x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Options

At $299 and exclusive to AT&T, the Nokia Lumia 1020 is too expensive

0. phoneArena posted on 12 Jul 2013, 01:38

During Nokia’s introduction of the super-cool, mega-camera, Lumia 1020 in New York today...

This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 03:22 5

22. pyradark (Posts: 882; Member since: 10 Jun 2012)

Im not taking S4 yak
cheap build up, too many bloatware, outdated processor
boring look

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 04:51 8

28. BadAssAbe (Posts: 465; Member since: 22 Apr 2011)

cheap build up, sure plastic is cheap
too much bloatware, Yes
Boring look, sure but smallest 5in phone

outdated processor, No way
but u forget The SGS4 also has
the fastest/best ram in a phone
The Newest/best Glass available
the Best display Ever made ( phone or not)

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 09:45

49. greathero1 (Posts: 576; Member since: 13 Jun 2008)

I was with you all the way until "Best display!" It is definitely in the top 3 or 5 but the HTC One's display is a hell of a lot better.

posted on 13 Jul 2013, 21:23

62. jroc74 (Posts: 6019; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)

You are one of the few that sees it for what it is when it comes to Nokia phones. Even then....those that are camera enthusiasts....will probably go for a dedicated camera first.

I did have to print out some pics for my kids project. The print outs were horrible. I used a Maxx HD and I think an EVO Design 4G. I would bet in that instance a Nokia phone woulda did better. Most ppl that take pics on a phone either upload them to websites, have them on the phone to show ppl, or email them to ppl. In that case most cameras on a phone are fine.

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 02:47 3

13. deacz (Posts: 162; Member since: 02 Nov 2011)

Im not sure its about price, I couldnt care less if i pay 650 euros or 500 for a flagship phone, and im fairly sure im not alone.

If you cant afford the best then buy something middle of the road for 50$ on contract and enjoy your monthly fees for 2 years.

edit: who cares about gpu's? most games on mobile are useless junk.

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 02:54 4

17. _Bone_ (Posts: 2155; Member since: 29 Oct 2012)

IF it packed the SD800 - let's face it; that's the Q3 flagship SoC, 3000mAh battery - all are getting there, FHD 4,8-5" screen - 2013 standard, and a microSD slot, THEN I'd consider looking at the price, but so many things are 2012 about this device that I wouldn't considering it unless it had $4xx written over it.

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 03:33 4

23. Tsepz_GP (Posts: 1042; Member since: 12 Apr 2012)

It's ultimately a Lumia925 with an upgraded camera, for most it simply won't be worth the price due to the fact that WP is still behind Android in functionality, its using 2012 specs, it's more expensive than the GS4 and iPhone5 and lets not forget that the next iPhone is due out in September, IMO, this maybe too little too late for Nokia, had they launched this last year it would've been totally worth the $299 on contract.

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 04:12 4

25. timezone (Posts: 87; Member since: 16 Jun 2013)

Behind in functionality...get real Most people don't even know the features they currently have on any platform. This includes notification which the windows phone will soon have available. The only thing this does is allow the sales people to make stupid comments about how one is better off with an Android. They don't even know why they say it except for being biased against something they have rarely looked at or because the store is pushing a sales contest for them. People don't turn into sheep and check out a great smartphone. The windows phone is excellent and with Nokia is hard to beat.

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 04:35

26. Edmund (Posts: 656; Member since: 13 Jul 2012)

Umm, I don't think even Nokia expects to sell more than 2-3 million of these. They make more profit on cheaper handsets like the Asha series and low-end Lumia models eg. 520, 620, and 720

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 04:45 1

27. Edmund (Posts: 656; Member since: 13 Jul 2012)

I guess they're not trying to convince android/samsung/HTC fanboys to buy this. There's another 32GB phone currently selling for $299.99 called the Iphone 5. When presented side-by-side, I think this is a very good proposition.

To paraphrase Mr Poirot, "One needs to use the grey matter".

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 04:58 1

29. SingDaFire (Posts: 74; Member since: 21 Jun 2013)

Well the price is very reasonable when you look at the features Nokia has put inside this beast. Gpu , processor and other things are easy to implement but not wat Nokia has done right now. This clearly shows that one doesn't need no octo core or 3 gb ram to perform smooth

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 05:02

30. SingDaFire (Posts: 74; Member since: 21 Jun 2013)

Unlike Samsung and other android oems who keeps on upgrading their specs , don't you guys know that an 18 years old girl was badly injured from explosion of s4 , this is one example of overload

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 07:37 1

40. Whateverman (Posts: 3284; Member since: 17 May 2009)

That's such a weak argument I can't even believe you went there. The lithium ion Barry is the most likely cause of the explosion in that phone. Care to guess what type of battery EVERY OEM that makes cell phones uses???

Don't use that young lady's pain to fuel fanboyism.

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 08:23

43. SingDaFire (Posts: 74; Member since: 21 Jun 2013)

Not an argument pal its just the fact

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 08:32 1

46. Whateverman (Posts: 3284; Member since: 17 May 2009)

Well the "fact" is that a quad core processor will not generate enough power to make an explosion of that nature. The battery is the ONLY way something like that could happen. So to say high end specs causes phones to explode is just really weak reasoning, argument, rationalization, excuse, or whatever you want to call it.

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 05:43 1

31. papss (unregistered)

Expensive or not I'm buying it. I hate my space tweakfest that is the same grid icon setup since 07 Not for me at all.. I'll stick with my organic beautiful windows phone.

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 05:45 1

32. papss (unregistered)

Edit I'm buying it

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 05:57

34. muhsen (Posts: 281; Member since: 07 Jun 2012)

windows phone 8 is not zune dependable !!! :/

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 06:16 2

36. InspectorGadget80 (unregistered)

Another way for att being too damn greedy 249 just for the camera? You're sales won't meet expectations att set it at 199

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 07:02 2

37. ajac09 (Posts: 1482; Member since: 30 Sep 2009)

lol be free in a month or so

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 07:31 2

38. Whateverman (Posts: 3284; Member since: 17 May 2009)

First off... Great article Maxwell! Very nice read.

Second, much of what Maxwell says is absolutely true. Nokia has to remember a few things; not many people don't like Windows OS right now. That may be hard for some to hear, but it's true. The general consumer doesn't have WP8 on their short lists of phones they want, so to make a device of this nature with a limited appeal OS, limited demographic (those really into photography), then stick it on a carrier that just about everybody hates (AT&T)... That kinda like Nokia shot themselves in both feet and an arm. They should have made it available to all carriers and charged $200 bucks for it. That would have made this a breakout hit, but I think all those things mentioned will just hold it back.

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 07:37

39. sks1969 (Posts: 91; Member since: 04 Mar 2012)

PA, just review the device, don't worry about the price. When the GS4, with a ton of gimmicky stuff was released it was priced correctly. This device with lots of innovative features that WORK is expensive WTF:-(

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 10:37

54. roscuthiii (Posts: 2241; Member since: 18 Jul 2010)

Well, they've already done a hands-on with the 1020, so...

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 07:45 2

41. sks1969 (Posts: 91; Member since: 04 Mar 2012)

To add, Nokia has invested in R and D and produced a device that is great, you are paying for that, not something that was mass manufactured straight from a reference design.

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 09:40 2

48. Maxwell.R (Posts: 218; Member since: 20 Sep 2012)

I fully acknowledged the realities of costs of the technology behind the camera. The rest of the innards are year-old tech (which I'll argue is a good thing given the performance of WP) however, plus solidifying a foothold will take more than a camera when WP is going through some critical updates over the next several months.

That said, I also outlined that AT&T is the wrong choice for Nokia. Verizon has proven itself to be a more capable partner with inferior models. Heck, the Lumia 928 already had 2%+ of the US market after being available for a week according to AdDuplex. After the Forbes reporter asked her question about the state of the relationship, the audience erupted in applause.

Couple those factors with the fact that Nokia is still reestablishing its brand, with a young platform in the US market, $299 for this level of device given the current crop of the Lumia 1020's direct competition is a liability. The SGS4 camera may not be as glamorous, but it's probably best in class right now.

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 08:30

44. VLaRueC (Posts: 182; Member since: 18 Dec 2012)

So....is this an article about how broke Maxwell R. is? I'm confused. $299.99 isn't unheard of in retail. Let me name a few items that are $300. Note 2, some versions of the PS3, a nice KitchenAid mixer, a 2013 Demarini Juggernaut Softball Ball, high quality silk sheets.... people who want something that makes them feel good will come up with the money.

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 09:51 3

50. Maxwell.R (Posts: 218; Member since: 20 Sep 2012)

The Note 2 is a different class of device. I know the price-point isn't new, but it is not the right price point for Nokia *yet* and it certainly isn't the right price point with AT&T as an exclusive partner. If you want to compare different devices altogether, take the Samsung Galaxy Camera, it might not make phone calls, but it has some amazing capabilities, and lightly used models are trending under $350 on eBay.

I totally see the value in the 1020, and I would buy one. But I, like the readers of this site (and most sites), see the technology differently. Joe-Q-Consumer is fickle and doesn't pay attention.

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 08:44

47. Packer29 (Posts: 56; Member since: 10 Sep 2011)

The 1020 has a great camera and no doubt its innovative and groundbreaking for smartphones but at the end of the day that price is going to come down before they seriously have a chance at making huge sale numbers. I really want to jump on the Windows band wagon but i think i will wait for the 1080p displays!

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 10:19

52. jsdechavez (Posts: 758; Member since: 20 Jul 2012)

We're not bothered here in Asia since we don't rely much on carrier subsidies. We buy them unlocked.. It will most likely sell for as much as the HTC One, probaly US$600-700 unlocked.

posted on 12 Jul 2013, 11:44

58. ngo2dd (Posts: 896; Member since: 08 Jul 2011)

Yes the camera is 41 mp. But they don't take 41 mp pictures. It is just an updated 928 for 200 dollar more

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories