- 05-06-2012, 09:02 PM #1
Hello folks. I was having random thoughts about the state of the smartphone biz. I know this isn't the first time someone has thought about this, but some of our favorite WP7 devices cost as much as devices with better processors and better screen resolutions. Why are we buying into this allowing the companies to make big bucks off of totally outdated specs? I received my Lumia for free plus an extra 100 so long as I stick with my ATT contract. Off contract it is 429. Which is what it should be. But some other phones cost 549. Lesser specs other than LTE. Is it worth it? Knowing that the companies may be getting over on us a bit?
Sent from my Lumia 900 using Board Express
05-06-2012, 09:09 PM #2
- 77 Posts
When the Os runs with few issues on the existing hardware why buy into the spec only side of things. Android has to tout specs as they have no other way to differentiate between the hundred of phones not only that but make the average consume hears specs automatically assumes better. Eventually with Apollo we should have different hardware specs available but that will only do so much for a pretty seamless experience.
Sent from my Lumia 710 using Board Express
- 05-06-2012, 09:25 PM #4
Oh I agree that the experience speaks for itself, but not all experiences are created equal. Some folks have had issues from data loss to reboots, etc. So the WP7 system isn't perfect. But I guess this goes back to customer satisfaction ratings. Forget specs, and focus more on general reception. And I'm not speaking about specs. I'm more speaking about the price we pay for specs. I mean, it would seem the price of specs these days ate inflated which to a degree forces some folks into buying into this 2 year contract?
Sent from my Lumia 900 using Board Express
- 05-06-2012, 09:43 PM #5
I actually agree. You shouldn't be paying as much for these phones if the parts to make them don't cost as much. I also don't think they are bad deal, either, especially when you can easily find good deals on them usually. This problem should be rectified once WP8 comes out. I can't wait.
- 05-06-2012, 09:54 PM #6
05-06-2012, 10:07 PM #8
- 133 Posts
If you're simply comparing clockspeed, or cores, or the amount of DRAM, then you could indeed conclude that Windows Phones are "cheap". However, one has to remember that the design was actually for pretty good hardware back when it was released (Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 ARM CPU is arguably the most bang for the least battery "buck", perhaps even today). I would agree that today, the hardware is arguably behind the times, but the OS is still as slick as ever on it (and those large screens are *really* expensive compared to the rest of the device - the ClearBlack AMOLED on the L900 for instance is $58 of the whole $209 it costs to simply manufacture the device). Yes, there's profit built into the phone's cost, but I would argue that it's not much more (or less) comparatively to the higher-end hardware and what it's costs are, for example some of the really high-end Android designs.
05-06-2012, 10:30 PM #10
- 254 Posts
The Lumia 900, for example, is actually more expensive than the iPhone 4S:
iPhone 4S - $188: iPhone 4S Costs $188 To Manufacture
Lumia 900 - $209: Lumia 900 materials cost $209, point to low-cost approach by Nokia, Microsoft - Computerworld
- 05-06-2012, 10:45 PM #11
- 05-06-2012, 11:05 PM #14
The logistics of constructing a phone are complicated. High end specs don't cost a lot to add; but, the intrinsic value of a lower spec phone to consumer plummets greatly.
Believe me when I say that the phone manufacturers WANT to sell you a quad core phone for $600. They're not going to make more money selling you outdated phones for less because they're not nearly as cheap as you think to manufacture.
- 05-06-2012, 11:34 PM #16
Sent from my Lumia 900 using Board Express
05-07-2012, 03:16 AM #19
- 4,482 Posts
I agree that the perception is that the price should be lower for the mere fact that it's older and cheaper hardware. We can all agree that the "experience" is stellar. It's just knowing that you're shelling out more than what you expect the hardware demands the cost should be.
Though I think consumers forget the other costs associated with making phones in lower quantities. Not that it's the consumer's problem.
Nokia is the one doing things right. Priced right for the hardware. That's how you get new users to give you a shot. You allow them to perceive value immediately, as opposed to having to use it for a while to be able to see it.
- 05-07-2012, 08:41 AM #20
- 05-07-2012, 09:03 AM #21
All of folks that currently own a windows phone 7 device know it's worth, but to the people new to smartphones or just in general don't know much about them would assume that more X is better. Windows phones happen to have less X than many devices out there, but runs a lot better (in my opinion) than many other phones out there. But you wont truly know that until you buy into the phone. In the store it may have less things installed on it and then you wont get the full experience.
I was playing with the HTC One X the other day and to my surprise (or not so surprise) I still found some lag in transitions, bringing up webpages, etc. Where it shined was that camera. man was it sweet. But in the stores you have a windows phone which many store associates don't pay much attention to until now, but the display model has NO extra apps to show off some more live tile functionality and more of what it brings to the table. The average Joe sees that and finds it to be plain, but we all know it's great.
- 05-07-2012, 01:25 PM #23
well the sooner people relies that buying into SPECS is a BAD idea the sooner they would relies that they are paying for OVER ALL QUALITY and not just specs.
My single core FOCUS is worth HUNDREDS more then the Crap Samsung Nexus or GS2..
even with there *superior* specs ...my phone is still smother , faster , more reliable ...etc...
so specs = mean NOTHING. if you buy into specs you ether misinformed and/or a Media Child(brainwashed)
- 05-07-2012, 01:35 PM #24
There are more important things than that, and Android/iOS devices continue to have superior camera tech in them than Windows Phones coupled with easily superior camera software to go along with it. Some of them have dedicated chips for image processing allowing you to do things like take stills while recording video or shooting rather high quality burst shots.
This discussion has been made many times and the general consensus is that the user experience makes up for it but that's purely subjective. People are increasingly making buys based on objective, tangible aspects of the device and specs are a huge part of that. Lagging behind so far looks bad and makes it seem like the device is overpriced. People will often go with the technology that is more up to date and will last the longest without falling too far behind. With WP7 devices, consumers feel like they're starting in 10th place trying to catch up to an Amtrak on horseback.
- 05-07-2012, 01:40 PM #25
Specs do matter. Even if WP7 had BT file transfer or tethering, the GSII would outperform it handily becuase it has a module with BT3 + HS allowing up to 24 Mb/sec transfer speeds. The Focus has BT 3.1. The GSII has a sAMOLED+ screen, the Focus has a 1st gen sAMOLOED PenTile Screen which looks terrible and burns in easily (I had a Vibrant, same screen tech). The focus does not outperform the GSII. Not sure where you're getting that from. The GS2 Camera is much superior to what's in the focus. There is no area where the Focus is better than the GS2 that is purely objective. Pretty much everything from Cell Radio to BT to WiFi module to Screen Tech to Camera, etc. is superior in that phone.
The Focus is basically a downgraded GS1 device with WP7 on it.
There are games that lag on WP7 devices that perform without a hitch on that phone (and others) due to the superior SoC and huge RAM differential between the two.
Hardware matters a lot, not sure why people are trying this hard to discredit its impact.
I'm not sure what Nexus you're talking about, the Nexus S is a downgraded GS1 as well, the Galaxy Nesus is superior to a Focus in almost every way except it lacks an SD Card slot.
The hardware argument is loss for all current WP7 devices. The user experience is subjective and if a consumer prefers WP7 then perhaps they will choose it based on its merits as a software system. However a lot of people base percieved value on the hardware components (read: specs) and they are at a huge disadvantage there.
Yes, maybe Apollo will fix that. If Microsoft opens up things a bit more than I think Nokia will not fare as well against Samsung and HTC, though :P The reason why Samsung's plastic phones sell so well is because the hardware in them is fantastic. HTC faltered because even though their external build quality was good, their hardware was worse. Nokia is running the tables in WP7's eco because Microsoft locked the specs so people can just buy based on external build quality and be assured that the internal specs are basically equalized between all the vendors, anyways. The tables will turn once Microsoft starts allowing vendors like Samsung to use their own hardware in their phones.
Last edited by N8ter; 05-07-2012 at 01:47 PM.