Comments Locked

69 Comments

Back to Article

  • jjj - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    The price is suicidal, nothing can sell at 300$ on ATT ,even less so a midrange phone ,with WP , no SD but with a nice (or maybe even great) camera.
    Poor Nokia just can't get a break .. damn Elopocalypse.

    I also wish they would focus a bit on video too, for some reason video doesn't get enough attention from phone makers and even reviewers.
  • crispbp04 - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    how could you possibly consider this a midrange phone? It's priced at the 32GB iPhone price point.
  • FoolOnTheHill - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    I think that's kind of the point. It's priced as a high end phone, but it's still a midrange (other than the camera) Windows Phone, so it doesn't tend to attract the type of people willing to pay $300 for a phone.
  • crispbp04 - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link

    Your logic is broke. You implied that the iPhone 5 is a high end phone. Explain yourself in jumping to the conclusion that the iPhone 5 is a high end phone while the Lumia 1020 is not. Use real logic and not retard logic.

    Lumia 1020 Retail Price: $602
    iPhone 5 32GB Retail Price: $749

    comparison: iphone 32GB vs. Lumia 1020 32GB
    NFC: NO vs. YES
    Mem: 1GB vs. 2GB
    Cam: 8MP vs. 41MP
    OIS: NO vs. YES
    PPI: 326ppi vs.. 332
    Res: 1136x640 vs. 1280x768
    screen: 4in. IPS vs. 4.5" AMOLED
  • sherlockwing - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    Android users see 4.5" 768p & MSN 8960 and automatically classify it as midrange
  • Stoli89 - Saturday, July 13, 2013 - link

    Why...1080p is way overkill on a screen below 5 inches. The 768p HD+ on the the Lumia 1020 is above "Retina" quality...more than enough for the most discerning human eye. It also packs super sensitive touch (fingernails, gloves, plastic styluses...all work), hi nit brilliance, and latest generation Clear Black Display technology. This is an AMOLED that will perform well in direct sunlight.

    As for the SoC...Nokia needs a powerful GPU and dedicated scaling chip for the camera module to manage the Billion per second calculation load the PureView oversampling demands. It seems the result is a very smooth user experience, especially if you settle for the noiseless 5MP setting and avoid parallel saving huge 34 and 38MP output files. I could care less if its dual core...as long as the product is fast and fluid...and the battery life is decent.
  • greyhulk - Sunday, July 14, 2013 - link

    Tell that to someone currently using a phone with a 1080p screen. I have had over a dozen phones in the last few years. My current three phones are all 1080p (S4, One, Optimus G Pro) and when I pull out my Nexus 4, I can easily tell the difference. I would not want to go back to 720p screens for anything.

    If you CAN'T tell the difference, you need to see your eye doctor. They are most certainly not overkill.
  • nikon133 - Sunday, July 14, 2013 - link

    Just wondering - what are your desktop/laptop screen resolutions?
  • toraji - Monday, July 15, 2013 - link

    armoled, deep blacks..and come on you look at a 4.5 " screen not your desktop I think you really need to take a look at and try a nokia phone, even the 521 ($149 without contract) has a great screen..you are making an elephant from a mosquito
  • jjj - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    Yes and Apple is know for it's reasonable prices lol. 16 extra GB of NAND are 10$, you triple that to get to retail pricing and you still are far bellow an extra 100$. Apple also doesn't sell all that many devices with more than 16GB,because of the stupid pricing.
    And it might have 32GB but it was Nokia's decision to cripple the device and not include a microSD slot , why they do that and who makes that decision is something for the regulators to fix actually,, but they certainly can't put their mistakes on the consumer.
    This pricing means 300-500k units per quarter in lost sales on ATT vs a 200$ pricing and Nokia needs share gains and brand visibility in the US where the young generations is just vaguely aware of the Nokia brand.
  • melgross - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    Why do you think so many other makers offer trivial amounts of flash? It's because flash for phones and tablets is EXPENSIVE! Just go and look at the better cards for cameras. You'll find that 32GB cards can cost as much as $100.

