11 Comments

Summary:

The Lumia 925 is a fine-looking device and it successfully answers criticisms levelled at the plasticky 920 and 928. However, it’s very similar to other high-end Nokias. The company’s real “wow” moments happen at the low end.

Lumia 925

Nokia’s new flagship has been revealed. Not the Lumia 928 – that was announced late last week as a “hero” device for Verizon — but the GSM-friendly Lumia 925. As predicted, Nokia is highlighting the photographic capabilities of the device and its camera is slightly enhanced over that on the 928, but the real difference here is the 925’s aluminium frame.

Here in Europe, people don’t like their phones too thick and plasticky, and that’s been a consistent criticism levelled at the Lumia 920, Nokia’s previous flagship, and for that matter the very similar-looking 928. The 925 makes things sleek and metallic (I like metal; I used to be a proud owner of the Nokia E71) and is, at 139g, significantly lighter than the 920 (185g) and 928 (163g).

The 8.7-megapixel camera has 6 elements, rather than the 5 found in the 920 and 928, and wireless charging comes courtesy of a snap-on cover rather than being built in, but otherwise it’s really, really similar to the 928: 1GB RAM; 1,280 x 768-pixel, 4.5-inch OLED screen; dual-core 1.5GHz Qualcomm processor; and so on.

Here’s how IHS Screen Digest mobile chief Ian Fogg reacted as the unveiling happened:

And there’s the thing. You can tell Nokia didn’t have that much to shout about in hardware terms, because its main message around the 925 is the around the photo-centric apps it’s pre-installing, namely Hipstamatic’s Oggl and Nokia’s own Smart Camera software, which clearly seeks to rival Samsung’s recent efforts in the Galaxy S4. This is all good and fine, but exciting? Not so much.

Look lower

But even if the limitations of the Windows Phone platform don’t allow Nokia to truly exercise its innovation muscles, that doesn’t mean the Finnish handset maker is taking it easy. Just look at what it’s doing at the low end of its range, once we’re out of Microsoft territory.

As I pointed out a few weeks ago, the QWERTY-enabled Asha 210 offers an incredible amount of social functionality for its $72 price tag (the Lumia 925 costs just north of $600). And just last Thursday, Nokia revealed the Asha 501, a touchscreen device that runs the new version of Nokia’s S40-derived operating system and also comes in at under $100.

Nokia Asha 501The new version of Asha comes with features such as Fastlane, a second homescreen option that provides direct access to recently accessed contacts and apps, rather than showing a conventional grid of apps. This is all a result of Nokia’s purchase in early 2012 of Smarterphone, a Norwegian company that tries to make so-called featurephones seem, well, smarter.

Nokia has come in for a lot of flak for calling its all-touch Ashas “smartphones”, with many seeing this as a trick to inflate its real smartphone shipment figures. That may be one motivation, but I honestly think Nokia has every right to call these devices smart. When the 501 came out, Nokia also made a major push for developers to address the revamped Asha platform, releasing a new SDK and new in-app payment tools. Apps that are already on or in development for the platform include Facebook, Foursquare, LinkedIn and Twitter, and also games from the likes of EA and Gameloft.

Sure, heavier apps are lacking, but frankly the kinds of apps we’re talking about there might be better executed on a tablet than a smartphone anyway – particularly given the excellent battery life promised by Asha phones, Asha-plus-tablet is starting to look like a pretty tempting combo.

Who’s smart now?

Of course, the big promise with Windows Phone these days is that it will hit lower and lower price points, perhaps becoming a viable rival to low-mid-range Android devices at some stage (right now Nokia has only managed to cross the $200 threshold with Windows Phone products, namely the Lumia 520). These Ashas are already targeting the same rivals, though, and they are more optimized for the price point than efforts based on Google’s OS.

Nokia is clearly putting a large amount of effort into industrial design and user experience for both the Windows Phone and Asha ranges. However, it has way more freedom to tinker with its own platform. There’s also the small matter of price — the Lumia 925 costs 6 times as much as the Asha 501 so, if customers respond well to the new version of the Asha platform, the potential impact of the 501 will be greater than that of the Lumia 925. (That is admittedly a big “if”, though, as last quarter’s results showed roughly even sales for Lumia and full-touch Asha phones, with Lumia heading up and Asha down.)

The Lumia 925 sure does look fine, and if I was in the market for a high-end smartphone I’d give it strong consideration. However, in terms of making a real splash, the innovations Nokia is making at the low end come through more starkly than the tweaks made to its Lumia range.

  1. While I find Asha interesting, I worry about its long-term ability to compete with Android. It seems far easier to continue to make cheaper hardware and stick Android on top of it than eke out improvements from the S40-based Asha.

    Share
    1. Nicholas Paredes Tuesday, May 14, 2013

      Meego on the other hand was/is perfectly capable of competing. After Nokia purchased EPOC it became perfectly clear that they were not going to innovate in mobile beyond the device. The NetBook was ready to roll long ago. UIQ was where any action was in smartphone until the 6820.

      They have continually had everything necessary to succeed and drive the future of mobile. Nokia has continued to demonstrate a shallow vision of the future restricted to the handheld profile. They are at least worth plenty for their mapping products alone.

      Share
  2. You’re comparing the high end Lumia 92x phones to the low end Asha series? fail. At least be equal in your comparison by comparison the low end Lumia 600, and 500 to the Asha series to see how they stack up.

    Share
    1. Avneesh Übermensch Balyan Tuesday, May 14, 2013

      Did you read the article… Author didnt compare the phones, but discussed about Nokia’s strategy and how low end phones will eventually may become powerhouse of Nokia’s future…

      Share
  3. Nokia needs to take Android in its offerings…
    Behave like Samsung pls, they ride on what is successful rather than Ego…

    Share
  4. The Asha 501 gives you very little for the price, You misleadingly compare it with upper mid-range devices (Windows Phone doesn’t support high end specs ,can’t really call dual core Krait and 720p screen high end anymore) but if you look at the Lumia 520 and it’s 150$ price tag the picture is a lot different.
    Asha is just not a smartphone,hardware or software wise and the 501 is way too costly, it’s not competitive against the Lumia 520 or low cost Android devices that offer a lot more.
    Asha is just an emergency measure until they’ll have more flexibility to cover those price points but it’s rather ridiculous to be locked out of the high end and low end smartphone because M$ is…. you choose what to call them.
    A tragic decision by Elop and ,what looks like, a contract that offers Nokia very little protection if M$ isn’t executing well enough are just crippling them for the time being.They can’t keep going like this or the Nokia brand will keep loosing value and that’s hard to get back.They either dump M$ or M$ has to do much better.

    Share
  5. good move from nokia by introducing new OS. as most of the android device coming at this price range facing battery probs 501 is a good choice as it gives more than 40 days standby :)

    Share
  6. Dashing Maddy Tuesday, May 14, 2013

    Nokia Lumia 925 vs Lumia 928 vs Lumia 920 .. Which is the Best one ? Exclusive Comparison at

    http://googlefeed.com/nokia-lumia-925-vs-lumia-928-and-lumia-920#

    Share
  7. What about the Nokia 521 no-contract deal at Walmart? Isn’t that low-end enough for your consideration? Sorry, but I’m missing your point.

    And comparing Ashas to the 920 or 925, you had to know that would debase your credibility. That’s like comparing a Ford Focus with a Lexus. Total apples and oranges, come on.

    Share
  8. “The Lumia 925 costs 6 times as much as the Asha 501 so, if customers respond well to the new version of the Asha platform, the potential impact of the 501 will be greater than that of the Lumia 925.”

    I don’t think there’s any doubt that the 501 will have a strong impact, but financially speaking Nokia is probably only making a few dollars on each phone, if not less. One 925 sold may equal hundreds of 501s which doesn’t make it a bigger financial success.

    Regardless though they are different target markets. Regardless of home-grown innovation, a 501 (with a tiny low-res screen, underpowered CPU and weak ecosystem) would go no where in America unless it’s sold as a dumbphone competitor.

    But where Nokia has it right is putting a 501 in a users hand and having them aspire to a Lumia 520 or 620, instead of aspiring to a better Android version of what they’re using.

    Share
  9. bimalroybimal Wednesday, May 15, 2013

    The Asha 210 has complete value for money comparing with Lumia 925.

    Share

Comments have been disabled for this post