09-06-2014 02:27 PM
26 12
tools
  1. The Lard's Avatar
    As per the title.
    09-03-2014 04:35 PM
  2. hasasimo's Avatar
    If it sports a SD 400 I'll go with $299 (181.66)

    If it's a SD 800 my guess is $349 (151.28)

    Of course, the price difference isn't a simple currency conversion, so these are really only my guesses in U.S. dollars. It appears these devices tend to be a bit more expensive in the U.K. than in the U.S. initially.
    09-03-2014 04:51 PM
  3. The Lard's Avatar
    Of course, the price difference isn't a simple currency conversion, so these are really only my guesses in U.S. dollars. It appears these devices tend to be a bit more expensive in the U.K. than in the U.S. initially.
    This is basically exactly what I was going to say after I'd just read the first bit. Bound to be at least 200 here :-(
    09-03-2014 04:56 PM
  4. The Lard's Avatar
    Actually 250+ wouldn't surprise me.
    09-03-2014 04:57 PM
  5. nicfromwales's Avatar
    $299 will translate as 299, as bloody usual.
    09-03-2014 04:59 PM
  6. AlexanderPD's Avatar
    $299 will translate as 299, as bloody usual.
    you can come to italy, it will translate in €299! :P Just a little more cheap! :P
    09-03-2014 05:01 PM
  7. The Lard's Avatar
    How much was the 820 when it was first out, anyone remember?
    09-03-2014 05:02 PM
  8. AlexanderPD's Avatar
    How much was the 820 when it was first out, anyone remember?
    in italy it was about 500€, don't know about US or other countries
    09-04-2014 01:54 AM
  9. The Lard's Avatar
    330 Euros = ~260, + VAT = ~310.

    So I reckon you could maybe get an unwanted upgrade off eBay for about 200 after a couple of months when the dust has settled.
    09-04-2014 12:55 PM
  10. rafal soboczynski's Avatar
    I would say they will price it on par with galaxy s5 mini and HTC one mini 2
    09-04-2014 02:07 PM
  11. Keith Wallace's Avatar
    If it sports a SD 400 I'll go with $299 (181.66)

    If it's a SD 800 my guess is $349 (151.28)

    Of course, the price difference isn't a simple currency conversion, so these are really only my guesses in U.S. dollars. It appears these devices tend to be a bit more expensive in the U.K. than in the U.S. initially.
    I just wanted to point out the hilarity of this, just because they gave the thing s Snapdragon 400 and have its Euro price in-line with $433. That's bad.
    hasasimo likes this.
    09-04-2014 02:35 PM
  12. The Lard's Avatar
    True, the SoC is disappointing considering the price point. I do think though that the masses generally wouldn't even know the implications of it having a SD400 - they will however choose a device based on design, display size and quality and possibly resolution (and it is still HD after all). So the 830 might do OK after all - once the price drops a bit.

    In fact I think it's quite possible that in the mass market the choice of 10MP sensor could actually be more damaging than the choice of processor given some of the alternatives available for a similar price - I'm sure there are still a lot of people that subscribe to the megapixel myth (unfortunately) and consequently manufacturers will churn out devices with higher numbers to take advantage when as we all know there's no real world benefit (natutally I'm referring to devices with ~16MP sensors but standard smartphone optics as opposed to high-res Pureview tech that utilises pixel oversampling).
    09-04-2014 03:26 PM
  13. hasasimo's Avatar
    I just wanted to point out the hilarity of this, just because they gave the thing s Snapdragon 400 and have its Euro price in-line with $433. That's bad.
    Funny thing is I thought that, if anything, my estimate might be on the high end.
    09-04-2014 03:57 PM
  14. hasasimo's Avatar
    True, the SoC is disappointing considering the price point. I do think though that the masses generally wouldn't even know the implications of it having a SD400 - they will however choose a device based on design, display size and quality and possibly resolution (and it is still HD after all). So the 830 might do OK after all - once the price drops a bit.

