Too many Lumia device models -- and the issue of it

[TheCudder]

I don't mean to rant, but as a 1020 user, I was bit let down to not see it on the initial W10 for phone support list. So my mini rant? Why does Microsoft have so many Lumia models? I don't quite understand it and the trouble they're experiencing supporting more devices right now is one of the reasons Microsoft needs to move away from having so many models & variants. It's bound to create fragmentation with OS versions.

It seems life would be way better for Windows Phone, Microsoft & users with 5 or 6 universal devices --- 530, 730, 930 & 1030 & 1530 series. Models such as the variants ending in 1, 5 or 8 need to go away, along with the 400, 600 series & 800 series. I meant is their really a need to have an entire new phone model only to remove the front facing camera, drop LTE or add a second SIM slot? There is just way too many models being released by a single manufacture. I really don't see the need for their current approach with mobile device models. If your feel their is a method to their madness, some one please feel free to explain it to me. I'm aware this is partly Nokia's doing, but Microsoft does not appear to be moving away from it.

I know the cause of carrier variants is that some carriers pay big bucks up front for exclusive rights --- understandable for Nokia with the position they were in, but I don't think a company of Microsoft's size should be easily persuaded by a large up front payment. They need to ditch that strategy, thus ditching awkward variant models ending in 1's 2's, 5's & 8's.

 

[taraque20]

I see where you're coming from.

 

[theefman]

Its just a preview, your rant is only just because you're impatient and cant wait till the preview is expanded to more models. As long as the final product is available for all phones you really have no reason to complain.

 

[TheCudder]

Its just a preview, your rant is only just because you're impatient and cant wait till the preview is expanded to more models. As long as the final product is available for all phones you really have no reason to complain.

Unfortunately I'm not your typical "ranter" on this forum. I've always felt this way about the Lumia brand even when it was under Nokia, but only due to the carrier variant issue. But this post is geared more towards the "bigger" picture and the future, as I've never really considered the work and effort that must be put into supporting various models until now --- with the release and chatter surrounding this preview. Fragmentation of the ecosystem is a big issue within the Android ecosystem and a big part of that is because there are so many OEM creating Android devices, whereas in Microsoft's situation they really have no reason to place themselves in such a situation being that they themselves are the primary creators of Windows Phone devices. This just isn't in reference to Windows 10 Preview, but also 8.1 & 8.1 Update. Creating device device lines could create a smoother & more focused processs, which as we can see with Denim, has not been the case. Having to create a supported update for so many models is bound to leave some models hanging out to dry over time.

 

[PepperdotNet]

100% agreed. If you do the math, you can completely understand the debacle of firmware release schedules which is a major cause of complaints around here.

The sheer number of different Lumia models is staggering. Throw in the number of carriers, plus country and regional variants, you end up with a ridiculously large number. Each of those has a different firmware and a different release schedule and different people responsible for making it so.

Take the Lumia 1020 for instance. Three different hardware models (RM-875, RM-876, RM-877). This is somewhat acceptable because there are different radio bands in use (better would have been a worldwide compatible radio but probably more expensive). But then, each carrier that sells that phone, has their own version of the firmware. Each place where they are sold unbranded, that's another firmware. Maybe the only difference between two neighboring regions is the default language but they have a separate firmware for each. Since the first question you get asked on booting up a new phone is what the default language should be, what's the point?

There should have been three, and no more, firmware variants for the Lumia 1020. One for RM-875, one for RM-876, and one for RM-877. Or better yet, one with conditional branching in it that determines which hardware it's running on. I understand sending it out to carriers for testing. Do that, get the results back, make whatever changes are necessary to accommodate whoever had problems, and then release it for all of them at one time. If you end up with a Verizon, dragging their feet for no good reason, well make sure when you agreed to provide the device to them, you specified a timetable they had for firmware testing.

When you look at Apple, which has the same one firmware per device model worldwide, you have to wonder what were the Nokia engineers thinking.

 

[Dk92]

I completely agree with you on this.

 

[HeyCori]

I don't mean to rant, but as a 1020 user, I was bit let down to not see it on the initial W10 for phone support list. So my mini rant? Why does Microsoft have so many Lumia models?

More accurately, why did Nokia have so many models? The 435 and 535 are the only Lumias Microsoft have made since buying Nokia. The multitude of other Lumias is all Nokia's fault.

 

[PepperdotNet]

More accurately, why did Nokia have so many models? The 435 and 535 are the only Lumias Microsoft have made since buying Nokia. The multitude of other Lumias is all Nokia's fault.

