European carriers: Lumia phones are 'not good enough' to compete


Recommended Posts

(Spork)

We also know how android runs on dual-core devices. Still like crap.

lol WUT ! my evo3d when i had it run great after i rooted it even better sorry if you have a phone that just plain sucks but dont lump all the phones together

Link to post
Share on other sites
(Spork)

Bunch of Windows fanboys in this thread. I recommended my uncle a Nokia Lumia 710. He is not happy with the phone for 3 unfixable reasons

1. Sound from speakers is not loud enough

2. He hates WP7.5 OS on it. He asked me the reason for things to be hidden in menus (Its a hit and miss with OS. Microsoft will not alter the fundamental design. So unfixable)

3. Battery life lasts him less than a day and after updating to latest version (I highly doubt it can be fixed in software update if original battery is of lower capacity to begin with)

The overall WP7 experience does not wow us like ICS or even iOS. Top that with lame fake advertising (the Indian chick ad) Nokia comes up with does not help anything.

good god just how much battery life is needed i get a full days charge from my phones ... less than a day i LoL @ this

Link to post
Share on other sites
Muhammad Farrukh
"IF THE LUMIA WITH THE SAME HARDWARE CAME WITH ANDROID IN IT AND NOT WINDOWS, IT WOULD BE MUCH EASIER TO SELL."

Well that just goes to show they know nothing about the optimization of Windows Phone and Android. They can't differentiate it.

Pfffttt

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
CentralDogma

Microsoft faces a plethora of problems breaking into the mobile market.

They?ve come in late to the game with Windows Phone 7, when Android and iOS were already well established. So, now there are many potential buyers that have gotten used to those competitors and have bought into their respective digital market places. Those customers will be very hard, if not impossible, for Microsoft to court over to Windows Phone.

What?s worse, there was more than a year before there was a flagship product (the Lumia). Now that it?s out so late in the Windows Phone 7 cycle, those in the know will be waiting for Windows Phone 8. Something Microsoft has not guaranteed to run on the Lumia.

What can Microsoft do?

Windows Phone 8 having compatibility with Windows 8 is a start, leveraging Window?s market share to Windows Phone?s advantage.

They?re going to have to through a lot of money at the problem. Every phone is subsidized now a days, you have a wide select of free or near free phones. But no one is subsidizing the real money hog: plans. Dropping the data plan to $10 or $5 from the $30 most charge would be huge and help them pick up the shrinking segment of the population not on smartphones.

If they want to pick up people already invested in Android or iOS, and like I said this is something they probably shouldn?t even bother with, they?re going to have to find some way to refund peoples investment in those other market place. If someone has invested $100 in the App Store, you?re unlikely to get them to switch to Windows Phone, but if you offer them $100 towards the Windows Phone Marketplace, it makes a better proposition.

And, as always, Kinect level advertising wouldn?t hurt.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Vice

If the phone had Android I'd recommend it to people and I'd buy one myself. But with Windows Phone I'm not interested in it in the slightest. I'm european btw.

Link to post
Share on other sites
techbeck

Thats to bad. Hoping WP7 does well so competition gets better. Shall have to wait and see how the public minus the carriers review the phone. Could be MS was to late, they need to advertise more, or WP7 will just take a little while to catch on. Who knows at this point.

I do think MS/Nokia needs to ditch the smoked commercials and focus more on why someone would want a WP7 phone over anything else. A few second faster upload speeds to FB are not going to cut it with the majority of the people out there. IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites
UndergroundWire

unibody, design and name, and of course there's NO 4,3 screen WP in Europe - Titan is more, Omnia 7 is less and 1st gen - and that's not Lumia 900 but Lumia specific but the Nokia Drive/Maps/Transport apps are a large appeal

Build quality, design, call quality, Nokia's outstanding support, Nokia apps, the screen.

Ill answer for him.

  • Build quality - an area most Android manufacturers neglect.
  • Camera- Carl Ziess lens
  • Nokia apps - They are great
  • Nokia clear black display. The polarised glass Nokia use make a huge difference when viewing in sunlight. Its one of the most important features imo.

These are just a few off the top of my head.

So the OS operates exactly the same. You get the Nokia collection and a bigger screen. So why is the Lumia getting all this attention? It doesn't change the experience of Windows Phone at all? It is basically the name. You are also getting more apps on it. Do you really blame people now if they don't get Windows Phone because they want apps?

You see Windows Phone can't differentiate itself from any other Windows Phone. Nokia is allowed to do it by having the Nokia Collection in the market.

But one thing is for sure, the Lumia 900 hardware design (external) is really nice. Too bad for the OS. I even like the Cyan color over the black or white design. If and when the app developers come to Windows Phone, you will see better specs on Windows Phone. Right now the OS and the apps that it has doesn't need it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
xeleraph

So the OS operates exactly the same. You get the Nokia collection and a bigger screen. So why is the Lumia getting all this attention? It doesn't change the experience of Windows Phone at all? It is basically the name. You are also getting more apps on it. Do you really blame people now if they don't get Windows Phone because they want apps?

You see Windows Phone can't differentiate itself from any other Windows Phone. Nokia is allowed to do it by having the Nokia Collection in the market.

But one thing is for sure, the Lumia 900 hardware design (external) is really nice. Too bad for the OS. I even like the Cyan color over the black or white design. If and when the app developers come to Windows Phone, you will see better specs on Windows Phone. Right now the OS and the apps that it has doesn't need it.

You're talking as though the Lumia series is supposed to change the experience and fragment WP before it deserves any attention. You asked for differences and you got your answer. Yet all you do is ignore them completely and claim that the Lumia series doesn't deserve attention because it doesn't offer fragmentation.

I thought Eric Schmidt was kidding when he argued that Android fragmentation is a good thing because it's not actually fragmentation, it's differentiation. But apparently it looks like there are actually people who bought his sales pitch.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
simplezz

"IF THE LUMIA WITH THE SAME HARDWARE CAME WITH ANDROID IN IT AND NOT WINDOWS, IT WOULD BE MUCH EASIER TO SELL."

Wow. That's pretty damning. I guess it proves what many have been saying all along. Nokia should have gone Android, or multi-OS like other vendors.

Link to post
Share on other sites
UndergroundWire

You're talking as though the Lumia series is supposed to change the experience and fragment WP before it deserves any attention. You asked for differences and you got your answer. Yet all you do is ignore them completely and claim that the Lumia series doesn't deserve attention because it doesn't offer fragmentation.

I thought Eric Schmidt was kidding when he argued that Android fragmentation is a good thing because it's not actually fragmentation, it's differentiation. But apparently it looks like there are actually people who bought his sales pitch.

- Actually I wasn't talking about fragmentation. But everyone did say Nokia Collection. That tells me the other handsets lack apps.

- Bigger Screen is not fragmentation since the resolution is still crappy. So that doesn't break any apps.

- 4G LTE is not really fragmentation since it is only the data speed. I suppose it can be fragmentation if Skype was finalized and said you can only make calls over 4G LTE or WiFi. But I actually did say to keep LTE out of this since world-wide it isn't available.

Where did you get fragmentation from when I posed the question, Do you really blame people now if they don't get Windows Phone because they want apps? That is how Nokia is really differentiating themselves. Either that or it is purely the Nokia name that is giving this phone attention. How did you miss that? Why are you making up stuff?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Vice

Where did you get fragmentation from when I posed the question, Do you really blame people now if they don't get Windows Phone because they want apps? That is how Nokia is really differentiating themselves. Either that or it is purely the Nokia name that is giving this phone attention. How did you miss that? Why are you making up stuff?

Although Nokia has made some apps for their Lumia phones I don't think the volume of those apps is in anyway going to sway someone from buying a Android or iOS device. Instead it merely sways someone from buying a HTC or Samsung Windows Phone to buying a Nokia Windows Phone. Basically Nokia isn't stealing marketshare from the market leaders, only from within their own very tiny ecosystem of Windows Phones.

And I would say the only reason that Lumia is selling is due to the beautiful industrial design of the Lumia 800 and 900. Had these phones looked like any other Android device or one of Nokias earlier Symbian phones they would not sell anywhere near as well as they do. It is that striking design that tempted me to buy one but I decided against it due to Windows Phone.

