x PhoneArena is looking for new authors! To view all available positions, click here.
  • Home
  • News
  • Indeed there is a way to downgrade your Windows Phone from 8.1 to Windows Phone 8.0

Indeed there is a way to downgrade your Windows Phone from 8.1 to Windows Phone 8.0

Indeed there is a way to downgrade your Windows Phone from 8.1 to Windows Phone 8.0
Even before Microsoft released the developer preview of Windows Phone 8.1, it was a given that it would be a one-way trip. Obtaining the developer preview is easy even if you are not a developer, and the upgrade itself is pretty much painless, making it easy to choose the red pill.

Enough people chose the red pill that it crashed Microsoft’s App Studio for a few hours when the developer preview for Windows Phone 8.1 dropped last Monday.

However, since the OS is not optimized with carrier and manufacturer settings in mind, it is not perfect. Some people have noted a decrease in battery performance, devices getting warm, we have seen some folks saying that Bluetooth connectivity was a crapshoot, and of course, some general bugs.

For the geeks in the room, they are more than likely willing to put up with these issues while they continue tinkering with Windows Phone 8.1 and learn more about what to expect when it finally has its commercial rollout later this summer. For others some of the changes they are seeing are bringing feelings of buyer’s remorse, and perhaps they wish they took the blue pill instead. Alas, they should have known it would be a one-way trip.

Indeed there is a way to downgrade your Windows Phone from 8.1 to Windows Phone 8.0
Not so fast! There is indeed a way to bring your device back, and on the face of it, it is not terribly complicated, but all indicators are that it will be somewhat time consuming.

Alin Gheaja uploaded a video in which he claims he has been able to reflash his Lumia 720 several times successfully from Windows Phone 8.1 to Windows Phone 8.0. Perhaps not ironically, it is Nokia’s own desktop software that does the heavy lifting.

The process itself is pretty simple:

  1. Back up your data, because you will lose it
  2. Download and install Nokia Software Updater (see below the source link)
  3. Connect your Windows Phone with the screen unlocked and Nokia Software Updater running
  4. The app will say there is an update available
  5. Follow the prompts to install the “new” firmware

Surprisingly, that is it. Alin’s video is below. Everything is pretty basic, so you should fare okay if you choose to give it a shot. Just remember the caveats and we offer no guarantees. It is safe to assume that this procedure would not work with a Samsung, Huawei or HTC Windows Phone, but chances are if you have a Windows Phone it is a Nokia anyway. Let us know if decide to take your Windows Phone back to 8.0 and why. Also let us know if you were successful in the endeavor.

As for us, we are staying in Wonderland to see how deep the rabbit hole goes.



sources: Alin Gheaja (YouTube) via WMPoweruser

Download Nokia Software Updater (will prompt to download installer)

70 Comments
  • Options
    Close




posted on 21 Apr 2014, 02:11 21

1. alterecho (Posts: 1072; Member since: 23 Feb 2012)


Windows Phone wouldn't have survived without Nokia.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 02:28 9

2. tech2 (Posts: 1880; Member since: 26 Oct 2012)


And vice versa

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 03:21 9

5. alterecho (Posts: 1072; Member since: 23 Feb 2012)


Without Microsoft/Windows Phone holding it back, Nokia would have dominated the market.

Try to vice versa above statement, and you will realize.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 03:32 5

7. tech2 (Posts: 1880; Member since: 26 Oct 2012)


How was MS holding'em back when they were already burning cash, kept losing market share at a steady pace and were struggling to compete with android and ios's offerings ? Yes they could've developed their existing OS but they didn't that's their own fault. They only thing keeping them afloat was their feature phone lineup.

Microsoft injected the all necessary cash in to their business which they badly needed. Even now if MS didn't rescue them they would've been wiped a long time ago.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 04:16 2

11. alterecho (Posts: 1072; Member since: 23 Feb 2012)


"How was MS holding'em back when they were already burning cash, kept losing market share at a steady pace and were struggling to compete with android and ios's offerings ?”
Yes.

