Moto X2: 4.7" vs 5" screen

[Orion78]

Rumored? What rumor? Where did you see this?

Posted via Android Central App

This one is from back on last Oct.....
Motorola prepping its own 6.3" Xplay phablet, and a Droid Ultra heir dubbed Quantum

This is the most recent one......
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Motorolas-6.3-inch-phablet-to-arrive-in-Q3_id54213

Again, it's only rumors but if true......I'm on board 100% with this. I doubt that screen will be that huge however.

 

[Ccota08]

5" is the sweetspot for today's market! Everyone is carrying bigger phones now!

And if everyone threw their phone off a cliff, that would obviously be the correct thing to do!

/sarcasm

 

[Eli_C]

There is no "sweetspot" for screen size. There is a sweetspot for physical size of the phone, and that seems to be about 130mm x 65mm x 10mm. In order to fully utilize the space, ideally as much as possible screen should be squeezed into that space. A 5" screen can fit into those dimensions.

 

[Eli_C]

I was wondering how well a 5" screen would fit in nearly the same form factor as the current Moto X:

4.7" screen
104.0 x 58.5mm

5" screen
110.7 x 62.3mm


Moto X
129.3 x 65.3mm
12.65mm avg top and bottom bezel (G2 is 11.7mm)
3.4mm side bezels (G2 is 3mm)


This means you could do a 5" screen on a phone that is:
130.7mm x 66.3mm
or about 1.4mm taller and 1mm wider then the current Moto X IF the top and bottom bezel are 10mm and side bezels are 2mm.
A true edge to edge phone could actually be 3mm THINNER (less wide) then the current Moto X

Well, with the rumors of a 5.2" screen, its measurements are:

115.1mm x 64.8mm

So to be near the current form factor you would need edge to edge screen (1mm size bezels) and about 7-8mm above and below the screen. Possible, but improbable! Plus I don't know how easy it would be to use a phone that have virtually no bezel anywhere around the screen.

A 5.1" screen (ie GS5 AMOLED):
112.9mm x 63.5mm

 

[Premium1]

I believe the increase in cost would be very significant for an insignificant improvement.

Going from a 4.7" to a 5" screen wouldn't be that "significant" in added cost.

 

[livetoride4666]

The M8 is to long to put in the pocket. Width is not to bad, but it would be nice if it was a little slimmer.

Yes the m8 is too long and not comfortable to use compared to the N5 and dare I day the G5. The speakers and black bar make the device almost an inch too long.

Posted via Android Central App

 

[Eli_C]

Going from a 4.7" to a 5" screen wouldn't be that "significant" in added cost.

In fact if you compare the total BOM (bill of materials) of the Moto X ($221) and the GS5 ($251), despite the significant spec gap, they aren't that far apart. So yes, there is an increase cost, but its not that much.

I would love to see the Moto X+1 launch at $400 OFF CONTRACT with SD805, 3GB 32-bit quad-channel LPDDR3, 8.8 mm ? 6.6 mm camera sensor size w/ 2?m pixels 14.5 MP, 5" 1080 screen on a 130mm x 66mm body, 32/64/128 GB storage options, 3000+ mAh battery.

Yes, it would cost a LITTLE more to build, but clearly the cost savings, IMO, don't justify the spec hit. They could launch with top notch specs AND a very competitive price. If its a 15% increase in BOM, a 15% increase in retail price would be ~$400. There is additional costs savings eliminating the TI DSP parts of the x8 that are integrated into the SD800+.

 

[A895]

In fact if you compare the total BOM (bill of materials) of the Moto X ($221) and the GS5 ($251), despite the significant spec gap, they aren't that far apart. So yes, there is an increase cost, but its not that much.

I would love to see the Moto X+1 launch at $400 OFF CONTRACT with SD805, 3GB 32-bit quad-channel LPDDR3, 8.8 mm ? 6.6 mm camera sensor size w/ 2?m pixels 14.5 MP, 5" 1080 screen on a 130mm x 66mm body, 32/64/128 GB storage options, 3000+ mAh battery.

Yes, it would cost a LITTLE more to build, but clearly the cost savings, IMO, don't justify the spec hit. They could launch with top notch specs AND a very competitive price. If its a 15% increase in BOM, a 15% increase in retail price would be ~$400. There is additional costs savings eliminating the TI DSP parts of the x8 that are integrated into the SD800+.

So you want to turn the next Moto X into another phone? You are doing it wrong. That is not the point the Motorola of now is trying to make.

 

[Premium1]

In fact if you compare the total BOM (bill of materials) of the Moto X ($221) and the GS5 ($251), despite the significant spec gap, they aren't that far apart. So yes, there is an increase cost, but its not that much.

I would love to see the Moto X+1 launch at $400 OFF CONTRACT with SD805, 3GB 32-bit quad-channel LPDDR3, 8.8 mm ? 6.6 mm camera sensor size w/ 2?m pixels 14.5 MP, 5" 1080 screen on a 130mm x 66mm body, 32/64/128 GB storage options, 3000+ mAh battery.

Yes, it would cost a LITTLE more to build, but clearly the cost savings, IMO, don't justify the spec hit. They could launch with top notch specs AND a very competitive price. If its a 15% increase in BOM, a 15% increase in retail price would be ~$400. There is additional costs savings eliminating the TI DSP parts of the x8 that are integrated into the SD800+.

Id be happy with 4.7" 1080p display, snap800(to save on cost) camera with better sensor, 2gb ram. It won't be a super high end device, because moto showed you don't need super high end specs to run fast and smooth.

 

[Eli_C]

So you want to turn the next Moto X into another phone? You are doing it wrong. That is not the point the Motorola of now is trying to make.

"The point" isn't to use low end specs. The point is a better form factor, a better user experience, a better camera,... and ultimately to sell more phones.

My point is that even using lower specs really didn't save them much money, so why do it? I like Moto phones for a lot of reasons. I like the size of the X, especially compared to the newer crop of phones. I want them to make a high end flagship phone, keep the same form factor and advance on the unique features of the X.

snap800(to save on cost) camera with better sensor, 2gb ram. It won't be a super high end device, because moto showed you don't need super high end specs to run fast and smooth.

Again, there is minimal cost difference between an S4, SD 600, SD 800 and SD 805.

In terms of the camera, a camera is more then just a great sensor (though its very important). You need great optics and you need to process the images. The 805 excels in Image Signal Processing compared to the 800/801, which will lead to a much faster camera.

 

[A895]

"The point" isn't to use low end specs. The point is a better form factor, a better user experience, a better camera,... and ultimately to sell more phones.

My point is that even using lower specs really didn't save them much money, so why do it? I like Moto phones for a lot of reasons. I like the size of the X, especially compared to the newer crop of phones. I want them to make a high end flagship phone, keep the same form factor and advance on the unique features of the X.



Again, there is minimal cost difference between an S4, SD 600, SD 800 and SD 805.

In terms of the camera, a camera is more then just a great sensor (though its very important). You need great optics and you need to process the images. The 805 excels in Image Signal Processing compared to the 800/801, which will lead to a much faster camera.

The point is not to use high end specs either. You are essentially equating high specs to more sales when in reality that isn't the case. The point of using less specs was to show that you can make a device just as fast and good as other phones without all the extra specs other phones have. As you say, YOU want them to do all this ***** measuring when it is not necessary.

Sent from my XT907 using Mobile Nations mobile app

 

[NoYankees44]

Good to hear from ye ol' tardy one! Been playing around with the Storm instead of the G1, eh? Well, we'll forgive you, if you are nice.

I'd answer all your questions but the one-a-day round robin requirement encourages speading out the comments. For now I'll just point you to this article on how to do screen captures. Not the ideal solution but relatively simple. Screen capture is one of the highly anticipated capabilities such as video recording, soft keyboard, app storage on the SD card, and full backup that are being worked on.

Edit: sorry, quoted wrong post.

BOM does not include labor, shipping, engineering, equipment investment, advertising, etc.

There would be no way possible for them to make any profit at 400$. Sense Motorola has been in the red for the last few years, there is no way they could cut the price. Not for several months anyway. The absolute best realistic launch price would be 500$, but 600$+ would be much more likely. Companies have to make money. Especially companies that have not made money in a while and have recently been acquired. Wanting both top tier hardware and bottom barrel price is not realistic.

 

[HZD]

I think Moto is onto a winner with the Moto X2, if they can deliver what google did with then Nexus 5.


A device of a Similar size to the nexus 5 with a bigger battery and the Touchless control for a good price say 300ish would kill even the OnePlus.

5" format does really seem to be the sweet spot now, alot of people considering 5"+ is Phablet and 4.7 " is just too small, i Own a Nexus 5 and have used the Moto X i loved it but the screen is too small for me i find the Icons to small and the font makes me squint abit to read more than a few lines of text.

5" (1080)
2500Mha
SnapDragon 800 ( with the low power listening )
2 Gigs of Ram
16/32 Gig storage
BT(LE)
QI charging
NFC
Rear - 8MP camera (OIS )
Front - 2MP camera

This would be an Insta buy !

 

[PFKMan23]

I think Moto is onto a winner with the Moto X2, if they can deliver what google did with then Nexus 5.


A device of a Similar size to the nexus 5 with a bigger battery and the Touchless control for a good price say 300ish would kill even the OnePlus.
....

This would be an Insta buy !

And like the Nexus 5, the device would be sold at a loss for the company, so that's not going to happen. I'm hoping the specs are a bit beefier than that with the price at 499 or 599 unsubsidized.

 

[Ry]

And like the Nexus 5, the device would be sold at a loss for the company, so that's not going to happen. I'm hoping the specs are a bit beefier than that with the price at 499 or 599 unsubsidized.

Re: Nexus, they don't lose money on the hardware. Their profit margins are just lower. They is little to no marketing cost. Their software costs are probably rolled into the cost of Android as a whole.

 

[Evilnut]

As long as the new X is an excellent overall phone experience like the original & "about" the same overall size, I will be very happy. The phrase my dad used to say to me when he would tell me to do something that was important comes to mind. He used to say: "Tim, don't **** it up".

Posted via Android Central App from my Ebony backed Moto X

 

[PFKMan23]

Re: Nexus, they don't lose money on the hardware. Their profit margins are just lower. They is little to no marketing cost. Their software costs are probably rolled into the cost of Android as a whole.

Noted. So when people are saying their taking a loss, it's just with respect to more standard profit margins on phones then? But then why would they sell of Motorola?

And going back to the Moto X for a moment, does anyone remember the unsubsized cost at release? That would probably be a good point of reference.

 

[Ry]

Noted. So when people are saying their taking a loss, it's just with respect to more standard profit margins on phones then? But then why would they sell of Motorola?

And going back to the Moto X for a moment, does anyone remember the unsubsized cost at release? That would probably be a good point of reference.

For AT&T, 16GB was $580 and 32GB was $630.

The unlocked "T-Mobile" model launched at $599 for the 16GB model.

 

[NoYankees44]

Noted. So when people are saying their taking a loss, it's just with respect to more standard profit margins on phones then? But then why would they sell of Motorola?

And going back to the Moto X for a moment, does anyone remember the unsubsized cost at release? That would probably be a good point of reference.

No one really knows the margins. I can almost guarantee you that if there is any loss or low margin that it is on Google's side and not the manufacturer. There would be 0 reason for a manufacturer to make the Nexus if they didn't make a reasonable amount of money on the hardware.

 

[chevyman29]

Edit: sorry, quoted wrong post.

BOM does not include labor, shipping, engineering, equipment investment, advertising, etc.

There would be no way possible for them to make any profit at 400$. Sense Motorola has been in the red for the last few years, there is no way they could cut the price. Not for several months anyway. The absolute best realistic launch price would be 500$, but 600$+ would be much more likely. Companies have to make money. Especially companies that have not made money in a while and have recently been acquired. Wanting both top tier hardware and bottom barrel price is not realistic.

guys think about this for a min . I just bought a LG 8.3 tablet with lte on Verizon off contract for 300.00 bucks . its got a huge screen compared to a phone the over all device is at least 3 times the size of a smart phone its got a camera it has basically everything a phone has for 300.00 OUT THE DOOR NO CONTRACT. if lg can sell this device for 300.00 I promise you every single phone on the market is over priced by 300.00 at least. theres no way anybody can make me believe it costs more to make a phone that's 3 times smaller than a tablet.