back to article First pics of flagship Lumias for 18 months released … or maybe not

Images of the first flagship Lumia phones for 18 months have popped up on Twitter ... or have they? Renowned technology "leaker" Evan Blass posted two images of models described as the Lumia 950 and Lumia 950 XL. It needs to be remembered that marketing teams are experts at planting images of forthcoming devices with bloggers …

  1. mythicalduck

    5.2 inch (950) and 5.7 inch (950XL) displays

    Am I the only one who is happy with a 4.5" display? I don't need or want anything bigger. I assume that this means I'll be moving to a "featurephone" or something, as all the "smartphones" will be too big

    1. Youngone Silver badge

      @ mythicalduck

      No, you're not the only one.

      My son's Samsung Galaxy SII is just the right size for me, I think that's a 4.5" display.

      That size screen with micro SD, and removable battery, modern processor and amount of RAM would suit me down to the ground.

    2. Frank N. Stein

      Apparently so. Who else is making a phone with a screen 4.5" in size. Even Apple is bigger at 4.7" and they are making the smallest screen, unless you want something really low end and low quality.

      1. Terry 6 Silver badge

        My Lumia 635 is 4.5in

        I'd prefer something a little bit bigger, but not a lot.

        When I bought it the options were this rather basic phone, or a high end/large and significantly more expensive one, that I couldn't justify. Especially since the " a lot more expensive" bit didn't match up with the bit of extra functionality of those higher end jobbies..

        So these could be what I was really wanting. A mid range phone, with a decent pocket size.

        Something that does the job. Not an ibling or a Google pocket ad agent .

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Enquiring Minds

    " technology "leaker""

    Does this mean he has a cyber-willy? And does that mean we can look forwards to the Internet of Thingies.

    Sorry. Long day.

    1. Ugotta B. Kiddingme
      Joke

      Re: "Does this mean he has a cyber-willy?"

      no, it means he's cyber-incontinent

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    If the ability to run Android apps works well, I may well be tempted to go back to WinPhone. I had one for a few years but went back to Android just because some of the apps I want weren't there, or if they were they had some missing features (e.g. no ability to cast Netflix to my Chromecast; no ability to play Ultraviolet movies I have licenses for; can't use my local bus company's ticket app). I MUCH preferred the WinPhone user experience to the Android one though.

    Many years ago I remember OS/2 trying to run Windows applications. It did it well, but that was it's death-knell as no-one wrote anything for OS/2 since they didn't need to. That's definitely a risk for Microsoft here - that no-one will write for WinPhone if they don't need to. However, two lessons they need to learn to turn that around:

    1. Make it very easy to port an Android app to WinPhone and allow devs to start taking advantage of some of the WinPhone APIs and features piecemeal on top of their existing Android app features. There was no easy port for Windows-OS/2 so no-one bothered making the effort. Sounds like they're a long way down that path already, so fingers crossed that's looking good.

    2. Give some compelling extra features in the WinPhone API that devs and customers would want to take advantage of. OS/2 native applications looked pug-ugly compared to Windows ones and apart from OS/2 offering better multi-tasking and stability than Windows prior to WinNT, it didn't have any killer features to offer. Some people like the WinPhone UI while some don't, and other than that I'm not sure what Microsoft can offer as a killer feature. This one may be more difficult to do!

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Depends how well they work and integrate with the OS features (tiles etc).

      Having Android apps available will mean there's no incentive for devs to bother to create a native Windows one.

    2. asdf

      except

      Good points about the OS but you forget Microsoft is not a hardware company (other than perhaps peripherals) and it shows as even their one success story the Xbox is starting to tank. Perhaps the OS can catch on somewhere else (big if) but Microsoft's days of making phone hardware is quickly coming to an end.

      1. asdf

        Re: except

        Ok I did forget about Surface Pro sales (and even then by many metrics they are just now breaking even on themselves (R&D plus marketing was massive on them) forget covering the original Surface massive failure) but still they are dwarfed by what they make on software sales. Hardware is just not in Microsoft's DNA long term.

