This is the perfect smartphone

There’s lots of competition to be the best smartphone around: Apple’s iPhone 5s has many fans, while others are enamoured with the Samsung Galaxy S5, the HTC One M8 and the LG G3. Each of those phones has its strengths and weaknesses – and here we're going to combine all their best points to great the best phone ever (or at least so far, until one of the phone markers or platform developers comes up with something super shiny that wows us all).

This is a bit of fun - and a benchmark to judge any new phone by, including the apparently soon-to-be-forthcoming iPhone 6 - but underpinning it is that there is no one best phone on the market, you've got to find the one whose best features appeal most to you.

Most usable: iPhone 5s

iOS 7 is the best mobile phone platform around – and it runs best on the iPhone 5s. Android is highly configurable and the best to get your nerd on with – but for the vast majority of users, iOS is the easiest to use. Apple has nailed interface design with iOS 7 – and by 'interface design’ I mean how it works and how you achieve what you want to achieve, more than how it looks. It’s simple and almost never confusing, and you always know how to navigate around the OS and use Apple’s key apps – and these design principles have been picked up by other designers of iOS apps, pushing them to use the best practice that Apple has set down.

There was a lot of hate for the design of iOS 7 when it first launched – but this was primarily about its aesthetics, not how it works. Almost a year on, even the haters have come to accept the look and feel of iOS 7 – probably because they’ve realised that how it works is more important. iOS 7’s aesthetics are a consequence of the way that it works, chosen to complement how you use the platform and make it obvious how you activate functions when you want to start or complete a task. (If you want to know about design for usability, I’d recommend reading The Design of Everyday Things by ex-Apple designer and usability guru Donald Norman – who explains how designers choose how things work and why you’re always lighting the wrong hob on your oven.

This said, I'm really quite impressed with next version of Android, still just codenamed L, which has been designed with a focus on usability (under the name of material design) – but I’ll reserve judgement until I see the finished version.
Neil Bennett

Best screen: LG G3

It’s very rare these days that a physical aspect of a phone wows us - but the LG's 'quad HD' screen is a marvel. Ignore those nerdish quibbles that it's not actually four times the resolution of HD, the first time you see photos and video on the phone, it both surprises and delights you. The level of detail is like nothing you’ve seen before.

You're probably not going to notice the difference most of the time when surfing the web until this quality of screen becomes widespread enough that websites start using 4x times images – like they offer 2x images for high-res phone screens and Retina displays – but if you take a lot of high quality photos and videos you'll be delighted by the improvement.

Best product design: HTC M8

The problem for any smartphone vendor that wants to charge a high price for its products is that cheaper low-end and mid-range devices are becoming much more sophisticated.

The use of premium materials such as metal and glass is one way of making expensive models seem worth extra investment, and HTC has taken this to the extreme with the gorgeous One M8. It comes close to the feel of a Rolex, which isn't true for any other smartphone.

To me, the all-metal unibody makes the smartphone look more luxurious than the iPhone's mixture of glass and metal. LG Electronics has made the most of what metal-looking plastic can offer with the G3, but that still can't compete with the real thing.   

If that wasn't enough, HTC has also designed the coolest looking case: the perforated Dot View Cover. HTC deserves a lot of credit for the design of the One M8, and hopefully it will be around to develop an even better successor.
Mikael Ricknäs

Best camera: Nokia Lumia 1020

The Nokia Lumia 1020's amazing camera would be an essential feature for the ultimate smartphone. It's 41Mp combined with a Xenon flash, and focus assist light, and is the most advanced and powerful camera we've seen on a smartphone to date.
Ashleigh Allsopp

Best gadgety extras: Galaxy S5

You may not use them all but the ultimate smartphone has got to have everything possible, just in case. In terms of additional features there's no-one better than Samsung for throwing extras at devices so for this section we've selected the Galaxy S5.

Since we're only selecting real-life features which you can get now and not James Bond-esque gadgets like fricking lasers and miniature rockets, the Galaxy S5's fingerprint scanner, heart rate monitor and infrared transmitter will have to do.

With these you can keep your device more secure, check how hard that workout actually was and control all manner of gadgets (even prank other peoples).
Chris Martin

Best apps: Apple App Store

Steve Ballmer knew better than anyone that smartphones live and die by their app library, and that the support of third-party app developers is crucial to getting a mobile platform off the ground. And while Google Play might boast more apps, I would back Apple's iOS App Store over anyone.

Tech-savvy early-adopters will appreciate the fact that apps are almost always developed for iOS before any other platform (mainly because Apple users are more likely to spend money on software), and sometimes - including some big names, such as the Infinity Blade games - never appear anywhere else. And the quality average in Apple's app ecosystem is undoubtedly higher than on Android.

But the more stringent vetting process required to get software on the App Store really shows its value for beginner and casual users, who are far more likely to end up with dodgy apps, scams and even out-and-out malware on their phone when using Google's more porous system.

Samsung Galaxy Alpha I've been banging on about poor plastic build quality in Samsung reviews for years now and the firm has finally launched a device which, in its own words, has "real metal". That device is the Galaxy Alpha and while it's great to see Samsung taking action, the new smartphone is something of an odd ball which doesn't make sense. The smartphone market is generally split into three categories: budget, mid-range and high-end. They are possibly known as other things particularly at the expensive end like premium or top-end. It's normally pretty easy to place a new smartphone into one of those pigeon holes but the Galaxy Alpha fits two in different ways. Watch: 9 Apple-bashing Samsung ads that'll either make you angry or make you smug. The easiest way to do it is by price and going by this measure, the Galaxy Alpha is a high-end smartphone at around £500. Yes, it has that metal design which we've all been waiting for but at this price, it's more than the Galaxy S5 which, as you probably know, is Samsung's flagship smartphone. We're used to Samsung pumping out devices in all shapes, sizes, colours, prices and specs but with this handset it is really competing against itself. It really only makes sense for vendors to have one top-end device, hence the term 'flagship'. See also: Why Samsung should be more like Apple: Samsung launches way too many Galaxy products. The higher price is partly because the Galaxy S5 cost has dropped since it's been on the market for a few months, but Samsung needs to take this into account when launching a new smartphone. You get what you pay for? No? You might think that paying more money means you'll get everything which the Galaxy S5 offers but with a more premium design and build quality. This would have made sense – a Galaxy S5 Prime type branding - but it simply (and strangely) isn't the case. For whatever reasons, the Galaxy Alpha is both better and worse than its sibling. Of course, the metal on offer is a nice lure (I like shiny things as much as the next man) - although it's worth pointing out that it's limited to the edge like the Lumia 930 so the rear cover is still plastic. But there are a couple of advantages of the Alpha over the GS5. Is has a better processor in the form of a Exynos 5 octa-core chip and double the amount of standard storage at 32GB. Unfortunately, that's where Samsung stopped and decided to downgrade everything else. Samsung Galaxy S5 vs Galaxy Alpha review The Galaxy Alpha has a 4.7in screen with a 720p resolution - now a resolution common on smartphones as cheap as £100 like the Moto G. It retains the Galaxy S5's fingerprint scanner and heart rate monitor but so does the Galaxy S5 mini so that's no big deal. What's strange, is the choice to drop the microSD card slot (something which Samsung usual offers without fail) and the IR blaster. Furthermore, it's not IP67 dust and waterproof rated like the Galaxy S5 so that's another downgrade. Last but not least are a lower capacity battery (not so bad considering the lower screen res) and a downgraded camera from 16Mp to 12Mp with the loss of features like phase detection autofocus and dual-tone LED flash. Don't get me wrong, it's great to see Samsung using some 'real' metal on a smartphone but with its higher price tag and largely downgraded specifications, the Galaxy Alpha really makes no sense and competes against the firm's existing flagship handset.

I've been banging on about poor plastic build quality in Samsung reviews for years now and the firm has finally launched a device which, in its own words, has "real metal". That device is the Galaxy Alpha and while it's great to see Samsung taking action, the new smartphone is something of an odd ball which doesn't make sense.

The smartphone market is generally split into three categories: budget, mid-range and high-end. They are possibly known as other things particularly at the expensive end like premium or top-end. It's normally pretty easy to place a new smartphone into one of those pigeon holes but the Galaxy Alpha fits two in different ways. Watch: 9 Apple-bashing Samsung ads that'll either make you angry or make you smug.

The easiest way to do it is by price and going by this measure, the Galaxy Alpha is a high-end smartphone at around £500. Yes, it has that metal design which we've all been waiting for but at this price, it's more than the Galaxy S5 which, as you probably know, is Samsung's flagship smartphone.

We're used to Samsung pumping out devices in all shapes, sizes, colours, prices and specs but with this handset it is really competing against itself. It really only makes sense for vendors to have one top-end device, hence the term 'flagship'.

The higher price is partly because the Galaxy S5 cost has dropped since it's been on the market for a few months, but Samsung needs to take this into account when launching a new smartphone.

You get what you pay for? No?

You might think that paying more money means you'll get everything which the Galaxy S5 offers but with a more premium design and build quality. This would have made sense – a Galaxy S5 Prime type branding - but it simply (and strangely) isn't the case. For whatever reasons, the Galaxy Alpha is both better and worse than its sibling.

Of course, the metal on offer is a nice lure (I like shiny things as much as the next man) - although it's worth pointing out that it's limited to the edge like the Lumia 930 so the rear cover is still plastic. But there are a couple of advantages of the Alpha over the GS5. Is has a better processor in the form of a Exynos 5 octa-core chip and double the amount of standard storage at 32GB.

Unfortunately, that's where Samsung stopped and decided to downgrade everything else.

The Galaxy Alpha has a 4.7in screen with a 720p resolution - now a resolution common on smartphones as cheap as £100 like the Moto G. It retains the Galaxy S5's fingerprint scanner and heart rate monitor but so does the Galaxy S5 mini so that's no big deal.

What's strange, is the choice to drop the microSD card slot (something which Samsung usual offers without fail) and the IR blaster. Furthermore, it's not IP67 dust and waterproof rated like the Galaxy S5 so that's another downgrade.

Last but not least are a lower capacity battery (not so bad considering the lower screen res) and a downgraded camera from 16Mp to 12Mp with the loss of features like phase detection autofocus and dual-tone LED flash.

Don't get me wrong, it's great to see Samsung using some 'real' metal on a smartphone but with its higher price tag and largely downgraded specifications, the Galaxy Alpha really makes no sense and competes against the firm's existing flagship handset.