POST A COMMENT

24 Comments

Back to Article

  • andrewaggb - Wednesday, September 05, 2012 - link

    camera looks nifty, but most of the video dragged on a bit Reply
  • Spivonious - Wednesday, September 05, 2012 - link

    Looks like a nice piece of hardware, with some very nice camera tech. Hopefully MS handles the launch of WP8/Win8 in a way that gets people excited about the possibilities.

    I'm hoping for a "and you can buy it today" launch of WP8.
    Reply
  • Belard - Wednesday, September 05, 2012 - link

    Surprised they bothered to put a SLOT in the 820 case... why bother? People rarely change out their SD memory card / SIM card, so might as as well require the case to be removed to gain access to them that way. more secure... too... safer for the hardware too.

    So is the 820 case made out of the same material as the Lumia 920/900/800 or is it a cheaper plain grade of plastic. I'm guessing its the same.
    Reply
  • alissa914 - Friday, January 18, 2013 - link

    I'm glad they did it. I put a 64GB Micro SD in there. Enough room to put all the songs I own, a couple videos, all my podcasts (videos too), and still have space left over. It's the only reason I bought the 820 over the 920. Reply
  • Pantsu - Wednesday, September 05, 2012 - link

    Looks great in terms of specs. I really like the low light and stabilization features, those really are something smartphone cameras need. Lacks replaceable battery and memory card, but 32 GB is enough, and the wireless recharge and good sized battery take the edge out of that complaint.

    In terms of WP8 I'm still undecided. I do like the freedom of Android, but ultimately I'm not a heavy smartphone user so any OS is fine by. I think WP8 will get good app support once things get going. The only thing I'm sorta disappointed is lack of MKV support.

    While the 920 looks great, they really should've had a launch date and prices. I really hate it when companies show off their devices and then won't say when they'll release it or at what price.

    All in all, this gives some hope for Nokia, though there's still ways to go to get back on top.
    Reply
  • zilexa - Wednesday, September 05, 2012 - link

    I am excited about WP8 and really think Nokia did a good job..

    BUT..

    Basic features are lacking: battery capacity. Very heavy phone.

    1. For such a heavy and thick phone (185grams!) the battery is very disappointing. A bigger battery would expain the weight and thickness.
    Motorola shows a 4.5" phone that weighs less then the Lumia 820 but features a 3300 mAh battery, thats 150% more then the Lumia 920.

    2. The lineup. The 820 basic specs are really poor. The battery is just a sad story and display resolution is suprisingly low for a 4" screen. It would be good for a 3.7" (cos it would have a higher pixel density on a smaller screen). But even on a 3.7" I would expect higher battery capacity on a 820, come on, this is not september 2011, this is the phone for 2013!

    3 The line up, really! Now you can only choose the 920 because the 820 is really a 2011 phone in basic features. Why not a 920, a 820 with same specs but smaller screen (but not that low res) and a 720 with same specs but 3.7" screen? Like Motorola is doing (Razr M, HD, Maxx).

    4. Where the hell is Bluetooth 3.1 coming from?? WTF? We need APT-X support !! The only really useful cool thing Bluetooth brings us since Bluetooth 1.0 ! But APT-X is Bluetooth 4.0!
    fyi: APT-X is wireless music streaming, lossless, no quality loss. Samsung has this for a while now. LG Also.. Sony also..

    I was really waiting for these Nokias but the heavyness, lack of high capacity battery and no high quality music streaming.. Maybe I will choose Android again for a year or 2.

    Don't get me wrong all these unique features (superb quality screen, superb camera, optical stabilisation, wireless charging) are cool but gimmicks/selling points. All new smartphones have extremely good screens (you need to put them all on a row to find differences, I am not going to do that after buying one). So I am checking basic features here.
    From the other features, only touch with gloves (!) support is really what I needed.

