Nokia WP8 Announcement today -LIVE

jayjay2010

Hi guys,

just thought Id share the link to watch the LIVE unveiling of the new Windows Phone 8 Nokia phones which will start at 3PM Irish time.

Link:
http://www.nokia.com/global/about-nokia/webcast/live/


It will be interesting to see what will be unveiled, people are expecting a WP with the same Pureview technology that was found in the Symbian 808 Pureview phone.

dloob

The Verge have a live blog too if you don't want a video stream

http://live.theverge.com/windows-phone-8-nokia-lumia-microsoft/

quad_red

Does it have proper pureview or just a pimped up 8 megapixel sensor? (as rumoured)

justsomebloke

quad_red wrote: »

Does it have proper pureview or just a pimped up 8 megapixel sensor? (as rumoured)

the 920 has a 12mp with pureview

edit: actually 12mp might be a mistake I think that was only a what it may have comment from some one else

Inquitus

It is not pureview as on the 808, its the pureview name lobbed on a vastly inferior camera.

Professey Chin

The "pureview" on this seems to be just image stabilzation?
Such pretty hardware though

Inquitus

The Samsung Ativ is comfortably the best WP8 launch phone to debut so far, lets see what HTC bring out next week.

quad_red

justsomebloke wrote: »

the 920 has a 12mp with pureview

edit: actually 12mp might be a mistake I think that was only a what it may have comment from some one else

Nope. The rumours were right. It's an 8 megapixel sensor with image stabilisation stuff thrown in.

So it's Pureview - with no '41 megapixel' sensor, no lossless zoom, no depth of field.

Just some new image stabilisation stuff.

g0g

dloob wrote: »

The Verge have a live blog too if you don't want a video stream

http://live.theverge.com/windows-phone-8-nokia-lumia-microsoft/

Damn you this is way too distracting at work!!!! :mad:/:)

Outkast_IRE

to me it looks much the same with some fancier hardware.
Was there anything groundbreaking or at least innovative announced

Inquitus

Outkast_IRE wrote: »

to me it looks much the same with some fancier hardware.
Was there anything groundbreaking or at least innovative announced

Not really.

SuprSi

Wireless charging is included, which is pretty cool

quad_red

The guy doing all the photography demonstrating is from MS, isn't he?

It's all software stuff. Skydrive integration yada yada. Taking multiple images to select the best.

Where is the proper pureview tech? Where is the 'instant on' camera functionality ala the SIII?

"Worlds most innovative smartphone" - my ass!

edit: the wireless charging is cool.

justsomebloke

quad_red wrote: »

The guy doing all the photography demonstrating is from MS, isn't he?

Ye as they are introducing some of the new features of Windows phone 8 that haven't been officially announced until now he is doing it

Corruptedmorals

It works with gloves, that's pretty cool. 4.5 is too big and im very happy with my lumia 800 but I hope this gets more converts.

Dyr

As someone who remembers having to charge a mobile off a charging dock, this wireless charging comes across as a bit of a gimmick. :pac:

quad_red

Does the Nokia music service work here?

Dyr

omgz animated gif photo's!

g0g

"Smart Shoot" sounds like a great gimmick if it worked! Removing moving objects from a photo!?

quad_red

g0g wrote: »

"Smart Shoot" sounds like a great gimmick if it worked! Removing moving objects from a photo!?

It does look cool.

As does the wireless charging.

But where in that presentation are the features that will have people sitting on the fence coming over?

And Ballmer - what planet are you from where you think people want to see your mug on their start screens?

justsomebloke

well that was slightly under whelming especially given it's closeness to the new iphone release

sink

It's not blowing me away. There is nothing fancy in the hardware with the exception of the wireless charging. That said it's the build quality and the WP8 software that will lure me in.

Inquitus

sink wrote: »

It's not blowing me away. There is nothing fancy in the hardware with the exception of the wireless charging. That said it's the build quality and the WP8 software that will lure me in.

Wireless charging is a cack idea until we have an industry wide standard a la microusb for wired charging.

There's no guarantee the std adopted here will be the winning std, so no guarantee your next phone, unless it's a nokia will be able to use it. I have a touchstone for my touchpad, and its utterly pointless. It's as easy to plug in a bloody microusb cable as it is to put the phone on the wireless charger, and given all your devices use microusb you are likely to have plenty of them around the house.

They also charge you a good 30 yoyos minimum for each wireless charger. As I said at the start until theres an industry wide wireless charging standard its nothing but an expensive and pointless gimmick.

kenyard

Inquitus wrote: »

Wireless charging is a cack idea until we have an industry wide standard a la microusb for wired charging.

They also charge you a good 30 yoyos minimum for each wireless charger. As I said at the start until theres an industry wide wireless charging standard its nothing but an expensive and pointless gimmick.

yeah the galaxy s3 even has wireless charging but its not event lked abut because of the cost of the charger and benefits...
i wiould like if a wireless charger came with a phone ofc. would be cool to have for sure either way. most of them work up to 5m if im correct so its a very nice little feature for the future

Inquitus

kenyard wrote: »

most of them work up to 5m if im correct so its a very nice little feature for the future

No they work on contact. You must put the phone lying on top of, and touching, the charger.

testicle

quad_red wrote: »

And Ballmer - what planet are you from where you think people want to see your mug on their start screens?

People who have him in their contact list!

Francie Barrett

quad_red wrote: »

Nope. The rumours were right. It's an 8 megapixel sensor with image stabilisation stuff thrown in.

So it's Pureview - with no '41 megapixel' sensor, no lossless zoom, no depth of field.

Just some new image stabilisation stuff.

I thought that this phone was going to deliver 808 image quality to a WP8 device? If the 920 fails to do this, then I fail to see any unique selling points to it. I have the 8MP camera on my E7 that doesn't have DOF and it's pretty shoddy compared to the competition. If the camera on the Lumia is anything like the E7 camera, then this phone is going to be behind the competition.

Alanstrainor

I think it looks beautiful tbh, I'll be very tempted when it comes out. I've been a very happy WP7 user for a year and a half, and I think I wont to stay with WP8. Hopefully my LG Optimus 7 doesn't die before this is out:o

I suppose I'll have to wait and see what the camera is like, I have high hopes for it, but it's a big priority for me.

Francie Barrett

Alanstrainor wrote: »

I think it looks beautiful tbh,

I don't think anyone questions that.

The problem I have is that Nokia seem to have went with style over substance with this device. All the successful phones have a niche. The Iphone has a reputation for usability. The SGS3 has a reputation for massive specifications. The Google Nexus has a reputation for a very slick and pure implementation of Android. I don't think it's enough that the Lumia 920 is just a pretty phone.

Inquitus

And the markets agree its a very damp squib:

http://www.google.com/finance?client=ob&q=NYSE:NOK

Nokia shares are down 10% at the time of writing and tanked as much as 13% during the announcement

http://news.sky.com/story/981027/nokia-shares-dive-after-new-smartphone-launch

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443819404577633352198554784.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Francie Barrett

Release date is Q4 for the two devices.

Elop (Nokia chairman) kept telling reporters who innovative this device was. So far at least, it's not clear where the innovation is to me - it's basically trying to be an iphone/SGS3.

Dyr

tbh the presentation was a bit cringeworthy, they were making grandiose hyberbolic statments, pausing for effect then there would be an awkward silence before some half hearted clapping eventually kicked in..looked awful

Oafley Jones

Like the look of the 920, although I'd prefer matte and miss the cyan. The 820 looks rotten though. Still think the ruined the look of WP, seems cluttered (yes I know you can customize tile size etc.) especially without the asymmetrical black bar. I own a HOX and love it, but every time I go into a phone shop I'm drawn towards the Lumia 800s and regret not buying one; they're a magnificent piece of design, but that 820 is a huge step backwards.

quad_red

Can't believe they ditched amoled screens for LCD (especially after gring on about how the true blacks of amoled were perfect for windows mobile on the Lumia 800).

After totally overpromising with the imaging tech in the 808, they've totally under delivered.

And according to engadget the new gloss plastic back looks and feels cheap compared to the previous generation's cases.

Just all very underwhelming.

AngryLips

Why are there so many enraged comments about the camera? Once you go over five megapixel the megapixel count becomes a non-issue unless you intend blowing your photographs up to poster size anyway.

The event was underwhelming but, then again, what can Nokia do about that? Nobody cares about hardware anymore once you tick all the right boxes (which they've pretty much done) ...what matters most is the UI and that's out of their control.

g0g

AngryLips wrote: »

Why are there so many enraged comments about the camera? Once you go over five megapixel the megapixel count becomes a non-issue unless you intend blowing your photographs up to poster size anyway.

The event was underwhelming but, then again, what can Nokia do about that? Nobody cares about hardware anymore once you tick all the right boxes (which they've pretty much done) ...what matters most is the UI and that's out of their control.

Re the camera I think the point is that with loads more megapixels (e.g. 42) you can digitally zoom in on a small enough area of the photo yet still have a high quality image (e.g. 5MP+), thus finding a way around phones not having optical zoom with lenses.

Inquitus

g0g wrote: »

Re the camera I think the point is that with loads more megapixels (e.g. 42) you can digitally zoom in on a small enough area of the photo yet still have a high quality image (e.g. 5MP+), thus finding a way around phones not having optical zoom with lenses.

Exactly right, phone cameras are all pretty much good enough, for all they are good for, on any OS's flagship handsets. What they suck at is being able to take photos when optical zoom is required, which incidentally is pretty much any photo you want to take that's not of people, the only way cameraphones can get round this is with digital zoom by having an extremely high pixel count.

BostonB

For those interested in the best phone cameras its not about pixels or zoom (well a little bit). But that he 808 simply takes much better photos.

http://pocketnow.com/2012/07/16/apple-iphone-4s-vs-samsung-galaxy-s-iii-vs-nokia-808-pureview-vs-htc-one-x-camera-shoot-out-video/
http://www.allaboutsymbian.com/flow/item/15013_Camera_phone_shootout_Nokia_80.php
http://blog.gsmarena.com/nokia-808-pureview-vs-olympus-e-pl2-vs-canon-5d-mark-iii-vs-apple-iphone-4s-38mp-shootout/

That said the main issue for Nokia is how good Windows Phone 8 is. I don't think having the best camera will save them. That said I'd love an 808.

Oafley Jones

g0g wrote: »

Re the camera I think the point is that with loads more megapixels (e.g. 42) you can digitally zoom in on a small enough area of the photo yet still have a high quality image (e.g. 5MP+), thus finding a way around phones not having optical zoom with lenses.

That's not what they were doing with Pureview at all.

edit. See BostonB's post.

Dyr

Did anyone else find it odd that nokia completely ignored the corporate/office features of WP8 in this launch? Aiming at a different market perhaps.

Inquitus

BostonB wrote: »

For those interested in the best phone cameras its not about pixels or zoom (well a little bit). But that he 808 simply takes much better photos.

http://pocketnow.com/2012/07/16/apple-iphone-4s-vs-samsung-galaxy-s-iii-vs-nokia-808-pureview-vs-htc-one-x-camera-shoot-out-video/
http://www.allaboutsymbian.com/flow/item/15013_Camera_phone_shootout_Nokia_80.php
http://blog.gsmarena.com/nokia-808-pureview-vs-olympus-e-pl2-vs-canon-5d-mark-iii-vs-apple-iphone-4s-38mp-shootout/

That said the main issue for Nokia is how good Windows Phone 8 is. I don't think having the best camera will save them. That said I'd love an 808.

The 920 might take better photos but noone really cares, all cameras on flagship phones take good enough pics for Facebook and Twitter etc. and none of them are any use for more than casual pics when out with friends, family due to the lack of any sort of viable zoom.

This is a terrible way for Nokia to try and differentiate themselves, as 95% of people are happy enough with their iPhone 4S or SGS3 cameras, and don't really care.

AngryLips

I was hoping for more WP8 news from the event, but there's nothing. No mention of Skype integration...

BostonB

Inquitus wrote: »

The 920 might take better photos but noone really cares, all cameras on flagship phones take good enough pics for Facebook and Twitter etc. and none of them are any use for more than casual pics when out with friends, family due to the lack of any sort of viable zoom.

This is a terrible way for Nokia to try and differentiate themselves, as 95% of people are happy enough with their iPhone 4S or SGS3 cameras, and don't really care.

I dunno why you are quoting me about the 920 when I was correcting the info about the 808 which has a different camera completely.

I don't get the problem you have with zooming for social shots. You can simply walk closer to the subject your taking. Besides people focusing on zoom on the 808 are missing the main point of the technology. Never mind comparing it with the 920 which has a different unit.

One of the main improvements of the iPhone 4S vs 4 is a better camera. The S3 has some improvements over the S2 aswell. Considering the effort that goes into marketing he camera features I think slightly miss leading to say no one cares about the quality/functionality of the camera. They wouldn't go to all that effort if it didn't have a significant impact on sales. I'm not saying that most people would realise the difference but they understand they want a decent camera when they pay top money for a phone.

g0g

Oafley Jones wrote: »

That's not what they were doing with Pureview at all.

edit. See BostonB's post.

You sure? That's certainly the impression I got from watching the various Nokia videos in the past anyway. Otherwise why would you possible want so many MPs in an image!?

Dyr

Ouch :pac:

http://www.theverge.com/2012/9/5/3294545/nokias-pureview-ads-are-fraudulent

Francie Barrett

That is shameful.

BostonB

g0g wrote: »

You sure? That's certainly the impression I got from watching the various Nokia videos in the past anyway. Otherwise why would you possible want so many MPs in an image!?

Due to the industry miss selling the whole mega pixel terminology the majority of people don't really understands that more mega pixels does not always equal better quality.

The Finnish company is at pains to point out that when it comes to image capture, the 808's headline specification of 41MP is far from the whole story. In fact, one of the reasons why Nokia has incorporated such a high pixel count is to allow the 808 to produce better quality lower-resolution images (3MP, 5MP or 8MP).

The main reason to use a big pixel capture is oversampling.

In Nokia's words, 'pixel oversampling combines many pixels to create a single (super) pixel'. In theory then, at 28mm (equivalent) - i.e., without any 'zoom', the camera's 3MP PureView output should give the best critical image quality, followed by 5MP, then 8MP, and then 38MP. When fully zoomed in, all four output modes will give the same pixel-level image quality, since at this point there is no oversampling going on

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/8083837371/review-nokia-808-pureview

That said theres a lot of other things going on like the lense and the IOS etc. The end result it that the 808 is a massive jump in image quality over other mobile phones, its approaching that of camera's and DSLR's, which is stunning.

Of course if people don't understand the tech, (or want it) its not much of a selling point. Its quite similar to SQ on phones. Most people wouldn't know the difference between a good sounding music player and a bad one. So wouldn't appreciate some phones with very good MP3 playback and some are brutal.

BostonB

Francie Barrett wrote: »

That is shameful.

A own goal for sure. Nokia is its own worst enemy.

Francie Barrett

Not only is the video faked, but the photos are doctored too!

http://sefsar.com/nokia-faked-the-still-photos-too

gizmo

On the other hand, there's this...

Nokia takes photo challengers against the Lumia 920 PureView, crushes the iPhone, GS3

Personally I'd prefer better low level light performance than the additional zoom abilities of a higher MP camera. And lets not forget what that huge sensor found in the 808 actually does the profile of the phone. While it would be nice to see such tech in one of their WP8 models, I certainly wouldn't want it in their flagship model with no other options.

quad_red

Bambi wrote: »

Ouch :pac:

http://www.theverge.com/2012/9/5/3294545/nokias-pureview-ads-are-fraudulent

Bigging up Pureview with clear implication that the technology was similar to what was in the (superbly capable) 808. And then with a glitzy trailer which clearly sends the message it was filmed with the phone.

And it turns out that really f**k all of what was in the 808 has made it over and the glitzy trailer really represented f**k all of what the new phone was capable of.

Fail.