3 ms·

> Lumia costs half as much as the new Motorola You are mixing carrier subsidy. Price is in the same ballpark. > big difference, however Lumia 520 is far behi

by enscr 12y ago

> Lumia costs half as much as the new Motorola You are mixing carrier subsidy. Price is in the same ballpark. > big difference, however Lumia 520 is far behind in features. It has single SIM, no Gorilla glass, smaller screen, smaller battery, half the RAM (although double internal storage)

adolfojp 12y ago
The Lumia 520 costs $70 in the USA without a carrier subsidy and without a contract. I know this because I own one and because I just checked a few online retailers to see if they had increased the price. And for that price difference the differences in features become irrelevant, especially when you take into account the surprisingly good build quality of the device and the fact that WP runs very well on low spec devices.
- sandyarmstrong 12y ago
  The AT&T version is actually $59 [0]. I think the advantage the 520 has going for it is that MS and WP app developers have realized that the vast majority of WP users are on 512MB devices like the 520. So, MS has committed to excellent support. Even these low-end WP8 devices are getting the 8.1 update, and it runs really well on them. MS has every reason to support these devices throughout the complete WP8.x lifecycle. And MS is heavily pushing for developers to make sure their apps work there. This was a huge focus at the recent MS Build conference. Contrast this with the Moto E, which is only promised "at least one update" to another version of Android. My original Nexus 7 became quite sluggish after a couple of OS updates. Of course, I'd rather own an Android phone than a WP phone, and app availability is just a totally different ballpark. But for a "basic" smartphone, given the price, performance, and support, I think the 520 might win for a ton of users. [0] http://www.microsoftstore.com/store/msusa/en_US/pdp/No-Contract-Nokia-Lumia-520-for-AT-T-+-Free-Case/productID.300181200 http://www.microsoftstore.com/store/msusa/en_US/pdp/No-Contr...
- jsight 12y ago
  > The Lumia 520 costs $70 in the USA without a carrier subsidy and without a contract. I know this because I own one and because I just checked a few online retailers to see if they had increased the price. Prepaid carriers often still discount phones to prices that would not be workable without the expectation of the phone being used on their network. Similar things have happened with the Moto G, which retailed for ~180 in the US, but is readily available from prepaid carriers for ~100. Time will tell, but I expect that some will retail the Moto E for <80 once it goes on sale here.
- enscr 12y ago
  Can you point to a reliable retailer that's selling an unlocked Lumia 520 for $70 ? The MSRP on Lumia 520 > MSRP on Moto E. It's possible that some e-tailers might give you a good discount on 520 because it's more than a year old. The price on unlocked Lumia 520 that I see is $110. http://www.amazon.com/Nokia-Lumia-Unlocked-Windows-Phone/dp/B00CKUBLFQ/ http://www.amazon.com/Nokia-Lumia-Unlocked-Windows-Phone/dp/...
sandyarmstrong 12y ago
Battery life on the 520 is pretty great. Lasts 3 days easy. The dual-sim 630 just came out in India [0], but the price appears to be closer to $200. It has a 4.5" gorilla glass screen, but keeps the 512MB of RAM, and has no LTE support (that's in the coming-soon 635). See my other comment on this thread for thoughts on how a 512MB WP device might provide a better long-term experience than a 1GB Android device in some ways. I find this low-end market fascinating. Personally I use and prefer a Nexus 5, but as a WP developer it's eye-opening to see that fully 50% of our active WP8 user sessions are on a 512MB WP device (and almost half of those are 520/521). [0] http://www.ibtimes.co.in/nokia-lumia-630-india-price-revealed-hit-stores-14-may-600102 http://www.ibtimes.co.in/nokia-lumia-630-india-price-reveale...
- enscr 12y ago
  > Battery life on the 520 is pretty great That's not my point. You are getting better specs (higher mAh) on Moto E for the same price. That's all. Which one will last longer per charge will be out soon.
sirkneeland 12y ago
> Lumia 520 is far behind in features Yes but to be fair the Lumia 520 is also over a year old at this point (went on sale in April 2013).
- enscr 12y ago
  Not having gorilla glass / less RAM / smaller battery has less to do with being a year old. Nokia has always skimped on RAM for Lumia series (even for 620 & 720). Many popular games won't run on them. They have Gorilla glass on models 720 & upwards. Similar story with battery capacity. I'm not shooting down Nokia, just saying that Moto E is more value for money.

by enscr 12y ago

adolfojp 12y ago

The Lumia 520 costs $70 in the USA without a carrier subsidy and without a contract. I know this because I own one and because I just checked a few online retailers to see if they had increased the price. And for that price difference the differences in features become irrelevant, especially when you take into account the surprisingly good build quality of the device and the fact that WP runs very well on low spec devices.

sandyarmstrong 12y ago
The AT&T version is actually $59 [0]. I think the advantage the 520 has going for it is that MS and WP app developers have realized that the vast majority of WP users are on 512MB devices like the 520. So, MS has committed to excellent support. Even these low-end WP8 devices are getting the 8.1 update, and it runs really well on them. MS has every reason to support these devices throughout the complete WP8.x lifecycle. And MS is heavily pushing for developers to make sure their apps work there. This was a huge focus at the recent MS Build conference. Contrast this with the Moto E, which is only promised "at least one update" to another version of Android. My original Nexus 7 became quite sluggish after a couple of OS updates. Of course, I'd rather own an Android phone than a WP phone, and app availability is just a totally different ballpark. But for a "basic" smartphone, given the price, performance, and support, I think the 520 might win for a ton of users. [0] http://www.microsoftstore.com/store/msusa/en_US/pdp/No-Contract-Nokia-Lumia-520-for-AT-T-+-Free-Case/productID.300181200 http://www.microsoftstore.com/store/msusa/en_US/pdp/No-Contr...
jsight 12y ago
> The Lumia 520 costs $70 in the USA without a carrier subsidy and without a contract. I know this because I own one and because I just checked a few online retailers to see if they had increased the price. Prepaid carriers often still discount phones to prices that would not be workable without the expectation of the phone being used on their network. Similar things have happened with the Moto G, which retailed for ~180 in the US, but is readily available from prepaid carriers for ~100. Time will tell, but I expect that some will retail the Moto E for <80 once it goes on sale here.
enscr 12y ago
Can you point to a reliable retailer that's selling an unlocked Lumia 520 for $70 ? The MSRP on Lumia 520 > MSRP on Moto E. It's possible that some e-tailers might give you a good discount on 520 because it's more than a year old. The price on unlocked Lumia 520 that I see is $110. http://www.amazon.com/Nokia-Lumia-Unlocked-Windows-Phone/dp/B00CKUBLFQ/ http://www.amazon.com/Nokia-Lumia-Unlocked-Windows-Phone/dp/...

sandyarmstrong 12y ago

Battery life on the 520 is pretty great. Lasts 3 days easy. The dual-sim 630 just came out in India [0], but the price appears to be closer to $200. It has a 4.5" gorilla glass screen, but keeps the 512MB of RAM, and has no LTE support (that's in the coming-soon 635). See my other comment on this thread for thoughts on how a 512MB WP device might provide a better long-term experience than a 1GB Android device in some ways. I find this low-end market fascinating. Personally I use and prefer a Nexus 5, but as a WP developer it's eye-opening to see that fully 50% of our active WP8 user sessions are on a 512MB WP device (and almost half of those are 520/521). [0] http://www.ibtimes.co.in/nokia-lumia-630-india-price-revealed-hit-stores-14-may-600102 http://www.ibtimes.co.in/nokia-lumia-630-india-price-reveale...

enscr 12y ago
> Battery life on the 520 is pretty great That's not my point. You are getting better specs (higher mAh) on Moto E for the same price. That's all. Which one will last longer per charge will be out soon.

sirkneeland 12y ago

> Lumia 520 is far behind in features Yes but to be fair the Lumia 520 is also over a year old at this point (went on sale in April 2013).

enscr 12y ago
Not having gorilla glass / less RAM / smaller battery has less to do with being a year old. Nokia has always skimped on RAM for Lumia series (even for 620 & 720). Many popular games won't run on them. They have Gorilla glass on models 720 & upwards. Similar story with battery capacity. I'm not shooting down Nokia, just saying that Moto E is more value for money.