08-23-2013 09:39 AM
153 1234 ...
tools
  1. vjynn's Avatar
    With all that's (mostly) been revealed about the Moto X thus far, is it something you would want to pick up, or is there something it's missing that's really important to you?
    I was really excited about the Moto X but ultimately decided to hold off due not so much to one thing but instead to what I think is a more promising phone overall. I decided to go for the Ubuntu Edge after seeing the specs and reading about its capabilities overall:

    first off, it can dual-boot Android & Ubuntu
    4.5" screen with sapphire crystal display
    4GB RAM
    fastest CPU
    Dual LTE
    I really like that I can run a full Desktop with the phone as well.
    I like the design of the phone: little smaller than 4.7", power button is NOT on the side, speakers are not on the back, 3.5mm is on the bottom (not the top), etc.
    And the Ubuntu Touch software looks like it is going to make operating the phone super efficient.

    Basically, I like what I'm seeing from Ubuntu more than what I'm seeing from Android. So I don't want to invest in an Android Phone right now. But if I was going to invest in Android, I'd go Moto X.
    07-22-2013 01:30 PM
  2. cgardnervt's Avatar
    Now that the specs are known...why are you on this forum? If the price is announced at $699 you'd never see me post here again. I wouldn't spend my day repeating myself over and over to people who have different desires in a phone...
    Because we have no official word. Plus this is a public forum to talk about opinions. Like any other forums.

    Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2
    07-22-2013 02:28 PM
  3. Slusho64's Avatar
    I've been excited for this phone because of the rumors of battery life and durability, so if they didn't deliver those I might consider other phones. The problem is that the GS4 is huge and the HTC One's camera is meh, and both use physical/capacitive buttons, so they're different than the total Google experience (I would definitely flash the GE ROM on those phones, otherwise I wouldn't even consider them due to the long development periods of custom ROMs). As for the Nexus 4, it's got a glass back so it's really fragile. I might have waited for the Nexus 5 if the Moto X turned out sub-par, but my GS2 has to be underclocked to 800 MHz or it crashes. But I really don't see the Moto X being a disappointment unless you care more about specs than real-world performance. Besides, if rather give money to a company that I like what they're doing than one I don't (looking at you Samsung).
    07-22-2013 02:44 PM
  4. mountainman's Avatar
    The Droid Ultra Maxx might keep me from getting the Moto X.
    07-22-2013 03:11 PM
  5. ChuckG73's Avatar
    I was really excited about the Moto X but ultimately decided to hold off due not so much to one thing but instead to what I think is a more promising phone overall. I decided to go for the Ubuntu Edge after seeing the specs and reading about its capabilities overall:

    first off, it can dual-boot Android & Ubuntu
    4.5" screen with sapphire crystal display
    4GB RAM
    fastest CPU
    Dual LTE
    I really like that I can run a full Desktop with the phone as well.
    I like the design of the phone: little smaller than 4.7", power button is NOT on the side, speakers are not on the back, 3.5mm is on the bottom (not the top), etc.
    And the Ubuntu Touch software looks like it is going to make operating the phone super efficient.

    Basically, I like what I'm seeing from Ubuntu more than what I'm seeing from Android. So I don't want to invest in an Android Phone right now. But if I was going to invest in Android, I'd go Moto X.
    Depends on the price of the Moto X. I have committed 600 for the Edge, but would drop 300 for the Moto X to hold me over until May.
    07-22-2013 03:30 PM
  6. philly's Avatar
    moto x with current specs should be $400 retail. if they had a supercharged version with an s800+better screen for $600 id jump all over it.
    07-22-2013 04:17 PM
  7. jbruha's Avatar
    In my mind I would find it as STILL a mid level device for a few reasons.

    1) CPU speeds do matter on some apps. Games, mostly but I think we will see this more and more on some of the utility apps that are out there. Is this a silly way of thinking right now? Of course but I'm thinking years down the road for someone who wants a device for a year or so. Also not having a 1080 screen is just lame and there is no reason for this. Everyone wants a great screen! I mean lets be honest its one part of the phone we use the most.

    2) Resell value is also important to me. Trying to sell a device at the mid level is a lot harder. Because of the features are awesome other OEM's will follow suit and use them in the higher tier devices within the next year would by my guess. So the phone features may not be a selling feature anymore to a stock user.

    3) 5 inch phone is NOT important to me personally. So I will not comment much here. BUT I will say its an important selling point to most Android users. Why? I don't know.

    But just like you guys I am simply second guessing my self right now. I can be wrong and I might eat these words in a few weeks. However its my current opinion and I will stand by it until then! In fact I'm hoping I'm wrong and they beef up them specs some. I'm not interested in buying a S3 level phone....Even though its a little bit better and better optimized I'm sure.
    Per your points, I totally get wanting to future-proof yourself. For the processor, I would dissent that having a balanced chipset that can still deliver battery life and performance is more important for future-proofing than to shoot for top tier speeds. In this regard, RAM is a more critical element to the overall speed. There is a very good reason to not have a 1080p screen and that reason is battery life. You said yourself you don't want a 5" screen, so why would you want to cram a 1080p screen into a smaller area at the expense of battery life? It'll still look great and the battery benefits would outweigh any perceived difference in sharpness.

    As for resale value, Android falls quickly no matter what you do. You'll always be taking a loss when trying to resell an Android phone. The only way to minimize the impact is to lower your upfront cost, and that's exactly what Motorola's most likely doing.

    If it helps you understand better, even with only the leaked specs, the Moto X is NOT an S3 level phone. Even just analyzing the specs, the Moto X has a higher clock speed, better GPU, and won't be running a heavily modified version of Android with TouchWiz. In fact, if you compare just the specs to other "midrange" devices that are either out or coming soon, the Moto X is sitting higher than all of them.
    07-22-2013 07:01 PM
  8. jbruha's Avatar
    1.OS Lag
    2.Battery life not on par with the Galaxy Note 1
    3. Slow os updates
    4. Size phone must be smaller than my S3 and no thicker than a N4.

    If phone has any of these issues then I will gave to pass until I see the next nexus phone.


    Sent from my SGH-T999 using AC Forums mobile app
    I'm concerned about lag too, but not due to the internals of this phone. 4.2.2 has wreaked havoc on devices that have received it as an update and it seems it's still not quite finished.

    Battery life will be questionable. My RAZR MAXX HD didn't deliver amazing battery life because of solely how big the battery was, but for how well the CPU slept when the screen was off. The Moto X has to do this and then some.

    Updates will be a non-issue. Even the aforementioned RAZR MAXX HD got updates pretty fast and Dennis Woodside said the Moto X would receive them quickly too, like the GE devices.

    If you check around, the size of this phone will fit right into your dimensions. It's only a little bit smaller than a Galaxy Nexus.
    07-22-2013 07:10 PM
  9. jbruha's Avatar
    There are 2 things that will have me not purchase a Moto X:

    1) Camera. If the camera is ****, I won't purchase it. The camera needs to be on par with what is on the market already - don't care about the price point. If this is to be my "everyday" camera, it needs to be decent in low light conditions.

    2) Relative performance. If it greatly underperforms the HTC-One Mini or the S4 Mini I will just get one of those as I know they (should) run stock Android and that they should have good performance.
    If you're comparing it to the One Mini or SIV Mini, I wouldn't be worried. Even on paper, the Moto X is ahead. We'll have some more benchmarks next week to confirm that further.
    07-22-2013 07:20 PM
  10. dkhmwilliams's Avatar
    I think the phone definitely looks great from the photos I've seen. I wouldn't imagine that the phone wouldn't run smoothly if advertised a as the next big thing from Google and Motorola. I would wonder if it will implement Google Wallet. I also am curious about the price. If the price is around that of the Nexus or lower, it should be a good buy.

    Sent from my Nexus 7
    07-22-2013 07:21 PM
  11. bunique4life05's Avatar
    I'm concerned about lag too, but not due to the internals of this phone. 4.2.2 has wreaked havoc on devices that have received it as an update and it seems it's still not quite finished.

    Battery life will be questionable. My RAZR MAXX HD didn't deliver amazing battery life because of solely how big the battery was, but for how well the CPU slept when the screen was off. The Moto X has to do this and then some.

    Updates will be a non-issue. Even the aforementioned RAZR MAXX HD got updates pretty fast and Dennis Woodside said the Moto X would receive them quickly too, like the GE devices.

    If you check around, the size of this phone will fit right into your dimensions. It's only a little bit smaller than a Galaxy Nexus.
    Devices that have had issue with stock android were mostly OEM UI or hardware not coded correctly with stock android.

    Motorola is a "Google Company " so software should be solid regardless of internals.

    Sent from my SGH-T999 using AC Forums mobile app
    07-22-2013 08:12 PM
  12. tdizzel's Avatar
    Specs don't mean a damn thing as long as it lasts all day and runs smooth. The only way I don't buy this phone is if it doesn't come to Verizon or if it's priced ridiculously.
    neonworm, jdbii, JFH8 and 1 others like this.
    07-22-2013 09:00 PM
  13. ultravisitor's Avatar
    Due to my experience with my Galaxy Nexus so far, I'm mainly concerned with battery life. Still, I don't think there's one thing that will keep me from buying my next phone. I have to consider a combination of factors when looking at my next phone, and I'm currently looking at either an Ultra/Maxx or a Moto X. I need to see what kinds of trade offs I'll be making by choosing either phone. Hell, I may even decide on a GS4 or a One, though that's not too likely as I really have been wanting a Motorola for my next device.
    07-22-2013 11:38 PM
  14. karsdroid's Avatar
    Big No for me.....
    No removable battery......
    No sd card slot.....
    No sale!

    Besides I've been completely spoiled by the incredible battery life of my Note 2, awesome large screen, and its the absolute most trouble free, smoothest running phone I've ever had!!
    07-23-2013 01:24 AM
  15. TheLibertarian's Avatar
    What would stop me? My Nexus 4.

    But I genuinely cannot wait for the 1st!
    07-23-2013 02:01 AM
  16. Sizzers's Avatar
    I'm not too keen on the curved back and the lack of a MicroSD is a little bit of a concern, but the main thing would be build quality.

    I buy all my phones SIM free so this is very important to me, but if it can at least match the build quality of my XT890 then I would be very happy.
    07-23-2013 02:42 AM
  17. Roundpotato's Avatar
    -Weak processor.
    -Non-1080p screen.
    -Too thick (If it doesn't have Maxx battery life).
    -No multi-window (Ala Samsung) feature or indication that stock Android will implement this soon.

    Software optimization only applies to its weak processor, but software optimization is greatly overrated, and demonstrably so. Having used multiple generations of Nexus devices and skinned devices, I can conclude that while there may be some slight performance edge (Much slighter than people wish to admit) in favor of stock devices in comparison to skinned devices of the same generation, the truly determining factor of performance is hardware. For example, the performance difference between the Galaxy Nexus and the Nexus 4 is greater than the performance difference between the Nexus 4 and the Droid DNA. The Nexus 4 is faster than the Droid DNA which is faster than the Galaxy Nexus, and the DNA has a 1080p screen at that.

    So if this claim people wish to make is true, that the Moto X, which is perhaps two processor generations behind the curb, can through software optimization alone supersede the speed of a skinned top tier phone, then without question the Galaxy Nexus should be faster than the Droid DNA, given that the Galaxy Nexus is closer in generation to the Droid DNA than the Moto X will be to something such as the Galaxy S4, and given that the Galaxy Nexus is a more truly stock device than the Moto X. But alas, this is not the case to be found, and we may thus conclude through rational study of the empirical data that the Moto X will be slower than the giants its proponents wish to send it to battle against.

    Also, the Nexus One didn't even make it to 4.0 and it came out with bleeding edge specs (Another testament to the power of specs against optimization), so good luck with your updates.

    And I wonder how they'd even be able to hit a mid-range price point by building it in the US, if not from Google subsidizing it. It would be quite a laugh to see people defending it if it ends up being $600.
    07-23-2013 04:34 AM
  18. karn101's Avatar
    -Weak processor.
    -Non-1080p screen.
    -Too thick (If it doesn't have Maxx battery life).
    -No multi-window (Ala Samsung) feature or indication that stock Android will implement this soon.

