09-06-2012, 08:29 PM #1
- 31 Posts
So after giving it some time to sink in, I'm not sure Nokia made the right moves with the 820/920 in terms of form factor. First off they are not Apple, so they can't get away with a rehash of design. I think it's safe to say, Apple has a massive loyal fan base that let's them get away with such things. Nokia are in the process of building so they need to be more aggressive. I mean, how do you attract new customers if they don't even think you have a new phone out. The average Joe looking at your 820/920 on the shelf, will think it's last year's phone they remember not being interested in. They may take one look and pass their eyes over to the next device. But I believe the biggest issue they have is the size of their devices. The 920 is just too darn heavy and thick as a mobile device. Now this isn't an issue with Nokia customers, but it's the casual shopper you have to think about. It's their perception that matters when it comes to growth of the brand and model. Samsung attacked the industry with Specs you could see and feel. By that I mean screen size and quality, lightness and thinness. These are specs you don't have to do any research to know. You just pick up the device and see and feel it. Their Galaxy line has grown out of control in an ocean of Android devices. I have no doubt that the 920 will feel like a bigger phone compared to a GS3 (which has a bigger screen) because of it's weight and thickness. These are not specs that are desirable in a mobile device. For those that think the Camera is gonna be a selling point, I don't believe it will. People in general don't care about "top" quality camera performance. I have never heard anyone say that they picked phone X because it had the best camera on the market. Do you really think the average joe that bought the GS3 even knew the quality of it's camera?
So again, when a company is in a position where they are digging themselves out of a hole, they need in your face stats to attract the customers. Apple has built itself a cult following that lets them get away with underwhelming hardware, so it wouldn't make sense comparing Nokia's situation to Apple's.
Now for my part, I will be buying an Ativ S. Not because I think it's the best phone out there, I don't even need a phone right now. I have a GS3 and it's unreal. I will buy the Ativ S to support the growth of Windows Phone OS fist and foremost.
Last edited by Timture; 09-06-2012 at 08:38 PM.
- 09-06-2012, 08:50 PM #2
Couple of points. The L900 was released in April, so the design has only been out 5 months, not a year. And both phones are different enough from their predecessors to not be confused. Second, all I read about a few months ago was how much the Nokia Lumia camera sucked, and was a show stopper. Now, a camera is not that important? What a difference a season makes.
At the end of the day, you go to the store (or online) and buy the phone of your choice. Everyone has different needs. But knocking phones on the same platform, the platform you (generalizing here, nothing personal) prefer, is bull****. Tell me what you like about your choice, but don't tell me why I shouldn't buy my "choice". And please don't tell me who to vote for either.
Sent from my Lumia 900 using Board Express Pro
09-06-2012, 09:05 PM #3
- 31 Posts
In regards to your point on people complaining the camera sucked on the 900, it's called a loud minority. You know like the loud minority that cries about how Android is fragmented and updates are few and far between. Yet Android is activating 1.3 Million devices a day. Or how about the loud minority that swears Samsung devices are cheap feeling plastic phones that look uninspiring, yet the GS3 has sold over 20 Million phones in 100 days.
So you see, I want to keep this discussion void of emotions. Let's discuss whether you think Nokia has done enough with their new 820/920 to grab the NEW customers they need to get WP8 growing and to stop them from becoming extinct.
- 09-06-2012, 10:13 PM #5
920 is what the 800/900 should had being from the start. I'm not sure about the specs 100% so I can't comment much but I'm very disappointed by the 820 resolution and camera. I though it was going to be mid range not low end.
09-06-2012, 10:40 PM #7
- 1,038 Posts
I'm not sure that I would call the 820 low-end... it definitely has its strengths, but I do agree they skimped on the display...
UNLESS, they do, in fact intend to offer the 920 and 820 on all carriers once the AT&T exclusive ends.
OR, they are minimizing development expense. Why release an expensive device that a carrier won't bother promoting?
As for the 920, I agree... this is the device the 900 refined and perfected... almost as if the 900 was still a beta after all, lol.
- 09-06-2012, 11:29 PM #8
You know, at 1st, I really didn't the 820. It has the same screen resolution as my current trophy. I really wanted the 920 but I'm on a family plan and Verizon really does have the best coverage where I live. So seeing as Nokia is really the only supporting windows phone I'm going to get the best Nokia wp8 on Verizon at launch to support them.
- 09-06-2012, 11:58 PM #10
09-07-2012, 12:05 AM #11
- 4,491 Posts
My sister has been an iPhone fan since it first came out. She converted her husband, my other sister, a cousin, and other to Apple over the years.
...and now she feels icky and town because all her emotions are telling her that she wants the Lumia 920.
The appeal is broad.
I think the biggest problem right now isn't the phone. It's Nokia haters that feel threatened for some reason.
- 09-07-2012, 12:14 AM #12
This has been exactly what I've been saying. As you called it "the in your face specs." You pick up a phone that's thin, light and with a big beautiful screen, you know it. You don't need a sales guy shoving specs down your throat, nor do you have to read about it. You know it because you holding it in your hand and feeling it. Your typical buyer doesn't know about dual core/quad core, 1-2 GB Ram, or the abilities of the camera. All they know is what they feel in their hands at the time they buy.
I'm worried someone picks up a 920, and right away they see it's thick and heavy. Then continues to associate WP as thick and heavy phones. Most people don't like that. You can see it by the sales number of current phones. And we also saw it in a recent study. It would be nice if WP8 had it's own display with all it's phones in one display. This would be ideal.
- 09-07-2012, 12:47 AM #14
Lumia 920 - 185g and 10.7 mm thick
Lumia 900 - 160g
Titan II - 147g
iPhone 4S - 140g
Galaxy S3 - 133g
HTC One X - 130g
You have people who have moved on to the GS3 or the One X from and iPhone 4S and have raved about how much more lighter they are than their 4S. And that's from a 7g-10g difference. Trust me it's quite noticeable. Can you imagine what a 52g difference would feel like?
Note: Galaxy Note 2 weighs 180g. It's got a 5.5 inch screen and 9.4 mm thick.
So let's be clear, the Lumia 920 is one heavy phone.
Last edited by samzer; 09-07-2012 at 12:52 AM.
- 09-07-2012, 12:59 AM #15
To answer the OP's Q, 920 is what I like. But there are several factors that will play a part in me giving Nokia my hard-earned money.
1. The price. I just read somewhere, it might be 758$ I MEAN WHAT??!! No ways am I paying so much.
2. Lumia's reception over all. And by that I don't mean paid-reviews but real ones.
3. The future. What lies ahead for this series of phones and what MS plans to do with them.
4. Updates. The fact that flashing a ROM is non-existent on WP, only and only MS will be updating my phone.
5. The apps. Will be in a better position to react to them once they are out in the open.
09-07-2012, 02:26 AM #19
- 390 Posts
I didn't like it on day one. On day two, I really do.
OIS camera seems really good in the hands of third party reviewers.
Massive onboard storage for my Zune Pass music.
Nokia has a good reputation for customer support and sending out updates and patches.
I worry that all the added technology--OIS, super-sensitive touchscreen, etc, is "more stuff to break." More sources for bugginess.
The button placement is really bad for a left-hander. I'm going to be cradling the power button in my palm when I'm holding the phone in my right hand (to hand-write while talking, to touch the screen with my left hand, etc). Power button should be somewhere else so that there's "neutral ground" to hold the phone on the middle of each side.
I miss cyan. Cyan, I miss you.
- 09-07-2012, 03:28 AM #20
The sites say its light. The people that have wielded the phone say its light. Because it is heavier does not mean its heavy and I highly doubt someone like you would have a necessity for two phones to have a daily reminder that one is bigger than the other. For the general population that has one and uses one phone at a time, they won't think its a brick. And all the sites say that. All.
Now have a seat
- 09-07-2012, 08:14 AM #21
Because is heavy does not mean the phone isn't light? The things people will say to defend a phone they haven't held in their arms.
The proof is there, the Lumia 920 is heavier than the new standard. The ATIV is actually lighter than the GS3.
- 09-07-2012, 08:22 AM #22
Am I denying that its heavier than some current phones? No. It means that unless you are a phone reviewer or you wield more than one phone a day, you won't notice the SUBTLE weight. The over exaggeration these past 48 hrs is beyond ridiculous and once again, common sense flies over your head
- 09-07-2012, 09:04 AM #23
So lets be clear. Samsung takes their top android phone and changes the body and loads WP8 on it. No tech changes or improvements, its just thin, light and has a big screen. Nokia takes their older flagship WP devices, adds the first hardware image stabilization tech, adds faster responsive tech to the screen, adds automatic color intensity adjustment for better outside visibility, adds Synaptic tech to enable the screen to be used with gloves or practically any other surface, refines the design with curved glass and ceramic camera surround BUT- its heavier and thicker than the Samsung.
Yes, I agree, none of that matters, EPIC FAIL!!!!! /s
Sorry, forgot the wireless charging. Doesn't matter cos its a BRICK!
- 09-07-2012, 09:19 AM #24
Seen this on another forum:
"I'm an Android guy, but all these posts about the Lumia 920 being a disappointment confuse the heck out of me.
I just looked up a list of all Windows Phone devices, and here's what I gather about the 920 (compared to previous WP devices):
1 GB RAM, so far WP devices have had only 512 MB RAM tops
S4 SoC, a HUGE improvement over WP SoCs because after running through the entire list of WP devices the most advanced SoC so far has been the S2 Scorpion. I cannot even begin to explain how much of a gigantic leap the S4 is over the S2.
32 GB storage. Only ONE previous WP device has had 32 GB of storage.
EVERYTHING about the display. First 4.5" display on a WP device (not to say that it is the largest, as there have been 4.7" displays, but there has never been a 4.5" display on a WP device). 1280 x 768 resolution, a HUGE leap over the 480 x 800 resolution we have seen so far on WP devices. IPS display, so far the most advanced LCD display on a WP device has been SLCD. The display is just like the SoC: an absolutely gigantic leap over what we've seen so far in WP devices.
LTE support. So far it looks like only 3 WP devices have had LTE.
2000mAh battery. Previous record was 1830mAh.
Camera: let's get down to what's important and talk about something other than MP. Yes, it's 8.7 MP is nothing new, as the Titan II had a 16 MP rear camera. But anyone who knows anything about cameras knows it's about much more than just MP count. So: F/2.0 aperture, the lowest of any smartphone (to my knowledge the only other phone with such an f-stop is the One X), a 1/3 inch sensor (which is larger than the 1/3.2 inch sensor the iPhone 4S, One X, and GS3 all have, so effectively the largest sensor other than outliers like the 808 Pureview), backside illumination, and floating lens mechanical stabilization. BSI isn't new, but few WP phones have had it, and mechanical stabilization isn't new, but based on the video of it in action on a 920 (the actual footage Nokia released, not the ad), no company has ever developed such effective mechanical stabilization. Lastly, very high megapixel counts can actually decrease image quality for small sensor sizes, so it doesn't make much sense to stuff a 16+MP camera into smartphones when they have very small sensor sizes. Higher MP counts are important only when the sensor size correspondingly increases, and the increase from 8-8.7 MP seems like a good increase for a sensor size increase from 1/3.2 inches to 1/3 inches.
I'm not going to avoid the truth: the Lumia 920 represents a huge leap in WP hardware. I see almost nothing to complain about other than the lack of expandable storage. Previous WP phones ran damn smoothly with POS single-core S2 SoCs on earlier versions of WP, and now the Lumia 920 packs a dual-core S4 SoC running WP8. Goodness, if a GS3 runs smoothly with the S4 on ICS, how much of a performance beast will the 920 be given it has the S4 and runs the much faster WP8? The display is in every way a huge improvement over what WP devices have had. HUGE. Nokia claims it's the brightest smartphone display, to go along with all the other details about it that impress me. The camera should be downright impressive. Look up actual pictures the 920 has been demonstrated to take and it is very impressive, especially in low light."
May be this would change your perspective a bit.
Sent from my DROID RaZr.