Moto X (Is Out) [8.01.2013]

[T_Yamamoto]

I'm think I'll just pick up an iP5s/6 when it comes out, looks like I'll have to shell out 500 dollars both ways, might as well get an iPhone at that point.

 

[foghorn67]

God damm Google/Motorola need to get back to reality.
No freakin way they can release a phone with inferior specs 4 months later and still price it the same $199.
Beside the HTC One and GS4 can be had for less than $199. HTC1 can be found FREE with contract during promotions.

The HTC1 has been on the market for a few months. The Moto X isn't even out yet. Im sure everything will settle soon.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Anybody that thought this phone was going to unlocked for 350 is a moron. It wasn't going to happen. Blame yourselves for being dumb, not Motorola.

Well it wasn't completely unfair to expect that. I kinda expected it given the N4's pricing and that this is Google's influence. Actually I groaned a bit at first with the sight of those low prices. I see good and bad out of it. Low prices = we can continue to release gimped phones and justify that based on price. I for one want a flagship device, not some device with corners cut. I'm tired of people talking about how the Nexus 4 is awesome and that Google can cut LTE out and make all the excuses they want.

At the same time the high price sucks because its not really worth it. I see this phone being more of a $449 phone or $499 phone with respect to the HTC One/GS4. After all the GS4 Mini is still pretty high priced unlocked.

So yeah I don't know. I'm conflicted. On one hand the specs don't justify a high price, but at the same time I don't like Google's race to the bottom approach. I do agree it'd be nice to have competition to help drive phone prices down because at $600, the margins are ridiculous.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Uh, no, here's what you said before:



I don't think any Android release will ever please you.

The only thing wrong with this phone is the price. I agree with AT's conclusion that the price will more than likely drop down quickly.

The reason I was disappointed with its specs at first was the fact that there was so much hype and buzz like this was the next big thing. It's not. It's a mid range phone. Overall the phone isn't bad. It's just not meant to go head to head against a GS4 and HTC One.

However, in general I always say why do specs NEED to matter that much? If you can deliver a solid experience without 2893472837 cores, then so be it. I'm a little skeptical about the performance, but if Moto says its "optimized" to perform better than other phones, so be it. I'd like to check it out and use it a bit before I say it's completely underpowered. It's just underpowered in the paper specs sense at least.

I'd like to see us stop worrying so much about specs races and stuff, but at the same time that requires our current hardware to run the OS sufficiently well. It seems on the iOS side it doesn't need to be a massive arms race for specs, but for Android, its still easy to bring the phone to its knees with a dual core processor. So yeah, while I'd like to see that specs matter less, it's not the reality.

Also I don't see how my quote says that specs matter. My quote says that in order to penetrate the US market with cheap phones, you need to compromise in specs. Specs like 5GB of RAM and 28973824 cores shouldn't matter, but specs like LTE or onboard storage do matter because they directly impact the experience on the phone.

 

[Dunkman04]

Not all of us game. I'd rather have a more responsive camera and UI. Much more useful to me. Even the S4 stutters about once in a while.
You are going the wrong way with my point let me break it down.

13Mp camera vs. 10MP.
That 13MP has poor noise control and heavy NR when in Night Mode. A better sensor might help. If that is the case, give me the 10MP.

Screen: It's smaller, 720p isn't the worst thing, it's not a 5" screen. It doesn't need to be 1080p. Its about the same size as my GXN, no issue of resolution on the GXN. I actually prefer my 4.7 HTC One compared to the 5" of my S4. Yes, it takes a back seat in resolution, but not screen size. Some people have caveats on the 5 inch screen.

Processor: Using the latest s4 Snapdragon and clipping at 200mhz faster than my HTC One, the s4 stutters. It shouldn't. Great, I can play with dolphins with machine guns on dope 10fps faster. Weee.
My HTC doesn't stutter....ever. Don't give me ROM this, ROM that. That's like what, 4% of people willing to do that.
If the Moto can effortlessly breeze through it's own UI faster, smoother, it's camera fires up faster...etc. It's more useful as a phone. If you want a gaming device, fine. But I'm sure even on last years specs, most games should be okay.

Storage:
Expandable storage. That's great the S4 comes with an SD card slot. All phones in reality should. Even the lowly N4 to the HTC One and Nexus 10.
But as far as app storage, even Samsung is nerfing the storage abilities on it's own devices. The 32GB S4 should have been available to all from the beginning. Try finding it outside a few carriers.

At the end of the day, I want a phone that is more useful. With useful features and not gimmicky never used S4 features sitting on top of the ugliest UI in the world.

My last phone was a dated midrange offering, and the last year was painful in every way. Webpages took forever to load, new games couldn't run very well (if at all), etc. In addition, battery life was atrocious (thankfully I could and did replace that). If I was in an industry that afforded me the opportunity to acquire new phones as they came out, or I hated money and kept buying them every few months, then I could see why the Moto X may be attractive. However, when I bought the phone I have now I was thinking about what kind of experience it could deliver in 18 months. Just about every phone can deliver a nice experience today. My old Incredible 2 was great when I bought it. If I am going to pay flagship prices, I expect to get a 2 year flagship experience. Now, maybe Motorola has found a way to optimize their hardware far better than Samsung, HTC, or even Apple. Consider me a skeptic.

 

[Ryan]

Why get the Moto X when you can get incredible better devices like the LG Optimus G pro for $439 off contract from AT&T?

I really wanted to like this phone, but the off contract price is totally unwarranted. The Google Play Edition should have been available TODAY for the same price as the Nexus 4.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

What's a fair price for this phone on the play store? I want to hear AT's opinion.

I'm going to say $399 for 16gb. They can even sell for $449 and it'd be marginally reasonable.

Here's why. Flagship phones are typically $550-$600. Even the GS4 Mini goes for $450. Phones have been traditionally priced that way.

Now before you all mention Nexus 4, that's something separate. I think we should acknowledge that the Google tried hard with the Nexus to push something new, and maybe needed that kind of pricing given that it was only sold subsidized on 1 carrier. However, its out of standards with industry pricing. So while I'd love to have N4 pricing levels, I don't think its a realistic standard to expect for all new phones. It's nice to have, but until the industry really changes its pricing structure, I'm not too surprised by $500 phones.

 

[Ryan]

What's a fair price for this phone on the play store? I want to hear AT's opinion.

I'm going to say $399 for 16gb. They can even sell for $449 and it'd be marginally reasonable.

Here's why. Flagship phones are typically $550-$600. Even the GS4 Mini goes for $450. Phones have been traditionally priced that way.

Now before you all mention Nexus 4, that's something separate. I think we should acknowledge that the Google tried hard with the Nexus to push something new, and maybe needed that kind of pricing given that it was only sold subsidized on 1 carrier. However, its out of standards with industry pricing. So while I'd love to have N4 pricing levels, I don't think its a realistic standard to expect for all new phones. It's nice to have, but until the industry really changes its pricing structure, I'm not too surprised by $500 phones.

The Optimus G pro has nearly the same specs as the Galaxy S4 and HTC One (1.7ghz Snapdragon 600, 2gb Ram, 32gb storage, 5.5 inch display, 13MP rear-facing camera and 2.1MP front camera, 3140mah battery, wireless charging, IR Remote Control, SD-Card slot). It costs $439 off contract from AT&T.

 

[Lyfer]

This thing is going to be as successful as the Xoom/XYBorg product.

 

[Trombe]

The Optimus G pro has nearly the same specs as the Galaxy S4 and HTC One (1.7ghz Snapdragon 600, 2gb Ram, 32gb storage, 5.5 inch display, 13MP rear-facing camera and 2.1MP front camera, 3140mah battery, wireless charging, IR Remote Control, SD-Card slot). It costs $439 off contract from AT&T.

The optimus g pro imo is the best phone this year nobody's heard of. It was 550 at launch though and still ATT exclusive until the CDMA carriers get there hands on it. Definitely keeping it in mind as an option depending on how the rest of the year turns out, assuming I can get it unlocked out the door to take it straight to T-Mobile.

 

[Crono]

The pricing is what makes this phone unappealing. I would have heartily recommended it at $300 or $350 off contract for 16GB

I'm sure it will still sell fairly well, but it's inferior on all points to the HTC One which is at the same price for 32GB, 1080p, and a similarly high-end body. This might appeal to people looking for decent battery life, which Motorola phones have generally been good for.

 

[Ryan]

The optimus g pro imo is the best phone this year nobody's heard of. It was 550 at launch though and still ATT exclusive until the CDMA carriers get there hands on it. Definitely keeping it in mind as an option depending on how the rest of the year turns out, assuming I can get it unlocked out the door to take it straight to T-Mobile.

You can - AT&T will unlock the phone if you buy it outright

 

[Anubis]

i was already planning on passing on it because of the lack of a notification LED. today sealed the deal

 

[cliftonite]

What's a fair price for this phone on the play store? I want to hear AT's opinion.

I'm going to say $399 for 16gb. They can even sell for $449 and it'd be marginally reasonable.

Here's why. Flagship phones are typically $550-$600. Even the GS4 Mini goes for $450. Phones have been traditionally priced that way.

Now before you all mention Nexus 4, that's something separate. I think we should acknowledge that the Google tried hard with the Nexus to push something new, and maybe needed that kind of pricing given that it was only sold subsidized on 1 carrier. However, its out of standards with industry pricing. So while I'd love to have N4 pricing levels, I don't think its a realistic standard to expect for all new phones. It's nice to have, but until the industry really changes its pricing structure, I'm not too surprised by $500 phones.

$399/$450 would be reasonable.

 

[OBLAMA2009]

youd think they would have learned their lesson from nexus 10 or pixel, nobody bought dat scheet.

 

[georgec84]

As others have said, too expensive for the specs.

 

[Crono]

For anyone disappointed by this phone, hop on ebay for an HTC First if you are on ATT. New is $250 - $300 for 16GB and 720p. Used unlocked versions going for $200 or less. That's a steal for a near stock Android phone. The Nexus 4 is a little pricier, but also still a great option.

 

[Ravynmagi]

I was thinking about this price issue and why a rather mid range phone has a the same contract price as much more powerful and expensive flagship phones.

This phone has no carrier modifications at all. No bloat (maybe no branding either). Perhaps because they are not allowed to touch the phone they've decided not to subsidize it as much they do more expensive phones that they are allowed to modify and control.

So maybe the rumored $300 could still be true? Or maybe a more realistic $400 price? I think the phone would still be good at the $400 price range. I wish they would have spilled the beans on the real price of the phone.

 

[Ryan]

I was thinking about this price issue and why a rather mid range phone has a the same contract price as much more powerful and expensive flagship phones.

This phone has no carrier modifications at all. No bloat (maybe no branding either). Perhaps because they are not allowed to touch the phone they've decided not to subsidize it as much they do more expensive phones that they are allowed to modify and control.

So maybe the rumored $300 could still be true? Or maybe a more realistic $400 price? I think the phone would still be good at the $400 price range. I wish they would have spilled the beans on the real price of the phone.

Think again......
http://www.androidheadlines.com/201...o-x-has-a-ton-of-bloat-no-surprise-there.html

 

[OBLAMA2009]

I was thinking about this price issue and why a rather mid range phone has a the same contract price as much more powerful and expensive flagship phones.

This phone has no carrier modifications at all. No bloat (maybe no branding either). Perhaps because they are not allowed to touch the phone they've decided not to subsidize it as much they do more expensive phones that they are allowed to modify and control.

So maybe the rumored $300 could still be true? Or maybe a more realistic $400 price? I think the phone would still be good at the $400 price range. I wish they would have spilled the beans on the real price of the phone.

alternatively, it could just be that verizon and att refused to let them sell it below a certain price cuz they didnt want it taking away from droid etc...sales that they need to lock people in to contracts. moto wanted it on all carriers, so thats how it had to be.

also if you read the cnet article it says that they havent actually announced the full retail price, so there is a glimmer of hope for a semi-cheap play store price.

itll be really funny if they go ahead and spend $500 mil marketing this cuz thatll just be down the drain, they shouldnt have built this up so much, theres been a massive negative reaction to this on day one

 

[OBLAMA2009]

Think again......
http://www.androidheadlines.com/201...o-x-has-a-ton-of-bloat-no-surprise-there.html

id pay $400 for this

 

[v8envy]

itll be really funny if they go ahead and spend $500 mil marketing this cuz thatll just be down the drain, they shouldnt have built this up so much, theres been a massive negative reaction to this on day one

That's exactly right. While there's no such thing as bad publicity, the buzz all across the net is: this thing is light on hardware and extremely heavy on price. The initial reaction among the plurality geeks (myself included) seems very very negative.

Had Moto set expectations early re: flagship pricing everyone would have just ignored this device from the get-go. We knew it was going to be midrange-but-good-enough-maybe hardware. But with all the buildup, hype and buzz finally getting something underwhelming across the board with a standard flagship pricetag offends geek sensibilities.

Rumors are $579 pricing off-contract for the base model. And there's the locked boot loader to consider.

Motorola needed to hit this out of the park to stay relevant. I think we can all agree this is far from hitting it out of the park on any level. As far as I'm concerned it's a swing and a miss.

 

[Ravynmagi]

Think again......
http://www.androidheadlines.com/201...o-x-has-a-ton-of-bloat-no-surprise-there.html

Hmm.. I thought I read a feature of the Moto X was no carrier bloat. Guess that story I read was mistaken then. Well, so much for that theory then.

 

[Ravynmagi]

Ugh, I just heard the 32GB model is temporarily an AT&T exclusive. /facepalm

 

[Dunkman04]

Ugh, I just heard the 32GB model is temporarily an AT&T exclusive. /facepalm

My guess is that Verizon wants to steer people towards the Droid Ultra and Maxx in the short term. It seems that Motorola is catering to Verizon with the Droid lineup refresh, AT&T with the Moto X, and the other carriers get some scraps. At any rate, I absolutely wouldn't buy a phone for 2 years right now with a fixed 16 GB. It already isn't enough storage and the OS and Apps will only demand more as time goes on.