    Software optimization only applies to its weak processor, but software optimization is greatly overrated, and demonstrably so. Having used multiple generations of Nexus devices and skinned devices, I can conclude that while there may be some slight performance edge (Much slighter than people wish to admit) in favor of stock devices in comparison to skinned devices of the same generation, the truly determining factor of performance is hardware. For example, the performance difference between the Galaxy Nexus and the Nexus 4 is greater than the performance difference between the Nexus 4 and the Droid DNA. The Nexus 4 is faster than the Droid DNA which is faster than the Galaxy Nexus, and the DNA has a 1080p screen at that.

    So if this claim people wish to make is true, that the Moto X, which is perhaps two processor generations behind the curb, can through software optimization alone supersede the speed of a skinned top tier phone, then without question the Galaxy Nexus should be faster than the Droid DNA, given that the Galaxy Nexus is closer in generation to the Droid DNA than the Moto X will be to something such as the Galaxy S4, and given that the Galaxy Nexus is a more truly stock device than the Moto X. But alas, this is not the case to be found, and we may thus conclude through rational study of the empirical data that the Moto X will be slower than the giants its proponents wish to sent it to battle against.

    Also, the Nexus One didn't even make it to 4.0 and it came out with bleeding edge specs (Another testament to the power of specs against optimization), so good luck with your updates.

    And I wonder how they'd even be able to hit a mid-range price point by building it in the US, if not from Google subsidizing it. It would be quite a laugh to see people defending it if it ends up being $600.
    How do you know the processor is weak? Proof? This happens to be a new-to-the-public processor and may just be a dual-core variant of the S600, rather than the dual cores of two years ago. Also, those leaked benchmarks have placed it with better results than the Nexus 4, so could you please point to a reference to prove your point?

    Also, your logic of the Galaxy Nexus being faster than the Droid DNA is flawed, being that the Nexus 4 is closer in generation and should be used as a reference point, not the GNEX.

    Where is the empirical data? How do you know the target audience that Motorola/Google are targeting with this phone?

    And your comment about the Nexus One is also lost without a comparison - have any phones of that generation also been updated to 4.0?

    If it's $600, then I doubt any one would buy it. So I'd laugh with you, but we wouldn't have much to laugh at.

    Basically, I think we should all just wait and see. Peace, love, and happiness.
    TheLibertarian and JFH8 like this.
    07-23-2013 05:06 AM
  19. RenoD2010's Avatar
    A large, angry gorilla.

    Sent from my LG-E970 using AC Forums mobile app
    Rizz1-2 likes this.
    07-23-2013 05:43 AM
  20. Roundpotato's Avatar
    How do you know the processor is weak? Proof? This happens to be a new-to-the-public processor and may just be a dual-core variant of the S600, rather than the dual cores of two years ago. Also, those leaked benchmarks have placed it with better results than the Nexus 4, so could you please point to a reference to prove your point?
    It's dual core and it's rumored to be mid-range; that's all that unbiased and reasonable people will need to know it's weak.

    Given the benchmark data it is likely the S400, and also given the benchmark data, though its score is slightly higher than the average Nexus 4, it is still within the class of a Nexus 4, making it one generation of power behind, which is equally compatible with the argument I made.

    Also, your logic of the Galaxy Nexus being faster than the Droid DNA is flawed, being that the Nexus 4 is closer in generation and should be used as a reference point, not the GNEX.
    Your claim of my logic being flawed is merely a non-comprehension of my argument. The reason that I do not use the Nexus 4 as my reference point is that I do not own any current generation devices of which to compare it to. But of course, this has little baring on my argument as I am making a general comparison of generational leaps of performance. You mistake having flawed logic with having non-ideal circumstances. The logic stands.

    Where is the empirical data?
    Empirical data is data born from experience and observation, so as to where the empirical data is, it's right before your eyes, in my post that states my experience and observations.