"Yes they could've developed their existing OS but they didn't that's their own fault.”
Really?
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2387559,00.asp

"They only thing keeping them afloat was their feature phone lineup.”
http://www.allaboutsymbian.com/images/news/smartphone_os_unit_sales_(based_on_gartner_and_idc_figures).png

"Microsoft injected the all necessary cash in to their business which they badly needed.”
Its Microsoft that needed someone to push the WP.

"Even now if MS didn't rescue them they would've been wiped a long time ago.”
If Nokia didn’t rescue Windows Phone, WP would have been wiped off, just like Microsoft’s previous attempts, those Kin phones.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 04:41 3

14. tech2 (Posts: 1880; Member since: 26 Oct 2012)


That PC Mag article just goes to prove my point. They decided to stick to WP and not to develop Meego.

"They only thing keeping them afloat was their feature phone lineup.” Nice graph but high unit sales doesn't mean high profits.

'Its Microsoft that needed someone to push the WP'
Nokia needed them too because they were making loss.http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-of-the-day-income-for-apple-nokia-motorola-rim-2010-9

'If Nokia didn’t rescue Windows Phone, WP would have been wiped off, just like Microsoft’s previous attempts, those Kin phones.'
Lets assume for a sec your 'if' analysis is true. Even then all MS would loose is a mobile OS platform and they would back to drawing board and start again which they can afford to considering how filthy rich they are. Unlike Nokia for whom WP was their last shot. That's why Nokia needed MS more than MS needed Nokia.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 07:07 2

22. alterecho (Posts: 1072; Member since: 23 Feb 2012)


"They decided to stick to WP and not to develop Meego.”
Its not ‘they’, it was Elop. Because of which many left Nokia on their own.

"Nice graph but high unit sales doesn't mean high profits.”
Nice attempt, but Nokia were still selling more Symbian device than Android devices being sold.

"Nokia needed them too because they were making loss”
Nokia needed a good OS, which they should have developed, if it weren’t for Elop strangling MeeGo, slashing off Symbian and preventing the adoption of Android.

'If Nokia didn’t rescue Windows Phone, WP would have been wiped off, just like Microsoft’s previous attempts, those Kin phones.'
"Lets assume for a sec your 'if' analysis is true.”
You don’t need to ‘assume’ facts.

"Even then all MS would loose is a mobile OS platform and they would back to drawing board and start again which they can afford to considering how filthy rich they are.”
And i said 'Microsoft would have been wiped off’, where?
Are you rephrasing what i said, to make it look like you were right?

" Unlike Nokia for whom WP was their last shot.”
It was made a last shot because of Elop.

"That's why Nokia needed MS”
To drive them straight into the ground, so that they can be bought by it?

"more than MS needed Nokia.”
MS’s Windows Phone division needed Nokia, sorely.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 10:11

41. tech2 (Posts: 1880; Member since: 26 Oct 2012)


'Nice attempt, but Nokia were still selling more Symbian device than Android devices being sold.'
-AGAIN, sales mean nothing if you can't generate profit from it.

'Its not ‘they’, it was Elop. Because of which many left Nokia on their own. Nokia needed a good OS, which they should have developed, if it weren’t for Elop strangling MeeGo, slashing off Symbian and preventing the adoption of Android'
-Funny how Elop gets blamed for every wrong decision Nokia makes when they're the ones to appoint him as a CEO. So if he made a bad decision Nokia is equally responsible as they appointed him as the CEO. He just didn't appear from thin-air.

'If Nokia didn’t rescue Windows Phone, WP would have been wiped off, just like Microsoft’s previous attempts, those Kin phones.'
'You don’t need to ‘assume’ facts.'
-So what you're saying is Nokia rescued WP. If so, why is the rescuer being rescued then ? NOKIA DID NOT RESCUE WP. WP is beyond rescuing IMO. Although Nokia did made them popular.

'And i said 'Microsoft would have been wiped off’, where?
Are you rephrasing what i said, to make it look like you were right?'
-It was written in context to WP not MS. Re-read the comment.

