Sure, the Samsung event at Radio City Music Hall was kind of weird for the new Galaxy S IV from Samsung, but the real question is: did Samsung screw the pooch on its new flagship by making it just an incremental upgrade of the last one? Technically, it did, but here's why that doesn't matter one bit.
When you look at the Galaxy S IV side-by-side with its predecessor, the Galaxy S III, you could be forgiven for not really knowing which one is which without being told. In fact, I predict that in a couple of days I'll be able to pull an S III out of my pocket and tell people it's an S IV based purely on the looks. The substantive differences between the two come when you peer under the hood.
Samsung has packed a better screen, new 1.9GHz quad-core (or 1.6 octa-core depending on your market) processor, 13-megapixel rear-facing camera and a bit of extra storage into the device to make it new and shiny. The Korean gadget maker has also crammed the S IV to the gills with software that the average person will never use more than once -- if at all.
So by my maths, the S IV an incremental upgrade on the S III. Plain and simple.
We really have to ask ourselves, though: what's wrong with that?
The Galaxy S III is probably the most popular Android handset on the market right now, having seen of challengers from Sony, HTC and even handsets from within its own family like the Note II.
So if the S III ain't broke, why does Samsung have to fix it? Despite the echoing chorus that the S IV isn't that far away from its predecessor, Samsung will still sell the S IV by the truckload. Perhaps even to folks who already own Galaxy S IIIs.