I have a N9 (same design as the Lumia) and in my opinion it doesn't feel cheap at all. It's feel quite solid in the hand and it's a great simple design.
Frankly, this seems like more of a problem for Microsoft than Apple. People are perfectly happy with Android as the iPhone alternative, for whatever reason they choose (cost, "openness," anti-appleness, etc). It's going to take something special to drag them away to the msPhone.
The display size is about halfway between the Nokia 800 and Nokia 900 of the same body design. It's poly-carbornate, which is technically plastic, but it's not a cheap plastic. It's like comparing Apple's poly-carb products to the standard PC plastic cases. It's not as dense feeling as the iPhone, which admittedly feels solid, but It's a solid phone. I'm quite a fan of Nokia's design and MS's WinPh7.x OS. Not enough to switch from the iPhone and iOS but enough to say that if I couldn't choose the iPhone I'd definitely go with a Lumia 800.
SIII (which sold a whopping 6 M units during a time period when Apple probably sold 35-40 M units. In the segment where Apple chooses to compete, they're the clear leader.
Apple competes in all smartphone segments - high end, midrange and Free. Why do you talk like Apple is in only the high end?
pretty awkward to use with one hand. Most of all Android OS sucks when you've used an iPhone.
Apple did a lot of testing and they found that the 3.5 inch screen is optimal for the user experience. Otherwise, you need to contort your thumb to reach the upper left part of the screen.
Apple competes in all smartphone segments - high end, midrange and Free. Why do you talk like Apple is in only the high end?
We've had this debate many times on here. Apple only really competes in the "contract" segment of the market - ie if you buy an iPhone on contract - probably because it's the most profitable segment.
It doesn't compete in the Pre-Paid or Pay As You Go (PAYG) market which is very popular outside the US. I know things are very different in the US.
You can buy the iPhone on PAYG in the UK but it's way too expensive to be a player in that segment.
The funny thing about all these surveys that claim high market share numbers for Amdroid is that possible corroborating evidence and sightings don't support the numbers claimed.
Most of Android phones are feature phones, how are Android and iOS comparable?
If it's running Android it's a smartphone. There's no arguing that.
But yes, many Android phone have low end hardware which is why you can pick them up for so cheap and use them on prepaid carriers or let them be first smartphones for kids.
I don't see the issue with consumer choice. And obviously consumers are choosing Android.
If it's running Android it's a smartphone. There's no arguing that.
It's good to know that you think netbooks, tablets, media appliances,set top boxes, eReaders, PMPs, handheld game consoles, home phones (cordless landlines), and ski goggles, and watches are smartphones.
<sigh> It's so tiring how people (everybody) discuss this issue.
The only thing I want to know is this one simple thing.... How many copies of Apple iOS have been sold? That's it. Each copy of iOS sells for between $199 and $830 (US) per copy. How many copies are out there?
Then you can tell me how many copies of Android 4.0 have been sold (devices running versions before are dead units)
Apple competes in all smartphone segments - high end, midrange and Free. Why do you talk like Apple is in only the high end?
Because Apple doesn't compete on the very low end ($99 prepaid phones, for example). Apple's cheapest phone is free with a 2 year contract - which means that it still costs a lot of money.
OTOH, Android have plenty of feature phones - where Apple has nothing.
If it's running Android it's a smartphone. There's no arguing that.
Sure there is. I posted a number of links the last time this topic came up. There are quite a few Android phones where the manufacturer and/or carrier call them feature phones.
But yes, many Android phone have low end hardware which is why you can pick them up for so cheap and use them on prepaid carriers or let them be first smartphones for kids.
I don't see the issue with consumer choice. And obviously consumers are choosing Android.
Considering that the larger number of phones sold are cheap feature phones or very low end smartphones, that's not surprising.
At the high end, you have 6 M Galaxy SIII phones sold in the first quarter - compared to 4 M iPhone 4S phones on the first weekend and somewhere around 20 M per quarter (roughly half of all Apple iPhone sales by my estimate). In fact, there's no Android phone that outsells the iPhone 4S.
Nearly 2 years on the market. Hundreds of millions of dollars in marketing. Aggressive, public promo campaign By Nokia. Lots of bluster and chest-thumping from Microstupid.
I switched from iPhone to Galaxy 2. Great phone, easy to use. Initiallly I just thought I'd try it and return it but it was so much better than the iPhone that it's a keeper.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredaroony
I have a N9 (same design as the Lumia) and in my opinion it doesn't feel cheap at all. It's feel quite solid in the hand and it's a great simple design.
Which Lumia?
610, 710, 800 or 900?
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
The Symbian based Nokia 808 PureView, with the 41 Megapixel looks interesting.
It was released last month.
There are still a lot of low end Symbian phones available, just not in the US.
I agree but given Nokia's financial problems and their partnership with MS how long before they kill off Symbian phones altogether.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
Which Lumia?
610, 710, 800 or 900?
800 but you already knew that didn't you... The 900 is the same basic design but bigger.
Frankly, this seems like more of a problem for Microsoft than Apple. People are perfectly happy with Android as the iPhone alternative, for whatever reason they choose (cost, "openness," anti-appleness, etc). It's going to take something special to drag them away to the msPhone.
The display size is about halfway between the Nokia 800 and Nokia 900 of the same body design. It's poly-carbornate, which is technically plastic, but it's not a cheap plastic. It's like comparing Apple's poly-carb products to the standard PC plastic cases. It's not as dense feeling as the iPhone, which admittedly feels solid, but It's a solid phone. I'm quite a fan of Nokia's design and MS's WinPh7.x OS. Not enough to switch from the iPhone and iOS but enough to say that if I couldn't choose the iPhone I'd definitely go with a Lumia 800.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
SIII (which sold a whopping 6 M units during a time period when Apple probably sold 35-40 M units. In the segment where Apple chooses to compete, they're the clear leader.
Apple competes in all smartphone segments - high end, midrange and Free. Why do you talk like Apple is in only the high end?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Brother 84
pretty awkward to use with one hand. Most of all Android OS sucks when you've used an iPhone.
Apple did a lot of testing and they found that the 3.5 inch screen is optimal for the user experience. Otherwise, you need to contort your thumb to reach the upper left part of the screen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610
Ok. How is this news?
When you flood the market with Android flotsam and jetsam this is what happens.
Elitist, much?
Quote:
Originally Posted by KoreaFighting
Elitist, much?
If he is, so what? What's your point?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerrySwitched26
Apple competes in all smartphone segments - high end, midrange and Free. Why do you talk like Apple is in only the high end?
We've had this debate many times on here. Apple only really competes in the "contract" segment of the market - ie if you buy an iPhone on contract - probably because it's the most profitable segment.
It doesn't compete in the Pre-Paid or Pay As You Go (PAYG) market which is very popular outside the US. I know things are very different in the US.
You can buy the iPhone on PAYG in the UK but it's way too expensive to be a player in that segment.
It should be Electronic paperweight's growth outpace iOS'
Most of Android phones are feature phones, how are Android and iOS comparable?
Really happy with my Galaxy Nexus w/ Jelly Bean.
Can't wait to see how the next Nexus and the next iPhone compare
Quote:
Originally Posted by fuwafuwa
Most of Android phones are feature phones, how are Android and iOS comparable?
If it's running Android it's a smartphone. There's no arguing that.
But yes, many Android phone have low end hardware which is why you can pick them up for so cheap and use them on prepaid carriers or let them be first smartphones for kids.
I don't see the issue with consumer choice. And obviously consumers are choosing Android.
It's good to know that you think netbooks, tablets, media appliances,set top boxes, eReaders, PMPs, handheld game consoles, home phones (cordless landlines), and ski goggles, and watches are smartphones.
<sigh> It's so tiring how people (everybody) discuss this issue.
The only thing I want to know is this one simple thing.... How many copies of Apple iOS have been sold? That's it. Each copy of iOS sells for between $199 and $830 (US) per copy. How many copies are out there?
Then you can tell me how many copies of Android 4.0 have been sold (devices running versions before are dead units)
Because Apple doesn't compete on the very low end ($99 prepaid phones, for example). Apple's cheapest phone is free with a 2 year contract - which means that it still costs a lot of money.
OTOH, Android have plenty of feature phones - where Apple has nothing.
Sure there is. I posted a number of links the last time this topic came up. There are quite a few Android phones where the manufacturer and/or carrier call them feature phones.
Considering that the larger number of phones sold are cheap feature phones or very low end smartphones, that's not surprising.
At the high end, you have 6 M Galaxy SIII phones sold in the first quarter - compared to 4 M iPhone 4S phones on the first weekend and somewhere around 20 M per quarter (roughly half of all Apple iPhone sales by my estimate). In fact, there's no Android phone that outsells the iPhone 4S.
And Windows Phone?
Nearly 2 years on the market. Hundreds of millions of dollars in marketing. Aggressive, public promo campaign By Nokia. Lots of bluster and chest-thumping from Microstupid.
Result?
1.3%.
After ALL THAT.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610
Ok. How is this news?
When you flood the market with Android flotsam and jetsam this is what happens.
1M activations PER SECOND.
Initiallly I just thought I'd try it and return it but it was so much better than the iPhone that it's a keeper.