re being honest:

  • Versus Google Pixel 9 Pro XL / 10 series
  • OnePlus 13 wins: battery life, charging, raw performance, IP69.

  • Pixel wins: cameras, AI integration, software support (7 years), Google‑first features.

  • Versus Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra / S25 Ultra
  • OnePlus 13 wins: price, charging, weight/feel for some, faster fingerprint reader.

  • Samsung wins: zoom range and camera versatility, display brightness (with anti‑reflective coatings), S‑Pen ecosystem, software longevity, global polish.

  • Versus other BBK cousins (Realme GT 7 Pro, Oppo Find X8/X8 Pro, vivo X200/X200 Pro)
  • OnePlus 13 gives you cleaner software and better global availability.
  • Some of those rivals offer brighter displays, more ambitious camera hardware (especially vivo), or equally wild charging at lower prices.

Where the OnePlus 13 should have punched harder is exactly where it plays it safe:

  • No radical camera leap beyond the 12, just incremental tweaks and a worse ultrawide sensor on paper.
  • Display that’s “very good” but not best‑in‑class in 2025.
  • AI that mostly trails what Google and Samsung are doing.
  • Software support that stops where everyone else’s story is just getting started.

Instead, OnePlus nailed the basics — battery, speed, build, water resistance — and then stopped short of making the 13 a no‑brainer over a Pixel or Galaxy for anyone except power users obsessed with charging speeds.

Verdict: Excellent Phone, Underwhelming Strategy

If you buy the OnePlus 13, you’re not making a mistake. In a lot of real‑world ways, it’s nicer to live with than more expensive phones:

  • It lasts longer on a charge.
  • It refuels dramatically faster.
  • It’s finally as water‑resistant as the big names.
  • It’s fast enough that you’ll stop thinking about performance entirely.

But the hype calling it “phone of the year” or “Pixel and Galaxy killer” glosses over where it falls short:

  • Cameras that are good, not class‑leading — especially on telephoto flexibility and selfies.
  • A display that underperforms its own spec sheet in brightness tests.
  • AI features that feel like checkbox additions, not a cohesive strategy.
  • A 4‑year OS promise that’s now mid‑pack, not competitive.

OnePlus had a chance here. With IP69, a 6,000mAh SiC pack, Snapdragon 8 Elite, and actually reasonable pricing, the 13 could have been the flagship that forced Google and Samsung to respond on fundamentals, not AI marketing.

Instead, it’s just a very good Android phone in a market where “very good” is no longer enough to stand out for long.

If your priorities are battery life, fast charging, and speed, the OnePlus 13 absolutely belongs on your shortlist. If you care more about cameras, software longevity, and deep AI integration, the safe, boring choices from Google and Samsung still make more sense.

Stay tuned to IntoDroid for more Android updates.

Galaxy A56 Review: Great Updates, Wrong Price Fight

Galaxy A56 Review: Great Updates, Wrong Price Fight

Nadia Malik Leave a comment

I spent three weeks daily-driving the Galaxy A56 alongside my iPhone, and somewhere around the second week I caught myself reaching for the Samsung more often. Then I looked at what else you can buy for the same money—and that’s where the honeymoon ended.

The Galaxy A56 is a textbook Samsung mid-ranger: polished, familiar, and technically solid. But in a 2025 market packed with aggressive competition and a Pixel 9a waiting in the wings at the same $499 / £499 / AU$849 price, “solid” isn’t enough.

Premium Hardware, Mid-Range Ambition

On build quality and ergonomics, Samsung didn’t phone this one in.

You’re getting a 162.2 x 77.5 x 7.4 mm glass-and-metal slab with Gorilla Glass Victus+ front and back, an aluminum frame, and IP67 dust and water resistance. At 198 g, it’s lighter and thinner than the A55 while stretching the screen from 6.6 to 6.7 inches thanks to slimmer bezels.

The design is clean and very obviously Samsung, just without the top-end S25 Ultra price tag. This is basically flagship feel on a mid-range budget—no plastic rails, no flex, no creaks. It looks and feels like something that should cost more than the €479 / $499 asking price.

If you’re crossing over from a cheaper Android or an older iPhone, this alone will impress you. But nice glass doesn’t take photos or run games.

Display and Audio: Flagship Vibes, Mid Pack Brightness

The 6.70-inch Super AMOLED panel checks all the usual Samsung boxes: 1080 x 2340 resolution, 120 Hz refresh, HDR10+ support, and an always-on option.

Brightness is where the A56 improves over the A55 but still doesn’t lead. In auto mode it can hit about 1,213 nits, with Samsung rating it at 1,200 nits HBM and 1,900 nits peak outdoors. That’s fine for outdoor use, but rivals like the upcoming Pixel 9a are expected to go significantly brighter, and we’re already seeing 2,000+ nit panels become normal in this class.

Refresh behavior is basic: Standard locks you to 60 Hz, Adaptive tries to sit at 120 Hz and drops to 60 Hz for static content and video. It’s not LTPO-smart, but it’s what every mid-range 120 Hz OLED is doing.

On the plus side, games that support 120 fps do actually hit 120 Hz on this panel, so you’re not buying a fake-high-refresh screen.

The stereo speakers are quietly one of the nicer touches. The hybrid setup (bottom main + earpiece) measures at -26.2 LUFS: not the loudest, but with a warmer, fuller sound than most similarly priced phones, and less harsh treble at high volume. If you stream a lot of video or podcasts, this absolutely beats the tinny setups you still get from some rivals.

Exynos 1580: Better Than A55, Worse Than Rivals

On paper, Exynos 1580 doesn’t look bad. It’s a 4 nm chip with ARMv9 cores (1x Cortex-A720 at 2.9 GHz, 3x Cortex-A720 at 2.6 GHz, 4x Cortex-A520 at 1.9 GHz) and an Xclipse 540 GPU based on AMD’s RDNA 3 architecture. Storage is UFS 3.1, and you can get up to 12 GB RAM and 256 GB storage.

In benchmarks, it’s a clear step up from last year’s Exynos 1480:

  • ~17% faster CPU (Geekbench 6)
  • ~11% faster overall in AnTuTu 10
  • ~30% faster GPU in 3DMark Wild Life Extreme

That’s a healthy generational jump. But Samsung isn’t competing with its old self—it’s competing with phones like:

  • Xiaomi 14T with Dimensity 8300
  • OnePlus Nord 4 with Snapdragon 7+ Gen 3
  • Poco F6 Pro with Snapdragon 8 Gen 2

Those chips simply outmuscle the Exynos 1580 across CPU, GPU, and especially gaming performance.

The one bright spot: sustained performance is excellent. In CPU and GPU stress tests, the A56 kept 80–100% of its max CPU and ~99% GPU performance. It doesn’t throttle hard, it doesn’t cook your hand, and it feels stable during long tasks.

The problem is you’re starting from a lower performance ceiling than the best mid-rangers in this price band. If you’re into heavier gaming—think Fortnite, not just Clash Royale—this is not the phone to buy.

Battery and Charging: Big Cell, Slow Lane

Battery capacity is the classic Samsung mid-range spec: 5,000 mAh. Real-world endurance is good but not class-leading.

In GSMArena’s Active Use Score, the A56 lands at 12:08 hours, slightly down from the A55 thanks to the bigger screen and more powerful SoC. It’s fine for a full day, but some competitors (Nothing Phone (3a) Pro, OnePlus Nord 4) squeeze more out of similar or identical capacities.

Charging gets an upgrade to 45 W wired over USB-PD PPS. Lab results:

  • 0–65% in 30 minutes
  • 0–100% in 1h 13m

That’s better early on than the A55, but slower to full, and well behind what others are doing. We’re talking about rivals pushing 100 W+ (Motorola Edge 50 Pro, Poco F6 Pro, Nord 4). If you care about true “splash-and-go” charging, Samsung isn’t playing the same game.

Two more annoying details:

  • No charger in the box
  • To actually hit 45 W, you need a 5A-rated cable that Samsung doesn’t ship

So you’re buying a €479 phone, then buying a proper PPS charger and a 5A cable if you want the headline charging spec. And there’s still no wireless charging at this price, while even some cheaper phones are starting to offer basic Qi.

On the plus side, Samsung does at least give you battery health-focused options: you can cap charge above 80%, or disable fast charging to prolong longevity. It’s a small thing enthusiasts will appreciate.

Software and Updates: Samsung’s Real Trump Card

This is where the A56 quietly humiliates most of the competition.

You’re getting Android 15 with One UI 7 and a promise of 6 major Android OS upgrades plus 6 years of security patches. For a mid-ranger, that’s essentially industry-leading. It’s longer than what plenty of premium phones offered just a couple of years ago.

One UI 7 on the A56 doesn’t get the full “Galaxy AI” flagship loadout, but it does bring a decent AI feature set under the “Awesome Intelligence” branding and some Google smarts:

  • AI Select: Enhanced Smart Select that can analyze content on screen, grab text from images, create GIFs from Instagram Reels, and generate wallpapers from a photo you’re viewing.
  • Circle to Search: Google’s gesture-based visual search, plus the ability to identify songs (even with humming) and translate text on screen.
  • Object Eraser: Basic content-aware removal in Gallery (not as strong as the S25 series implementation).
  • Custom Filters & Auto Trim: AI tweak tools for photo mood filters and automatic highlight reels from multiple video clips.
  • Read Aloud: Web articles read as audio, though only via Samsung’s browser.
  • Now Bar: A lock-screen bar that surfaces live info like media, timers, fitness, and more—imported from S-series territory.

The skin itself is mature and heavily customizable: app drawer options, icon and grid controls, dynamic wallpapers, themed color palettes. And unlike a lot of Chinese brands in this price range, Samsung isn’t loading the phone with aggressive bloatware or weird battery management.

If your priority is long-term software support and a clean, predictable interface, this is where the A56 actually makes sense.

Cameras: Great Selfies and Video, Disappointing Stills

On paper, the camera story looks boringly familiar:

  • 50 MP main (Sony IMX906, f/1.8, 1/1.56″, OIS)
  • 12 MP ultrawide (Sony IMX258, 123°, f/2.2)
  • 5 MP macro (f/2.4)
  • 12 MP selfie (Samsung S5K3LC, f/2.2)

The rear hardware is basically the same as the A55; only the selfie camera is new.

In daylight, the main camera is… fine, and that’s the problem. Stills are detailed enough with punchy colors, but highlights clip more often than they should, exposure can be slightly off, and everything leans on the soft side. Move indoors and softness increases while saturation drops.

The 50 MP mode doesn’t really salvage this—it doesn’t add appreciable detail and is not worth using.

Portraits are similarly underwhelming: soft rendering, and the lack of a telephoto means the 2x portraits are just crops with exposure and autofocus hiccups.

The ultrawide is a letdown for this price: soft photos, limited dynamic range, and desaturated indoor shots. The 12 MP sensor should theoretically beat the common 8 MP ultrawides in this segment, but Samsung’s tuning isn’t getting you there.

Macro is miles better than the usual useless 2 MP sensors, but still a small, fixed-focus 5 MP module. When the light is good and your distance is excellent, it’s passable. It’s also fiddly enough that you’ll be spamming shots just to get one in focus.

Low light is where the A56 really exposes its compromises:

  • The camera app often refuses to actually use Night mode on the main camera, even when you select it.
  • Auto mode photos are usually better than forced Night mode. Night mode processing introduces weird purple/pink tints, colder white balance, washed-out colors, and lower contrast.
  • The 2x crop at night is barely usable—sharpness falls off a cliff.

The ultrawide at night is, bluntly, bad: very soft, noisy, limited dynamic range, and with off white balance in Night mode. Night mode helps slightly with noise but doesn’t fix the underlying softness.

Now the good news: the 12 MP selfie camera is excellent. Sharp, natural, wide dynamic range, and it finally feels like a proper upgrade over the A55’s 32 MP unit despite the lower pixel count.

And video is surprisingly strong. All cameras—including the ultrawide and selfie—can shoot 4K30, and the main camera’s 4K footage is sharp, detailed, colorful, and relatively noise-free. Low-light video from the main cam holds up better than you’d expect in this class, even if highlights can blow out a bit. EIS works in 4K, and stabilization looks very good.

So you’re getting:

  • Great selfies
  • Very good video
  • Mediocre-to-bad low-light stills
  • No telephoto at all

Against what’s coming from Google with the Pixel 9a—Tensor G4, 48 MP 1/2″ main, 13 MP ultrawide, 13 MP selfie, 5,100 mAh battery—this is not going to age well on the camera front.

Competition: When €479 Isn’t Enough

Here’s the real issue: Samsung kept the A56 at roughly the same launch price as the A55 (around €479 / $499), but the market moved on.