I think had Nokia launched the Lumia 800 with Android it would be one of the best selling smart phones on the market right now. But unfortunately they decided to go against the grain and choose a loss leader operating system to "be different". There is a good reason Windows Phone isn't the market leader, it sucks. They should have definitely gone with Android instead.

Link to post
Share on other sites
xeleraph

- Actually I wasn't talking about fragmentation. But everyone did say Nokia Collection. That tells me the other handsets lack apps.

- Bigger Screen is not fragmentation since the resolution is still crappy. So that doesn't break any apps.

- 4G LTE is not really fragmentation since it is only the data speed. I suppose it can be fragmentation if Skype was finalized and said you can only make calls over 4G LTE or WiFi. But I actually did say to keep LTE out of this since world-wide it isn't available.

Where did you get fragmentation from when I posed the question, Do you really blame people now if they don't get Windows Phone because they want apps? That is how Nokia is really differentiating themselves. Either that or it is purely the Nokia name that is giving this phone attention. How did you miss that? Why are you making up stuff?

What stuff am I making up? You asked what made the Lumia series different, completely ignored the answers you got, then asked why is the Lumia series getting so much attention when they don't offer fragmentation. You're not making sense at all. If you wanted to argue that people aren't buying WP because it "lacks apps", why not just say so?

The Nokia Collection is just one way the Lumia series is different. It's not "how Nokia is really differentiating themselves", which is simply something you made up. There have been at least three posts answering your question of how Nokia is really differentiating themselves, all of which you simply ignored to push your made-up argument.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
BajiRav

You see Windows Phone can't differentiate itself from any other Windows Phone. Nokia is allowed to do it by having the Nokia Collection in the market.

All OEMs can have their own section in the marketplace, it's not specific to Nokia (not sure if you meant that). A Windows Phone can differentiate itself and Nokia Lumia phones are a good example and Samsung to some extent. On the other hand, HTC and LG completely ****ed up by just tacking it on lackluster Android models.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
xeleraph

I think had Nokia launched the Lumia 800 with Android it would be one of the best selling smart phones on the market right now. But unfortunately they decided to go against the grain and choose a loss leader operating system to "be different". There is a good reason Windows Phone isn't the market leader, it sucks. They should have definitely gone with Android instead.

Really? Going by your argument, there's a good reason Firefox/Chrome aren't the market leader instead of IE, it's because they suck.

Market share often has little to do with quality, this has been proven time and time again. The reason Android is so popular is simply because there are so many models selling at bargain bin prices everywhere, which is why you see Froyo still having 25% of Android's usage stats, and the same will still keep happening with Gingerbread for at least 1-2 years from now. Windows Phone is an alternative to that; a chance for Nokia to attack the budget smartphone market that made Android so successful, but without putting the user through the crap experience that Android offers on low-end hardware.

Link to post
Share on other sites
UndergroundWire

Although Nokia has made some apps for their Lumia phones I don't think the volume of those apps is in anyway going to sway someone from buying a Android or iOS device. Instead it merely sways someone from buying a HTC or Samsung Windows Phone to buying a Nokia Windows Phone. Basically Nokia isn't stealing marketshare from the market leaders, only from within their own very tiny ecosystem of Windows Phones.

And I would say the only reason that Lumia is selling is due to the beautiful industrial design of the Lumia 800 and 900. Had these phones looked like any other Android device or one of Nokias earlier Symbian phones they would not sell anywhere near as well as they do. It is that striking design that tempted me to buy one but I decided against it due to Windows Phone.

I think had Nokia launched the Lumia 800 with Android it would be one of the best selling smart phones on the market right now. But unfortunately they decided to go against the grain and choose a loss leader operating system to "be different". There is a good reason Windows Phone isn't the market leader, it sucks. They should have definitely gone with Android instead.

You are 100% right on that. That design is nice. Too bad for the OS. But the Nokia collection offers Nokia Drive and that I believe is the thing that draws people (if they want a WP).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr. Gibs

Do you really blame people now if they don't get Windows Phone because they want apps?

