Ruined
New member
Its possible I don't see why they are dragging their feet with this one, unless May 2 is the first day outside of the AT&T exclusivity contract and the phone cannot even be officially announced before that date nevermind sold.
Is Verizon always going to lag behind when it comes to the release of Nokia phones? I mean I know it's been a trend of AT&T always getting the phones first, but with Verizon exceeding expectations on the 822 as mentioned by Abe, one would hope that they'd give one of these Nokia flagships a chance... at this point the damage has indeed been done; it's too close to the GS4 hype, a phone which I am considering as I don't want Nokia's old specs, so that's why I'm hoping Verizon will take a chance on another Nokia flagship to make up for this failure.
Its possible I don't see why they are dragging their feet with this one, unless May 2 is the first day outside of the AT&T exclusivity contract and the phone cannot even be officially announced before that date nevermind sold.
Is Verizon always going to lag behind when it comes to the release of Nokia phones? I mean I know it's been a trend of AT&T always getting the phones first, but with Verizon exceeding expectations on the 822 as mentioned by Abe, one would hope that they'd give one of these Nokia flagships a chance... at this point the damage has indeed been done; it's too close to the GS4 hype, a phone which I am considering as I don't want Nokia's old specs, so that's why I'm hoping Verizon will take a chance on another Nokia flagship to make up for this failure.
I guess that is the next rumor we can hang on for a annoucement, unless VZW says something, I guess next week would make the most sence here....
Another week... Nothing from @VZWsupport been pestering them and they wont give up ANYTHING
Yea, I can be a PIA when I want something
There was a lot of rumors with the 928, including a new CPU and a lot of other features. Maybe it's a totaly new from what we know ? We dont know anything besides what the screen looks like and a some images of the shell that could be different from the final version ANYTHING ELSE is complete rumor as nothing is official.
The more we think we know about this phone, it could be the less we know.... If it's just a 920 in a different shell, I will be very disapointed after this hype about it...
With VZW I always start out disappointed :winktongue:One thing Abe was clear about is that the 928 is a Verizon version of the 920 (with a xenon flash) so prepared to be disappointed.
It pretty much has to have old specs until Microsoft opens up the chassis specs, right? So it's not really Verizon or Nokia doing the dragging as far as specs go. I could give a crap less about specs in all honesty. My 8X runs amazingly smooth; better than the Droid DNA that has literally double the processing power and double the RAM. I know most of you *think* that "specs are important because customers like high numbers," but that's not the case. Majority of customers walk into a VZW store and want a phone that's "good," has a "good camera," and "won't be outdated in two months."
This is a good point about MS but it also points out exactly why the 928 will most likely be a huge failure for Verizon. If it is released on May 2nd or 9th, and, as is speculated, Nokia announces the EOS with a 41 MP camera on May 14th followed by an announcement that it will be an ATT exclusive device in the US, then the 928 will "be outdated in 2 months". What reason would I have to stay with Verizon? It has been written in the forums elsewhere that Verizon really wants WP to succeed because the phones are much less costly for them compared to Androids and iPhones, but they don't act like a company that wants WP to succeed. Releasing a warmed-over version of last year's phone instead a flagship phone with Nokia's newest technology (despite the restrictions with MS specs) only proves this.
The reason (for me anyway) to stay with Verizon is the quality of the network. Clearly T-Mobile and Sprint are cheaper but overall the network quality and coverage isn't a good as Verizon. AT&T has a much better phone selection but their network quality isn't quite there, although it seems to be getting closer with all the LTE markets they are adding. The question is are you willing to sign a two year contract with one of these other carriers and risk going through the hassle of poor network quality.
So it's a question of putting up with a non-optimal phone and a good network (Verizon) or a not as good network with cutting edge phones (ATT). Why can't we have it all ...
the network claims are just brand loyal crap. I don't have any "network" problems with AT&T here in Los Angeles. Customer service, especially their horrific online forums? Yes, but the network is just fine.
It shocks me how cultishly loyal people can be to a signal pusher. They all suck at pretty much the same level.
No, they're not. It all depends on location. I get 4 bars of LTE on Verizon at home, and when someone was at my house with an ATT phone, they couldn't make a call. My step-daughter's phone on Sprint drops calls at the house. One place I used to work, I put a Verizon repeater on the roof because NONE of the carriers had a signal (terrain blocking the signal at our plant). I put up an ATT repeater as well, but it took LOTS of time and effort for the guys from the communications company who installed it to get it right, because ATT was so resistant to allowing them to have the data they needed to tune the thing.
There are places where ATT is better, places where Verizon is better, and places where there is no notable difference. But overall, Verizon's network is better. Don't be a judge just based on where you happen to live.
the network claims are just brand loyal crap. I don't have any "network" problems with AT&T here in Los Angeles. Customer service, especially their horrific online forums? Yes, but the network is just fine.
It shocks me how cultishly loyal people can be to a signal pusher. They all suck at pretty much the same level.