    This crap about flash costing $10 is a joke! That's the cheapest flash, which is designed for storage that doesn't change much. It has a very short life if you keep writing and erasing it. It's also extremely slow.
  • jjj - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    You actually have no idea what you are talking about and, while not very accurate (many pay less than that), you can easily go google for an isuppli teardown and see how they price it. If that's not enough and you dig deep you can find comments from execs from NAND makers about how much the NAND in phones costs.
  • michaelljones - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    What it 'costs' and 'what someone will pay for it' are two different things.
  • Bob Todd - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    Your point is entirely irrelevant considering the BOM estimates are based on what the companies PAY for the components, not what it costs to manufacture them.
  • kyuu - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    Wrong.
  • sherlockwing - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    HTC One 32GB is $200 on contract, I rest my case.
  • Stoli89 - Saturday, July 13, 2013 - link

    HTC One...caught using Nokia HAAC microphones for HTC's "Distortion Free Recording"...supply stopped by European court as it was deemed to violate Nokia Rich Recording's exclusivity. HTC Distortion Free Recording now under ITC review for patent infringement.

    HTC One Ultra pixels = 2.0 microns at 4 MP resolution
    Nokia Lumia 1020 Super Pixels = 3.2 microns at 5MP resolution
  • Bob Todd - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    Ignoring the fact that we know how much the flash costs from the BOM estimates that teardowns provide, Apple's own pricing disproves your theory. Yes, faster NAND is more expensive than slower NAND. But Apple charges $100 for a 16GB increase in NAND. And Apple charges the same $100 for a 64GB increase in NAND (from 64GB to 128GB). Apple isn't in the habit of losing money, so there is margin built into every one of those bumps.
  • Winterblade - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    It's a midrange because of the specs, mainly it's not Full HD and it does not have the latest SoC, that being said, WP8 it's not nearly as demanding as android, or at least that's the impressión I got from playing with a lowish end Lumia that was butterly smooth (at least the OS navigation part :P).
    Kudos to Nokia for being able to cram that sensor in a such a slim body, now we only need a Lumia PureView phone with interchangeable lenses.
  • jjj - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    The great part about the low end Lumias is that they use Krait cores and that's why they are fast. Nokia is hold hostage by M$ not supporting anything else so they got to pay a bit more and use Krait even in the low end but the upside is that the phone is actually nice.
  • sherlockwing - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    Slim Body??? This phone is over 10cm thick, the GS4 is only 7cm.
  • sherlockwing - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    Correction: mm, not cm.
  • Roland00Address - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    The iphone 4s is 9.3 mm thick. Yes their are thinner phones on the market now, but there are very little thin phones with such camera optics.
  • michaelljones - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    When you say 'not full HD' what do you mean? That the screen isn't 1080p? Cause the camera is BEYOND HD, hell it's beyond 4k at 7712 x 5360 pixels, and the video is 1080p.

    And I'll say the same thing to you I said to jjj about the SOC: who cares? It's one generation behind the latest, but name something on a Windows phone where that would make a difference?
  • sherlockwing - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    I think the High storage versions of Note 2 sells for $300 on ATT.
  • bakedpatato - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    That's the first reaction I had to the price but then again, this is a unique product.
    Everyone from DPReview to AnandTech loved the 808 but hated Symbian...therefore, combined with carrier backing, this guy could do well, not SGS4 well but Optimus G "well".

    I could see it becoming very popular among the camera nerds to even average Joes if Nokia manages to market it well enough to show that it has better quality than the average P&S.
  • michaelljones - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    I agree. And I agree with the lady in the audience that asked Elop how they were going to market this thing as they've not done a very good job to date. It's all on Nokia to make the sale.

    That said I'm sorry that they continue to see AT&T as their premier launch partner in the US.
  • michaelljones - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    Not sure what you mean?

    As Windows phones go, this is top end. Comparing it to Android phones in the context of processor, etc. is a bit unfair. Further, the people saying this isn't HD are just wrong. Sure the screen is only 768 pixels wide, but the last time I looked 720p is still considered HD (go look it up, I'll wait), and the pictures are FAR beyond that and the video is 1080p. Who cares that the 4.5" screen isn't 1080p. For a screen that small it's mostly a worthless spec. If you like carrying around lots of 'spare' capacity that you can't use, then be my guest, but I don't think a lot of phone buyers make a decision that way.

    As to the sensor size, I challenge anyone to find a camera that has a 41MP sensor that they consider 'affordable'. Hell, the top of the line Canon EOS-1D X is on 19MP and costs $6,000 bucks! Now, it's important what you DO with that sensor (see HTC One for instance), but even if it holds up to a pro-sumer camera, you are still talking about an ~$600-$700 camera INSIDE the phone you are already carrying.

