POST A COMMENT

14 Comments

Back to Article

  • psychobriggsy - Tuesday, February 25, 2014 - link

    Dual-core Cortex A5 ... sheesh, that's pretty low end. These are for the developing market, right? Reply
  • Laxaa - Tuesday, February 25, 2014 - link

    Yes. For low-cost countries, like India, China, parts of eastern Europe. Etc. Reply
  • winterspan - Friday, February 28, 2014 - link

    In my mind, low end would be cortex A7 or A9. Cortex-A5 was probably developed more for tiny low power embedded devices like smartwatches, etc. It has just 75% of the performance of a Cortex-A8 per clock.
    Although two cores should help, I'm worried that the modern versions of Android will be far too resource hungry to do very well on this device. With optimization it's possible, everyone should remember the iPhone 3GS had a (single core) 600mhz Cortex-A8
    Reply
  • Gunbuster - Tuesday, February 25, 2014 - link

    I guess this makes sense for countries where the user is going to pirate the APK... But still I'm astounded Microsoft didn't stomp this down. Reply
  • Klimax - Friday, February 28, 2014 - link

    UI familiarity... Reply
  • MRMsys - Tuesday, February 25, 2014 - link

    If you're wondering why Microsoft allowed this to continue, it's quite simple: the user experience on these devices is terrible, as it is on all low-end Android devices. This is compounded by the use of a build from nearly two years ago (by the time these are launched). Since Nokia invested in the development of these devices, Microsoft does care about making a return on that given that they now own the company. The threat from these phones to low-end Windows Phones is approximately zero, in fact they are already available for less and with better specs (and run far smoother on equivalent specs as it is). See Nokia 520, recent announcements at MWC, etc. Reply
  • bhima - Friday, February 28, 2014 - link

    I disagree that these phones aren't a threat to Windows Phones. They LOOK like a Windows phone to your average user. Since most users won't know the difference, many will equate this franken-version of Android with the genuine Windows OS... not Android. That shit experience on the X, X+ and XL will directly effect the public perception of Windows phone. Microsoft should kill this thing tout suite. Reply
  • ethanolson - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    Microsoft is also weighing options for developing the ability to run APKs on the Windows Phone platform. This may be watched carefully to see if the interface plus Android apps seem to play well together.

    Anyway, Microsoft has a bunch of apps they've written for the Android platform, including Office Mobile for Office 365 subscribers. There's money to be made here, folks.
    Reply
  • qyqgpower - Tuesday, February 25, 2014 - link

    For about 79EUR without any contract, someone at China could get Redmi (Xiaomi's low cost version)which spec is like quad-core A7, 1GB RAM, 4.7inch@720p IPS Screen, 8MP Backlit Camera. What's the point of these Nokia Xs? Reply
  • MRMsys - Wednesday, February 26, 2014 - link

    That is also a very good point. I think it boils down to: these phones, at these prices, would have worked in 2012. In 2014? Um no. Reply
  • Wolfpup - Tuesday, February 25, 2014 - link

    Eh, I was momentarily excited until I read these were Android phones. If they were stock Android, then maybe, but I really like their Windows Phones. Still, if it helps the company... Reply
  • DracheMitch - Tuesday, February 25, 2014 - link

    Nokia, and Stephen Elop, have said over and over again it uses AOSP. How is this not stock Android? Because it uses a custom launcher? Factually, Google has removed the launcher from being part of AOSP. Reply
  • Alexvrb - Friday, February 28, 2014 - link

    Google has removed a LOT of stuff from AOSP and moved it to GMS. In fact, by itself AOSP is pretty worthless. They did this to discourage forks - they aren't the friends to open source many people once thought they were. You can't use bit and pieces of GMS, you have to sign on to the whole deal, and thus funnel money to Google through their services.

    Nokia has had to invest a lot of time and energy building equivalent pieces to replace stuff that Google now puts in GMS. In some cases there is an older, outdated version in AOSP that doesn't really get maintained anymore (like location service). Factors like that contribute to why it is based off an older version, it would take quite a bit of time and effort to update further, especially as they continue to migrate vital functionality to GMS.

    Still, the fact is that most developers still target semi-old versions of Android, so as they say most apps should run fine once they're on the Nokia marketplace. But I still don't see the point of this device... it seems to compete with low-end WP8 devices, and you're not really encouraging developers to port apps to WP this way. But I guess it makes about as much sense as anything I've seen in the Asha line in this same price range.
    Reply
  • HangFire - Wednesday, February 26, 2014 - link

    This article misses the fact that it's not just a WP8-like skin on top, but all the Google based services underneath have been replaced by Nokia or Microsoft based services. The end result is a very un-android-like experience while retaining very close compatibility for Android Apps, minor changes are necessary. App developers will rush to expand their market into expanding markets, and bring themselves on step closer to being actual WP developers. It's the ultimate embrace, extend... and extinguish. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now