    So yes amazing phone, the 920 that is, but in basics lacking therefore Android (Motorola or another) is still an option for me even though I was really looking forward switching to WP8.
    Reply
  • ananduser - Wednesday, September 05, 2012 - link

    The screen quality(improved refresh rate, improved touch sensor and dynamic adjusting of brightness), superb camera+ improvements are not gimmicks but features. Siri and wireless charging yes, those are gimmicks. Reply
  • ericloewe - Thursday, September 06, 2012 - link

    While I agree that Bluetooth 3.1 is kinda lame, you seem to have some weird priorities.

    Battery capacity is meaningless without knowing the exact power draw. You also seem to have the math a bit off - the Motorola's battery is 65% bigger than the 920's. I can easily imagine Android gobbling up the extra power, in the end resulting in similar battery lives. Don't judge the battery before it's actually been tested.

    185g is hardly heavy. It may be relatively heavy when compared to other phones, but why does it really matter?

    Same goes for thickness - we're reaching absurd thicknesses in phones, but for what reason? For any reasonable thickness, length and width will determine if you can hold it.
    Reply
  • Sasparilla - Thursday, September 06, 2012 - link

    The battery issue probably is not be as big a deal as it appears. The capacity of the battery is 40% larger than an iPhone 4s, while the internals of the 920 are closer to the 4s than the latest in the android world (where more power hungry specs often reign). Nokia often uses efficient and lower end spec internals (which are cheaper) for their phones. So the 920 battery might be quite sufficient. Best to wait and see what reviews say. Reply
  • TzCzar - Thursday, September 06, 2012 - link

    The real news is the 'missing' 820.

    The current Lumia line up is three phones; with the 800 just a smaller version of the 900 and a world away from the much cheaper 710.

    With the new line up, it looks like they just did away with the 'real' 820 and tried to pretend an updated 710 was an 820. It's not. It's a cheap 720 pretending to be a classy 820.

    The specs on the 920 look fabulous and it's delighted the largely male reviewers (as it shoul), but it's just too big for small hands. And it's too heavy too.

    There is an iPhone sized hole in the middle of the line up.
    Reply
  • MadMan007 - Sunday, September 09, 2012 - link

    Funny thing is the 820's screen is just 0.2" less than the 920. I almost thought 'why bother'...I know the specs are quite different in other ways and the price points will be different too but that's just not enough variation to be a lineup. Reply
  • terrybear - Saturday, September 22, 2012 - link

    Exactly 920 is just too big, will wait and see what Nokia brings out early 2013.
    iPhone is right in saying phone width should be around 60-65mm for comfort me thinks.
    Reply
  • Malih - Thursday, September 06, 2012 - link

    "the 820 is really a 2011 phone in basic features."
    well the specs is improved, Dual Core Krait, and 1GB RAM, and with added microSD option
    Reply
  • polzombie - Wednesday, September 05, 2012 - link

    920 hits the most important buying points for me - decent hardware, nice screen, good camera. And it looks nice. It's a very solid flagship phone for Win8. And I like the wireless charging feature.

    But 185 grams? It's this Nokia's entry in the race for the first "phone" weighing over one lb?
    Reply
  • tipoo - Thursday, September 06, 2012 - link

    It has a substantially larger battery than most phones though. I've never picked up my phone and thought "boy, I wish this was lighter", I have however been left wanting for battery life. Reply
  • tipoo - Wednesday, September 05, 2012 - link

    Any chance you were able to snag some numbers? With the new IE plus Krait it should be pretty competitive, but WP did lag on browser tests before so I'd love to know. Reply
  • susanna88 - Wednesday, September 05, 2012 - link

    The Lumia 920 supports 5 LTE bands along with 4 HSPA bands - pretty amazing.

    What baseband processor is it using?
    Reply
  • RenderB - Thursday, September 06, 2012 - link

    I would love to know how well the built in screen magnifier etc will work on wp8. In part how they will prevent accidental clicking while trying to move the zoomed view, and speed while zoomed in. Reply
  • haukionkannel - Thursday, September 06, 2012 - link

    Well the wireless cahrging increases the weigt a guite a lot, so it is easy to see why the weigh is as high as it is. It still is not too heavy, I have to say. But it all depends on what you wan to have. Reply
  • Azurael - Friday, September 07, 2012 - link

    What I don't get about WP, and what really alienates me from it (aside from the fact I don't really 'get on' with the UI, but I appreciate that this is very personal) is the choice to allow all external connectivity ONLY through the cloud or proprietary software. Sometimes I like to get stuff on and off of my phone, and I don't always have my own PC with the appropriate sync software to hand. What's wrong with mass storage/MTP or even Bluetooth object push? It feels to me like Microsoft have gone out of their way to make interoperability impossible. I work as a photofinisherr, and the (admittedly very few) customers with WP7 devices are always dreadfully disappointed that they can't print their photos on our kiosks, since they work with 'everybody else's phones' (their words, not mine...)

    Are they going to fix this/has it been fixed in WP8?
    Reply
  • briandb82 - Sunday, September 09, 2012 - link

    I think this smartphone is great and it has 4G LTE technology. If the phone is approximately USD 200 cheaper as the iPhone 5 I would prefer this smartphone instead of Apples iPhone 5. Source: http://www.factitup.com/2012/09/09/nokia-released-...

    Brgds,

    Brian
    Reply
  • VikasJSheth - Tuesday, September 18, 2012 - link

    I believe that Nokia is falling way behind in hardware....It has a Dual Core Snapdragon S4 processor, which people say that it out performs the Tegra 3...If you are talking about core to core comparison, may be they are right as Tegra 3 has A9 whereas Lumia has A15 processors...but if you look at the real world performances, the Tegra 3 will just rip off the snapdragon from the roots, because the single core performance might be higher in nokia, but in real world you are comparing Dual Core and Quad Core, Plus on top of that, the GeForce ULP GPU of Tegra 3 is the fastest in real world tests as it contains 12 Cores! So, except for the camera, the wireless charging, may be the sound through the headphones (as it Lumia has Dolby Headphone), the display & the touch screen, it fails in everything else...plus also considering the felxibility of Android OS...Nokia is Leagues behind everyone else!!!! Reply
  • toyotabedzrock - Monday, September 10, 2012 - link

    I think this with the simple interface will be the key for Microsoft with older audience and with the wider non tech audience. Reply
  • MLSCrow - Saturday, September 15, 2012 - link

    Contrary to what many people seem to like, I actually prefer a heavier phone. For the last few days I've been at the mall going from AT&T to Sprint to Verizon to T-Mobile, etc., checking out all the different phones. There are only 2 phones that appeal to me at this very moment; the Iphone 4S and the Nokia Lumia 900.

    I'm not going to get either of them, because better things are just around the corner, but the reason why I like these two phone deigns so much, is because of their build quality and sturdiness. The reason for the weight is not only the internals, but the materials used to create the rest of it. The iPhone and the Lumia are the only two phones that I wouldn't be worried about breaking if I accidentally dropped them (which happens to me a lot more than I'd like) or if I happened to fall asleep with it on the bed and roll over on it, I would never expect it to break the way I would with a Galaxy S3 or an HTC One X. Yes those phones might be lighter, but they're also very cheaply made. I'd be nervous to ever drop either of those phones (I know, just don't drop it, right? But crap happens!)

    Anyway, as long as Nokia is upgrading the internals to be pretty much on par with the best of the best, along with 4GLTE and the best camera around...I think I'm sold on trying it and W8 after 4 years of IOS. I want to try something new and the only phone that is sturdy enough for my lifestyle outside of iPhones while having the performance I want, seems to be the Lumia.

    Though, I am upset that it was just announced that Tegra3 has finally integrated the Icera 4GLTE modem and we'll be seeing quad-core LTE phones before Christmas. I suppose I can deal with dual core for another 2 years before switching to quad, though I am a huge fan of the Tegra3 and it's 5th power saver core. Still, just like CPU's back in the day, most apps aren't developed to take advantage of quad core processors (although the benchmarks obviously are). Dual core should be fine for now, but I'm sure I'll want a quad by the time this next 2 year contract is up.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now