The great hardware debate -- is better actually better?

[nyc_rock]

At what cost? I could spend $1000 on a phone and have a "future proof" phone as is technically feasible today. Would that be worth it? Absolutely not. I simply question whether even $300 is worth it. I suggest that it is not. If I can pay only $99 for a phone now and have it simply last and remain functional for two years, that's about all I can ask for. Phones are not really made to be 3-6 year devices, unlike most laptops and desktops.

So no, I have to completely disagree with you.

You cant disagree. It's not a debatable point. It is always better to have better hardware. Inspite of this, you may decide to go for something that is underspec'd but that is your decision. Influenced by a myriad of factors. $ obviously being one of them.

No, you dont have to spend $900. Any device without an Apple on it runs a max of 550 with no contract. $299 is the highest with a contract and most new phones will run you 199 with a contract.

 

[AndreaCristiano]

Yes, better is better. Especially when you consider how fast technology advances. It is always better to have a phone that is as "future proof" as possible. Always.

I dont understand this argument how future proof can a phone be? At the rate of tech 6 Months max, and most tech peeps 2 year plan or not upgrade before. The average Joe or Joesephine waits there two year and buys what suits them best.They dont care about the specs. So who do the specs really matter for? A slight few

 

[nyc_rock]

I dont understand this argument how future proof can a phone be? At the rate of tech 6 Months max, and most tech peeps 2 year plan or not upgrade before. The average Joe or Joesephine waits there two year and buys what suits them best.They dont care about the specs. So who do the specs really matter for? A slight few

A slight, educated few. And if you are on here, reading and posting about a phone then I'm betting you are one of them.

I will give you an example. Not applicable to the 900. If you had bought a WP a year ago, it would not have come with a FFC, right? Now you are a year into your contract and WP now has Skype and Tango. Guess what? You are stuck. Maybe you didnt care about the FFC a year ago. Maybe now you do. Would have been better to have it though, right?

 

[AndreaCristiano]

A slight, educated few. And if you are on here, reading and posting about a phone then I'm betting you are one of them.

I am one of them but I am not a spec whore by no means to me its about functionality and total experience. perfect example sold my SGS2 for my galaxy Nexus for ICS, people thought I was crazy, processor was less, camera was less, no sd slot, etc etc but because the ICS was optimized for the GNEX it was worth it. The user experience was much better.So to me the specs meant nothing. Specs are more or less a marketing tool to pistol whip the public into thinking their respective phone is better than the competition.

 

[nyc_rock]

I am one of them but I am not a spec whore by no means to me its about functionality and total experience. perfect example sold my SGS2 for my galaxy Nexus for ICS, people thought I was crazy, processor was less, camera was less, no sd slot, etc etc but because the ICS was optimized for the GNEX it was worth it. The user experience was much better.So to me the specs meant nothing. Specs are more or less a marketing tool to pistol whip the public into thinking their respective phone is better than the competition.

Spec wise you didnt exactly take step backward though, right? The Gnex has a better screen, faster processor and better camera module (though less MP). And the GS2 is a great device for defining future proof. Even today is one of the best Android devices on the market.

You know that WP is going to release Appolo sooner rather than later. You know its going to support high res screens, multicore processors and expandable memory. You know that developers will produce games specifically designed to utilize the two cores and the better resolution. So you know that the 900 may be holding you back from experiencing the best that WP has to offer within 6 months. Its fine if that doesnt matter to you, but the Nokia would not fit the definition of future proof. Im not saying its not a great phone or that you shouldnt buy it. Im also not saying that Nokia could have done much different. Im just saying its always better to have better hardware.

 

[sting7k]

I think iMore puts it best; "You don't bring specs to an experience fight."

I feel you on this as well. I don't know what it will take for people to understand that raw power is no longer as needed if you design the OS "better". IMO this is where iOS and I hear (and am hoping to experience) WP7 are way ahead of Android.

These days are so long; I keep watching my email inbox for notice that my Lumia 900 is on the way.

 

[AndreaCristiano]

Spec wise you didnt exactly take step backward though, right? The Gnex has a better screen, faster processor and better camera module (though less MP). And the GS2 is a great device for defining future proof. Even today is one of the best Android devices on the market.

You know that WP is going to release Appolo sooner rather than later. You know its going to support high res screens, multicore processors and expandable memory. You know that developers will produce games specifically designed to utilize the two cores and the better resolution. So you know that the 900 may be holding you back from experiencing the best that WP has to offer within 6 months. Its fine if that doesnt matter to you, but the Nokia would not fit the definition of future proof. Im not saying its not a great phone or that you shouldnt buy it. Im also not saying that Nokia could have done much different. Im just saying its always better to have better hardware.

you are also thinking android wise. Apollo is bringing that functionality but you need to think iOS wise almost all if not all of iOS5 works as far back as 3GS. This is how WP will work even if the better sreen res and hardware etc will be supported in WP8 it doesnt mean the phones will get left behind especially the top of the line models/ hero phones

 

[camaroguy]

I think you are missing the point WP does NOT support dual cores...you CANNOT futurproof in this way...Same thing with the screen its NOT supported, you CANNOT build a device with WP7 and a higher res screen and just "ignore" the resolution until Apollo hits.

Also, I have not seen any word from MS about Apollo's release dates yet. I have seen speculations all over the place.

Anyway, the point is, there really isn't "better hardware" that Nokia could have used to make this phone "Future Proof", aside from the camera. So in this debate...specs don't matter, the phone runs super well as is. My Verizon trophy runs super great on the latest WP OS. If the fact is that if you want super high specs just to "future proof" your phone, you really aren't MS/Nokia's market, and should stick with android and all that comes with that.

 

[trumpet116]

YES! Thank you! I went in AT&T today and the guy was like "...it's a pretty nice phone. i just wish it supported better specs." I played with his phone, it was smooth and fast.
I went over to the galaxy note (which i was really considering, too) and opened the app drawer, it froze, took a couple seconds, and then scrolled slower than my 2 year old Quantum.... I couldn't even believe user experience could be so awesome on a second gen snapdragon single core device with half a gig of RAM and so terrible with a third gen snapdragon dual core with a full GB of RAM. People need to look past specs. I bet you 90% of the people who reps talk into dual core phones have nooo idea what that even means. I really hope more reps (especially at places like best buy and radio shack) wake up and recommend the 900.

 

[nyc_rock]

I think you are missing the point WP does NOT support dual cores...you CANNOT futurproof in this way...Same thing with the screen its NOT supported, you CANNOT build a device with WP7 and a higher res screen and just "ignore" the resolution until Apollo hits.

Also, I have not seen any word from MS about Apollo's release dates yet. I have seen speculations all over the place.

Anyway, the point is, there really isn't "better hardware" that Nokia could have used to make this phone "Future Proof", aside from the camera. So in this debate...specs don't matter, the phone runs super well as is. My Verizon trophy runs super great on the latest WP OS. If the fact is that if you want super high specs just to "future proof" your phone, you really aren't MS/Nokia's market, and should stick with android and all that comes with that.

"Im not saying its not a great phone or that you shouldnt buy it. Im also not saying that Nokia could have done much different."

I wrote that last sentence for a reason. Although they should have given it 32GB of memory.

 

[nyc_rock]

you are also thinking android wise. Apollo is bringing that functionality but you need to think iOS wise almost all if not all of iOS5 works as far back as 3GS. This is how WP will work even if the better sreen res and hardware etc will be supported in WP8 it doesnt mean the phones will get left behind especially the top of the line models/ hero phones

There are plenty of games on IOS that do not run well on the Iphone 4 let alone the 3GS. Of course there will be backward compatability, but it wont run as well.

You guys are personalizing this too much. I was answering the generic question about is it better to have better hardware. The answer is still yes. It doesnt mean you wont love the 900.

 

[AndreaCristiano]

you know another reason I believe Nokia went this route because Nokia is european and to be honest most europeans dont have the latest cutting edge tech and dont spend there money like americans. They just get the best phone for their budget and keep it for a long time. Lets be honest the only reason this is LTE is because of AT&T

http://wmpoweruser.com/nokia-and-att-pushed-microsoft-to-bring-lte-to-windows-phone-early/

 

[thebizz]

Yes it's better to have better specs up until a point I would say I would take a single core snapdragon s2 over my dualcore exynos anyday as long as the software were optimized for it. When I had the HTC trophy it was a great phone just wasn't for me. I switched to the Motorola droid 3 because of specs and that was a mistake. The droid 3 was slower in daily operations than the trophy and just plain sucked the software wasn't optimized very well for the hardware. I run into this problem with my galaxys2 also what great specs it has but it still can't get rid of lag waiting etc and guess what it's running android 4.03 do I think about waiting until the end of this year and getting the first high res screen qualcom s4 running nokia device yes.. But will it change my experience with windows phone probably not its already snappy lag free and very minimalistic which I like.
Ps.. If this is hard to read sorry swiftkey x is really sucking right now making it almost impossible to type along with all my unrecognized touches makes me want to throw this phone in the nearest dumpster

 

[nyc_rock]

you know another reason I believe Nokia went this route because Nokia is european and to be honest most europeans dont have the latest cutting edge tech and dont spend there money like americans. They just get the best phone for their budget and keep it for a long time. Lets be honest the only reason this is LTE is because of AT&T

I just think Nokia got cought in a tough spot. The OS didnt allow for anything groundbreaking. If they had been able to release the 900 6 months ago, it would have been viewed differently.

 

[AndreaCristiano]

Yes it's better to have better specs up until a point I would say I would take a single core snapdragon s2 over my dualcore exynos anyday as long as the software were optimized for it. When I had the HTC trophy it was a great phone just wasn't for me. I switched to the Motorola droid 3 because of specs and that was a mistake. The droid 3 was slower in daily operations than the trophy and just plain sucked the software wasn't optimized very well for the hardware. I run into this problem with my galaxys2 also what great specs it has but it still can't get rid of lag waiting etc and guess what it's running android 4.03 do I think about waiting until the end of this year and getting the first high res screen qualcom s4 running nokia device yes.. But will it change my experience with windows phone probably not its already snappy lag free and very minimalistic which I like.
Ps.. If this is hard to read sorry swiftkey x is really sucking right now making it almost impossible to type along with all my unrecognized touches makes me want to throw this phone in the nearest dumpster

perfect summary

 

[apoc527]

Yes, better is better. Especially when you consider how fast technology advances. It is always better to have a phone that is as "future proof" as possible. Always.

You cant disagree. It's not a debatable point. It is always better to have better hardware. Inspite of this, you may decide to go for something that is underspec'd but that is your decision. Influenced by a myriad of factors. $ obviously being one of them.

No, you dont have to spend $900. Any device without an Apple on it runs a max of 550 with no contract. $299 is the highest with a contract and most new phones will run you 199 with a contract.

Only in a completely nonsensical vacuum is my statement "not a debatablepoint." There are always tradeoffs with any realistic scenario, and with technology in phones, cost is one of the most important. You also can't say something is "underspec'd" because that is a meaningless term. Underspec'd compared to what? If the device works smoothly and without lag, how is it, by any definition, underspec'd? If you want to argue that the Lumia 900 is underspec'd compared to an Android device, that argument would only be true if the Android phones offered significant performance bonuses over the Lumia that were actually perceivable by a user. I don't know if that's the case. In any case, when you start adding in cost, the question is whether the phone is underspec'd for its price compared to comparably priced phones. I submit that it is not, that it represents an amazing value for the average phone customer and that as more and more people make the switch to smartphones, this kind of price point is going to attract MANY TIMES more people than the incredibly overpriced and "overspec'd" Androids that sport quad-core processors and GBs of RAM.

 

[nyc_rock]

Only in a completely nonsensical vacuum is my statement "not a debatablepoint." There are always tradeoffs with any realistic scenario, and with technology in phones, cost is one of the most important. You also can't say something is "underspec'd" because that is a meaningless term. Underspec'd compared to what? If the device works smoothly and without lag, how is it, by any definition, underspec'd? If you want to argue that the Lumia 900 is underspec'd compared to an Android device, that argument would only be true if the Android phones offered significant performance bonuses over the Lumia that were actually perceivable by a user. I don't know if that's the case. In any case, when you start adding in cost, the question is whether the phone is underspec'd for its price compared to comparably priced phones. I submit that it is not, that it represents an amazing value for the average phone customer and that as more and more people make the switch to smartphones, this kind of price point is going to attract MANY TIMES more people than the incredibly overpriced and "overspec'd" Androids that sport quad-core processors and GBs of RAM.

" I submit that it is not, that it represents an amazing value for the average phone customer and that as more and more people make the switch to smartphones, this kind of price point is going to attract MANY TIMES more people than the incredibly overpriced and "overspec'd" Androids that sport quad-core processors and GBs of RAM."

ATT, Nokia and MS are all hoping you are right.

I think Nokia could have put in the best camera possible and gave it 32GB of memory, retailed it at $199 on a two year contract and done better overall. But who knows.

 

[AndreaCristiano]

I just think Nokia got cought in a tough spot. The OS didnt allow for anything groundbreaking. If they had been able to release the 900 6 months ago, it would have been viewed differently.

possible, but in the end all of us have 30 days those who feel underwhelmed can switch out those that are satisfied can hold onto the phone for a year

 

[nyc_rock]

possible, but in the end all of us have 30 days those who feel underwhelmed can switch out those that are satisfied can hold onto the phone for a year

Yes, the 30 day trial period. People stress out so much about buying a phone. If they dont like it, take it back!

 

[apoc527]

What I'd love to know is what the numbers look like for Samsung, HTC, and the other major Android OEMs. We all know the iPhone is a sales powerhouse, and I don't really expect WP7 to really take marketshare from Apple (and I'm not sure that is even the major strategic goal).

The reason I ask is precisely your opinion that Nokia could do better with a $199 phone with more memory and a better camera. Consider this: the population of this forum and basically all tech forums are probably the ONLY set of people routinely willing to shell out big bucks for technology. I view it as the same reason that computer manufacturers have taken such a hit--they are forced to rely on low margin products because only GAMERS actually spend money on expensive, higher-margin products. When's the last time a computer neophyte spent $2000 on todays' best gaming rig? How about never?

The same is going to happen with smartphones. HTC can produce a stunningly powerful device, but how many consumers are going to buy it? Is Samsung on top of the Android pile because of its $299 phones or its $50 phones? I'm sure there are answers to these questions out there, but I'm not sure where to find them. The answers, however, should give us a very good idea about how well the Lumia 900 should do.