'It was made a last shot because of Elop.'
Strongly disagree for the reasons I wrote in first comment, to which you agreed too.

'MS’s Windows Phone division needed Nokia, sorely.'
WP needed them not MS. No matter what, you can't deny the fact that Nokia needed them too and all that necessary cash injection from MS.

Anyway, we gotta agree to disagree on this one. Nice talking to ya. Cheers.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 11:24 1

47. alterecho (Posts: 1072; Member since: 23 Feb 2012)


"-AGAIN, sales mean nothing if you can't generate profit from it.”
It would have if Nokia wasn’t confined to Windows Phone.

'Its not ‘they’, it was Elop. Because of which many left Nokia on their own. Nokia needed a good OS, which they should have developed, if it weren’t for Elop strangling MeeGo, slashing off Symbian and preventing the adoption of Android'
"-Funny how Elop gets blamed for every wrong decision Nokia makes when they're the ones to appoint him as a CEO.”
Which is why i’m angry at the board too. But they to wouldn’t have known.

"He just didn't appear from thin-air.”
He appeared from Microsoft.

"-So what you're saying is Nokia rescued WP. If so, why is the rescuer being rescued then ?”
They weren’t rescued, they have been assimilated to so that Microsoft can be rescued everytime.

"NOKIA DID NOT RESCUE WP.”
How can ANYONE lie like this. But since you are a WP fanboy, thats expected.

"WP is beyond rescuing IMO.”
It was before Nokia stepped in.

"Although Nokia did made them popular.”
It rescued them.

"-It was written in context to WP not MS. Re-read the comment."
Changing context doesn’t hide the fact that you accused me of claiming that.

"Strongly disagree for the reasons I wrote in first comment, to which you agreed too.”
Which is?

"WP needed them not MS.”
Thats what i said.
"No matter what, you can't deny the fact that Nokia needed them too and all that necessary cash injection from MS.”
Nokia needed cash yes. Needed Microsoft, NO.
It needed to adopt a good OS.

"Anyway, we gotta agree to disagree on this one.”
You gotta agree to the fact that Nokia saved WP.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 14:36 1

56. -box- (Posts: 3744; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)


No. For the last time, no. Elop is/was answerable to the board of directors, and did as directed by them. He wasn't some tyrannical dictator who sought to kill Symbian and MeeGo for the sake of WP, he did what he was told to do, and, honestly, it has kept Nokia alive. If the BoD decided Android or MeeGo or being acquired by apple or Samsung or Motorola was the best course of action, they would have pursued that. While Symbian (and to an extent, MeeGo) are natively the most capable mobile OSes yet made in large numbers (and, yes, including android), they aren't the most user-friendly (but better than IOS, IMHO), nor greatly appealing to the mass market, which are some things WP has over them.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 21:05

64. alterecho (Posts: 1072; Member since: 23 Feb 2012)


"No. For the last time, no. Elop is/was answerable to the board of directors"
Thats why i blame them too. But, it was Elop who coaxed them. He WAS the CEO at that time. He was supposed to come up with the course of action.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 06:58 2

20. z4520ft (Posts: 4; Member since: 30 May 2013)


Without MS/Windows Phone, Nokia will dominated which market? Meego has potential but then it still 2 horse race back then, since there is not enough reason for iPhone or Android user jump to Meego.
Migrating from Android after 2 years, I pick Lumia since I love both WP and Nokia but without any one of them, I still pick HTC or Samsung's WP than Nokia's Meego or Symbian because Android still a better choice when it comes to open source OS since they already established large user base thus larger developer support.
I think BlackBerry with BB10 & z10 is a good example how market will react to gesture based Nokia-meego, they are really good in fact I did own N9 and my buddy have Q10 but then both not enough appeal for people to buy them/migrate over android or iOS.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 09:26

31. eharris560 (Posts: 59; Member since: 28 Dec 2012)


Don't forget webOS. I love gestures, but the market seem not to.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 10:09

40. alterecho (Posts: 1072; Member since: 23 Feb 2012)


"Without MS/Windows Phone, Nokia will dominated which market? Meego..."
Thats why i said Nokia would have been advancing Symbian, while it recuperates by selling Android, by which it would have dominated the market with its well known hardware.

