x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA

Jolla Smartphone Review

Jolla Smartphone 2

Posted: , by

Tags:

Pages

Camera

Takes decent daytime photos, but struggles in low light.

On the back of the Jolla smartphone we find an 8MP camera with auto-focus and LED flash. One can easily access its interface either by launching the camera app from the home screen, or using the shortcut in the phone's swipe-down menu. Once there, we're treated to a clean, minimalist UI with no bells and whistles anywhere in sight. There are some manual controls – we're allowed to change the focusing mode or tweak the white balance, but that's pretty much it. There's no built-in panorama feature, and there's no HDR either. Oh well. At least the camera app is dead simple to use. On second thought, there are several things that could have been made better. The resolution setting, for example, is found in the Settings menu, not in the Camera app. But the thing we are much more frustrated with is the shutter sound. Well, not the actual sound itself, but the delay between the moment it goes off, and the moment when the photo is captured. In other words, you hear the click half a second in advance, so by the time the photo gets taken, you might have already moved.

Anyway, given favorable conditions, the Jolla phone is well capable of taking decent, presentable photos. Sure, they are a tad noisy and the fuzzy details don't look nice at 100% zoom, but all in all, the phone's daytime shots are definitely share-worthy. Colors have a neutral tone to them and don't really pop out, but they do look close enough to the way they do in real life. The only thing we find annoying is that while tapping on an area of the frame shifts the focus onto it, the exposure doesn't get adjusted accordingly.

Low light photos, however, are barely usable. They are noisy, blurry, and the auto-focus often refuses to cooperate. The LED light might help to a certain extent, but it often messes up with the color balance, rendering the image much colder than it should be.


The Jolla smartphone can capture videos at resolution of 1920 by 1088 pixels, but their quality is far from inspiring. Details are poor, noise is abundant, and objects in motion don't move very smoothly. As you might guess, it gets even worse under low-light conditions because of the even poorer details and the horrible motion blur.



Multimedia

Nothing but the basics.

We find a humble, basic Gallery application pre-loaded on the Jolla smartphone. It lets us browse the image- and video-containing folders in the phone's storage and the photos we've shared on our social networks. Thumbnails of the images in these folders are organized in tiles of a fixed size. Sadly, there's little that the Gallery app can do. It lets us share images on Facebook or over Bluetooth, but there's no image editing tools and there's no way of posting multiple photos at the same time.

The Music player is not very advanced either. Actually, we didn't even get one out of the box so we downloaded one that is in Jolla's list of recommended apps. It gets the job done, but it lacks fancy perks like an equalizer or the option to set a song as a ringtone. It is nice that we can control music playback from the app's tile in the list of running apps since it kind of acts as a widget.

There's a single loudspeaker built into the Jolla phone. It is placed at the bottom of the device so it is not uncommon for the user to obstruct its opening by accident. The loudness of the speaker is average and there's not even a hint of lower-frequency tones, but at least the sound is very clear.

You have to be very desperate if you resort to watching videos on the Jolla smartphone. The screen is fit for the purpose, but the software isn't. Videos of up to 1080p resolution are played through the gallery app and not all popular formats are supported. Furthermore, the UI lacks any features that go beyond fast-forwarding and it did crash on us a couple of times. YouTube videos can be watched by opening the YouTube web site in the web browser, which is better than having no YouTube at all.

118 Comments
  • Options
    Close




posted on 14 Feb 2014, 07:05 16

1. Reality_Check (Posts: 277; Member since: 15 Aug 2013)


Man that's brutal !! :P

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 07:32 19

14. akki20892 (Posts: 3900; Member since: 04 Feb 2013)


Sometimes they need good Reviewer. This Is childish review. Sometimes I see fanism.

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 07:48 23

20. rangaha (banned) (Posts: 86; Member since: 05 Dec 2013)


Funny how these people comment that this is a terrible review, yet they have never even used the phone being reviewed. Quite hypocritical that this guy calls the author out on 'fanism'.

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 08:15 16

29. Skoms (Posts: 118; Member since: 03 Feb 2014)


This is better than WP8

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 08:45 4

37. NokiaFTW (Posts: 2071; Member since: 24 Oct 2012)


Hahahahaha that was funny! LOL! +1

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 08:54 3

41. papss (unregistered)


Nice trolling skoms.. So cleaver and has nothing to do with this phone.

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 11:13

85. Dastrix (unregistered)


Sure, 2/10 is better than 9/10. How's math for you?

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 09:23 3

58. akki20892 (Posts: 3900; Member since: 04 Feb 2013)


2 out of 10, men think about it, this is out of limits.

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 11:59 1

90. ihavenoname (Posts: 1693; Member since: 18 Aug 2013)


It's not good device, but after all, it's Jollas first smartphone, made by ~100 guys. OS is great, but it's more like alpha than beta or finished one. Some forgiving must do, and I think that this device should get like 4 or 5, just to be generous.

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 12:49 1

95. saurik (Posts: 86; Member since: 13 May 2013)


I need John V. to wipe my tears.

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 16:36 1

99. downphoenix (Posts: 3155; Member since: 19 Jun 2010)


typically Nokia fanboy. It is clear that this is a junk phone. It has lesser specs than the Moto G and is about 3-5x the price (depending on where you get the Moto G at) and apparently is worse than the Moto G on all fronts. I cant think of a single reason why someone would buy this over that, and that is a phone that costs about 100-150$ generally.

posted on 16 Feb 2014, 14:52

125. microsoftnokiawin (Posts: 1178; Member since: 30 Mar 2012)


oh yeah the specs are what makes a phonne junk now may i remind that unlike android other OS's don't need big specs to run seamlessly

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 07:38 4

16. easymomo (Posts: 91; Member since: 04 Jul 2012)


The score is very low, but I read the review... the phone is really really disapointing and has the same price as the Nexus 5 or LG G2.

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 08:32 3

34. chunky1x (Posts: 270; Member since: 28 Mar 2010)


Brutal is a conservative term. There are no words that could ever describe this review on the planet.

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 09:12 9

48. Johnnokia (Posts: 1074; Member since: 27 May 2012)


Nick T. ,, just grow up.

Your review is more than disgusting.
This is the worst unprofessional review I ever seen.
I can't call a review either.

6 years child could write better than you.

I used to read only GSMArena reviews.

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 09:52 9

65. cripton805 (Posts: 1432; Member since: 18 Mar 2012)


Honestly, I think the review was justified. The specs are horrible and every single pro the phone has, it has to be limited to what seemed "unfinished". For example, the NFC. Why didnt they finish NFC support, if its included. It's $550 which is not cheap by todays standards. It doesnt support much in multimedia. The camera has no HDR, camera lag, etc... Bad call quality. Low res screen...

I would have given it a 1 out of 10.

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 10:14 4

71. jroc74 (Posts: 5996; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)


Exactly. I think some ppl have blinders on. Just because you like a phone or want it to succeed....doesnt always mean its a good phone.

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 16:49

100. downphoenix (Posts: 3155; Member since: 19 Jun 2010)


so true. Phones like Moto G are better when they're about 1/3rd of the price, and this phone is just BARELY ahead of the Lumia 520/521 which are about 1/5th of the price.

posted on 15 Feb 2014, 22:04

121. microsoftnokiawin (Posts: 1178; Member since: 30 Mar 2012)


you do know the jolla office is made out of 85 people they don't have advanced research facilities or beta testers the beta testers are the community i got sailfish running on my n9 and it's great for it's beta tag !

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 12:14

91. PAPINYC (banned) (Posts: 2315; Member since: 30 Jul 2011)


iAgree, iL♥ve this new iPhone 6; there's no need for such a horrific review, that's just unprofessional!!

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 21:39 1

105. -box- (Posts: 3991; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)


I wonder how much the price played a part in the overall rating. Yes, the Jolla phone is admittedly incomplete, but it's a device for people that like to tinker, explore, experiment, and modify their devices, and want more freedom than what android offers, or something different, fresh, and coming from a semi-grassroots foundation. If it were $200-300, I'd consider picking one up, but $550 is steep for what it is, and better to sell more $300 phones than few $500 phones, IMHO, as it gets the product in more hands and gives more opportunities for crowdsourcing and the like.

posted on 15 Feb 2014, 11:07 1

115. great (Posts: 85; Member since: 21 Jan 2013)


phonearena.... why so serious !?

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 07:07 4

2. Sesameopen (Posts: 106; Member since: 02 Aug 2013)


Lowest score on PA up to date.

Damn I was actually thinking about getting this.

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 08:00 8

25. mobi_user (Posts: 150; Member since: 18 Jun 2013)


PA will not give this phone a good review.
First it is a very small company to sponser thing for them.
Second, Jolla is made of revolting members of Nokia+Microsoft. They didn't surrender to the morachy.
Third, Tizen needs to be put in place.

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 08:55 1

42. papss (unregistered)


So they instead made a pos OS with even worse hardware.. Awesome

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 07:10 3

3. xperiaDROID (banned) (Posts: 5629; Member since: 08 Mar 2013)


2 out of 10? Really? Jolla is gonna kick PA's a**.

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 07:22 1

9. kaikuheadhunterz (Posts: 1157; Member since: 18 Jul 2013)


Not if everyone else kicks it first

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 07:11

4. Andrewtst (Posts: 614; Member since: 25 Jan 2009)


Wow! Score of 2 !!!

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 07:12 7

5. power_x (Posts: 264; Member since: 28 Aug 2013)


only 2/10 ??????
i feel sorry for the people who worked so hard on developing this phone

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 07:30 9

13. kaikuheadhunterz (Posts: 1157; Member since: 18 Jul 2013)


You should feel sorry for the consumers who are manipulated into thinking that this is a terrible product

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 07:40 4

17. SleepingOz (unregistered)


GSMArena did a preview of this a while ago, and they came to the same conclusion as PA.

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 07:55 4

22. jellmoo (Posts: 1525; Member since: 31 Oct 2011)


Whoa, hold on there. The GSMArena preview most certainly did not. It was a great write up that showed what they liked, what they didn't, what needed improvement, and had great followup. They dug into each piece and showed a complete picture of the device.

This is a hack job of a review that contains wayyyy less detail than that preview (which is sad in and of itself).

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 07:58 2

24. buccob (Posts: 2522; Member since: 19 Jun 2012)


well I rarely trust PA reviews... but this is definitely not an outstanding product either... specially for the price

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 07:16 10

6. lucid.brat (unregistered)


PA how much does Sammy and apple pay u????

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 07:18 8

7. muser793 (Posts: 58; Member since: 15 Aug 2013)


well i know it can't compete with android and windows phones but 2?! seriously?! i think it deserves a 6. not a bad camera, average display, nice design, average hardware...
of course it has many downsides but 2 is not fair at all...

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 07:22 1

8. X.E.R.O. (unregistered)


Harsh!

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 07:23 20

10. jellmoo (Posts: 1525; Member since: 31 Oct 2011)


Wow. The utterly negative tone in this review is simply not welcome. Grade a product with a low score if it applies, but this was written as though the author had every intention of disliking the product from the get go. Things like:

"Remember MeeGo? Don't feel bad if you don't. Announced jointly by Intel and Nokia in 2010, it was a Linux-based OS that never really achieved any commercial success... In other words, we're dealing with an underdog mobile operating system built upon a product that flopped."

Are are a gross oversimplification bordering on downright fabrications.

The entire slant of this review is just brutally oversimplified, with no time taken to even dig into anything. It's literally a list of "didn't like this, didn't like that, not a fan of this..." with no context, no understanding, and no concept that this isn't just another device from a big name manufacturer.

If a phone deserves a 2 out of 10, fine, give it that score. But this reads like the author was looking for reasons to give this device as low a score as possible, and simply wasn't going to like it. Expecting a device made by a small group, with extremely limited means to offer a 100% competitive product from the get go and try and compare the device to those made by juggernauts like Apple or Samsung is utter folly.

You could have done the same review, given the same score, but stripped away the negativity and offered a compelling look at a flawed product. Could have gone in deep and identified what had promise, what needs a complete overhaul, and offered constructive criticism. This site is a great place for news, rumours and editorials. But the reviews here are incredibly inconsistent, follow no set parameters that I've been able to see, and consist of little more than hack jobs for products that aren't loved, and giant circle jerks for products that tickle the reviewers fancy.

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 07:46 7

19. sbw44 (Posts: 433; Member since: 04 Dec 2012)


Some reviewers are really Pathetic!

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 09:08 5

45. xoatomxo (Posts: 57; Member since: 26 Apr 2011)


And some reviewers are honest.
He took some time to review the product and he believes it's a 2.

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 09:12 2

49. akki20892 (Posts: 3900; Member since: 04 Feb 2013)


sometimes review numbers have limits.

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 09:13 2

50. xoatomxo (Posts: 57; Member since: 26 Apr 2011)


He took some time to review the product and he believes it's a 2.
Reviewer should be a reviewer and must be fair and honest.
He should not give higher score just because its not ios, android or wp.

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 09:33 6

61. jellmoo (Posts: 1525; Member since: 31 Oct 2011)


The score isn't the issue, it's the content. The review contains no real context, very few actual details, some terrible half truths, and a negative tone from the get go. He didn't take the time to do the review, he took the time to do a hatchet job on a product and offer nothing of value.

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 08:56 7

43. raunak (Posts: 507; Member since: 12 Oct 2011)


"This site is a great place for news, rumors and editorials. But the reviews here are incredibly inconsistent, follow no set parameters that I've been able to see"

I have been saying this for as long I have been commenting here. This especially applies to their camera comparisons.

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 10:25 3

75. corporateJP (Posts: 2431; Member since: 28 Nov 2009)


"Remember Meego?" and "product that flopped" are just plain incorrect on the reviewer's part.

The N9 "flopped" because it was never allowed to succeed, thanks to new-at-the-time CEO Stephen Elop.

Meego has quite a cult following out there, just like Ubuntu does, and the Sailfish team is evidence of this.

This site has become so biased due to big dog money being tossed at it, whether it's Microsoft, Samsung, Apple or whoever. Nobody will succeed outside of this realm if people base opinions off of what they learn here.

Jolla has a way to go, yes. But I am rooting for them. This is a first product, there will be hiccups. But wisecrack statements with no evidence to back it up tied to a two rating make you guys look like a bunch of marks.

And, if you hate the phone so much, send it to me, I'll make better use of it than any of you would with all your free test and demo devices you end up giving to your hipster friends and family members.

posted on 15 Feb 2014, 04:45

111. cripton805 (Posts: 1432; Member since: 18 Mar 2012)


Honestly, this phone is as horrible as it sounds. This is something you would see as a prototype. One of the first if I should say. It is a horrible device for $550 regardless of what OS its running. I'm amazed by some of you people defending it. The company should be ashamed of releasing a product like this. I feel bad for anybody that gets suckered into buying it.

posted on 15 Feb 2014, 22:17

122. microsoftnokiawin (Posts: 1178; Member since: 30 Mar 2012)


tbh if you go on talk.maemo.com you'll see that meego is more alive then it seems we have sailfish we have opened our own app store we have nitdroid running on it which is android we have tweaks that overlay is entire software bug fixes and improvements by the community apps still being worked on !

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 07:24 17

11. kaikuheadhunterz (Posts: 1157; Member since: 18 Jul 2013)


This is why I'd much rather go to GSMArena for a FAIR review

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 07:50 7

21. dratomic (Posts: 483; Member since: 09 Oct 2013)


gsmarena is the best. and i buy my phones based on their reviews and have never been disapointed

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 09:14 3

51. akki20892 (Posts: 3900; Member since: 04 Feb 2013)


i agree. they have mature reviewers.

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 07:29 2

12. hkxm8 (Posts: 64; Member since: 08 Apr 2012)


Lower than asha 503. What a shock!!!

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 07:33

15. _Bone_ (Posts: 2154; Member since: 29 Oct 2012)


Bit harsh, but I guess per review standards, true.

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 07:44 6

18. sbw44 (Posts: 433; Member since: 04 Dec 2012)


Wow wonder why you don't say Samsungs eye tracking is a complete gimmick or how every other OS also has bugs! This just confirms PA is run by a bunch of Samsung/Android fanboys!

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 07:56 3

23. mobi_user (Posts: 150; Member since: 18 Jun 2013)


It is very certain that PA doesn't get anything paid for this review. Otherwise even the nonsense phones have got a rating of 7+. Come on PA, be honest to the industry. Even the initial version of WP got much more than this, which were nothing by s***.

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 08:03 7

26. StraightEdgeNexus (Posts: 3689; Member since: 14 Feb 2014)


'The phone is too expensive for what it delivers'. well that should apply for all iphone reviews.

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 08:21 2

30. ihavenoname (Posts: 1693; Member since: 18 Aug 2013)


iPhones are quite expensive, but they actually are really good devices. 5S is one of the fastest flagship phone on market, camera is awesome, it's well made, great app store, vivid, bright and crisp display, the list goes on and on. Jolla is not good device, and it's really expensive.

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 08:04 2

27. Planterz (Posts: 2038; Member since: 30 Apr 2012)


If there were nothing to compare this phone against, perhaps it would have rated higher, but in comparison to others, the score of 2.0 is probably justified. There seems to be zero reason to buy this phone instead of others except to try a different OS. And even then, the price should be way, way less.

And for all you fanboys accusing PA of being fanboys, EVERY major manufacturer has a currently available phone that has scored 9 or higher. HTC One, Motorola, Samsung, LG, Apple, Nokia (OK, everybody but BlackBerry).

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 08:29 4

31. Diego! (Posts: 555; Member since: 15 Jun 2009)


Oh Gosh... this was slashed! Wasn't this phone outselling Nokia Lumias and iPhones in Finland? Is that accurate? I think I remember reading that here in PA.

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 10:32

77. corporateJP (Posts: 2431; Member since: 28 Nov 2009)


I think you're thinking of the Nokia N9 a few years ago, which ran an infant version of what OS this phone runs.

Regardless, the review is harsh by any standard.

posted on 15 Feb 2014, 22:20

123. microsoftnokiawin (Posts: 1178; Member since: 30 Mar 2012)


yes on the carrier DNA for christmas it was the 3rd most sold phone more then iphone and lumias !

posted on 14 Feb 2014, 08:29 4

32. darkvadervip (Posts: 365; Member since: 08 Dec 2010)


This is not better than wp8! I hate when people hate on an os they never sat down and used.

* Some comments have been hidden, because they don't meet the discussions rules.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Display4.5 inches, 540 x 960 pixels (245 ppi) IPS LCD
Camera8 megapixels
Hardware
Qualcomm Snapdragon 400, Dual-core, 1400 MHz, Krait 200 processor
1 GB RAM
Size5.16 x 2.68 x 0.39 inches
(131 x 68 x 9.9 mm)
4.97 oz  (141 g)
Battery2100 mAh, 9 hours talk time

Latest stories