Direct and near-direct alternatives include:

  • Nothing Phone (3a) Pro – Similar price, more versatile camera hardware with a periscope telephoto, better battery and charging.
  • Xiaomi 14T – Cheaper in many markets, with a dedicated telephoto and generally better photo output.
  • Motorola Edge 50 Pro – Often under low €400s with 3x telephoto, AF selfie camera, and significantly faster charging.
  • OnePlus Nord 4 – Comparable camera hardware but wins on performance, battery life, and charging.
  • Poco F6 Pro – Around the same or less money in many regions, Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, much stronger gaming, 120 W charging.

Then there’s Samsung’s own lineup:

  • Galaxy S24 FE – Better cameras (including telephoto), wireless charging, nicer display, and a more powerful SoC. If you’re already buying into Samsung and willing to stretch the budget, it’s just a better device.

And looming over all of this is:

  • Google Pixel 9a – Same $499 / £499 price, Tensor G4, serious camera credentials, 5,100 mAh battery, and Google’s AI-heavy software experience. If it repeats the 8a formula with better thermals and brighter screen, the A56 becomes a much tougher sell, especially in the US and UK.

Against that backdrop, the A56’s proposition—good build, good screen, okay performance, mixed cameras, average charging—doesn’t justify its premium.

Verdict: A Great Long-Term Phone in the Wrong Fight

Taken in isolation, the Galaxy A56 is a genuinely decent all-rounder.

You’re getting:

  • Premium glass-and-metal build with IP67
  • Bright 120 Hz AMOLED display
  • Good stereo speakers
  • Stable, if not blazing, Exynos 1580 performance
  • Excellent thermal behavior
  • Great selfies and video
  • Clean One UI 7 with useful AI and customization
  • Class-leading 6 OS upgrades and 6 years of security

You’re giving up:

  • Truly competitive camera stills, especially at night
  • Any kind of telephoto
  • Top-tier gaming performance
  • Wireless charging
  • In-box charger, plus needing a specific 5A cable for full 45 W
  • Value parity with faster, better-equipped rivals

If you want a “buy it and forget it for six years” Android with a premium feel, stable software, and you don’t care about having the most powerful chip or the best night photos, the A56 will quietly do the job.

But if you care about camera versatility, raw power, or fast charging—or you’re in a region where the Pixel 9a is going to sit on the exact same store shelf for the same $499—Samsung needed to try harder.

Have thoughts on this? Share them in the comments.

Samsung’s Latest Galaxy A Moves: Updates, New Budget Phones,

Samsung’s Latest Galaxy A Moves: Updates, New Budget Phones, Same Old Limits

Nadia Malik Leave a comment

I’ve been daily‑driving mid-range Android phones on and off for years, and Samsung’s A-series is usually where I end up when I want dependable over flashy. The Galaxy A53 was one of those safe picks: not exciting, but easy to recommend. Seeing it finally pick up Android 14 while Samsung drops new budget A-series hardware should be a win. Instead, it feels like Samsung is coasting on software promises while the hardware story barely moves.

Android 14 Lands on Galaxy A53 and A14 – With a Catch

Samsung’s Android 14 rollout continues, and this round hits two key budget and mid-range devices: the Galaxy A53 and the Galaxy A14.

The Galaxy A14, a $199 phone launched in January 2023, is getting Android 14 with One UI 6 slightly ahead of schedule. On paper, that’s impressive: Samsung promised two major Android updates and four years of security patches on a sub-$200 phone. That kind of support window at this price used to be fantasy.

But there’s a hard ceiling here. Android 14 is only step one. Android 15 will be the last major OS update for the Galaxy A14, and then you’re stuck. For a phone bought in 2023, that means your big feature updates are effectively done after the next one.

The Galaxy A53, Samsung’s 2022 mid-range crowd-pleaser, is also getting Android 14. The update is currently rolling out in the UK and should expand to other regions soon. It follows the Galaxy A54, which grabbed One UI 6 earlier.

On the plus side, this shows Samsung is still serious about keeping the A-series relevant beyond launch day. The downside: the software story is outpacing how much the hardware is actually evolving year over year.

Galaxy A15 and A25 Hit the US: Solid Specs, Familiar Corners Cut

Alongside the Android 14 rollout, Samsung has officially launched the Galaxy A15 and Galaxy A25 in the United States. These aren’t new devices globally; they debuted internationally late last year. The US versions stick closely to those specs, which is a polite way of saying there are no nice surprises here.

The Galaxy A15 lands at $199. For that price you get:

  • MediaTek MT6835V processor
  • 8GB RAM
  • 128GB storage
  • 5,000 mAh battery
  • 6.5-inch FHD+ 90Hz AMOLED display

On paper, this is exactly the sort of spec sheet that makes budget phones feel far less compromised than they used to. A 90Hz AMOLED at 1080p on a $199 device is the headline here, and 8GB of RAM plus 128GB storage should keep basic multitasking and app installs from feeling cramped.

The Galaxy A25 bumps the price to $299 and swaps in:

  • Exynos 1280 chipset
  • 8GB RAM
  • 128GB storage
  • 5,000 mAh battery
  • 6.5-inch FHD+ 120Hz display
  • 50MP main camera + 8MP ultrawide + 2MP macro

Versus the A15, you gain a higher refresh rate (120Hz vs 90Hz) and a more capable camera setup with the 8MP ultrawide. The A15 only gets a 5MP ultrawide, plus a 2MP macro that, let’s be honest, exists mostly so Samsung can print “triple camera” on marketing slides. No one is buying this for that 2MP sensor.

The problem is that for all the numbers, there’s nothing here that shifts the mid-range needle. The chip choices (MediaTek MT6835V and Exynos 1280) are fine for everyday use, but they’re hardly exciting, especially when you’re pushing 120Hz on the A25. You’re not buying these to game hard or future‑proof performance.

Design-wise, both phones use Samsung’s new “Key Island” layout, with the buttons sitting on a raised section of the side frame. It’s distinctive, sure, but it’s also pure cosmetic fluff. It doesn’t solve any real problem; it just makes the phones look newer in photos.

US Availability: Better Than Before, Still Weirdly Limited

Samsung is at least trying to get these into people’s hands. The Galaxy A15 is available in “Blue Black” and “Light Blue,” sold unlocked and through major US carriers including T-Mobile, Verizon, AT&T, and US Cellular. At $199, with carrier promos and trade‑ins (up to $100 on Samsung.com), this is going to show up in a lot of pockets.

The A25, though, is oddly restricted. It’s only available in “Blue Black” and only through US Cellular in the carrier channel, plus unlocked. That’s a strange move for a $299 phone that should, in theory, be Samsung’s mainstream mid-range option.

Samsung is offering up to $200 trade‑in credit toward the A25 on its own site, which helps, but the distribution signals where Samsung thinks the real volume is: the ultra‑budget tier, not the $300 sweet spot.

Both phones are shipping immediately, so this isn’t a paper launch situation. But if you’re on a major carrier and want the A25 specifically, your options are basically: buy it unlocked, or don’t bother.

Indonesia: Galaxy A57 and A37 Are Coming, But Details Are Thin

While the US is getting the A15 and A25, Samsung is lining up its next round of mid-range 5G phones for Indonesia: the Galaxy A57 and Galaxy A37.

Both devices have appeared in Indonesia’s TKDN certification database under codes SM-A576B (A57) and SM-A376B (A37), each with a 39.60 percent TKDN score. That beats the 35 percent minimum required for official sale, which means Samsung has cleared a major administrative step for launch.

These are 5G phones targeting the mid-range bracket, and they’re expected to hit the market around late February to March 2026. The A57 is tipped to bring improvements in chipset, camera, and design compared to its predecessor. It’s also expected to keep a slim body around 6.9 mm with a more premium mid-range aesthetic.

The Galaxy A37 sits below it as the more affordable option, still promising 5G and a balanced mix of performance, camera, and pricing for the mid-tier crowd.

The frustrating part is that we’re talking about yet another cycle of “incremental upgrades” with almost no concrete specs shared yet. Better chipset, better camera, nicer design – the usual mid-range script. Until Samsung starts pushing the envelope on long-term support or genuinely higher-end features filtering down, these will likely be safe but unexciting buys.

Samsung’s Mid-Range Strategy: Safe, Predictable, and a Bit Boring

Put this all together and a pattern emerges.

  • The Galaxy A14 gets Android 14 and will stop at Android 15 for major updates.
  • The Galaxy A53 and A54 keep getting pushed up the software ladder, which is great – but hardly generous when you look at how long people keep phones now.
  • The Galaxy A15 and A25 arrive in the US with competent specs, nice displays, and big batteries, but predictable compromises in chip performance and cameras.
  • The upcoming A57 and A37 in Indonesia are setting up as yet another “slightly better mid-range 5G” duo.

Samsung isn’t doing anything wrong here for the average buyer. But for enthusiasts and anyone paying attention, it’s tough not to see this as minimum‑effort iteration. The software story is strong for $199 hardware, yet capped just enough to nudge you toward upgrading sooner than you might want. The hardware story is good enough to look modern but not ambitious enough to stand out.

If you just need a reliable phone and don’t chase specs, the Galaxy A15 and A25 will likely do the job. If you already own an A53 or A14, Android 14 makes them feel fresher for a while longer. But if you were hoping Samsung’s mid-range lineup was about to get more aggressive on performance, camera quality, or software lifespan, this latest batch suggests you’ll be waiting a bit longer.

Stay tuned to IntoDroid for more Android updates.

AI.com: The $70M Domain Bet That Looks More Like Hype

Nadia Malik Leave a comment

If you’re wondering why everyone suddenly cares about a two-letter domain, AI.com just became the latest symbol of how wild – and frankly directionless – the current AI gold rush can get.

Crypto.com’s CEO, Kris Marszalek, dropped around 70 million USD on AI.com, turned down a reported 500 million USD offer immediately after, and is now positioning it as the front door to an ambitious AI agent platform. On paper, it sounds huge. In reality, the story so far is more about branding, speculation, and strain than actual value for users.

A $70M Domain in a Hype-Drunk Market

Start with the number: 70 million USD for a domain name.

AI.com is now in the same conversation as some of the most expensive domains ever sold. Previous high-profile deals like CarInsurance.com (49.7 million USD in 2010) and Cars.com (valued at 872.3 million USD as an intangible asset in 2014) were tied directly to clear, established businesses. Those domains anchored mature, money-making verticals.

Here, AI.com is being pitched as a launchpad for a new AI agents company. No long-standing user base. No proven products. Just a massive price tag, a hype wave around AI, and a Super Bowl ad.

This isn’t a careful, incremental product play. It’s a very expensive billboard.

From a Kid’s $100 Gamble to a Trillion Jackpot

The backstory is actually the most grounded part of this whole saga.

In 1993, a 10-year-old Malaysian kid, Arsyan Ismail, quietly bought AI.com for around 100 USD, using his mother’s credit card without permission. At the time, AI wasn’t a buzzword; he just liked it because it matched his initials, “A.I.”

For decades, the domain sat in the background while the rest of the internet exploded. Fast-forward to the AI boom: Arsyan sold AI.com for roughly 70 million USD to Marszalek. That’s a jump from around 100 USD in the early 90s to about 70 million USD today.

If you want a clean lesson from this story, it’s this: the only clear winner so far is the guy who registered the domain in 1993.

OpenAI, Musk, and the Tug-of-War Over Two Letters

Before Crypto.com’s acquisition went public, AI.com was already a quiet battleground.

In early 2023, typing AI.com in your browser would send you to ChatGPT, tying the domain to OpenAI’s flagship product. Then it switched to redirecting to x.ai, Elon Musk’s AI company. That wasn’t random; it reflects aggressive behind-the-scenes negotiations over one of the most obviously valuable keyword domains on the internet.

Those redirects were almost certainly part of leasing or negotiation strategies while Arsyan still held control. Multiple major AI players clearly wanted AI.com, yet none of them locked it down until Marszalek showed up with 70 million USD.

Now, instead of pointing to the models and tools that are actually shaping the current AI landscape, AI.com is tied to a new, still-unproven platform.

Crypto.com’s CEO Says No to $500M – But Why?

Here’s where the story moves from impressive to questionable.

Marszalek says that right after he closed the AI.com deal, “the other side” approached him with an offer of over 500 million USD – for the domain. He claims he refused outright, saying even that number wouldn’t be enough to get him to pick up the phone.

On a spreadsheet, that’s an instant ~7x return.

Refusing that kind of flip only makes sense if you believe AI.com will become the core of something much bigger – or if you’re more focused on the optics of being the guy who owns AI.com in an AI-obsessed cycle. From a user perspective, though, none of this guarantees a better product. It just proves the domain has become a speculative asset with more value as a status symbol than as a gateway to real utility.

What AI.com Actually Wants to Be: Agents, Everywhere

So what is Marszalek planning to do with this insanely expensive URL?

AI.com is being built as a separate entity from Crypto.com. While Crypto.com stays in its lane as a crypto exchange, AI.com is pitched as a platform for AI agents – autonomous software agents that don’t just reply to prompts but can act on your behalf.

The promised capabilities cover a ton of real-world tasks:

  • Managing tasks and workflows across apps
  • Sending messages
  • Running cross-application workflows
  • Building projects
  • Handling stock trading and other transactions
  • Even updating your online dating profile

In theory, you’d get personal AI agents that talk to services, execute complex actions, and automate parts of your digital life.

Yes, that sounds powerful. It also sounds like every broad AI pitch of the last two years condensed into a single sentence. There’s no detail yet on specific integrations, latency, reliability, or how much control users actually keep. It’s all ambition, zero benchmarks.

Security Promises vs. Zero Proof

On the security and privacy front, the pitch is equally grand.

Marszalek says AI.com’s agents will run in an “encrypted, user-key-based” system, protecting user data and privacy more strongly. Conceptually, that would mean your keys, your control, your encrypted interactions.

That’s reassuring language, especially if this thing is going to trade stocks for you, touch your communications, and mess with your personal profiles. But right now, these are just claims. There’s no technical whitepaper here, no architecture diagrams, no granular explanation of how keys are managed, stored, or rotated – especially critical if you’re bridging AI agents with financial and personal data.

If you’ve watched this industry long enough, you’ve seen how often “strong encryption” gets name-dropped long before the boring, hard details are hammered out.

AGI Teasers, Super Bowl Ads, and a Crashed Site

Instead of launching with stable infrastructure and clear documentation, AI.com launched with a Super Bowl ad and a crash.

The commercial showed floating balls of light forming the phrase “AGI is coming soon,” and invited viewers to lock in a username in the format ai.com/yourname. That’s a pure hype play: tease AGI (Artificial General Intelligence), offer cool usernames, and count on fear of missing out.

The result? The site buckled under traffic immediately after the ad.

Marszalek later admitted he’s rolling out access in stages because “hundreds of thousands” of people are queued up, and they don’t want the site going down again. That’s a classic scaling problem, sure, but when you’ve just spent 70 million USD on a domain and bought a Super Bowl ad slot, not having infrastructure ready doesn’t exactly scream “prepared.” It screams “marketing first, product later.”

AGI Dreams, Zero Grounding

The messaging around AI.com doesn’t stop at agents. Marszalek’s vision is a decentralized network of billions of AI agents that share capability improvements with each other, accelerating AI development toward AGI.

In theory:

  • AI agents run globally
  • They share improvements and knowledge
  • Overall capability ramps up quickly
  • This accelerates the arrival of AGI

On a conceptual level, fine. AGI is the theoretical form of AI that can perform at or beyond human levels across many domains, learning and solving new problems without explicit training.

The issue is the gap between that vision and the current product reality. Right now, AI.com is:

  • A domain with a huge price tag
  • A platform that has barely launched
  • A service that already crashed from traffic

Talking about “billions of agents” and AGI in this context feels less like a roadmap and more like trying to ride the biggest possible buzzword wave. For developers and power users who care about real capability, the question is simple: what can it do today, and how well?

So far, we don’t have that answer.

Free Access, Paid Tiers, and the Usual Monetization Playbook

AI.com is supposed to be free to the public, with paid subscription tiers planned for:

  • Higher input limits
  • Advanced capabilities
  • Extra features

There’s nothing inherently wrong with that. It mirrors how most AI platforms are monetized right now: free core, paid power user features.

The disappointment comes from the fact that beyond that standard freemium structure, there’s no clear differentiation. Other than the domain name and some ambitious rhetoric, we don’t have a reason yet to believe AI.com will do AI agents better than existing ecosystems.

The Harsh Contrast: User Value vs. Vanity Asset

If you strip away the brand drama, what remains is a simple question: does any of this materially improve your life as a user, developer, or enthusiast?

Right now, AI.com looks like this:

  • An incredibly valuable domain acquired at the height of AI mania
  • A rejected 500 million USD offer that would’ve been a massive profit
  • A vague agents platform with sweeping promises and little proof
  • A high-profile Super Bowl teaser that crashed the site

Meanwhile, actual AI progress – the stuff that matters to Android power users, devs, and everyday people – is happening in models, tooling, hardware acceleration, and real integrations. None of that depends on owning AI.com.

AI.com could become a strong AI agent hub. It might even grow into something meaningfully integrated with finance, productivity, and communication. But based on what’s public today, this feels more like a domain flex and hype engine than a thoughtful product launch.

Check back soon as this story develops.