2011-10-26 19:21
2011-10-26 20:23
If i have helped at all a click on the white star below would be nice thanks.
2011-10-26 20:34
2011-10-26 20:42
If i have helped at all a click on the white star below would be nice thanks.
2011-10-26 21:21
2011-10-26 21:29
If i have helped at all a click on the white star below would be nice thanks.
2011-10-26 21:37
2011-10-26 21:44
If i have helped at all a click on the white star below would be nice thanks.
2011-10-26 21:49
2011-10-26 22:44
Looks are subjective. I actually think the 700 in black is moderately attractive in an Elaine from Seinfeld kind of way. Its no 800, but besides the N9, what is? I will agree that design and build quality matters A LOT, particularly in Nokia's case. It's one area where they have the potential to blow away the competition.
2011-10-27 5:52
2011-10-27 8:21
I'm confused by this discussion, but on the other hand, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Look here:
http://www.allaboutsymbian.com/reviews/item/13431_
You should get a huge photo of what the 700 looks like in black, in someone's hand. What's wrong with this photo?
I've got expensive phones, and I've got inexpensive phones. I love my N8 for what it is, and does, but there are times I'd rather put the SIM card in something simple. I would have zero problems with a phone that looks like this.
(Whether or not I'd be satisfied with the OS is a different story, but I haven't tried one yet, so can't say very much. If I could buy one tomorrow just to try out, and if the price was reasonable, I'd go down to the store and get one.)
2011-10-27 8:24
Oops, wrong 700 photo....
2011-10-27 8:29 - edited 2011-10-27 8:29
This is the photo that I should have linked to, but my comments are the same. I've got no problems with the looks of this phone.
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/56288000/jpg
(....but what's on the screen is another story completely...)
2011-10-27 9:21
2011-10-27 9:28
2011-10-27 10:43
I have never bought a phone based on its looks and couldn't care less about them. If the phone does well what I need it to do and the price is right, I buy it.
And please get at least the name right - it's Lumia, not LumiNa.
2011-10-27 11:50
2011-10-27 13:55
2011-10-28 1:52
@Mike_Myers_N8: May I add something to this conversation? I agree wholeheartedly with kolembo's point that releasing two phones that are very similar, with the major difference being that one is sleek and pretty and the other is just satisfactory in comparison. This will lead to exactly the kind of response she pointed out, and in fact I already see the response on these forums before the phone is even released ("oh beauty's in the eye of the beholder", "looks are not everything" etc).
The truth is that yes, visual appeal is generally low on the list of "musts" when purchasing a new phone - its a nice addition, but you're looking for funtionality and features, as well as longevity with future updates and a decent apps environment. But what happens when you are presented with 5 different phones that all have the same functionality, the same features, and varying (negatively to Nokia) app environments? One of the only tools the consumer has left to make their important decision (usually for 1-2+ years of use) is the physical design of the phone - has the company put time and effort into the design? It might not be immediately obvious, but good physical design translates, mentally, to good overall design - it shows that the manufacturer actually cares about the product; that it is actually quality and not just another filler-product; that it will be at least part of the manufacturer's future product focus.
Just remember that we're not talking throw-away nokias, we're talking smartphones, and the two markets are VERY different.