Did Samsung pick the right form factor for the Galaxy Z TriFold?

In essence, dual-hinge folding phones can have one of two form factors. Samsung Display experimented with both for years and called them Flex S and Flex G.

Samsung's mobile division recently announced its first dual-hinge folding phone, the oddly named Galaxy Z TriFold. It has the Flex G form factor and folds inwards twice. But was this the right form factor to choose?

To save you the suspense, I think that Samsung made the right choice for the Galaxy Z TriFold, even though, on paper, the Flex S form factor offers a couple of unique advantages over the other. Here's what I mean.

Even though it has two hinges, the Galaxy Z TriFold's G shape enables only two use cases. You can use it as a regular smartphone when folded or as a tablet when unfolded. But there's no in-between.

The TriFold shape doesn't allow you to unfold the device partially and use just two-thirds of the foldable screen.

Conversely, the Flex S form factor enables three use cases. Single screen, dual screen, and triple screen, as Huawei demonstrated with its Z-shaped Mate XT a few months ago.

A Z-shaped foldable allows you to use the cover screen in phone mode, the entire foldable screen in tablet mode, or two-thirds of the panel in a Galaxy Z Fold-like aspect ratio.

In short, the Flex S shape is more versatile than the Flex G. The Galaxy Z TriFold has only two modes of operation, while a device like the Mate XT has three modes.

Because the Flex S-type design never hides the foldable screen entirely, you don't need a second cover display to offer a hybrid user experience. The foldable panel acts as the cover screen when the phone is folded.

This design seems more efficient. It does more with less and can potentially reduce production costs by negating the need for a cover screen.

Plus, it's tempting to think that the single-screen design means that the phone has fewer potential failure points. But that's where we need to think about on-paper specs versus the real world.

Why do I believe Samsung made the right choice for the Galaxy Z TriFold, given these two clear advantages of the Flex S design? Because these are theoretical advantages, and reality is different.

The truth of the matter is that flexible displays are not as resilient as rigid, glass-covered displays. And they might never be. But right now, despite being better than ever, they are still more fragile than regular screens.

The Flex S shape might be ideal in an ideal world, but we don't live on paper. In reality, the Flex S design exposes the foldable screen too much.

I could never pocket a Flex S-type of foldable phone, knowing that a portion of the foldable panel is always exposed.

Not to mention the part where the foldable panel wraps around the hinge on the phone's exterior. One accidental drop on that vulnerable edge, and the foldable panel could be compromised.

All things considered, I believe that the Flex S design might be ideal once durability is no longer a concern. But right now, it is, and I'm glad that Samsung chose the Flex G design instead. It didn't bite off more than it could chew.

One day, flexible screens may become as or nearly as durable as glass-covered rigid panels. And when that day comes, if ever, Samsung could expand its foldable device lineup with a Flex S-type of product. Until then, I think Samsung was wise to play it safe.