140

Nokia announces the Lumia 630, dual-SIM and LTE Lumia 635

Nokia today introduced the Nokia Lumia 630 and Lumia 635 budget smartphones. The Lumia 630 is a 3G device in single- and dual-SIM varieties, while the Lumia 635 packs dual SIMs and supports LTE. Both include a 1.2GHz quad-core processors, 4.5-inch displays, and Windows Phone 8.1.

With dual SIM cards, the Lumia 635 can have different contacts assigned to call through different SIM cards, and even have apps assigned to each SIM card. Color coding is built in throughout the OS to indicate which SIM would be use. The single-SIM Lumia 630 is expected to be available around the globe in May for $159, while the dual-SIM LTE Lumia 630 will retail for $189 off contract.

Both phones take advantage of new features in Windows Phone 8.1, including the addition of on screen buttons and Action Center. They also include SensorCore low-power sensor data collection for real time motion monitoring.

The Lumia 630 and 635 come in a variety of colors, with the 630 getting a matte finish while the 635 goes high gloss with "a unique dual-layered, luminous tonal surround that glimmers and glows".

7
loading...
0
loading...
61
loading...
0
loading...

Reader comments

Nokia announces the Lumia 630, dual-SIM and LTE Lumia 635

140 Comments

Ready to buy Lumia 635 on day one!

 

I keep my personal and work lines seperate and have been using Google Voice (another Google service besides Youtube that I am forced to use) for my work line. I will port Google Voice number in a heartbeat and use with a cheap prepaid service SIM!

That sounds like a good plan. Isolate Google as much as you can. I've just recently deleted all my Google accounts after their forcing of Google+ on my (no longer existant) YouTube account.

I think what i have read. 630 will be the single sim variant non LTE. While the 635 will be the 4G/LTE Dual sim Variant.. Correct me if i'm wrong sam..

"The Lumia 630 is a 3G device in single- and dual-SIM varieties, while the Lumia 635 packs dual SIMs and supports LTE."

I think that's very clear.

"while the dual-SIM LTE Lumia 630 will retail for $189 off contract"

It has not been corrected. I just copied and pasted this from the article. This is incorrect.

The dual-sim LTE Lumia is the 635 not the 630.

Here is correct info direct from Nokia...
Nokia Lumia 630, HSPA+ (3G)
Nokia Lumia 630 Dual SIM, HSPA+ (3G)
Nokia Lumia 635, LTE (4G)

so, only dual SIM is 630 with 3G.

No, they are avoiding costs at all costs to make it this cheap even with a 4.5inch clear black display, corning 3 glass, compass, and quad core processor at a $25 cheaper recommended initial price than 520 had.

Is flash so expensive that it really makes a difference? Or do they have to "save" every penny? To some people, no flash is a deal breaker. I'm pretty sure that doesn't help them.

I believe for more people getting a 4.5 inch screen, scratch resisten glass, good outdoor readability of the screen (especially given that this is a very important phone for countries with a lot of brigh sun... ) and a compass are more important than an essentially useless flash. :)

Products are designed with a target price point and a priority target market, and its placement in the overall product portfolio in mind. Given that the team was given the task to put out a phone with those improved specs I listed AND to lower the price point considerably below that of the 520 the price of the flash MAY have been a consideration. BUT, you may be right, and it was morea about product line up differentiation/placement.

What you can be sure of is that Nokia did not leave it out just by mistake/because they forgot. :)

Of course. Aside from the flash, one really great thing about this is that there is no way any Android phone will beat Windows Phone at such a low price. These are midrange specs at a low end price. It's also unlike the iPhone, with it's midrange specs at a high end price.

MMMM. I say Moto G beats this. See my other post. The lack of a camera flash is a huge let down and fail in my opinion. That should be standard by now! Besides the bigger screen on the 635.. It has not much else going for it. 620 is better & the 925 which has some good deals running & it will get the 8.1 update

Whatever makes you happy.  The specs on the 635 are not better then the Moto though. Just comes down to between these if you want WP or Android. I would go with the 925 over this. Nokia should have done better and still could have kept it at a good price point like the G.

The 925 specs aren't that great either. I think, at least for T-Mobile, this phone is way too expensive. They really need to drop the price on something so old. I bought my 925 in January, and I paid $500 for it. I always pay full price, so I thought it was expensive (Sony Xperia Z1s came out a week after I bought my 925, for $528). I do know the Moto G is a good competitor to the low-end Lumias, though. It does have the flash, 1GB RAM, and 720p display, which is better than people expect for under $200. Although it is a bit more expensive, I guess at that point it would come down to the performance of each. Androids are forever known for being laggy, just like IE will forever be known for being slow, but I haven't used the Moto G so I can't say much about that.

I hear ya. But I guess your not aware of the great deals going now on the 925...? Hsn has it and you can do payments. Also Newegg has a great price & Qvc too. Like I said the lack of a flash is the biggest fail with this 635. Not much going for the 635 over the 620 except a bigger screen & version 8.1. Android has solved a lot of the lag probs too on the newer versions.  Especially on something near stock like the G. I hardly ever see a force close etc anymore..

Having tried the Moto G, it is a great low end device!! I have the 521 as well. I feel that the Moto G has really set a standard with low end devices. The screen is awesome, it runs great, no lag, the camera is OK and you get a flash. It packs a lot of punch for it to be a low end device. One of the things I really dislike about the 521 is the lack of flash....it makes it really difficult to take pictures in low light situations. Flash should just be standard in a smartphone, now matter if it is low, mid, or high end.

Posted via the WPC App for Android!

Exactly! The camera on the G got a bit better with the Kitkat update as well. A great app you may want to check out too is called a better camera. I like it because you can control the exposure to where sometimes the G's flash is so bright otherwise it blows out the shot. The G is has really set a new standard. I'd say it's almost upper midrange. Nokia had a chance to compete in that space here with the 635 & blew it. But of course some don't care about these missing features, Which to me are must haves & it will sell. They just should have added at least a flash and still kept the price down & it would prob do even better.

I agree. The Moto G sets a pretty high standard for low-end devices, and Nokia really needs to step up their game if they want to beat Android, at least in the low-end market. Since Nokia is pretty much part of Microsoft, like Motorola is part of Google (for now), we don't really want to hear excuses about costs causing them to sacrifice the flash, extra RAM, display resolution, etc.

Def deal breaker for me even the 620 has it & a front cam. I'll stick with my Moto G. I may check out the 925. Getting kind of tired of Nokias strange moves like this though. There to all over the map with there models. With the 4.5 screen they could have easily made this better to compete with the G.

Well, the 620 start price was $241, whereas the 630 starts at $159. A massive difference.

It is difficult to compare prices of a device that's been in the market for a year to one that is just being lauched. But if you prefer the 620 and it fits your needs, its certainly a great little (somewhat literally given its 3.8 in screen) devce too! :)

Google is probably subsidizing Moto G heavily, so perhaps not that "easy" for Nokia to compete with it on all specs.

For me, 4.5 inch is next to a deal breaker, and no flash breaks the deal. If I can't handle it one-handed, then it's not a phone for me.

Yeah I think the decision is correct to exclude flash as a compromise since you can manually focus using nokia camera and not many people photograph in the dark I think.

I take indoor night shots etc quite often when out and about & without flash they would be useless. Big fail them not including that.

FYI and I'm quite sure that you all are aware of this. 520 has become the top of WP market share compared to its own WP family, and YES 520 does not have any flash. Have you guys got the logic here?
Yes 630 & 635 will be a super deal for a budget phone, and I'm sure those who complained about flash feature are not using 520, and not even on the low-end level of market. So there will always be a better phone that will suit you better, a more expensive one perhaps?
Keep calm guys.

Ya of course & like I said people will buy it who don't care. It's just puzzling for those of us wanting something in the range of the G from Nokia & WP at the lower price point & then they leave off what should be now a standard feature  really on all but the lowest end models.. Nokia is to all over the map with there models I think is the point too. People expect that the higher number like the 635 should naturally succeed the 620 with things it had and then it doesn't.. Not to much exciting in other words about this over even the 520/521 except the larger screen and version 8.1

The numbering may indeed appear a bit confusing (Nokia's naming/numbering always has been, frankly). I suspect  Nokia is repositioning the whole line price point wise, with the next 5xx also being significantly cheaper than 52x phones were (AT LAUNCH). The next 7xx and 8xxx devices would, if I am anywhere near the mark) also be cheaper than the previous round and better "maneuvering space" relative to the 9xxx series, and the top end phones (i.e. 1xxx ones) will have also more room to play with price and specs points.

screen 840x480 4,5"

yes, microSD support

corning gorilla glass 3

no flash

yes, compass

512mb ram is good enough, only the terrible screen resolution (840x480 REALLY?) bothers me

 

currently im using a Samsung Ativ S... I love the 635 design but honestly, the Ativ S still seems to be the better device for the same price. Even after 2 years.... meh.

Not a typo, listend to the anouncement live and the 630 is dual sim only, the 635 is only single sim but with LTE

Yep, not much news today. WP 8.1 is still not here and most of this info (630) was leaked a long time ago :( Waiting for 530/730/830 announcements so I can make a final decision and wait for release of those (waiting so I'll be able to wait sounds sweet).

Does Dual SIM mean they are both _ON_ and able to recieve calls to either SIM?

Or do you have to toggle back and forth between each one to use 1 at a time.

(I don't understand how dual SIM works)

Yes, they're on at the same time. It's like having to phone numbers in one phone.

EDIT: actually, I don't know if this is how it will be here, on second thought. Some ARE on at the same time and have two radios, and some use the same radio and can't be used at the same time.

Well, I just saw the presentation, and it has two signal strength indicators, so I assume it has two radios and thus can have them running simultaneously.

In watching it looks like both are always on and you can set calls to be made on a specific sim down to the contact level (as it says in the article).

You get to choose if you want the phone to treat each sim (phone calls/text messages) seperately or combine them. The example given would be a "Business" sim and a "Personal" sim. Of you could just have them flow into one call history and one text message display.

Windows Phone = Personalize how you like your phone to be

the best use of dual sim phone in my country is: you could use one for data connection only, and one for receiving call & sms only. Yes they're both ON as default.

635 is definitely the must-have-device. I only guess why did they decided to use 5" in low end device. 4-4.5" is just enough for me (by now) l. But dual sim, lte and 189$ is unbeatable

It's not unbeatable.

 

Samsung Ativ S:

- Flash(light) on camera vs No flash on Lumia 630/635

- 720p HD screen vs 480p

- Super AMOLED+ vs ordinary LCD (washed out colors, terrible viewing angles for nokia)

- Physical home button vs touch button on lumia

- 2300mAh battery vs 1830mAh battery

- Dedicated camera button on Ativ S, none on nokias

- 1,2mp front-camera on Ativ S, NO front camera at all on 635

- great 4,8" screen vs 4,5" minus on screen buttons (maybe 4,45" total?)

- 1GB ram on samsung vs 512mb ram on lumia

- Samsung 8,7 MP camera vs 5MP on nokia

The only things that are better on the Lumia 635 is LTE and dual sim. And I like the colorful casing.

Other than that the 2 year old Ativ S trashes the 635.

From the article: "The single-SIM Lumia 630 is expected to be available around the globe in May for $159, while the dual-SIM LTE Lumia 630 will retail for $189 off contract."

Is that a typo and you really meant to say Lumia 635 in the second instance there, or is there a dual SIM version AND a single SIM version of the Lumia 630?

 

 

Was really expecting Nokia to announce a worthy upgrade to my Lumia 720 in Lumia 725/730 (With 1GB RAM and Dual-Sim Support, with other specs same as 720). Disappointed :(

that was the lumia 525,i was confused between the htc 8x and this(the RAM issue and camera push me towards the 8x it is only 200$ here, with the camera and the ram despite the older processor 8x is a better device) Moreover the 8x has a hd screen too... so end game nokia

Not available in india. Even the 8X here is for about 220$ unlocked. AND IMO it looks better and has better audio quality from what i have heard.

Now just need to wait for word of these to get out there, to the stores, and I think I'll be snapping up a 620 on the cheap in a few weeks when they start dumping stock 

No flash-- Okay, No front cam-- Okay, No camera button?-- atleast it has 1gb ram.

NO 1GB RAM??????? To hell with this phone. I'll do fine with my 520.

Lol, I'm thinking the same thing and what a disappointment at least if it had 1Gb ram. I am going to stick to my 520 until a 525 is available here is South Africa, so sad with 512mb a lot of the good games that matter we can't get these phones, oh well here is to another round of the waiting game with Microsoft and Nokia

Yup, I don't get it either. I have a Lumia 521 and was looking forward to upgrading. I just can't see what I get out of a 630/635 vs my Lumia 521.

4.5inch clear black display, corning 3 glass, compass, thinner, and quad core processor at a $25 cheaper recommended initial price than 520 had.

But sure, if you actually use the front cam and camera button, 520 is a fine choice, espacially with its current prices (those who want might want to grab it while it lasts in general,ready supply).

