CNET UK – “Nokia 808 PureView, best camera phone money can buy…”
Cnet UK takes a look at the Nokia 808 PureView, which should hopefully be making its way to UK buyers soon.
From the start, there’s both praise for PureView but an immediate negative tone towards Symbian. I don’t know if that was based on actual use or the years and years and years of constant negative press towards it, in addition to the news that it was no longer the main focus at Nokia. (Note, remember Cnet UK also hated the N8 – thought sucked, PRIOR to anything Elop said for those who want to chirp that same 211 accusations again).
They reiterate the dislike on Symbian again as a downside. The ‘unlovely’ Symbian OS. They admit Belle is better than previous incarnations, they feel the make over is only skin deep. Dig down and apparently the surface polish rubs off.
Now, I’ve been highly critical of S^3/Anna. Note that Belle is quite different to Belle FP1 and it’s actually super nice now (though I’ve not had the chance to FULLY test it, by way of the browser and possible slow downs/freezing after time that I experienced with N8).
For those that are negative, I wish they would be more SPECIFIC about what actual problems they had with Symbian, otherwise it just seemed to be a superficial nag and whine that could have simply rubbed off by reading other moans from other people. CNet on this instance mentions first that they’re having problems with the browser, which they feel is severely underpowered.
I don’t know how Nokia could have gotten the browser so right in Maemo 5 as to get Engadget to call it Glorious, and have users fawning over it years and years after its announcement, but on the flip side have Symbian with a constantly poorly reviewed browser. What gives?! I just can’t reconcile that difference. How the hell does Nokia both have the best browser ever and , what’s seems to be also the worst browser. Why can’t we have ALL the great things at Nokia ALL moving together in future devices as opposed to always having bits and pieces of a good thing leading to a mishmash of mediocre with hints of brilliance?
On the camera, they’re in complete adoration and acknowledge that this is the best camera phone EVER. “It’s the BEST camera phone money can buy but it’s a subpar smartphone”. In they end, they recommend the iPhone 4S as a better package for smartphone and camera.
I guess by current expectations, by the constantly shifting capabilities for smartphones, the 808 may not meet their particular overall needs (e.g. the apps, or the browser, or the keyboard). But the 808 understands its target consumers. It’s first and foremost for the imaging buff who wants a smartphone but also wants THE BEST CAMERAPHONE MONEY CAN BUY as to never miss that photo/video opportunity.
by cnetuk
About the Author (Author Profile)
Hey, thanks for reading my post. My name is Jay and I'm a medical student at the University of Manchester. When I can, I blog here at mynokiablog.com and tweet now and again @jaymontano. We also have a twitter and facebook accounts @mynokiablog and Facebook.com/mynokiablog. Check out the tips, guides and rules for commenting >>click<< Contact us at tips(@)mynokiablog.com or email me directly on jay[at]mynokiablog.comSubscribe
If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to receive more just like it.
Now that not many reviewers use Symbian, you don’t really get many reviews that understand Symbian’s strength. There’s not even any mention of its sharing capabilities! – HDMI out, USB-OTG, Play via Radio, Nokia Play to, NFC. The phone is also a multimedia hub built to share content!
As for the browser, blame Nokia for not using a cortex CPU. I mean, for the last and greatest Symbian phone, they could at least sacrifice some apps compatibility for more power? Even the gallery and camera UI are already different from other Symbian phones, why not make the CPU too?
The pureview really is made to share. Of course not everyone would appreciate the benefits
“HDMI out, USB-OTG, Play via Radio, Nokia Play to, NFC”
Unfortunately those are not important features for the majority of consumers. Only a small group of tech users are interested in about those. That feature set will not add to additional sales.
Consumers want a smooth and easy to use UI, lots of applications and a nice set of modern features. Social photography is important. The 808 should have social applications like Instagram. Mobile games are very popular these days. It has become a religion to deny this.
That’s why they recommended the competition if you want to get the best camera phone. The 808 is the best camera with some smartphone features.