That is correct. Unfortunately it seems Microsoft is determined to follow Nokia's path. See here for just the tip of the iceberg. http://www.seidea.com/2015/01/26/so...-535-rm-1090-version-02055-00000-14511-2200x/ Each region, country, carrier, gets its own product code which means a different firmware with a different release schedule controlled by a different entity.

It would be nice if they learn the lesson, and make their new flagship model(s) one hardware, one firmware, available everywhere unlocked, but also available to carriers for their simlocked contracts.

 

[TheCudder]

More accurately, why did Nokia have so many models? The 435 and 535 are the only Lumias Microsoft have made since buying Nokia. The multitude of other Lumias is all Nokia's fault.

You are correct, and I mentioned just that towards end of the second paragraph in my OP :wink:

I'm aware this is partly Nokia's doing, but Microsoft does not appear to be moving away from it.

And I say the last part because they introduced the 435...a completely new series in an already crowded product family. If they release a Lumia 335 I may just lose it, LOL.

 

[aximtreo]

Jeez guys. This release is not even 8 hours old and we are complaining about how many models of phones we have, why not my model. Patience is utmost at this point. I'm as curious as any of you what the new version would be like. I just happen to have a 635 that I kept as a backup to my ICON. Now, if you want to give the new version a try, Amazon is selling brand new 635's for under $50 today. Now you can try the new version and not have to take a chance on bricking your daily driver. Have some common sense for a change and quit so much ********.

 

[Nicholas Lovan]

Patience is utmost at this point.

Well, I waited for Cyan on my 521. I may or may not have some patience. :3

 

[HeyCori]

You are correct, and I mentioned just that towards end of the second paragraph in my OP :wink:

Opps :grin:

 

[HeyCori]

That is correct. Unfortunately it seems Microsoft is determined to follow Nokia's path. See here for just the tip of the iceberg. Software Update for Microsoft Lumia 535 Dual SIM (RM-1090): Version 02055.00000.14511.2200x ? Seidea Each region, country, carrier, gets its own product code which means a different firmware with a different release schedule controlled by a different entity.

It would be nice if they learn the lesson, and make their new flagship model(s) one hardware, one firmware, available everywhere unlocked, but also available to carriers for their simlocked contracts.

But is that really uncommon? An old list but here's a list of firmwares for the Galaxy S3.

My Galaxy SIII How To: Samsung Galaxy S3 Firmware Update List - July 2012

I'd imagine most manufacturers do the same.

 

[TheCudder]

Jeez guys. This release is not even 8 hours old and we are complaining about how many models of phones we have, why not my model. Patience is utmost at this point. I'm as curious as any of you what the new version would be like. I just happen to have a 635 that I kept as a backup to my ICON. Now, if you want to give the new version a try, Amazon is selling brand new 635's for under $50 today. Now you can try the new version and not have to take a chance on bricking your daily driver. Have some common sense for a change and quit so much ********.

I take it you didn't read my entire post and follow up? This really isn't about "Oh, poor me --- why is my phone not supported now!?", the list of supported devices of the first preview just lead me to think more about their overall strategy & my previous issues with too many models and carrier variants. You can see the first part above in my first two posts.

The other down side to so many models & variants is the struggle to create any brand and/or model recognition. Sure, "Lumia" has a bit of a brand for itself --- usually it's bright colorful shells & PureView comes to mind! But as for models...I don't see how for example the 920, 925, 928 situation helped Nokia --- other than the **** load of upfront money from AT&T to get the 920 exclusively. If I see some one with a colorful 920 on AT&T and I excitedly head to get that phone from T-Mobile (6 months later at that) only to see a dull silver wireless-less charging 925, will I settle for this device? Probably not. Sure they're sister devices (as many other Lumia's are), but features & style vary. When some one goes to buy a Samsung Galaxy S5, they're not going to be presented a Galaxy S51 at T-Mobile, a Galaxy S58 at Verizon & a Galaxy S50 at AT&T...with different features.
.
I don't see any positive reason to create so many models. I'm at least hoping Microsoft Mobile moves away from making deals with AT&T & Verizon to allow 6-12 month exclusive deals. That does nothing to build your brand because only Windows Phone fan boys are jumping carriers for 3rd place (by far) mobile OS. Some one new to Windows Phone probably wouldn't be so willing to change carriers.

435, 520, 521, 530, 532, 535, 630, 635, 638, 730, 735, 830, 920, 925, 928, 930, 1020, 1320, 1520? It really isn't so bad ending in 0 or 5, but where do the 1's, 2's & 8's come in?

 

[jibgilmon]

At the core of this issue is the fact that Microsoft wants and NEEDS to get these devices into as many consumer pockets as possible (to spread the word, gain market share, and ultimately achieve more support from other developers). Since the platform does not currently seem "mature" or "trendy" enough (basically, since it doesn't get many apps when they're still in the "fad" stage) for many consumers (obviously this doesn't apply to the users of this forum; I've always been more than satisfied with WP and WM), Microsoft is FORCED (unless they never want to see significant PROFIT; opposed to revenue) to release phones that are inexpensive enough to catch someone's eye, and make them consider switching to a platform that is outside of their current ecosystem. What does this mean? This means they need to produce phones with minimal costs and minimal certification setbacks. Let's say they produce a phone that has every radio necessary to be used one ANY carrier in the United States. Before this phone can be released, it needs to acquire proper licensing for any proprietary spectrums/lines, approval from the FCC, as well as approval from each individual carrier that Microsoft wishes to sell the phone from. Not only does it cost more to add additional radios, but adding additional radios to a device increases the length of the certification process exponentially. If Microsoft makes a phone that only supports one carrier, they only have to deal with the FCC and one client. As a result, this single-carrier phone can be released to the public much more quickly, giving a quick turnaround for profits and getting more devices into the wild.

It is important to understand that Microsoft is not the only company that does this. Let's look at Samsung, for example. Sure, you can buy a Galaxy S5 from just about any carrier. But "Galaxy S5" is merely a product name; not a device number. If you go to GSMArena and check all of the Galaxy S5 pages, you'll see that there are SEVERAL models (this does not include the offshoot devices like the S5 Active; this is pure S5):

Samsung SM-G900F for Europe
Samsung SM-G900I for Asia
Samsung SM-G900K/G900L/G900S for Korea
Samsung SM-G900M for Vodafone
Samsung SM-G900A for AT&T
Samsung SM-G900T for T-Mobile
Samsung SM-G900W8 for Canada
Samsung SM-G900V - Verizon
Samsung SM-G900R4 - US Cellular
Samsung SM-G900P - Sprint
Samsung SM-G906S - Korea
Samsung SM-G901F - Europe
Samsung Galaxy S5 4G+ for Singapore
Samsung SM-G900H

That's 16 different revisions of the "same" phone. Unfortunately, given the current state of spectrum fragmentation and national certification, this is unavoidable. In my opinion, by making these revisions more noticeable to uninitiated consumers (via fragmentation in naming), Microsoft has prevented their customers from buying a phone that they will not be able to use.

With the recent bill mandating carriers to unlock your device at your will, it is very possible that we will start seeing more true flagships in the United States (on any platform, not just WP), supporting all spectrums in a single device.

 

[TheCudder]

Unfortunately, given the current state of spectrum fragmentation and national certification, this is unavoidable. In my opinion, by making these revisions more noticeable to uninitiated consumers (via fragmentation in naming), Microsoft has prevented their customers from buying a phone that they will not be able to use.

I'd say that's a reach, as we have certain models such as the 530, 532 & 535. These are all in the same product range, but have different bodies, memory, storage, resolution, pixel density, battery size and front facing cameras --- if it came down to radio frequencies, why are there so many different features and why are some of the "better" features on the phone with the fewer supported radio frequencies? Then of course you have other devices that simply share the same name & body but different ROMS --- ie. the 1020, RM-877, RM 875, RM-876.

I'm aware that the cellular spec's will be unique to the country or carrier and this is more on defending the brand building of Lumia and it's phones, than software support & firmware. I know every Samsung Galaxy S5 isn't identical in that respect, but at the end of the day, a Galaxy S5 is a Galaxy S5 to a consumer & your average joe. Design, size & feature wise they are identical. This is not always the case with Lumia devices, its carrier variants often lose or gain features and receive a unique design. Something I think can only hurt Lumia.

 

[jibgilmon]

I'd say that's a reach, as we have certain models such as the 530, 532 & 535. These are all in the same product range, but have different bodies, memory, storage, resolution, pixel density, battery size and front facing cameras
...
I know every Samsung Galaxy S5 isn't identical in that respect, but at the end of the day, a Galaxy S5 is a Galaxy S5 to a consumer & your average joe. Design, size & feature wise they are identical. This is not always the case with Lumia devices, its carrier variants often lose or gain features and receive a unique design. Something I think can only hurt Lumia.

FWIW, those phones have identical cores, and only vary in peripherals, but regardless you are absolutely correct and that's an excellent point. I think different price points is the reasoning for such variation in this case, and I think it's unfortunate that the naming structure doesn't help at all with device comparison. I don't mind having so many different titles, as I mentioned, but I think the real problem is that the naming structure doesn't correlate to tiers of specifications. Microsoft should consider ditching the Lumia naming, and starting fresh with a new numbering system. M(icrosoft), Generation, Relative numbering based on specs (1 for lowest spec device, 9 for highest spec device, within that generation), Screen size, Country number. For example: M1-950: (1) 1st generation of new phones from Microsoft, (9) highest spec'd range of devices to be released this generation, (5) ~5in screen, (0) US. M1-541: 1st generation, mid-range specs, ~4in screen, UK. Let's say, a year later, Microsoft releases a phone that has similar specs to the M1-541, but it has the newer revision of the cpu, a 5in screen, and destined for the US; this would be the M2-550. A year later, they release this device with the same dimensions and specs, but with the new version of WP out of the box, and the newer generation of the processor. This would be the M3-550.

Let's apply this to the Lumia 530, 532, and 535:

Lumia 530 (July 2014, 4in, 512mb) - M1-440
Lumia 532 (Jan 2015, 4in, 1gb) - M2-542
Lumia 535 (Nov 2014, 5in, 1gb) - M1-551

To summarize, I think the issue is not that there are so many different devices. Rather, that the numbers in the current name system don't mean anything.

Also, I'm at an [8] right now, so I'm sorry if this is confusing or contradictory or way off xD

 

[aximtreo]

I take it you didn't read my entire post and follow up? This really isn't about "Oh, poor me --- why is my phone not supported now!?", the list of supported devices of the first preview just lead me to think more about their overall strategy & my previous issues with too many models and carrier variants. You can see the first part above in my first two posts.

The other down side to so many models & variants is the struggle to create any brand and/or model recognition. Sure, "Lumia" has a bit of a brand for itself --- usually it's bright colorful shells & PureView comes to mind! But as for models...I don't see how for example the 920, 925, 928 situation helped Nokia --- other than the **** load of upfront money from AT&T to get the 920 exclusively. If I see some one with a colorful 920 on AT&T and I excitedly head to get that phone from T-Mobile (6 months later at that) only to see a dull silver wireless-less charging 925, will I settle for this device? Probably not. Sure they're sister devices (as many other Lumia's are), but features & style vary. When some one goes to buy a Samsung Galaxy S5, they're not going to be presented a Galaxy S51 at T-Mobile, a Galaxy S58 at Verizon & a Galaxy S50 at AT&T...with different features.
.
I don't see any positive reason to create so many models. I'm at least hoping Microsoft Mobile moves away from making deals with AT&T & Verizon to allow 6-12 month exclusive deals. That does nothing to build your brand because only Windows Phone fan boys are jumping carriers for 3rd place (by far) mobile OS. Some one new to Windows Phone probably wouldn't be so willing to change carriers.

435, 520, 521, 530, 532, 535, 630, 635, 638, 730, 735, 830, 920, 925, 928, 930, 1020, 1320, 1520? It really isn't so bad ending in 0 or 5, but where do the 1's, 2's & 8's come in?

Thanks for the reply. My posting was not specifically aimed at you but to point out that this site has become platform to vent against anything MS does.

With respect to your listing of models that did not received the update. It was specifically stated that this release was being limited to a few phones to see how the roll out was and to see what bugs popped up. I'm sure over the next few weeks more and more models will be addressed.

 

[DavidinCT]

You have a 1020 and your disappointed? I have a 929 (AKA-Verizon 930) a newer, higher end (accept camera), what is the current FLAGSHIP WP device and we don't have it available....

Crap, I didn't even have Cyan or Denim till yesterday...

 

[PepperdotNet]

I can't speak for the OP, though I think we're on the same page here. As for me, I understand why the high end models aren't supported yet and any disappointment about that really has nothing to do with the subject.

The fact that the phone I use (also a 1020) was not included simply served to illustrate a real problem with the Lumia line which is the sheer number of different devices there are. It truly is nowhere near as simple as for a PC where you can insert the install media and run setup, the same install media will work on any current PC you buy or build. Instead the phones are at the opposite extreme - each OS build is custom to a specific device. I submit that it should be an important Microsoft goal to reduce this needless complexity.