    In fact I think it's quite possible that in the mass market the choice of 10MP sensor could actually be more damaging than the choice of processor given some of the alternatives available for a similar price - I'm sure there are still a lot of people that subscribe to the megapixel myth (unfortunately) and consequently manufacturers will churn out devices with higher numbers to take advantage when as we all know there's no real world benefit (natutally I'm referring to devices with ~16MP sensors but standard smartphone optics as opposed to high-res Pureview tech that utilises pixel oversampling).
    Yeah, after all the back and forth today I think I might still be on board, but now I face the unexpected challenge of getting a U.S. LTE-compatible variant.
    09-04-2014 03:58 PM
  15. Keith Wallace's Avatar
    True, the SoC is disappointing considering the price point. I do think though that the masses generally wouldn't even know the implications of it having a SD400 - they will however choose a device based on design, display size and quality and possibly resolution (and it is still HD after all). So the 830 might do OK after all - once the price drops a bit.

    In fact I think it's quite possible that in the mass market the choice of 10MP sensor could actually be more damaging than the choice of processor given some of the alternatives available for a similar price - I'm sure there are still a lot of people that subscribe to the megapixel myth (unfortunately) and consequently manufacturers will churn out devices with higher numbers to take advantage when as we all know there's no real world benefit (natutally I'm referring to devices with ~16MP sensors but standard smartphone optics as opposed to high-res Pureview tech that utilises pixel oversampling).
    In that case, you sell the user the 1020. The internal components will rival those of the 830, but you'll get the 41-MP sensor. In fact, I don't get why you'd go 830 over 1020, if you care about a camera.
    09-04-2014 05:01 PM
  16. The Lard's Avatar
    In that case, you sell the user the 1020. The internal components will rival those of the 830, but you'll get the 41-MP sensor. In fact, I don't get why you'd go 830 over 1020, if you care about a camera.
    Fair point. I get that no device can have everything as there always has to be a trade-off somewhere, be it thickness, power, battery life, whatever. Guess I was more just trying to illustrate that Joe Public will be looking more at the likes of megapixel count etc than they would at the SD400 vs 800 SoC - something most people know, understand and care little about.
    09-06-2014 04:04 AM
  17. AlexanderPD's Avatar
    coming back to topic:
    it should cost 330€ + taxes. How much are taxes? its not only VAT.

    Based on what happened when Lumia 720 was released, Nokia said it had to cost 250€ + taxes. Real price was 350€ (here, in italy).
    So taxes increased the final costs by 40%. If this is true with Lumia 830 too it final cost is 462€. So its likely to see it at 470€.

    I love this phone but i can't pay 470€ for a snapdragon 400 :( 400€ is my maximum price for this but i don't think we will ever get that price.

    I'm really considering a nexus 5 (s800, full hd, wireless charging and same dimension of lumia 830 but 20g lighter) at ~310€ and switch back to Lumia with 1030.

    uff not satisfing at all :(
    09-06-2014 08:49 AM
  18. worldspy99's Avatar
    Yeah, after all the back and forth today I think I might still be on board, but now I face the unexpected challenge of getting a U.S. LTE-compatible variant.
    I think we'll probably get a 830.3 variant of this phone in the USA at some point in time and will probably match the current price of the Lumia 1320 six months after launch.
    09-06-2014 09:10 AM
  19. 1101x10's Avatar
    With the current exchange rate EUR 330 into UKP + 20% VAT = 314
    09-06-2014 09:20 AM
  20. Keith Wallace's Avatar
    Fair point. I get that no device can have everything as there always has to be a trade-off somewhere, be it thickness, power, battery life, whatever. Guess I was more just trying to illustrate that Joe Public will be looking more at the likes of megapixel count etc than they would at the SD400 vs 800 SoC - something most people know, understand and care little about.
    I agree, a number the folks don't understand but can easily read is easier than trying to translate what the SoC difference means.

    However, I'll say that there wasn't much of a compromise with my 920 in 2012. The battery life wasn't perfect, but I started yesterday around 85% battery, left for the day (6:15 AM until about 3:30 PM), never turned anything off, and ended up home in the 50% range just fine (though usage wasn't heavy). My phone can last me probably 24-36 hours.

    That said, the battery life is the biggest downside on the 920 to me, and I don't mind it one bit. The thickness is a plus to me, as I have larger hands and like the feeling of durability. The SoC at the time was basically the best you could get. The wireless charging was a nice touch, and 32 GB of internal storage has served me well over these 22 months. The display is great, and I honestly don't see how another will improve on it (resolution/pixel density is beyond the eye's capability of perception, highest refresh rate in a smartphone, size is just fine). The camera is more than what I need, since I'm not big on the media capturing. It had the OS I wanted, and it's the OS I still want in the future. Oh, and the thing only cost $50 on-contract and came with the $50 wireless charger for free, making the price great.

    Point being, the 920 from 2012 had nothing about it that felt like a compromise to me. However, when I look at the 830 in 2014, I see compromises all over the place. The display isn't great for being an alleged flagship. The SoC is a step above low-end, but far from flagship-quality. The camera is good, but not at the level of a flagship device. The design looks nice, but the coloring doesn't (hate the aluminum). The wireless charging is nice, but in 2014, AT&T is stripping out Qi from devices it sells, so I lose that. It's an OK-ish mid-range phone, but it's price just below the high-end stuff, which is isn't even close to competing with.

    I feel that the 920 had everything I wanted and more in 2012. Its only lacking quality in 2014 is an old SoC, which isn't its fault. The 830 has something comparable inside, but it's 2 years later, so it is harder to defend these specs.
    09-06-2014 10:37 AM
  21. The Lard's Avatar
    Arguable though we should be talking about 830 vs 820 and 930 vs 920, not 9 vs 8. And the 820 did have significant compromises - screen resolution, camera, battery, design was a bit lame etc, and these are the areas they've improved on with the 830. You could even go as far as to say the 920 had compromises if you consider no SD card support, fixed battery, bulk/weight to be such - none of these things really bothered me but they did some people. Again, you can't have everything - there's always a trade off. Even the true 'flagship' 930 had to sacrifice Glance for the sake of a 1080p AMOLED screen. Not a choice I would have made if it was up to me. Ideally you'd just be able to mix and match your own features and have your own bespoke device made to spec. How cool would that be?!
    09-06-2014 11:44 AM
  22. HelloLudger's Avatar
    I'm sorry, but you are white washing the stupid decisions which lead to this phone.
    They say it's the affordable flagship, but right now it's not affordable nor a flagship.

    For 330+tax they could have easily added a Snapdragon 800. Just compare prices with other manufacturers and I don't even talk about Xiomi, etc.

    Or they could have made it really affordable. With a retail price of 249 they had every right to call it the affordable flagship, but not now.

    Btw, the Lumia 930 is 395+tax on Amazon.de.... Why should anyone care for the 830?
    09-06-2014 01:02 PM
  23. The Lard's Avatar
    Btw, the Lumia 930 is 395+tax on Amazon.de.... Why should anyone care for the 830?
    Ignore the 'affordable flagship' stuff, that's just marketing. It's not a flagship. The flagship is the flagship.

    I understand what you're saying about the price but you can't compare the announced launch price of a phone with another's current price on Amazon. The price is likely to drop lower than the RRP by some amount not too long after initial launch, particularly through large retailers like them.
    09-06-2014 01:16 PM
  24. HelloLudger's Avatar
    The RRP is of course higher than the street price. But it still have to make some sense. And this doesn't , it's an embarrassment for Microsoft and Nokia since they doesn't seem to have any understanding of the current smartphone market.

    I just read a blog of one of Germanys biggest online retailers.

    The RRP of the 830 is 399. Do you know what the RRP for the new Moto G is? 199.

    And they are basically the same phones. Sure Nokia's camera will be better, so will probably the build quality. But still, the 830 is a bad joke, an insult to any informed customer.
    09-06-2014 01:31 PM
  25. The Lard's Avatar
    09-06-2014 01:47 PM
26 12

Similar Threads

  1. Pushbullet for Windows Phone 8.1
    By sandeepsb in forum App Spotlight
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-24-2015, 04:12 PM
  2. Hi. Joining the 1520 family.
    By Nakazul in forum Nokia Lumia 1520
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 09-05-2014, 12:56 PM
  3. Lumia Smartwatch
    By iamakii in forum Upcoming & Rumored Phones
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-03-2014, 04:41 PM
  4. Nokia Lumia 620
    By jewels 1 in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-03-2014, 03:49 PM
  5. WhatsApp not working on Lumia 520
    By syedabdul22 in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-03-2014, 03:16 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD