Hacker News Reader

Comment by martythemaniak | Hacker News Reader

I'm glad to see Anand focus so much on the price in the conclusion. A lot of the other reviews talked at length about lack of LTE etc, but that misses the point of this phone.

While it may disappoint many people who just want the best at any price, you can't ignore the fact that the N4 is half the price of other phones in its class. The price really is the killer feature of this phone.

I suspect there is lots of demand out there for this phone amongst regular folk. No want likes being chained to a carrier and everybody likes getting a great deal. I told my sister (non techie) about it and her eyes popped. She's very very excited about it.

View on HN

Ignoring OS, there are other phones that are getting much cheaper. Example is the new Lumia 920 that is $449 on ATT w/o contract. While it is $100 more expensive than the the 16GB Nexus you do get the following in addition:

* 32GB (+16GB)

* LTE

* [Removed]

Is this worth $100? I think probably so, but in any case, I think it shows that phones in this class (flagship like devices) are actually more price competitive than people may think.

Edit: To remove wireless charging per comment.

Nexus 4 does have wireless charging.

I'll take a lighter device + $100 over 16GB + LTE at least until LTE is widely available in my city (which is probably 2-3 years away).

But again, ignoring OS which is generally not a good idea when making a phone purchase.

Ignoring OS is the only way to make a fair comparison, since OS preference probably trumps the feature and price delta ( whether you prefer WP or Android).

The only way to fairly compare devices is to ignore the single most important aspect? No, I don't think so.

The single most important factor is also the most subjective. I personally dislike Android and wouldn't use this phone if you gave it to me for free, but I can still respect the price for hw. I'm surprised this even needs explaining.

Have you ever used Android 4.2? This phone ships with a new OS version that I don't think is out anywhere else yet. How do you know in advance that you will subjectively not like it? I hate Windows Phone 7, but I wouldn't dare say I hate Windows Phone 8 since I've never seen it IRL. How could I make such a judgement? It's not purely subjective, either. What's the point in having more RAM or a bigger screen if the OS doesn't handle those well? Or, if it handles it exceptionally well, that should be noted as well.

Android 4.0 is reasonably similar to Android 4.2 for many people. Just as WP7 is reasonably similar to WP8 too.

Then why bother comparing. It is a classic apples and oranges then isn't it?

The whole point is to compare the hardware to see how price competitive the phones actually are.

The 920 also has a much better camera, which is a big deal for some people (myself included).

Yeah, that camera is amazing, but I'm not sure I could handle Windows phone. It looks smooth and all, but I'm pretty locked into the Google ecosystem.

The 920 is a great phone, but FYI in UK the price is almost exactly twice the Nexus 4:

GBP 554 Nokia 920 GBP 279 16G Nexus 4

Out of interest, would buyng the phone outright from AT&T mean it's unlocked? Also is the phone available in the US from a non-carrier shop?

I agree completely. With the N4 google is finally making good on their initial mission with the Nexus line, that is, to get rid of the carrier subsidies nonsense. With a phone that is $349 off contract, this can really save people a good deal of money on phone contracts to. As for the lack of LTE, there is a good reason for that as well, as the N4 seems specifically aimed at T-mobile customers. T-mobile offers some of the best cellular deals for off contract phones, and if the other big carriers see customers flocking to T-mobile they will hopefully be pressured to lower their prices as well. I think it's great that Google is putting pressure on the carriers to get rid of the outdated on-contract model.

you can't ignore the fact that the N4 is half the price of other phones in its class.

I wonder why the phone is so much cheaper (both in absolute and relative terms) in the US than it is here in Sweden. Here it's exactly the same price as the SGS3 and the iPhone 4S and quite a bit more than the HTC One X.

I think it's actually illegal in the EU to sell products bellow cost. We call it dumping but it seems Amazon and Google are able to do it just fine in the US. So that might be one reason.

Its 299 (granted € not $) in Germany too, thats more expensive than in the US but still cheap for a phone like that!

Cool phone, LTE is a non issue for me since its not widely available here anyway and with the tiny amount of data your get here (i have 300Megs included in my contract after which it gets slowed down to dialup speeds) its kinda useless.

The US price does not include sales taxe (19% in Germany). If you take this into account is's still more expensive in Germany but less than 10%.

The odd thing is the Shenzhen Foxcon factory is closer to Berlin than San Francisco. Somehow, even excluding taxes, it's still more expensive in Germany.

And a difference of 7% is substantial for a product with no margins.

This is not why; the nexus4 is much cheaper than the SGS3 in the UK. (240/280 VS ~400).

Moreover, google and amazon do NOT sell below cost. They are near cost, for the cheapest version, at launch. Go look at how much tablets sell for in China if you think their tablets are below cost. (or miumiu phones).

I do think they might sell bellow cost. Of course, it's illegal to say it so they claim it's at cost. Amazon even brags there is no margin: http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2012/10/12/amazon-ma... but I wonder, if they are so desperate for market share, wouldn't get go a bit further. I think they do.

In Spain Google is advertising the Nexus 4 for 299€ / 349€. So I don't really know what is going on in Sweden. Maybe is because they don't use the euro as its currency?

Resellers don't sell it at the same price as the play store does.

I liked the fact they took it into account too. I did find this review of the IPad Mini particularly amusing:

"Lining those pluses and minuses up against those for the Nexus 7 – which garnered four stars – there's no doubt that this is indeed a five-star device. The 70% difference in comparative price is more than made up by the difference in build quality and software selection" (http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/oct/31/ipad-mini-r...)

Not arguing one way or the other but this and a few other recent reviews have made me wonder why tech reviewers seem to pay so little attention to price.

Because they get all the devices for free?

That's right! I'm buying this phone because of its price. It's cheap compared to other phones with the same specs. The lack of LTE is not really a setback to me (and I think to all others that live in a third world country). LTE is almost "not yet" existing in our region/country.

I am curious, in US, most carriers don't offer any discount for bringing your own device. So, how does spending $349 on Nexus vs buying a subsidized iPhone for $200 going to save anyone money or makes Nexus a better deal?

If you want to upgrade before the end of your term you typically pay back a prorated amount of your subsidy. So your free $600 iPhone costs $400 after one year, or $200 after two years. For a user who upgrades every 18-24 months, this device is almost cheaper than that fee by itself.

At least here in Canada, we also have a few niche players (WIND, Mobilicity) who differentiate themselves with slightly lower costs than the big three, but no subsidy on phones. In this case, I can buy a $300 Nexus 4 and switch, saving about ~$35 a month on my bill. My prorated subsidy from Telus is $14 a month, so I still save $21 a month over buying a subsidized phone. Even the iPhone, which is very heavily subsidized, doesn't cover the price differential between these carriers and the big three.

In conclusion: find a small, regional carrier that doesn't offer subsidies, save big money.

T-Mobile in the US used to discount their post-paid plans when you brought your own phone. They stopped doing that but started offering some pretty great prepaid plans:

http://prepaid-phones.t-mobile.com/monthly-4g-plans

I am on the $30/mo unlimited text, 5GB of HSPA+ data and 100 voice minutes plan and it's great. I reduced my monthly bill by 60%.

T-Mobile has discounted post-paid plans again if you bring your own device: http://www.t-mobile.com/shop/Packages/ValuePackages.aspx

I'm on the $30/mo "walmart" prepaid plan, but I'm considering switching back to post paid because you can't use any data roaming at all on T-Mobile prepaid.

Whoah what? There's no data roaming? What does that mean? I can't use data in another state?

People who don't want a contract, or people who are on a contract but already used their subsidized phone.

> you can't ignore the fact that the N4 is half the price of other phones in its class.

You also can't ignore the fact that in the US other phones in it's class are subsidized by $400 or more, upending this comparison greatly. Yes you're locked into a contract but it's not like Nexus 4 users get some special monthly rate. For some use cases being off contract is a god send, for most though, a subsidized iphone 5 or galaxy s3 is a better option at $100 cheaper (and a higher resale in case you want to break that contract).

On T-Mobile, yes, yes they do. I save $20 a month on my bill from bringing in my own phone.

This not true for all carriers. T-mobile has cheaper non-contract plans.

No-contract is 50 dollars for unlimited everything ($70 if you want 4G): http://prepaid-phones.t-mobile.com/monthly-4g-plans

With a contract it is 90 dollars for unlimited everything (which I believe is roughly standard across the industry): http://www.t-mobile.com/shop/plans/individual-plans.aspx

Yes all 3 people note that you can get a cheaper contract on T-Mobile. However the 500 lb gorilla none of them mention is that T-Mobile's network really sucks:

http://opensignal.com/coverage-maps/US/San%20Francisco/

T-Mobile in San Francisco makes AT&T's network look good and it's a shadow of Verizon everywhere.

> for most though, a subsidized iphone 5 or galaxy s3 is a better option at $100 cheaper

Is it really, though? As an example, T-Mobile prepaid offers $30/month for unlimited data (5gb @4g) & SMS, plus 100min voice. Poking at ATT's site the most comparable contract plan I see for iphone 5 is about $90/month. That's over $700 more out of pocket in a year if you go with the subsidized phone.

> That's over $700 more out of pocket in a year if you go with the subsidized phone.

That's the same savings you get with an iphone on Virgin Mobile/Cricket though [1]. Very few people do this though because Sprint's network sucks and the upfront cost is a turn off. In addition many people do not pay the full plan rate. My monthly AT&T bill is around $59 including fees.

[1] http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-57449345-94/why-a-prepaid-i...

I was actually surprised I didn't see more of Anand's jabs at Android or maybe too many comparisons with his conclusions with devices from other companies...and then I saw the article was actually written by Brian Klug. So good job Brian on this one.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com