backtop


Print 52 comment(s) - last by inighthawki.. on Aug 20 at 11:05 AM

The device is priced at $99 with a two-year contract on Verizon Wireless

We’ve known about HTC’s latest Windows Phone device for quite some time, but today was the official unveiling for the HTC One (M8) for Windows.
 
As we’ve previously reported, the Windows Phone 8.1 version of HTC’s flagship smartphone shares identical hardware specifications with its Android relative. That means a 2.3GHz Snapdragon 801 processor is onboard along with 2GB of RAM, a 5” 1080p display, 32GB of internal storage, microSD slot for further expansion, a 2600 mAh battery, HTC Boomsound, U-Focus, and support for the Dot View case.

 
The HTC One (M8) for Windows is launching today on Verizon Wireless and is priced at a respectable $99 with a two-year contract. Verizon Wireless also announced this added bonus for new signups:
 
And for a limited time, customers who activate or upgrade to a new smartphone on MORE Everything plans with at least 1 GB of data will get an extra 1 GB of bonus data per month for up to 24 months, as long as that smartphone remains active on the MORE Everything plan.

 
So is hardware that matches some of the best Android smartphones currently available, a non-Nokia exterior design, and Windows Phone 8.1 a recipe for success? Microsoft needs all the help it can get in pushing Windows 8.1 on consumers, and this latest partnership with HTC can only help further those efforts.

Sources: Verizon Wireless [1], [2]



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

VZW website showing $199
By l0wt3k on 8/19/2014 1:02:14 PM , Rating: 2
as far as I can tell, the device is going for $199 on their website. This is still a reasonable price for a new flagship model, particularly in light of their new $60 pricing structure.




RE: VZW website showing $199
By stm1185 on 8/19/2014 1:30:04 PM , Rating: 2
Its not reasonable right now though, with every other phone half off.

$199 for One Windows, $99 for One, $0 for Lumia Icon... hard sell.


RE: VZW website showing $199
By Reclaimer77 on 8/19/14, Rating: 0
RE: VZW website showing $199
By stm1185 on 8/19/2014 2:10:20 PM , Rating: 2
Or, they like me, just wait for it to fail at the $199 price point and pick it up for 0 in a month.


RE: VZW website showing $199
By Labotomizer on 8/19/2014 3:14:35 PM , Rating: 4
Icon has a superior camera and a killer software suite. The One M8 is nice and I would consider it at the same price. But I wouldn't switch off the Icon to it. You can't beat the Nokia software suite.


RE: VZW website showing $199
By Reclaimer77 on 8/19/14, Rating: -1
RE: VZW website showing $199
By nikon133 on 8/19/2014 3:44:38 PM , Rating: 1
It does? I sympathise with you, then. Personally, I prefer Nokia's colourful design. Plastic is OK for me, after all Samsung does it too and I haven't seen you complaining there.

This HTC looks nice, but I'm a bit tired with that getting old idea that if it's aluminium, it is premium. Good plastic feels nicer in hand, is leas prone to scratches... and I like colours. But I'm happy that other OEMs are putting some effort in Windows Phone.


RE: VZW website showing $199
By inighthawki on 8/19/2014 3:46:47 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
As far as software suite...well...LMAO. It's a Windows Phone so uhhh yeah. Funny stuff.

Aw man, good one bro!

quote:
Let's face it. It took an Android OEM to finally make a compelling Windows Phone. Burns doesn't it?

HTC was making Windows Mobile phones long before Android. They stopped making phones when WinMo kinda came to a hault. They later made a number of models for WP7 and WP8 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_HTC_phones)


RE: VZW website showing $199
By Reclaimer77 on 8/19/14, Rating: -1
RE: VZW website showing $199
By amanojaku on 8/19/2014 4:31:01 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Seriously what more do you want?
YOUR BLOOOOOOOD!!!

/pitchforks


RE: VZW website showing $199
By Labotomizer on 8/19/2014 4:49:12 PM , Rating: 3
Slipping a very small, backhanded compliment in amongst a string of insults is not "positive".


RE: VZW website showing $199
By inighthawki on 8/19/2014 4:59:12 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
You guys are amazing. You always say I do nothing but bash Windows Phones. Yet when I praise this one by HTC, you STILL find something to complain about.

Because you couldn't do it without first bashing it for being inferior to Android

quote:
Talk about brand loyalty! I guess you MUST buy a Nokia if you want to enjoy Windows Phone...

Not at all. I actually don't like Nokia's phones. This phone looks pretty nice, unfortunately I don't have Verizon, so no point in even thinking about it...

quote:
Because Windows Mobile was before Android. What kind of argument is that anyway? And Windows Phone isn't even based on Windows Mobile lol.

I said this because you claimed "Let's face it. It took an Android OEM to finally make a compelling Windows Phone. Burns doesn't it?"
HTC is not "An Android OEM." They were making Windows based phones long before Android even existed. And despite the different UI, WP7 was based on Windows CE, the same core as WinMo 6.5 and below. So they are related.

quote:
I'm really not a fan of Nokia's design aesthetic. This is hands down the best Windows Phone made to date, in my opinion. But of course, I can't say that! You guys have to find something to troll me on.

No, you absolutely can say that! Just try to focus on that point instead of trying to take small jabs and punches along the way to your point. Otherwise people won't take you seriously. You might as well have said:
"This is the best Windows Phone yet, too bad it still suck!!! lololol"


RE: VZW website showing $199
By retrospooty on 8/19/2014 5:09:33 PM , Rating: 2
"HTC is not "An Android OEM." They were making Windows based phones long before Android even existed."

And before that they made most Treo's for Palm. They have been around making smartphone a long long time.


RE: VZW website showing $199
By inighthawki on 8/19/2014 5:30:33 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry, I wasn't trying to imply they were a "Windows OEM" either. Just that they are not "an Android OEM" like Reclaimer claims. They've been making phones and devices long before Android was conceptualized.


RE: VZW website showing $199
By retrospooty on 8/19/2014 6:13:05 PM , Rating: 2
I know... I was just adding to your point, not contradicting it.


RE: VZW website showing $199
By inighthawki on 8/19/2014 6:42:00 PM , Rating: 2
I see, my bad :)


RE: VZW website showing $199
By Reclaimer77 on 8/19/14, Rating: -1
RE: VZW website showing $199
By inighthawki on 8/20/2014 11:05:54 AM , Rating: 2
Wow... Is it like, that time of month or something? You're taking this WAY too seriously...


RE: VZW website showing $199
By ritualm on 8/19/2014 9:56:19 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
"HTC is not "An Android OEM." They were making Windows based phones long before Android even existed."

And before that they made most Treo's for Palm. They have been around making smartphone a long long time.

Yeah. HTC has been around for a long time - as an Original Device Manufacturer (ODM), rather than an OEM. It had a lot more in common with Compal, Quanta, Foxconn and others, than it did to the Nokias and Samsungs of the world.

An ODM manufactures products with generic designs so the customer can slap their own branding and such afterwards. HTC basically had no brand recognition at the retail level until Google hired it to build the original Nexus One phone.

Thus Reclaimer's claim
quote:
Let's face it. It took an Android OEM to finally make a compelling Windows Phone. Burns doesn't it?

backfired very badly for him.


RE: VZW website showing $199
By Reclaimer77 on 8/20/14, Rating: -1
RE: VZW website showing $199
By retrospooty on 8/20/2014 10:39:59 AM , Rating: 2
"Retro it's bad enough you're playing his silly little anal-retentive game, but to do it while stabbing me in the back"

Take a non-drama pill man. All I said was HTC made most of the Treo lineup for Palm back in the day... It wasn't an attack, or a stab in your back. It wasn't even about you. :P


RE: VZW website showing $199
By Reclaimer77 on 8/19/14, Rating: -1
RE: VZW website showing $199
By inighthawki on 8/19/2014 11:35:26 PM , Rating: 2
Uhuh...

P.S.
You call us condescending when youre the one who said he complemented WP in the middle of an insult...


RE: VZW website showing $199
By Reclaimer77 on 8/20/14, Rating: -1
RE: VZW website showing $199
By Manch on 8/19/2014 5:19:30 PM , Rating: 2
I like the Android M8. It's a nice phone. As a windows phones it's still a nice phone. Compared to the higher end Nokia's which are a bit long in the tooth now, at the same price point, I would pick it over the Nokias. At $200 for one over the nokia, nope. It's not worth a $200 premium. I have a 1020 right now. I got it bc of the 40MP camera. It's the best camera phone out there. Emphasis on camera. It serves me well as a point and shoot replacement. If a 1020 replacement comes out, Ill probably get that unless someone provides a better camera. As far as aluminum goes. I like the solid plastic. It's sturdy, dont need a case for it and it hides scratches. Slap a screen protector on it and call it a day.

Everyone has there preferences and a price delta they wont cross. $200 is a huge price gap. I dont know the off contract price, but that may be more palatable for some people.


RE: VZW website showing $199
By Labotomizer on 8/19/2014 3:56:48 PM , Rating: 2
Hmmm... I'm not really sure the point you're trying to make. Or if you're trying to make one at all. I'll pretend to give you the benefit of the doubt.

The Icon is a great looking phone and feels great in the hand. Maybe you don't like it, and that's fine, but I prefer it over the One M8. But I fail to see how a variety of options is a bad thing.

Yes, Nokia does make the best cameras on smart phones. People ignore them, and that's fine, but I remember when only having my phone was a trade off from having a P&S. I no longer feel that way. I do see others around me taking awful pics on a regular basis. But, again, that's their choice.

Nokia's camera software is outstanding. And I could take it one step further and point out that Here Maps has features that Google can't match. I suppose it burns knowing that a Finnish phone/software maker produced better mapping and navigation tools than your precious Google? Oh, it doesn't. Much like HTC making a good Windows Phone that isn't made by Nokia doesn't bother me. In fact I'm glad for it.

But way to try to stir the pot. And you have the nerve to call other people trolls? You, sir, are a hypocrite. Have fun with that nonsense.


RE: VZW website showing $199
By Reclaimer77 on 8/19/2014 4:31:31 PM , Rating: 3
Yeah except the one feature that matters in mapping software, finding out where places are, Nokia Here fails at.

http://techcabal.com/2014/04/05/nokia-here-vs-goog...

"Of what use is offline navigation on Here Maps if you can’t find the places you’re looking for? On Google Maps, I don’t need to know the address of where I’m going. I just type the place and 8 to 9 out of 10 times, it’s there. On Here Maps, it’s more like 2 out of 10. "


RE: VZW website showing $199
By ritualm on 8/20/2014 1:47:54 AM , Rating: 2
All I see are benefits and pitfalls, relative to their "online"-ness.

Google Maps has almost everything going for it - and it just falls apart when it comes to offline. The service itself requires an always-on internet connection besides the GPS lock. Not a big deal normally, of course. However, even within the country there are areas where there is simply no cellular tower within range - what are you gonna do then? Its route-caching feature is no stopgap for a truly offline mapping service, period.

Offline map apps like CityMaps2Go (which uses OpenStreet map data) and HERE Maps run into a different kind of problem. Every time something changes, the entire map pack must be updated. Also, just how much searchable data needs to be there to be [barely] equivalent to an online version for the same area? Probably too much for most devices, seeing how they're stuck with 8-16GB local storage. The flip side? They only need a GPS lock, because all the required map data is already available locally.

It's like having your PC hooked up directly to the wall, versus putting a battery backup in between. The latter requires periodic maintenance, monthly testing, and occasionally a full battery replacement. It's a lot more hassle over time, why bother with a UPS? Yeah, wait until the lights go out while you're doing something important on the PC.

HERE isn't a replacement of Google Maps; rather, it's a complement. It never will be 10% as good, let alone half, and I'm okay with that. Only fools use Google Maps exclusively.


RE: VZW website showing $199
By Reclaimer77 on 8/20/2014 8:36:48 AM , Rating: 2
First off I want to say reading this post was a pleasure, I honestly mean that. I can't really object to any particular point you've made, I agree with a lot here. And you didn't feel the need to insult me, which is always a plus.

All I see in Windows Phone related articles are people claiming Nokia Now is superior, exclusively because of the offline feature (which isn't exactly unique to Windows Phone anyway).

You've done a good job laying out the pro's and con's. To me personally, what I love about Android and Google Apps in general is that the best most powerful search engine comes baked-in. Nokia Here just seems to have problems finding places, which to me is the whole point of GPS software.

Also I'm not a heavy GPS user, so to me taking up precious storage space on my phone for offline maps is a waste. If I didn't have data services everywhere I would feel different. But I do, especially in my car.

The whole point of smartphones is to be always connected to our ever-changing world. Nokia Here is just a big step backwards from that imo.

quote:
HERE isn't a replacement of Google Maps; rather, it's a complement. It never will be 10% as good, let alone half, and I'm okay with that. Only fools use Google Maps exclusively.


I have no problem with this statement, I would agree with that. I gave Nokia Here an honest fair trial, I just didn't see the point. And it didn't seem nearly as good as Google Maps in a lot of ways.


RE: VZW website showing $199
By kleinma on 8/19/14, Rating: 0
RE: VZW website showing $199
By Reclaimer77 on 8/19/14, Rating: 0
and the power button is still on top...
By testbug00 on 8/19/14, Rating: 0
RE: and the power button is still on top...
By FITCamaro on 8/19/2014 12:59:51 PM , Rating: 2
My wife has the original HTC One. She has no problem with the power button being on top.


RE: and the power button is still on top...
By amanojaku on 8/19/2014 1:07:43 PM , Rating: 2
That's the only logical place to put a power button. You don't want it on the sides where your palm and fingers grasp. You don't want it on the bottom where you might rest the phone absentmindedly. You don't want it on the front because it mars aesthetics. You don't want it on the back because the phone rests there. So...

The top.


RE: and the power button is still on top...
By coburn_c on 8/19/2014 2:47:01 PM , Rating: 2
The LG phones put it on the back and manage not to rest it on the button. I was scared of it at first, but edge buttons now make no sense to me. Just ingrained.


RE: and the power button is still on top...
By Chaser on 8/19/2014 3:48:30 PM , Rating: 2
LG G2 and G3 owner here. I won't buy a phone now with side slits for buttons. No more button groping for me.


By amanojaku on 8/19/2014 4:29:02 PM , Rating: 2
It's the opposite for me. I prefer a slightly protruding, top-mounted power button in this form-factor. Textured or not, I'd have trouble finding the flush rear button without looking, and I usually turn my phone off without looking.

But that's the beauty of Android and Windows phones: you can choose from a variety of styles.


RE: and the power button is still on top...
By bah12 on 8/19/2014 1:15:11 PM , Rating: 2
I'm just the opposite I prefer it on the top. My Nexus 5 is on the side, and when it is in my pocket if I bump into something, or just lean on the arm of my chair wrong it will turn on. I notice as my leg gets hot.

Just personal preference I guess.


By testbug00 on 8/19/2014 10:48:51 PM , Rating: 2
Being on the top is fine, if your phone is not huge.

Power button being on the top is a fine design, I have used phones with both. I also have used the HTC One (m7) and would not buy it myself, although, part of that reason is I use the camera in my phone for things besides social-media-sharing, which is what the Ultra-pixel camera is really aimed at.

If I could buy an GTC Butterfly 2 in the USA I would in a heartbeat :)


RE: and the power button is still on top...
By GreenEnvt on 8/19/2014 1:23:26 PM , Rating: 2
If I remember correctly, on my original HTC One (M7) the power button also served as the IR blaster. So having it on top made sense for using phone as a remote. Not sure if the M8 is the same.


By hughlle on 8/19/2014 4:30:07 PM , Rating: 2
It is just a case of people being used to one thing, so they'll settle for nothing less. There is really no rational issue with having the power button up there despite it's size. And as you point out, it is also the IR blaster so the positioning is suitable.

Sure there could be a power button and a separate IR blaster, but certain compromises naturally have to be accepted given its design. I personally have no issue with the compromise. No matter what size the device, i have always been used to having the power button up top. And i like it that way.


RE: and the power button is still on top...
By DPigs on 8/19/2014 1:26:40 PM , Rating: 2
You can double tap the screen to unlock the phone, so you are really only using the power button to lock the phone again. Not really a big deal.


By testbug00 on 8/19/2014 10:51:39 PM , Rating: 2
that is the problem, borrowing friends HTC One (m7) for a week led to frustrations over the power button.

I have never had problems with: iPhone 4, cheapo LG, 920, 1020, 1520 or Moto G. The iPhone 4 and Cheapo LG had power buttons on the top. no problems.

The huge HTC One with its power button caused me to needlessly spend more time fumbling around when I wanted to 'lock' it.

I would say that it is a matter of that I only used it for a week, but, well, the friend I borrowed it from disliked it and used it from its launch to about a week ago, he did not have small hands, he likely had slightly larger than average ones.


RE: and the power button is still on top...
By Flunk on 8/19/2014 2:10:33 PM , Rating: 2
I prefer the power button to be at the top, my previous phone (HTC HD7) had the power button on top and I never had a problem with it.

My current LG Nexus 5 has it on the side and I occasionally hit it by accident and it's much harder to differentiate it from the volume buttons by feel alone. All in, it's not that important but top is better.


By testbug00 on 8/19/2014 10:52:23 PM , Rating: 2
Just to clarify, the issues is the with power buttons being on the top, the issue is the power button being on the top with the size of the phone :)

Sorry for not being clearer.


Dual boot?
By Manch on 8/19/2014 12:27:53 PM , Rating: 2
Awesome one phone 2 OS's for it. How long till someone figures out how to dual boot if possible? If that happens, Ill pick one up!




WTF?!?
By shabby on 8/19/2014 6:34:31 PM , Rating: 2
Only one verizon logo on the phone?!?




How about...
By coburn_c on 8/19/14, Rating: -1
RE: How about...
By kmmatney on 8/19/2014 12:57:48 PM , Rating: 3
Those are the people who need an iPhone. If anything, it's easy to use.


RE: How about...
By bah12 on 8/19/2014 1:17:55 PM , Rating: 2
I'd argue at this point windows is actually easier. Coming in from scratch with no accounts with anyone, they are all easy, but windows is the easiest.

The misinformation around iTunes, and when/if you should sync your phone up just confuses people. Ironic, that apple is the more convoluted sync architecture now.


RE: How about...
By Flunk on 8/19/2014 2:18:10 PM , Rating: 2
Also, if you're running Windows iTunes is a slow, crashy, bug-filled disaster.


RE: How about...
By coburn_c on 8/19/14, Rating: -1
"The Space Elevator will be built about 50 years after everyone stops laughing" -- Sir Arthur C. Clarke














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki