Lumia 930 is 6 months behind the times

hasasimo

New member
Apr 8, 2012
1,922
0
0
Visit site
I personally don't think that lighter is automatically better. While it might just be a placebo, weight in general almost always adds to a quality feel. I hate the way most Android flagships feel like. They are big but so light, they feel like toys. iPhone is a bit better in this regard as it's much smaller too so it feels a bit more proportionate. I wouldn't trade away a single gram from my 185g Lumia 920 :p

Could not agree with this more. I think marketing weight is more gimmicky than anything else. The difference, most times, is so ridiculously infinitesimal that bragging about one being lighter than the other is simply asinine. And like you said, there's an air of quality you often sacrifice the lighter you go.
 

Yazan Abdullah

New member
Nov 3, 2013
40
0
0
Visit site
As to the comments on weight, there is a taste element to this as some people love hefty phones. Personally I want a phone I could forget was in my pocket, and my 920 certainly never managed that, and many people took a similar view. The 930 is a huge improvement on the 920 and the weight might not actually be a problem (won't know until I try), my point was more that it would be nice to see *some* hardware improvement to show for a 6 month lag. As to the relationship between weight and build quality - the HTC One M7 was only 143 grams, and the M8 160 grams, and both of these have been lauded as amongst the highest build quality, so there's room for Nokia to bring the weight down and maintain a premium feel. There's nothing to be gained by having the heaviest flagship phone of the major market players.

agreed! nokia's engineers need to figure out a way to make thin and light phones. the 920 is def way too heavy. betcha the grand majority of 920 owners agree with u. nokia might b using design and bright colors to compensate for its inability to produce thin and light phones. hopefully nokia proves me wrong one day.
 

taymur

New member
Aug 22, 2012
1,321
0
0
Visit site
Nice discussion, although 930 owners wont be early adopters, early adopters where in the generating of the 800/ 900...... people getting the 930 are most probably 800/900 owners.
As a device, the hardware is just as what's in the market, Nokia sadly do not have the cash to buy the 1080/ 4.5" when they are selling like Hot Cakes in the markets, the need to wait a little bit for he prices to cool down, they need to cut the cost, in order to maximize the profit..... they are in big trouble you all know this.

I'm going to buy the phone soon as soon as it hits the Saudi market, ill keep my 920 by my side till then.

I also love the fact that Nokia didn't include a Wireless charger in the 1520, and made it available in the 930. Because this small situation is preventing me from getting a 1520, as I have already invested in a wireless charger, and aim not feeling like investing in a new wireless charger cover, I want that thing to be built in.. I don't know why :p
 

smoledman

Banned
Apr 17, 2012
1,303
0
0
Visit site
I'm honestly shocked that Microsoft didn't unveil a Surface Phone at BUILD with specs that surpass the iPhone 5S. That's what Windows Phone needs right NOW.
 

bilzkh

New member
Aug 10, 2011
704
0
0
Visit site
The SensorCore stuff sounds a little similar (at least in concept) to the M7 Motion Coprocessor on the iPhone 5S, and given what's already on the Lumia 930 (i.e. quad-core CPU, 1080p display, 2GB RAM, 20MP PureView camera *and* Qi wireless charging), I think that's a damn good set-up. In fact, the only thing somewhat bumming me out (besides not being announced for Canada) is the lack of another chip to handle Cortana, similar to the way Moto X manages Google Now and natural language processing.
 

PureView

New member
Jan 12, 2014
137
0
0
Visit site
I'm honestly shocked that Microsoft didn't unveil a Surface Phone at BUILD with specs that surpass the iPhone 5S. That's what Windows Phone needs right NOW.
The SoC on the iPhone 5S is technically superior to even the latest Snapdragon. Where would Microsoft come up with something superior to A7?
 

tipu2185

New member
Oct 30, 2012
127
0
0
Visit site
Someone please tell Microsoft for the tech giant that they are, there progress with OS within last three years is shameful. Even with windows 8.1 they are not on par with IOS and android. With 930 glance missing (seriously), only 32 Gb version. Moderate battery life (when 1520 can have awesome battery life, they could have done same with Lumia 930) when they should be looking at retaining their customers. And someone please tell why there cannot be a high end device with 4.3" to 4.5". Am I the only one who think 5" is too big. You want to go there introduce 16xx series
 

Live2Deliver

New member
Oct 30, 2013
233
0
0
Visit site
If anyone think WP is behind technology for you, too heavy or whatsoever, go buy another phone! No one is forcing you to buy WP or Nokia, there are choices for you out there.
 

Jan Tomsic

New member
May 8, 2013
383
0
0
Visit site
I'm honestly shocked that Microsoft didn't unveil a Surface Phone at BUILD with specs that surpass the iPhone 5S. That's what Windows Phone needs right NOW.

Nokia = microsoft => Lumia = surface phone. And quite frankly 'Surface Phone Windows Phone 8.1' sounds ridiculous.
About surpassing iPhones chip:
iPhone 5S: CPU: Dual-core 1.3 GHz Cyclone (ARM v8-based), GPU:powerVR G6430 (quad-core graphics) @ 450 MHz (115,2 GFLOPS)
Lumia 930: CPU: Quad-core 2.2 GHz Krait 400, GPU: Adreno 330 (also quad core) @ 450 MHz (115,2 GFLOPS)

iPhones A7 is arm v8 based while Snapdragon 800 is arm v7. A7 has more L1 cache, but seems to be lacking (info about) L0 cache. Graphics performance is exactly the same (unless 930 uses the 578MHz GPU, which has 148GLOPS, in this case it's better)
I don't think the chip itself is much better, it's the OS that's written and optimized specifically for the chip and WP is highly optimized for Snapdragons as well
Even previous chip (used in 92x, 1020) had higher clock speed than A7. Yes, I know A7 is 64bit, but besides being able to address more RAM, this doesn't add to performance too much.

I don't know what makes the 930 not surpass the iPhone 5S in your eyes. WP right now needs an update (which it got) and a fantastic flagship to go with it (930, ATIV SE, 1520, Icon) (which it has).
 

tipu2185

New member
Oct 30, 2012
127
0
0
Visit site
If anyone think WP is behind technology for you, too heavy or whatsoever, go buy another phone! No one is forcing you to buy WP or Nokia, there are choices for you out there.

Exactly the point dear that attitude that Microsoft also retains. I am tired of supporting Nokia. I will listen to your \ (Microsoft's) advice. When I will buy new phone. I will switch.
 

Keith Wallace

New member
Nov 8, 2012
3,179
0
0
Visit site
So the Lumia 930's been released, and lo and behold it's a tweaked Icon. The problem is that the Icon was released in February, and the 930 won't be released until June/July, 4-5 months later. The 20MP camera module is presumably about the same as the 1520, which launched in December 7 months previously. That's a long time in this business, and they should have at least found a way to make it thinner and lighter than the Icon (10-20 grams would make all the difference), given feature parity. As things stand it certainly won't give first adopters the sense they're getting cutting edge tech.

Don't get me wrong, it seems like a great phone, but come June/July I just can't see myself being super excited about it. This phone should have been launched with WP8.0 back in Dec/Jan/Feb, with an update coming Dec 2014. Instead I feel like Nokia's playing catch-up with its flagship once again.

When WP8 first launched, the devices on the high-end ran on the MSM8960, the SoC found in the Galaxy S III. The S III came out in May of 2012. The 810, 820, 822, 920, and 8X came out in November of 2012 (on AT&T). The 928 wasn't out until May 2013, a full year after the S III. The 925 then came out in June 2013. The 1020 finally launched in July 2013, 14 months after the S III, which had THE EXACT SAME SoC as the 820-1020.

The sky did not fall. My 920 is still running fine in 2014 with an SoC MORE than 6 months old when I got it (even though I mentioned at the time that MS needed to work on its release schedule to not be running 6-month-old hardware every time it launched a device). The most-important thing here is that the stuff in the S5 is essentially the same, just a little bit faster (higher clocks). Last time around, Nokia had NOTHING out on the S III's SoC until about 7 months later. This time, at least the Icon launched before the S5, and the 930 will only be a little slower. Oh, and the Lumia 1520 launched last November, and it's running the same SoC as the Icon and 930, but it beat the S5 to market by about 6 months.

Trust me, Nokia's doing MUCH better this time around.
 

freestaterocker

New member
Nov 19, 2011
1,675
0
0
Visit site
It's not thinner or lighter because they put Qi wireless charging back in. The Icon doesn't have this feature. Compare it to the phone it's actually made to replace: the Lumia 920. WP8.0->8.1; Screen 4.5" 768x1280->5" 1080p; SOC Snapdragon S4 1.5ghz dual core->Snapdragon 800 Quad core; Memory 1gb->2gb; Camera 8.7mp->20mp; Battery 2000mah->2430mah (maybe 2420, I can't specifically recall); Audio Recording Dual HAAC Stereo->Quad HAAC Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround Sound.

In almost every conceivable category on the spec sheet Nokia has made a more significant improvement over one iteration than Samsung has over TWO iterations of their much heralded Galaxy S series, or than Apple has made over the last FOUR iPhones! Not to Mention HTC from the One X to the One to the One M8. The list goes on...

Granted it's basically an international Icon with a slight redesign and the addition of built-in wireless charging, but only one carrier in one country got the Icon.

Don't get me wrong; I wish it had Micro SDXC. I'd like an even larger battery for increased peace of mind day-to-day. And yes, it would be nice if they'd managed to get the more energy-efficient Snapdragon 805 in there to help those 2400+ milliamp hours to stretch a little further. But when compared against the device it's actually replacing in the lineup, the Lumia 930 is a truly remarkable single-generation upgrade. It's entirely possible the Goldfinger or even the 1020 successor will be out by the time I'm ready for my next device. But otherwise, I'm looking squarely, and happily, at the 930.
 

buxz777

New member
Mar 5, 2013
399
0
0
Visit site
it isn't 6 months behind the times , the camera just got voted the best out bar the 1020 in a blind test on phone arena , the cpu is the best on the market at the minute , the screen one of the best , the mics are the best on the market , the build quality is great , the colours funky and fresh , its the device everyone on these forums was asking for a 5" top tier windows 8 device

the only thing it is missing is mhl connection and or a micro sd slot and maybe waterproofing ...... this would enable usb flash drives to help out the 32gb memory and also tv out via cables which can be very handy when travelling etc , waterproofing just gives you extra confidence in the phone to take pics in the wet etc and we all know how handy a micro sd slot can be

things like heartbeat monitor and finger print scanner are just gimmicks to me , fun , nice to have , but give me xenon flash like the 1020 or nokias oversampling and raw shooting capabilities any day of the week

the s5 hasn't been released yet and its better then that I think , the htc one m8 is a joke with its camera and one drop and its ruined aluminium design , so why is it so behind the times compared to other flagships

it isn't for me I want another camera flagship and ill stick to my 1020 64gb until then but this 5" 930 is a decent phone so why all the hate?
 

boovish

New member
Jul 27, 2012
300
0
0
Visit site
Yep, quad core cpu, 20MP reframing camera with DNG support, Dolby digital plus, 1080p screen are waaaaaay behind the times. Please state what functionality is missing because of these ancient specs that other "cutting edge" phones have.

Your missing the point! they want 4K screens, a 4.2GHz octo-core, Beats built in, 16GB of RAM and a gigapixel camera!
 

Jan Tomsic

New member
May 8, 2013
383
0
0
Visit site
Your missing the point! they want 4K screens, a 4.2GHz octo-core, Beats built in, 16GB of RAM and a gigapixel camera!

Beats is just an equalizer with bass amplified. But yes, I see your point.

I'd like to add my bit to the sd card: I don't need it, I'd much rather have 64 or more built-in storage. I've had a lot of problems with SD cards, they don't get recognized, they get lost and so on. I know it's a cheap add-on memory, but I'd rather have the speedy built in storage available. I don't understand how they're not putting in 64GB already, memory is super cheap, the iPhone is one of the only ones you can get with 64, but it costs extra 100$ which is not worth it. I want 64 or 128 GB for the same price as I'd pay for an SD card.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
322,906
Messages
2,242,872
Members
428,004
Latest member
hetb