Nokia's Windows RT tablet reportedly codenamed Sirius

We have been following the rumors and speculation about Nokia's plans for a Windows RT tablet for some time. Today a new report from The Verge claims that the code name for the product at Nokia is Sirius. It's a name that popped up on a list of rumored codenames for future Nokia products a few days ago.

The report claims that the final product will look a lot like Nokia's Lumia Windows Phone devices and a bit different than images of a prototype version that made their way to the Internet a couple of weeks ago. The report also says that the Nokia tablet is thinner than Apple's current iPad, weigs just under a pound and has a projected battery life of up to 10 hours.

The rest of the report repeats what's previously been rumored about the tablet, including that it will have a Qualcomm Snapdragon 800 processor inside, 2GB of RAM, and 32GB of storage, along with a keyboard accessory that also has an extra battery. Nokia is rumored to officially announce the tablet, along with a possible 6 inch Windows Phone device, at a New York press event on Sept. 26.

Source: The Verge | Image via Weibo

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

GameStop general managers getting a free PS4 and 7 games [Update]

Next Story

Surprise! All GameStop general managers will get a free Xbox One as well


View more comments

Nashy said,
Dunno how I'm brainwashed. It's pointless having the desktop mode on RT. MS need to make up their mind. Mobile or Desktop. Can't be both.

LOL, why would anyone need RT when there is Pro? Are you some kind of troll?

Here comes another corporation who wants to loose money. I don't know how much MS is going to help Surface write off for Nokia.

Auditor, I have a question for you - how can a commercial OS compete against a free OS? Windows has held off Linux due to not merely application count, but application quality. The ONLY advantages Android has, compared to RT or Apple iOS, are hardware cost/price (remember, Android costs little or nothing for OEMs; on top of that, it requires less in terms of hardware than RT) and app count. Yet Apple has the high end - which Android is purposely avoiding. Microsoft is going right after iOS with RT, and Surface.
Despite the thinking of some, iOS in general, and the iPad in particular, IS vulnerable. (The last two quarters of Apple's own sales numbers are, in fact, proving the vulnerability of iPad - not just to RT/Surface, but, to an extend, even to Android.) Just because Android OEMs - and Google - are making a conscious choice NOT to go there, does NOT mean that Microsoft should follow suit.

Since you asked it so nicely, I will answer your question. First of all you need to understand that we are talking about tablet ecosystem here which is relatively new and is completely app based unlike desktop environment. Linux can not compete on desktop front because so many commercial software are exclusively written for windows environment. The desktop market for Linux is very limited and I don't see Linux making any progress in desktop dominance.

But things are completely different on Tablet front. Most of the apps written are for either Andriod or iOS. Developers are writing those apps because these two are the most popular and have highest number of market share. This is exactly analogous to Microsoft having dominance in Desktop sector which they are so diligently working on to destroy. MS will never be able to catch up in Tablet market in a same manner Linux will never be able to catch up on desktop market.

MS is so late in tablet game and with such a poor and limited app selection that it will be very hard if not impossible for them to gain any solid ground in tablet sector. Android market strategy is not to compete on higher or larger margins but in number. Android biggest strength is in number which it can range from the cheapest to iPad comparable price range. This is the reason Android market share keep climbing despite iOS share dropping. You are right about MS not following Google's path but MS has lost the opportunity to make any dent in tablet market. In summary, MS on tablet will be same as Linux on desktop. Both will not disappear and will coexist together but there will remain huge gap between their respective market share.

The only reason I would disagree with you about it already being too late is the fact that the tablet market itself is still small compared to the pc market. Heck, even the smartphone market hasn't eclipsed it yet.

MS is late to the part for sure, but no chance to compete? I kind of doubt that.

All it takes is MS being willing to take their lumps up front, now, but aggressively pursuing improvements to their OS and to the app ecosystem. If they are willing to accept low sales for things like WP or tablets now, I could see them making a bigger dent down the road. But that means they cant give up on these platforms.