    Kill two birds with one stone? You bet. I spent $300 on the last Canon Digital Elph I bought 3 years ago at Costco with a 10MP sensor at the time, and I hardly ever carry the thing anymore because it's just one more thing to pack around.

    The only thing I'm a little disappointed in is the lack of memory expansion. It would have been nice if the camera body held extra storage along with the battery, etc., though we have no idea yet how many pics can be saved on the camera or what the file size is from anything I've seen. The 32GB will help a little, but I'm currently using about 14GB of the 32GB on my Lumia 928, so hard to say how fast I'd fill up 16GB before I'd need something to empty the phone too. However, this is one place where the underlying platform is a bit of a problem as Windows Phone isn't really made for using 'removable' media. So that's MS's fault (and one I hope they correct in WP 8.1). It hurts Nokia a little in that regard though, I agree and is something to watch.
  • jjj - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    By your logic the best FF OS phone is high end despite the very low end specs. Maybe we should all get that at 100$ off contract, that's great for a high end smartphone.
    This is sold as a phone and that's what the consumer will judge it as , the camera is an upside but Nokia starts with a bunch of handicaps as it is. WP , the brand, no SD, the specs. 200$ would fly despite the negatives but 300$ is crazy. The average ATT user has no clue what a megapixel is anyway and his iphone is cheaper and good enough to take selfies.
    They will be forced to lower the price in 2-3 months max but that's far from ideal.
  • michaelljones - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    No, by my logic the best phone is the one that does what you want it to do, somewhat regardless of the specs. My father doesn't care what the processor is in any phone he's ever owned (and he's on his 3rd iPhone at the moment), same for my wife who is on her second Windows Phones, and on and on and one. So I think the majority of people by phones on capability and ecosystem, not on a spec sheet. You and I are NOT typical.

    As to your second comment about this being sold as a phone and consumers will judge is as, I disagree. That said I think it's up to Nokia, as Elop noted, to tell that story, and so far they've done a 'meh' job of it. But you look at a grandparent and say 'with this phone you can take pictures of your baby grandkid that are as good or better than a separate camera, AND it is your phone and it costs less than either of those devices singularly', then I think that's a story that CAN resonate with a part of the consumer population. I agree it won't be iPhone big, but is it big enough to be popular? Time will tell.

    I also disagree about ATT users not knowing what a megapixel is. I bet if you looked at a cross section of ATT users, many of them probably have a P&S camera or better that clobbers the phone capability in just about any current phone over a wider range of photo opportunities. I'm talking about a camera in the $250+ range mind you, not the $100 throw aways everyone has to say they have a $100 camera. I'd say the average ATT user probably has ZERO clue however about what the hell the processor is inside their phone, nor do they care.

    The SD card one I can't disagree with you on though. That one is still a pain point depending on the size of those JPEGs.

    Beyond that you haven't given any justification beyond the processor as to why you consider this a middle of the road smartphone from a specs reason.

    The iPhone 5 is 1136x640 (not even 720p there), has an 8MP camera, and at 32 GB of storage, no SD card slot, and costs the same as the Nokia.

    The HTC One has a Snapdragon 600 vs a Snapdragon S4 here (but in performance terms, they aren't all that different (http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Qualcomm-Snapdragon-S4-Pro... a 1080p screen, a 4MP camera, and no SD Card, and granted it's only $99 upfront. So price may win there.

    And the list goes on and on.
  • kyuu - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    Even though no OEM has currently taken advantage of it, I could've sworn that WP8 already has support for removable microSD storage.
  • michaelljones - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    It does, but it doesn't treat it that way you'd think of like Android does. There are ways to make it save all your pictures, audio, etc. to the SD card, but it's not seamless.
  • michaelljones - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    Oh, and there ARE OEM's taking advantage of it. My wife's VZW Lumia 820 has a removable back and removable SD card. She just never takes it out. *shrugs*
  • kyuu - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    Ah right, sorry. I forgot that Nokia's non-flagship phones have removable microSDs. Damn, I really can't fathom why they view that as a lower-end feature that can't be included in their flagships.
  • michaelljones - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    Form over function. Thank Steve and the fruit company.
  • 4wayhandshake - Sunday, July 14, 2013 - link

    WP does support removable storage but it has issues -- even WP 7 supported it.
    For example, since there's not native file manager you can't relocate files. You cannot control where apps are installed, so there no way to install them there either. If you can't relocate apps or control where they store their data, what good is it?

    MS needs to fix these issues before it's really of use.
  • jeffkibuule - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    It's the stock Android camera UI Google has always wanted to build, done right!
  • juicytuna - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    How big is the sensor? I'm hearing it's been reduced from 1/1.2" to 2/3" which explains the significantly slimmer bump than the 808. If that is the case, I wonder what it means for the image quality.
  • michaelljones - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    Nokia lists it as 1/1.5". http://www.nokia.com/global/products/phone/lumia10...
  • Drazick - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    This looks amazing.
    Probably should be everyone's next smartphone.
  • michaelljones - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    Here are the full camera specs from Nokia's website:

    Main camera sensor: 41 MP, PureView .
    .Camera resolution: 7712 x 5360 pixels.
    .Main camera focus type: Auto focus .
    .Carl Zeiss Tessar lens: Yes .
    .Sensor size: 1/1.5 inch .
    .Main camera f-number/aperture: f/2.2 .
    .Camera focal length: 26 mm.
    .Camera minimum focus range: 15 cm.
    .Camera image formats: JPEG .
    .Flash type: Xenon flash .
    .Flash operating range: 4.0 m.
    .Flash modes: Off, Automatic, On
  • Lonyo - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    What an utterly worthless product.

    Make a phone that has a high res camera (large pictures). Has a special grip with extra battery (so you can take more pictures without the battery dying, since you can't replace the battery).

    Then make it so it has a fixed amount of space to store all those large pictures you are taking.

    They fixed the non-user-replaceable battery issue with the camera grip, then made a new issue with storage instead. Good job, you almost made it.
  • kyuu - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    This is the one concern I can agree with, though I wouldn't go as far as to call it worthless.

    If you're saving those 38MP pictures, then it's easy to see how you could very quickly fill up the 32GB of storage. Especially if you're also doing video and have half of it taken up with the OS, apps, and music. The only "solution" I can see is cloud storage, but that's not an option if you're not in an area with good coverage (or no coverage at all, such as the wilderness). Even if you do have coverage, moving those gigantic images around is going to be a major strain on your bandwidth and data plan.
  • amdwilliam1985 - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    Hopefully their next version will be 3,000mah+ with 32GB & microSD support :)
  • skiboysteve - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    I have a 920 with 32GB of storage. I don't keep much music on the device since I have an xbox music subscription so I just listen to whatever I want with that... so I have more than 20 GB free usually.

    Since the device auto uploads to skydrive, and skydrive photos are a first class member of your photos library... you can delete photos after you take them to save space. Obviously you could run out of sky drive space though.

    but honestly, their sample images are around 12 mega bytes. So:
    Skydrive can hold = (7*1024)/13 = 551 photos
    Partially Empty Device can hold = (20*1024)/13 = 1575 photos

    How is that not plenty?
  • skiboysteve - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    er 13 not 12
  • kyuu - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    12MB per photo for the 5MP oversampled images or the 38MP images? I'm assuming the former since 12MB for 38MP would be some heavy compression, it seems to me.

    While I would likely use the 5MP oversampled images for everyday stuff, I (and most others, I would presume) would definitely use the full 38MP images when doing any halfway serious photography. That's when the storage issue would come into play.
  • skiboysteve - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    thats for the full res 41MP picture. See the samples nokia posted:
    http://conversations.nokia.com/2013/07/11/nokia-lu...
  • mahck - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    Thanks for the link. It's amazing how much detail is in the aerial shot even if it is a bit soft when viewed 1:1. What's also amazing, on a completely unrelated note, is how none of the cars have any color. Virtually everything is either black, white or gray (aside from the taxis.)
  • Kill16by9TN - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    ???
    I only get to see this:
    <Error><Code>PermanentRedirect</Code><Message>The bucket you are attempting to access must be addressed using the specified endpoint. Please send all future requests to this endpoint.</Message><RequestId>BFE2C2044EBE439D</RequestId><Bucket>cdn.conversations.nokia.com</Bucket><HostId>zlwhuxn2hz/34AIpyg96gTojpM5sePvy69T1oyj4Uf1lZY1o01BY8bOAHOAB2zao</HostId><Endpoint>cdn.conversations.nokia.com.s3.amazonaws.com</Endpoint></Error>
  • Kill16by9TN - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link

