Nokia Lumia Windows Phones, carrier logos allowed?

AT&T Nokia Lumia 820

The other day we reported that Nokia may be prohibiting carriers from branding the new Lumia Windows Phones with their company logos. Instead, preferring that carriers use virtual branding through preloaded software or software hubs.

Several Italian carriers are reportedly preparing to offer the new Lumia Windows Phones without logo branding. As we mentioned previously, the overseas carrier influence is a little more passive that what we experience here in the States. We weren't sure if this logo ban would extend to AT&T, Verizon or T-Mobile until this morning.

It's really not a shocker that the product images released by AT&T this morning have the AT&T logo clearly displayed on the Lumia 920 and 820.  Then again, these are renderings but our guess is that we'll see the U.S. Lumias with subtle corporate branding on phone.

So... do you think the logo should stay, go or does it matter?


Reader comments

Nokia Lumia Windows Phones, carrier logos allowed?


Luck you! I personally do care because we all know that's free advertising for them but if anyone is gonna get away with what they want it's gonna be at&t let's not forget they have also invested a great amount of money on Lumia 900 line.

I honestly don't care if my phone has T-Mobile's logo on it as long as it's the Lumia 820 and it works as it's supposed to. Just give me the phone, damn it! I would say that about the 920, but it's obvious T-Mo isn't getting it. :-/

I would rather *NOT* have AT&T branding my on Lumia 920. But, as long as I get my hands on it, I would forget about the branding.

This is the same thoughts I have with mine when I'll be picking it up on Rogers...i'm glad my Focus doesn't have the branding, but I won't avoid getting the phone based purely on a small logo that i've lived with on almost every phone for the past 15 years.

Well perhaps your idea of crappy software does not agree with someone lese's idea of crappy software.  But in any event the apps  (such as ATT's collection) are uninstallable, so thats no bid deal! 

New android versions allow you to disable software so it ceases using any system resources and doesn't show up in your app list.

Well my Xbox  and my ps3 don't have comcast stamped on them, yet I use their service.  I would prefer not to have it, but it will not stop me from buying the phone.

They should only be on the back of the device and never on the front, I feel that way about the NOKIA logo too though.

I disagree. The back is what other people see when you're using the phone (why the phones are getting increasingly colorful) and if rather have it on the front. Yea it sucks to have it on there but I've never been distracted by a carrier logo. The worst one I've ever seen was the carrier logo on the Atrix HD.

I don't even notice the branding on my Focus.  If it ends up not being on the 920, awesome.  If it does. eh oh well.
Would the branding be a term of the nokia exclusivity?  So folks know that ONLY AT&T offers this phone?

The Nokia logo should be to the left, camera should be centered, ATT logo far right. That looks odd all on the right.

Like I said before... Nokia doesn't have the leverage to not include carrier logo in US. Apple has that leverage, but definitely not Nokia. That is different in Europe of course.

I had ordered an unlocked cyan Lumia 900 online not long after their release, but I cancelled it right away once I found out it was AT&T branded.

I never was able to get an unlocked, unbranded L900 LTE so I still do not have a Lumia.

Expansys USA had them until 2 days ago for US$289.99 - bought 2. Currently, they're sold out.

On the topic:
Back in time, phones used to be cheaper when they were provider branded. This absolutely devalued the device, regardless if it was locked or unlocked. I am a bit scared that so many people don't mind having a carrier logo on their devices. No wonder American network providers mutated to what they are today!

That was then, now I want a 920 now. It was Expanys I had it ordered from though so they did get unbranded ones later did they?

At least in Europe, branded phones are worth less, just as with carrier locks.
Nowadays no one adds branding to hardware anymore...

Given that the logo is under the glass, the only way is to buy a new complete screen assembly. They will run at about $80 on ebay. There is no other way to remove that logo because its under the glass.

of course the carier logos will be included in the USA. the fact that it's a carrier exclusive is moot. the 920 NOKIA logo is centered which looks better though, nice job!

exactly my thoughts. i say let them slap their brand all over the phone so long as i can delete their pre-installed apps.  this ability is in my top five favorite features of windows phone over android.

If it's that minimal, I don't really mind it.  I'd rather have that, than have some crappy AT&T software preloaded that I can't delete.

As already mentioned, all apps that aren't native to the OS are easy to uninstall on WP, and have been since the beginning. This isn't Android.

Honestly, I'm happy carriers don't get to put their logos on phones over here, at least not on my current Lumia. To me it ruins the whole aesthetics a nearly perfect design. All those logos are usually pretty awful too.

I think all phones should be like that render, phone logo front and center with carrier logo off to tue side if on it at all.

It doesn't really matter to me, but it would be nice not to have the logo on the phone; once again not a deal breaker.

Let me rephrase it for you
" in others, more mature markets, the carriers racket dominating the US does not exist".

i've noticed some ATT crap slipping into Windows Phone that can't be uninstalled.  ATT mail and ATT address book.  True these don't really take up any room if you dont configure them, but I'd prefer to have the device completely free of carrier references.
Oh, and the "shim" for ATT that is inserted on the Internet Sharing button that COMPLETELY renders internet sharing dead if you dont have service with ATT.  No way to get around it.  THAT NEEDS TO BE REMOVED!

It makes sense that Nokia is going to put the logo on the phone in the USA, they don't have any real clout over here. 
Nokia: "Hey Verizon we haven't sold a phone with you in a long time but listen... it's a work of art don't tarnish it with your companies logo." 
Nokia: "Hey AT&T thanks for being so great and receptive with us with the Lumia 900.... uh how do we say this? Your logo is great and all but you aren't going to put it on our new phone. If you don't like it, well then... uhhh............"

I don't mind a small logo on the front like how it is on the 900, verizons branding is too much though

My Telstra HD7 has a Telstra logo on the back. It's pale grey on the dark grey casing & quite subtle. I think it's really good without ruining anything.

Deal breaker for me. It just completely ruins the entire design. Fortunately, Canada is too slow to have time to put logos on their phones. But if it does have a logo, I will buy unlocked.

Luckily for me my 900 isn't an officially supported phone on Vodafone UK so when I got it through a third party it came unbranded and unlocked. Pure Nokia stormtrooper :-)

To be perfectly honest, I spend more time looking at the display than the logos, so I just don't give a rats rump roast whether the logos are there or not. I also think that this whole discussion is just an excuse for people to whine about something.

Given the choice, I'd rather go without carrier branding or logos, software I'd be fine with. It's mostly because I'll be unlocking or getting an unlocked 920 to use on T-Mobile's prepaid service.