Lumia 830 disapointment, and why it will fail

[chuck232]

Up-front caveat: I live in the United States, so there's a bit of price extrapolation, based on historical precedence. One cannot simply do the currency conversion from Euros to USD and call it a day.

You can compare the Lumia 735/830 to its competitors in a couple ways:

1. Against something like the Nexus 5, OnePlus, various Xolo, Micromax devices, where a company's goals are to be price leaders in primarily emerging markets or have marketing-led pricing schemes, these Nokia devices, which will be sold in 100+ countries, fall down on price-performance.
2. Assuming they come to North America (despite some comments here and there, I'm confident they'll show up in the US, as well), I estimate the 735 will appear for $199-249 (at the lower-end as a "pre-paid" phone or the higher end, as part of a loan-installment, a la Lumia 635 today), while the 830 will typically only appear as a loan-installment type device, around $349.
   
   a. In North America, the vast majority of cellphone customers walk into their local carrier store, check out the selection, and get pushed a suggestion by the CSP. Recently, carriers have begun to split out the cost of the phone payment/subsidy from the actual service portion of the contract. That means the transfer price of the device matters more than ever, and becomes visible to the customer (e.g. pay $10/month for 24 months for A phone versus $15/month for 24 months for B phone). In that environment, the 735 goes up against whatever you can get for $200-250 at your local carrier store. That's something like an HTC Desire 610 or a Samsung Galaxy Avant. Both are Snapdragon 400 devices, with LTE, 4.5-4.7" qHD displays. Both look and feel very much like budget phones. At an estimated $350 for the 830, you'll find the likes of a Samsung Galaxy S4 mini, LG G Vista, or Moto X between $300-400. Screen sizes start to vary, but resolution doesn't exceed 720p, SoCs are all still Snapdragon 400s, and each has 1 or 2 differentiators up their sleeves (Moto X - design, voice activation, G Vista - giant display, S4 mini - Samsung brand?)​
   b. Compared to open market phones, such as the Moto G LTE (or the upcoming new G), the Lumia 735 should be within $50 of the transfer price, and spec-for-spec, pretty similar. You probably get a marginally nicer design in the 735. Compared to a Moto X or Nexus 5, the 830 loses out on SoC performance and/or display resolution, but tries to counter with a better camera and possibly design, subjective, of course. I've owned both the Moto X and currently own a Nexus 5. If you asked me how I'd rank them, given what I know, it'd be Nexus 5 > 830 > Moto X. For the 830, it's definitely not a home run, but neither is it a complete blow-out, except perhaps for the spec-focused. ​

At the end of the day, folks appear to be holding a single product up against a bevy of alternatives, each which has made a different design compromise. The device should have similar specs to a Nexus 5 (which is a margin-subsidized device, for the Android program), with as wide availability as a flagship Samsung, but at a price point equivalent to any Xiaomi or Xolo device with a 720p display (targeted at a few regional emerging markets), while maintaining the same Lumia differentiators as a 1520 or 930 (like Glance or physical camera buttons or etc.).

If a device like that truly appeared on the market, it would simply mean that everyone else was incompetent or negligent in their business.

 

[MikeSo]

It doesn't matter what specs it has. It could be $200 and include diamond studs around the display. Here's why it will fail in the US at least:

BECAUSE IT WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE IN THE PLACES WHERE PEOPLE BUY THEIR PHONES.

I've said that a thousand times, I know. But it's bizarre to see people debate specs and price point for something that will NEVER even be seen by the vast majority of customers.

 

[chuck232]

Hey Mike, I posted this in another thread, but surfacing it here as well: Nokia Lumia 830 - Slim Stylish Smartphone with Windows - Nokia - USA

The Lumia 830 and 735 product pages are up on the Nokia US website, and availability notification sign-ups are also listed.

 

[MikeSo]

Hey Mike, I posted this in another thread, but surfacing it here as well: Nokia Lumia 830 - Slim Stylish Smartphone with Windows - Nokia - USA

The Lumia 830 and 735 product pages are up on the Nokia US website, and availability notification sign-ups are also listed.

When I see it at Best Buy, Costco, Wal-Mart, Target, mall carts and anything other than in the corner of a corporate carrier store, that's when I'll start worrying about the effects of specs and price on sales numbers. Until then, the biggest obstacle to sales is that people can't even see it in stores, let alone buy it.

 

[Keith Wallace]

I see that the Moto G is much cheaper, but except for the Snapdragon 400 and the 720p resolution, they are diffrent devices. The 830 features 16gb, microSD, LTE, better design/build quality, hardware navigation, camera key, wireless charging and a high end camera (while the Moto G cam is garbage). Maybe it's a little bit overprieced, time will tell, but it is no way on the same level as a Moto G.

The Moto G has an LTE model with microSD support (though only up to 32 GB, not 128). The design issue is completely preferential and not a talking point in phone quality. Granted, I agree that the 830 looks better than the Moto G, but I also feel that the 820 looks better than the 830 (I really hate the aluminum coloring). Hardware navigation is also nice, but not essential, and the camera stuff is the obvious advantage. However, my whole point here is that the 830 basically adds more storage and a better camera, yet its expected price is twice that of the Moto G.

The 820 released at $350 unlocked, I think, while the 920 was $450. At its time, the 820 was basically running the best stuff it could, while offering a lesser camera than the 920 and lacking wireless charging. Basically, it was on-par with the Galaxy S III, except with the display resolution. Fast forward to 2014, and the 830 is supposed to be the successor, it costs $50-100 more than the 820 did when it launched, and it doesn't stack up with the Galaxy S5, from an internals standpoint.

Basically, we're being told that the 830 is the successor to the 820, but it's not true. The 820 was a legitimate "affordable flagship," because it carried the high-end internals with a few small sacrifices. The 830 is an across-the-board compromise, from the display to the storage to the camera to the SoC. Microsoft has really just gotten totally out of whack with its naming scheme here. The 630 should never have existed, because what we have here is a 730 and an 830 that are almost the exact same phone, and they're even close to the 630. The 730 is a 630 with more RAM and a better FFC. The 830 is a 630 with double the RAM, a better rear camera, a shutter button, and wireless charging.

The 630 should never have happened, the 730 should be the 630, and the 830 should be the 730. That's where the performance of those devices really sits. The 830 name honestly does Nokia a disservice because the 820 was such a great device for what it was sold as, while the 830 moniker gives folks hope for the device, only to hear that it's a slightly-fancier 630.

 

[kingenu]

agree with the opening post, if this phone was ?200, it would sell so much! but at the current price i can easily add am extra ?50-70 and get a 1520 used in a mint conditon

 

[bilzkh]

Microsoft's trying to broaden the margins of the Lumia series and put its OEM partners on good footing. They clearly don't want you buying the Lumia 830 for its specs, but rather, for the experiences it offers in terms of PureView, Qi charging, SensorCore and the full WP package (i.e. 1GB RAM).

As for the price, it won't stick for that long. The Lumia 520 was set at something like $180 MSRP when it was revealed.

 

[TechFreak1]

I haven't read through all the posts, but some people are missing the point here Google is selling the Nexus devices for next to nothing in terms of specs so they can make money off your data. The company that makes the most out of Android handset sales is Microsoft via their licensing model.

Also to expect the 830 to bundle in a snap dragon 800 is just silly (bar the camera & screen) it wouldn't make sense for the 930 to exist otherwise.

I agree marketing this around $440 dollar is just.. incomprehensible and is not a "affordable flagship" for you guys in the US as it just shy of being half a grand. This would have sold in bucket loads two years at that price, now It would be worth around $300 dollars including tax for the US if your basing it on specs alone compared to the competition.

However on the flipside €330 is equivalent to ?260 which is still affordable, so if anything blame your currency rates not MS or Nokia (€330 = $427) :winktongue:.

So if MS put this out $300 dollars it would be worth ?183 and €230 respectively , where does that leave the 730 / 735?
Any lower and you may as well scrap the 5xx and 6xx, I must admit pricing the 830 @ ?183 & €230 MS would have made headlines everywhere and would have definitely lived up to the name bestowed upon it.

 

[chuck232]

It's a bit odd that the 820 is held in such high esteem now. Around the time of launch, it was panned (at least in its AT&T incarnation) as uninspiring, with a mediocre display, camera, and limited storage, for a price too close to the 920. The 820 was $399 off-contract (but not unlocked), compared to $449 for the 920. Meanwhile, the Galaxy S3 was $550-580 at various carriers.

I would be extraordinarily surprised if the 830 arrives in North America at anything above the 820 price point. One cannot simply convert Euros to USD and call it a day. Remember the 920/820 European launch pricing? It wasn't pretty (the 820 was 499 Euros).

For what should be in-line or even lower pricing than the 820 launch, you get:

• Marginally worse GPU, worse per-core/clock CPUs, similar multi-threaded performance
• Larger, higher resolution display
• Significantly improved camera/IQ
• A different, possibly more premium design
• Thinner and lighter
• Significantly larger battery
• LTE Cat4 vs. Cat3
• New features, such as SensorCore support

 

[kingenu]

I haven't read through all the posts, but some people are missing the point here Google is selling the Nexus devices for next to nothing in terms of specs so they can make money off your data. The company that makes the most out of Android handset sales is Microsoft via their licensing model.

Also to expect the 830 to bundle in a snap dragon 800 is just silly (bar the camera & screen) it wouldn't make sense for the 930 to exist otherwise.

I agree marketing this around $440 dollar is just.. incomprehensible and is not a "affordable flagship" for you guys in the US as it just shy of being half a grand. This would have sold in bucket loads two years at that price, now It would be worth around $300 dollars including tax for the US if your basing it on specs alone compared to the competition.

However on the flipside €330 is equivalent to ?260 which is still affordable, so if anything blame your currency rates not MS or Nokia (€330 = $427) :winktongue:.

So if MS put this out $300 dollars it would be worth ?183 and €230 respectively , where does that leave the 730 / 735?
Any lower and you may as well scrap the 5xx and 6xx, I must admit pricing the 830 @ ?183 & €230 MS would have made headlines everywhere and would have definitely lived up to the name bestowed upon it.

im tired of all this data talk, all company do it, i dont care i have nothing to hide. that is a crap excuse.

well at ?260 you could get this or get a 1520 for ?289 lol. that means there is a ?29 different in having a proper high end device and the lumia 830 which has no advantage on the 1520

 

[Marco Ciccone]

I think 830 is priced right, it will be in store promotions for xmas with lowered price... The real challenge is in the flagship territory now, because the Lumia 930 is great but at IFA Lenovo and other presented real beasts...

 

[opusthecat]

No, this is just a craptacular statement. I research this stuff quite a lot before I make a decision, and the day one reveal tells me that this phone blows...at best. A Nexus will run circles around it, from a performance standpoint. This honestly might not be a significant SoC improvement over the 820, despite the market lie of being a "flagship." You're getting a 2-year-old phone with a better camera and higher resolution, that's what it sounds like. The memory, CPU, and GPU don't compete with the alternatives in the market, and that's what will kill it.

I mean, I've often said that I'd sooner give up using a smartphone than go back to Android (and iOS, I'd give up a phone altogether before using). However, I'm sitting here wondering what going from a Lumia 920 to a Lumia 830 would even mean. We've seen nothing to suggest that the SoC is an improvement. I'm on AT&T, meaning that I wouldn't get wireless charging with the 830. The display resolution is worse. There's microSD support, but half the internal storage (and 32 GB in the 920 is fine for me, so I don't need the microSD slot). The camera's resolution isn't substantially better.

We're talking about a phone that would have looked great in 2012, but looks low-end in 2014. If this is anything more than free on-contract in the U.S., it's overpriced, seeing as the Icon has dropped to $100 on-contract already. Basically, this phone exists for people who don't want a 6" 1520, but are screwed by the lack of a 930 on AT&T/T-Mobile/Sprint in the U.S. It's a phone of last resort, and it's a damned shame.

What I don't get is the complete impatience of smartphone consumers like yourself. Yes Verizon has a lock on the 930 but my god man, you're acting like once a phone is exclusive it's permanently missing from every other carrier! I give it 2-3 months before it comes to ATT and then probably a new true flagship phone coming first quarter next year from MS/Nokia. No way they will leave flagship customers hanging forever. Chill out!

 

[Keith Wallace]

What I don't get is the complete impatience of smartphone consumers like yourself. Yes Verizon has a lock on the 930 but my god man, you're acting like once a phone is exclusive it's permanently missing from every other carrier! I give it 2-3 months before it comes to ATT and then probably a new true flagship phone coming first quarter next year from MS/Nokia. No way they will leave flagship customers hanging forever. Chill out!

How do you know my level of patience? Is waiting 2 years for a replacement-level phone to be released not enough? I mean, it's bad enough that they basically glossed over 2013 as a whole, releasing the 1520 and a bunch of low-end stuff. As for your absolute fallacy of an exclusivity statement, not much I can do about that. Your flat-out lie that claims I expect the exclusivity to be permanent is laughable. Since you wanted to try to make that ridiculous assumption, I'll point out how you're wrong on assuming my expectations and patience.

The Lumia 920 was released in November of 2012. The Lumia 928 was out on Verizon 6 months later, and the 925 followed a month later, meaning both the Verizon and T-Mobile iterations were announced shortly after the 6-month mark, and both devices were out within 8 months of the release of the 920.

The Lumia Icon was released in February of 2014. The international 930, rather than being announced with the U.S.-exclusive version (like had happened with the 920), was not announced until more than a month later, and it didn't hit shelves until 3.5 months later. Right there, we're already behind the 920's release cycle. Now, we're about 6.5 months into the life cycle of the Icon/930. If we were to expect anything close to what happened with the 920, then today would have been the perfect time to announce a 930 for the rest of the U.S. carriers (you know, except that part where it would make the 830 look like the mediocre phone it is). So, we're already beyond the point in time where the 920's exclusivity ended, and that's the problem. They had the perfect stage to announce a U.S. 930, and the timing matched what we had with the 920, yet nothing came. Like I said, it's been almost 2 years since the 920 was released, and nothing has been announced to replace it on AT&T, the leading WP7 and WP8 launch carrier.

So, your suggestion is 2-3 months until the 930 is widely available, meaning November/December. Honestly, that's too late. The Icon initially launched in February, so even if you wanted to back up to the March release schedule Samsung and HTC typically follow, you're talking about suckering your WP8 early adopters (the AT&T 920/820 crowd) into a 930 in November/December, only to then replace it 2-3 months later? Honestly, I'd be pretty annoyed if they locked me in for 2 years, then told me my phone was obsolete that quickly.

Finally, even if they DIDN'T have a Spring 2015 refresh, they'd be trying to lock people into late-2013 hardware a year after it launched, only to have the Android OEMs blow the specs away a few months later, and then you have more WP customers wondering why Microsoft is so unwilling to push any kind of technological boundaries on a platform needing a major selling point, and why they can't AT LEAST stuff on-par with the competition at a reasonable time.

The Icon and 1520 were honestly (mostly) great releases, because they came out before the Samsung and HTC Android flagships did, and carried comparable (if not superior) hardware. Nokia did a great job on that. Microsoft just went and undid all of that, it seems, by locking the majority of the U.S. out of a proper flagship device without announcement of change in the near-future. Now, the early adopters to Windows Phone 8 are going to be understandably jaded over some of this, and when their contracts are up in November/December, we could easily see nothing to replace a 920 on the AT&T shelves, while Android devices with 930-quality hardware will be plentiful.

 

[bilzkh]

If the Lumia 830 does make it to North America (with a carrier), it'll probably cost $300-350 off-contract. That said however, Paul Thurrott isn't sure about the Lumia 830 reaching the U.S, though Canada might have a shot.

 

[MikeSo]

If the Lumia 830 does make it to North America (with a carrier), it'll probably cost $300-350 off-contract. That said however, Paul Thurrott isn't sure about the Lumia 830 reaching the U.S, though Canada might have a shot.

I see the 735 as more likely to come here. T-Mobile or one of the smaller ones. The 830 seems like an odd fit for the US market.

 

[bilzkh]

I see the 735 as more likely to come here. T-Mobile or one of the smaller ones. The 830 seems like an odd fit for the US market.

It depends on the carrier. Some might consider the Lumia 830 to be an easy sell based on the fact that it does offer a few attractive features, e.g. its design, the colours, PureView optics, the Qi charging, etc.

 

[Etios]

I am not really that informed about processors and stuff. Reading the comments, although I wanted to upgrade to this phone from my 820,I don't know if I should wait a couple of months and get the Lumia 930. Is snapdragon 400 that bad? I mean, phones like the 630 can't play asphalt, gt racing, halo etc or is there any lag? I play maybe once in a week games on my cell so there wouldn't be a problem for me.But, will there be any lag or something else going wrong?
Sent from Lumia 820

Lumia 830 will not be a proper upgrade from SOC/hardware point of view, the GPU Adreno 305 in Lumia 830/Snapdragon 400 is weaker than 2+ year old Adreno 225 in Lumia 820/ Snapdragon S4 Plus. So, yeah, i will definitely not downgrade from 820 to 830 at the same price as the SOC performance should have doubled in 2 years time not regressed. All this could have been avoided by using Snapdragon 800 just like Lumia 820 shared Snapdragon S4 Plus with Lumai 920,925 etc

 

[Keith Wallace]

It depends on the carrier. Some might consider the Lumia 830 to be an easy sell based on the fact that it does offer a few attractive features, e.g. its design, the colours, PureView optics, the Qi charging, etc.

The problem with that mindset:

Verizon: The Icon wouldn't cost much more than the 830, yet it would be a major step forward in performance, making the 830 a lame duck of sorts.
AT&T: The wireless charging will get stripped out, and the device is going to have similar internals to the 1020, which boasts a better camera and should keep the Qi inside (I can't remember if AT&T took it out). What's more, the 830 doesn't offer much over 2012's 920 and 820, making the upgrade hard to defend.
T-Mobile: Similar to AT&T, but with the Qi intact. What's the meaningful benefit here over keeping a 925 or an 810? Well, I think they stopped offering firmware updates for the 810, and IDK if the 925 had the Qi, so there's some potential.
Sprint: They can't do jack to support Windows Phone, so there's no reason to have faith in them now.

 

[rhamblet]

The OP is suggesting the 830 will fail because of the lower end processor.

Don't know about you guys, but if I went out on to my local high street and asked a random selection of people if they knew what processor they had in their smartphone, I'm sure 90% wouldn't have a clue or even care...

A decent front facing camera however, is something the general public may have an interest in.

The phone will fail because of the marketing, not the CPU.

Like I said, its a nice phone, but it most certainly is NOT an a flagship, and it isn't even affordable!


As some people have pointed out, the people who write reviews, who hype the phones, make recommendations and, ultimately, sell the phones, do care about specs.

My mom cant tell an LG G3 apart from a LG Optimus G but the newspapers, and the salespeople all say the G3 is superior, and the only reason it is superior is because of the specs.

Don't underestimate specs, they may be just numbers but they truly are the most important factor.

 

[DalekSnare]

It does have the distinction of being the first sub-6" caveat-free upgrade from the 920. It's not missing anything, like the sharper RGB stripe display the 1020 lacked, or glance like the 930 lacked, or Qi like the 925 lacked, etc. It's not as fast as the new flagships, but it's not a downgrade in any respect like they are.