Alleged photos of Nokia Windows 8.1 RT tablet in red for Verizon leaked

For well over a year now there have been murmurings and rumors that Nokia is working on a Windows 8 tablet with little to show for it. We have seen leaked images in the past and most recently, a late September date has been suggested as the announcement timeframe (Nokia is evidently planning an event in New York City).

Now, two images have come forth showing what is reportedly a Verizon-branded Nokia tablet with Windows 8.1 RT on board. The device appears to be labelled with “RT” suggesting that this is not a full Windows 8 Pro tablet, though there are too many caveats here to reach any firm conclusions. For instance, could Nokia have both RT and Pro devices both being tested as options for carriers and retail channels?

Earlier reported Nokia 8 RT Tablet prototype

Other reported specifications of the device include a blue or red color option, 10.1-inch 1080P display, 5-point multi-touch, 2.15GHz Snapdragon 800 processor, 32 GB of built-in storage, micro HDMI, USB 3.0.

The photos themselves reveal very little except a blurry red “device” of some sort and some labelling. The image quality though is too low to discern legitimacy or yield anything really interesting. Windows Phone Central has heard of sightings of a red Nokia tablet in the past and the specifications fall in line with what is expected by a company like Nokia.

Due to the inconclusiveness of these specific photos, we're rating them a "6" on our rumor meter but we would put the overall rumor of Nokia releasing a tablet soon at a "9".

Nokia is expected to reveal the tablet in September for a mid October release, along the same time as when Windows 8.1 RT is released. Later in November, Nokia's first "phablet" phone with a 1080P display of 5-inches or greater is expected to be announced in conjunction with Windows Phone 8 GDR3. Windows Phone Central has learned that Nokia plans to have at least one "major" release every quarter with smaller releases in between to keep attention on the struggling company. 

Source: Digi-wo; via: New Phones, WPCentral Forums; Thanks, et and chfhyh, for the tips!

Daniel Rubino

Daniel Rubino is the Editor-in-chief of Windows Central, head reviewer, podcast co-host, and analyst. He has been here covering Microsoft since 2007 when this site was called WMExperts (and later Windows Phone Central). His interests include Windows, Microsoft Surface, laptops, next-gen computing, and for some reason, watches. Before all this tech stuff, he worked on a Ph.D. in linguistics and ran the projectors at movie theaters, which has done absolutely nothing for his career.

  • A Red tablet? Here's Nokia's first foray into the tablet arena! :D
  • Daniel maybe you shouldn't put the leaked images as the main pictures for the articles to be considerate for those readers who want to be surprised on September 10. From all of the leaks for the 1020, the announcement didn't seem as exciting as it should have been since we knew literally every thing before hand.
  • Lol, don't look at them if you don't want to spoil it. I'm sure there are as many people who want to get a look before the release. This is part of what wpcentral is all about. Your comment is just hilarious.
  • +1
  • I don't think his request is bad at all. It would nice if these sites had spoiler filters. Kind of like how Phonearena lets you filter by OS. So if I wanted just Windows Phone news that's all I would get. Tag this article as spoiler, let us filter the site. ;)
  • +1.
  • It's called a tease.  I would never go see a movie before seeing some type of trailer.  Nor would I read a book if it didn't provide some type of synopsis on the back cover.  The onus is on the viewer not the one providing the information.  :)
  • I just want to know if Office for RT 8.1 will support VBA. Those tablets would be perfect for me, but no macros is a deal breaker for my usage. Apparently this is not a common issue for people?
  • Well....this VBA is also a deal breaker for me...i was scouring the internet trying to find out whether Surface 2 has Macro support or not n your comment showed up on
    I am glad to know that I am not the only one...the RT version would be perfect for me n I would buy either surface 2 or the nokia tablet in a heartbeat...only if they have VBA support....hoping for the best...though chances seem low. 
  • I hear what you're saying. All these leaks kinda ruin announcements, but every site does this now.  If WPC didn't do it, 10 others would and eventually steal WPC's visitors. If I were gonna make a plea to anyone, it'd be all the idiots snapping the leak pics in the first place.
  • Who cares?  It's the total waste of space known as "RT."  MS needs to put this dog down ASAP and focus on Real Windows.
    Wake me up when they pack Real Windows into a phone.  That's when I'll get excited.
  • I have both an rt & a pro device and sure I can tell the difference in speed because one has an Intel i5 as opposed to a cell phones qualcom processor in it. Outside of that, there's really no difference as I use Remote Apps with both my RT & Pro, therefore, everything I do with my Pro, I can do with my RT; I'm sure Citrix will allow you to do the Same Thing.
  • Exactly how I use my RT. Remote Desktop to my PC for heavy lifting and productivity, or as a content consumption device, especially with the full flash browser.
  • I see a lot of people who use the RT as a remote device and I can see how that would work well.
    But, I would really like to know how that (remote desktop) would work on a plane. Or when I'm waiting for my doctor at a place where they don't have WIFI and no cell service. That's why I like my Surface Pro. I can do real work and don't need to be connected. 
    Yes, the Pro is heavy as a plain media comsumption device IF you are going to use it for a long time. Even then, with the proper case, which I have, I can easily use the Pro on my lap. And if I really want a light machine for media comsumption, I have this thing called a Nokia L920 that works very well as such.
    MS has indirectly paid my bills since 1988, yes 25 years. People call me an MS fanboy and I have to admit it, yes I am. But the RT to me doesn't make sense. An Atom device is much more versitile in my view. When Win 8 Prev first came out 2 years ago, I went out and bought an Acer W500. I still have it, and I still use it every once in a while. The W500 has an under powered CPU in comparison to the current Atom. But I used that thing for MS Office work. for media consumption, and I even had Visual Studio installed for light work. At one point I even loaded VMWare Player with a Windows XP machine. Oh, I could remote desktop to do really heavy lifting.
  • The RT is for the individual who wants the ultra portable device with a little extra. I fully see a market for the RT and understand its place in the overall food chain. I want something thats running lean for media consumption, internet browsing, document viewing/editing and has the ability to remote if I need to. ANYTHING that I need an x86 backbone for, I'll bring the ultra book with me. The Surface RT is so light and effective for me that its a part of my daily loadout, regardless of where or what I'm doing
    I have my laptop for work, but within my man bag (yes, my MOAB manbag) I always have my tablet. I USE to carry my MSI Wind U100 for the longest time until Windows RT came along in the Surface RT.
    Sure an Atom based processor can run the x86 programs but at what cost? Too many people want the ability for traditional applications but don't want to pay for the hardware that gives them the battery life to performance ratio...They say "I'll settle for an Atom" but the overall performance is a novelty.
    The sooner the world can wrap their minds around the fact that the RT is a tablet...Nothing more, nothing less,  the sooner the sheep of the world will have the light bulb moment and see its value over the "competition."
  • So basically, you are saying different strokes for different folks. :)
    My problem is that in my simple mind (yes, I’m a simpleton,) I don’t see what the “extra” thing is.
    Media consumption, iPad and Android tablet can do.
    Document editing, iPad and Android tablet can do. I can even log in to my Skydrive and do the editing online with an iPad or an Android tablet. I would need a connection if I wanted to do remote desktop, so the same applies to Skydrive.
    Remote Desktop, iPad and Android tablet can do.
    Store Apps, All 3 devices are pretty well covered. But even though I’ve not found anything I want missing in the Windows Store, there might be people out there who need apps that only iOS or Android have.
    Light with long battery life, iPad and Android tablet can do. Shoot, not too long ago, getting 5 hours of battery was excellent. My Surface Pro can do that with the 3rd gen CPU it has.
    And bringing an Ultrabook for anything x86 makes sense. But now you are not as light since you have your RT and your Ultrabook. I have just the 2.4lb Pro that does both the job of the RT and the Ultrabook.
    The Pro makes sense for me. It is light (I used to have a Compaq Portable at a point in my life. And not too long ago, I had a 3.5lb laptop that was considered super light in comparison to what was available.) It has decent battery life (not the same as an RT, but like you said, at what cost?) And it can do everything that I need on the road.
    Back to the first sentence, different strokes… The problem as I see it, and the market sees it as the sales indicate, the RT doesn’t seem to have too much advantage over an iPad or Android tablet. Like you said, "the RT is a tablet, Nothing more, nothing less."
  • It still has the advantage over ipad/android of being able to run 2 apps side by side, and that is one huge advantage. I now find it very difficult to get anything done on a tablet without that functionality. Situations like typing out a research article on word whilst having IE pinned with some journal articles, or quickly opening email attachments in photos or PDF reader without having to keep switching back to the email, or having 2 browsing windows side by side, or a browser and a video. There are endless ways in which the RT provides increased productivity over other tablets. Most of us on this site are in the (vocal) minority as far as needing x86 apps on the go. For 90% of consumers there is no need for non-touch x86 apps on a small 8-10" touch screen. Most of these people can do everything they need to do on an RT tablet: email, tv/movies/music, flash enabled web browsing, web video, microsoft office, etc. Having talked to several non-techie family members about this, they only want the things I listed above, and they want to be able to run 2 apps side by side (one family member was looking at getting a tablet, and was shocked that the ipad couldnt do this, she is not set on a surface RT). If there is no technical disadvantage to an x86 tablet then microsoft should get rid of RT to avoid confusion, however there are currently no 1080P atom tablets. Either atom is not powerful enough to run some store apps at this resolution, or it is but would consume too much battery life to go in a slim 8-10" device. Either way x86 chips arent yet at the point that they can provide the advantage of x86 with zero compromise. Just looking at the reviews of current windows 8 tablets, one of the big criticisms was the screen res/DPI. Microsoft needs to be able to compete in this area to be recommended by reviewers. Until the majority of reviewers stop saying the ipad is still the best tablet (an opinion largely based on its excellent hardware) windows 8 market share won't increase at any great rate. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to be able to run x86 apps on a 1080P 8-10" tablet that is slim and light with 12hr+ battery life (and I think within 2 years that will be a reality), but currently RT does have a place, and will certainly power my next tablet. For x86 I currently have a powerful desktop, and a laptop (that I never use). Almost every tablet user out there still has an x86 machine for the odd thing they can't do on their tablet. Most of the stuff I do on my desktop wouldnt run fast enough on a tablet anyway.
  • I understand the IOS and android line of thinking. But some people (like me) want a streamlined arm based os for consumption that is within the windows ecosystem. I would rather have an RT device for doing my light work and play than an IOS or android device, because of the layout and design and compatibility with other windows devices. I don't want a desktop at all on my tablet. I don't want to install x86 apps on my tablet, nor do I want all the extra bloat an x86 os brings to have those features. So while IOS and android exist for light work and media consumption so too should RT.
  • Agreed. I always thought it would be cool if, to differentiate between RT and Pro, MSFT simply did away with the desktop mode on the RT. I feel desktop mode is pretty crummy on a small tablet anyway, and it would enhance the touch experience on the RT. Desktop mode simply never made sense on tablets,
  • THIS. HERE. THIS. ^^^^ THIS. Dude that was worded so perfectly lol. That's what this damn tech world needs to understand. Windows RT is JUST a tablet OS. Oh it can run office? GREAT but its still a tablet OS that Microsoft obviously optimized office to run on it to COMPETE with Apples iOS (which hellooo its a TABLET OS) Damn man if people only understood this. All I read on the world wide web is how this OEM and that OEM is dropping RT production and bla bla cause Atom tablets offer full windows 8 and good battery life so why RT? well why the eff are you still buying iPads... its not like those run full Mac OSX -__- see how frustrating this can be lol.
  • Plese add to yor signature, posted frm my iCrap, i hav never used an RT.
    Does RT need more apps?  Sure , hell I would like an i7 in my Pro.
    Does RT need a little more Power? Sure.
    Does RT Suck?  HELL NO..
  • I'm perfectly happy with my Surface RT. People just don't understand the differences. I see many people with full PCs and an iPad, what's the difference between having a full PC and RT?
  • oh god are you serious...? Don't read rumors if you want to be suprised...
    wow i still can't believe how stupid your comment is...
  • Here's why I thin it is crap and hope it's not gonna come out. At least for this time. Right... the first thing it's 10 inches. Egronomy factor says these days that the smaller tablets are easier to sell. due to mobility issues. 2nd it's RT, RT is dead, well actually never been alive. And I do still like RT but can't admit the truth. What Ms Said that the apps are easy to port from tablet to phone and vice versa (due to common kernel) in practice is not as it is. the apps mostly either on phone or on the Tablet. The only positive point is Office, but even it is limited by the memory size of 32 GB.
    I wouldn't mind le 7-8 inches tablet with RT, for afordable price and god damn it with the 4G or any type of celular. 10 in ches? Nah.
  • Jesus Christ. RT is far from dead. We just keep getting the same few if you that don't want it, complaining non-stop about it. We get it. You don't want a RT model. Some of us do though.
  • wow some one who has a working brain, and ccan think for them selves. 
  • For rt to live, it must also run windows phone 8 apps. Give me a reason to keep my next one. Also idk about a red tablet. Verizon you can't release a red 928 but a red tablet?
  • So much Branding on the back of that thing... 4 logos? With that much branding you start to lose the simplicity of the design language.
  • +920
  • That's by far the minority, though. I'm of the opinion that, Microsoft would have a much easier time selling Windows RT if they merged it with Windows Phone (has, that way developers would have a easier time making apps across the whole ecosystem, both run on ARM chips, both share the same Kernel, etc). The way they marketed here (in the microsoft store) was has a laptop and tablet replacement. It wasn't at the point where it could survive without x86 compatibility, due to most Windows Programs being designed for that, and for the desktop instead of the metro interface. Sure, over time it will grow, but people want the here and now, and normally don't look towards the future and it's potential growth (not to mention there was likely some confusion among sellers, who mistakenly told customers it could run x86 programs).
  • It isn't necessary to merge WRT and WP. The only things that needs to be merged are the WinRT and WinPRT APIs. MS is working on that as we speak. We will get 100% app compatibility between the two OS' at some point, but it probably won't be achieved with WP8.1.
  • Once the Common API becomes a reality, it probably would make sense for Nokia to release a combo tablet like the ASUS Padfone so the WP phone and the RT tablet can share one contract.  I do expect the WP OS and RT OS will be merged at some point.  Most of the WP apps can be optimized to support the tablet.
  • Yep nothing wrong with RT. So many people here hate on it. I have no need to install programs so why do I need a Pro? It's not like I want to pony up more money just for Office nor do I believe in a subscription model for Office. I still believe a Pro is needed (maybe) but my old HP Laptop serves me just fine for now but the poor thing is collecting dust.
  • Plus battery life is outstanding on the RT, much better than the pro.
  • RT is fine in theory, a "lite" windows that does 90% of what 90% of people do with a computing device: surf the net, e-mails, Office, music, Kindle or Nook books, Netflix. However, the last 10% is important too. I've used Quicken to manage my bank accounts for at least 20 years, TurboTax to file my taxes for just as long. Experimented with Dragon Dictate for writing. If these came to RT or the web/cloud, I would replace my 2006 convertible tablet with an RT. Instead I will probably bite on a Bay Trail tablet.
  • I don't think that RT is dead, but the only way it can be a success at this point is if Microsoft allow Windows Phone apps to be run on the platform, whether through an emulator or what I don't know, but it would give it a huge ecosystem almost instantly and make only one platform for developers to have to code for at a time.
    And personally I prefer the 10 inch form factor for a tablet in a 16/9 aspect ratio, and the above tablet looks really thin too, so let's see.
  • WP apps were not allowed on RT by design.  MS made a conscious decision not to allow that b/c they were shooting for quality over quantity in terms of apps.  Whether or not that was a mistake is a matter of opinion.
    Have you seen the iphone apps running on an ipad?  It's painful to look at.  Now, maybe with the advent of the 7" tablet, that should change but on a 10" tablet most apps written for a phone provide a horrible experience.
  • You really can't compare iOS apps to Windows Phone 8 apps, especially as to how they'll look on a tablet because of the screen resolutions and aspect ratios used. The iPhone 5 has a 1136 x 640 screen resolution at a 16:9 aspect ratio compared to the original iPad's (and 2) screen resolution of 1024 x 768 at a 4:3 aspect ratio. The newer iPad's have even higher screen resolutions, so all the apps are squeezed into the aspect ratio and then scaled to the resolution making them look like crap.
    By comparison, 720p WP8 devices are 1280 x 720 at a 16:9 aspect ratio, and WXGA WP8 devices are 1280 x 768. Windows RT devices can be forced into using the WXGA resolution in the display control area (but do get the black bar effect as a consequence of the 15:9 aspect ratio), or are natively using the 1366 x 768 resolution at a 16:9 aspect ratio. The scaling so going to be really small and the aspect ratio is going to be the same.
    Also, look at how the Metro apps can scale on both WP and W8. On WP an app looks roughly the same on the 620 at 3.8" as on the 625 at 4.7", both at the same resolution. But on W8, an app looks the same on my desktop connected to a 32" display as on my Surface RT with a 10.6" display. I still maintain that apps would work fine. Games could be more of an issue with scaling admittedly, but apps would be fine.
  • That's not true.  WP apps will eventually merge with RT.  That's the goal of the continued development of blue, and why currently it is relatively easy to port WP apps to the MS store.
    MS has always said that it ended on merging the app ecosystems as much as possible, so i'm not sure where you're coming from here.
  • That's what I was thinking from the image, "That thing is thin". It looks thinner than both the 920 & 1020
  • Why is everyone so into dumping on MS's first attempts? It's been less than a year for W8 and people want RT to die rather than see it improve and grow. However when Google do something, the internet tech nerds will defend the shit out of it. Androids first year was awful so they should've just given up right? How about Honeycomb tablets like the Moto Xoom, total garbage so I guess no one else made any more Android tablets? Google+ is plastered everywhere and Google force it on their users even if they don't want it yet no one was using it within its first year either. Even the iPad when it first came out was severely lacking and if it were a tablet by any other company, no one would've bought it.
  • The issue I have with RT isn't that its as dead as people make out - after all, android launched with fewer tablet apps (literally like fifty) than we did. RT was created to force Intel to step up their game. They did. You can have a 1080p bay trail tablet with the EXACT same performance *and* price as windows RT, that ALSO runs full windows 8.1. A sipvermont SoC is not that much more expensive if at all over a snapdragon 800. So why on earth push RT? I don't know a single person in the world that would rather have an RT tablet for $300 than the exact same tablet with W8.1 and a bay trail SoC instead of snapdragon 800 for $300.