That depends? Are their some missing apps, sure. But then you have news articles that claim WP7 doesn't have Pandora, doesn't have dropbox etc.

Well yes it does, it has unofficial apps and they work just fine. Added benefit of the unofficial Pandora app? I get 0 ads, and I can skip as many songs as I want (and no I don't have a paid account).

And a lot of carriers seem pleased with WP7, so I'm going to take this article with a grain of salt. AT&T and Amazon have had the lumia 900 on their best selling list for a few days now. T-Mobile (USA) is pleased with how their 710 is selling. Canadian carriers seem pleased with the lumia series ( http://mobilesyrup.com/2012/03/27/canadian-carriers-and-dealers-happy-with-nokia-lumia-sales/#comments ). It's selling well in Finland (well Nokia's home country). WP7 has been doing well in Germany and in Denmark.

And honestly, everyone said the same **** when Android was released. "Oh god it will fail, the iPhone 2G is a billion times better and there's absolutely no way Android can compete." Well look where we are 4 years later, pretty sure Android is outselling the iPhone (for a variety of reasons).

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
CentralDogma

I think had Nokia launched the Lumia 800 with Android it would be one of the best selling smart phones on the market right now. But unfortunately they decided to go against the grain and choose a loss leader operating system to "be different". There is a good reason Windows Phone isn't the market leader, it sucks. They should have definitely gone with Android instead.

Nokia didn't choose Windows Phone to "be different". They were money hat'ed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Melfster

I think I don't agree. Right now Samsung is the leader in android phones. All the other android manufactures are are not doing terrible well. Spec wise Nokia phone would be behind there is no way could compete hardware wise with Samsung...so they have to differentiate on industrial design ... kind of like what Sony Erikson are doing. However the android market is to crowded. I think they did the best they could do.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BajiRav

Nokia didn't choose Windows Phone to "be different". They were money hat'ed.

If they had chosen Android instead then that's because GOOG was also offering them moniez. ;) Not to mention MSFT is getting a few good things in return that benefit all WPs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Vice

Really? Going by your argument, there's a good reason Firefox/Chrome aren't the market leader instead of IE, it's because they suck.

Market share often has little to do with quality, this has been proven time and time again. The reason Android is so popular is simply because there are so many models selling at bargain bin prices everywhere, which is why you see Froyo still having 25% of Android's usage stats, and the same will still keep happening with Gingerbread for at least 1-2 years from now. Windows Phone is an alternative to that; a chance for Nokia to attack the budget smartphone market that made Android so successful, but without putting the user through the crap experience that Android offers on low-end hardware.

Firefox isn't as good as it used to be and is losing Market Share. Chromes share is very high and in some metrics beats IE. For example the latest Chrome beats the latest IE in usage. But when you add all the IE versions together they beat Chrome. The reason for this is simple. Many consumers use whatever comes with their PC. Most PC's run Windows and Windows comes with IE.

And I would disagree with you that Market Share has little to do with Quality otherwise Windows Mobile 6.5 and Rims Blackberry would hold 90% of the market. Instead Android and iOS (much better operating systems) are dominating.

People buy new phones all the time and they want to buy the best phone at that time. That is why they aren't buying Windows Phones, they aren't the best.

Nokia didn't choose Windows Phone to "be different". They were money hat'ed.

I'm just going by what Nokia themselves said. They chose Windows Phone because everyone else was using Android and they felt they could be different by using Windows Phone. But we all now really know Microsoft paid them a billion dollars.

Link to post
Share on other sites
UndergroundWire

You are 100% right on that. That design is nice. Too bad for the OS.

What stuff am I making up? You asked what made the Lumia series different, completely ignored the answers you got, then asked why is the Lumia series getting so much attention when they don't offer fragmentation. You're not making sense at all. If you wanted to argue that people aren't buying WP because it "lacks apps", why not just say so?

The Nokia Collection is just one way the Lumia series is different. It's not "how Nokia is really differentiating themselves", which is simply something you made up. There have been at least three posts answering your question of how Nokia is really differentiating themselves, all of which you simply ignored to push your made-up argument.

Nokia drive specifically. No other WP manufacturer has anything close to that. Also I did answer that question, it only comes down to the build quality and Nokia's name. The camera, as someone mentioned, is not a compelling enough to bring someone to choose this phone.

What you are failing to see is that in the end, it doesn't really matter which phone you get. You still get the same experience.

If I said Windows Phone sucks. Oh by the way I have the Trophy. Can you sway me to get another Windows Phone today?

How about this, if I said Android sucks. By the way I have the HTC Hero. Can I sway somebody back to Android? Absolutely. The hardware was to slow for the OS. However when I had a single core Droid Incredible with Sense, the phone operated nice.

Same thing with the iPhone 3GS vs 4S, you can sway someone to come back to iOS because it is a different experience.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BajiRav

I think I don't agree. Right now Samsung is the leader in android phones. All the other android manufactures are are not doing terrible well. Spec wise Nokia phone would be behind there is no way could compete hardware wise with Samsung...so they have to differentiate on industrial design ... kind of like what Sony Erikson are doing. However the android market is to crowded. I think they did the best they could do.

Spec wise they are "behind" because of WP's stringent requirements and not because they couldn't put a multi-core processors in there.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BajiRav

Firefox isn't as good as it used to be and is losing Market Share. Chromes share is very high and in some metrics beats IE. For example the latest Chrome beats the latest IE in usage. But when you add all the IE versions together they beat Chrome. The reason for this is simple. Many consumers use whatever comes with their PC. Most PC's run Windows and Windows comes with IE.

And I would disagree with you that Market Share has little to do with Quality otherwise Windows Mobile 6.5 and Rims Blackberry would hold 90% of the market. Instead Android and iOS (much better operating systems) are dominating.

People buy new phones all the time and they want to buy the best phone at that time. That is why they aren't buying Windows Phones, they aren't the best.

Actually wrong on two counts:

Chrome hasn't beaten IE (there was some explanation, look up if you have to)

All Dell, Sony PCs come with Chrome as default(last I checked) so your IE bundling argument doesn't stand.

Edit: **** why is neowin not merging comments? :huh:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Vice

Actually wrong on two counts:

Chrome hasn't beaten IE (there was some explanation, look up if you have to)

All Dell, Sony PCs come with Chrome as default(last I checked) so your IE bundling argument doesn't stand.

Edit: **** why is neowin not merging comments? :huh:

Neither Dell nor Sony are the market leading OEM's - Their competitors make up more than the market than they do. And even if they do come with Chrome bundled they still also come with Internet Explorer. People see the word Internet and know what they are doing. Chrome doesn't give an idea of what it is by just the name and I'd doubt many consumers who buy those computers with it bundled even use it, I mean for starters they are buying a Dell or a Sony notebook so they are obviously not all there mentally.

And no I disagree with you about IE beating Chrome. The latest Chrome does beat the latest IE in market share. http://www.tomshardw...sers,15053.html

Quote the article: "The most popular browser version was Chrome 17 with 29.51 percent. IE9 was a distant second with just 15.6 percent."

Link to post
Share on other sites
xeleraph

Firefox isn't as good as it used to be and is losing Market Share. Chromes share is very high and in some metrics beats IE. For example the latest Chrome beats the latest IE in usage. But when you add all the IE versions together they beat Chrome. The reason for this is simple. Many consumers use whatever comes with their PC. Most PC's run Windows and Windows comes with IE.

And I would disagree with you that Market Share has little to do with Quality otherwise Windows Mobile 6.5 and Rims Blackberry would hold 90% of the market. Instead Android and iOS (much better operating systems) are dominating.

You're being inconsistent. Frankly speaking, your argument that the reason a product isn't leading the market is because it sucks is complete nonsense, and when the flaw in your reasoning pointed out to you all you do is try to find excuses to hand-wave away your logical inconsistencies. Just because a product isn't leading the market is hardly evidence that it sucks, the web browser market proves that to anyone who isn't busy being blinded by their pro-Android fanboyism.