When Microsoft's Elop, took over as CEO of Nokia, he killed all developments on Symbian and gave the Symbian development team the boot, killed of MeeGo and confined Nokia from adopting Android. He basically killed all options for Nokia.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 03:25 5

6. iamfury (Posts: 59; Member since: 07 Oct 2012)


You couldnt be more wrong buddy.
nokia would have destroyed samsung and other android OEMs if they had gone with android.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 03:36 4

8. tech2 (Posts: 1880; Member since: 26 Oct 2012)


'would've.....' doesn't cut it buddy. Fact is they DIDN'T and its their fault not MS's

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 06:44 2

17. WindowsiDroid (Posts: 108; Member since: 22 Jul 2013)


Nokia have been destroyed because of their wrong tactics and business plans, if they gone with Android they will totally dominate the whole Android Ecosystem. In year 2008-2010 I guess, Samsung is not totally popular within that time and it just pop-out after they used Android so if Nokia did this things it will be totally good for us Super Quality, Good Software Update, Best Mapping and ETC.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 09:45 4

36. jroc74 (Posts: 4720; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)


I might have to agree with this....the most popular Android phones have tons of features, and nice specs.

Nokia would have given Samsung a run for their money. HTC was supposed to...Moto...I dont know whats up with my fav phone manufacture. Still love their phones tho.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 14:49

57. -box- (Posts: 3744; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)


Nokia explored android years ago, and opted not to pursue it because ots interface, capabilities, and user experience wasn't up to Nokia's stringent standards for their customers (which I quite agree with), and when they approached google about their using it and requesting the ability to - as they eventually did with WP - edit, update, and revamp the core code and setup to make it user-friendly. Google refused that permission, and also refused to help Nokia - then still the largest phone manufacturer by volume - transition to Android while they developed their own skin, which would have a lot of MeeGo elements and features. It was an offer to make android a two way street, rather than what it was and has become, a basic framework that OEMs put their own bloat on, that has since been dominated with Samsung, to the point that galaxy phones are almost synonymous with android to general consumers, and google is losing control of the platform. End result, Nokia goes WP, eventually makes a very heavily skinned non-google Android phone, and only for low-end or "developing" markets, as a stepping stone from the basic Nokia ### and Asha lines to the WP-running Lumias, which offer a wide range from I introductory models like the 520 to cutting-edge models like the Icon, 1520, and 1020.

So in your laying-of-blame-game, make sure you add google to the top of the list.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 17:18

61. elitewolverine (Posts: 1352; Member since: 28 Oct 2013)


Not to mention they did not have the cash flow to do such a thing. Yes Nokia shipped 80million units in 2011 vs 90million for Samsung in first quart 2012. But how much of those nokias were smart phones....

The simple problem was Symbian platform was a dead end, meego was the same and the costs was to high.

Your comment was a great one. People seem to think Elop came in on some unicorn that non of Nokia had any clue how to code and simply bowed down to the Master....

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 04:07 2

9. NokiaFTW (limited) (Posts: 1900; Member since: 24 Oct 2012)


Why wouldn't have WP survived without Nokia? I see you surviving and commenting crap without your brains. If you can pull of a thing, then anyone can.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 04:20 1

12. alterecho (Posts: 1072; Member since: 23 Feb 2012)


"I see you surviving and commenting crap without your brains. If you can pull of a thing, then anyone can."
?
Is that a logic only which Windows Phone fanboys can understand and justify?

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 06:44 1

18. elitewolverine (Posts: 1352; Member since: 28 Oct 2013)


It is a logic which you cannot understand.

Nokia needed win os just as much as win os needed nokia. Before their failed symbian experiment, how much share did symbian have vs android, ios, and more importantly the samsung oem. Because you seem to think anything running android is so profitable...

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 07:09 3

23. alterecho (Posts: 1072; Member since: 23 Feb 2012)


"It is a logic which you cannot understand."
I know, since i'm not a WP fanboy.

"Nokia needed win os just as much as win os needed nokia"
Read above.

" Before their failed symbian experiment, how much share did symbian have vs android, ios, and more importantly the samsung oem"
Look above, In the links.

"Because you seem to think anything running android is so profitable..."
And i said that, where?

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 07:42 1

24. elitewolverine (Posts: 1352; Member since: 28 Oct 2013)


No because you simply don't understand. If we don't agree with you, we are fanboy's, sounds familiar but again you wont understand. And that is somehow uber bad. I use all 4 OS's on a daily basis, teching them on a daily basis.

I did read above, Symbian was such a success it crushed android...you do know that before Nokia killed it off, Symbian sales made up 1% of the market.

Because if nokia would have made an android phone it would have been game over for everyone else....which at this point is nothing but what ifs and nothing more. There is no evidence that anyone can point to thinking that Nokia would be in any better shape with android, zero. Right now it is because of the resurgance it got from MS that people even want a nokia android device.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 08:01 3

27. alterecho (Posts: 1072; Member since: 23 Feb 2012)


"No because you simply don't understand. If we don't agree with you"
Of course not. I don't care if you agree with me or not.

"you do know that before Nokia killed it off,"
It was Elop, the first foreign CEO at Nokia, not Nokia itself, that killed it off.

"Because if nokia would have made an android phone it would have been game over for everyone else."
Not game over for everyone else... it would have just been dominating the market. thats all.
Android or its own developed MeeGo or if it had advanced Symbian, while it recuperates by selling Android devices.

"There is no evidence that anyone can point to thinking that Nokia would be in any better shape with android, zero."
Its current shape since going with Windows Phone - devices division sold to Microsoft.

"Right now it is because of the resurgance it got from MS that people even want a nokia android device."
They want a Nokia Android because they like Nokia hardware and don't like Windows Phone software.

Be a bit greatful/respectful for the company that is being sold, trying to save your favourite plaform, Windows Phone.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 11:10

45. elitewolverine (Posts: 1352; Member since: 28 Oct 2013)


You are right, you dont care, since we are just wp fanboys...

Yes it was Elop and no one else *eyeroll*, not even Cisco wanted to use Symbian. Here is an expert from a more informed person than you or I.

"So what went wrong? It's easy to say "the iPhone did it", but while Apple undoubtedly benefited from Symbian's problems it didn't create them. As Psion's first employee Charles Davis told The Register in 2011, Symbian was plagued by disagreements. "Owner-licensees "went for maximum differentiation in the end - UIQ was completely different to Series 60. This hampered Symbian's ability to innovate, and it stopped the aftermarket. We could have had an App Store 10 or five years before Apple."
Symbian grew messy. When Cisco considered adopting it, they discovered that not only did Symbian come in multiple, incompatible versions, but that - as Davis recalled - "we hadn't sorted out backwards compatibility at that time so apps written for Symbian 7 wouldn't work on Symbian 8." Cisco decided to go elsewhere."

Wait this was done just a year after elop joined? I didnt know Elop was the coder of symbian and its inherent issues.

This is why elop stated it was a burning platform, Elop had nothing to do with why symbian would not be a droid equivalent.

As well, by the time Elop had them ditching symbian, it was 2011, in 2011, you already had the Galaxy S and S2, you had apple and you had HTC which was doing overly well. Nokia would have had a tough tough time.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 11:34 1

50. alterecho (Posts: 1072; Member since: 23 Feb 2012)


"You are right, you dont care, since we are just wp fanboys…”
Yes.

"Yes it was Elop and no one else *eyeroll*”
Instead of rolling your eyes around, you should start observing with it.

