12 Hours with the Lumia 1020

[kevinn206]

Maybe if people **** on the Lumia 1020 enough, and Sony's Honami, even with it's 1/2.3" sensor, easily matches the pictures on auto mode, as well as whatever fancy stuff that will be released in the next couple of months by other phonemakers, Nokia might finally **** in their pants and restart from the 1080p quad-core prototype they most certainly had in the oven and finally bake it through for a late 2013 release. I mean, its not unprecedented.

When Samsung released their late response to the first iPad, it was a whopping 12mm thick. Then a month later Apple comes out with the iPad 2 that was 8.8mm and Samsung went OH ****. They had already released the 12mm one in several European markets. They quickly said they were going back to the drawing board and then a couple months later voila! The final design for the Tab 10.1, which was 8.6mm. Sucks to be the ones who bought the first 12mm Tabs, but when someone like Samsung can see how their product will turn into an utter failure, they will really go OH **** to shore up the flaws pronto and even switch to a whole new design. That tab ended up being one of the best reviewed and best sold Android tablets around for the time, so even when rushed, when they put their mind to it, magical things can happen.

Can Nokia remedy this mistake in a speedy manner? There needs to be way way way more criticism for them to notice. I think the poor sales are gonna smack them good, again. Who knows if they will listen. BTW sold out pre-orders really don't mean jack, nor has it been confirmed to actually be sold out other than simply unavailable. Most consumers can't judge whether the camera on the Lumia 1020 is good or bad. Definitely not by looking at the pictures on the dinky small smartphone screen. They look for size to equate to quality, and the biggest thing around is the Galaxy S4 Zoom. It actually looks like a camera too! Bigger cameras take better pictures, thats how most people understand cameras right? Regardless of specs, appearances matter far more. The Lumia 1020 looks like a 920, has the same dinky screen, same OS, same speed and response, and if you just look at it from the front you wouldn't be able to tell it had a large camera hump. It would just look like a price typo of $299 next to a bunch of similar looking Lumia 920s at $99. The phone names are always in really small font compared to the price. The people who do pay attention to specs won't be thrilled to see the same dual-core 720p stuff of yesteryear.

Bad Nokia. Bad! Give me my 5" 1080p snapdragon 800 now!

How can Nokia give you that spec NOW when WP8 doesn't support it? How do you suppose them advertise? Oh yeah, we are selling a 1080p phone with quad-core, but you have to wait until at least November 2013 for that to work. Oops sorry!

 

[smoledman]

Isn't it the case that the 1020 is still taking grainy photos?

 

[maverick786us]

My personal take is that we'll see two things in October:

(1) A GDR3-based quad-core 1080p version of the Lumia 1020 for Verizon.

(2) A $100 price drop on AT&T's Lumia 1020, bringing the phone to price parity with the iPhone 5S and the GS4.

Depending upon how successful the 1020 is on AT&T, we might also see a T-Mo variant as well but w/o the GDR3 specs.

I wish that would happen. But that will cannabalize the sales of 1020.

 

[bygbyron3]

Depending upon how successful the 1020 is on AT&T, we might also see a T-Mo variant as well but w/o the GDR3 specs.

An AT&T rep told me that the 1020 is only a four month exclusive. I can't confirm though.

 

[N_LaRUE]

Either way, Nokia's naming sucks. The people deciding on model names should be fired. It lacks coherency or any real meaning. The Lumia 510, 610 and 710 are based on WP7 hardware, but the 810 is WP8 hardware. 1020 sounds like it should be a next generation device, but the internals are no different from the 920. The 720 sounds like a higher-end device than the 620, but the internals are almost identical and only the later ships with a world wide license for HERE Drive. If they built a 930 using the GDR3 chassis spec (as we both suspect they will), it would be more powerful than the 1020, but that won't be reflected by the model number.

Nokia's naming scheme, which is just arbitrary enough to be useless, is responsible for thousands of posts along the lines of : "this is not a worthy upgrade to the Lumia 920". Even on this forum, where the most informed WP users hang out, such threads were not uncommon. It was so bad that Nokia had to come out with an official response explaining that the 925 is simply a "new expression" of the 920, which would have been completely unnecessary if handled more intelligently:

[TABLE="width: 1000, align: left"]
[TR]
[TD]Instead of
[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Lumia 925
[/TD]
[TD]Lumia 920S
[/TD]
[TD]making it instantly clear that this isn't an upgrade, but a variant of the 920 (S=svelt)
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Lumia1020
[/TD]
[TD]Lumia 920 PureView
[/TD]
[TD]or any other suffix emphasizing the camera, but ultimately a variant of the 920
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Lumia 928
[/TD]
[TD]Lumia 920V
[/TD]
[TD]V for Verizon, also a variant
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Lumia 521
[/TD]
[TD]Lumia 520T
[/TD]
[TD]T for T-Mobile, also a variant
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]











IMHO that is still far from adequate, but it's a start.

I am in complete agreement with you. I personally think all these variants that have come out do nothing to help the ecosystem at all. I'm not sure how much influence the carriers had on the model numbers or if they would have been happy with a system similar to what you put forward but it would have cleared any confusion and made more marketing sense overall. You would know that your model is still a 920, 820, 720, 620 and 520. You could advertise the models better making them more generic and keep costs down and confusion to a minimum.

I personally wouldn't be surprised if something came out around September. Reason being is that the 1020, for all the fanfare is a niche product. Yes the camera is nice and all but it's not for everyone. I'm quite happy with my 920 camera so I don't see the need for something of this level. I see no reason to upgrade at this stage.

 

[a5cent]

I personally think all these variants that have come out do nothing to help the ecosystem at all. I'm not sure how much influence the carriers had on the model numbers or if they would have been happy with a system similar to what you put forward...

The 925 was a necessary redesign of the 920, focused on solving the 920's thickness and weight issues. I think it makes sense as a variation of the 920 in the Lumia lineup.

For all other variations I suspect you are right. Although it is hard to say how Nokia would be doing in the U.S.A. without their exclusivity agreements (the source of these variations), but based on what I read here, it doesn't sound like Nokia is getting anything worthwhile out of it. I also don't know how much marketing the carriers do on Nokia's behalf in return, which nobody seems to have numbers on.

 

[N_LaRUE]

The 925 was a necessary redesign of the 920, focused on solving the 920's thickness and weight issues. I think it makes sense as a variation of the 920 in the Lumia lineup.

For all other variations I suspect you are right. Although it is hard to say how Nokia would be doing in the U.S.A. without their exclusivity agreements (the source of these variations), but based on what I read here, it doesn't sound like Nokia is getting anything worthwhile out of it. I also don't know how much marketing the carriers do on Nokia's behalf in return, which nobody seems to have numbers on.

I can agree with the 925 statement. It is different, being honest though I hate the charging case, it's a tad ugly, other than that nice phone.

Here in the UK I've found the marketing side of carriers lack luster, even in the stores. Nokia has been promoting several TV series and the occasional WP ad pops up but not much else.

I understand that Nokia is the underdog in all this so they have to bend and twist to the carriers but it just seems to me that when you flood the market with various phones all with similar numbers you end up confusing people. It also makes little marketing sense for Nokia, the carrier is the winner here who can 'tout' having a 'special' phone.

I have no idea what the US marketing is like personally. I've heard from this forum that it's better than the UK. There's commercials on all the time.

Would be interesting to know what the numbers are like.

 

[texantony]

Either way, Nokia's naming sucks. The people deciding on model names should be fired. It lacks coherency or any real meaning. The Lumia 510, 610 and 710 are based on WP7 hardware, but the 810 is WP8 hardware. 1020 sounds like it should be a next generation device, but the internals are no different from the 920. The 720 sounds like a higher-end device than the 620, but the internals are almost identical and only the later ships with a world wide license for HERE Drive. If they built a 930 using the GDR3 chassis spec (as we both suspect they will), it would be more powerful than the 1020, but that won't be reflected by the model number.

Nokia's naming scheme, which is just arbitrary enough to be useless, is responsible for thousands of posts along the lines of : "this is not a worthy upgrade to the Lumia 920". Even on this forum, where the most informed WP users hang out, such threads were not uncommon. It was so bad that Nokia had to come out with an official response explaining that the 925 is simply a "new expression" of the 920, which would have been completely unnecessary if handled more intelligently:

[TABLE="width: 1000, align: left"]
[TR]
[TD]Instead of
[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Lumia 925
[/TD]
[TD]Lumia 920S
[/TD]
[TD]making it instantly clear that this isn't an upgrade, but a variant of the 920 (S=svelt)
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Lumia1020
[/TD]
[TD]Lumia 920 PureView
[/TD]
[TD]or any other suffix emphasizing the camera, but ultimately a variant of the 920
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Lumia 928
[/TD]
[TD]Lumia 920V
[/TD]
[TD]V for Verizon, also a variant
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Lumia 521
[/TD]
[TD]Lumia 520T
[/TD]
[TD]T for T-Mobile, also a variant
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]











IMHO that is still far from adequate, but it's a start.

I've always said Nokia should of gone with the PureView name. The name alone tells the story and it sounds good, especially if you want to increase US sales. Why? Because we live in a country that's about brand names or status symbols. That's why many buy things with logos, pay more, even if a similar item is available for half the price. Same thing applies to phones or electronics. In my opinion, the PureView name falls in that category. Sounds good and right off the bat people know you are talking about the phone with the sweet camera Oh well, I guess somewhere in Nokia there is someone getting paid a bunch of money for their marketing and know better

 

[a5cent]

It also makes little marketing sense for Nokia, the carrier is the winner here who can 'tout' having a 'special' phone.

I almost forgot: Exclusivity does offer Nokia one important advantage: price!

Nokia have consistently been able to get carriers to the pay a larger subsidy for exclusive devices. Nokia always passed those savings on to consumers, resulting in a $50 cheaper device (on average).

That sounds great to me, but based on the consistently low sales in the U.S. I'm starting to wonder if that makes much of a difference.

Just wanted to through that in, as it is an important part of the exclusivity strategy.

 

[heelo]

I almost forgot: Exclusivity does offer Nokia one important advantage: price!

Nokia have consistently been able to get carriers to the pay a larger subsidy for exclusive devices. Nokia always passed those savings on to consumers, resulting in a $50 cheaper device (on average).

This is true, and the fact that the Lumia 1020 is priced at $299 leads me to believe that AT&T has reduced the size of its subsidy and, as a result, is receiving a reduced window of exclusivity.

 

[decimus plancus]

I like your first two options... but drop the last two. I hate the carrier specific variants. Wish Nokia and MS just sent out a single per model OS distribution. This whole customized for a carrier model is a maintenance fiasco.

 

[a5cent]

This is true, and the fact that the Lumia 1020 is priced at $299 leads me to believe that AT&T has reduced the size of its subsidy and, as a result, is receiving a reduced window of exclusivity.

Yes, I have suspected the exact same thing.

 

[a5cent]

I like your first two options... but drop the last two. I hate the carrier specific variants. Wish Nokia and MS just sent out a single per model OS distribution. This whole customized for a carrier model is a maintenance fiasco.

I just considered all the models that exist and suggested what I think are at least somewhat more useful and less confusing names. Whether carrier specific variants make sense or not is a different topic.