People buy new phones all the time and they want to buy the best phone at that time. That is why they aren't buying Windows Phones, they aren't the best.

Wrong. Teens who buy iPhones and the vast majority of average people who buy dirt-cheap Android phones have never made any research or objective comparison of which phone is the "best". The overwhelming majority of users simply can't tell which phone is the "best" even if their lives depended on it, what they do is buy whatever their friends are using, or whatever's cheap and what the salesperson is telling them to like how my dad did.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By indospot
      Nokia 5.4 is HMD's latest mid-ranger, packing a Snapdragon 662 for €189
      by João Carrasqueira

      After introducing the entry-level Nokia C1 Plus just yesterday, HMD Global is now back with a new mid-range model, the Nokia 5.4. The Finnish company has been refreshing some of its smartphones multiple times throughout the year, with the Nokia 5.3 announced just a few months ago.

      The Nokia 5.4 curiously packs a Qualcomm Snapdragon 662 chipset, which is an apparent downgrade from the Snapdragon 665 of its predecessor. Based on Qualcomm's spec sheet, though, the Snapdragon 662 does have a better image signal processor, promising zero shutter lag and support for 48MP cameras.

      That's exactly what HMD is promising for the Nokia 5.4, which is likely to be an advantage for most users. There's also support for 60FPS recording, as well as a 24FPS cinematic mode, which can record video in the typical 21:9 format of theater movies, plus "professional color grading". The rest of the camera setup includes a 5MP ultra-wide camera, a 2MP depth sensor, and a 2MP macro camera. Over on the front, there's a 16MP camera.

      The 6.53-inch display comes in at HD+ resolution in the 19.5:9 aspect ratio, and it has a punch-hole front-facing camera. The Nokia 5.4 also has a 4,000mAh battery, which HMD says should last up to two days on a charge or, as the company puts it, 42 commutes (assuming an average 67-minute commute). The battery only charges at 10W, however. In terms of software, the phone is running Android 11, and as usual, the company promises two years of major software updates and three years of security updates.

      The Nokia 5.4 is available now in select markets for €189. It comes with Polar Night (blue) and Dusk (pink) colors.

    • By zikalify
      Nokia announces affordable Nokia C1 Plus for €69
      by Paul Hill

      Nokia has announced its lowest cost 4G smartphone, the C1 Plus. For the low €69 cost, users get a 2,500mAh battery, 4G, and a large, crisp HD+ screen. The device is ideal for those on a budget want a modern Android experience, free of bloatware.

      The specifications for the new device are as follows:

      Operating system: Android 10 (Go edition) RAM: 1GB DDR3 CPU: Quad-Core 1.4GHz SIM card: Dual and Single SIM models available, Nano SIM Sensors: Ambient light sensor, Proximity sensor, Accelerometer (G-sensor) Rear camera: 5MP with flash Front camera: 5MP with flash Battery: 2,500 mAh, removable Storage: 16GB, MicroSD card slot supports up to 128GB Display: 5.45” HD+ in-cell, 18:9 Connectors: 3.5mm headphone jack, Micro USB charging Connectivity: Bluetooth 4.2, GPS/AGPS, Wifi 802.11 b/g/n The Nokia C1 Plus comes with a solid polycarbonate body that the Finnish firm says makes the device more durable. To further boost the security and convenience of the device, users can enable face unlock which lets you get past the lock screen just by letting the phone see your face. As the device ships with Android 10 (Go edition), there is more space reserved for your content but you’ll still probably want to be careful as 16GB of storage is not very much.

      Commenting on the new product, Juho Sarvikas, Chief Product Officer and Vice President of North America, HMD Global, said:

      The device isn’t available to purchase just yet but will go on sale at some point this month and will be available in just two colours; red and blue. Nokia didn’t mention whether it'll provide further OS updates for this device as it does with some of its others but it’s probably a lower priority than their more expensive products.

    • By zikalify
      Nokia to lead EU's 6G research project Hexa-X
      by Paul Hill

      Nokia has announced that it has been selected as the project leader for Hexa-X, the European Union’s main 6G research project. 6G is probably about a decade away from commercial availability but the creation of Hexa-X is a big step towards that end.

      Nokia and the rest of the Hexa-X consortium, which includes Ericsson, have identified six research challenges that need to be addressed to create the technical foundation of 6G, they include:

      The Hexa-X project was awarded funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program and has been described by Nokia as a “significant step toward bringing together key industry stakeholders in Europe to take the lead in advancing 6G.” The new project is expected to begin its work on January 1, 2021, and will run until the middle of 2023.

      In addition to Hexa-X, Nokia is also involved with other European 6G research projects such as 6Genesis and Horizon Europe Smart Networks and Services. The latter project is very important for the EU as it will help the bloc get ahead with regards to the development and deployment of 6G networks.

    • By zikalify
      Nokia research says 5G is 90% more energy-efficient than 4G
      by Paul Hill



      A new study conducted by Nokia and Telefonica has found that 5G networks are up to 90% more efficient than 4G networks. The findings were the result of a three-month study which looked at the power consumption of the Radio Access Network (RAN) in Telefonica’s network.

      The two firms were keen to highlight that although 5G networks will dramatically increase network traffic, it will not lead to a rise in energy consumption at the same rate, which they say shows their commitment to climate change.

      Despite the positive results, Nokia admits that 5G networks still require further action to make them more energy-efficient and to reduce their CO2 emissions. It said existing energy-saving features at the radio base station and network levels like 5G power-saving features, small cell deployments, and new 5G architecture and protocols can “significantly improve” energy efficiency of wireless networks when they’re combined.

      The study used solutions from Nokia’s AirScale portfolio including AirScale Base Stations and AirScale Massive MIMO Active Antenna solutions. Commenting on the hardware and study President of Mobile Networks at Nokia Tommi Uitto said:

      Both of the firms say they’re committed to limiting global warming to 1.5C. Nokia, in particular, said that it will be decreasing its emissions from its operations by 41% by 2030 and that it has helped customers who modernised their base stations to use 46% less energy. Last year, the firm said that it delivered zero-emission products to over 150 customers worldwide; this should help cut a lot of CO2 emissions that would have otherwise been produced.

    • By indospot
      HMD Global introduces the Nokia 6300 and 8000 with 4G and Google Assistant
      by João Carrasqueira

      HMD Global has announced the latest members of its family of feature phones, or "dumb" phones, as they're sometimes called. The new phones are the Nokia 6300 4G and Nokia 8000 4G, and they share some similarities in terms of specs and features, including the same Snapdragon 210 chipset, 512MB of RAM, and 4GB of internal storage, which you can expand via microSD cards.

      The Nokia 6300 4G naturally draws some inspiration from the original Nokia 6300 from 2007 in terms of design, but it's been modernized to be more suitable for the modern day. KaiOS can run some basic apps - including popular apps like WhatsApp - and it also supports the Google Assistant, so there are still some smarts. What's notable about it is that it's Nokia cheapest phone yet to offer that feature set, coming in at an average retail price of €49.



      In addition to 4G, the phone supports Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, A-GPS, and it has an FM radio, which is enabled by connecting a headset with the 3.5mm jack. The display is a 2.4-inch QVGA panel, which isn't meant to wow anyone, and the camera is also the bare minimum, being a VGA sensor, but it does have a flash, which can be used with the camera or just as a flashlight. There's a 1,500mAh battery, which promises up to 27.9 days of standby time and 8.2 hours of talk time.

      As mentioned above, the Nokia 8000 4G is very similar in terms of specs, and the biggest differences are in the design. It has a front panel that curves at the edges, including the number keys, and the back uses a "glass-like" material to make the phone feel more premium. It also comes in different colors that make better use of that design.



      Specs-wise, the only differences are the display, which is 2.8 inches diagonally, and the rear camera, which is a 2MP sensor instead of a VGA one. Everything else is pretty much the same.

      Both phones are available in select markets from today. The Nokia 6300 4G comes in Cyan Green, Light Charcoal, and Powder White colors and costs €49 on average. The Nokia 8000 4G comes in Onyx, Opal, Citrine, and Topaz color options, and costs €79.