Euro mobile operators: Lumia handsets are not good enough

The launch last week of the Nokia Lumia 900 in the US was greeted with some better than expected sales, despite a software issue that Nokia quickly fixed. However, a new Reuters report claims that a number of wireless carriers in Europe are not happy with the sales of the Lumia line since the first, the Lumia 800, launched in November.

The article, which cites unnamed executives and representatives from Europe's leading wireless carriers, claims that those operators that have sold the Lumia products are unhappy with their price points as well as a perceived lack of innovation in the phones. One was quoted as saying, "If they could lower the price we think they could sell more. It might be worth making it a bit of a loss leader to get it out of the door. It's not rocket science."

Another telco representative, from a network that has sold both the Lumia 800 and 710 in its stores, states, "No one comes into the store and asks for a Windows phone", adding that "if the Lumia with the same hardware came with Android in it and not Windows, it would be much easier to sell."

One executive stated, "Ultimately, Nokia and Windows are challengers and they either need to come to market with a really disruptive, innovative product or a huge marketing budget to create client demand. So far they have done neither."

The report highlights the scale of the challenge that Nokia and Microsoft face together in their aim to become the 'third ecosystem' - and without the mobile networks on their side, it's not going to get any easier.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

FlipToast Twitter app released for Windows 8

Next Story

Apple facing class action suit over children's app bills

109 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I think it's pretty good Microsoft's dominance, which was taken for granted, is slowly coming to an end. Here's hoping Windows 8 will get nuked in the tablet market as well!

.Neo said,
I think it's pretty good Microsoft's dominance, which was taken for granted, is slowly coming to an end. Here's hoping Windows 8 will get nuked in the tablet market as well!

So we can all be stuck with iPads and droid tablet clones?

.Neo said,
I think it's pretty good Microsoft's dominance, which was taken for granted, is slowly coming to an end. Here's hoping Windows 8 will get nuked in the tablet market as well!

Maybe you like the Apple vision of the future but there are plenty of us who don't.

.Neo said,
I think it's pretty good Microsoft's dominance, which was taken for granted, is slowly coming to an end. Here's hoping Windows 8 will get nuked in the tablet market as well!

Windows 3.1 was doomed, cause OS/2 2.0 was the killer OS.
Windows NT was doomed cause Novell and Unix already had the market secured.
Windows 95 was doomed because its user interface was too different, and it still had a 32bit version of the Windows 3.x Monolithic kernel.
Windows 98 was doomed because it was bloated with HTML.
Windows ME - Ya it sucked.
Windows 2000 - was doomed because too many features were removed that were promised, and it wasn't seen as much more than NT 4.0 with a complicated AD technology.
WindowsXP - was doomed because of the fisher price interface, and it wouldn't run on a 486, and people were afraid their hardware wouldn't work because it needed NT drivers.
Windows Vista - was doomed because too many promised features were removed, and it was slower than XP. (Which was only true in the release video drivers from ATI/NVidia were slower than XP. However in a few months were faster than XP, but that didn't get as much press as the Vista sucks FUD.)
Windows 7 - was doomed, because it was just Vista with fixes and new name.

...and we can do this for almost every Microsoft product from Word 2.0 to Visual Studio.


Today Windows on computers is over 1.5 billion 'active' users, and Windows on devices and computers is around 4 billion. With more people 'currently' using Windows 7 than all the Macs and iPhones and iPads sold combined in the history of Apple going back to 1984.

I wonder if Windows Phone is really 'doomed' like all the other predictions... Because a student of computer history will see this year and last year of WP7 and the side development of Windows 8 very much like 1990 and 1991 of the Windows 3.0 years with the side development of NT, right before Windows 3.1 was released in 1992 and NT 3.1 in 1993.

Good luck with the doomsday prediction, but sadly I have to best against you on this.

Microsoft has a problem with carrier and sales education.

WP7 is 'different' in a good way, but unless someone actually uses the device, they will have no understanding.

I have seen 'reviews' by smart technical writers and you can tell which ones have used the phone and which ones turn it on, open some Apps and the ones that actually use the device for a few hours like it was their phone.

I would bet that even the brightest non-WP7 users here, and writers for this site could not name the top 10 things that set it apart from iOS and Android and would be the key selling points when introducing it to a new customer.

So imagine a store of employees that haven't used the phone, with no incentive to use the phone, and have personal 'religions' about which phone they think is the best, and WP7 gets shoved in the corner.

The last phone I bought, the person selling it was surprised that I wanted the phone, and said how weird it was that they had another customer in earlier that had just bought one. I took a couple of minutes after it was activated and showed her 5 things she had no idea the phone could do and said she wished she had known about it before buying her iPhone.

So any takers, any smart non-WP7 users that can name 5 or 10 things that are true advantages and key selling points that would make a happy iPhone or happy Android user be amazed and consider buying one?

(You can even skip the features that Android and iOS added in the last two years that mimic WP7, which I would bet that most reader/writers could not name 5 of them.)

Just because you feel it is different in a 'good' way doesn't mean everyone does.
I'll name one, take a picture and post it to FB, which is what most of the challenges were in that silly competition they are running.
Perhaps the reason that no one knows about these 'killer' features that set WP apart is because no one needs them.

recursive said,
Just because you feel it is different in a 'good' way doesn't mean everyone does.
I'll name one, take a picture and post it to FB, which is what most of the challenges were in that silly competition they are running.
Perhaps the reason that no one knows about these 'killer' features that set WP apart is because no one needs them.

Nice, care to make any other generalisations about WP7 and the userbase it targets?

Have you ever used a Windows Phone, I guess not!!!

Just because YOU don't need or want those features doesn't mean that others feel the same way.

recursive said,
Just because you feel it is different in a 'good' way doesn't mean everyone does.
I'll name one, take a picture and post it to FB, which is what most of the challenges were in that silly competition they are running.
Perhaps the reason that no one knows about these 'killer' features that set WP apart is because no one needs them.

And ironically, this would NOT be one of the things I would put in the top 10 list, whatsoever....

______________
Here I will be nice and give you one (1) feature I would put in the top 10, just since you at least replied...

People Hub - History


Why and what is it?

I have about over 50,000 emails, over 10,000 text messages, and over 2,000 calls on my phone, and I can flip to any person's history in two taps and a swipe, and see everything I have ever done to interact with them. Instantly...

This includes Email, Texting, Calls, Missed calls, Facebook, Tweets, and on and on...

It all appears in a nice aggregated timeline that I can scroll through 1000s of items in a couple of flicks, instantly.

Which is handy when talking to a client or a friend and referencing something from a past discussion or date. As clicking on any item not only opens it, but all linked items to it, so if it was an email conversation, a search result of that conservation appears with everyone that was involved.


BTW If you read the details I describe of this feature, you can probably guess another feature from the top 10 list.


Without mobile operator support in Europe MS-Nokia are doomed.

1. MS came to the real smartphone party really really really late after letting horrible complicated Windows mobile stagnate
2. MS saw the error of their ways and that iOS and Android powered devices were the computing platforms for the masses and decided to start fresh and make a mobile OS that was obviously different to Android and obviously different to iOS (they succeeded)
3. MS knew they needed some critical mass so they made a deal with Nokia to replace Symbian on their phones.

Does this sound like a recipe for success?

Edited by derekaw, Apr 17 2012, 8:04pm :

derekaw said,
Without mobile operator support in Europe MS-Nokia are doomed.

1. MS came to the real smartphone party really really really late after letting horrible complicated Windows mobile stagnate
2. MS saw the error of their ways and that iOS and Android powered devices were the computing platforms for the masses and decided to start fresh and make a mobile OS that was obviously different to Android and obviously different to iOS (they succeeded)
3. MS knew they needed some critical mass so they made a deal with Nokia to replace Symbian on their phones.

Does this sound like a recipe for success?

Wow, not even factually on track, although you are correct that carriers need to support the product, which will happen as users keep requesting it.

Windows Mobile was the first OS Platform phone, it was pricey and marketed to the corporate and technical user base, not average phone users. As price points dropped, Apple took advantage of the timing, and also took lower priced components to kick out the iPhone (didn't have the digitizer requirements, etc.)

What Microsoft has done right is hitting the mix, which is analogous to what Windows 3.0/3.1 did. Windows 3.x brought a new type of OS model that was hardware agnostic, yet had the simplistic driver and application platform of a closed system like the Mac. Basically it combined the simple user experience, and simple developer experience with a wide range of hardware that included drivers and features that were not normally part of a traditional OS.

This gave Windows 3.x the ability to be sold and run on anyone's hardware that met the specifications, and yet was a consistent interface for hardware vendors and drivers, developers for writing application and no longer having to worry about supplying video/printer/sound drivers and user's got a consistent experience.

WP7 follows the same model in that it gives hardware MFRs the ability to create the device they want, and not have and can use chipset level drivers from their suppliers and let Microsoft handle the OS and its updates and security.

Contrast this to Android where MFRs have to use generic stub drivers or write their own, and then literally build the OS for the device and rebuild it for every update, which is why most device never get updates or security fixes.

Also contrast this to iOS that has a nice unified hardware model, per phone version, and Apple controls and supplies the OS and the updates. However users are limited to the hardware choices Apple offers, so no keyboards, no 10 point touch screens, no 16mp cameras, etc.

WP7 has the best of both worlds, giving hardware MFRs the ability to participate and create their own hardware features and combinations, and they can give users an OS that will be updated and taken care of, without all the development and work that they are now investing into Android.

Companies like HTC and Samsung are 'drooling' for when WP7 takes off, as they want to dump Android, which some MFRs are already planning to phase out around the time WP8 releases.

So Microsoft was 'late' in changing their platform, they were NOT late to the smartphone market. They were smart about hitting the void that mimics what Windows 3.x did as well. The end of hardware and developer fragmentation and the end of user level fragmentation as well, without the hardware constraints that Apple provides.

Remember Windows PocketPC was doing things in 2002, that the iPhone was NOT able to do until iOS 5 released just last year. The iPhone was a major step backwards technically, which is why Microsoft didn't even see it as a threat.

Sadly the 'fans' and the people that don't see technology until Apple 'reveals' it, to this day think the iPhone created something or was the first at something, and it wasn't.

thenetavenger said,

Companies like HTC and Samsung are 'drooling' for when WP7 takes off, as they want to dump Android, which some MFRs are already planning to phase out around the time WP8 releases.

Ummm I don't think so. If anything they are drooling for the day they could sell a computer without being dictated terms by MS.
...
Doesn't matter how you spin it. Fact remains that they were losing market share to their competitors and they did nothing about it, until it was too late. Then they did what they usually do, which is sue the competition, and throw money around to undercut the competition. Only this time it isn't working.

recursive said,

Ummm I don't think so. If anything they are drooling for the day they could sell a computer without being dictated terms by MS.
...
Doesn't matter how you spin it. Fact remains that they were losing market share to their competitors and they did nothing about it, until it was too late. Then they did what they usually do, which is sue the competition, and throw money around to undercut the competition. Only this time it isn't working.

Go Bing/Google Samsung comments from last year and early this year... You might be surprised what they are saying at the management level.

recursive said,

Ummm I don't think so. If anything they are drooling for the day they could sell a computer without being dictated terms by MS.
...
Doesn't matter how you spin it. Fact remains that they were losing market share to their competitors and they did nothing about it, until it was too late. Then they did what they usually do, which is sue the competition, and throw money around to undercut the competition. Only this time it isn't working.

Just reread this... Really? You think Phone/Computer MFRs want to go back to the days before 'standards'? Really? You think they want to have to build their own OS or customized OS version again?

Go look at the 1980s and the move to standards, and the 1990s when Windows pushed the definition of what an OS provided, giving OEMs the freedom to ship hardware without having to worry about compatibility issues, and could drop in sound cards with MFR supplied drivers and Video cards and have them just work for the first time in the PC industry.

If you think other OS technologies were providing this level of 'consistency' you have idea what computing history was like, and it was either a customized and closed product or a compatibility mess.

The also goes in the other directions as well for developers having a consistent interface to hardware and not having to write 100 printer drivers, like Wordperfect and others were doing in the 1980s. This includes Video, Sound and other aspects of the OS that were not 'technically' considered the responsibility of an OS and why unified driver models were not popular, as the OS purists did not believe that an OS should provide this functionality, as it was an Application layer issue.

(Want proof, look at Linux, 20 years later and the lack of standards are the primary reason it has little desktop adoption and is avoid by both OEMs due to support costs and developer due to the extra work in dealing with variations.

Just to print something, it wasn't until 1999 that CUPS came along, and to this day it is still a freaking mess of nightmares for developers and end users that was supposed to 'unify' printing, and instead created more variations and infighting.

Using Linux in a professional printing role is insanely hard and limited in features, when Windows is spitting out XAML based content that even includes 'dynamic' imaging for new printing technology like e-ink and dealing with lpi,dpi, and color depths that are not possible in the Unix world, which includes besting OS X's printing features by a full generation of technology.


The reason Windows 3.x was successful is that it integrated a fragmented hardware world, a fragmented development world, and a fragmented usability/user base, offering better than Mac consistency with the biggest pool of hardware diversity ever seen offered by an OS technology.

This is a set of 'standards' to aim for, that MFRs could never achieve before or without Windows today, as Intel would fight for A,B,C and AMD would fight form B,C,D and TI would fight for X,Y,Z and none of them would work together. Instead the very nature of the NT architecture ensures that even this 'non-standard' fight break out, the OS is able to deal with them seamlessly.

Something Linux due to its architectural design dependencies cannot do, and often has to use stubs that mimic what Windows inherently does to bridge these gaps until a standard is achieved.

(Want proof, go look at the Video driver issues with AMD/ATI and NVidia and how they had to each create their own version of 'wrapper' technology to bypass the Linux video model, and thus created issues for games on Linux and also started a riot mentality as neither company wanted to reveal their 'custom' technology.)

Windows doesn't give a crap what ATI and NVidia are doing, and setups up a certain level of standards, and also gives them options to work around the standards like NVIdia was given for WDM 1.x and WDM 1.1 for the new WDDM technologies. (Which these 'standards' from Microsoft for GPU technologies also benefited Linux by providing a common hardware footprint and is why the DX9 and DX10 and DX11 class 'hardware' has less to do with DirectX and more to do with the hardware technology base supported.

Oh BTW... DX10/DX11 GPU hardware is based on Microsoft GPU reference design technology from Microsoft hardware, NOT ATI and NOT NVIDIA, so any Mac or Linux computer with a modern video card is using Microsoft technology. (Although you seem to think they just sit back and 'throw' money at problems, when almost every piece of hardware in a computer today has technology designed by Microsoft, that they gave away 'FREELY', go look up the onboard GPU/DMA and BUS interface and unified shader technologies that Microsoft 'created' and are what allows CUDA 2.x and OpenCL to even exist as they do today for fast memory transfer and GP-GPU operations through the agnostic shader model.

Wow... I am just POed at the lack of 'thinking' that goes into a subject and watching people take 2 + 2 and get 5 as the obvious answer...

I supported Microsoft Windows Phones from 2007-2011. It was out of fustration with the support I had on Windows Mobile 6.5 that cause me to leave the platform. I know that i have never wanted a Apple iPhone, so I went along with an Android in May of 2011. I enjoyed the Android Platform and services it had to offer. However, over time I started getting irritated with being behind 1-2 OS. I also got tired of seeing Android phones released every month with no support for my phone that was barely a year old. Every angle I would turn, someone had an Android. It was becoming like the Apple iPhone all over again, nothing different and getting to big for even Google and carriers to manage. I finally decided to give Windows Phone 7 a try and I am in love with it. The OS is very clean, neat and professional looking. Even Facebook and Twitter looks clean. Most people who talk about Windows Phone 7 are people who have really never given it a chance. They are also scared that they may enjoy it better than their iPhone or Android. I will agree that there needs to be some more features, but overall it is a really good phone. I am sick of everybody comparing these smartphone against each other. If they were all built the same, people would still be comparing and complaining. Each platform has something unique to offer that makes them different from each other. If you want to get an Apple iPhone, then get one, If you want to get an Android, then get one and if you want to try the Windows Phone 7, then get it. What people seem to miss while comparing these phones against each other, is the freedom of choice.

JSYOUNG571 said,
I supported Microsoft Windows Phones from 2007-2011. It was out of fustration with the support I had on Windows Mobile 6.5 that cause me to leave the platform. I know that i have never wanted a Apple iPhone, so I went along with an Android in May of 2011. I enjoyed the Android Platform and services it had to offer. However, over time I started getting irritated with being behind 1-2 OS. I also got tired of seeing Android phones released every month with no support for my phone that was barely a year old. Every angle I would turn, someone had an Android. It was becoming like the Apple iPhone all over again, nothing different and getting to big for even Google and carriers to manage. I finally decided to give Windows Phone 7 a try and I am in love with it. The OS is very clean, neat and professional looking. Even Facebook and Twitter looks clean. Most people who talk about Windows Phone 7 are people who have really never given it a chance. They are also scared that they may enjoy it better than their iPhone or Android. I will agree that there needs to be some more features, but overall it is a really good phone. I am sick of everybody comparing these smartphone against each other. If they were all built the same, people would still be comparing and complaining. Each platform has something unique to offer that makes them different from each other. If you want to get an Apple iPhone, then get one, If you want to get an Android, then get one and if you want to try the Windows Phone 7, then get it. What people seem to miss while comparing these phones against each other, is the freedom of choice.

+1 for your post.
I liked when you said :
"Most people who talk about Windows Phone 7 are people who have really never given it a chance. They are also scared that they may enjoy it better than their iPhone or Android"

boumboqc said,

+1 for your post.
I liked when you said :
"Most people who talk about Windows Phone 7 are people who have really never given it a chance. They are also scared that they may enjoy it better than their iPhone or Android"

I really like the Windows Phone. The issues for me are with the ecosystem. Besides the problem I mentioned in my comment above about not being able to change my account region, the platform also lacks decent apps.

No matter what perfectly reasonable explanation Microsoft can give us, I find it embarrassing that Photosynth is available for iPhone and not yet for Windows Phone. Also Skype is still in beta and many top apps still aren't available.

It is a shame because it seems (relatively) easy to code for the Windows Phone platform and in overall, it is a good platform.

I tried it and I liked it. But Microsoft pushed me away.

imho Lumia's 800/900 only fault is that they are a bit too thick for these days. It's 12.1 mm for 800 and 11.5 for 900.

It's 2012 and I don't even consider a phone thicker than 9 mm.

Other than that, Lumias are great and I'm looking forward to the next gen!

this has been the case since day 1. no one asks for a wp7 device and the carriers do not advertise or push them either. wp7 isn't real popular just as w8 will not be. maybe this is the kick in the ass microsoft need to get back on track. this is also why both sprint and verizon do not carry anymore wp7 devices, they didn't sell just like webos didn't. BUT at least hp was smart enough to open source it.

smooth3006 said,
this has been the case since day 1. no one asks for a wp7 device and the carriers do not advertise or push them either. wp7 isn't real popular just as w8 will not be. maybe this is the kick in the ass microsoft need to get back on track. this is also why both sprint and verizon do not carry anymore wp7 devices, they didn't sell just like webos didn't. BUT at least hp was smart enough to open source it.

What's it like in the future?

I think the problem with windows phone is the lack of great apps and the name windows phone. I say lack of apps because while the ui is indeed innovative, the os cannot do anything that ios or android can and thats the one reason i ditched my samsung focus. Its biggest feature , the live tiles, are not well implemented, almost all apps dont take avantage of live apps and the phone can only have a few of them running at the same time.
I also say its name its a problem because lets face it, nobody want so say windows phone and most people associate the windows brand with bad stuff, such as viruses, malware, and so on, besIdes the fact that it doesnt have the 'cool' factor.
I think a lot of thing

I think the constant swiping/scrolling is another annoyance. The last time I used one it was just a pain to use. Initially it looks ok and the animations are good eye candy, but once you get past the novel aspect of the tile ui, there's not much underneath, especially for me, coming from Android.

When it comes to the 710 and 800 I will agree with some of the statements made.

Launching 1st gen hardware during the 2nd gen hardware refresh was a mistake.
Moving the N9 on to Windows phone is good, but then they lost the great camera.

Once WP8 launches with more options in terms of reference hardware and supproted sensors, Nokia will hit the ground running.

I Love the unibody polycarbonate design, and seeing as how HTC have adopted it as well, you have to give them credit for innovating there.
It's just a shame their value phones don't inspire like the 800/900.

dotf said,
When it comes to the 710 and 800 I will agree with some of the statements made.

To be fair, I think that's what this article is really about, although the 800 is quite nice. But the 900 is in a completely different category.

Not sure why they don't think Windows Phone is innovative. Windows Phone is the definition of innovative. In that case, iPhone and Android definitely aren't. Certainly no new ideas there [if you consider WP old or non innovative...].

Now i want to see the face of the Indian guy from the ad posted here a few days ago... XD plain and boring Windows Phone.... :@

Why do carriers love Android?! I went into 5 stores and told them I was really interested in a Nokia Lumia, just to see what the salesmen said, and in 4 out of 5 of them they recommended that I didn't get it, because "Windows Phone is terrible" and tried to sell me a Galaxy S2 or a Galaxy Nexus.

The only store which the salesman knew anything about the phone was O2, and he asked me if I'd like one.

McKay said,
Why do carriers love Android?! I went into 5 stores and told them I was really interested in a Nokia Lumia, just to see what the salesmen said, and in 4 out of 5 of them they recommended that I didn't get it, because "Windows Phone is terrible" and tried to sell me a Galaxy S2 or a Galaxy Nexus.

It could be because of the number of returns. If the return rate is high, carriers tend to stop promoting them. Or there's just little demand, as demonstrated by the european carriers.

simplezz said,

It could be because of the number of returns. If the return rate is high, carriers tend to stop promoting them. Or there's just little demand, as demonstrated by the european carriers.

3 of them said "We've had no complaints about it, I just don't think it's very good"
One of them even said "Windows doesn't belong on a Phone, it's like putting Android on a Computer"

McKay said,

3 of them said "We've had no complaints about it, I just don't think it's very good"
One of them even said "Windows doesn't belong on a Phone, it's like putting Android on a Computer"

Yet you can buy Netbooks, yes Netbooks, with Android installed. What, do these idiots think it's called Windows 7 Phone?

Something tells me that the last Mobile Phones they used with a Microsoft OS on them was a WM2002 device, when Microsoft tried to squeeze a desktop OS into a Phone.

I LOVE my Nokia Lumia900, and you haters can say what ever you want!
My family will continue to tell people that it's Nokia Lumia 900 when people stop, stare and ask about the phone, and tell us that they will be getting one as well.

This is a ridiculous article, I have 3 Lumias and to say they are not good enough is uninformed. I'd say the Windows Phone is revolutionary, there is nothing like it. And don't get me started on itunes, it is a joke, especially when compared to Zune, Zune and the Zunepass are fantastic for listening to music

DKAngel said,
ahah i havnt seen a single lumia ad in au yet

None yet I don't think. I've seen some signs set up in some stores, but even that is rare.

From what third hand information I get in aus, it seems like they're spending millions on advertising, however it doesn't seem to be getting to people on the ground. I must say I'm a bit worried for the platform.

Edit: I think the title is misleading too - they love the handset, they don't like the OS

The whole thing smells suspicious when no-one wants to make any claims about who said what. The whole news story looks like a libel case in the waiting.

lt8480 said,
The whole thing smells suspicious when no-one wants to make any claims about who said what. The whole news story looks like a libel case in the waiting.

agreed, hope they get stuffed for it tbh

I stopped reading when they said lack of innovation in the phones, have these people actually used the device? The UI is like no other, it's super fast and fluid, it hasn't made many little addon innovations like camera unlock. But the innovation is at the core of the system.

Edit: I think this is a PR move by another rival of Nokia.

Gaffney said,
...

These arseholes think innovation is bigger numbers on the info card in front of the phone.
Smaller numbers is not innovation.
800x400 screen
8/5MP camera
8GB internal non-expandable storage

They don't understand beyond their own infocards.

Gaffney said,
I stopped reading when they said lack of innovation in the phones, have these people actually used the device? The UI is like no other, it's super fast and fluid, it hasn't made many little addon innovations like camera unlock. But the innovation is at the core of the system.

Edit: I think this is a PR move by another rival of Nokia.

I have 'camera unlock' on my Android, it's facial recognition unlock. Innovation on Microsoft/Nokia's part? Who are they, Apple?

I'll agree, now that Nokia has began putting out WP7 phones the market just needs to sit back and give them time to mature but on the other hand I hope they don't take the path of Apple and claim innovation where they did nothing.

KCRic said,
I have 'camera unlock' on my Android, it's facial recognition unlock. Innovation on Microsoft/Nokia's part? Who are they, Apple?

I'll agree, now that Nokia has began putting out WP7 phones the market just needs to sit back and give them time to mature but on the other hand I hope they don't take the path of Apple and claim innovation where they did nothing.

Camera Unlock ? haha, what an important feature.
Wish you had the beautiful unlock ( slide ) of WP7, you wouldn't need to actually look at your cellphone waiting for it to unlock, you could just swipe that beauty.

Their statement is very poor. I see more Nokia advertisements than Samsung on TV. I don't see what features other phones have that the Nokia lacks and therefore should lower the price. Moreover they should push the devices more if they want to sell more. The only handset that the average user will go in and ask for is the iPhone; everything else it is up to the salesperson to push.

Riva said,
Their statement is very poor. I see more Nokia advertisements than Samsung on TV. I don't see what features other phones have that the Nokia lacks and therefore should lower the price. Moreover they should push the devices more if they want to sell more. The only handset that the average user will go in and ask for is the iPhone; everything else it is up to the salesperson to push.
Dual core, graphics (GPU), 1080p, better resolution, larger app ecosystem. I've never used the newer Windows phones so I can't speak for exact OS differences but those I just named off the top of my head.

KCRic said,
Dual core, graphics (GPU), 1080p, better resolution, larger app ecosystem. I've never used the newer Windows phones so I can't speak for exact OS differences but those I just named off the top of my head.

And real multi-tasking. That's a big one.

simplezz said,

And real multi-tasking. That's a big one.

Multi-tasking, laughable.
Is having your facebook open waiting for someone to actually care about you and trolling on neowin AT THE SAME TIME worth it ?
I mean, the suspended state of WP is just perfect.

boumboqc said,

Multi-tasking, laughable.

So you'd be content with Windows 3.1 on your desktop then? Every OS worth its salt has a good SMP implementation. It's 2012, not 1980.
boumboqc said,

Is having your facebook open waiting for someone to actually care about you

I don't use Facebook. However I do use IRC, which is impossible to use on Windows Phone because whenever you switch apps your connections drop. And that;s just one example. Some people actually like to you know - do real things with their devices, not just stare at eye candy all day.
boumboqc said,

and trolling on neowin AT THE SAME TIME worth it ?

If by stating WP's real world limitations, then yes.
boumboqc said,

I mean, the suspended state of WP is just perfect.

No it's not. It's terrible when you consider it's 2012. I ran single task OS's in the 80's and I don't plan on going back thank you very much. I like an OS that I can get things done with, not just to look at and go - "don't those animations look pretty".

boumboqc said,
I'm with rogers in Canada and the Lumia 900 is back order.
Weird.

The Rogers kiosk in the mall where I live only got 1 unit, and it's already sold.
When Rogers get Cyan, I'm upgrading from my Focus, buying it retail and unlocking it for my carrier.

boumboqc said,
I'm with rogers in Canada and the Lumia 900 is back order.
Weird.
That really means nothing. If I make 2 devices and 3 people order one - I will have one on backorder. They could have sent Rogers 1,000 or them and 1,200 people order one - guess what happens to the extra 200? I'll give you two guesses...

recursive said,

Ummm I don't think so..

Here is a copy of the e-mail I received this morning.
Ohh btw, it's a pleasure :

Dear Valued Customer,


Further to our recent Hardware Order Update, please note that your Nokia Lumia 900 Black, RSIM3FFLTE RAW LTE MICRO 3FF SIM FOR ROGERS, is on back order.

We will ship the back ordered item as soon as it becomes available and will send you an email with a tracking number and courier details when your order leaves our warehouse.

dotf said,

The Rogers kiosk in the mall where I live only got 1 unit, and it's already sold.
When Rogers get Cyan, I'm upgrading from my Focus, buying it retail and unlocking it for my carrier.

I bought the black as the color isn't really important for me.
I have the LG Quantum and even if everyone bashed this cellphone it's better than everything else I had before ( T-mobile G2, palm Pré, galaxy Nexus, Iphone 3g.)

boumboqc said,
....

I don't know why people trash the quantum. It was the only one available on my carrier of choice. Since I wanted the Focus, I bought it outright.
After showing my friends, they all went and go the subsidized quantum and all of them love it.
Now that they've retired the quantum, my carrier is flaunting the HTC Radar.
I still prefer the Lumia, so that's my next!

boumboqc said,

Here is a copy of the e-mail I received this morning.
Ohh btw, it's a pleasure :

Dear Valued Customer,


Further to our recent Hardware Order Update, please note that your Nokia Lumia 900 Black, RSIM3FFLTE RAW LTE MICRO 3FF SIM FOR ROGERS, is on back order.

We will ship the back ordered item as soon as it becomes available and will send you an email with a tracking number and courier details when your order leaves our warehouse.

Weird, a friend of mine ordered one as well, and he claims he hasn't received any such emails. Maybe it is region specific? Personally, I hate rogers. I am such a loser that I pay ~100 bucks a month and still don't have 3G. I got suckered in their network a few years back because they were the only GSM carrier around (other than Fido which they own as well), and no one else was offering 3G where I lived. Things have changed since then, but Rogers just haven't kept up, even though they happily charge me every month for data which I can't use. Just can't wait till my contract ends.

I think the real problem is that the Lumia range isn't cutting edge, like the various flavours of iPhone and companies like HTC on Android. First it was the lack of large screen models, then it was the lack of dual-core / quad-core processors, the lack of NFC and front-facing cameras, etc. Gradually they're getting there but it looks like they're playing catch-up when people prefer to go for the companies leading the way.

theyarecomingforyou said,
I think the real problem is that the Lumia range isn't cutting edge, like the various flavours of iPhone and companies like HTC on Android. First it was the lack of large screen models, then it was the lack of dual-core / quad-core processors, the lack of NFC and front-facing cameras, etc. Gradually they're getting there but it looks like they're playing catch-up when people prefer to go for the companies leading the way.

The same argument could be made about Android when it had been around the same amount of time WP7 has.

neo158 said,

The same argument could be made about Android when it had been around the same amount of time WP7 has.

No it can't

18 months after Android's release and it already had 20% US market share, was running Froyo (the 6th version change), was running hardware in 2010 that surpasses what hardware is running in WP currently in 2012, had front facing camera devices, market had 60,000 apps etc...etc...

Android's first 18 months were EXTREMELY successful when compared to WP's lowly numbers

Sonne said,

No it can't

18 months after Android's release and it already had 20% US market share, was running Froyo (the 6th version change), was running hardware in 2010 that surpasses what hardware is running in WP currently in 2012, had front facing camera devices, market had 60,000 apps etc...etc...

Android's first 18 months were EXTREMELY successful when compared to WP's lowly numbers

That is ridiculous.
Android arrived in an open market where everyone was switching from basic handsets to smartphones.
Your argument is competly out of the context as WP7 arrived in a market already saturated with people with iOs or Android smartphones.
This is like saying Car industries have now difficulty to sell car WHILE Ford sell like crazy when they first arrived in 1903,.

boumboqc said,

That is ridiculous.
Android arrived in an open market where everyone was switching from basic handsets to smartphones.
Your argument is competly out of the context as WP7 arrived in a market already saturated with people with iOs or Android smartphones.
This is like saying Car industries have now difficulty to sell car WHILE Ford sell like crazy when they first arrived in 1903,.

erm did you even read the comment I replied to?

Maybe Nokia is targeting markets it can win, for example its been well received in the US and even in Australia where most companys dont even bother to advertise.

I think with success in other markets come the launch of WP8 and Win8 later in the year we will see a big blitz over Europe, however WP will never take on the same ridiculous hardware specs that android goes for, not for the fact thats its not necessary for the fact that it will put the devices into another price bracket. Rather I think we will see some solid hardware improvements in other areas like better screens, better cameras (nokia pure camera for example).

To me, the smartphone war became a choice among the "lesser of all evils". I had a Windows Phone but replaced it because of draconian (absurd) Windows Phone market limitations concerning account relocation .

Android wouldn't be my preferred choice, let alone the iPhone. But since Blackberry decided to just throw in the towel and Microsoft is snubbing EU regulations (http://www.itisourdata.com/about), I had to start looking at these two brands.

The problem is, most people, myself included are now stuck in an eco-system of apps, syncing and cloud integration all bespoke to one device or one OS.

I'm really thinking about getting myself a 900, but I'm stuck in the iOS eco-system, I have apps, music, syncing etc... It's too awesome and fitting to leave.

jbrooksuk said,
The problem is, most people, myself included are now stuck in an eco-system of apps, syncing and cloud integration all bespoke to one device or one OS.

I'm really thinking about getting myself a 900, but I'm stuck in the iOS eco-system, I have apps, music, syncing etc... It's too awesome and fitting to leave.

That's absolutely a good point. It's not the easiest thing starting over. I think that you should get an app gift card if you switch from another smartphone OS. That would certainly help.

jbrooksuk said,
The problem is, most people, myself included are now stuck in an eco-system of apps, syncing and cloud integration all bespoke to one device or one OS.

I'm really thinking about getting myself a 900, but I'm stuck in the iOS eco-system, I have apps, music, syncing etc... It's too awesome and fitting to leave.

That's the reason why my friend won't leave. He says he would leave and get the 900, he loves the phone and the OS, it's just that he bought so many applications and stuff on iOS that it's harder for him to switch. He told our other friend to buy the 900, but he wants that Samsung tab stuff...I'm like dude, don't. Oh well.

jbrooksuk said,
The problem is, most people, myself included are now stuck in an eco-system of apps, syncing and cloud integration all bespoke to one device or one OS.

I'm really thinking about getting myself a 900, but I'm stuck in the iOS eco-system, I have apps, music, syncing etc... It's too awesome and fitting to leave.

And that's exactly why I never bought an Apple device. Oh, you switched computers, phone, or OS and your music, though legal, wasn't bought through iTunes? F@#* you.

At least with Android you can migrate things like that to your new device, computer, or whatever you'd like. Things like this aren't really an ecosystem problem, more like an iOwnyourass problem.

I think I agree with some of the concerns but the lumia still doing very good in the US and still ranking #1 in amazon. the OS is very fresh and finally getting a lot of attention. however MSFT needs to keep updating it and finally de-cripple it from the winCE kernel so it can support all kinds of resolutiosn and codecs. this will allow not just nokia but samsung and htc to go all out on the specs and bring some innovation the the ecosystem.

It is so true. People just prefer an iOS or Android device. Windows Phone is just non-existent. But the good news is that there is a slight chance that Windows Phone will be the number 3 handset OS by default since Blackberry is not doing to well.

UndergroundWire said,
It is so true. People just prefer an iOS or Android device. Windows Phone is just non-existent. But the good news is that there is a slight chance that Windows Phone will be the number 3 handset OS by default since Blackberry is not doing to well.

it has a lot more traction than before. it has nearly 100K apps which brings the ratio of apps to ios to about 1:4 instead of 1:400000 when launched. sales have been beyond ATT expectations and the platform finally has a lot of press going around. if they release apollo this summer as they should and make the development environement identical to windows 8, it should propel the platform to a serious challenger to iOS and android.

this is a very long marathon. not a sprint.

UndergroundWire said,
It is so true. People just prefer an iOS or Android device. Windows Phone is just non-existent. But the good news is that there is a slight chance that Windows Phone will be the number 3 handset OS by default since Blackberry is not doing to well.

The flaw in your logic is that you think "people" think like you, when infact most people don't even know their phone OS is called Android. They go for #1 the cheapest or #2 "the best" according to their friends recommendations.

UndergroundWire said,
It is so true. People just prefer an iOS or Android device. Windows Phone is just non-existent. But the good news is that there is a slight chance that Windows Phone will be the number 3 handset OS by default since Blackberry is not doing to well.

I think it more that everyday people see is iPhone and then a whole mob of android devices.

With the enthusiasts the Lumia and Windows phone are not pushing any boundaries.

But despite that Microsoft and Nokia have probably the best mid-range device.

Personally I prefer to use the Lumia instead of my iPhone 4 as i find the interface far easier to navigate.

funkydude said,

The flaw in your logic is that you think "people" think like you, when infact most people don't even know their phone OS is called Android. They go for #1 the cheapest or #2 "the best" according to their friends recommendations.

My Flaw? OK, try reading the Verge article. They said, NOBODY ASKS FOR WINDOWS PHONE.

The flaw with your statement is that people know they have Android they just call it a Droid.

Also is that why the Lumia is selling with AT&T because it is $49?

Edited by UndergroundWire, Apr 17 2012, 12:57pm :

neonspark said,

this is a very long marathon. not a sprint.

Why is this acceptable? Microsoft does this all the time with entry products. They out shined with the Xbox 360 because they came out with something that offered more.

Microsoft failed with the Zune hardware. Because it didn't offer anything more than the iPod. Windows Phone doesn't offer anything more than the competition either. Will Windows Phone 8 change that? Microsoft can pump all the money they want into this, but they have to offer more to get me to switch.

UndergroundWire said,

My Flaw? OK, try reading the Verge article. They said, NOBODY ASKS FOR WINDOWS PHONE.

The flaw with your statement is that people know they have Android they just call it a Droid.

No, they really don't, that name is even LESS popular than Android. The reason they don't "ask" for Windows Phone is the same as I've already stated, they don't know what OS their phone runs. They walk into a store and ask for advice. People don't walk into a store and ask for an "Android Phone", nerds do that. The only time a specific device or OS is singled out by consumers is the iPhone, due to the popularity of its name.

UndergroundWire said,

My Flaw? OK, try reading the Verge article. They said, NOBODY ASKS FOR WINDOWS PHONE.

The flaw with your statement is that people know they have Android they just call it a Droid.

Also is that why the Lumia is selling with AT&T because it is $49?

And Nokia has just started. I went into an AT&T store in the US and they told me people are constantly in there to look at the Lumia 900. I'm sure given time that will be the case in Europe as well.

funkydude said,

No, they really don't, that name is even LESS popular than Android. The reason they don't "ask" for Windows Phone is the same as I've already stated, they don't know what OS their phone runs. They walk into a store and ask for advice. People don't walk into a store and ask for an "Android Phone", nerds do that. The only time a specific device or OS is singled out by consumers is the iPhone, due to the popularity of its name.

My experience has been much different. I see people walking into the store asking for the iPhone 4S and the Droid Razr. Before that people were asking for the Evo by name and the Droid X. How very interesting. I must live in a more informed state by your logic then.

Second, assuming you are right, No carrier will ever recommend a Windows Phone over iOS. Android devices are more profitable to carriers because of the bloat they add. When I walked into a Verizon store to buy the Galaxy Nexus, they wanted to sell me the Droid Razr. Because the Nexus device has no bloat and the Razr does.

Why on earth would the carriers ever allow both the iPhone and Windows Phone to be the top two phones? With the iPhone they have to because people ask for it. With Windows Phone, they will not be pushing it because it is just another closed off OS.

UndergroundWire said,

My Flaw? OK, try reading the Verge article. They said, NOBODY ASKS FOR WINDOWS PHONE.

The flaw with your statement is that people know they have Android they just call it a Droid.

Also is that why the Lumia is selling with AT&T because it is $49?

Look its a numbers game right? If there were 30 or 40 different WP7 handsets on offer - all with different casing designs and different price points - I'm sure it would kill the opposition.

Right now, there are incumbent (android / ios) devices that have a large / wide-ranging historical foothold on repeat sales - in 2 years time this will start happening with WP as people like me going for a new WP8 device having already owned a WP7 handset.

Having said all that, I think in this current market, MS should be supporting a loss on each Nokia handset so they sell brand new (SIM Only) for £149 Lumia 800 & £199 Lumia 900...on a 2 year contract on the "one plan" (3 uk) it should be free for £20/month for the next 12 months...THEN that sales acceleration will happen sooner and the kind of comments that the guy being quoted in the article as saying will cease.

Edit : Btw I don't think that the guy in the article saying that that Nokia lack innovation is agreeable. In fact - it is total BS. The Nokia Lumia series is extremely innovative and it is certainly a game changer.

Edited by L1520, Apr 17 2012, 1:26pm :

UndergroundWire said,

My Flaw? OK, try reading the Verge article. They said, NOBODY ASKS FOR WINDOWS PHONE.

The flaw with your statement is that people know they have Android they just call it a Droid.

Also is that why the Lumia is selling with AT&T because it is $49?

Quoting anything in The Verge regarding Windows Phone would be your second flaw.

UndergroundWire said,

Microsoft failed with the Zune hardware. Because it didn't offer anything more than the iPod.

That's a damn lie.

funkydude said,

The flaw in your logic is that you think "people" think like you, when infact most people don't even know their phone OS is called Android. They go for #1 the cheapest or #2 "the best" according to their friends recommendations.

Unfortunately you are correct. I know it's not all that hard to actually look up the specs and try to personalize your purchase before hand but most people just need a phone that does everything they need on the road. All the major smartphone OS's/devices do that so they'll go with what's popular, what their friends have and what is the best they can get with as little money possible.

WP7 said,

Right now, there are incumbent (android / ios) devices that have a large / wide-ranging historical foothold on repeat sales - in 2 years time this will start happening with WP as people like me going for a new WP8 device having already owned a WP7 handset.

I know people will disagree but with Windows 8 coming later this year, we will have to wait a few more years to see the rise of Windows Phone. As much as people say they're going to skip Windows 8, it won't stop it from selling millions upon millions of devices with Windows 8 on it. When Windows Phone 8 comes out and they're both in sync with each other, people will start going to the stores asking for the phone with Windows on it. I can see the rise of Windows Phone to be right up there with Android and iOS. I can easily see them all getting almost identical shares of the market with no one OS standing out. That's a few years away. Until then, we have to hear haters saying it's going to fail or it sucks. We have fanboys from 3 different OS's now, technically 4 but the big 3 get pretty stupid with it.

UndergroundWire said,

Why is this acceptable? Microsoft does this all the time with entry products. They out shined with the Xbox 360 because they came out with something that offered more.

Microsoft failed with the Zune hardware. Because it didn't offer anything more than the iPod. Windows Phone doesn't offer anything more than the competition either. Will Windows Phone 8 change that? Microsoft can pump all the money they want into this, but they have to offer more to get me to switch.

Xbox didn't sprint to where it is now. It's 10+ years in the making. It had Sony and Nintendo to deal with. It stayed in the game and kept putting in resources. http://www.xbox.com/en-GB/xbox2001-2011/

So many people wait for something to catapult into a raging success overnight. It's not one app or one single product. It's trying to become an ecosystem in its own right. Expecting it to become wildly successful in 2-3 years is likely foolish at best. It WILL catch up with hardware/software. It WILL continue to accumulate apps. With Win8 coming and WP8 coinciding, it will pick up speed. Will it win the race at that time? Nah, but it will be catching up.

laserfloyd said,

Xbox didn't sprint to where it is now. It's 10+ years in the making. It had Sony and Nintendo to deal with. It stayed in the game and kept putting in resources. http://www.xbox.com/en-GB/xbox2001-2011/

So you are agreeing with me then. Microsoft didn't become a success with the Xbox until the 360 which offered more. You are saying the same thing. You are also stating that because of Windows 8 and Windows Phone 8 it will offer more. Exactly what I am saying. They need to offer more.

UndergroundWire said,
It is so true. People just prefer an iOS or Android device. Windows Phone is just non-existent. But the good news is that there is a slight chance that Windows Phone will be the number 3 handset OS by default since Blackberry is not doing to well.

Yeah. BlackBerry has been doing very crappy phones lately. You need to replace a curve phone each 6 months due not support of sturdy handsets.

funkydude said,

No, they really don't, that name is even LESS popular than Android. The reason they don't "ask" for Windows Phone is the same as I've already stated, they don't know what OS their phone runs. They walk into a store and ask for advice. People don't walk into a store and ask for an "Android Phone", nerds do that. The only time a specific device or OS is singled out by consumers is the iPhone, due to the popularity of its name.

I actually know a lot of people that are far from 'nerds' that know exactly what OS their device is running. I don't know what kind of people you surround yourself with and frankly don't want to know but most people actually do know what OS they have, they usually refer to it as 'type' as in "what type of phone do you have?"

Not knowing about the OS, the version, or things like that aren't something you can really hold against the average user. That IS a 'nerd' thing.

Zedox said,

That's a damn lie.

All UndergroundWire does is talk BS about Microsoft & WP7. I even got a moderator warning after I APPARENTLY berated him a while back.

I was shocked that he reported me for having an opinion lol!

Jose_49 said,

Yeah. BlackBerry has been doing very crappy phones lately. You need to replace a curve phone each 6 months due not support of sturdy handsets.

Is the Curve the one with BB7 on it. I don't keep up with handsets made by RIM anymore (until the BBX comes out). Anyway, there are issues of BB7 from what my brother tells me. He is the BB guy that stays informed of archaic technology (oxymoron).

KCRic said,
I actually know a lot of people that are far from 'nerds' that know exactly what OS their device is running. I don't know what kind of people you surround yourself with and frankly don't want to know but most people actually do know what OS they have, they usually refer to it as 'type' as in "what type of phone do you have?"

Not knowing about the OS, the version, or things like that aren't something you can really hold against the average user. That IS a 'nerd' thing.

Exactly. My experience shows that people call android, droid. They have no clue to what version they have though.

WP7 said,

All UndergroundWire does is talk BS about Microsoft & WP7. I even got a moderator warning after I APPARENTLY berated him a while back.

I was shocked that he reported me for having an opinion lol!

So why aren't you mad at Neowin for giving you the warning of your so-called "opinion"? Perhaps your language was harsh and you deserved it?

Logic = Flawed!

But back to the point at hand, You are saying Microsoft didn't fail with the Zune hardware? That statement you are saying is BS.

I apologize, let me go buy a Zune device now. Oh wait I can't. They have been discontinued yet I still can buy an iPod. Think again before saying my statement is BS. Think again before you try to berate me and get another warning. Do me a favor, just think. Not asking for much.

UndergroundWire said,

So why aren't you mad at Neowin for giving you the warning of your so-called "opinion"? Perhaps your language was harsh and you deserved it?

Logic = Flawed!

But back to the point at hand, You are saying Microsoft didn't fail with the Zune hardware? That statement you are saying is BS.

I apologize, let me go buy a Zune device now. Oh wait I can't. They have been discontinued yet I still can buy an iPod. Think again before saying my statement is BS. Think again before you try to berate me and get another warning. Do me a favor, just think. Not asking for much.

Lol thanks for apologising at last - you are forgiven... now I have had an apology we can move on.

I had an iPod Classic...recently sold cause sound quality was APPALLING (320kbps before you go down that road)..guess what I bought instead...No, not an Ipod Touch, no an Ipod (no better SQ wise)..I bought a Sony NWZ-A867 because it dumps all over the Apple products (and everything else) for music.

There will be a replacement for Zune hw...it will be known as WP8....it will be awesome. I know, I have been in touch with Ballmer & Elop about it.

Zedox said,

That's a damn lie.


Indeed it is a damn lie. Anyone who's ever used a Zune or Zune HD knows the devices were better for audio and video than the iPod's ever were. The problem with them was because MS refused to market them. Hard to sell something if no one knows anything about it. Why MS even bothered to have Zune in the first place when they never marketed it beats me. They've shot themselves in the foot several times because of the lack of marketing, and that goes beyond the Zune.

These days ecosystem is more important than a device. IF MS were smart they'd make a media device that uses Windows Phone without the phone. We all know that will most likely never happen. Then again, MS did finally simplify the Windows 8 SKU's...

xiphi said,

Indeed it is a damn lie. Anyone who's ever used a Zune or Zune HD knows the devices were better for audio and video than the iPod's ever were. The problem with them was because MS refused to market them. Hard to sell something if no one knows anything about it. Why MS even bothered to have Zune in the first place when they never marketed it beats me. They've shot themselves in the foot several times because of the lack of marketing, and that goes beyond the Zune.

These days ecosystem is more important than a device. IF MS were smart they'd make a media device that uses Windows Phone without the phone. We all know that will most likely never happen. Then again, MS did finally simplify the Windows 8 SKU's...

I'm confused, are you agreeing or disagreeing that the Zune hardware failed? Anyway, I had the Zune 80GB, 120GB and the HD. They were great devices. Being a great device doesn't mean it can't fail. Microsoft just couldn't compete against Apple which dominates the MP3 market. THAT IS NO LIE. I'm open for a counter argument on that FACT.

WP7 said,

Lol thanks for apologising at last - you are forgiven... now I have had an apology we can move on.

I see how you thought why you got a warning for an opinion. You misread things. Nowhere did I ever apologize for that incident but let's move on anyway.

WP7 said,
There will be a replacement for Zune hw...it will be known as WP8....it will be awesome. I know, I have been in touch with Ballmer & Elop about it.

Sweet, how much are they? Do I need to pay a monthly fee? Please ask Ballmer or eFlop.

Edited by UndergroundWire, Apr 17 2012, 5:36pm :

"if the Lumia with the same hardware came with Android in it and not Windows, it would be much easier to sell."

Wow, if the same hardware came with Android in it, it would lag in levels beyond comprehension. I don't think it would sell at all in that case. Maybe these carriers need to educate themselves on the selling points of Windows Phone instead of pushing AdDroid phones all the time.

Enron said,

Wow, if the same hardware came with Android in it, it would lag in levels beyond comprehension. I don't think it would sell at all in that case. Maybe these carriers need to educate themselves on the selling points of Windows Phone instead of pushing AdDroid phones all the time.


So ultimately it comes down to marketing which Nokia just cannot match with Apple or even Samsung. On a side note, the music they use on Nokia Lumia adverts is annoying at its best after multiple listens.

sanke1 said,

So ultimately it comes down to marketing which Nokia just cannot match with Apple or even Samsung. On a side note, the music they use on Nokia Lumia adverts is annoying at its best after multiple listens.
aww i like TEED

Enron said,
Wow, if the same hardware came with Android in it, it would lag in levels beyond comprehension...

Lumia hardware is not heavy enough for android, android would struggle with performance on it

sanke1 said,

So ultimately it comes down to marketing which Nokia just cannot match with Apple or even Samsung. On a side note, the music they use on Nokia Lumia adverts is annoying at its best after multiple listens.

so far nokias marketing has been much better than samsung which is downright horrible. look at the nokia events in time square and london. ever seen samsung light up entire buildings?

Enron said,

Wow, if the same hardware came with Android in it, it would lag in levels beyond comprehension. I don't think it would sell at all in that case. Maybe these carriers need to educate themselves on the selling points of Windows Phone instead of pushing AdDroid phones all the time.

yup. android is so bloated it requires like a quad core just to match it. the device itself with its colors and shape are perfect match to the OS. android would bastardize it

Deviate_X said,

Lumia hardware is not heavy enough for android, android would struggle with performance on it

I don't think Android would 'struggle' on this hardware. The issue is their older than sin SOC - MSM8255?! Adreno 205?! This is a CPU used in Android phones from almost 2 years ago but clocked at a higher frequency. The Adreno 205 well it just sucks. 720p video is well behind it's time. That being said, these phones could run Android just fine - they'd just be well behind the mark and would only be a low to mid level device. Not the high end device their being marketed as.

Couple that with an OS that people really don't want (at least from how things are playing out) and this whole campaign is just DOA.

Enron said,

Wow, if the same hardware came with Android in it, it would lag in levels beyond comprehension. I don't think it would sell at all in that case. Maybe these carriers need to educate themselves on the selling points of Windows Phone instead of pushing AdDroid phones all the time.

You and all the loons who agree with you are stupidity wrong.
Android Gingerbread runs fast on many devices that still have single core CPU's and GPU's and have 512MB of RAM. Windows Phone OS would run just fine on them. You dont need dualcore unless you have fancy features ike 1080P recording and fancier cameras and the like.

You all need to lay off the glue. I just sold a Droid Incredible running Android 2.3, and the device has a 1Ghz Snapdragon w/512Mb of RA<...if it had Windows Phone it would run identical to Windows Phone on the lumia 800/900.

These carriers simply dont want to push Windows because they have gotten spoiled on iPhone and Android devices selling without them needing to do any work. Yet they all worked hard when Android first appeared.

They are being lazy and so is your thinking.

Enron said,

Wow, if the same hardware came with Android in it, it would lag in levels beyond comprehension.

I have a single core cortex in my ICS tablet, and it works great. Of course, multi-core would be better because of Android's real multi-tasking. Windows Phone can't do real multi-tasking, so there's little need for that technology.
Enron said,

I don't think it would sell at all in that case. Maybe these carriers need to educate themselves on the selling points of Windows Phone instead of pushing AdDroid phones all the time.

I think carriers are in a better position to judge the market than us. Clearly they aren't impressed with the software. Nokia should just release an Android phone so it can survive. As it stands at the moment, Windows Phone is going to be its downfall.

TechieXP said,

You and all the loons who agree with you are stupidity wrong.
Android Gingerbread runs fast on many devices that still have single core CPU's and GPU's and have 512MB of RAM. Windows Phone OS would run just fine on them. You dont need dualcore unless you have fancy features ike 1080P recording and fancier cameras and the like.

You all need to lay off the glue. I just sold a Droid Incredible running Android 2.3, and the device has a 1Ghz Snapdragon w/512Mb of RA<...if it had Windows Phone it would run identical to Windows Phone on the lumia 800/900.

These carriers simply dont want to push Windows because they have gotten spoiled on iPhone and Android devices selling without them needing to do any work. Yet they all worked hard when Android first appeared.

They are being lazy and so is your thinking.

Whilst I don't think that Android can compete with WP7 on a spec for spec basis, I do agree that it it laziness & easier selling Android currently for reasons I've noted in previous posts above.

sanke1 said,
They have a point. The advertising for Lumias is just not up to the mark which will make people want em'.

You mean those creepy big brother type ads that is kind of voyeuristic?

sanke1 said,
They have a point. The advertising for Lumias is just not up to the mark which will make people want em'.

I have to agree to some degree that the advertising isn't what it could be. but it is a lot better than the MSFT advertising which has always been created by the failed class of communication arts schools.

sanke1 said,
They have a point. The advertising for Lumias is just not up to the mark which will make people want em'.

If the UK carriers are anything to go by, they left it on the shelf in the corner. The Windows Phone wasn't even mentioned to me when I visited 4 major carrier retail shops and it was only a mobile warehouse centre that had them on the shop display next to the likes of GII and 4s. AND not only that but the phone was bare, not even the 'Into' app was installed on it.
So it was like 5 blank tiles vs android's flashy, colourful swooshing screen by defaul. It was only when I commented to the retail assistant when trying to buy a out of stock android phone that I was interested in the Windows Phone, that he promptly took out his own phone and showned me how he had set it up and everything was there for him,all twinkling with information that was personal to him.

The retail stores in euroland aren't helping themselfs. Windows Phone is a different animal then the ones they're used to selling, the store staff actuall have to get off butt and show people what the phones can do and explain that they 'come to life' when they have your own personal accounts setup.
When the Windows Phone does get a bit of movement and people know what to expect from a Windows Phone, they can lay off a bit.

sagum said,

If the UK carriers are anything to go by, they left it on the shelf in the corner. The Windows Phone wasn't even mentioned to me when I visited 4 major carrier retail shops and it was only a mobile warehouse centre that had them on the shop display next to the likes of GII and 4s. AND not only that but the phone was bare, not even the 'Into' app was installed on it.
So it was like 5 blank tiles vs android's flashy, colourful swooshing screen by defaul. It was only when I commented to the retail assistant when trying to buy a out of stock android phone that I was interested in the Windows Phone, that he promptly took out his own phone and showned me how he had set it up and everything was there for him,all twinkling with information that was personal to him.

The retail stores in euroland aren't helping themselfs. Windows Phone is a different animal then the ones they're used to selling, the store staff actuall have to get off butt and show people what the phones can do and explain that they 'come to life' when they have your own personal accounts setup.
When the Windows Phone does get a bit of movement and people know what to expect from a Windows Phone, they can lay off a bit.

The carriers here are the same. When Windows Phone was first released to ATT, I went in to look at them. At the time I had an iphone 4. I told the associate I wanted to see the new Windows Phones. He asked why those and not iPhone. So I pulled the iPhone out my pocket. He then said why would I want to downgrade to Windows. I said, its not a downgrade if the phone does what I want.

I dd purchase the Samsung device first, but I didn't like the cheap feel. I then tried the HTC Surround, but I didn't like the LCD. if the Samsung screen could have been on the HTC Surround, that would have sealed the deal. After using AMOLED, I dont like backlite LCD's anymore.

I decided now I wanted to wait for the second release after Mango to get better devices. OI do want the Lumia 900, but I refuse to go to ATT for it. It needs to come to Verizon. But even with the single one VZW has, the HTC Trophy, the associate was surprised I wanted to look at the phone. The only thing I didn't like was the size. I also like the T-Mobile version of the trophy in white, but again, it is to small. My next device must be 4.3" or better.

Verizon refused to get on the bandwagon bec they don't sell Windows devices very well. But it is also because they don't push them. They pushed Android hard with the Droid branding to fight iPhone until they got one. Even tho they still brand some Android devices as Droid, they are marketing them as hard as they did at first.

All these carriers want to push iPhone because Apple forces the carriers make a sizable investment upfront. In other words, they basically prepay for how many devices they think they can sell and for that they push the sales crew to push iPhone first