    How do you know the target audience that Motorola/Google are targeting with this phone?
    I imagine they're targeting those who buy mid-range phones. I never made any claims about their target audience. I was only responding to the OP's request, which was to state the reason(s) why I personally wouldn't get this phone.

    And your comment about the Nexus One is also lost without a comparison - have any phones of that generation also been updated to 4.0?
    My comment about the Nexus One doesn't require comparison, as the Nexus One was the ideal update device, being bleeding edge and ordained by Google itself, and it didn't even make it 2 years before being cut off. That is all one needs to know to understand the fate of the Moto X in comparison.

    If it's $600, then I doubt any one would buy it. So I'd laugh with you, but we wouldn't have much to laugh at.
    Oh I think there would be much and many to laugh at, but we shall see.

    Basically, I think we should all just wait and see. Peace, love, and happiness.
    There will be no peace nor love nor happiness, not until I find a proper phone to update to, which at this point will likely be the Galaxy Note 3, much to my detest at its disgusting and offensive aesthetic hardware and software design.
    07-23-2013 06:16 AM
  21. Rule9's Avatar
    Serious courtroom melodrama over a smartphone guys, way to turn a forum thread into a trial.
    07-23-2013 06:44 AM
  22. Aquila's Avatar
    Is the argument that the Nexus One wasn't upgraded enough?

    The Nexus One launched with Eclair and was upgraded to Froyo and Gingerbread officially. Additionally, being that it is a developer phone, it's not hard to find ICS or JB ROMs for it. Either way, getting two full generations of upgrades from your device is generally viewed as acceptable in terms of software obsolescence. It 6 had API level increases (started on 5, officially ended on 10, dev community has it on 17)

    If the Moto X launches with JB, gets KLP and gets whatever 'L' is at the end of 2014 (assuming that update would happen in early 2015) then you have 18 months of updates, and I think that most people would be happy, on an inexpensive device such as this, to have it be fresh for an average upgrade cycle.

    If we want to compare it to the Galaxy Nexus, it started on API level 14 ICS and will be on API level 18 4.3 in a couple of weeks, API level 19 by Christmas and I think it, the Nexus 4, 7 and 10 are probably the most valid comparisons to Google's thoughts on software obsolescence relative to upgrade cycles as contrasted with Motorola's previously independent practices.
    Rizz1-2, JFH8 and bunique4life05 like this.
    07-23-2013 06:50 AM
  23. drhill's Avatar
    I'd still curious to know, outside of games (and even then...), what apps people are running that peg two cores at 100% with more than two active threads?
    07-23-2013 07:16 AM
  24. NoYankees44's Avatar
    Locked bootloader.

    No available fully stock android/cm variant. (dev version acceptable as long as it is fully working and no serious radio hacks)

    It have the rumored specs and features, but not the rumored low price. Why would I pay the same for this as something with better hardware and features?

    No off contract reasonably priced Verizon version.

    No software features that are actually new and different and show some sort of intelligent effort. I am sorry but you can't give me cheap hardware for a cheap price and automatically sell me. You need to show me that you thought out this device and are going to give me lasting value. (The voice control I will wait to see before I judge, but it's not looking good)

    Sent from my SCH-I535
    07-23-2013 08:04 AM
  25. Woosh's Avatar
    If it doesn't run T-Mo 4G then I might not buy it. If its priced too high then I might not buy it. I'd prefer wireless charging and IR blaster but I don't think those are deal breakers unless something better came out before I end up grabbing the Moto X.
    07-23-2013 08:09 AM
153 1234 ...

Similar Threads

  1. Is the S4 an improvement over a Galaxy Nexus?
    By droidRama in forum Samsung Galaxy S4
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 07-27-2013, 06:54 AM
  2. What do these do?
    By General Tso in forum Verizon Samsung Galaxy S4
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-23-2013, 11:57 AM
  3. whats that?
    By Bernardo Freitas in forum General Help and How To
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-22-2013, 12:59 AM
  4. What features will make up for the average specs?
    By hodan in forum Moto X (2013)
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-22-2013, 12:53 AM
  5. The ebay Tempered Glass Screen Portector.
    By AKA_Rizzo in forum LG Optimus G Pro
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-21-2013, 10:56 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD