jlangner
New member
Per Dan, At&T exclusive, but even if in MS Store, would have to buy out right there then keep paying off at T-Mobile.
Should New Lumia Devices be sold at a loss ?
- Thread starter KarateDad
- Start date
HoosierDaddy
Well-known member
Nobody can blame a carrier or Microsoft for them not being able to have the phone they really want. What a sad state of affairs that so many people live hand to mouth and the only way they can have any phone is to stay on the hamster wheel of phone payments thru a carrier. Don't carry a phone you can't afford. You don't need another liability piled on your back. And if you can't afford a phone outright, what do you do when the tiniest of life's setbacks hit you? Don't keep overpaying for a phone by making payments to a carrier. Buy the best phone you can afford so you have an asset and not another liability. Then save the money you would have thrown away on carrier payments and save/invest it. And if you don't have the sense to do that, at least stop blaming the carrier or phone makers for your situation. [/rant]
Last edited:
To be honest the 640 is pretty fast...i can't justify spending so much money IF all I want is a LITTLE increase in speed a better camera...i can just go with a higher end Nokia released 2 years ago for 130 bucks....
Is anything known about the camera yet? There are a lot of really good cameras that came out in the past year.
sent via Nvidia Shield Tablet - Android Central Moderator.
sent via Nvidia Shield Tablet - Android Central Moderator.
920Walker
New member
Zeiss optics
Pure View
OIS
If former Nokia imaging personnel were involved in designing these new devices I'll safely assume these cameras will smoke the competition.
It will be very interesting to see how they price the Lumia 950s.
They can't really sell these for more than the Nexus phones. It's pretty much the same specs and not too many people want a Windows Phone.
We saw what happened with the Surface RT, which was priced like an iPad and with the Amazon Fire Phone, which was priced like an iPhone. Both were such big flips they ended up being a write off and sold in a flash sale.
On the other hand, they said the flagship phones will be for the WP fans, who might pay more. So if all they want to do with these devices is appease the fans, the pricing could be higher (and later on the models targeting business users, where they're looking for growth now, will be priced to sell)
That's why it's so interesting. The pricing will let us know where Microsoft wants to go with WP
They can't really sell these for more than the Nexus phones. It's pretty much the same specs and not too many people want a Windows Phone.
We saw what happened with the Surface RT, which was priced like an iPad and with the Amazon Fire Phone, which was priced like an iPhone. Both were such big flips they ended up being a write off and sold in a flash sale.
On the other hand, they said the flagship phones will be for the WP fans, who might pay more. So if all they want to do with these devices is appease the fans, the pricing could be higher (and later on the models targeting business users, where they're looking for growth now, will be priced to sell)
That's why it's so interesting. The pricing will let us know where Microsoft wants to go with WP
houkoholic
New member
Well the 950/XL has microSD and swappable batteries - supposedly "deal breaker" level features for many of the highly vocal geeks whom would complain loudly that the Nexus and most Android flagships don't have (just look at all the hate when Samsung removed these feature on the Galaxy flagships and how many geek swore that Samsung will not get their business). So it's not the "same spec" as a Nexus - it's actually better. The only inferior point of the 950s is that of the app ecosystem.
Not that I expect any of those people to put the money where their mouth is though, no matter the pricing, as Os choice for mobile is like a religion for these people, and no rational reason will convince them otherwise, which includes cheaper pricing. So no point in making it the same.
Not that I expect any of those people to put the money where their mouth is though, no matter the pricing, as Os choice for mobile is like a religion for these people, and no rational reason will convince them otherwise, which includes cheaper pricing. So no point in making it the same.
I truly believe the right thing to do is to price them slightly below the Nexus phones. True, the fans might pay more regardless, but it would be incredibly short-sighted of Microsoft to try to make a quick buck off of those who have supported them for years. I'd say the price should be about $350 for the 950 and $450 for the XL.
Microsoft has said that they're no longer trying to grow a standalone phone business, so at this point their premium phones exist solely to complete the Windows 10 "picture". The market for Windows Phone is already tiny, the market for *premium* Windows Phones is multiple times smaller than that. So the 950/950XL are not going to be money-makers in and of themselves, no matter what they cost.
I'd really like to see Microsoft essentially say, "Hey, thanks for sticking with us on our whole vision for the Windows 10. We're not going to gouge you on the prices because there's no reason to anyway."
John McIlhinney
Member
I guess the difference is that Blackberry didn't have a PC OS installed on over 100,000,000 computers the world over with the same core as their phone OS. From what I've read, Microsoft's hope is that devs will at first just port iOS and Android apps because why not if it takes almost no effort. With the availability of those apps, W10M becomes more attractive to users and market share goes up. With increased market share, W10M becomes more attractive to devs and they start creating apps specifically for W10 because then they can access Windows-specific features and differentiate themselves from those devs who haven't made full use of the system. That's the theory, at least.
zkyevolved
New member
I'm so excited for the event tomorrow! 
The prices that were leaked can't be right... I hope... nearly 1,000 USD for their base model? Hmmm... That's like Blackberry asking for 1,000 USD for their next Priv hahahaha. I'd laugh them right off the stage. It must be due to inflation or first day releases or something. But that price will never hold xD
The prices that were leaked can't be right... I hope... nearly 1,000 USD for their base model? Hmmm... That's like Blackberry asking for 1,000 USD for their next Priv hahahaha. I'd laugh them right off the stage. It must be due to inflation or first day releases or something. But that price will never hold xD
mariusmuntean
Banned
a5cent
New member
As long as MS prefers for WM to own a larger chunk of the smartphone market share than a smaller one, then they care. IMHO nobody is claiming otherwise. We agree that would be BS.
Not caring about market share is not the same as not chasing it however! There is a difference! You appear to gloss over that difference and view both as saying the same thing with different words. It's not. The wording is important, or it least it is if we want to understand what it is we're agreeing to disagree on. :wink:
Chasing market share would require:
- MS to aggressively compete on handset price (they won't)
- for MS to at least maintain their device R&D and manufacturing capacities (massively being scaled back)
- for MS to launch sizable WM marketing campaigns globally (you will see nothing of the sort)
- MS to put FAR more effort into providing WM with innovative, compelling, and most importantly, unique features, without which the masses have no reason to choose WM over competing offerings (by tying WM to iOS/Android MS has willingly sacrificed their ability to innovate in the app space, and we all know where MS stands when it comes to keeping at least some features or services exclusive to WM).
WM is no longer of major relevance in and as of itself. It isn't required to be a successful product in its own right. It needs only to serve its purpose as a component of MS' overarching UWP vision. As such, for as long as MS remains in the personal computing market, WM isn't going away, even if doesn't gain more market share.
Last edited:
houkoholic
New member
This is not a given actually. Chasing market share doesn't really mean you have to sell stuff much cheaper than your rivals. It's ONE way to do it, for sure, but not the ONLY way.
They cut manufacturing capacities but it means absolutely nothing in today's world of production outsourcing. Manufacturing capacity can be easily bought from people like Foxconn etc. Cutting manufacturing means you aren't keeping your own people and assets, and only THAT. A well managed outsourcing and supply chain strategy can completely cover this point (see Apple).
They still have internal R&D, they just got rid of the Nokia ones. Again, means nothing, some people may even think it is better because Microsoft's internal R&D gave us gems like the Surface Pro 3.
This we can agree on.
The innovation will come from a complete ecosystem - not just from W10M.
Ever since I've moved to W10 everywhere (my desktop, my Surface Pro 3, my 1520) I've experienced a much tighter integration between my devices that cannot be rivaled by Android/iOS (iOS CAN do it, but it means I have to switch to OSX - which I'm not going to). The only thing that's missing is Edge sync support which is coming. This is already a huge feature win over the competition to me. Is it for everyone? No. But for people who spend equal time on all screens (desktop AND tablet AND phone) instead of mainly one screen (desktop OR tablet OR phone), Windows offers the best experience and that is Microsoft's sales point. It won't appeal to everyone, but to say MS doesn't have anything to innovate in is nonsense.
Agreed. At those prices, or anything close to them, there is no chance that I will be upgrading. What is the best place to buy these new phones in New Zealand I wonder?
a5cent
New member
Nowhere did I say that aggressive pricing is the only means by which to gain market share. It stands to reason this would be part of any market share growth strategy however. Many here are expecting the L950/XL to be priced aggressively, precisely because they believe MS would be stupid not to chase market share in that way. When that doesn't happen, it should signify to those folks that MS does in fact not believe market share to be an important enough goal to follow by such means. It's just one of many indicators, and one we'll be able to verify soon. That's why I mentioned it.
Exactly. Whatever your preferred interpretation is, this does, at the very least, signify that MS is not willing to make the same sized investments into smartphone hardware innovations as Nokia previously has. Unless the folks in Redmond were just sitting around twiddling their thumbs, there is no way they will be able to pick up all the slack.
Integration and interoperability are rarely OS level features. They are typically application and service level features, all of which MS has made available to iOS and Android (IMHO rightly). There may be rare and subtle areas where WP/WM does things better, but it will be very difficult to use them in an effective sales pitch. Unless you can demonstrate a sales pitch that is easy to understand, highly desirable to many iOS and Android users, and easily marketable on television, I'm not buying the idea that the abstract notion of "a complete ecosystem" can play an important role in an effective market share growth strategy. Most of the innovation in the smartphone space stems from apps. That is precisely the space where Astoria and Islandwood will limit WM apps to doing no more than what is already possible on iOS and Android.
I'm not saying it's hopeless. W10M still has a chance at a comeback, theoretically even without MS' UWP vision taking off (we can never fully rule out Google imploding or whatever). But until MS' UWP vision takes off or something else changes, W10M will remain on the sidelines, in the sense that MS will not be pushing it directly into the market with any meaningful amount of corporate muscle. If you disagree with that, we'll also have to agree to disagree.
:wink:
Last edited:
Michael S8
New member
What Microsoft should possibly attempt to do is to sell at cost, or with extremely low profit, ALL its set of phones, from the high end ones to the cheapest ones and do that for say three years in a row and see what happens.
I believe the result will be that many will try them because the financial penalty of getting a phone that the person would not like would then be very minimal for these first three years when they are ALL sold at cost, or with extremely low profit.
The idea is to gain as much market share for Windows 10 mobile and its Windows smartphones as possible in the shortest possible period of time. Of course, it would be a strategic and long-term (just three years) decision.
That would be similar to the strategic and extremely smart decision (as well as indispensable for the apps for the Windows 10 mobile OS) that Microsoft took by giving for free the Windows 10 OS to most current users of Windows (Windows 7, Windows 8 users).
What Microsoft must do is to allow any Google Android and iPhone users to give it a try for the Windows 10 mobile OS and a Windows smartphone at the minimum financial penalty in case they would not like the Windows smartphones that they would choose to try for a while. That is the goal that Microsoft must make reality.
Having said that, Microsoft has a lot of work to do to put all the Windows 10 mobile phones in the hands of every single main US carrier first. It is by winning the American users first while keeping the users in Europe happy with new Windows smartphones that Microsoft will change the dynamics of the market and increase its market share.
After all, I believe that is what Google did and still does with its phones, they are sold probably at cost or very near to cost, as they are usually much cheaper than they should for their specifications and than they are for similar Android phones on the market.
I believe the result will be that many will try them because the financial penalty of getting a phone that the person would not like would then be very minimal for these first three years when they are ALL sold at cost, or with extremely low profit.
The idea is to gain as much market share for Windows 10 mobile and its Windows smartphones as possible in the shortest possible period of time. Of course, it would be a strategic and long-term (just three years) decision.
That would be similar to the strategic and extremely smart decision (as well as indispensable for the apps for the Windows 10 mobile OS) that Microsoft took by giving for free the Windows 10 OS to most current users of Windows (Windows 7, Windows 8 users).
What Microsoft must do is to allow any Google Android and iPhone users to give it a try for the Windows 10 mobile OS and a Windows smartphone at the minimum financial penalty in case they would not like the Windows smartphones that they would choose to try for a while. That is the goal that Microsoft must make reality.
Having said that, Microsoft has a lot of work to do to put all the Windows 10 mobile phones in the hands of every single main US carrier first. It is by winning the American users first while keeping the users in Europe happy with new Windows smartphones that Microsoft will change the dynamics of the market and increase its market share.
After all, I believe that is what Google did and still does with its phones, they are sold probably at cost or very near to cost, as they are usually much cheaper than they should for their specifications and than they are for similar Android phones on the market.
They might put a wireless chargeing in the pack too or a second cover or continuum doc - for boosting the sales and not makeing so obivous the underpriced launch products
It's unrealistic for people to say these phones should be under $500.
Spec wise, 950/950xl are on par with any flagships out there. Plus continuum, Windows Hello, SD card slot, exchangeable battery, dual SIM, and the expected superior camera they are truly strong competitors.
Strategy wise, MS won't want these two phones comparable with Nexus. Nexus has always been the representative of the best budget phone, while 950/950xl aim at premium business and WP fans markets. They will be charged similar to Galaxy S6 and iphone, but a little bit lower to compete.
My guess is $579 for 950, and $659 for 950xl.
Spec wise, 950/950xl are on par with any flagships out there. Plus continuum, Windows Hello, SD card slot, exchangeable battery, dual SIM, and the expected superior camera they are truly strong competitors.
Strategy wise, MS won't want these two phones comparable with Nexus. Nexus has always been the representative of the best budget phone, while 950/950xl aim at premium business and WP fans markets. They will be charged similar to Galaxy S6 and iphone, but a little bit lower to compete.
My guess is $579 for 950, and $659 for 950xl.
NOLATechy
New member
A couple of things you might want to consider.
1) Although subsidized phones are going away, payment plans are replacing them, so you can still get a decent phone (albeit iPhone, Android or Windows 10) at a cheap price and pay monthly payments added to your bill. I believe the Microsoft Store may be adding this option as well, since Apple is now doing it.
2) CONTINUUM - With Continuum, you get not just a phone, but a PC as well. You don't have to purchase a phone AND a laptop. With Lumia 950/950XL, your phone IS your laptop. Just plug it into the Continuum dock and you have a desktop PC with full monitor, keyboard and mouse support. This is something you will NOT see in either iPhone nor Android. This feature alone is worth charging the same price as iPhone or Android devices because you won't need the added expense of purchasing a PC. So, instead of lowering the price of the 950/950XL, I think MS should INCLUDE the Continuum dock with the purchase of the phone, thereby eliminating the need for any other purchases. But even if they don't, the Continuum dock will still cost a lot less than a new PC, so you still come out ahead.
1) Although subsidized phones are going away, payment plans are replacing them, so you can still get a decent phone (albeit iPhone, Android or Windows 10) at a cheap price and pay monthly payments added to your bill. I believe the Microsoft Store may be adding this option as well, since Apple is now doing it.
2) CONTINUUM - With Continuum, you get not just a phone, but a PC as well. You don't have to purchase a phone AND a laptop. With Lumia 950/950XL, your phone IS your laptop. Just plug it into the Continuum dock and you have a desktop PC with full monitor, keyboard and mouse support. This is something you will NOT see in either iPhone nor Android. This feature alone is worth charging the same price as iPhone or Android devices because you won't need the added expense of purchasing a PC. So, instead of lowering the price of the 950/950XL, I think MS should INCLUDE the Continuum dock with the purchase of the phone, thereby eliminating the need for any other purchases. But even if they don't, the Continuum dock will still cost a lot less than a new PC, so you still come out ahead.
Similar threads
Trending Posts
-
Microsoft Edge's latest update has an AI feature I bet you missed
- Started by Windows Central
- Replies: 0
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram