Monthly Archives: February 2012

Nokia Lumia 800 – Review

From just a cursory glace at the smartphone market as it currently stands, it’s pretty clear that 2012 will see handsets judged by the features of the operating system far more than the unholy abomination of plastic and glass it happens to have been stuffed into.

Microsoft and Nokia have less than stellar track-records in this arena. Microsoft’s ‘Windows Mobile’ platform was already pretty antiquated when Apple’s iPhone first came out, and failed to capture the imagination on the fledgling smartphone users with its clunky, productivity-oriented design. Its rebranded ‘Windows Phone 7’ has taken the last few years to mature. Meanwhile, Nokia’s staunch refusal to budge from imbuing their blowers with their own software until as late as 2011 very nearly signalled the death knell for them. Can the union of two former titans, incarnate as the Nokia Lumia 800, succeed where neither could alone?

The three main colour options

The first thing you’ll notice is that the Lumia 800 looks almost identical to HTC’s crop of Windows Phone 7 handsets. That’s because Microsoft only licenses out WP7 for devices that meet certain hardware requirements, such as three touch-sensitive buttons on the front. Uniquely, though, the Lumia’s gorilla-glass screen is embedded in an injection-moulded polycarbonate body; though this deprives the phone the slenderness we’ve come to expect from smartphones, it does make it feel much more durable and stalwart. Our review model is a neatly understated black, but in true Nokia style it also comes in a range of gaudy fascia colours, such as sky cyan and tepid pink.

On top you get the microSIM slot, 3.5mm headphone jack and a rather flimsy cover for the USB port. The right edge houses volume rocker and buttons for power and the camera, whilst the bottom seats the microphone. Around the back, you get a pretty decent Carl Zeiss camera and flash, though it lacks a front-facing camera. The screen is a gorgeous 3.7-inch AMOLED display with a 252 ppi resolution. The handset comes with a rubber case that, thankfully, doesn’t add much bulk to its already stocky form. Though since the Lumia itself looks like it could take a beating or six it’s probably not necessary. But still, having some padding between your phone and the ground never hurts.

The Lumia comes pre-loaded with the ‘Mango’ blend of Microsoft’s ‘Windows Phone 7’, which will be the standard install on every WP7 handset from hereon in. Since this is a review of the Nokia Lumia 800, whereas WP7 will be present on an increasing number of handsets in the coming months, we won’t go into too much detail about the OS here. Instead, we’ll be bringing you a full review of the Windows Phone 7 software itself later in the term. For now, we’ll just say that it’s refreshingly different and fully customisable homepage is a delight to behold, and made finding specific app tiles a breeze. Though the home screen has been sinfully underused (such as no signal indicator or quick-access to connectivity options) and the only browser option is the always dejecting sight of the Internet Explorer logo, it is otherwise a very well-designed and very usable interface. The app marketplace for WP7 is a tad lacking at the moment due to the relative infancy of the OS, but that looks set to change and the more popular apps are already there. For the Lumia’s part, the interface between hardware and OS has clearly been thoroughly tested and is seamless.

Black

Nokia have always had a love of tacking their own software onto their handsets, far more than the users do, and haven’t let the Lumia 800 escape their tinkerings. ‘Nokia Drive’, ‘Nokia Maps’ and ‘Nokia Music’ are three pre-installed apps that distinguish this phone from its HTC cousins.

‘Nokia Music’ is a fairly unremarkable music hub, combining streaming with local files and a store that has to not only fight off music-monolith Spotify (available from the App Marketplace) but also Microsoft’s own Zune software that comes pre-installed too. Not great co-ordination there.

‘Nokia Maps’ is, oddly enough, a map. Once again, Nokia have bundled this very basic application into the WP7 software that itself already comes with a far more sophisticated and feature-rich map app.

‘Nokia Drive’, on the other hand, is a unique addition to the handset and provides free turn-by-turn Satellite Navigation. Feature-rich, detailed displays and utilising the GPS receiver rather than hog your data allowance with 3G, this is definitely a nifty add-on. Although, we did notice that ‘Nokia Drive’ ran down the battery pretty rapidly, so you may want to buy an in-car charger if you’re planning to use the Lumia for a lengthy voyage.

Nokia Drive

As mentioned, the Lumia 800 lacks a front-facing camera and this was a massive disappointment for us. With the WP7 Skype app just around the corner, Nokia could’ve used this chance to add one more killer feature to the device. The flap covering the USB port, which opens by a peculiar mechanism of applying pressure to the hinge, seems almost destined to snap off over the phone’s lifespan.

Battery life is contentious. Just after it hits the shelves it was subject to a storm of criticism over a bug that gave the phone a battery life of about eight seconds, but our review model managed a comfortable 36 hours of moderate use straight out of the box. When the update purported to fix the legendary battery glitch descended, the practically clockwork lifespan of the battery became a mercurial mess. At times it would struggle to eke out 8 hours but at others it would nearly reach its former glories. Having turned off a few pertinent battery-intensive features, we’ve managed to get an average life approaching 40 hours. It’s also worth noting that, due to the one-piece polycarbonate shell, the battery is not user-replaceable.

The Nokia Lumia 800 is a great leap forward for both Microsoft’s Windows Phone 7 software and Nokia’s modernisation of their smartphone offerings. It’s by no means perfect and that’s probably why the follow-up Lumia 900 has already been announced for imminent release; which will feature the front-facing camera lacking on its predecessor and more colour variety. If the 900 gets a UK release, then by all means hold out for that; but if you can’t wait then the 800 will serve you very well.

Skepticism in Science – The Tabloids.

Spark* repost.

At the beginning of the term, we featured an article by Tom Hill about skepticism in science, pertaining to people clinging to debunked ideas for any number of ideological reasons and the importance of skepticism. Climate science is perhaps the biggest place where skepticism is misused, by people who apply the epithet to hide their dogmatism rather than base their views on the evidence. We’ve seen how scientists can do it and we’ve seen how religious and political groups can do it; but how does misleading information infiltrate the public consciousness?

A paper published in Nature at the start of February invoked the expected slurry of articles by the mainstream media covering it. The study looked at the changes in glacial ice from January 2003 to December 2010 in order to extrapolate future sea level rise and test the accuracy of previous predictions, as this was the first comprehensive satellite survey. The findings were that whilst the planet has experienced a devastating net loss of 532 billion tonnes of ice over that time, this is around 30% less than was predicted. In particular, the net loss was far less than predicted in the Himalayan glaciers where the previously predicted 50 tonnes was actually only 4. Since higher altitude glaciers are practically inaccessible, the predictions had to be extrapolated from the data at lower altitudes. Professor John Wahr, who lead the study, speculated that these earlier predictions may’ve incorrectly accounted for the lower temperatures at these altitudes, hence the disparity.

Though the anomalous Himalayan prediction was interesting, it is by no means the main point of the study. Surely, a loss of 532 billion tonnes of ice should be a shocking statistic to hear, should convert the self-proclaimed “skeptics” in the matter and rally a call to action amongst all the peoples of the world. In fact, none of this happened; as the mainstream media stressed the Himalayas point in order to subtly disparage the threat of climate change. It’s one thing for a journalist to misunderstand the data, but this was such a glaring omission that it could only have been borne of agenda.

The Daily Mail’s online equivalent, MailOnline’s blatant over-sensationalising of science creates an intellectual black hole so large it can be seen from space, a metaphor which they’d promptly report as a looming threat that will decimate the population. Their coverage of the Nature article blazed a trail with the headline: ‘New satellite data reveals that Himalayan glaciers are melting far more SLOWLY than predicted’ and spent it’s opening paragraphs repeatedly emphasising that the scientists were wrong. To their credit, unlike several other news outlets, they did eventually discuss the rest of the findings, though only once the attention span of the average climate change denier had long since expired.

Such transparently biased articles are usually the result of one of two factors. Either, in order to attract more page views, the MailOnline is purposely delivering a skewed headline and article that will draw in both the validation-seeking deniers and the astonished remainder. Alternatively, the writer of the article, and the editors of the MailOnline, have political or ideological reasons to ignore the reality of climate change, and so overlook and omit anything that doesn’t corroborate their preconceived ideas. It certainly makes for a quicker-written article if you don’t have to challenge your own opinions or do any proper research.

There is, however, a third option: the MailOnline is participating in the perpetual game of Chinese Whispers that permeates modern journalism. In a time when up-to-date information and content is in constant demand, and online news outlets live and die on the rapidity with which they get news to the audience, research is outsourced. One person misrepresenting the data (either by accident or by design) publicly enough will invariably result in the proliferation of that misinformation. When the window of opportunity is so limited, what inclination do journalists have to do their own analysis on a source when someone else already has? Though accuracy should be the highest priority, in such a competitive world it far too often takes a back-seat to speed.

Malicious intent and agenda make a far more interesting characterisation of these tabloids, but the simple truth may simply be laziness. In fact, by leading this article asserting that the MailOnline is carrying an agenda, aren’t I committing the same fallacy as them by sensationalising and speculating before looking at all the facts? And didn’t you agree with me?

Odds are good that this is simply a natural, if unwelcome, side-effect of the Information Age; by all means one we should fight to resist. I suppose it can only start with individuals, and I endeavour to fact-check every point I make, with the time afforded me by the fact that this is a print newspaper. I hope this mentality would carry over in an online news environment. I’d rather be the last person to get it right than the first person to get it wrong, but I’ll strive for both.

Sally Morgan fascinates me

Princess Diana’s former (and presumably current) psychic/spiritual medium, Sally Morgan is suing Associated Newspapers, the company that print the Daily Mail, for defamation after it printed an article in September by magician Paul Zenon accusing her of being a fraud.

Headline

I have no interest in spiritual mediums. Does it help people? Yeah, I suppose some people benefit from this possibly cathartic experience, but I also suspect that just as many people become even more distressed by it. For my part, I can’t see how rousing my beloved dead relatives and force them to chat to this dowdy, Coronation Street reject is anything but malicious. But that’s just me.

Since Morgan knows full well that she is a fraud, that (we hope) isn’t her beef. She seems to take issue more with the anecdotal evidence in the article that she was being relayed information via microphone from an unseen stage-hand who had mingled amongst Morgan’s audience before the show and gathered pertinent information. This may or may not be true, it’s a Daily Mail article so obviously there’s little to no supporting evidence. This is not what intrigues me about Morgan, however. The validity of the Daily Mail’s earpiece claim is not relevant, as she’s demonstrated an affinity with threatening legal action against any and all legitimate criticism.

Though she’s claimed that Zenon’s article has damaged her reputation, there’s been no indication that people have stopped buying show tickets (according to her website, several of the venues have sold out) or that there’s been some sudden disenfranchisement amongst her fans. Because the people who like Sally Morgan do not waste money on seeing her because they see evidence of her abilities, it’s because they want solace. It’s easy to come off as patronising when presenting her victims as the vulnerable, recently bereaved. But if you were ever seeking such comfort and someone comes along to give you some semblance of emotional abatement, anyone would shoulder a strong confirmation bias for that person. Her victims don’t care a whit if she’s indisputably shown to be a fraud, they want to believe.

Sally Morgan

This is what fascinates me about Sally Morgan. She’s something new: a proactive charlatan. Not content merely to preach to the choir of her loyal audience and eke out a few million per year, she demands that anyone who calls her out on her abject falsehood be frivolously pestered and censored. Maybe she wants to stop any uncharacteristically discerning follower of hers stumbling onto any blasphemous articles that may shake their faith. Perhaps she honestly believes that she is able to talk to the dead, despite having to actively engage in fraud to try and appear genuine.

Regardless of her motivation, she’s now thrown the harsh spotlight of scrutiny on herself. The media coverage of the case (what little there is) will only do harm to her as the details of the Mail’s claims are re-iterated (which she’s seeking an injunction against) and her methods closely analysed and called out. Defending yourself against defamation is fair enough, but since she lost no grace with her fans then what can she gain?