Notification lights will probably only be apparent in HTC devices so IMO reviewers should really get over it. Even with HTC notification lights, it's only for missed calls. Microsoft wants you to check the lock screen or start screen. It's kind of like a get with it or not type of thing. The other missing features disappointment is valid but as far as the specs not being "up to par", again, it's not needed for this platform. I really hate that Android has everyone on look out for beefed up specs and think they NEED it for a good performance
You misunderstood. Because of people using Android and needing the beefed up specs, everyone now feels that all platforms should follow suit when the other OS don't have that problem
Right. I totally agree. And I wasn't saying that the lack of a notification light was a huge deal - just commenting on what I would have liked to see included. To me, the biggest problems were the PenTile display and the lack of FFC. I have no issue with the processor speed or any of that. As you say, WP runs smooth as can be with that hardware. No need to beef it up and drain the battery.
IMO Nokia missed a huge opportunity to take the lead in WP hardware. By not including a FFC they have basically released a 1st generation device. They knew Microsoft purchased skype, they knew that there would be great OS integration with Video Chat. How could they possibly think it was a good move to get rid of the FFC? Especially when it already existed on the identical N9. They also blew a great opportunity for on board storage. Fine, you dont want to give expansion options, at least give bigger total memory capacity. 32 GB would have been a great option. When Nokia announced they were joining the WP game, I was excited. I thought they could easily occupy the top spot by offering class leading hardware and thier great design. Unfortunately, the Lumia is already behind the competition. A shame really.
I don't beleive it is behind the competition. To claim that Nokia has missed an opportunity, is to miss the point of what they've tried to do here...
Nokia made a decision to move to WP7, and with time against them, they had to act fast, so with the Lumia 800 they basically took an already shipping product (the N9) and adapted it for WP7.
Certain features didn't make the cut. No FFC? Well, there's no video calling yet, and if they'd implemented it by themselves they have had to spend more time creating some sort of Nokia version of video calling. Storage? Well, I can only speculate that they were trying to keep costs down.
If Nokia had started from scratch and brought a completely new design to market, with all the features you mentioned, then they wouldn't have been able to launch in /any/ market until (my guess) second quarter 2012.
This is just an opening gambit from Nokia, and is the best they could have done in the timescale. To declare it a fail is to miss the point - it's about getting the ball rolling with WP7 as early as possible - and that's a definate win.
We can expect more from Nokia in the future. They'll be releasing a whole range of different devices - including at the top end. I fully expect those devices to feature some of the hardware you've mentioned, and it won't be 'too late', because Nokia will have already done the groundwork with the Lumias.
I totally, and respectfully, disagree. Blackberry is case in point. They have rushed so many crappy products out the door (playbook, storm 1, storm 2, Torch) and they have taken hit after hit after hit. You only have one chance to make a first impression and Nokia should have delayed the release if timing was the issue. I would much prefer to wait a couple of months and have Nokia establish themselves as the premier WP OEM than to release a device that is missing key hardware. The lack of a video chat client is not stopping HTC and Samsung from adding FFC's. They know the support is coming and are making phones that, from at least on perspective, are future proof.