08-06-2013 08:28 PM
94 1234
tools
  1. dcjose48's Avatar
    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
    08-04-2013 12:37 PM
  2. eyesopen1111's Avatar
    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
    08-04-2013 04:27 PM
  3. JHBThree's Avatar
    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
    08-04-2013 05:03 PM
  4. eyesopen1111's Avatar
    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
    08-04-2013 06:08 PM
  5. JHBThree's Avatar
    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
    08-04-2013 06:23 PM
  6. JungleLarry's Avatar
    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.
    08-04-2013 06:52 PM
  7. Lstream's Avatar
    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
    08-04-2013 07:02 PM
  8. SteelGator's Avatar
    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.
    08-04-2013 07:11 PM
  9. eyesopen1111's Avatar
    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
    08-04-2013 07:32 PM
  10. Aquila's Avatar
    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.
    SteelGator likes this.
    08-04-2013 07:40 PM
  11. SteelGator's Avatar
    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.
    I think you have a point with most of your post, but there are a lot of reasons beyond the display that the 1080p devices are winning right now. The two best and newest devices are sporting 1080p displays, but that is confounded by the fact that both the GS4 and the One have several features that are worth plopping money down for beyond the display. It does not logically follow that 1080p is the only way to go because the 2 market leaders have that. It may be true in the end, but correlation does not mean causation.

    It will be interesting to see if the moto gambit pays off. I personally place a higher value battery life, and I think the Active Display may be a killer app. I am willing to give a little on the display for those points. Many others are, many others are not -- that is what is great about Android. We have a choice.
    eyesopen1111 likes this.
    08-04-2013 07:47 PM
  12. eyesopen1111's Avatar
    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.
    Which five Android phones are you referring to? I hope you're not counting the iPhone... Lol!

    Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4
    08-04-2013 07:48 PM
  13. roadkizzle's Avatar
    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 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.

    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.
    I agree with the others. If you'll note that the reason why many of the other phones do not have battery issues is because they are forced to have bigger batteries. This means that the manufacturer must designate more space in their phone for the corresponding bigger battery necessitating a larger phone. Motorola used a 720p screen because they wanted to reduce the resource impacts of the screen and enable an extremely good user experience in a very compact product.

    The benefits of a 1080p screen are negligible. I honestly won't say that there are no differences between 720p and 1080p screens, but I do honestly believe that these differences are so minimal on a day to day basis of using the screens when you aren't minutely comparing two different phones together to determine which is better.
    Your day to day experience of looking at a 1080p 4.7" screen will not be any different from a day to day experience of looking at a 720p 4.7" screen. Again, these differences may be noticeable when looked at side-by-side but individually it won't come into the picture.
    On the other hand, the stuttering of a GPU and CPU trying to push the 2.25x more pixels and overall phone size forced by the additional battery required to power the 2.25x more pixels WILL have a day to day impact on the experience of using your phone.

    I honestly see no compromise from the choices that Motorola made with their phone.

    I also don't see anything about the marketing campaign designed to convince buyers that any "compromises" shouldn't stop consumers from buying the phone.
    The only commercials I've seen showcase the touchless controls and the ability to quickly take pictures. Then both have a unified informing of the customization abilities. Their print marketing also either advertises Touchless Controls, Active Display, or customizeability.

    Nothing that I've seen talks about why their lower resolution screen is beneficial. In fact these discussions have only even been taken into consideration by people on this forum... Especially RoundPotato and you.
    08-04-2013 08:03 PM
  14. roadkizzle's Avatar
    Which five Android phones are you referring to? I hope you're not counting the iPhone... Lol!

    Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4
    PSST. The other poster said "Smartphones". They never said anything about the top 5 Android phones.
    08-04-2013 08:04 PM
  15. JHBThree's Avatar
    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
    Again, you have completely ignored the fact (and it IS a fact) that the majority of the population cannot see the difference between the two screens, and a good 720p screen will be indistinguishable from a 1080p screen for nearly all buyers.

    I'm not sure why you're attempting to disagree with scientific facts concerning visual acuity and the ability to distinguish pixels beyond a certain point. I guess it speaks to how much you want to bash this device.

    Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
    TheLibertarian likes this.
    08-04-2013 08:06 PM
  16. Paisley's Avatar
    this review is pretty interesting. LONG though so i'll give some bullets:

    he doesn't do too much comparison, mostly just talks about the moto after a brief comparison

    It's iPhone vs. s4 vs. moto x (he has all 3 on hand)

    720 noticeable
    moto screen brighter than s4
    Verdict on the screen "I like the moto screen the best, except for the resolution".(seems to prefer the moto screen overall),
    tasks = fast. Does a dual webpage visit "the samsung beat the X by a fraction of a second".
    "video is faster on the X"
    faster to take pictures

    then:
    "find their 24 hour claim to be very accurate"
    "if you were to buy one of the X, One, or s4 today, which would you buy," the guy answers "tough one" (in the end due to driving and wants easy hands free nav. - and the voice thing overall - he chooses X. "In california it's illegal to touch your phone in the car). Also not crazy about the UI on sammy.
    likes the feel of the phone

    can't comment on photos, hasn't done enough tests. (from other comparisons i've seen people do say s4 better pics.

    funny part, someone's asking a question about what do you want eventually from the voice services and he says "i wanna be able to say okay google now bring me a hamburger" and then the phone pipes up and gives him info on hamburgers. lol

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiIm7SXlPoU
    Aquila and eyesopen1111 like this.
    08-04-2013 08:08 PM
  17. roadkizzle's Avatar
    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.
    Why should Motorola be marketing their specs? I'm not saying that because they are better or worse than the other manufacturers rather because the actual specs provide NOTHING to the end user.

    They are telling the customers what actually impacts them. Samsung can take all the time bragging about their huge high resolution screens and quad core processors... But then the users get ahold of the phones and encounter a phone that still stutters, with features that struggle to actually perform.

    Motorola telling the consumers how their new phone will actually make their lives better seems to be a much more helpful marketing strategy to me.
    TheLibertarian and newsman787 like this.
    08-04-2013 08:09 PM
  18. eyesopen1111's Avatar
    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....
    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.
    Thank you for listening/asking! The Ubuntu Edge has other features that I value above screen resolution, like the 4gigs of RAM, the sapphire front "glass", the 128 gigs of storage, the dual boot capabilities, the. . . well you get the idea. So, yes I can compromise on display quality like anyone else can.

    The BIG difference is that I acknowledge that I am compromising on the display spec! I'm not here saying, "720p is just as good." Or "Nobody can tell the difference." That's nonsense. I'm acknowledging the tradeoff.

    The primary difference between this and the tradeoff with the MotoX is that with the MotoX you primarily get only voice activation and allegedly enhanced battery life. Secondarily would be the enhanced lock screen and, for AT&T customers, the glam dressings.

    But you're right: I'm not that hung up on screen if the rest of the offering is hella tight. I'm not sold on MotoX yet, but I could be if the actual device performance WOWs me. Not looking good at the moment though.

    Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4
    08-04-2013 08:10 PM
  19. asanatheist's Avatar
    This is what I expected, good for Moto. Contrary to all the negative comments on the "mediocre & outdated" specs, maybe Moto actually knows what they're doing & their approach will prove innovative after all.

    Sent from my Droid RAZR MAXX using Tapatalk2
    Or more like the people comparing don't know what they're doing. Typical in the mobile segment of "youtube experts".
    1920x1080 renders even if they're upscaled from 720p sources they will still take longer to load than lower resolution renders. This is comparing loading a standard def game versus a high def game. Remember these GPU's don't come with huge on board dedicated ram.

    Anyways I strongly believe this phone will flop, it's marketed for the Average joe yet the press release was private, the phone's key selling feature: customization is exclusive to AT&T, and the software feature they promise (voice commands) are really not big deal maker.

    Part of my job means teaching people how to use mobile devices: Few ever buy devices based on one or two features as silly as quick glance, or as somewhat useful as always ready "voice commands".
    Ignoring marketing (I will say in the smartphone industry, marketing is king).
    A good portion go to the store, look at specs and know 16GB<32GB. Dual Core< Quad core. 720P<1080P. Plastic< Aluminum. And when matching phones, Moto X S4 One and the Iphone 5 are all priced the same or cheaper it is going to lose. These are the ones who have money to blow, and a $200 is not an issue. These "Specs" are things they are more familiar with than "voice commands" since everyone has used a computer before and have seen the jargon already.

    The other portion are those looking for budget phones, from free to $100. Which is a no go for the Moto X.
    I see this for phones, laptops, desktops, and tablets on a daily basis.
    Despite all the marketing the Moto X simply is NOT for the average joe, not with a price tag of $200. Which is a darn shame.
    Remember the average joe simply doesn't understand the benefits of always ready voice commands, or quick glance (which many devices can have with a simple lockscreen widget some out of the box). Some barely know a thing about smartphones how will they know what to expect?
    All they will see is the price, and or the specs.

    A lot of reviewers I think still attach geeks to the stereotypes of the past where buying a smartphone for specs was truly all there was because the experience with android 2.3 and older simply was lacking and everyone's custom android version was unstable.
    This is simply not the case anymore. Most flagship phones will deliver the specs, and experience with no problems. The phone "looking at specs" only is no longer as big of a gamble as it once was. So reviewers? Stop playing the "experience card" and "geek" justification card.

    On a separate note I want to make it clear: I think a price of $200 is a really good price, and I don't think it's expensive by any means. It's assembled in the USA and that is something I strongly support. I think always ready voice commands are also cool. I've always wanted to talk to the computer in the sky.

    Funny but true: see how it takes a geek to understand the value of what Motorola thinks of as "average joe" features?
    eyesopen1111 likes this.
    08-06-2013 12:28 AM
  20. JHBThree's Avatar
    Or more like the people comparing don't know what they're doing. Typical in the mobile segment of "youtube experts".
    1920x1080 renders even if they're upscaled from 720p sources they will still take longer to load than lower resolution renders. This is comparing loading a standard def game versus a high def game. Remember these GPU's don't come with huge on board dedicated ram.

    Anyways I strongly believe this phone will flop, it's marketed for the Average joe yet the press release was private, the phone's key selling feature: customization is exclusive to AT&T, and the software feature they promise (voice commands) are really not big deal maker.

    Part of my job means teaching people how to use mobile devices: Few ever buy devices based on one or two features as silly as quick glance, or as somewhat useful as always ready "voice commands".
    Ignoring marketing (I will say in the smartphone industry, marketing is king).
    A good portion go to the store, look at specs and know 16GB<32GB. