Slashdot Mirror
Nokia Lumia 900 Reviews
MrSeb, zachareye, and others wrote in with several reviews of the Nokia Lumia 900. Starting things off, Extreme Tech asks if the Lumia redefines the smartphone; BGR chimes in declaring the phone "terrific". Ars Technica, on the other hand, isn't quite so enthusiastic, especially about the camera optics. Anandtech joins Ars in not being particularly enthused. It looks like most reviewers are happy with the UI, but not so enthused about the hardware (low display resolution for one). Signs point to an OK handset, but nothing spectacular.
I think you were in cryogenic stasis since ~2007, which is ironically the last time Nokia made a phone worth owning.
I am the proud owner of a Nokia N900 (which is very much worth owning) since end of 2010, which is well after 2007.
We need more competition in the mobile phone market. BlackBerry is pretty much dead, WebOS is dead, Symbian is dead. It would be really nice to see Microsoft grab a significant portion of the market away from Android, which will push Google into making their OS better.
hey!
That's sort of the point of the reviews. For the price (and that does count a lot) the Lumia 900 is a decent phone. It struggles to compete with dual core phones which are much more expensive, which is a problem for the windows brand, since the Galaxy Nexus and iPhone 4s are powerful flagship devices, but as a Nokia Phone that isn't going to just be sold to rich people who can afford 500+ dollar phones it's pretty good overall (where I am the Galaxy Nexus and iPhone 4s run 575 and 650 dollars respectively, where the Lumia 900 is about 450).
Now, overall, given the circumstances I don't think that makes it a great launch. Nokia, or one of the WP7.5 launch partners should have a quad core phone out the door nowish (but then I figured the playstation vita should be a phone as well), and the lumia 900 could be a mid range device. There's a big gap in the user experience between iphone and android in terms of software updates, and it's an area on the PC that MS does surprisingly well at in terms of how updates are delivered and what works/doesn't on them. But MS doesn't seem to have delivered very well, and that's not good for anyone, least of all nokia employees and shareholders.
You expected any other reason for ex-Microsoftie Stephen Elop to suddenly show up as CEO of Nokia?
Not sure what Microsoft would do with it beyond the patent portfolio, though. the brand is a perishable item, and by the time the company well and truly dies, it may well have about the same reputation as the AOL or Tandy brand. :/
As for the patents, I'm not really sure what they expect to get from those, other than income off the Android OEMs.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Curious: do you plan to dual wield 2 Win-Phones now?
That's obviously a win-win situation.
First.
The iPhone revolutionised the mobile phone market, essentially turning smartphones that had limited use and poor experience into things that are quick and reliable. Now we're tweaking and improving, it's hard for anyone to carve a niche. WP7's niche is that it totally integrates your contacts. If you know the same person in twitter, linkedin, your email db, facebook and more, WP7 seamlessly integrates them into the one person they are. That's it's killer app. The problem is that it takes more than a one-day test to really see this benefit so reviews are never going to "get it".
Second.
MS are keen not to make the mistake Android is making (or that they made in the PCmarket). They want to standardise the platform. This is easy for Apple/iPhone, they're the only ones making one. Not so easy keeping HTC, Samsung, Nokia and others to stick to one design. There's nothing for them to distinguish themselves in the market.
Roll on Windows 8 and tablets - then iPhone will be under serious threat. For most consumers, the tablet - if properly conceived and integrated - is a far better computer experience than the PC/Laptop.
(disclosure: I'm a devoted Lumia 800 and previously Samsung Omnia 7 owner)
Look. They're late to the game, they're trying to mimic the apple hype and simultaneously deliver while not putting enough effort into making a competitive device to actually deliver. They're praying that being able to be around long enough off android revenue (before B&N/antitrust cut that to zero) will be enough for people to consider it a competitive device.
Microsoft is just following standard protocol with Nokia. What makes you think the business model has *ever* changed? Why? Well look no further than:
Embrace, Extend, Extinguish. where are we at with Nokia again? What always comes first?
A quick glance on Amazon shows new android phones at less than $300 without a contract. T-Mobile has lots of Android phones available at $0 + plus a contract. Those current feature phone owners will find that more attractive than $450 for the Lumia 900, or about the same as $0 to $99 with a contract. It's not a new class.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Billions? They've been at this a while. Kin was dead out the door, they knew it, you knew it, I knew it. Everyone knew it. But contracts must be honoured.
That doesn't mean they'll ever make any money however, it could be billions invested for nothing. The windows 8 strategy of unifying all the device OS's is actually a good idea. A decent phone these days is basically a half speed laptop (with a dual core 1.x GHz processor and a gig or so of ram that's like half a laptop), which means you really can run the same OS on everything. If you try out the windows 8 preview it seems more like it's for phones than desktops, so this might be shooting themselves in the foot with a rocket launcher overall, but we'll see. They certainly seem to be all in on this plan.
Every OEM is using it expect Nokia and Apple
And the Android phones are having trouble standing out in a crowded market.
There are a lot of people out there waiting for new Windows phones.
If I used a sig over again, would anyone notice?
Actually if you look, the summary is wrong, it's only the ars review of the ones listed that doesn't have a generally very positive set of things to say about the phone, and the ars review is comparing it to a galaxy nexus and iphone 4s (which are 200 dollars more expensive, but much better hardware phones).
They're building up hype because they've made a pretty good mid range product, whether or not it gets any traction with consumers or AT&T retail monkeys (who then convince consumers to buy it ) who knows. They're not aiming for the 600 dollar phone market, stupidly, there should be a flagship device positioned there. But for what it is price wise, it's pretty good overall.
Nokia's problem with all their Windows phones (and MSFT's problem with Windows Phone in general) is that they can't get retailers to push the phones.
Nobody comes into a store wanting to look at a Windows phone, so immediately the hurdle is that you've got to change their minds about what they want. Some articles posted here have even said that salespeople are not willing to push it because the return rate on Windows Phones had been high, and they lose their time for zero commission, when they could be across the room selling someone an iPhone and being safe with their commission.
Honestly, when was the last time you tried a phone and found it to have poor sound quality for just talking? You sound like someone who shops for a new car and asks if it's hard to change the points or adjust the carburetor.