Actually those are important features for many customers. As much as app availability. If u don’t have certain app, u can use some similar app, but if u don’t have certain HW feature, u can’t do anything with it.
—
808 is best cameraphone with almost all smartphone features, much more than in WP or iOS.
Symbian’s declining market share seems to indicate those features are not very important.
The competition dropped less important features. Now they are selling in real volumes.
Symbian may not have some applications and you can’t get those.
Symbian’s declining market share however has nothing to do with these features.
Sure, Symbian was declining with or without these features. You can’t sell enough phones with these features.
Investing on features too many people find useless is not something Nokia should have been doing.
Most people find these features useful. At least people i have spoken with.
—
Symbian market share was declining with or without these features. Elop made his best to ensure it.
Nokia was losing market share long before Elop.
http://communities-dominate.blogs.com/.a/6a00e0097e337c88330167671c9e48970b-pi
Even iPad is losing market share. Right now. That doesn’t mean much. Nokia was selling more and more Symbian smartphones with each year, until burning platform memo.
Yeah, if iPad loses market share and profits for a long time, that will give Apple some hard time.
Nokia EPS reported
2007/2008
Q1 0.25/0.32 (0.07)
Q2 0.72/0.29 (-0.43)
Q3 0.40/0.29 (-0.11)
Q4 0.47/0.15 (-0.32)
2008/2009
Q1 0.32/0.03 (-0.29)
Q2 0.29/0.10 (-0.19)
Q3 0.33/-0.15 (-0-48)
Q4 0.15/0.26 (0.11)
2009/2010
Q1 0.03/0.09 (0.06)
Q2 0.10/0.06 (-0.04)
Q3 -0.15/0.14 (0.29)
Q4 0.26/0.20 (-0.06)
2010/2011
Q1 0.09/0.09 (0.00)
Q2 0.06/-0.10 (-0.16)
Q3 0.14/-0.02 (-0.16)
Q4 0.20/-0.29 (-0.49)
2011/2012
Q1 0.09/-0.25 (-0.34)
As you can see, Nokia was doing pretty well back in 2007. Only one year later at the Q4/2008 the competition was already crushing Nokia.
Lord US shut your mouth
u are the dumbest thing walkin on earth
I hope Instagram will NEVER be installed on the 808……Anyone who does, doesn’t deserve to own the 808.
It’s not the CPU’s fault for the laggy browser. You have droids with a 600MHz ARM11 with smooth browsers. It’s a plain and simple answer, the browser is programmed like crap.
The Symbian Belle FP1 dislike, i mean , hatred, is unwarranted.. Its quite a nice UI as far as im concerned. Not that far behind Android..
Hey Paul we could use your evangelism to get PR1.3 released on the remaining Australian N9′s right now!!
As far as I’m concerned even vanilla Belle on my N8 is pretty equal to ICS on my Android tablet (if anything the N8 is the smoother of the 2).
Android sucks. I prefer Belle any day. I do see the advantages to WP7 but I also see the restrictions and don’t like them!
i do have an ipad2 and an N8 with Belle.. If Belle is that bad, then why do I use my N8 a lot for casual internet browsing? Like posting this comment instead of my iOS on ipad? Or using Nokia Drive for navigating through traffic, or snapping great photos and videos? My ipad does some things that my N8 can’t do as a tablet does, but OS-wise, it’s like the iphone , it isn’t really that much better.. iOS does excel in the games section, though..
I want 808
it’s a lovely piece of device
Keyboards and Browsers are the stones of smartphonism and they still suck in FP1 (Swype is lacking Language support and Swype2 beta is horribly bugged) , while the browsing experience is not a fragment of what I used to enjoy on my N9, Even Mobile Opera and Mini Opera are somehow slow to use on FP1 … (I’m an 808 owner .)
Surely Opera Mobile will run considerably quicker on the 808 than it does on the N8, and that runs okay (probably comparable to Opera running on my Vega Android tablet)
actually it doesn’t , seems it needs some optimization for the app to work faster in FP1 , specially since Opera Mini got blazing fast after version 7
This is precisely why it’s looking more and more likely that the N9 will be my next Nokia rather than the 808. Belle’s browser doesn’t cut it and with Opera what you gain in performance you lose in UI and usability.
AN IF THAT f***** elop pushed symbian donna and had Nokia Air…this would be one of the best if not the best smartphone on the market
the Symbian browser is probably a classic evidence of Nokia mismanagement.
What Ive heard from a friend that the Nokia’s Boston unit worked on it for two years without getting a working version out. Incompetent outsourcing, project management, constant delays, arrogant mgmt. Someone said that it was worked on the browser also in yhe UK.
All they needed to do in the first phase was to take some open source basis, but no, they had to work on their own.
i have to agree with you on that….they fully should and could have used the MicroB browser from Maemo5 since they killed it
and upped the hardware for symbian to match the N900 modern wise,so the browser wouldn’t be so looked down on…but for me don’t even use opera anymore..since Anna so i think they’ve done a good job but not the best and not enough effort in updating and speeding up and making the UI more user friendly and fast loading. brower 8.3 is good now but still I still same RAM issues which still need fixing but i think it’s the RAM on my N8 and the fact that it’s a Leaked Symbian Belle FP1 lite i’m using i guess that’s the reason
We know… browser lags, keyboard sux… what else is that plain wrong UI wise? I experienced Android to be more painful to use than Belle. Android is fluid, but once memory is low – slow is a fast word…
What is wrong OS-wise?
I have special place in my heart for Symbian (Epoc32) mainly because it was developed by Psion and they made exceptional product. It took 10 years to catch up. I’m still holding my Psion netBook and it’s Eikon UI is much better than S60 in any form. It’s amazing how Nokia degraded Symbian.
Unfortunately, Nokia is not Psion and they demonstrated that they are not capable of developing operating systems. They have world record in starting new OS developments, but as well killing them once they get people buy-in.
Waiting for 808… The last symbian device.
Android is only fluid on very high end hardware.
And sadly … even Psion isn’t Psion these days
“to never miss that photo/video opportunity.”
That’s actually not true with the 808. While you can get great pictures, you have less moments to shoot those great pictures. It seems that the 808 needs 3-4 seconds to be able to shoot a second photo.
That is, unless you are willing to sacrifice image resolution. However the 808 is rather slow with the low resolution modes. Not extremely slow but slow.
It’s easy to miss a moment if the camera just doesn’t work fast enough.
Never miss a moment is several things:
1) Actually having the camera there with you as opposed to NOT having one because it’s a sperate gadget or was too bulky to bring
2) your 3-4 to shoot a second photo. Is that from personal use? I don’t remember it taking that long at all. Actually I remember it accidentally shooting one photo after another when I accidentally held the camera button for too long.
3) even having your other camera phones may mean your moment is captured but it looks terrible. It’s like having a hangover and patchy memories of a good night out.
I’d easily miss a moment if I didn’t have a camera with me that could capture it clearly.
1) It’s all about the size. If I would use the 808 as my everyday mobile phone, I would end up without a phone or a camera. It’s 17.95mm thick for everyone not measuring their own height from the shoulders.
2) I’ll have to check that one. It’s widely known the 808 is not a burst shooter.
3) Sure, you can take horrible and flawed pictures with any camera. That’s why learning to use the camera is important.
I will miss a moment with a slow shooter if I should be able to take two or more consecutive photos very fast. No matter how good the first one is.
A great camera should be able to handle burst shooting.
From what I’ve read, the 3-4 second figure only refers to saving the huge full-resolution 38/34mp shots (not how the camera is primarily intended to be used)
There doesn’t appear to be a dedicated burst mode. However, in Pureview mode it can apparently capture approx 1 photo per second if you keep the shutter held down.
Plus, all the apps in the store.
My 808 should be shipping in 5 days.
Burst shooting with flawed pictures? Now that’s something I want? Please explain US.
1) With 808 u will have less expensive, slimmer and lighter option than comparable smartphone + camera combo.
2) 808′s camera is on par with high-end android cameras speed-wise, faster than most of them, while shooting in default 5MP or 8MP mode. Full 38MP/34MP mode is a bit slower, but first of all, it’s not the recommended mode, and also it would be as slow on any other device, including DSLR cameras, if they have to save 38 MP photos (unless they have HDD drive).
3) U can learn as much as u want. Once u don’t have let’s say Xenon flash or big enough sensor, u can’t make good indoor party/pub photo with people. U just can’t. And that’s exactly what cameraphones should be good at, isn’t it ? To shoot photos of your friends wherever you are, often under bad light conditinos.
“If I would use the 808 as my everyday mobile phone, I would end up without a phone or a camera.” WTF?
I think something is being lost in translation here, because this repeated statement you copy/paste into nearly every 808 article comment makes no sense at all. If I would use Kellogg’s Corn Flakes as my everyday breakfast I would end up without a breakfast or something to eat. Does this make sense too?
Great SLR cameras are rated according to the images they are capable of producing, not gimmicks. The 808 is a mobile phone which has been conclusively demonstrated as being capable of producing the highest quality images of any mobile phone ever produced by a high margin. For consumers having photo image quality as a high priority in their mobile, the 808 is a tempting proposition. They can assess the other features of the phone against their own personal requirements as needs be.
If you feel that the package offered in the 808 isn’t for you, fine, move on. But why come here continually slagging it off with every opportunity like your personal (quirky) product purchase decision making views are the only ones that matter? Your view of how good/bad devices are in general seems distorted by your own requirements. Most features and software for mobile phones are pure bloat, with only a small subset of which being used by most users. The core function requirements are what matter to individual users and most devices are good enough in the margins. You pick a device which best performs the core functions you require and compromise where necessary in the margins, that’s life. Name me one mobile phone which is hands down the number one best at everything you can think of.
When friends ask me for advice on technology, I guide them based on their own needs, not mine. For mobiles, that might mean recommending an iPhone (which I f*****ing hate with a vengeance) or an Android device, or a Nokia option. If you’re so smart, you should do the same.
Accept it dude, if imaging is your exclusive #1 priority in a mobile phone the 808 is a no-brainer, period.
I would end up without a phone or a camera because the 808 is too thick to be carried around.
Yeah, the 808 is a good camera.
Actually 17.95 mm isn’t thick at all. It’s perfect size to fit your pockets for most people. Remember, pockets are made to be able to handle your hands, and those are roughly this size. Not to mention that most of 808′s body is only 14mm thick,, only small portion of it is 17.95mm thick. Everything under 10mm is maybe nice and slick, but not really comfortable for taking photos.
Sure, you can fit a compact and a SGS3 or Lumia in your pocket.
It’s uncomfortable.
A Lumia and a compact with your zoom preference in your pocket would easily be TWICE as thick than an 808 in there ALL around. And you use that as an argument against the 808 and wonder why some have a problem with you exaggerating?
I use a mobile phone.
So your mobile phone has obsoleted your compact?
No.
Where did all this pocket size thing come from anyway? I would never buy a phone for that reason. Dumb or what?
You’re saying if you bought an 808 that you wouldn’t use it because the dimensions are not to your liking? Well shut TF up and don’t buy one then.
As far as Lord US is concerned, it seems that he has a maximum physical size beyond which he feels a mobile phone is not suitable for his needs and this is a non-negotiable requirement. Because the 808 exceeds his personal maximum dimension rules, he considers it completely useless to him. Class-leading imaging capability is less important to him than thinness. That’s his choice.
Move on, nothing worth reading here.
Not you, D Harries, Lord US obviously!
I may buy one to be used as a camera. However I can’t use the 808 as a mobile phone because it’s too huge. Sure, that’s not the only problem but it’s critical.
See, it’s not completely useless for me. Shades of gray? Yeah.
What is wrong with your pockets? I remember times when I carried mobile phones like the Nokia 3310, Siemens C35i or Sagem MC 930 with me. They were over 2cm thick… everywhere.
Even my Droid/Milestone is (with case) close to 20mm.
They all fit nicely in my pocket.
Nothing.
We used to have laptops almost 3″ thick. Modern laptops are reaching the 3/4″ mark. That’s about the same as the 808. The competition is offering phones almost 1/4″ thick.
Sure, in the past mobile phones used to be 1″ thick. It’s great if you are ok with the 808. Use it an be proud of it. You can get some great pictures with it. Enjoy your life with the 808!
The problem is that Nokia needs sales and the 808 is a niche product.
I doubt most sane people are denying that.
But also most sane people don’t think the 808 is any kind of reason for Nokia’s currently lack-luster or scitsophrenic product lineup. The 808 is wholly separate, not a distraction, nor a reason for any issues. Something extra Nokia did and now sells.
Stop slagging 808 for being a niche device. There is nothing wrong in a niche device. Without niche devices this would be one dull world.
Nokia has many problems and many reasons for their problems – the 808 is neither.
It is a distraction. The 808 will harm the future reputation of Nokia.
What will happen when they will release a Lumia phone with a 12MP or 24MP camera? The media will announce has an inferior camera compared to the 808.
The 808 can’t sell because it’s a niche product and with the Lumia the PureView effect will lose the glamour it had.
Sure, it’s nice to have niche products. However I would like to see Nokia surviving. It’s obvious everyone here does not.
How the hell can you use it as a camera either, because and I’m quoting you now “808 is too thick to be carried around”?
Your carry around camera must be really small, have only a digital zoom and have a bad picture quality because it possibly cannot house an optical zoom and a big sensor due to your strict size constraints, where even “808 is too thick to be carried around”. Because I’m failing to see how anything suddenly becomes thinner and thin enough “to be carried around” when its called a camera instead of smartphone. That would be some f*****ed up logic.
But then again it’s you, and expecting any sane arguments from you is futile, because you’re just a lying troll on a mission to sabotage these 808 threads.
You are reading but you are not understanding. That’s why you fail to understand.
Sorry.
1) i take it you dont use a phone case like 99.9% of android/iphone users (boggles the mind i know)
3-4 secs is indeed the 34/38 MPix mode. 3/5/8 Mpix hovers below and around 1 second. Most importantly, bringing the number up in the context of getting a quick shot is misleading because it does not take that long to take the first shot.
Obviously Lord US chose the worst possible figure in his first message because he is on a mission against this device. Same with thickness where he always just quotes the bump size, not rest of device. What he says is not technically incorrect, but it is purposefully constructed in a way that leaves out important amendments. Also, using words like “low resolution” for the industry standard 8 MPix is intellectual dishonesty.
I tried to suggest corrections to his messages on this device many times but he never changed the tone, so indeed it is purposeful on his part.
The weiredest thing is, I don’t get it. I really don’t get why he is so against that device. If it were about the Symbian browser or keyboard or social I’d understand, but he is actually mostly attacking the camera. Can you believe it? The camera.
Any photography-buff I personally know is excited about PureView. Sure, none are replacing their DSLR with it, but they are appreciative of the accomplishment. It is bewildering that Lord US has actually made a mission of his out of this. The only reason I’ve come up with is that some earlier debate rubbed him the wrong way and now he’s out to prove the point.
Oh well, I tried to reason with him for a while.
You are twisting my words.
I was never telling it’s not a great camera. It’s a great camera.
1) The claim was that you will never lose a moment. You lose a moment if you can’t take the second picture soon enough. That’s not never losing one.
2) If you use the PureView effect, you will lose detail. This is why you have a slow rate of taking pictures if you want to have the best possible detail.
3) 8MP was claimed to be low resolution when the competition introduced 8MP in 2011. Somehow it’s no longer low resolution? Remember, it was told to be low resolution, not low quality. Surely 8MP low res from 2011 is still low res? That’s resolution. Not the quality.
4) It’s obvious that Symbian is considered substandard by the consumers. No point talking too much about that.
5) Sure, you can find a part that is only 1mm thick. Can you say the phone is 1mm thick? I don’t think so. However you need a space of 17.95mm for the 808 if you are going to put it into somewhere. Are you measuring your height from the shoulders?
6) Some people are claiming it makes compacts obsolete. The 808 just can’t beat the compacts in every situation. You consider it bashing if I don’t agree? Should I just praise the product no matter what’s the product it’s compared to? Lack of an optical zoom is a real issue when the product is said to make compacts obsolete.
Please stop twisting my words. I have told you several times the 808 is a great camera. You can get great pictures with it. The 808 has quality-wise the best camera in any mobile phone. It’s a great camera.
Now how would you like to hear it from me that the 808 is a great camera? Telling that is apparently not enough.
Please, what else do you want?
Lord US:
I think you have made a mountain out of molehill when considering other people’s enthusiasm for this product and thus are responding to them too strongly – hence the mission. It may not be intentional, but for whatever reason that is what you do.
For example, I don’t think the message you originally responded even tried to suggest the 808 is a burst shooter or even was discussing the speed of repeat shots. I think your response what completely disproportionate.
What I’m mostly disagreeing with is your choice of words, though. Read your messages and you’ll see they are not really balanced or a realistic representation of realities with the 808.
For example the thickness you quote. This is not about some one millimetre part, but THREE quarters of the phone being 13,95 mm and only ONE being 17,95 mm thick. Normal pockets usually grow tighter towards the bottom so it makes a lot of difference what you are sliding in there. A little bit of extra on the top is by no means the same thing as a wholly 17,95 mm thick bar.
As for low resolution, you again seem to be fusing together a lot ot commentary for your argument. I don’t think the objective comment would call 8 MPix low, at worst middle range or something. But again you chose words that made it sound like worse than it is.
Mostly I’m surprised though that you have such a hard time with people being enthusiastic about this product. Your rain on their parade feels unnecessary to me. Your logic on it hurting Nokia fails to make sense to me too. I doubt most people here think of 808 unrealistically, camera or thickness wise, so I don’t think your mission to educate them on those is necessary.
You just make things sound worse than they really are…
Regards – coming from an actual 808 owner under no illusions about Symbian or the niche nature of this device.
Also, hoe many actually are saying this will make compacts obsolete? Many feel it might make for a replacement for some people, which it indeed might.
Yet for some reason thickness is an issue for the 808, but apparently it is not an issue for an optical zoomer that needs to be thicker probably all around to get more zoom than the 808… AND you need a phone with you too.
This is why your argument fails to impress. I doubt anyone disagrees all these different solutions are compromises on certain parameters and people will need to pick the best compromise in quality, size etc. for them. But you just make the 808 sound like a useless “great camera” instead of just the wrong compromise for you personally.
Yeah, that’s a topic we have been talking about.
You don’t seem to have a problem people claiming the 808 makes compacts obsolete. That has been said several times. I never saw you having a problem with that.
However you do seem to have a problem if someone claims it doesn’t make compacts obsolete.
I never claimed the 808 to be useless. I have been repeating it’s a great camera. It has limitations and you seem to have a real problem with someone talking about those limitations.
Just get over with the thickness. Sure, you can measure your height from the shoulders but that doesn’t tell the truth.
I really hope you will enjoy the 808.
Does your pants have fixed sized pockets? Or do they stretch? Because if they stretch, a variably sized item like the 808 will take only the space it takes. Only if you have plastic boxes for pockets do you need to have all around thicker pockets.
Keep telling that thickness story if you must, but I have the phone here and it does not take 17.95 mm in my pockets anywhere else but on the bulge. This means it is better than a wholly 17.95 mm device thickness-wise. Significantly better.
Just get over it. Not everyone likes thick phones.
Now, that has not been your argument though. I agree with that. 808 is thick and not all like that. It is niche.
But you keep calling it 17.95 mm thick when in reality in a real-life pocket it is not that thick except in one quarter of it. But that is your style on the 808, exaggerating to the point where your points disconnect from reality.
Sorry.
Yeah, 17.95mm was nice back in 2007. It was not thin but it was nice.
It is really hard to get over the thickness issue because I have the phone here and it does not look, feel or exist as a 17.95 mm object. It is not about height but measuring people from their stomach and expecting them not to fit to a chair because their feet are as thick as their stomach!?! Your analogy is wrong and your message is wrong on the thickness issue.
But moving on from that, I don’t have a problem with people arguing products obsoliting compacts either way. Some may argue SGSIII will obsolete compacts and have some merit to it. Others may argue against it and have merit too. It is an interesting conversation either way.
I doubt I’d have any issue with your argument itself, but your persistence in making the points in the oddest of responses (and sticking to things like the thickness issue) just seems like a mission. No, it is a mission. If someone had a mission dissing compacts I’d dislike that too because that would not be truthful either.
I don’t dislike pointing out the weaknesses of the 808. There are plenty. I dislike inventing or stretching them to a point where reality is stretching.
Are you trying to tell me that the 808 is thick and I’m confused because I think it’s thick because it’s not thick? What?
Does it bother you if someone keeps telling how delusional Elop is? Some people seem to be stretching the truth about Elop’s management skills. I haven’t seen you really disliking that.
I’m telling you there are different results from different kind of thickness.
For example, a human with stomach might still fit in a tightly pitched airplane seat because his feet are not as thick as his stomach (the stomach might affect seat width though).
Similarly a phone, fat from one end but less fat from others will not feel as fat in pocket as a phone with same thickness throughout.
I’m not disputing 808 is fat. I’m disputing calling it 17.95 mm thick because it is misleading. In reality it fits on pockets easier than devices that are 17.95 mm thick throughout.
What Elop has to do with this I don’t know, other than your attempt to deflect the subject.
I still fail to understand why do you measure your height from the shoulders.
It must be a cultural thing.
I still don’t understand why you have plastic boxes for pockets instead of flexible ones like the rest of the world, that conform to the actual shape of objects within instead of their thickest point.
It must be a cultural thing.
Import some foreign pants man, they are really useful.
Lol.
Gosh, you are pissed.
Is it the 17.95mm or your shoulders?
I’m sorry, but you seem to be really serious about this.
Your claim a few messages ago was that an object will take the size of its thickest point, hence only mentioning the thickest point matters.
I disagreed especially with phones because pockets ARE flexible. This means they do NOT take the space of the thickest point, but their actual size. Hence the difference matters a lot.
Here is how I’d post the size of the 808… Something to the tune of this:
“Yeah, it is a fat phone – almost 14 mm thick and the bump, a quarter of the phone, almost 18 mm thick.”
That or something like that would be fair. Because 75% of the phone is NOT 17,95 mm thick. Hence calling the device 17,95 mm thick is misleading, so much of it is not that thick – and the difference matters a lot in real world scenarios.
Measuring height from shoulders is a mistaken – and stupid – comparison and you know it. Import some pants with real pockets instead of fixed-size boxes in their place. You’ll see my point.
Having said all this, the 808 is still a big, fat, niche device that will only appeal to a very limited market. But it isn’t 17,95 mm thick, no, not really.
How high is Mount Everest?
Yeah.
When you take normal pictures, are you always shooting in burst mode? I actually enjoy the fact that you are persistent to point out negatives. I think that’s a good thing so we’re not all carried away with what Nokia does.
However, I think we might be thinking about different things if you associate ‘never miss a moment’ with burst mode as opposed to always having a great camera in your pocket because it’s also your phone.
Something interesting pops up that I should take a picture of, 808 starts super quick and can take that shot. I did NOT miss that moment.
Even with burst mode, if you are that adamant about second by second moments, you will still miss something. My 60D in Burst mode is great sometimes but other times it just produces a blurry mess.
Burst mode is cool, it would be nice to have it but as to the overall package, it’s better to have the 808 that is ALWAYS WITH YOU than a pocket camera with burst mode that DOESN’T or a shitty cameraphone that will take a burst of shitty photos.
Burst mode is one thing and the ability to take the second picture as swiftly as possible is another matter. We are probably thinking about different subjects.
I love the ability to be able to take the second shot with as small delay as possible. This can be done without the burst mode by just taking the second picture as soon as you feel like.
Let’s say I’m going to take some pictures of my friend skateboarding. If I take the first picture just a brief moment before I should have been taking it, I have a problem. If the camera is able to take the second picture without any considerable delay, I may be able to catch the moment. If I have to wait too long I will miss the moment.
That’s done without the burst mode.
This does not make the 808 a bad camera. You can still take great pictures with it. I was just wondering about never missing a moment. It’s nothing too serious.
Jay:
I guess his numbers may come from my 808 measurements which I posted here:
http://mynokiablog.com/2012/06/26/engadgets-nokia-808-pureview-review-obliterates-every-other-camera-phone-revolution-of-stills-and-video-for-entire-imaging-industry/
only the full res mode takes a few seconds(2-4 considering the animation it does every image you take) to take another photo. I rarely use the full reso mode since you cant zoom in. I prefer using 8mp with PV mode, takes a second to shoot a photo.
This is based on my personal experience with my 808.
errr, lord us has a point about pocketability.. my brother ditched his N8 for the 808. so i ve seen and tried it. however, i still prefer the size of my N8, as it is less bulky in my front pant packet… for my photo needs, N8 still serves me well ..and the Belle on N8 isn’t really bad.. does more stuff than iOS, actually.. so i am holding in maybe for pureview to come out in better form factor, as i am still happy with N8.. haha
penoy: As a guy who was one of the first to use an 808 here and who also has an N8, I remember telling people how much bigger it is compared to the N8. Some didn’t believe me. And it is true, it is a lot bigger. You are right a out that. The N8 is much more mainstream in size, and design too, where as clearly the 808 is a niche device. It will not sell that many, because of form-factor (and Symbian).
However, I’d opine that is where the validity of Lord US’s argument ends, because he makes the 808 sound like something unusable and unsuitable for carrying around comfortably. That is just hogwash. Sure, because thinner phones are available most people will prefer those, and most definitely because not many want Symbian, but for someone who wants the features in 808 has a very good chance of finding the size perfectly adequate or even good.
It is a lot bigger than an N8, and big enough to make it a niche device on size alone because the competition is so much smaller, but it is not uncarryably thick or somehow universally uncomfortably thick by any means.
I have read comments claiming that compacts are too huge to be carried around. Yeah, they are too huge.
Now suddenly when someone tells the 808 is too huge, it’s a problem for you. I’m actually not sure what you are claiming. However you are most certainly not fine with the claim that the 808 is too huge compared to the competition.
Do you really feel like I’m claiming the 808 to be unusable if I tell you it’s too huge for most of the people? I have stated several times some people will be able to use it regardless of the size.
What is the king of the camera phones? Do you accept any limits to the size? If you do, then maybe you can understand why someone may feels the 808 is too huge.
Yeah, people seem to have problems understanding how the 808 can be too thick for some users.
Do you understand the concept of a niche device? I have always acknowledged and agreed, even argued with people, that the 808 is one. So yes, it is bigger than the competition in a way that will seriously limit its target market. Of course.
But in all seriousness, pointing just that out is not what you do. It has gone well beyond that for you. If you don’t see that, then well…
Sorry.
After all the updates, do phones need defragmenting? I sometimes plug mine in to the laptop and do it that way.
Don’t do that dude. Its not a hard drive, and only hard drives need to do that. I’m pretty sure defraying a phone memory actually lowers its life spans.