        1. Richard Plinston

          Re: except

          > Hardware is just not in Microsoft's DNA long term.

          Before it was called Microsoft Bill's and Paul's company (Traf-o-data) sold traffic monitoring hardware. In 1980 the majority of MS's revenue was from hardware (Z80 Softcard). They sold mice and keyboards since the late 80s, XBox, Surface, and now phones. They also sell large touch screen devices.

          1. asdf

            Re: except

            @Richard - Yeah and when was the last time hardware accounted for a more than a tiny percentage of their profits? Ok maybe in the very earliest days but that is not really the company that went on to dominate PC computing that we know today.

            1. Richard Plinston

              Re: except

              > when was the last time hardware accounted for a more than a tiny percentage of their profits?

              It has recently accounted for a not insignificant percentage of their losses. 900million write off for Surface RT (and maybe more to come), 7billion write off for phones, and XBox is likely to still be a loss in total (though it may show a quarterly profit it may not have made up on accumulated losses).

      2. Sandtitz Silver badge

        Re: except @asdf

        "and it shows as even their one success story the Xbox is starting to tank."

        How is it tanking?

        Gamespot reports that PS4 is outselling Xbox 2:1, but the business is growing for Microsoft, as well as for Sony.

        ...Microsoft, meanwhile, revealed Xbox Platform revenue increased $86 million, which translates to a 10 percent growth. According to the company, this was driven by "higher volumes of consoles sold, offset in part by lower prices of Xbox Ones sold."

        Microsoft said it moved 1.4 million consoles in the fourth quarter compared to the previous year's 1.1 million. It did not clarify the exact contribution Xbox One made to this figure, opting instead to combine sales of the console with its predecessor, the Xbox 360.

        Total Xbox revenue showed a growth of 27 percent compared to the same period last year. This increase was attributed to console sales, Xbox Live transactions, and first party game sales.

        1. asdf

          Re: except @asdf

          >Total Xbox revenue showed a growth of 27 percent compared to the same period last year.

          Just goes to show what a flop it was out of the gate. They are getting sales by reducing prices (ie margin). Revenue increasing doesn't mean profit is. One can argue its their main way of reaching millennials fine but if Microsoft spun off all their hardware into a separate company it wouldn't live on its own very long.

          1. Sandtitz Silver badge

            Re: except @asdf

            Revenue increasing doesn't mean profit is.

            I never said so.

            Since the article doesn't state the amount of profit (or loss) how can you say the Xbox is tanking? If you have the figures - show them.

            Even if PS4 is ahead in console wars of this generation with quantity and profits, it doesn't necessarily mean that the rest of the competition are just losing money.

            NB: I'm not a console owner and not interested in owning one, but I think it's good for the customers to have more players than just Sony and Nintendo.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      OS/2 3.0 did run Win 3.x applications. But it couldn't run Win32 applications, and there were some issues with some Win 3.1 as well. IBM too thought it was a way to get OS/2 more deployed, and instead of investing heavily on OS/2 native apps (it had bough Lotus, which had already lost by then on Windows...), waited for someone else do their own porting. They never did, and as soon as OS/2 couldn't run the newer app, it was in a dead end.

      Is MS sure Google won't ensure soon Android apps couldn't be run on Windows, and users depending on them will have a good reason to migrate away?

      I wonder what Nadella smokes, it should be worse than what Ballmer smoked...

      1. Richard Plinston

        > OS/2 3.0 did run Win 3.x applications. But it couldn't run Win32 applications,

        OS/2 could run Win32s applications because it could load that add-on -- until Microsoft added a completely spurious memory access to beyond the OS/2 virtual memory space in a new version specifically to stop OS/2 running it.

  4. Surur

    Just because its plastic does not make it mid-range. Until last year all of Samsung's flagships were plastic. Way to judge a book by its cover.

  5. nichomach

    Thurrott's wrong.

    Our Lumias are very popular, the *only* complaint being "I can't run <android app> on it, otherwise I'd buy one". Anything that removes that hurdle is going to make WP more popular.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Thurrott's wrong.

      Agree that Thurrott is wrong.

      The whole `people will not bother to write software for Windows Phone if they can just write for Android` argument forgets about Universal Apps, that will work across multiple Windows 10 device formats; they are thinking in terms of the current situation, not the one that will arrive with Windows Phone 10,

      Personally I think it is pretty clever strategy. I wonder what `tech bloggers` will find to complain about after this.

  6. leon clarke

    That android on Windows strategy

    Makes sense.

    After all, a wise man once said 'When you're standing on a burning platform, you have to jump'.

    1. Charlie Clark Silver badge

      Re: That android on Windows strategy

      Yep, a coherent presentation on the why, what and how. I suspect there might even be some financial incentives in switching from higher % to out and out sweeteners.

      I think it's probably only the first part of an out and out services strategy because, as Intel have found out, lots of Android apps run native code. Still, it's a start.

      It also looks like MS thinks Oracle's case against dead in the water as this is a ringing endorsement of Dalvik. Or maybe they hope to provide a runtime that isn't subject to legal action?

  7. DaLo

    "Both eschew physical buttons"

    And yet from the photos there appears to be 3-4 physical buttons showing?

  8. Bob Dole (tm)
    Coat

    Plastic?

    I thought the iPhone 5c debacle pretty much proved that we don't want plastic phones anymore?

    *mines the one with the lifeproof case on it.

    **yes, I recognize the irony.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Plastic?

      It proved that Apple simply can't produce an affordable phone. If it was a poor cousin at a low price it would have sold. But it was a poor cousin at a price too close to the normal modal.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Plastic?

      I think it's more that if we're spending £35+ per month on a phone, rather than £12 per month, we'd like it to look as expensive is as it is.

  9. SW10

    6310i

    It's an oversized claim, I know, but I think my Nokia 925 is shaping up to be remembered alongside the 6310i in my little mind*: it doesn't have all the bells and whistles of its competitors, but with a mighty camera, HERE maps and wireless charging (yes, via a cover) it does a few things that I need very well. For everything else, there's t'internet.

    I've dropped it, kicked it, splashed it and put it on bar tables covered in the kind of mixture that would eat into stainless steel and it's still going. Any other phone I've had disappears into the quatermass of inaccessible memory never to be properly recalled.

    Two years old, and for the moment there's nothing I'd swap it for—and certainly not a plastic 'flagship.'

    *I recognize that your brand of fanboi-ism may tell you different—but please don't tell me I'm wrong; I'm just giving you benefit of my own personal view.

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Why would anyone want a windows phone?

    Windows 10 is geared for spying, if these run Win 10 won't they just do the same thing?

    1. This post has been deleted by its author

    2. asdf

      Re: Why would anyone want a windows phone?

      >Windows 10 is geared for spying, if these run Win 10 won't they just do the same thing?

      Trolling or do you forget that %80+ of the market is using an OS built by a giant ad agency solely for spying (Android, at least once Google's services are on there).

  11. Hellcat
    Coat

    Its a phone - looks alright

    Not sure when "flagship" meant "must be made of materials not best suited to being used in a handheld mobile device - but look nice". Polycarbonate is fairly resistant to scratching, doesn't smash or dent when dropped, doesn't prevent signal to radios and can be made into a multitude of shapes while retaining stiffness. If the guts inside the shell are decent specification what's wrong with that?

    Mines the one with the phone in the pocket that isn't pretending to be an iphone.

  12. Ugotta B. Kiddingme

    does it or doesn't it

    have a µSD slot? That would be a deal breaker for me and a shame, too, because this is pretty close to the perfect phone for my needs.

    I have a Lumia 635 and like the interface. As I've mentioned elsewhere in this forum, Win 8.1 on a phone is a nice interface. And with the ability to run Android apps, I will have to rethink my hesitation about Win10. And if the 940/950 does indeed have a µSD slot, then I'll probably bite.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like