    Trying to download one of the JPGs and look at it locally outside of FF also doesn't work:

    $ wget https://s3.amazonaws.com/cdn.conversations.nokia.c...
    --2013-07-11 22:55:11-- https://s3.amazonaws.com/cdn.conversations.nokia.c...
    Auflösen des Hostnamen »s3.amazonaws.com«.... 207.171.163.151
    Verbindungsaufbau zu s3.amazonaws.com|207.171.163.151|:443... verbunden.
    HTTP Anforderung gesendet, warte auf Antwort... 301 Moved Permanently
    Platz: nicht spezifiziert
    FEHLER: Umleitung (301) ohne Ziel(?).

    But inexplicably those pics all load on my friends SGS3, when he opens http://conversations.nokia.com/2013/07/11/nokia-lu... !?

    How can that be?
  • Atomic Eco - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    If I can finally leave that point & shoot camera at home, I'm sold. My previous phone cameras have been disappointing image quality wise, but I love having a camera along everywhere. The camera grip seems like a good idea, I hope it's well executed.
  • Sabresiberian - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    Well, if you are buying a phone with a 2-year contract and thinking you are getting a good deal you are fooling yourself anyway, but frankly I'd consider dropping the full price on one of these over any Android device.

    Calling it a midrange phone is just silly. Does it have bleeding edge phone hardware? No, but that certainly doesn't make it "midrange", it's a high end phone built by one of the best companies in the business.
  • mike55 - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    From Engadget: "Around the front, you'll find a 4.5-inch 1,280 x 768 pixels (at a 16:9 aspect ratio) AMOLED PureMotion HD+ display..."

    It seems many other sites are reporting a 16:9 aspect ratio as well. Is this just mass brain farts or is there truth to this?
  • michaelljones - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    Yeah, it's TECHNICALLY a 15:9 ratio at that resolution. Though at 48px over a true 16:9 for most content I'm not sure you'd notice a whole lot.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wide_XGA#WXGA_.281280...
  • abrowne1993 - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    If this really is their new flagship I can't help but be disappointed. Aside from the (admittedly awesome) camera, the only real upgrades are the RAM, Gorilla Glass 3 screen, and weight. Not to mention the ungodly on-contract pricetag. The 920 had specs that were top of the line at the time of its release as well as a few innovative additions such as wireless charging, unparalleled durability, and an extremely sensitive screen that was easily visible outdoors. Plus, it was offered at $100 subsidized with a free wireless charging plate.
  • haukionkannel - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    Absolutely high end camera, with desent phone!
    My only hope is that they will make some day a version with a little bit bigger batter and maybe 64Gb or 128Gb internal memory. But even now there are not any other phone can even get near this one.
    Well, ofcource if you really have to have Android or iPhone, then then is out of question.
  • Mrsash - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    I have the N8. I like the camera part on 1020, brilliant. Now what? Where is the FM transmitter? Where is the storage? Again a major dissapointment. When the S4 came out I thought good, Nokia will learn something from a competitor, but samsung didnt get the point either. S4 was a dissapointment as well since it didnt have better specs than my N8, well a 13 Mp camera. I am not refering to the processor, ram etc. If its fast enought to run things reasonably I am happy. What I am peeved about are the lack of these brilliant features such as the FM transmitter. Its true there is no more innovation, just improvements. Add some more pixels and a bit more processing power and they expect us to fork out all this amount on it....... my 2 cents
  • kyuu - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the GDR2 update for WP8 will enable FM radio functionality (I assume that's what you mean by FM "transmitter"). I know that the Nokia 620 can't do FM radio, but I believe most of Nokia's other phones can (after the update).
  • soryuuha - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link

    Yes you are wrong. FM Radio, in technical term it is called FM Receiver/FMRX. FM Transmitter/FMTX is the other way round, you transmit the FM transmission to the selected frequency..and you can actually listen it through your car's radio FM. So far, Nokia 808 is the last descendent of FM TX built-in.
  • michaelljones - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link

    And is a feature that nobody else provides in any phone, so I'm not sure why wanting such a feature now is an issue??? Certainly nobody else does this and it requires a hell of a lot more frequency management, testing, certification etc. for a feature most people don't use.
  • Mrsash - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link

    I dont understand your question?! Are you saying just because no other phone offers this and no one else uses it I should simply live with it? Shouldn't they add features than remove them? I buy a phone based on what it does for me, for eg if I am in the market for a tv. Unless I am a CRTV fanatic would expect to buy something(maybe Ultra HD tv) with heaps of good and useful features.
    The FM transmitter yes works brilliantly on my N8. I dont have to worry about attaching cables to a HUD which does not have an input. As a matter of fact I use this feature everyday so do a lot of my friends. So yes it is important to me, but I cant explain to you how much.....
    The same could be said about the storage. I need the MicroSd slot since moving data all the time is a pain, so is running out of space. I recently added a 64MicroSD to the N8 and it is excellent. Now if I move on to this phone for example. I will now have to purchase a mp3 transmitter, but then I have to attach the phone to the transmitter via a cable which is not ideal for me.
  • pandemonium - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link

    I'd be totally onboard with this phone, but I have a few problems with it so I'm still on the fence:

    -no SD card: constantly removing my videos and pictures due to limited space capacity will piss me off

    -battery is not removable (I'll have to see how much of a PIA it is to surgery this thing): batteries die or lose a majority of their charge retention after 1-1.5 years. I plan on keeping this for 3-4 years. Lugging around an external USB extended battery pack adds just another device to worry about and sort-of defeats the purpose.

    -it's unoriginal in its body design and seems cheaply covered (at least an aluminum option would've been nice!): When people see it, they shouldn't be able to say, "Oh...a Lumia 920. But it's modified and has a giant camera thing on it?" /facepalm
  • banvetor - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link

    I know everyone already said it, but I need to say it also:

    no SD = fail.

    No other way to put it. I would DEFINITELY consider it otherwise...
  • toraji - Monday, July 15, 2013 - link

    Hey boys and girls,

    new to this site so forgive me my blondness ;o)....

    I really liked this "starter" review until the last sentence where Brian still had to get a DIG in to WP8. Believe me that I do understand the "hate" against WP8 and MS ( I have been reading many blogs, forums, websites and reviews) but things are getting better, they really do and maybe that is because wp8 is maturing?

    I always had a blackberry for work and an Iphone in between just so that I could understand what people are so crazy about. Iphone worked as promised. blackberry was awesome for work purpose but I truly missed something. I guess that was my work environment and my home desktop environment being glued together.

    In October last year I purchased the surface RT (of course knowing what I was buying being it an ARM machine) and I truly loved it for what it was so I decided to change my iphone for lumia 810 (best available on tmobile at that time) and I LOVE IT. There is nothing simpler and besides the fact that some apps are not available (yet) I really get a lot of fun out of this phone.

    I am not trying to buy soles here but I just want to share my opinion. The lumia 925 will come out the day after tomorrow on tmobile if everything goes as planned and I am GONNA get it right away for whatever its gonna cost. I just want it because my phone is al I use lately, I also bought the surface pro when it came out in February and all my devices work seamless together.

    The 1020 is a little overkill for my purpose and the 925 is an awesome photo shooter to so will wait a little while before I go the next step

    you guys might like this article that shows a good presentation of the 1020

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/07/15/nokia_lumi...

    best regards
    t
  • Krysto - Thursday, July 18, 2013 - link

    Holy cow, look that huge bezel. There's first the white bezel, and then then much bigger black bezel around the screen. And the bottom bezel is enormous. What's that - 20 percent of the whole screen?

    I thought Nokia was supposed to be good at design. Or I guess they've just never been very good at making the phones very compact and thin.
  • wintercold74 - Sunday, August 18, 2013 - link

    the Nokia 1020 is a excellent all around phone, very smooth and lag free. the camera is excellent, photos are really good.
  • princyxavier - Thursday, August 22, 2013 - link

    1020 attracts people and the reason behind this is because of this camera feature 41 mega pixels, Zooming effect and picture quality so good that a pic can be take even from very far without compromising on quality.So the main reason people buy this model is because of its camera facility so that they don't need a digi camera, as the phone would be always available with them.
  • sztim - Monday, March 10, 2014 - link

    New Nokia lumia 1020 leather case with lens cap
    http://blackberry-cn.com/product-category/nokia-lu...

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now