All Things Windows Phone - Apps, Phones, and Discussion

While I understand that, I think they would have been better off (financially) with having fewer models.

 

Is it really costing them much to have three or four near-identical models?
Most of the components will be the same, so that should keep the costs down.

It's a strategy that Samsung used well, there are potential long-term advantages for Nokia to play the game for now.

 

...and here we go.

Google asks Microsoft to remove YouTube app for WP8, takes issue with lack of ads

 

Google don't be evil But yeah, that's totally Google's next cashcow: YT on WP8.

 

If google was going to complain about ads, they should have made an app themselves; no complaining allowed.

 

I want a 'handleable' Nokia to use as a primary. I'm really not feeling the 8x, apart from the size/weight - not only does it feel typically HTC-crappy in the hand, Beats Audio is a fricken joke, and most importantly I use a lot of Nokia-exclusive stuff on the 920 and I want those in an 'everyday handleable'.

After getting the 800's again as my Zune devices, I know I wouldn't miss 720p (let alone 1080p on e.g. the toiletphone*) most of the time, especially as if I need it, I'm carrying the 920 in the bag anyway.

The 820's always struck me as a bit ugly.

The 620 seems like a good deal, but while it's probably on balance better looking than the 820 it veers a bit towards the toy-like.

Is the 720 for me? Or is there a better machine in the pipeline (I don't mind waiting a quarter, but not >=6 months)?


*That's what I'm calling the Xperia Z

 

^^^This one should suit you well:

 

This ain't the iOS thread

 

Nice one, cat!


But Win8 looks similar .

 

No, it doesn't work that way. Imagine if Google made an Xbox Music client for Android...one that gave its users free unlimited access to the Xbox Music library. Of course Microsoft would scream foul, since it cuts off the revenue source of a Microsoft online service, even though they themselves have not offered an Xbox Music app for Android yet.

Microsoft did something clearly improper here, probably to call public attention to the lack of an official YouTube app. But that doesn't change the fact that what they did was improper.

Also, Google's not the only one who loses. Any user who makes money off ad-supported videos would be hurt by an ad-free YouTube app.

 

What about the Lumia 810 (on T-Mobile)? It doesn't look at all like the ugly 820 with its removable cases or the bland 822 with its overly-rounded body.



Nokia Lumia 810 for T-Mobile review

 

We don't get the 810 here.

 

Google hasn't gone after any of the other Youtube app makers that don't show ads with videos, have they? If MS is using the same APIs everyone else gets, then it's not MS's fault.

 

Breach of contract (which is what I think this would classify as--breaching the terms of service) isn't like trademark. You don't have to go after every single violation in order to maintain your right to go after a major violator. You can have five contracts with five people (person E being a lot bigger and more important than the other four), and if you only sue person E, he can't defend the claim by saying "but persons A through D didn't get sued!"

 

Understandable, but there doesn't seem to be any contract signed, just google not wanting to be supportive of another platform. If they were that worried about trying to show ads to everyone they possibly could, they would have made their own app in the first place instead of getting all angry about a large corp making one using the same APIs everyone else is given. They need to open them up.

Then there's this: Microsoft responds to YouTube demands, 'more than happy' to include ads if Google allows it | The Verge

 

Why when directing people to the YouTube website would mean they would see the ads anyway?

 

Everytime you agree to terms of service in order to use a service, there's a contract, even if you don't sign anything.

Google is playing hardball by trying to keep a full-featured YouTube app off WP8. No doubt. And Microsoft is playing hardball by stripping ads out of their YouTube app. The difference is, what Google is doing is nasty but legal and what Microsoft is doing is nasty and illegal (not in the criminal law sense, but in the civil cause of action sense).

As for "If they were that worried about trying to show ads to everyone they possibly could, they would have made their own app in the first place," a company has a the right to not offer their services on a competing OS if they choose. Where's iTunes for Android? Where's Xbox Music for Android? Where's MS Office Mobile for Android? Etc. That's Apple and Microsoft deliberately keeping services off Google's OS to give their OSes a competitive advantage. But what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Google refusing to allow a full-featured YouTube app on WP8 is no different. It's ugly but legal.

 

Nokia Lumia 925 hands-on video | The Verge

Wait for the Lumia 925 in June. Great design, more compact with every feature of the 920 besides built in wireless charging.

 

Then why is google complaining about everyone not being open enough when they're not open themselves? Practice what you preach.

And how are you breaking ToS if you're using what you're given as-is without modification?

 

Every business is a hypocrite if you know where to look for the right examples. I'm not denying that Google are total hypocrites. Microsoft are hypocrites too. What disappoints me about Microsoft's actions is that they're clearly legally impermissible done solely to stir up the public. As a lawyer, that annoys me. Do legal stuff (like the scroogled ads) to stir stuff up; don't knowingly do something legally impermissible and then claim the other side is being the bad guy when they send their lawyers after you.

I don't know the tech specifics of how the ads work, but if YouTube comes with A+B (where A is the video stream and B is the ads), and you only show A, then you're modifying. If the terms of service say you can use A but only if you add separate component B, and you use A without adding B, then you're breaching the terms of service even though you're not modifying A.

 

I see the weight is no longer a problem - a nice achievement, only 9g more than the 8x - but the size could still be a problem. I don't want a two-hander.

 

4.5" isn't that bad, particularly with the WP8 UI, which is much more one-hand-friendly than iOS or Android in my opinion (because you can easily scroll with your thumb until the tile you want is right by your hand, instead of reaching to the top of the screen to get an icon in the top row). I've found my Galaxy S3 to be far more one-hand-friendly once I installed Launcher8 (a WP8-style Android launcher) as opposed to more traditional Android launchers.

 

Nah, it is that bad. The 8x is pretty much the biggest phone I'm willing to tolerate as a primary. I haven't looked too deeply at the 925 measurements but I'm willing to bet it's notably bigger.

On T:

iPlayer on WP8!


On WP7

 

I'm liking the Lumia 620 and 720 way more than I thought I would*.


*Limitations of WP8 excepted of course

 

Looks like Nokia definitely managed to slim down the bezels, and with a thinner frame it should be easier to operate one handed

Gallery: Lumia 920 vs. Lumia 925 vs. Lumia 928 | The Verge

 

Holy crap it looks even more like an HTC than I thought.

No thanks

 

41 MP Nokia EOS specs and pics leak again, AT&T version named 'Elvis'

Lumia 920 with the PureView 808's camera?

 

^^^I hope that picture wasn't taken with its camera.

 

Nah, it's the obligatory 'Blurry Cam' that comes along with these new device leaks.

 

Moar compression needed.

 

I'm stealing those gifs:

Windows Phone 8 finally comes to US Cellular!!!



...in the form of the Ativ Odyssey...

 

How could it have the Pureview 808's camera yet be thinner than the Lumia 920? The 808 had a massive hump to make room for its camera hardware.

 

The 808 also had higher TDP, lower performance parts, a gap between the display and the front glass, and several more kinks that kind of made it a brick. I can see them slimming down the Lumia version quite a bit. The sensor itself could fit in the GS4... it's just the lens assembly that needs a bit of room.

 

The leaked pictures posted earlier is fake, apparently this is the real deal (From GSMArena and ViziLeaks this time around):







Not as sleek as the 920, but Nokia does a better job of hiding the girth of the camera this time around so it doesn't look as swollen as the PureView.

 

Can't wait to see what it can do.

Also can't wait for the regular Lumia 92x to trickle down to US Cellular as a consequence of this beast. Desperately want a Lumia 92x...

 

iOS 7 revealed. Imitation is the most sincere form of flattery. Image lifted from Ben Rudolph's twitter feed:

 

I see the resemblance in the top and bottom ones, not seeing it in the middle photo.

 

I think it's that there's no slider or anything like that, it's just a screen that slides as a whole ( at least I'm assuming that's how it works on iOS7 from the screenshot).

 

It's (1) the font, and (2) the slide-the-entire-screen-up-from-the-bottom unlock method. But yeah, it's the least compelling of the three examples; I would have just done the first and the third if I was making a comparison myself, and then made a comparison of the round in-app buttons:

 

Apple is still using Helvetica Neue, just in a light/ultralight version.

Windows Phone is still using my favorite font, though... Segoe WP. Roboto Light is a close second, which is itself a stem of Helvetica.

 

I know it's not identical, but it has a very similar feel to it (like how TouchWiz, particularly early TouchWiz, had a very iOS-ish feel to it even though it wasn't technically identical in any respect).

 

My money. Shut up and take it.



Spec sheet warriors will whine about the 1280x768 screen as opposed to 1080p screens on Android flagships, as well as the fact that it has fewer cores than an octopus has legs, but JEEBUS with a camera and related software that good, and a case and screen that pretty, I'd take this over a Galaxy S4 or an HTC One in a heartbeat. No question.

(Pity it's going to be an AT&T exclusive in the US).

 

It's an awesome device, I just hope AT&T doesn't scare any perspective buyers away with that lofty $300 on-contract price. If the full price of it is less than $600, I'd pick one up.

 

^^^OK, I surrender! Where did you hide the DSLR?
And dat random farting noise in the beginning...

 

Probably going to be a rogers exclusive in Canada, so they won't get my money either.

 

It's a great, great camera, which I would love to see somewhere in the Android ecosystem, and I think overall that makes the 1020 probably the most compelling Windows Phone at the moment. Pricing it above the GS4 and HTC One is going to be a very tough sell, though.

 

^Exactly. It's a VERY good camera, but all around it's still just a 920 with a huge camera sensor.

I got into an argument with someone on The Verge who seemed utterly confident that the 1020 would ship with Snapdragon 800. I knew that was a crazy speculation... but I at least expected S4 Pro. But all they did was add another 1GB of RAM.

 

I have to admit one thing though... the Lumia 1020 seems to be LEAGUES better than the S4 Zoom, from a preliminary stand point. The S4 Zoom's sample photos were comically bad.

 

AT&T has the 1020 up for pre-order now, $299 on contract and $659 upfront. It's good to see Nokia going with the matte finish on all colors now, this phone will look pretty good in white.

 

The S4 Zoom is also the size and shape of a point-and-shoot instead of being shaped like a phone. That form factor difference is huge.

Also, the S4 Zoom has a Galaxy S4 Mini for the phone and OS (despite the S4 name, a lower-end phone); the 1020 has a Lumia 920 (the best WP8 hardware on the market) for the phone and OS.