It has taken WP a couple of years to reach 4% of the market, but all the signs point to continued growth. The reality is that growth will be slow when you have two competitors in as a good a spot as Apple and Google. But as long as the trend remains up and MS keeps pushing, I don't see why they wont eventually have a much larger chunk.

Same can happen for win 8/rt tablets. Again, growth will be slow, but if they keep improving the software and commit to a good pace, then their market will grow.

MS can't give up on these things before they have even really begun to push it forward.

Tablet market is different than traditional PC market. Market is working toward reaching the equilibrium. Previously, PC was the only option for every household but now Tablet and Smartphone and two additional options. So Tablet will go upward and PC will go downward in near future but growth and decline will be in some what relative proportion.

MS may not abandon the Tablet market but they really need to focus on keeping their desktop market as well. MS need to spinoff Tablet from Desktop otherwise they will loose the game on both front.

MS did give up on long list of things, so if they keep loosing money at this rate then I won't be surprised if new CEO takes some change of course action. It will be interesting to watch the new vision of upcoming CEO of MS.

Well if the change is to abandon tablets and simply go back to focusing on keeping the same old desktop as it is forever, then MS really is in trouble.

If they can't improve 8 and make it work, then they will just become marginalized against the Google and Apple. The desktop market will keep shrinking, and MS along with it.

I just think that if they don't try to branch out now, they never will and they will be stuck in a shrinking box.

This goes beyond your personal opinion of Windows 8 or WP. Its about how MS competes in the changing market. Stagnating in the desktop world does not sound like a smart idea.

And Auditor (like a lot of folks looking at the tablet space) are thinking it's entirely about app count. App count gets folks interested and generates buzz - that much is true. However, what keeps customers is app/application quality. The tablet space is NOT the pre-tablet smartphone space. Also, some apps, while they can be commonly used on tablets and phones, are more critical on tablets than on smartphones - text-manipulation apps (especially e-mail) are a major example. Outside of Office365, what do Android and iOS have in terms of e-mail apps (for either tablets OR phones)? RT, on the other hand, includes OutlookRT. It's not a blown-up phone e-mail app - if anything, it's Outlook re-coded for RT. If I have a PC at all, I'm familiar with Outlook. (In fact, Outlook has been my default Windows e-mail application for seventeen years - on the OS X side, Outlook replaced Entourage.) Hence my transition curve is zero. Same applies to the rest of Office RT. That have a TON of value - and it's something that both iOS and Android outright lack. Android and iOS have that app count build-up because they DON'T have the actual apps, let alone applications, that Windows has. How many of the various Android and iOS apps are replacements for Office components or other features that are included with RT? (The same applies to the bloatware and crapware that RT OEMs include with their RT hardware - how much of that bloat and crap is, in fact, useful?) You chose Android based on PRICE reasons, and now you are trying to say that the entire tablet space is ONLY about price. I respectfully disagree.

You are right, it is quality over quantity which matters and as of today MS is lacking both. There will be less chance of having both factors in favor of MS if developers sense market is not favorable to MS store. This will be true if people keep bypassing start screen and spending less time on Windows Store.

Office on RT, I don't know what is fuss about that. There is no doubt that Office is good application but majority of people don't need full blown office suite on their 8-10 inch tablet. I don't know how many people are going to do full blown excel macro or VBAs on their tablet or smartphone. For basic and limited documents viewing and editing, there are so many free alternatives on Andriod and iOS which has excellent format compatibility with Office suite.

Email apps.. yeah right Android and iOS both comes with email client which you can setup for any provider. There is no complexity in that or so called transition period.

Price is one of the biggest factor for demand of product. Price need to be taken in context when launching the product and people need to perceive value in the product in order to justify the asking price. At this moment people don't see value in purchasing surace or MS vision at the price point they are offering and MS need to price accordingly if they even think of selling their inventory.

You might disagree with me as I does not matter to me but Price is one of the biggest factor for failing of Surface and we have proof that this device is not selling at the price point which MS decided it to sell. If price is irrelevant, as per your logic, then it will sell if it is marked at $1,500 and will not sell if it marked at $99. Ask any sane person and he will tell you the flaw in your reasoning.

MS tablets and phones are overpriced with same or worse specs and less software quality and choice. Most people think Metro is ugly and it has become associated with the similarly unpopular Windows 8 UI.

MS will continue to fail in the market until they address those core issues.

Most people think Metro is ugly? I see this said a lot, but I have no idea how you or anyone else knows that.

The only thing we know is the slow sales, I think these other complaints are more your own opinions, not the reality of 'everyone's ' opinion.

I will completely disagree that the phones are over priced and under powered. That's not an opinion, its a fact, just go look for yourself at any of the cell phone companies that sell these phones. Heck, even out of contract, there are some WP priced more than competitively.

I will agree about tablets though. If I had to guess why the tablets, especially well made ones like the Surface, are not selling well, it would be price and app library. The apps aren't there yet (same as WP was for a while, but at least it is now much improved) and the pricing needs to come down a little.

I think the concept is fine, they just need to improve the value.

I'll have to agree with the others: costs too much. If they want to be in this space, they have to realize they're really competing against Android and other Windows tablets (including Atom powered devices). This seems like its the Nokia tablet I've been waiting for, so I'll be getting it more than likely, but I'm a definite minority of consumers.

On the plus side, Nokia's marketing seems much better than Microsoft's. That's a plus. And, really, they've got some brand built up again, plus will hopefully not repeat the many other mistakes of Surface.

But first and foremost? A non-iPad ARM-based tablet simply should not be $499 to start, regardless of OS. *Maybe* if it's got a cellular connection, but even then it's a stretch to me.

$499 might not be unreasonable if it includes the keyboard/cover/battery accessory that was mentioned.

And if it does include LTE at that price, its even more reasonable.

All it takes is the right package and the right marketing to make that price work. If not, then $399 might be a better idea.

trooper11 said,
$499 might not be unreasonable if it includes the keyboard/cover/battery accessory that was mentioned.

And if it does include LTE at that price, its even more reasonable.

All it takes is the right package and the right marketing to make that price work. If not, then $399 might be a better idea.

Given how price conscious the market can be, I think that the lower starting price would be better. Let them add what they want. If someone doesn't want the bundle, or balks at the price, they have tablet only options with Android.

Also, accessories mean add on sales that retailers may like.

As a fan of Nokia and W8/RT? I don't think an RT device, even if its really good and "better" than the iPad (by whatever metric you want to use, including upgradeable storage, connectivity, bundled goodies, etc), can ask the same price as an iPad. They really need to go after Samsung, and that alone will be difficult enough...

trooper11 said,
But what is the price of an iPad?

Wouldn't an iPad with LTE cost much more than $499?

They start at $499. The Surface already tried matching, beating the storage (sorta), and on occasion including the type-cover. An iPad with LTE is usually $100-$129 more expensive than its non-LTE counterpart, but I really believe there's a significant profit margin built in for both Apple and the carrier.

Seriously: a smartphone costing $500-$600 can be bought, subsidized, for $200. I don't know why they don't do that with tablets. Certainly, if Nokia can get their RT tablet subsidized down to $300? I think that'll be good. Instead, at least with AT&T, they only subsidize $100, rather than the $200-$400 they will on smartphones.

They don't do that with tablets because the two markets are not - and never have been - the same. You can buy tablets with just wi-fi, or even tablets with none of that built in. (The base iPad supports wireless G or N, but nothing else - same applies not just to RT, but most Android tablets as well.) Unlike smartphones - or even cell phones in general - you don't need a wireless carrier to use them. (Good thing, too, as there are too many places where cell-tower coverage is, in a word - AWFUL. And that is in the United States. Europe? Asia? India? South or Central America? No thank you.) Also, most carriers DO sell tablets. (In fact, all of the Big Four in the United States do.) However, as is the case with smartphones, coverage is an issue. Further, practically everywhere, the COST of coverage is ALSO an issue. However, all of that is quite aside from the Android v. iOS v. RT debate, as it affects all equally.

Commenting is disabled on this article.