10-08-2012, 08:37 PM #1
- 392 Posts
It's not as if that Verizon will suddenly get a L922/L910 or something, but I think it's interesting how with 1 device, Nokia might have proved that there's method to their apparent madness.
Some exclusive midrange devices that can compete with the exclusive droids from the other manufacturers. The US market is special, but Nokia might be back now.
OT: I do hope that Nokia will give the international fans a crack at the L810.
- 10-08-2012, 08:50 PM #3
10-08-2012, 09:00 PM #4
- 12 Posts
I think each carrier just wants to 'feel' like they have their own exclusive device so they can market it as such. Being able to boast that only they have this awesome device is a good marketing strategy. Nokia looks like they're going to play that game.
- 10-08-2012, 09:07 PM #6
10-09-2012, 01:10 AM #10
- 524 Posts
The thing that would annoy be about this would be that they may remove certain frequencies from the radios. Thus limiting the phone to less carriers, making it less economical to "unlock-and-go".
I like that I can take my 900 to pretty much any carrier. It makes it immensely useful and it will still remain so as my back up phone. If they stripped radio tech from a 910/922 to cater to one carrier I would be disappointed. Especially if they do so to the 920s.
- 10-09-2012, 01:19 AM #11
Microsoft's WP OS [in ROM]: is identical across all devices.
OEM's Firmware [in ROM]: OEM's very low level software (manage radios, battery power etc) and the OEM's drivers enabling WP to access the OEM's peripheral hardware (camera's, gyroscopes, etc)
All else is in flash storage, including the OEM's own apps.
Last edited by a5cent; 10-09-2012 at 01:35 AM.
- 10-09-2012, 01:25 AM #12
I'm not sure that I see the benefit of a bunch of minor variations of the same handset across carriers.
If it's the only way that Nokia can crack the US market, I guess that's okay. But it creates an exceptionally large number of confusing products with limited differentiation.
- 10-09-2012, 02:06 AM #14
Yes, the variations are deliberately minor. It's about making the devices as "unique" as possible, while ensuring actual/real technical differences are as good as non-existent. That minimizes the amount of effort Nokia's developers must later invest into supporting each SKU, as all devices will use similar if not identical firmware.
Apparently, "carrier exclusivity" is the price the underdog must pay, in exchange for advertising dollars and carrier sales staff pushing Nokia's devices.
Last edited by a5cent; 10-09-2012 at 02:14 AM.
- 10-09-2012, 04:29 AM #15
The variations increase production costs, and thus device costs. That's one reason why Samsung did away with the carrier variations when they launched the Galaxy S III. Note that prices on that handset are far lower for a full-priced purchase than the S II and S variants were when they launched. That's no coincidence.
- 10-09-2012, 05:58 AM #16
If you agree that Nokia must get carriers on board, then Nokia's approach is the best you can hope for. Yes, it reduces Nokia's ability to leverage economies of scale, but you could argue they haven't got much leverage in that area anyway. At least those variations won't be tying up an extra couple hundred people per device in their R&D and support departments, as many of those devices are, from a technical point of view, identical. That would have been much more expensive.
10-09-2012, 01:16 PM #18
- 136 Posts
I think it's smart and it satisfies all the carriers whilst giving everyone something different.
I don't really feel like the 920 and 820 are the 'main' phones anymore. I think the T-Mo phone is gorgeous, better looking than the 820, and it would not surprise me to see one or two more higher spec Nok phones in the next couple of weeks. I feel pretty strongly that Verizon will get another Higher-spec Nokia like a 910 or 922 or something.
-DocActual location: Inside the system itself.
Vaporwaremagpolydilithium- What Surface is actually made of.
10-09-2012, 01:26 PM #20
- 392 Posts
10-09-2012, 02:00 PM #21
- 49 Posts
This is the way that usually works in the mobile business, you need to get your products into shelves, and a lot of different kind of products. Thats why Samsungs Galaxy line is so popular and that is how Nokia dominated the whole industry for nearly 15 years.
This is an extremely good thing for Windows Phone in general. Nokia is doing what it does the best in the world and that is to flood the market with "different" products (actually, they are pretty much the same products just in different design but it is proven to work).
It is also good for the carriers because now they can market the products as "Exclusive" something desirable from just them and thats exactly what Nokia is aiming for.
- 10-09-2012, 11:45 PM #22
I did not state that AT&T agreed to pay Nokia money for exclusivity! Although that might also be happening indirectly (by AT&T shouldering a larger percentage of the subsidy), that isn't what the exclusivity deals are about. Note also, that exclusivity can be limited, so even if something like a 922 is coming to Verizon, the 920 still counts as an exclusive until Verizon has the 922 in retail.
So, again, the exclusivity deals are the only thing Nokia currently has to offer, which carriers can potentially profit from themselves. Only by giving carriers something to be interested in, will they agree to running advertising campaigns for the Lumia line. Possibly even more important, is that Nokia can expect carrier management to be much more deliberate in dictating sales policy to carrier sales staff. If AT&T advertises it, they can't well have sales staff actively discouraging customers from buying it. You may recall WP devices had a huge problem last year at carriers POS. That is what exclusivity is about.
My Lumia 800 also installs apps after a hard reset, but I've got protocols clearly showing those apps get downloaded from the marketplace during the initial setup process. That means those apps aren't in ROM!
Also note that after a hard reset, none of those carrier and OEM apps require updating from the marketplace (at least I have never witnessed such). I think that makes it quite obvious those apps aren't installing from ROM, as whatever apps were stored in ROM, would get outdated rather quickly.
Last edited by a5cent; 10-10-2012 at 04:28 AM. Reason: Last scentenc in response to TK-093