Um.. The 520 doesn't have a front camera. I don't care if it doesn't have Corning 3 Glass I love my phone and am extra careful about it... :P About the thickness I'm okay with the thickness on 520. and compass.. I probably won't even use it. As for the quad-core processor, I don't think WP needs that much power.

The only things that mattered to me were 4.5 Inch CBD display and mostly 1GB of ram. The 4.5" CBD is still pretty nice, but I don't think I would buy another 512MB device,

IF it had 1GB ram it would have been a competitor for the Moto X

512mb ram?? Damm flop phone i think. But quad core.... Gorilla glass 3 seems great. Should i go for this phone? I want 1gb ram damm u nokia why??

I loved how Elop said that the USA 'will have to do' with the icon a bit longer, since the 930 goes Europe first. :P

One thing these devices confirm though, is that WP8.1 doesn't have such an increased memory footprint that it will be a half-a***ed experience on 512MB devices (you know, works, but makes you want to swear at it. Like iOS7 on a iPhone 4...).

If the mem footprint had gone up substantially, then even the entry level devices (and lets face it, the 630 is the replacement to the 520) would have 1GB.

A valid hypothesis. Hope all these budget phones force app makers to optimize their apps for 512 MB RAM :)

FANTASTIC price. Like I suspected (and said in another thread), seems like Nokia is reposition its line price wise. The 620 recommend price was $241 (sans taxes and subsidies) at launch. This is a full third cheaper.

Promising also in the sense that the rumor of the 530 potentially being close or even below the $100 mark.

Also, as I suspected and told those who yelled "thick", its significantly thinner than the 920 and 0.6mm thinner than the 930, and only 0.7mm thicker than the 925.

 

People who get these thin phones though have to get a case for it since they're super fragile and it ends up being a wash. I haven't seen any 920 owners around here that bother using cases since the phone is burly and tough enough itself. 

Sure. Nokia is legendary for its durability and thoroughness of its drop testing so hopefully its not that sensitive anyway. Plus its not super-duper-thin. :)

Lumia 630 = The New Lumia 520 in Windows Phone 8.1 generation (i can't understand why they actually made a quad core cpu and only 512mb of RAM) but hell... I CAN'T WAIT FOR THIS DEVICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

Does Quadcore somehow require 1GB???

If yes, then its just a supply issue of getting a good price if ordering in bulk and reducing variants at the factory.

Come on no 720p, FFC and 512MB RAM? How can the Lumia 630 or 635 compete with Moto G? Just microSD card support and LTE/Dual SIM for 635 is not worth it. Why couldn't they have included 720p, FFC and 1GB RAM for Lumia 630 and price it equal to Moto G for $179 and also add the same features to the Lumia 635 and charge $209 is beyond me!

For $20 it seems like they are missing out on such a huge opportunity to stick it to Android:-(

The 930 without sd support and this device not having 1gb ram and a flash (i cant believe flash modules are that expensive, surely not) - im not impressed with the current Nokia offerings. In that i mean there is nothing to tear me away from the Nokia 625 and 1520.

Shame, that.

I have my hopes set for goldfinger - hopefully a 1020 replacement that actually has an sd card slot for all those bally raw images!!!!!

For people buying the 635 they should,be able to memorize this...

"a unique dual-layered, luminous tonal surround that glimmers and glows".

No front cam I can get by with.. But a flash for the camera should be standard by now! This is a fail. I'll stick with my Moto G or maybey try the 925.. Nokia is weird & to much all over the map with there models. Even the 620 has a flash & front cam!  I am actually losing more and more interest in them with their poor choices.

I'm still hoping Nokia (or later would be Microsoft) will make a phone with screensize lower than 4,5 inch.
I don't know is it only me or everyone else feel the same with me, but I prefer a phone with "not too big" screen

There are so many things wrong with this device.
Only half gig RAM. No flash. Still the same screen resolution. And it looks EXACTLY like iPhone 5C! Not only the form factor and design but colors as well! They are ugly as hell. Not a worthy successor to the venerable 620 at all.

Look very interesting, especially at those prices! Too bad I'm on Sprint and they more than likely won't be getting either phones. I can't wait for the day VoLTE becomes huge.. Then it won't matter that I'm on Sprint as everything will be through LTE.

90% of my photos are taken without flash, flash always makes things look funky.  In fact, flash looks totally noob imo.  I mean the video even demonstrates how the phone is capable of taking lowlight photos decently.