I'm not that impressed because they're based off the Snapdragon 4xx series processors.

The Nokia 5 has the same basic hardware as a Moto G4 Play, but costs twice as much ($200 instead of $100). You're paying double for a possibly better camera and a metal back.

Similarly, the Nokia 6 is a $242 5.5" 1080p phone. The Moto G4 is a 5.5" 1080p phone, but has a Snapdragon 6xx processor rather than 4xx - and costs less. Again, the Moto is lacking the metal design.

The Nokia reputation doesn't really have anything to do with these devices. They're certainly playing it up in marketing, but I think that's yet to be seen. It's possible they'll have good build quality, but looking at the Nokia 6, it's not going to be more durable than an iPhone. In the video, they clearly want to leave you with the impression that they're somehow more durable than other smartphones, but the display is just Gorilla Glass (of unknown generation) completely unprotected (there's no lip or anything to deflect some falls).

The Nokias definitely look cool, but are they offering a better option? In addition to the Motos, you can get a Huawei Honor 5X with a Snapdragon 6xx for well under $170 unlocked on Amazon. That has a better processor for $70 less. Again, they definitely look good, but they also seem expensive (42% more expensive) compared to, well, more powerful options.

When put in the perspective of 42% more expensive, they don't look as great. It's like, "yea, they're fine, but if I'm being cheap, I should get a Moto G or Huawei Honor. If I'm not being cheap, I should get something with a better processor than a Snapdragon 4xx series." I mean, a OnePlus X is $200 with a Snapdragon 8xx series processor. The OnePlus X isn't a great option for Americans since it doesn't support enough of the North American bands to get good coverage, but the Nokias don't really support North America at all. I have nostalgia for Nokia too and the phones do look pretty, but I'd definitely take a $200 OnePlus X over a $242 Nokia 6. Similarly, a Huawei Honor 5X or Moto G4 looks to have a better processor than a Nokia 6 and they cost less. A Moto G4 Play has similar specs to a Nokia 5 for half the price. And I think Motorola/Lenovo are coming out with a G5 this Spring (which might be before the Nokia gets into customers' hands). LeEco and ZTE also have devices with more power.

The thing about the mobile industry today is that it's reasonably saturated with good options. The Nokia devices look nice, but they're in the "get notified when you can actually get one" stage. Let's say you can get your hands on one in June. By then a whole slew of new Android slabs could be out - possibly with better specs and prices. I do love CNC machined aluminum like the Nokia 6, but I also like a phone that has enough performance to be great to use for a while.

I'm guessing that Nokia is going to push these in cheaper markets. There are European countries like Poland and Greece that have lower GDP per capita, markets like India where Nokia has been historically strong where people might be willing to shell out an extra $75 for the Nokia, and China where the cachet of having a Nokia could play well (Volvo, another Scandinavian brand, plays well there). But it's a hard market that's saturated with plenty of good options and it's hard to one-up anyone given that all players (other than Apple and maybe to a small extent Samsung) are essentially pulling from the same parts (and OS) bin.

They look like fine devices, but they're not a value you can't already get for multiple manufacturers today and given that they aren't available yet, it remains to be seen what this Spring will bring from competitors. I mean, they're super pretty and that almost makes me want to cast off all my cynicism aside and say "screw-it, I want a pretty blue or copper metal Nokia", but the practical side of me notes the Snapdragon 4xx processor (and the fact that the device won't work where I live). I kinda wish that Nokia had decided to go high-end. I think Nokia could have done well with a $650 device if their build quality is actually what they claim in the videos. Why not stick a Snapdragon 8xx in there with the latest LTE and a display to match. I mean, we all miss Nokia and the Nokia 5/6 look nicer than most Android phones out there. Why not go after the profitable part of the market? Even if you don't want to deal with CDMA, there are a lot of people on T-Mobile/AT&T in the US or other GSM-stack carriers in the world.

But, alas, it was probably a calculated effort to play into the markets that might have the most Nokia dumbphone penetration today and therefore most receptive to a Nokia smartphone.