Nokia Lumia 900 Review
0. phoneArena 03 Apr 2012, 20:30 posted on
Nokia, Nokia, Nokia. Where have you been? It’s been a long time since the US market has been blessed with a high-end offering from you camp, so you know, there are some big expectations riding with this latest endeavor. We’re inching ever closer to that royal grand entrance that’s going to be attached to the Nokia Lumia 900...
This is a discussion for a review. To read the whole review, click here
45. -box- (Posts: 3933; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)
As was I, especially with the Carl Zeiss optics. I wasn't expecting N8-like quality (let alone 808 PureView!), but at least was expecting it to be on par with the Galaxy S2 and iphone4s
47. snowgator (Posts: 3339; Member since: 19 Jan 2011)
8.0 is a fair score for a WP7 device. It still is not as mature as Android or Apple, so we need to see Apollo WP before it can get to GS2/iPhone 4 ranges. This was a great write up, and Nokia's first top tier WP looks good. i hope the Titan 2 also performs real well, and that Sprints mid-range LG is a good effort. WP, especially Nokia, needs momentum going into WP8.
48. rsiders (Posts: 349; Member since: 17 Nov 2011)
This is a fair and honest review that shows the highs and lows of the Nokia Lumia 900. The only thing I would disagree with is that all Windows Phones are just alike and offer no differences besides the hardware. I say this because each branded Windows Phones does offer unique experiences like the HTC Hub or Samsung Now and exclusive apps. For instance my HTC Radar has HTC Watch where I can rent and watch new movies directly through the device and offers specials for even as low as 5 cents! And Nokia has done well with exclusive Nokia apps as well like Nokia Reading and the ESPN hub. But great review.
49. Leon101 (Posts: 90; Member since: 27 Feb 2012)
Can u guys tell me whats so great about this phone!!!!
72. frydaexiii (Posts: 1262; Member since: 01 Dec 2011)
I don't see what's so great about this phone either. Just looks like regular mid range Android hardware to me with the not so great WP7.
69. glentomas123 (Posts: 70; Member since: 01 Jun 2011)
How did this phone get a better rating (8.0) than HTC One X (7.8)????
On the weight of the pros as stated by PA, this phone pales in comparison to the HTC:
1. High resolution camera (HTC has BSI sensor and better IQ)
2. Big display (HTC has bigger and better at 720p)
3. Very fast processor at 1400MHz (HTC has quad core 1500MHz!!!)
What the??? Something is awry at PA.
76. jackhammeR (Posts: 1548; Member since: 17 Oct 2011)
Hm...something is not right with this review. it's a phone right? So, quoting "we find calling quality on the Nokia Lumia 900 to be nearly perfect" means that as a phone it is almost perfect.
One minus: shoots and videos not to great. But! HTC One s which is much worse than this Nokia and got 8 as well.
So...one minus (and of course, everybody says that camera is not important right now..it's all about fluidity and apps) and the final score is only 8?
Well..that's strange taking into account that in head-to-head comparison between IP4S and N 900 general performance was smooth and superb (what author admitted), call quality is nearly perfect...still, it doesn't deserve for something more than 8. Like every Nokias reviewed on this site.
77. dcalexander (Posts: 2; Member since: 21 Jun 2010)
We'll I've had my 900 for 3 Days. Gone is the legend of Nokia out of the box functionality. My N95, N97, and N8 lured me into this. Why would I need to user a 3rd party software to get files onto my phone? Why can't I join my phone to my home wireless network? Why can't I print via blue tooth? Ok... at this price point, I'm expecting to much.
78. Forsaken77 (Posts: 552; Member since: 09 Jun 2011)
I actually liked the review on the Verge website much better. It's much more in depth and says how the WP os has too many steps to get to the things you want, among other things. If you're deciding on this phone, I would check out that review because it paints a more accurate picture on the phones functionality. I thought this phone only came in blue. Glad to see it's got a normal color scheme also. Hopefully white will be available soon.
On a separate note about Nokia... I think that because Nokia is in trouble and NEEDS to have much better sales to stay relevant, they should really ditch the Windows exclusivity. This phone would have balls if it were on Android; with a dual core processor, a GB of RAM, and a much better resolution screen. Plus, if it were on Android with that $99 price point it would make a killing. Nokia is really sacrificing their own company by working exclusively with Microsoft. It's like they sold their soul to Satan.
81. Hombaca05 (Posts: 1; Member since: 13 Sep 2010)
1. Nokia has stated that they had thought of going with Android, but considering the staggering amount of Android phones already, there was a high chance of being lost in the crowd. Staking a claim to being the best on a newly emerging platform gives their hardware the best chance to shine. Plus, the giant amount of money MS gave them in support. :-P
2. Dual-core processors don't matter, at least not yet. Windows Phone doesn't need them to run smoothly, and they're not helping Android run any faster. Seriously, any head to head of a single core WP vs a dual core Android shows that WP runs just as good, if not better. It's about optimization, not spec numbers.
87. Alex123 (Posts: 238; Member since: 17 Oct 2012)
Can you tell where can I access to AT&T?
I am interested in Lumia 900 which comes with AT&T connectivity LTE.