My Biggest Issue: You can get competitor phones that will blow the Moto X away....for less $$$

[roadkizzle]

That's why I am really eagerly awaiting rigorous tests on the battery life for the X. I am skeptical that they have actually been able to do anything special with it... In which case it will definitely be making my choice of phones much harder.

Although, I am very hopeful that the DSPs will actually allow the microphones and sensors to be used without significantly draining the battery.

 

[eyesopen1111]

Yes, because people never browse the internet or open apps on their phones, so what's the point in comparison....right? RIGHT?

Please provide a "one-off event" that favors your HTC One so we don't have to listen to you complain anymore.

The references were to earlier posts in this thread. One was of a game load duel with link to video. The other was about a browser test that I didn't see as there was no link. (For the record, I can't find any video on YouTube showing the X outperform current flagships in browsing or benchmarks. So please link to any videos of this!)

The point was that one-off tests, standing alone, are an inadequate basis to support broad claims of device performance.

Do you disagree?

Given my point, why would I provide a counter anecdote?

But okay, I'll play along. Here's a link to PocketNow's comparison video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCn63XoWWYM&feature=youtube_gdata_player

I direct your attention to, for one example, 6:40 into the video: "the MotoX's color reproduction is pretty obviously inferior to the [HTC] One."

But I'm not here to bash the X. I just wanted more out of Motorola. Something revolutionary on the scale of the Ubuntu Edge, not just voice activation and an enhanced lock screen. Motorola has had a lot of time to develop this device.

I wanted to want the X, but so far, I don't.

That said, the X's supporters on this thread have given me a lot to think about and investigate further. No final judgement had been passed by me.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

[JungleLarry]

See, now you missed my point. It's plenty obvious to me that there is not clear-cut best phone; each one has its advantages and disadvantages. The thing is that each of these "one-off events" (as you call them) provides an admittedly small picture of comparison. But what is the big picture if not the aggregation of many small pictures?

They're just tests, relatively meaningless exercises in comparison until they are provided in some sort of context -- the context being your life and your usage and your needs.

I am by no means a Moto X supporter, just like I don't support the HTC One nor the Samsung GS4. The difference, however, is that I've actually used the One and GS4, whereas the Moto X is simply a device that interests me. I have my reservations, but unlike others here I'm not passing judgement until I have the phone in my hands. I don't need spec sheets and "tech comparisons" to justify any convenient fantasy I may have adopted due to bias and ignorance.

 

[eyesopen1111]

See, now you missed my point. It's plenty obvious to me that there is not clear-cut best phone; each one has its advantages and disadvantages. The thing is that each of these "one-off events" (as you call them) provides an admittedly small picture of comparison. But what is the big picture if not the aggregation of many small pictures?

They're just tests, relatively meaningless exercises in comparison until they are provided in some sort of context -- the context being your life and your usage and your needs.

I am by no means a Moto X supporter, just like I don't support the HTC One nor the Samsung GS4. The difference, however, is that I've actually used the One and GS4, whereas the Moto X is simply a device that interests me. I have my reservations, but unlike others here I'm not passing judgement until I have the phone in my hands. I don't need spec sheets and "tech comparisons" to justify any convenient fantasy I may have adopted due to bias and ignorance.

Huh? I'm just saying that I have my reservations about the MotoX, too. I said I wasn't passing final judgment on the phone multiple times. Sure, we'll learn more the phone as time goes on. Isn't that inevitable?

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

[roadkizzle]

The references were to earlier posts in this thread. One was of a game load duel with link to video. The other was about a browser test that I didn't see as there was no link. (For the record, I can't find any video on YouTube showing the X outperform current flagships in browsing or benchmarks. So please link to any videos of this!)

The point was that one-off tests, standing alone, are an inadequate basis to support broad claims of device performance.

Do you disagree?

Given my point, why would I provide a counter anecdote?

But okay, I'll play along. Here's a link to PocketNow's comparison video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCn63XoWWYM&feature=youtube_gdata_player

I direct your attention to, for one example, 6:40 into the video: "the MotoX's color reproduction is pretty obviously inferior to the [HTC] One."

But I'm not here to bash the X. I just wanted more out of Motorola. Something revolutionary on the scale of the Ubuntu Edge, not just voice activation and an enhanced lock screen. Motorola has had a lot of time to develop this device.

I wanted to want the X, but so far, I don't.

That said, the X's supporters on this thread have given me a lot to think about and investigate further. No final judgement had been passed by me.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4 Beta

I know you posted that video to showcase the HTC One having a better camera, but I find the really amazing part of that video comes at 8:50.

They state that the Boomsound from the HTC One doesn't blow the Moto X out of the water like all the other phones. They talk about how clear the Moto X sounds while being louder than the HTC One. Granted, this is with a bit less of a dynamic sound as they say but most people would have expected more difference, which seems to reduce the benefits of the HTC One sadly.

 

[eyesopen1111]

I know you posted that video to showcase the HTC One having a better camera, but I find the really amazing part of that video comes at 8:50.

They state that the Boomsound from the HTC One doesn't blow the Moto X out of the water like all the other phones. They talk about how clear the Moto X sounds while being louder than the HTC One. Granted, this is with a bit less of a dynamic sound as they say but most people would have expected more difference, which seems to reduce the benefits of the HTC One sadly.

I am eager to verify the sound quality, not just the loudness, that the X's rear speaker can produce when compared to the HTC One's capabilities.

Remember, I just want the best. The only reason I have an HTC One is because I haven't found a better smartphone yet. The reason I donated/bought the Ubuntu Edge is because I believe that it could be a better solution, if it gets made.

If the X comes to market and Wows me in person, I'll buy it on the spot, no doubt about it.

I'm no fan boy of the One; I'm an opportunist. I buy the best for my use situation. Period. The HTC One is the best phone I've seen so far, though. I do dig it, but once a better phone is available, the HTC One's days are numbered.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

[Paisley]

Huh? I'm just saying that I have my reservations about the MotoX, too. I said I wasn't passing final judgment on the phone multiple times. Sure, we'll learn more the phone as time goes on. Isn't that inevitable?

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4 Beta

Several companies as of late have tried to defend the idea of the low-spec flagship. Nokia Lumias do it. BlackBerry does it. Now Motorola is doing it. The primary difference now is that Motorola has deep advertising pockets and has given away a bunch of phones to friendly/hack journalists to build momentum for the underwhelming X.

The hack propaganda in smartphones has all the same tricks. Step 1: pick a meaningless contest that your second-rate product can win. The Motorola X proponents have shown it in a pointless browser test with the GS4 and in a single, near-tie game loading duel with the HTC One. This nonsense has to be another brain child from the people who brought us the "Smoked by a Lumia" campaign. Pathetic.

Step 2 of this hack protocol is to argue that weaknesses are strengths, or at least that they don't matter. Lack Boom Sound? Focus on compact size. Lack a good camera? Focus on voice activation. Lack carrier support? Focus on how much everybody really wants to sign up with AT&T to be the first to buy this turkey.

um, those aren't "reservations", those are judgements.

Anyway, for many compact *is* a huge strength/benefit. For many the Always Ready *is* a strength. both of these are strengths to me or i'd get another phone since i am switching over to android altogether and have an on-contract choice of anything (and i actually really like the samsung brand, no pref for motorola or htc). the 1080P is very clearly a strength, 720 is weaker. Sound boom is a strength that only the HTC one has, the S4 does not despite it's adding all high end specs, and i'd like it for sure, but the other benefits outweigh that for many (not all obviously, just as boom for some outtweigh the need for a relatively compact phone . that htc size is no joke, even their mini is the same size as the moto.). Extra sensor core so you don't have to hit the HTC one's awkwardly placed wake button 25 times a day at minimum? Point X, phew!!. As for carrier, it's only a "weakness" for non-Tmobile persons, and actually, it's not a weakness, but rather not a strength since no others have it either. I'm with Sprint and getting black or white, don't even like the colors and the strengths/benefits of the phone still outweigh the 1080/Boom sound (now, had they offered a glitter option for the back and THEN i'd be pissed, lol. so pissed). I'm not even going to go there with processor because none of us have handled the phone and cannot speak to that in any way except a couple of videos, one that favors the htc and one that favors the moto x.

And if, because by tally of strengths and weaknesses one could consider the One as a "better" phone, that in no way means the X is not a great phone or not worth of being a flagship/high end phone. If the One is "better" does that make everything else lame? of course not.

 

[Lstream]

Hopefully I won't get shot for posting on these forums, since I am a dyed in the wool Apple guy. This includes my personal devices and what we do in my company. We have an app up in the Apple App Store, as part of a much larger software product we sell to Enterprise. Our Mobile Strategy is iOS exclusive right now. The next tablet target for us is Windows Pro tablets due to the customer profile we support. We see some pressure from the market to support Android, and due to the fragmentation of the platform, I have said that we currently have no plans to support Android. In short, I expect that I'm the type of Apple supporter that you guys love to hate.

Why am I telling you this? I thought this background might be useful when passing along my thoughts re the Moto X. It is the first Android phone that I find tempting. I buy Mobile Devices for the experience not specs, and Moto has shown the courage to sacrifice some of the spec game for stuff that actually matters like battery life. Their multi-processor architecture seems very smart to me, especially if the promise of longer life is achieved. And that architecture allows the phone to listen all day for voice input. I find that feature appealing, because it can potentially deliver real convenience that I can use. Active Display also sounds great.

So Moto seems to have put some real thought and intelligence into the design of this device. I see a lot of complaining about the specs, but for most of the world, specs just don't matter any more. But battery life sure does. I am quite interested going forward to see how much of the Moto X promise is delivered in actual use.

So overall, I think Motorola deserves a lot of credit for forging their own path here.

 

[ultravisitor]

So Moto seems to have put some real thought and intelligence into the design of this device. I see a lot of complaining about the specs, but for most of the world, specs just don't matter any more. But battery life sure does. I am quite interested going forward to see how much of the Moto X promise is delivered in actual use.

So overall, I think Motorola deserves a lot of credit for forging their own path here.

Thank you. That's what some of us are trying to say.

 

[Paisley]

It is the first Android phone that I find tempting.

2nd. I have been waiting for a phone that i would switch to Android for and it is finally here, i was actually staying on webos! That's how much i was so unmoved by the "powerhouse" (oh, great, woopie do) phones on the market. A few days ago i was in Sprint, desperate to find a great non-ginormo fast phone with few android o/s issues, the s4 came the closest but i just couldn't do it. Plus the guy mentioned his need to do a reset 3x+ a month. Nothing drives me crazier (other than ackwardly placed buttons, hey htc, i'm lookin' at you!) than that. I left disappointed. That night i came home and saw the Moto X online. BAM. Done. Waiting for this to get into a store. Does it "blow the competition away", no, is it an awesome phone? Sure seems like it!

 

[dcjose48]

Specs isn't everything, and better specs on paper doesn't translate into making a phone better than next one. People are getting caught up by the numbers....720p, 1080p, quad-core, octa-core, etc etc. What is becoming a common "need" for everyday usage out of our phones? Battery life! Yeah you can increase the battery size and all, but increase screen real estate and resolution on top of increasing power of the chips is cancelling it out. A device that fits your hands, a resolution of 1080 is ridiculous and the human eye can't decipher the pixels. Good example of this Apple and it's iphone.....every Android phone is always compared to the iphone. Apple does a great job in fine tuning and optimizing their screen color reproduction so it's a "natural" look. And as far as having the latest and greatest chip, not going to talk about it because nothing out are talking full advantage of all 4 cpu chips.

So to say competitors will blow the Moto X away for less money is false. If we go by benchmark numbers, which everyone does, these "high-end" phones with a quad-core and 1080p screens are barely registering over 20k on AnTuTu (SGS4, One, G Pro). The Xperia Z is at or slightly under 20k. The Moto X...with its so-called "midrange" specs of a 720p screen and a dual-core is around 18-19k. How about benchmarks for GPU? Moto X shares the ssame Adreno 320 to its competitors and wins out. So it the X mid-range or high-end? IMO it sits in between...but closer to high-end than at mid-range. I think it was a let down for people because of the pricing. But if many of you recall, Google repeatedly said they weren't going to give Motorola any special treatment. I feel they overlooked the development, but it was all Motorola in handling the business side with carriers. I expected the X to go for $99 on-contract....but if you're with AT&T, you can do the trade-in program and get the X for under $100 or free!

I couldn't have said it better myself.

Posted via Android Central App

 

[eyesopen1111]

There is so much support for the MotoX's design choice of lower resolution based on the hope of better battery life that I have to ask: what is going on? Do you really need to permanently compromise your device's display for better battery life?

This is mystifying me. I have a mass market HTC One that makes it through the day on a charge under moderate to heavy use. I'm on XDA, this forum, and others and battery life just isn't a big topic. No one complains that life would be better if we marched back the resolution to improve battery life. Do people say that on GS4 threads? It's weird. Where else is this conversation happening?

Now I've seen kernel devs trying to maximize battery life and performance trade offs to get multiple day uses out of a single charge, but that's not what you guys seem to be talking about. You seem to be describing a more severe battery constraint that makes you thrilled to see an OEM who will (finally? bravely? innovatively?) compromise a device display in name of battery life. Huh? WTH?

Also, I saw mention of Antutu benchmarks in this thread and, while I'm not a big follower of those, I can tell you that the HTC One threads are reporting more in the 25,000 to 26,000+ range, not as I saw here in the low 20's. I'm not sure what the GS4s are getting, but I'd think that they'd do as well or better than the Ones are doing.

As for form factor, I like single handed use, too. I totally get that as a big benefit if the current flagships are too big for your hands. I happen to be a guy whose hands are big enough to single hand the One, but I didn't consider the phablets because of this reason. Most compact phones are compromised in some way (as are normal phones when compared to phablets), so this I understand. I suppose the only question is whether the size difference between the MotoX and other flagships is the difference for a particular individual.








Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4

 

[JHBThree]

There is so much support for the MotoX's design choice of lower resolution based on the hope of better battery life that I have to ask: what is going on? Do you really need to permanently compromise your device's display for better battery life?

This is mystifying me. I have a mass market HTC One that makes it through the day on a charge under moderate to heavy use. I'm on XDA, this forum, and others and battery life just isn't a big topic. No one complains that life would be better if we marched back the resolution to improve battery life. Do people say that on GS4 threads? It's weird. Where else is this conversation happening?

Cost/benefit analysis. The benefits of a 1080p screen are not worth the tradeoffs in battery life and performance. Manufacturers like Samsung and HTC don't include quad core processors on their recent devices because they want to, they do it because they HAVE to in order to power their screens. And yet, because of those things, the devices end up being slower to the user than a phone with a dual core processor and slightly lower resolution screen.

Now I've seen kernel devs trying to maximize battery life and performance trade offs to get multiple day uses out of a single charge, but that's not what you guys seem to be talking about. You seem to be describing a more severe battery constraint that makes you thrilled to see an OEM who will (finally? bravely? innovatively?) compromise a device display in name of battery life. Huh? WTH?

More like: they care about a manufacturer that is putting the EXPERIENCE above a meaningless spec war. A manufacturer that saw the BS going on, and decided they were going to go another way.

Also, I saw mention of Antutu benchmarks in this thread and, while I'm not a big follower of those, I can tell you that the HTC One threads are reporting more in the 25,000 to 26,000+ range, not as I saw here in the low 20's. I'm not sure what the GS4s are getting, but I'd think that they'd do as well or better than the Ones are doing.

Not relevant. If some users here are reporting lower scores, then that's what their experience is.

As for form factor, I like single handed use, too. I totally get that as a big benefit if the current flagships are too big for your hands. I happen to be a guy whose hands are big enough to single hand the One, but I didn't consider the phablets because of this reason. Most compact phones are compromised in some way (as are normal phones when compared to phablets), so this I understand. I suppose the only question is whether the size difference between the MotoX and other flagships is the difference for a particular individual.


Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4

Except this phone isn't compromised.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4

 

[eyesopen1111]

Cost/benefit analysis. The benefits of a 1080p screen are not worth the tradeoffs in battery life and performance...

All evidence is to the contrary. The top Android phones are both 1080p devices with the battery sizes we all know about. If what you wrote were true, you'd expect that buyers would avoid these phones in favor of other 720p devices allegedly better on battery. They don't. They buy 1080p by the millions, demonstrating their actual preference for the highest quality screen. If the MotoX causes a general pull back of the 5 inch 1080p screen, I'll admit you were on to something and eat crow. Of course, if it doesn't, I'll suppose you'll eat crow. I'm happy with my side of the bet, if you're happy with yours.

More like: they care about a manufacturer that is putting the EXPERIENCE above a meaningless spec war. A manufacturer that saw the BS going on, and decided they were going to go another way.

I would agree with you if I thought that it were true that 720p = 1080p. But I don't. Consequently, this spec delta is NOT meaningless in any sense. There is nothing "BS" about an OEM making and marketing a better quality screen or a consumer buying one. People like better screens precisely because smartphone display quality improves their EXPERIENCE. It's one thing to say that second rate meets your needs; that's personal choice. But it is quite another thing to say that second rate is just as good as first rate, which is objectively false and contrary to the facts being proven daily in the marketplace.

Not relevant. If some users here are reporting lower scores, then that's what their experience is.

The earlier post materially misrepresented the Antutu score, which was cited as evidence supporting the performance claim. Rebutting that misrepresentation is actually DIRECTLY relevant. The thread deserves the truth.

Except this phone isn't compromised.

I think that Motorola disagrees with you, as their entire marketing campaign is designed to convince prospective buyers that the compromises which were made on the MotoX shouldn't stop consumers from considering the phone. If it were the uncompromised best product, no such messaging would be needed.

Strictly speaking, I do not dispute Motorola's position. I do, however, dispute the claim of its being uncompromised. Perhaps we could agree that Motorola compromised aspects of the phone by design? They seem to admit this, after all.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4

 

[JHBThree]

All evidence is to the contrary. The top Android phones are both 1080p devices with the battery sizes we all know about. If what you wrote were true, you'd expect that buyers would avoid these phones in favor of other 720p devices allegedly better on battery. They don't. They buy 1080p by the millions, demonstrating their actual preference for the highest quality screen. If the MotoX causes a general pull back of the 5 inch 1080p screen, I'll admit you were on to something and eat crow. Of course, if it doesn't, I'll suppose you'll eat crow. I'm happy with my side of the bet, if you're happy with yours.

You ignored what was actually posted.

The costs of a 1080p screen outweigh the benefits. You cite battery size in your response, but totally ignore that the one and s4 both have larger batteries than the X, but have significantly (as in 50%) less battery life. As stated below, most people cannot tell the difference between 1080p and 720p. Anyone that tries to argue otherwise is trying to argue against science.

I would agree with you if I thought that it were true that 720p = 1080p. But I don't. Consequently, this spec delta is NOT meaningless in any sense. There is nothing "BS" about an OEM making and marketing a better quality screen or a consumer buying one. People like better screens precisely because smartphone display quality improves their EXPERIENCE. It's one thing to say that second rate meets your needs; that's personal choice. But it is quite another thing to say that second rate is just as good as first rate, which is objectively false and contrary to the facts being proven daily in the marketplace.

Except the majority of the population cannot see the difference between the two. 1080p is not objectively better, especially when you consider the human eye cannot perceive any difference between 1080p and 720p beyond a certain point. That isn't just conjecture, by the way, it's a proven fact. The return a manufacturer gets from including a 1080p screen is not worth the tradeoffs.

The earlier post materially misrepresented the Antutu score, which was cited as evidence supporting the performance claim. Rebutting that misrepresentation is actually DIRECTLY relevant. The thread deserves the truth.

Uh, no. Citing an antutu score from a device is not misleading. Scores vary, as you should know, so the scores you cite are no more valid than the scores cited in this thread.

I think that Motorola disagrees with you, as their entire marketing campaign is designed to convince prospective buyers that the compromises which were made on the MotoX shouldn't stop consumers from considering the phone. If it were the uncompromised best product, no such messaging would be needed.

Strictly speaking, I do not dispute Motorola's position. I do, however, dispute the claim of its being uncompromised. Perhaps we could agree that Motorola compromised aspects of the phone by design? They seem to admit this, after all.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4

Yeah, you're not actually paying attention. Motorola does not acknowledge any compromises at all. Selling features of the phone is not an acknowledgement of any compromises.



Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4

 

[JungleLarry]

All evidence is to the contrary. The top Android phones are both 1080p devices with the battery sizes we all know about. If what you wrote were true, you'd expect that buyers would avoid these phones in favor of other 720p devices allegedly better on battery. They don't. They buy 1080p by the millions, demonstrating their actual preference for the highest quality screen. If the MotoX causes a general pull back of the 5 inch 1080p screen, I'll admit you were on to something and eat crow. Of course, if it doesn't, I'll suppose you'll eat crow. I'm happy with my side of the bet, if you're happy with yours.

I'm not understanding your position. You keep referencing the 720p screen resolution and how it's supposedly a breaking point for the Moto X, but you've also admitted that you've donated to the Ubuntu Edge project and it's the only 720p phone you'll consider.

Moto X - 4.7" (4.5" usable) screen, 720p
Ubuntu Edge - 4.5" screen, 720p

WHAT HAS UBUNTU DONE? SHOT THEMSELVES IN THE FOOT, I GUESS.

This is a simple case of marginal costs vs marginal benefits. On a smaller (read: sub 5" display), both Motorola and Ubuntu clearly feel that the AVERAGE USER won't benefit from the increased pixel density of a 1080p display at a higher price point. Feel free to take your microscope and show us how much huger the pixels are on the Moto X than the HTC One, and omgomg I don't think I'll ever recover from this tragedy.

I sincerely hope production of the Ubuntu Edge is successful and your eyes explode from the pain of gazing upon a sub-standard, 720p display.

 

[Lstream]

I think some great points are made in this article. By focusing on simplistic CPU specs, I think many are missing the point of the X8 Architecture. The more I learn about this device, the more I impressed with the engineering that went into it.

The Moto X represents the future of everything - Computerworld

 

[SteelGator]

I think some great points are made in this article. By focusing on simplistic CPU specs, I think many are missing the point of the X8 Architecture. The more I learn about this device, the more I impressed with the engineering that went into it.

The Moto X represents the future of everything - Computerworld

+1
I cannot wait to get my hands on one of these phones. I think this article is right on the mark. It is one of those innovations that seems incremental at the time, but may be a tipping point in where the market will go.

 

[eyesopen1111]

You ignored what was actually posted.The costs of a 1080p screen outweigh the benefits.

I'm not ignoring you; I'm listening to you.

Listen, my point is simply that the two top Android handsets both sport 1080p screens, so saying that this spec is somehow lacking from a cost-benefit perspective is nonsense.

Remember, phones like the One and GS4 are competing against 720p devices in an intensely competitive market everyday, so the fact that 1080p is dominating proves that cost-benefit favors 1080p. It is betting against 1080p that's risky in this market. This is simple marketplace math and there should be no disagreement on this point. I'm puzzled as to how or why you dispute the results being obtained by the top Android sellers' 1080p devices.

On science. You seem to claim that customers' paying for 1080p is a hysteria, since you claim they cannot tell any difference in display quality between 1080p and 720p. I would strongly disagree.

Try this: Navigate to the same page or movie on both an HTC One and the 720p screen of your choice and survey people by asking, "Which one looks better?" The answers will surprise no one. Nor should they. Apparently, the answers will surprise you when they are able to tell the difference. Shocker! People can tell the difference between first rate and second rate displays. They can also tell the difference between first class and coach on an airplane, though a person can be happy flying in either.

Look, it's not just me. Several tech sites, tech writers, etc have noted that Motorola is trying to refocus the marketing debate surrounding the MotoX away from specs. I thought this was common knowledge. Apparently not. If you doubt this, I can supply links upon links.

Perhaps people will be willing to trade a second rate display for voice activation and allegedly better battery life. We'll see. But make no mistake, that is the deal Motorola is offering with the MotoX.

BTW, trying to dress up the phone in colors/back casing to add value is exactly what Nokia did with their underspec'd Lumia line and what Jolla is doing with the Sailfish phone. If you can't add steak, add sizzle.


Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4

 

[Aquila]

Except the majority of the population cannot see the difference between the two. 1080p is not objectively better, especially when you consider the human eye cannot perceive any difference between 1080p and 720p beyond a certain point. That isn't just conjecture, by the way, it's a proven fact. The return a manufacturer gets from including a 1080p screen is not worth the tradeoffs.

Of the top 5 smartphones out, 3 are 1080p and 2 are not. If this is considered top 5 it'll either stay 3-2 or move to 2-3, depending on what gets bumped off of the list. Clearly that one spec is not what makes or breaks a top device.