logo
I tested AI writing tools on iPhone vs Galaxy vs Pixel — here's the winner

I tested AI writing tools on iPhone vs Galaxy vs Pixel — here's the winner

Yahooa day ago
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission.
TG AI Phone Face-Off
This article is part of our AI Phone Face-Off. If you're interested in our other comparisons, check out the links below.
AI assistant
Phone makers have been focusing on writing tools as part of their efforts in putting AI features on their devices. Turn to AI, the argument goes, and you can write sharper, more focused messages, emails and texts that always strike the exact tone you're looking for. But how many of these phones actually deliver on that promise?
To find out, I took devices from Apple, Google and Samsung and set them to work adjusting different types of writing. I wanted to not only find out how well each phone's AI-powered writing features performed in a variety of scenarios, but if one phone maker in particular stood out from the crowd.
Writing tools are a specific set of features in both Apple Intelligence and Galaxy AI, with both iPhones and Galaxy flagship devices featuring tools for proofreading, rephrasing and formatting text. The text-based AI features on Google Pixel devices are not signposted in the same way, but you can turn to the Gemini assistant to perform many of these tasks.
I came up with five different scenarios for using AI writing features, and tried out each one on an iPhone 15 Pro, a Pixel 9 and a Galaxy S25 Plus, with each device running the latest available software for each model. (In the case of the Pixel, that's Android 16; the S25 Plus I'm using is still running Android 15.) Here's how they performed.
I wrote out a 215-word note, summarizing the 70-year history of the Disneyland theme park, striking a stiff, formal tone that didn't really jibe with the notion of the Happiest Place on Earth. So I wanted to see if any of the writing tools on my trio of phones could lighten the tone a bit.
Both Samsung and Apple include specific features in their writing tools for striking a casual tone. In the case of the Pixel, I pasted the text into Gemini and asked the assistant to make the tone more casual.
Interestingly, the AI tools on all three phones changed the first sentence of my essay into a question. (An example from Galaxy AI: 'Disneyland opened in July 1995, so it's celebrating its 70th birthday, right?') I guess that's one way to be more engaging, but it struck me as odd that each AI tool used the same rhetorical trick.
Both the Galaxy and Gemini AI tools went heavy on swapping out words for more casual-sounding synonyms. In some cases this was appreciated, like when Galaxy AI rewrote the phrase 'Much of Fantasyland' to read 'a lot of Fantasyland.' Other times they went overboard, particularly the Pixel, which threw in a lot of slang like 'glow-ups' for renovations and 'still chilling' for 'remain in place.'
Like the tools on the Samsung and Google phones, Apple Intelligence also stripped out the 50-cent words for simpler alternatives — replacing 'subsequent' with 'over the years,' for example. It also seemed to retain more of my original text, which made the changes it did impose feel more effective.
For this comparison, I used the Friendly button in Apple's Writing Tools panel, but I also gave the original text a pass using Apple's Describe Your Change feature, in which you type in directions for the tone you want. This was the only instance where the first sentence wasn't turned into a question, and Describe Your Change also retained a couple of asides that the Friendly option had excised. I did notice more compound sentences resulting from Describe Your Change.
Winner: Apple — Apple Intelligence's less-is-more approach altered the tone while retaining something of my original writing style. Galaxy AI on the S25 Plus did a good job of stripping out some of the stiffer phrases, but went a little too far in some cases. The Pixel's attempt at more informal text just felt forced.
In the next test, I went in the opposite direction, asking the different AI tools to help me strike a more professional tone in a letter that a manager might send their direct reports. In my experience, this is something AI generally excels at, as there are definite rules to clear, concise business communication. Indeed, all three phones passed this test with flying colors, producing cleaned-up emails I'd have no problem sending.
As they did when loosening up my text, all three phones took the same approach to starting off my letter, turning the informal 'Guys' into a variation more business-appropriate 'Team.' There were other similarities when it came to word choice so that each retooled letter struck the same professional tone.
But there were subtle differences in how each AI tool approached its respective rewrite. I appreciate the fact that Apple Intelligence broke out each point about the meeting time, dress code and lunch plans into separate paragraphs, each one covering a specific point. The PIxel's AI actually shortened the email, removing unnecessary sentences — a big improvement over the original.
Another note about Google's effort: It inserted a '[DATE]' right after I listed the meeting time, something the other AI tools did not. I like that addition because it added further clarity as to when the meeting would take place. I also prefer that it put the onus on me to insert a date, as it's a reminder that you need to go over suggested changes from even the best AIs rather than just blindly send off whatever they churn out.
Winner: Google — The Pixel's letter was more concise than the others, though all three produced solid efforts.
I admit to being ambivalent about using AI as a way to improve my writing — I string words together for a living, man — but one thing I am absolutely fine handing over to a chatbot is formatting my notes. When I'm jotting things down in an interview or a demo, I'm just getting words onto the screen as quickly as possible, with little thought for niceties like line breaks, readability or headers.
I don't think I'd turn over the task to Apple Intelligence again, as the List feature in the Writing Tools control panel simply took my list of iOS 26 features and added bullet points ahead of each line break — not a very helpful improvement. I had better luck trying again with the Key Point option, which at least grouped bulleted features underneath the different iOS apps. Still, it omitted FaceTime and Safari improvements, both of which were in my original notes.
If I had to turn to Apple Intelligence for note organization, I'd probably use Table. It's not the most intuitive of choices, but it basically split the notes into a table with the apps in one column and their iOS 26 enhancements in the other.
Gemini on the Pixel added introductory text under an iOS 26 header, summing up the changes accurately and quickly. Each bullet point under the app got a title like 'Intuitive Design' or 'Main Controls' followed by a description pulled from my notes.
Galaxy AI on the Samsung phone gives you a choice between 'Headers and Bullets' or 'Meeting Notes.' I opted for the former, and thought the end result was big improvement over the original list of features I had assembled.
I was particularly impressed with how Galaxy AI created new headers, turning something simple like 'Photos app' into a more detailed 'Redesign Photos App.' It also gave the overall note a title — 'iOS 26 Preview: A Glimpse Into the Future of Apple's Ecosystem' — though it added a superfluous bullet point.
Winner: Samsung — Galaxy AI actually enhanced my notes in the process of cleaning them up, though the Gemini AI comes in a close second. Apple Intelligence's note organization tools are too hit-and-miss for my tastes.
I've heard writing tools in AI dismissed as little more than a glorified spell-checker, and I'm not sure this particular test where I had each phone proofread a fake news article is going to do anything to dissuade people from believing that. I loaded up my fake article about Apple, Google and Samsung merging into one mega-company with lots of spelling errors, grammatical miscues and run-on sentences to see what the AI tools were smart enough to catch.
If you're looking for the positives in the test, all three phones did a solid job catching the misspelled words and basic grammatical errors, though of the three, Apple Intelligence let a couple mistakes slip through. But none of the phones stepped in to break up a run-on sentence, nor did any catch a passage listing all three CEOs where Samsung's TM Roh's name appeared twice. (To be fair, Google's AI did catch a misspelling of Roh's name that slipped past Galaxy AI. Samsung's CEO may want to have a word with his large language models.)
Winner: Google — Despite the missed run-on sentence and duplicate name, Google fared the best in this test, which used the AI-powered spellcheck feature in Google Keep. That said, Samsung's writing tools did a better job displaying corrections to make clear what it had changed. Apple Intelligence, which also failed to notice a stray quotation mark, trails its rival AI tools noticeably in this area.
Because I'm pitting an AI feature in Gmail against one of the Apple Intelligence additions in the iPhone's Mail app, I only tested the feature on the Pixel 9. I think it's safe to assume that the results would be similar via Gmail on the Galaxy S25 Plus. It's also worth noting that at the time of testing, Gmail's smart reply feature that draws on context and tone is limited to Google Workspace at the moment, which I have access to.
A reply to an email asking if I needed ground transportation to a convention and what entree I would prefer at the welcome dinner gave me three options in Gmail — one where I could confirm my attendance and that I needed a ride, another where I would still be attending but arrange my own transportation and a third option where I would not be attending. Unfortunately, Google's layout cuts off the responses after a few words, so I had to guess what the second reply would be.
I tapped on that reply and then had the chance to further refine my message, adding whether I wanted to eat the chicken or the pupu platter. I appreciated that it's easy to toggle between replies and that you can edit the text Gemini AI produces before sending your reply.
In Apple Mail, you have to tap reply for the smart replies to appear above the keyboard. Once I did that, I could either confirm attendance or say that I wasn't coming. After I tapped that I would be there, Mail gave me a second round of smart replies regarding the ground transportation question. But that's as many smart replies as Mail will give you — if I wanted to signify an entrée preference, I would have to type that in myself.
Winner: Google — I much prefer the way Apple lays out its smart replies in Mail, as it's easier to see what you're selecting. But Gmail recognizes the full array of questions I needed to answer in this email, so I think it's a more thorough solution.
Gemini AI came out on top in three of the five categories, and it came awfully close to beating out Galaxy AI for formatting notes. The only category where Google's chatbot came up short was in trying to make text sound more casual and conversational — probably the writing tool I would turn to the least.
Galaxy AI isn't that far behind Google, particularly since it relies on Gmail's smart reply feature. Apple doesn't do badly on suggesting changes to the tone of what you write, particularly if you make use of the Describe Your Change tool. On note formatting and checking spelling, though, Apple Intelligence is a lot more erratic than its more established competitors.
Should you buy the iPhone 16 or wait for the iPhone 17? Here's the advice I gave my own dad
Apple just delivered a smackdown to the EU over iOS 26 rollout — they won't be getting new features
iOS 26 has an awesome Wi-Fi upgrade for your iPhone
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Which Cryptocurrency Is More Likely to Be a Millionaire Maker? Dogecoin vs. XRP
Which Cryptocurrency Is More Likely to Be a Millionaire Maker? Dogecoin vs. XRP

Yahoo

time21 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Which Cryptocurrency Is More Likely to Be a Millionaire Maker? Dogecoin vs. XRP

Dogecoin has a big sail to catch sentiment-driven hype. XRP has real utility and features that attract capital to its chain. Delivering millionaire-maker returns is a very high bar for most assets to clear. 10 stocks we like better than Dogecoin › Sprinting races and marathons both cover distance, but using the strategy that works in one will wreck you in the other. Crypto investors chasing "millionaire-maker" coins often confuse the two, buying a meme coin sprinting across social media. Two perennial favorites in this conversation are Dogecoin (CRYPTO: DOGE) and XRP (CRYPTO: XRP). Both have cult followings and large market caps, yet only one is building the muscle needed for a long haul. Let's see which, if either, has the special sauce to make investors into millionaires, and then separately answer the question of whether either deserves a slot in a sensible portfolio. Dogecoin commands a respectable $25.7 billion market cap at a price near $0.17 and 150 billion coins in circulation. Those numbers matter, because every year, another 5 billion DOGE trickles into the supply through block rewards. The protocol has no cap on supply, so supply growth is perpetual, even if the inflation rate shrinks over time. With fundamentals this thin, price action has long hinged on celebrity shout-outs and macro phenomena that dictate liquidity conditions in the crypto sector. Elon Musk's social media posts have, in the past, served as prime catalysts for sudden spikes and slides in the coin's value. That isn't something serious investors look for when they're evaluating an asset's merits, because it's actually a risk. Separately, the coin has no formal road map, and no major functionality upgrades are in progress. It's a meme coin, not a living project that could offer real utility someday. So what does it take to parlay a $10,000 stake in this coin into $1 million? Per the math, a neat 100-fold move would do the trick. That would lift its market cap to roughly $2.5 trillion, which is to say, greater than Bitcoin's entire float. That leap also implies mass adoption, a killer utility use, or a meme craze bigger than any in internet history, enabled by multiple firehoses of supporting liquidity from central bankers around the world. None of those things look at all likely. This coin won't make anyone into a millionaire again. XRP's market cap sits north of $133 billion, at about $2.26 per coin. Demand for the coin stems from more than silly pictures of dogs. First, the development cadence of its chain is brisk. On June 30, Ripple, the company that develops XRP, pushed its long-awaited Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM) sidechain to the mainnet, letting smart contracts written in the same language as what's used for Ethereum run on the XRP ledger (XRPL) for a fraction of typical gas costs. That opens the door to onboarding thousands of existing decentralized applications (dApps) and app developers to XRP, and it is very probable it'll be stealing them from the Ethereum ecosystem, perhaps permanently. Second, Ripple is spending to widen XRPL's moat. The April acquisition of prime broker Hidden Road for more than $1.2 billion gives institutional investors an on-ramp for lending, cross-margining their capital, and transaction settlement that operates directly on the ledger. And Ripple's road map includes building more compliance tooling aimed squarely at enticing banks and asset managers to store their capital on its chain. These moves won't send the coin to the moon overnight, but they do give XRP multiple levers in the form of transaction fees, stablecoin issuance, and custody tooling to capture a large amount of value as the finance sector moves to using blockchains as its plumbing. If XRP nabs even a sliver of the trillions in real-world assets (RWAs) forecast to migrate to on-chain management this decade, the upside will be enormous for investors who build up a position now. But could XRP 100x, given its rosy setup today? A jump to roughly $220 per coin would take its cap to about $13 trillion. That's still massive, and therefore very improbable in the near term. But, unlike Dogecoin, XRP has plausible growth drivers in the form of enterprise adoption and a living road map. Don't confuse its better odds of making investors richer with good odds for it making anyone into a millionaire. For investors, that translates to moderation. Buy and hold XRP if you're interested in getting some exposure to its considerable upside, but keep your expectations in check, and don't over-invest, especially not if your portfolio isn't sufficiently diversified first. Before you buy stock in Dogecoin, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Dogecoin wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $699,558!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $976,677!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,060% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 180% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join . See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 30, 2025 Alex Carchidi has positions in Bitcoin and Ethereum. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Bitcoin, Ethereum, and XRP. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Which Cryptocurrency Is More Likely to Be a Millionaire Maker? Dogecoin vs. XRP was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

How Xiaomi Succeeded Where Apple Failed
How Xiaomi Succeeded Where Apple Failed

Yahoo

time24 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

How Xiaomi Succeeded Where Apple Failed

(Bloomberg) -- Lei Jun, founder and chairman of Xiaomi Corp., the only tech company to have successfully diversified into carmaking, couldn't resist. Trump's Gilded Design Style May Be Gaudy. But Don't Call it 'Rococo.' Foreign Buyers Swoop on Cape Town Homes, Pricing Out Locals Massachusetts to Follow NYC in Making Landlords Pay Broker Fees Are Tourists Ruining Europe? How Locals Are Pushing Back NYC Commutes Resume After Midtown Bus Terminal Crash Chaos Speaking at a triumphant launch event in Beijing late last month for Xiaomi's second electric vehicle, a long-anticipated SUV, Lei pointedly mentioned Apple Inc., which spent a decade and $10 billion trying to make a car before giving up last year. 'Since Apple stopped developing its car, we've given special care to Apple users,' he said, noting that owners of the American giant's iPhones would be able to seamlessly sync their devices to Xiaomi's vehicles. The not-so-subtle dig was followed by a flex: Xiaomi then said it had received more than 289,000 orders for its new sport utility vehicle within an hour of its announcement, more than its first EV, a sedan launched in March 2024. Xiaomi succeeding where Apple failed has burnished Lei's reputation, made his company one of the most valuable in China and shaken up both the tech and automobile industries. The collapse of Apple's moonshot car program has only underscored the effectiveness of Xiaomi's grounded approach, which took inspiration from proven designs from Tesla Inc. and Porsche Automobil Holding SE while staying true to the affordable ethos that's made it a cult brand for Gen Z consumers. Crucially, it also launched into the most fertile EV ecosystem in the world — China. With state subsidies, existing charging infrastructure and a ready made supply chain, Xiaomi had a structural tailwind Apple lacked. Xiaomi declined to comment for this story. Lei and Xiaomi's 'charisma, brand recognition and ecosystem cannot be underestimated,' Yale Zhang, the managing director of Shanghai-based consultancy Automotive Foresight, said. 'It's a big influence on young consumers who have filled their homes with Xiaomi products. When it comes time to buy an EV, they naturally think of Xiaomi.' But building cars is a far more complex, capital intensive challenge than making phones or rice cookers. It requires mastering safety regulations, global logistics and production at scale, all while competing against legacy automakers with long histories and large model lineups. Any international expansion will also require navigating complex geopolitical landscapes. As one of the first tech giants to actually manufacture a car, Xiaomi is in uncharted territory. Apple's Failings Apple's car project, internally dubbed Project Titan, failed in large part because it wasn't just an EV — it was at one point an attempt to leapfrog the auto industry with a fully autonomous, Level 5 self-driving machine. Its goals were lofty and the direction constantly shifting, the result being over a decade of effort with nothing to show. Lei, 55, was comparatively stingy with time and resources and staked his personal reputation on the endeavor, claiming that making cars would be his 'last entrepreneurial project.' Xiaomi's public narrative is that Lei and his team learned by visiting multiple Chinese automakers, including Zhejiang Geely Holding Group Co. and Great Wall Motor Co., and talked to more than 200 industry experts in some 80 meetings. The reality is also that he used Xiaomi's reputation as an innovative consumer behemoth to get close to China's large carmakers and pick off their top talent. Geely and its billionaire founder Li Shufu welcomed Lei to the automaker's research institute in Ningbo in the months leading up to Xiaomi's announcement that it would enter the car business to discuss topics, including potential collaboration. It's Geely lore that Lei added the WeChat contacts of many staff at the institute, including then-director Hu Zhengnan. Hu later joined Shunwei Capital Partners, the investment firm co-founded by Lei. Recruitment Tactics Xiaomi headhunters also courted Geely staff intensely, according to people familiar with the matter. While it's common for talent to move between companies in the same industry, it was unusual to see this level of aggressiveness around recruitment, the people said, asking not to be identified discussing information that's private. Geely didn't respond to a request for comment. Hu, known for his love of the German luxury marque Porsche, was one of the team members credited as being instrumental to developing Xiaomi's EV business, Lei said at the SU7 launch in 2024. Lei added that Hu left his previous employer after his contract ended. Other executives who joined Xiaomi came from companies including BAIC Motor Corp., BMW AG, SAIC-GM-Wuling Automobile Co. — the General Motors Co. joint venture with SAIC Motor Corp. and Wuling Motors Holdings Ltd. — and auto supplier Magna Steyr LLC. Besides assembling top Chinese automaking talent, Lei made a prescient bet on investing in a self-controlled supply chain — insulating Xiaomi's operation from manufacturing vagaries. This came from painful lessons learned in Xiaomi's early smartphone-producing days, when external suppliers would cut off components unpredictably. In 2016, some members of Xiaomi's supply chain team displeased Samsung Electronics Co. representatives and the South Korean firm threatened to halt supply of its industry-leading AMOLED screens. To mend the fractured relationship, Lei flew to Shenzhen to meet with Samsung's China head at the time. The pair drank five bottles of red wine during their dinner meeting, according to a Xiaomi company biography, and Lei also made multiple trips to Samsung's headquarters in South Korea to apologize and negotiate the resumption of supply. Representatives from Samsung declined to comment. After Xiaomi went into the carmaking business, it invested into almost all parts of the EV supply chain, from batteries and chips to air suspension and sensors. It pumped more than $1.6 billion via Shunwei or other Xiaomi-led funds into over 100 supply chain companies between 2021 and 2024, according to data compiled by Chinese analytics firm Zhangtongshe and Bloomberg. The components from some of the companies that Xiaomi invested in have ended up in its cars, such as lidars from Hesai Technology Co. and onboard chargers and voltage converters from Zhejiang EV-Tech Co. With the 10 billion yuan ($1.4 billion) it committed to the first phase of its EV venture, Xiaomi also built its own factory, rather than going down the contract manufacturing route that some Chinese makers, including Nio Inc. and Xpeng Inc., did when they started out. 'Among tech companies that now build electric vehicles, those who previously had hardware products seem to be more successful than those who only had software products or information services,' said Paul Gong, UBS Group AG's head of China autos research. Copycat Allegations Despite its early success, there are many who argue Xiaomi's one hit car is copied from elsewhere — and that a sole successful vehicle does not a successful auto producer make. Lei's aggressive approach has also raised hackles in China's car industry. Yu Jingmin, vice president of SAIC's passenger car division, reportedly described Xiaomi's approach as 'shameless' in a critique of the SU7 resembling Porsche. The SU7 has been colloquially dubbed 'Porsche Mi' by netizens. SAIC didn't respond to questions about Yu's remarks. Xiaomi's design team, led by former BMW designer Li Tianyuan, has defended the SU7's aesthetics, emphasizing that the choices were driven by aerodynamic efficiency and performance benchmarks. In late March, there was another setback after a fatal accident involving the SU7. The car had its advanced driver assistance technology turned on before the crash, which afterward led to authorities reining in the promotion and deployment of the technology. The usually vocal Lei kept a low profile on social media for more than a month post the March accident. He returned to more active engagement in May with a missive that said this period of time was the most difficult in his career. Fortunately for Xiaomi, its consumer base is sticky. Known as 'Mi Fans,' the loyal customers have played a pivotal role in the company's rise. Xiaomi cultivated this fandom early on by prioritizing user feedback and the grassroots allegiance has helped it build strong brand equity, especially in China. The SU7 has remained a top selling model even after the accident in March. Indeed, dealers have reported that nearly 50% of customers plump for the SU7 without comparing it to other brands. 'A significant number of older consumers are buying the SU7 for their children, indicating that the model has built trust among more conservative buyers thanks to its safety and quality,' said Rosalie Chen, a senior analyst from investment research firm Third Bridge. Small Scale Xiaomi has set a delivery target of 350,000 units in 2025, up from its previous goal of 300,000, buoyed by demand for the newly launched YU7 and a ramp up in production. The starting prices for the SU7 sedan, at 215,900 yuan ($30,100), and its SUV, at 253,500 yuan, make them competitive alternatives to models like Tesla's Model 3 and Model Y. The EVs are also showing financial promise. Xiaomi posted record revenue for the first quarter this year, driven by car and smartphone sales. Its EV division is expected to turn profitable in the second half of 2025, Lei said in an investor meeting in June. But even if the popularity of Xiaomi's EVs can spring beyond the company's devoted base, production is still on a much more boutique scale. China's top car brand, BYD Co., sold around 4.3 million EVs and hybrids last year, many overseas, while Tesla moved about 1.78 million vehicles globally. Toyota Motor Corp., the world's No. 1 automaker, sold some 10.8 million vehicles and boasts a lineup of approximately 70 different models. Lei doesn't seem to be prioritizing the mass market of below $20,000 yet, which drives significant volume and is where BYD dominates, Automotive Foresight's Zhang said. Without a lineup in that segment, Xiaomi cars will remain niche purchases for middle to higher-income consumers and Xiaomi may face the same risks as Tesla, which is seeing its sales slump exacerbated by a narrow consumer base and limited models. Nonetheless, Lei seems buoyed by Xiaomi's early wins and is now looking at global expansion. Xiaomi will consider selling cars outside China from 2027, he said last week. Success or otherwise, the European Union, the US and Turkey have all slapped tariffs on Chinese EVs, but Xiaomi wants to set up a R&D center in Munich and may test sales starting in European markets such as Germany, Spain and France when the time is right, Chinese media 36Kr reported in April. 'Xiaomi is a latecomer to the auto industry,' Lei admitted on Weibo in June. But, he said, in a market driven by technology and innovation and the rising global influence of China's EV culture, 'there are always opportunities for latecomers.' --With assistance from Vlad Savov, Mark Gurman, Drake Bennett and Jessica Sui. For Brazil's Criminals, Coffee Beans Are the Target Sperm Freezing Is a New Hot Market for Startups SNAP Cuts in Big Tax Bill Will Hit a Lot of Trump Voters Too Pistachios Are Everywhere Right Now, Not Just in Dubai Chocolate China's Homegrown Jewelry Superstar ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

It's almost time for new Galaxy Watches.
It's almost time for new Galaxy Watches.

The Verge

time25 minutes ago

  • The Verge

It's almost time for new Galaxy Watches.

Posted Jul 7, 2025 at 9:16 AM UTC It's almost time for new Galaxy Watches. Some images that reportedly show the new Galaxy Watch 8 (40mm/44mm dial size), Watch 8 Classic (46mm), and Watch Ultra (47mm) have leaked ahead of the Samsung Unpacked event on Wednesday, where they're expected to be officially unveiled. The round body of the Watch and Watch Classic has notably been updated to the round watch face and squircle body design used by the Ultra, alongside other changes and specification upgrades. 1/5 Leaker Roland Quandt posted what appear to be marketing images of the Galaxy Watch 8... Image: Roland Quandt

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store