Nokia finally getting in the game good with the Lumia 520

[GohanSSJ]

While you may love or hate Windows Phone, the simple fact is that as an OS it's 'finished' (I know nothing is truly finished, but you get the point), but so far the major issue versus Android was that it was lacking really cheap phones. At the end of WP7 Nokia released some cheap models, but 7 couldn't interest many anymore and they were in all definitions, cheap.
Now the Lumia 520 has been announced, a WP8 phone with a dualcore 1ghz, 512mb ram (which might be a problem for Android, but is more then fine for WP), 8GB with optional microSD card, 4 inch 800x480 screen (which can be used with any and all gloves) and of course with all the Nokia goodies such as worldwide free navigation, Nokia music etc and all of that for 139 euro's (so expect that number to go down even a bit more)

I'd say it's the perfect weapon against Android. The issue with cheap Android phones is that they are usually absolute shit, they are slow, got low resolution screens, unstable, look shit and can't run all of the cool games your friends are playing, because well, the hardware is shit.
This phone on the other hand will give you a butter smooth experience, nice screen and will allow you to play most games, of course WP does not have as many games as Android, but like I said, most of them won't run on the phones in that price class anyway, so in the end, you will get more out of WP.

Personally I think this will become the best sold Nokia smartphone in years.


Btw it's lacking in the camera department, it has no front camera, the rear camera is 5MP which can record video at 720p max and it has no flash.



http://www.nokia.com/global/products/phone/lumia520/

http://reviews.cnet.com/cell-phones/...-35619092.html

[MentaL]

[madhuz]

Well the camera on the nokia is shit. But its still a sexy phone ;O

[Repthon]

The phone looks good and everything but i really think the best looking phone in the market is Galaxy Note II.

[madhuz]

I like the Note II, but it's like a friggin tablet. Its hugeeee

[Lapje]

I think it's a very wise choice of Nokia to go into WP8. Firstly because it was one of the first brands to actually make phones for WP7, and secondly since it is actually good OS. I've used WP7(.8) a bit and I can only say how responsive and clean the entire thing feels. Sure, it misses all the freedom Android offers (Android fan here..) but it makes up for that with the entire look and feel of the OS. I think Nokia makes great looking phones. A real fan of the Lumia series here. I think a phone that colorful would be a joy to have, and I like the unibody design. Apart from that, Gohan makes a very good point. Low-end Android phones are a complete waste of money. They are slow, obviously because of how android is made + all those useless shells on top of stock android. They look nowhere near as appealing as the Lumia series and you can't play any games your friends play or run any apps that are actually useful (Facebook tages AGES to load..) I would really recommend anyone who wants a low-budget phone which you don't want to throw out of the windows after a month of using it to buy a WP8 phone. And if you like the colorful, goodlooking phones Nokia is offering I think this might just be the phone for you.

[Laz-low]

A poor quality camera is expected with a budget phone but it certainly looks like it can be a money spinner! Would have to be about £100-£120 in the UK, which with the features and tech specs makes it a more viable option than the Galaxy Ace

[Lapje]

Well.. it can record in 720p.. So for your everyday photos it's good enough. We also haven't seen any photos taken with it yet.. It might not be that bad. Plus, if you really wanted to take camera quality pictures you wouldn't be looking at a budget phone.

[madhuz]

A poor quality camera is expected with a budget phone but it certainly looks like it can be a money spinner! Would have to be about £100-£120 in the UK, which with the features and tech specs makes it a more viable option than the Galaxy Ace

Galaxy Ace was SHIT lol

[Liv3]

Phone is pretty good looking, but the camera is apparently crappy, according to my friend. Anyway, it's nice to have this. Nokia was always in one of those brands where barely anybody has them, but these phones made a few of my friends have them, since they are under budget.

Honestly, I'm not one for windows phones. I'd rather have iOS or Android. Android over all though I like most.

[GohanSSJ]

The phone looks good and everything but i really think the best looking phone in the market is Galaxy Note II.

So you're comparing a 130 euro phone to a 550 euro phone? Something tells me they should not fear each others competition...

Well the camera on the nokia is shit. But its still a sexy phone ;O

Phone is pretty good looking, but the camera is apparently crappy, according to my friend. Anyway, it's nice to have this. Nokia was always in one of those brands where barely anybody has them, but these phones made a few of my friends have them, since they are under budget.

Honestly, I'm not one for windows phones. I'd rather have iOS or Android. Android over all though I like most.

Do you know something about the camera that I don't? I have not seen any test images, so while it will definitely not be the best at all, but how do you know if it's shit or crappy? Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't be surprised if it was, I simply don't know though.

As for your love of Android and iOS, I'm guessing that based on high end phones, because Apple doesn't make anything cheap and cheap Android phones are absolute shit. The difference between Android on a high end and low end is absolutely massive.

[Ron]

Since the topic is great low-cost Nokia phones, I'd like to also point this out,

Nokia 105 and 301 candybar phones announced at MWC, offer simplicity on the cheap

Definitely going to sell very well I think. Its a very good backup when you're out on the go. A full month of battery life? Its about time someone realized "Hey, with the awesome battery technology we have now, lets go back to simple phones that don't require dual-core CPUs and push out something awesomely cheap and reliable."

[Parker]

Not bad, in regards to the Nokia 105, it seems pretty much the same as my Nokia 101 (obviously the shell is different) specification wise, you could even argue the Nokia 101 is better because of dual sim & microsd support. Battery lasts similar days amount of days (Nokia 101: 32 days; Nokia 105: 35 days) so not a whole lot different, even the UI seems very similar from the limited video I've seen so far.

Nokia 105 definitely looks better though.

GSMARENA comparison

Nokia 105 vs. Nokia 101 - GSMArena.com

I paid $29aud for my Nokia 101, be interesting to see what the price for the 105 is - watched another video, said 15 euro so that's about $20aud.


----

Why wouldn't they include flash in Lumia 520?

[GohanSSJ]

Why wouldn't they include flash in Lumia 520?

Not sure, I don't think it would cost that much to include, could be just a way to make it less attractive, because let's face it, for the majority this phone is more then enough, I'm using much less atm, so I guess they might have decided to not include certain things, use a smaller battery, partially to reduce the price a little more, but mostly so that you will buy the more expensive models.

[Lapje]

I actually never use the flash on my phone.. But then again I never take photos.. the quality is too crappy, especially in low light conditions. It could indeed be to lower the costs and thus the price.. So yeh. Its most likely for those who want a cheap smartphone that actually works, but who dont need any of the 'gimmicks' or just use the phone what a phone was intended to be used for (10 years ago..). If you want a phone with more features you would be looking at the Lumia 620 and higher.. which is I believe around 240 euros over here. Still think it's a good move Nokia made.

[Laz-low]

I have an iPhone 4S (I'm not an Apple fanboy Gohan, I just like the simplicity (in my opinion!!) of iOS and I'm somewhat used to it) and the flash is god awful. It's pish. Totally unreliable and ruins photos for me. So not adding a flash could be a smart option, again depends on the purpose of the phone and the user of the phone. The 105 is genius to be honest. In today's day and age where everyone seems oh so concerned about being the big smartphone player with Cloud storage offers, app stores, upping the under-the-hood stuff it's easy to forget there is still a huge, huge emerging market in Africa and parts of Asia/Indochina that can be tapped into. So bravo Nokia, bravo!

[GohanSSJ]

I have no problem with iOS, nor do I have a problem with WP or Android. Their companies on the other hand are absolute shit. But hey, I'm a socialist, I hate all large companies, it's my nature.
Btw regardless of that, I still prefer iOS over Google Android, Android is a wonderful product, Google Android is a pile of shit.


Flash on phones is usually shit yes, mine is shit as well (still on my Omnia 7 sadly...), that said, I still wouldn't like to miss it, because sometimes it's better then nothing. Besides I believe the flash on the Lumia 920 is quite decent, of course that phone is aimed at a good camera experience, but still.

[Robert]

The only time I use my flash is with the accessibility "torch" function. Which I use quite often tbh, so I'd hate to loose it. But then, I'd never get a cheap phone like this anyway, I find getting a 6 month old high spec phone on sale absolutely destroys anything near it's sale price range. My Galaxy Note was costs the same as what my boss is paying for his Ace, I just shopped around a lot before I considered going into a contract. I think I also get more minutes and text than him too as I'm on a different network (O2 gives the best signal in my house, every other network gives no signal, O2 has 2 bars).

As I've said before, I couldn't give a rats what operating system my phone is using. I just want a phone with decent spec, and a huge screen. I'm never getting a smaller screen than the Note now that I've gotten used to it. If there is a Win8 phone with a huge screen and comparable spec, at a much lower price point than Android, then I'd go for it tbh (though I'd totally have to check with Gohan to make sure I can disable all that social media shit they've got running in the adverts!). But with the licence fees for Win8, I'd still be slightly concerned that they'd have to cut build quality to achieve a price point even close to Android.

[GohanSSJ]

The social media stuff is only active when you use it. Setting up your FB works the same as adding an email account. So if you don't want it in, just don't add it.

License fees is the same really. Yes Android is free, but it's not free to sell, this is why HTC, Samsung etc are all paying MS for their phones, it's because Google/Android does not own the rights to many of the technologies used in Android.
In the end you are paying MS when you buy your Android phone, in fact in some cases MS makes more money of Android then Google does.

On top of that, from what I've gathered is that Nokia, HTC, Samsung etc are paying very little to nothing for WP, simply because MS has a major interested in spreading their OS around, so Android phones technically can't compete with Nokia phones, which makes sense because the price on this phone is extremely low and I don't know a single Android phone that compete with it.