"So what went wrong? It's easy to say "the iPhone did it", but while Apple undoubtedly benefited from Symbian's problems it didn't create them. As Psion's first employee Charles Davis told The Register in 2011, Symbian was plagued by disagreements. "Owner-licensees "went for maximum differentiation in the end - UIQ was completely different to Series 60. This hampered Symbian's ability to innovate, and it stopped the aftermarket. We could have had an App Store 10 or five years before Apple."
Symbian grew messy. When Cisco considered adopting it, they discovered that not only did Symbian come in multiple, incompatible versions, but that - as Davis recalled - "we hadn't sorted out backwards compatibility at that time so apps written for Symbian 7 wouldn't work on Symbian 8." Cisco decided to go elsewhere."
Exactly. Which was why Nokia and Intel were collaborating on MeeGo, a combination of Moblin and Maemo, which Elop set to its grave.

"Wait this was done just a year after elop joined? I didnt know Elop was the coder of symbian and its inherent issues.”
No, but he killed it along with MeeGo. Symbian was getting vastly better until Elop, fired the team.s

"This is why elop stated it was a burning platform, Elop had nothing to do with why symbian would not be a droid equivalent.”
He stopped its development and Symbian’s more promising alternative MeeGo/Maemo.

"As well, by the time Elop had them ditching symbian, it was 2011, in 2011, you already had the Galaxy S and S2, you had apple and you had HTC which was doing overly well. Nokia would have had a tough tough time.”
They would have adopted Android, at least to recuperate, but again, Elop restricted them from doing that.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 13:30 1

54. elitewolverine (Posts: 1352; Member since: 28 Oct 2013)


The eyeroll is your inherent lack in basic skills to understand that while Elop killed it, it was for so many valid reasons you simply just cannot and never will comprehend it is out of your grasp. Just look at your next statement thinking android would have saved them....like it is saving everyone right now....Not to mention every time someone buys a droid MS makes money anyways.

MeeGo was even worse in terms of collaboration, i would point you to more MeeGo's issues, but you would just ignore the 'reality' and go off on how great symbian was (it wasnt) or how awesome MeeGo would have been (which even intel killed, intel....)

Symbian was not getting better. Nokia did not have the resources to continue Symbian, you dont understand and never will. You think Elop came in and was like F-Symbian. No there was so many problems that Nokia working on it for YEARS didnt fix. It is why they were going with MeeGo. But even MeeGo was a dying breed out the gate.

In fact MeeGo is so promising, that the company that has taken it over, immediately pushed it into phones and is ripping up the sales chart....*crickets* for lack of knowing this concept which is just evident in everything you are posting regarding symbian/meego what ifs.

Adopted android...again thinking android is the savior of all things. Samsung even in 2011 along with HTC ruled. Nokia would have been in worse position. They would have offered a basic OS, one that even the nexus line is struggling with. Nexus Google, Google of all cash flows has not sold to expectations.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 21:18

65. alterecho (Posts: 1072; Member since: 23 Feb 2012)


"The eyeroll is your inherent lack in basic skills to understand that while Elop killed it, it was for so many valid reasons you simply just cannot and never will comprehend it is out of your grasp.”

"Just look at your next statement thinking android would have saved them....like it is saving everyone right now….”
It would have made more money for Nokia, than what WP has for them. Considering their amazing hardware, which when combined with the most popular software, is an insta-buy.

"i would point you to more MeeGo's issues, but you would just ignore the ‘reality’”
I’m not a WP fanboy.

"and go off on how great symbian was (it wasn’t)”
It wasn’t.. it IS.
"or how awesome MeeGo would have been (which even intel killed, intel….)”
Intel suspended it, since Nokia’s CEO, Elop (and of course, to some extension, the puppets in the board), withdrew support for it.

"Symbian was not getting better. Nokia did not have the resources to continue Symbian”
Did i say it did?

"you dont understand and never will.”
You won’t listen and never will. I have been saying Nokia should have been making money by selling Android devices, and be developing Symbian at the side.

"You think Elop came in and was like F-Symbian.”
Yes.

"No there was so many problems that Nokia working on it for YEARS didnt fix. It is why they were going with MeeGo.”
Exactly what i said.

"But even MeeGo was a dying breed out the gate.”
Of course, since Elop removed it support, right out of the gate.

"In fact MeeGo is so promising, that the company that has taken it over, immediately pushed it into phones and is ripping up the sales chart....*crickets*”
And the company the took up, Jolla? Jolla is startup, without the power and scale of Nokia.

"for lack of knowing this concept which is just evident in everything you are posting”
Sounds like your posts.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 07:53

25. NokiaFTW (limited) (Posts: 1900; Member since: 24 Oct 2012)


Lets not argue with this dumb little idiot. Let him enjoy his lagging crapdroid OS.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 08:26 3

28. alterecho (Posts: 1072; Member since: 23 Feb 2012)


"Lets not argue with this dumb little idiot"
You're more vocal today, aren't you.

"Let him enjoy his lagging crapdroid OS"
CrapDroid OS? I use Windows Phone OS, so if you're indicating that, then there is nothing to enjoy in that.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 08:53 3

29. AfterShock (Posts: 2540; Member since: 02 Nov 2012)


Now they're calling names when they don't like what's said?

You can't reason with fans.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 09:28

32. eharris560 (Posts: 59; Member since: 28 Dec 2012)


That's funny

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 09:40 4

34. PBXtech (Posts: 970; Member since: 21 Oct 2013)


Name one OEM other than Nokia that is doing well with WP. Nokia isn't even doing all that great either, every week there seems to be an article where they are giving away their phones with two year contracts.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 09:46 3

38. AfterShock (Posts: 2540; Member since: 02 Nov 2012)


Good point an well said.
Add in, it took free licensing, a huge cash injection a Trojan horse CEO.

+1

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 11:27 1

49. elitewolverine (Posts: 1352; Member since: 28 Oct 2013)


I wonder how moto is feeling like after google took them...

It was no trojan ceo, it was the simple fact that symbian was a poor, but capable os, and meego was just as bad. WP7 saved nokia from software debt that would have cost them so much. Who would have saved them if the droid root didnt work out? Google? lol moto knows how that went, oh wait its now lenovo.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 12:48 4

52. PBXtech (Posts: 970; Member since: 21 Oct 2013)


Two different companies with two different problems. Nokia's problem is they failed to upgrade and update Symbian. They also had huge potential with Meego but failed to nurture it properly.

Motorola's main problem was getting tied up with Verizon instead of spreading their phones out equally. While the "Droid" campaign was great, it was mainly focused on Verizon. It was also Google who started turning them around, the Moto X & G models sold very well. Lenova will continue with that success.

Meanwhile, Nokia is banned from producing smart phones for a number of years. Nokia is in a completely different situation than Motorola was.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 13:23

53. elitewolverine (Posts: 1352; Member since: 28 Oct 2013)


Your right, nokia retains the patents, can make low end devices like the asha line, and then produce phones. Where as moto is gutted sold and maybe will be selling moto phones if not under lenovo, nothing is left of moto like at least nokia has some.

Meego was not just them, it was intel and amd and others and there was simply a lack of support and nokia did not have the funds to nuture a OS. Droid with basic droid is rather well just that basic, it requires 3rd party to get up, Samsung spends money on their UI, nokia did not have that.

MS provided a OS, a consistent UI allowing Nokia to do hardware and their cam software which was already good with their 808's etc.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 20:08 1

62. jroc74 (Posts: 4720; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)


Motorola has a chance to make even more money with Lenovo...

We will have to wait n see if Google selling Moto was good or bad for Motorola.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 10:15 1

42. NokiaFTW (limited) (Posts: 1900; Member since: 24 Oct 2012)


Name one OEM other than Samsung doing well with Android. Its not funny now is it.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 10:23 4

43. PBXtech (Posts: 970; Member since: 21 Oct 2013)


News flash, Samsung isn't the only Android OEM showing profits.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 16:06

58. NokiaFTW (limited) (Posts: 1900; Member since: 24 Oct 2012)


I don't see the mobile division of Sony showing any profits and the same for LG. And HTC are almost dead. Get some facts. Use the internet for things other than trolling.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 16:56 2

60. PBXtech (Posts: 970; Member since: 21 Oct 2013)


http://www.phonearena.com/news/Samsung-and-Apple-reportedly-earned-87.9-of-the-smartphone-market-profits-for-the-last-6-years_id54030

Doesn't include the Chinese OEMS. Hard to find one that only breaks down the last quarter. If you have a link, by all means show it. Otherwise, you point is incorrect.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 20:12 1

63. jroc74 (Posts: 4720; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)


They are showing profits...maybe not as big as Samsung but its a profit...

HTC....dont know what to say about them...

And you dont mention the handful of other Android OEM's. That are smaller in scope so their profits could be larger in perspective.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 21:41 1

66. PBXtech (Posts: 970; Member since: 21 Oct 2013)


No doubt. Without looking I can name the following: HTC, Samsung, Sony, LG, Acer, Asus, Motorola, Xiaomi, Huwai, ZTE, Lenova, Goophone (why not), Geekphone, and Oppo. There's probably a good half dozen more but NokiaFTW would have you think only one of them is making money. Kinda expect stupidity like that from someone who has an OEM + FTW as a user name (no bias there!).

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 21:46 1

67. PBXtech (Posts: 970; Member since: 21 Oct 2013)


After looking it up: add Alcatel, Casio, Caterpillar, Coolpad, Dell, JCB, Kyocera, Lava, Meizu, Pantech, Toshiba, and Viewsonic.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 07:04 4

21. akki20892 (Posts: 3302; Member since: 04 Feb 2013)


Nokia is only one who bring wp here. After all wouldn't have that much shipments or market share.
I agree, that's a true and clean fact. Everyone have to agree.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 09:46 2

37. jroc74 (Posts: 4720; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)


Pretty much...

In Android land....first it was Motorola and HTC ...now its Samsung and probably LG. But Samsung by a big margin.

In WP land...its Nokia or bust.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 14:28

55. Penny (Posts: 1126; Member since: 04 Feb 2011)


Windows Phone is surviving, and Nokia is on board with it. All else is speculation.

How much must it hurt you to know that, given your mindset of being a troll that longs to live in an alternate reality in which this is not the case?

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 16:10

59. pookiewood (Posts: 565; Member since: 05 Mar 2012)


Did you really have too?

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 03:11 1

3. mr2009 (Posts: 25; Member since: 26 Mar 2013)


i think most Lumia user knows what NSU for with or without WP8.1...

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 04:11 1

10. ihavenoname (Posts: 1319; Member since: 18 Aug 2013)


What?

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 03:11 1

4. kdealltheway (Posts: 92; Member since: 21 Oct 2012)


My camera stoped working on 925.1 lumia, so I will return to ver 8 until official update...

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 04:39 1

13. Deaconclgi (Posts: 224; Member since: 03 Nov 2012)


Reinstall Nokia Camera from the store. That should fix it.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 06:46 1

19. elitewolverine (Posts: 1352; Member since: 28 Oct 2013)


all camera apps? My 925 has no issues. try reinstalling the cam app, and making sure all updates are installed. Also download the diagnostics tool from MS, so you can send the bug in, you know like a dev would do.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 05:18 3

15. rsiders (Posts: 239; Member since: 17 Nov 2011)


Windows Phone 8.1 is amazing and this is a preview after all. Even with the small bugs here and there why would you want to go back? I'm really enjoying all the new features.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 05:38 2

16. amsam7 (Posts: 10; Member since: 07 Apr 2014)


Meego was the huge wave that nokia bought into the market, Microsoft knew it and what they did they made a contract with stephen elop and made a no way to go and called Symbian "a burning platform" and he simply made it to windows phone. It was all pre-planned by Microsoft. To compete the market with goole and apple they needed a top share and phone maker which was Nokia themself.,they needed a best hardware company which Nokia was and you well know what happened.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 07:56 1

26. NokiaFTW (limited) (Posts: 1900; Member since: 24 Oct 2012)


Wow! That was a huge load of BS. You might make a good movie director. Go to Hollywood or Bollywood. This is a tech site.

posted on 21 Apr 2014, 11:21

46. elitewolverine (Posts: 1352; Member since: 28 Oct 2013)


Meego was actually a mess, between intel and nokia and even amd, it was just a mess.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories