It's a great form factor, I like it very much -- it feels slimmer than the iPhone: http://versusio.com/en/nokia-lumia-800-vs-apple-iphone-4s-64...
(click at the top right to view the phones in original size)
I'd love it with a different OS
I'd love it with a different OS
And some of the claims are downright weird ("1.9 newer Bluetooth version"? Really?).
It's everything that's wrong about checklist comparisons, made even worse.
Or a less power efficient OS. I'll go for the second.
Let's talk about compatibility with Linux, ergo, being able to use your phone as a mass-storage device.
Let's talk about compatibility with all major mobile web apps.
Let's talk about the ability, or lack thereof, to detach oneself from Microsoft's ecosystem, should you decide to get a Windows Phone. Who wants to use Bing, Hotmail, or the Windows Live stuff?
Let's talk about universal usage in modern society, resulting in apps for everything you could ever want. For instance, my university offers Android and iOS apps for navigation throughout the obscenely large campus.
Windows Phone 7 is a crippled system. It makes me sad, because Nokia makes great phones. It's a pity they didn't go with Android, which would give them the freedom to do whatever they want, not needing Google's permission. I would buy a Nokia Android phone in a heartbeat.
2. Based on my experience, they work pretty well.
3. Or gmail, twitter, facebook? (although bing kinda annoys me as a default search engine)
4. Just wait for WP7 userbase to grow.
Okay, this is getting silly. It's a phone, it's a mass storage device, it's a computer, it's a global networking device, it's a camera, it's a GPS locator, etc. It's all of them at the same time. Don't call it "a phone" and ignore everything else it can (or should be able to) do.
Sure, you can use Wifi, but that's slower, more cumbersome and wastes battery life.
Isn’t there a way to sync? That would be strictly preferable to a mass storage device.
And who said anything about it being manual? Mass storage devices can be synced. Mine certainly are.
2. Drag and Drop files.
That's geeky? I disagree.
No, I'm sorry. I want to access my files in whatever way I choose. What follows from the lack of mass-storage connectivity is that I can't access my files on a public computer, or a computer that I don't have admin rights over (e.g. computers in my university's labs). To actually defend this restriction is deplorable. It hurts all of us.
> 2. Based on my experience, they work pretty well.
I'm not going to take your word for it.
> 3. Or gmail, twitter, facebook? (although bing kinda annoys me as a default search engine)
This sidesteps my point: that Microsoft's online services, which are mostly pretty crap, seem to be the only viable option on WP7. Is this impression correct? I used a WP7 phone for 15 minutes in a store a few months ago, and it seems pretty heavy on MS.
Other commenters in this thread have pointed out that Gmail on WP is buggy and lacking in features. Gee, ain't that a coincidence?
> 4. Just wait for WP7 userbase to grow.
Hah. I've tried this before.
In Christmas 2009, I bought a hot new phone on a hot new platform. It was the most innovative phone out at the time. It had the best multitasking (), video calling, great PDF reader, and a great, fast, browser. It had a physical keyboard - which provided all sorts of nice features, like quick access to contacts by typing their names, or shortcut keys in every app. The platform was based on Debian Linux, and allowed native terminal access (i.e., it came rooted), so things like overclocking was a sinch.
In fact, save for WebOS, it was the only multitasking phone at the time. But its multitasking is still better than that of Android and iOS today.
The phone was the Nokia N900, based on Maemo 5. What happened? Well, the phone sold well, but Maemo eventually died. My phone is now running on a dead platform, and it sucks (apps are suffering bitrot).
So, I'm not going down that road again of buying a phone based on future aspirations. Buy what works now, because it's a good indication of what will work later.
If you're a Linux type(or MS hater) then these phones are not for you. The rest of the 99% of the planet might consider them.
>It's a pity they didn't go with Android, which would give them the freedom to do whatever they want, not needing Google's permission. I would buy a Nokia Android phone in a heartbeat.
Android giving them the freedom to do whatever they want? Huh? The source code of a new version is dropped over a wall after their competitor has already released a device with it(if the source is released at all). Android dev is nothing like the Linux kernel dev. Maybe you would know that?
Also, Nokia was in talks with Google over Android but Google wouldn't give them many concessions. Your anger should probably be directed at them.
And it's not even like you can complain about the lack of options on Linux. There's a ton of Android phones coming out every month, each better in specs than the month previous and they're pretty popular and have loads of apps.
What next, you'd buy the iPhone 5 but the only thing stopping you is that it doesn't run Android?
Careful. Those are not synonymous.
> Nokia was in talks with Google over Android but Google wouldn't give them many concessions.
Nokia wouldn't need concessions. Barnes & Noble didn't need the, nor did Amazon. They grabbed the code and used it. Android would be a good choice because a) Nokia could tailor the experience to whatever they wanted b) they already have extensive experience with Linux (and Android is Linux) and c) there is actually a market for Android phones
True Microsoft gave them a ton of cash to tip the balance towards WP7. That should also indicate what is actually needed to tip the balance towards making WP7 phones - that, unless US$ 1+ billion is involved, WP7 is not worth it.
In fact, the Nokia board specifically recruited a CEO who had experience in managing software companies(Macromedia/MS) just because Nokia was spiraling down because of the software and it was almost too late to right the course without the risk of completely dying.
>rue Microsoft gave them a ton of cash to tip the balance towards WP7. That should also indicate what is actually needed to tip the balance towards making WP7 phones - that, unless US$ 1+ billion is involved, WP7 is not worth it.
I think it was more about Nokia's need rather than because WP7 sucked as a choice. Regardless of WP7 sucking and Android rocking, Nokia would need to survive 2011 intact, and if making the hardware and writing drivers for WP7 took more than 7 months, what makes you think they can reliably modify Android(a software task that Nokia is weak at) in such a short span of time?
Remember, every month that Nokia doesn't have a viable smartphone platform on the shelves, it's bleeding mindshare, marketshare and money to run operations. They were also able to win the right to modify WP7 and get the latest source code before it's throw over a wall by Google after Motorola/Samsung/HTC already have a device on store shelves running it.
It could be that Nokia wouldn't survive long enough to put out an Android phone had it not received the money injection Microsoft provided for the to adopt WP7. Still, they took a very risky road. With that injection they bought time and it seems they kept a plan-B around Linux.
Anyway, I am sure Nokia will sell a lot of WP7 phones. It's not that hard to double WP7's vanishingly small market share. Their sales org is not aimed to you or me - they sell phones to telcos, not end users. That's also why they managed to get so out of touch with what the users wanted.
> Android giving them the freedom to do whatever they want? Huh? The source code of a new version is dropped over a wall after their competitor has already released a device with it(if the source is released at all). Android dev is nothing like the Linux kernel dev. Maybe you would know that?
The problem is that Google seems to be unwilling to develop Android in the open. With the fierce competitiveness in the mobile space, I think this stance is understandable (at the least).
Apart from that, Android 2.3 is completely open. Manufacturers can take it and do what they want with it. Look at Amazon.
Are you trying to suggest that Windows Phone offers Nokia better flexibility than Android would?
>Also, Nokia was in talks with Google over Android but Google wouldn't give them many concessions. Your anger should probably be directed at them.
Source for this? I'd be interested to read about it.
> And it's not even like you can complain about the lack of options on Linux. There's a ton of Android phones coming out every month, each better in specs than the month previous and they're pretty popular and have loads of apps. What next, you'd buy the iPhone 5 but the only thing stopping you is that it doesn't run Android?
This is a straw man argument. I never complained about this. My issue is with Nokia, specifically, choosing to go completely with WP7, which, for me, is completely unusable. I loved Nokia's phones (my current phone is an N900), so I see this as a real pity.
Please don't take offense at my criticisms of WP7.
About that, as far as the two markets I am most concerned, phones (we are talking about them, after all) and servers (where I work), Linux already took over the market.
WP7, OTOH, was written from scratch because it's predecessor (WinCE/WinMO) was so miserably broken Microsoft really had no choice but starting from scratch.