Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 76 to 98 of 98
Like Tree37Likes
  1. #76  
    Ry
    Ry is online now
    Ry's Avatar

    Posts
    7,221 Posts
    Global Posts
    7,228 Global Posts

    Default Re: Moto X Specs

    Quote Originally Posted by boricua80 View Post
    I dont care about it having top specs but it looks like one of the common sensors that it should have come with "IR" is missing. Is it possible I'm reading the specs wrong?
    Historically IR isn't a common sensor. It's just been re-introduced by Samsung, HTC, and Sony.
    a.k.a. RyZR from HoFo
    Motorola Moto X (164.55.2.ghost_verizon.Verizon.en.US, KitKat 4.4.2)
    Motorola Moto G (173.44.20.falcon_cdma.Verizon.en.US, KitKat 4.4.2)
    Motorola DROID Bionic (98.72.22.XT865.Verizon.en.US, Jelly Bean 4.1.2)
    Google Nexus 7 2012 (KOT49H, KitKat 4.4.2)
    What other devices have I had? Here's my phone timeline.
    Support your favorite Android app and game developers. Pay for apps! And don't block ads!

    Community Rules & Guidelines - Mobile Nations Forums
  2. #77  

    Default Re: Moto X Specs

    I thought those were blasters (transmitter) and not a sensor (receiver).
  3. #78  

    Default Re: Moto X Specs

    Quote Originally Posted by drhill View Post
    The X will have a smaller screen, so it might gain some battery there.

    The fact that the Mini and Maxx have wireless charging, but the Ultra doesn't scares me for the X.
    I'm thinking that if Motorola can afford to drop the battery to 2130mAh in the Ultra (down from 2530mAh in the RAZR HD), and the Moto X is supposed to be somewhere between 2200 and 2300mAh, the battery life will do just fine. It won't be 3+ day life like on the RAZR MAXX HD or the new MAXX, but it should easily withstand a full day of heavy abuse (hopefully).

    As for wireless charging, that's a nail-biter right now. Hardware-wise, the Mini is really close in configuration to the Moto X, and supports it. The FCC documents do not make mention of wireless charging for the Moto X nor the Ultra though. I hope they're not required to report inductive charging in FCC reports and that we will still see it make an appearance in the Moto X, or at the very least, have it available as a customization option.
  4. #79  

    Default Re: Moto X Specs

    Someone told me that FCC documents don't list wireless charging because the phone is a receiver and not a transmitter for the transfer. I wouldn't mind paying a bit more for wireless charging because it is a huge convenience to me.

    I am wondering if they purposefully withheld it from the ultra to push people to give the Maxx more incentive. It seems like those three phones (four if you count the X) will have the same internals, but just differ for shell, screen size, and battery. Weird that the Ultra would be 2130 and the X 2200. I'm not too worried about battery, but I would have been happy to add 1 mm thickness and a few more bucks for a 3500mAh battery in the X.
  5. #80  

    Default Re: Moto X Specs

    Quote Originally Posted by drhill View Post
    Someone told me that FCC documents don't list wireless charging because the phone is a receiver and not a transmitter for the transfer. I wouldn't mind paying a bit more for wireless charging because it is a huge convenience to me.

    I am wondering if they purposefully withheld it from the ultra to push people to give the Maxx more incentive. It seems like those three phones (four if you count the X) will have the same internals, but just differ for shell, screen size, and battery. Weird that the Ultra would be 2130 and the X 2200. I'm not too worried about battery, but I would have been happy to add 1 mm thickness and a few more bucks for a 3500mAh battery in the X.
    If you check the FCC documents for devices like the Nexus 4, Droid Mini, or Droid MAXX, all of them have a section describing an inductive charger used, but I don't remember if it was actually being tested or just included with their reporting. So if the FCC is the final say to determine whether or not a device will have it, then it's not looking good for the X.

    It sounds like they omitted the wireless charging portion for the Ultra to keep it thin more than anything else. Overall, it's a very bizarre group of devices. Mini has wireless charging, S4 Pro, only available in black, Ultra does NOT have wireless charging, X8, and available in 3 colors, MAXX has wireless charging, X8, only available in black, and the Moto X may/may not have wireless charging, S4 Pro, available in tons of colors. ???
  6. #81  

    Default Re: Moto X Specs

    Quote Originally Posted by jbruha View Post
    It sounds like they omitted the wireless charging portion for the Ultra to keep it thin more than anything else.
    Let's also remember that wireless charging is an easy omission for a manufacturer to make because it isn't a big deal at all for most people. It's just another reason to spend more money. I mean, really: "Hmm, spend more money on another device so I can charge my phone by setting it down on a specific pad or spend no money and just plug in my phone?" I'd be surprised if the majority of smartphone owners people even knew wireless charging existed.
    Thanked by 2:
    curley1441Ry 
    Ry likes this.
  7. #82  

    Default Re: Moto X Specs

    Quote Originally Posted by ultravisitor View Post
    Let's also remember that wireless charging is an easy omission for a manufacturer to make because it isn't a big deal at all for most people. It's just another reason to spend more money. I mean, really: "Hmm, spend more money on another device so I can charge my phone by setting it down on a specific pad or spend no money and just plug in my phone?" I'd be surprised if the majority of smartphone owners people even knew wireless charging existed.
    I agree with that. I sell them, and while I personally only want to use wireless chargers, most people would rather keep their money and stick to the older charging method, no matter how much more convenient it is. And yes, the majority has no idea the technology even exists.

    Seriously though, remember the car dock for the Nexus One with the pogo pins on the side? Wireless charging with Bluetooth and NFC would mean you would only need to set your phone in its dock, plug nothing into it, and it would change to your in-vehicle settings, start playing music over your car stereo, and charge all in one shot.
  8. #83  
    Armada's Avatar

    Posts
    61 Posts
    Global Posts
    287 Global Posts

    Default Re: Moto X Specs

    That's not to say that Moto can't add a backplate that supports wireless charging, ala the touchstone plates for the original Palm Pre. I personally don't want to drop the cash for it, though, so it's not a huge deal for me.
  9. #84  

    Default Re: Moto X Specs

    Lest that's one of the options you can include when choosing your color, I don't think that would be an option since all of the new Droids and the Moto X have a non-removable battery and backplate.
  10. #85  

    Default Re: Moto X Specs

    Wireless qi charging is better than the n1's pogo pins because you can have universal chargers. Never buy new house/car stuff... As long as the phone supports it.

    I never turn Bluetooth off so I can use tasker if I want to launch things when Bluetooth connects.
  11. #86  
    bunique4life05's Avatar

    Posts
    1,558 Posts
    Global Posts
    1,562 Global Posts
    ROM
    Stock

    Default Re: Moto X Specs

    Quote Originally Posted by Armada View Post
    Seeing as a lot of the specs and features in Moto's new Droids are the same as the Moto X we might be able to infer a few things about it. First is that the Moto X might last 28 hours (at least on CDMA). What usage factors into that metric is dependent on statistics we don't know. Second is the Moto X isn't "only" dual core. There are 4 GPU cores, a core dedicated to keeping senors ticking and aware, and language core that should always be listening and help process other voice commands.
    28 hours 2G or 3G?

    Quote Originally Posted by jbruha View Post
    I'm thinking that if Motorola can afford to drop the battery to 2130mAh in the Ultra (down from 2530mAh in the RAZR HD), and the Moto X is supposed to be somewhere between 2200 and 2300mAh, the battery life will do just fine. It won't be 3+ day life like on the RAZR MAXX HD or the new MAXX, but it should easily withstand a full day of heavy abuse (hopefully).

    As for wireless charging, that's a nail-biter right now. Hardware-wise, the Mini is really close in configuration to the Moto X, and supports it. The FCC documents do not make mention of wireless charging for the Moto X nor the Ultra though. I hope they're not required to report inductive charging in FCC reports and that we will still see it make an appearance in the Moto X, or at the very least, have it available as a customization option.
    God I hope it does last a full days of abuse because listen to music and love for once not have to worry about my battery for a day.


    Sent from my SGH-T999 using AC Forums mobile app
    Google is for the people and by the people. Android is for the people and by the tech people. Nexus is for the geeks and by the geeks.
    Solve
    [Nexus (A) + the latest and greatest tech] < [Nexus (B) + the best proven and optimize tech]
    Answer
    Nexus (A) is less than Nexus (B)
    Nexus (B) is greater than Nexus (A)
    ______
  12. #87  

    Default Re: Moto X Specs

    Quote Originally Posted by bunique4life05 View Post
    28 hours 2G or 3G?
    God I hope it does last a full days of abuse because listen to music and love for once not have to worry about my battery for a day.
    I think we'll be okay. I said it somewhere else before, but the magic in the last round of RAZR's wasn't the battery, but in how it slept like a baby in standby. When I owned the MAXX HD, it would draw a horizontal line on the battery stats page when it wasn't being used. It sounds like with the offloading of other features to other cores at a very low clock speed, they can replicate this and further it to new applications to pull even more performance out of a smaller battery. That, and having a larger battery in the Moto X than they put in the Droid Ultra indicates that they're confident that it will be more than enough.

    All educated speculation, but at the end of the day, I'm not concerned the battery life will suck. Motorola is the only brand I trust with batteries.
  13. #88  
    bunique4life05's Avatar

    Posts
    1,558 Posts
    Global Posts
    1,562 Global Posts
    ROM
    Stock

    Default Re: Moto X Specs

    Battery Life will make or break the Moto X or Nexus 5 for me. Phablets are too big for me but I am envious of the battery life.

    Sent from my Nexus 7 using AC Forums mobile app
    Google is for the people and by the people. Android is for the people and by the tech people. Nexus is for the geeks and by the geeks.
    Solve
    [Nexus (A) + the latest and greatest tech] < [Nexus (B) + the best proven and optimize tech]
    Answer
    Nexus (A) is less than Nexus (B)
    Nexus (B) is greater than Nexus (A)
    ______
    somdave2005 likes this.
  14. #89  

    Default Re: Moto X Specs

    Quote Originally Posted by karn101 View Post



















    I found this on Twitter. I cannot confirm anything. Cheers!


    Also, found a video here:



    And another video:


    Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk 2
    That girl he is calling does not look like her last name is really Lewis.

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using AC Forums mobile app
  15. #90  
    KWKSLVR's Avatar

    Posts
    433 Posts
    Global Posts
    434 Global Posts

    Default Re: Moto X Specs

    Actually, in regards to an i7, no, I wouldn't take one. My 4 year old Acer laptop has an old i5 M430 coupled with 8GB's of RAM , a 256GB Samsung 470 Series SSD and some huge, brandless Korean battery I've had hanging off the bottom for the past 3 years. It makes for a GREAT typing angle since it tilts the keyboard 10-15*. It boots in 15 seconds, opens Facebook and Excel files like a boss and lasts around 7 hours. No i7 needed. I don't need the processing speed. I don't want the loss in battery life and the increase in heat for all that extra processing that, like I said, I don't need. I play the occasional game on my desktop that I built myself. It's even older than my laptop and takes everything I throw at it. Well, the GPU is relatively new. But the overclocked Wolfdale under the hood certainly isn't. Everything I do is strategic. There's more to selecting hardware than just buying whats at the top of a spec sheet.

    The average person doesn't care about a spec sheet. I flash crap all day and tinker around with things all the time and I don't care about spec sheets either. Yes, Samsung tossed a Quad-Core into the S4 to deal with their bloat. Did it work? Is it a smooth experience? No, no it isn't, so what good does all that spec'd out hardware do? What runs smoother? A vomiting, repulse iPhone 5 or an S4? Which has higher specs? Which is more optimized?

    Like I've said before, if Motorola built this device well and optimized the thing for Android, then I don't see a need to flash a ROM until CM10.1 is finished for it, and maybe not even then. In the past, the devices I've owned have always "needed" a flash for various reasons like my original, stock Galaxy S being a lag ***** or my GNex needing to be rolled back off of 4.2. Is the GNex just OmGzErZ2oLd2RunKNeWaNdRoID? No, it's due to a lack of optimization. It was a turd of an update. As a result, the S4 is a laggy ******* despite it's quad cores and the One runs like a Ferrari. Spec sheet hardware had little to do with it.

    Stopping chasing spec sheets and wait for devices to come out to see how they run. I know it's a novel, new concept guys, but if you're always chasing spec sheets you're always going to be disappointed and you're always going to be waiting for the next greatest thing. There's zero reason to be upset and frustrated over a device that isn't even out yet! Give it a chance. Maybe we'll all be surprised. Maybe we'll all hate it. Either way we won't know until August.
    Thanked by 4:
  16. #91  

    Default

    Does anybody know if it has a infrared blaster?

    Because i guess you cant find it between sensors, right?

    Posted via Android Central App
  17. #92  

    Default Re: Moto X Specs

    Quote Originally Posted by ekimpadd View Post
    Does anybody know if it has a infrared blaster?

    Because i guess you cant find it between sensors, right?

    Posted via Android Central App
    Throughout my repeated OCD combings of the FCC documents for this device and all of the leaked information we've heard thus far, I have not seen anything that would indicate is has an IR blaster, nor wireless charging.
    Thanked by:
  18. #93  

    Default Re: Moto X Specs

    Quote Originally Posted by ekimpadd View Post
    Does anybody know if it has a infrared blaster?

    Because i guess you cant find it between sensors, right?

    Posted via Android Central App
    That would be awesome if it had ir.
  19. #94  
    bberrynewbie84's Avatar
    Galaxy nexus!

    Posts
    449 Posts
    Global Posts
    624 Global Posts
    ROM
    stock 2.3.4

    Default Re: Moto X Specs

    Does it have a nano SIM card slot? Maybe I can switch back it with my iPhone.
  20. #95  
    Darth Spock's Avatar

    Posts
    5,733 Posts
    Global Posts
    5,772 Global Posts
    ROM
    Assassin 'Droid

    Default Re: Moto X Specs

    Quote Originally Posted by bberrynewbie84 View Post
    Does it have a nano SIM card slot? Maybe I can switch back it with my iPhone.
    Most likely it is micro sim.

    Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

    ​Obvious statement: Why, I am an assassin 'droid, Master.
    May the Force Be With You

    Community Rules & Guidelines​
    (Formerly "NothingIsTrue")

  21. #96  

    Default Re: Moto X Specs

    Maybe not. looks like it might use nano sim after all

    Thanked by:
    jbruha and AbuYazeedUK like this.
  22. #97  

    Default Re: Moto X Specs

    Nano Sim FML better get mine now

    Posted via Android Central App
  23. #98  

    Default Re: Moto X Specs

    I've been looking for a reason to move to a Nano Sim and use adapters for other phones.
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Similar Threads

  1. Not impressed with the rumored Moto X
    By Eaglemaniac in forum Moto X
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 07-16-2013, 11:56 AM
  2. Another super-clear Moto X picture
    By Phil Nickinson in forum Moto X
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 07-14-2013, 06:11 PM
  3. Video of Moto X (Front and Back) Demo
    By Dan Rucker in forum Moto X
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 07-14-2013, 12:53 PM
  4. [FREE][GAME] -- Moto Race
    By androiddodo in forum Games
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-13-2013, 08:02 PM
  5. Moto vs Sony
    By anonymous-x in forum Moto X
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-13-2013, 06:54 PM

Posting Permissions

B