- 09-05-2012, 02:29 PM #1
Already we are seeing threads popping up deriding the Lumia 920, from questioning whether its a worthy flagship, to MS/Nokia blew it, to the Samsung looks better, 8MP is not PureView, and probably others. So why not put your reasons here why you think any other device is better, and lets see whether there is any truth to these claims or whether Nokia is still set to continue to be the no 1 WP OEM for a while longer.
- 09-05-2012, 03:14 PM #2
megapixels arent the only thing that make a picture quality good... i cant stand to hear people talk about specs sometimes... completely oblivous.
a 4mp photo could be 10x more clear than a 40 mp picture...
secondly, all people care about anymore is specs... its rather annoying to listen to the media and all these tech sites. talking about how this is last years technology... really? pureview techonology is by far the most superior camera on any phone ever made. jbl speaker docs with wireless charging, nfc and bluetooth. removable cases, exlusive apps, ect... whats with you people?
whats so ground breaking about the samsung ativ-s or the iphone? the samsung looks just like the gs3 with an aluminum back plate? nokia is bringing originality to the game. the are unique and setting trends, not folling them.
me personally, i love the new nokias. i love the direction they are headed. so i will be different i guess and buy what everyone else doesnt like.
- 09-05-2012, 03:18 PM #3
Here is the proof of the pudding, the not-so Pureview 920 laying the smackdown on the alleged best camera phones of today. http://gizmodo.com/5940697/definite-...era-is-awesome
Sure some will still call it crap....:dry
- 09-05-2012, 03:26 PM #5
Wow that shot from Gizmodo is nice. Hopefully it lives up. I didn't see mention of the sensor being back side illuminated though. I guess with the PureView tech under the hood though you don't really need. We shall see.
I also agree with bear lx that megapixels aren't everything. Hence IMO the Lumia 900's 8MP camera was vastly inferior to the 5MP camera on my iPhone 4.
- 09-05-2012, 03:42 PM #7
There's nothing wrong with liking other OEMs. Buy whatever makes you happy. Unfortunately, people are expressing their love for other products by tearing down its competitors. And it's gone from general displeasure, to bitterness, to outright venom. People are really becoming upset that Nokia is treated better than Samsung. Honestly, I don't know why they're surprised. Nokia has created a much bigger ecosystem, the 900 has won several design awards, Nokia is very vocal about the platform, Nokia is bringing new technology to Windows Phone, Nokia has spent more on advertising, Nokia is leading the charge - period.
I support anyone's decision to buy any Windows Phone from any OEM. But I'm not going to pretend that any OEM has as much invested in Windows Phone as Nokia. Nokia CHOOSE to go with Windows Phone and did so 100%. No one else has matched that commitment.
- 09-05-2012, 03:55 PM #9
My problem with the New Nokia phones is purely aesthetic but its a HUGE negative to me, TOO MUCH BEZEL. Not only do you have a 4.5 inch screen with like an inch of bezel, you have the colored plastic around it creating MORE Width. you all may say the ATIV-S is just a galaxy copy, but honestly, ITS AN AWESOME DESIGN. If Nokia would have been able to do away with all that excess around the screen Id be on it in a HEARTBEAT, but the ATIV is just a much cleaner design, regardless of originality.
- 09-05-2012, 04:03 PM #10
- 09-05-2012, 04:28 PM #11
Last edited by strictlystyles; 09-05-2012 at 04:39 PM.
- 09-05-2012, 04:28 PM #12
I agree that there is way too much bezel. The 900 I hold right now has too much. The biggest thing I wanted was a more flush screen with less bezel.
I am mostly happy with the announcement but the bezel, weight, and gloss instead of matte are huge disappointments. The 920 is not the end all phone. And I think the 820 is almost more attractive. But featurewise I could only go with the 920. The camera alone is reason for me to buy it. Though I will need to compare the screen with my 900. Sure it is higher resolution. But I don't know about going away from OLED. I am completely sold on OLED and I believe even with the lower res the 900's screen is bette than the iPhones.
- 09-05-2012, 04:44 PM #13
I owned both the samsung focus S and Nokia 900 so i like to believe i had an unbiased view.
While the title referenced why the samsung ativ is better than 900, i dont think that will be the case.
This is all speculation since i havent or anybody else havent used the phone.
The OS should be optimized for the nokia devices, exclusive 1st party nokia apps, exclusive 3rd party limited time apps, direct support from MS, and proven support from Nokia with their current devices.
I truly believe nokia chose windows phone platform because of the high reward factor, they weren't going to turn things around competing with android OEMs.
Samsung's golden goose is android and it will continue to be so. It is good to diversify and they are diong so with windows phone, but like the focus focus s and focus 2, i just dont see a heavy investment in the platform, they are just dipping their toes in the water just in case wp platform sees a considerable growth. I dont expect to see the type of support from samsung and definitely not the type of app development we've seen from Nokia so far.
HTC is another story, they really need to diversify, their relationship with android platform clearly isnt working as hoped. They should heavily invest in WP as growth potential is higher.
09-05-2012, 05:00 PM #14
- 4,483 Posts
- 0 Post(s)
- 0 Thread(s)
I think that the only advantages Samsung's ATIV S has over the Lumia 920 are the SD card slot, and for some, more traditional design.
That's pretty much it.
The 920 has a ton of advantages over the ATIV. So I don't get why some people are so upset about Nokia, but then say that they're happy with Samsung's level of commitment.
- 09-05-2012, 05:11 PM #15
The Ativ is lot lighter. I currently have a GS3 and while I would never call it an attractive phone, I do enjoy how light and thin it is and don't think it's "cheap looking". Either way the size for me isn't a deal breaker. Most people (not me though) put cases on their phone so you'll be bulking up the Ativ a little bit where it looks like maybe the 920 won't need a case?
The Ativ also has a removable storage card which some people will have as a requirement because they like to carry all kinds of data with them. For me it's a non-issue, but it will be a deal breaker for some.
Initially it looks like the 920 Camera will dominate all other phone cameras so a big +1 to the 920. I love taking random pictures and I refuse to carry a seperate camera with me. But that's just me, YMMV. And to be honest.. the Ativ camera will be pretty good too, assuming its the same as the GS3.
Radios will be a big one. The radio/signal strength in the VZW Galaxy Crapus, er Nexus, sucked. The GS3 is ok, but still not stellar. Folks in larger cities with towers all over the place and strong signal didn't seem to ever have issues, but if you were in places with just medium signal... you'd suffer. I don't know how good Nokia will be, but I'm going to start off assuming the Ativ will be as good as the GS3 is. Which I can live with.
I need free Turn by Turn Navigation, but I think that will be the same between them both.
I love the multiple color choices of the 920. My phones always go naked so I can let those colors be seen. :) I'll probably end up with grey though...haha.
The GS3 design is bland and boring, but from the screenshots of the Ativ is seems more "exciting looking" then the GS3 so I'm ok with that too...
They are both running WinPho 8, so a big **** yeah for that!
So, in conclusion, the only thing that matters is which bad boy comes to Verizon first.. If we can pretend and say by some miracle they both launch together, I would have to go for the 920. The main reason is that it seems more "exotic" because I've never rocked a Nokia smartphone before and I've had tons of Sammys all the way back to the i730 WinMo bad boy. All I care about is WP8 and taking pictures so either way I think I'm going to be happy.
- 09-05-2012, 05:55 PM #18
I know the reward factor going with Nokia, but I just cant get past that design as I feel its way too bulky for a 4.5 incher in 2012 . I have no problem with the weight though
09-05-2012, 06:22 PM #20
- 390 Posts
- 0 Post(s)
- 0 Thread(s)
I don't know that either phone is "better." Both are good for some people.
Right now I'm leaning toward the Ativ S myself for the following reasons. These are just my personal preferences; I'm not trying to talk other people out of the Lumia 920, but I'm entitled to explain why I myself don't want it as much as the Ativ S.
* I really value lightness. The Ativ S is vastly lighter. I've held the Galaxy S3 and loved how it featherweight it felt in my hand.
* I value screen real estate. This gives more.
* The Lumia 920's button configuration isn't good for me. As a left-hander, I often hold the phone in my right hand while talking, which means I'm palming the power button. On the Ativ S, there's no button on either side in the middle of the phone.
Maybe if the screen and camera are THAT much better in the hands of third-party reviewers for lengthy, detailed reviews (Nokia can't convince me with its own demo videos thanks to the OIS demo video fiasco), I'd go Lumia 920, but right now I'm really leaning Ativ S.
09-05-2012, 06:26 PM #21
- 6 Posts
- 0 Post(s)
- 0 Thread(s)
Like I've been saying, Nokia dropped the ball today and they unveiled some uninspiring devices. The Lumia 820 especially, an obvious downgrade in design from the Lumia 800.
- 09-05-2012, 06:39 PM #22
Last edited by strictlystyles; 09-05-2012 at 06:48 PM.
- 09-05-2012, 10:25 PM #25
Coming to the weight, the Lumia 920 is a whopping 37% heavier than the Ativ S. Tell me that is not significant.
Last edited by saintforlife; 09-05-2012 at 10:34 PM.