The Lumia 650 specs released by Microsoft

[Keith Wallace]

You still didnt prove that the 640 is better.Design is a preference, you not preferring the metal band doesn't mean its inferior. Generally lighter sets with low density (weight/volume) are more durable...case in point 1520 vs 640 XL, drop both, only one survives, 640 XL.

I never said I was going to. I said that the 640 might be better, and that the 650 doesn't do enough to justify the price tag. If your comeback is half-baked spec breakdowns that claim that because you think the 650 is pretty and maybe a LITTLE bit faster, then I've got no interest in wasting my time with someone uninterested in a legitimately intelligent discussion.

The 650 is a year newer, yet you can't definitively claim it as superior, and you ESPECIALLY can't do it when price is a factor. It had a year to progress, and it looks like it stood still. It didn't get cheaper than the preceding device, but it didn't progress the hardware, choosing to drop in SoC class to stay inexpensive to produce. All you can really say is for-sure better with the 650 is the storage, but storage is insanely cheap to produce, so that it added 8 GB of storage is really just a bare-minimum bump that means nothing to me.

 

[Skoen]

First(?) review out... that was really quick
Btekt:

Seems like the 212 isn't regarded as a deal-breaker after all... thoughts?

(Sorry if this has been posted already...)

 

[Kram Sacul]

--Design is preference, and I don't like the 650's design. I've never cared for metal bands, and the thing looks too much like an iPhone from the front. I don't like super-rounded corners. Plus, color options are boring, so I'd call the design a negative for the 650, vs. the 640. Thin and light can also mean less durable. I liked the feel of my 920 more than my 950 and its super-squeaky backplate, for example.
--CPU clock speed improvements aren't everything. It looks like the GPU is inferior, and it looks like the RAM might not be improved at all. Overall, the SoC is probably about the same, and given the 650 is a year newer, that's a negative.
--Storage is improved, though 16 GB still isn't enough for many. Since I'd have gotten the 128-GB microSD card in my 950 for either device, it's a slight benefit for the 650, but not a meaningful one, in my eyes. But, a plus is a plus.
--The camera definitely matters, but it's not necessarily much changed, if at all, from the 640 to the 650. Same resolution, and I've not seen that it's got better tech behind it. It might, I just haven't seen its other specs to compare.
--What employee wants this thing is the question?

Overall, the 640's likely be be available for around half the price of the 650. That's what kills the 650--it's maybe a LITTLE better than the 640, but priced like something much better. It's more of a 550 than a 650, given it's just about on-par with what was a 600-series phone a year ago.

Agreed. The iPhone wannabe design, the lack of colors (didn't Lumias used to be colorful) and only being able to run W10M are deal breakers. Being thin also doesn't impress me if it takes away battery life. If the 640 didn't exist at the ridiculously low price you can get it for now the 650 might be a good deal but right now it's just another misstep by MS.

 

[WesleyBPeres]

Review:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VCDoS8EvNc
Camera Test:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24rIjwSS2f8
Battery Test:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lkfPfc7Sjg
Comparison:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynuGBUsC5zU

 

[anthonyng]

Awww continuum would've been so interesting for this phone.

 

[phlamethrowre]

Reminds me of the Samsung Alpha a few years ago. Great looking but not very powerful.

 

[Jakoh]

I agree, the 650 is not as trans-formative as the 640. Its more iterative.

I never said I was going to. I said that the 640 might be better, and that the 650 doesn't do enough to justify the price tag. If your comeback is half-baked spec breakdowns that claim that because you think the 650 is pretty and maybe a LITTLE bit faster, then I've got no interest in wasting my time with someone uninterested in a legitimately intelligent discussion.

The 650 is a year newer, yet you can't definitively claim it as superior, and you ESPECIALLY can't do it when price is a factor. It had a year to progress, and it looks like it stood still. It didn't get cheaper than the preceding device, but it didn't progress the hardware, choosing to drop in SoC class to stay inexpensive to produce. All you can really say is for-sure better with the 650 is the storage, but storage is insanely cheap to produce, so that it added 8 GB of storage is really just a bare-minimum bump that means nothing to me.

 

[Jakoh]

LOL, Around 9:10, you get a full day of use because there is nothing to do on it! REALLY.

First(?) review out... that was really quick
Btekt:

https://youtu.be/y0sCitlthOw

Seems like the 212 isn't regarded as a deal-breaker after all... thoughts?

(Sorry if this has been posted already...)

 

[Jakoh]

Around 2:50, why does the multitasking screen look different from the 640 XL windows 10?

Review:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VCDoS8EvNc

 

[Keith Wallace]

Around 2:50, why does the multitasking screen look different from the 640 XL windows 10?

Without seeing a screenshot to compare for your question, I can't say.

 

[WesleyBPeres]

Around 2:50, why does the multitasking screen look different from the 640 XL windows 10?

You are talking about the apps side by side in line instead 2 lines of apps?
It's the "phablet mode" when you have less zoom in the settings.

 

[frustrated_user]

Pretty shoddy, Microsoft has to offer more in the midrange if it wants to keep its remaining customers. I have a 735, paid about the same as this phone costs 17 months ago, but this is a downgrade, no compass, no wireless charging, only marginally faster processor and double the ram, useful but not much, given that more than a year has passed since releasing the 735. I'm not sure I will replace my 735 with another Windows phone next year.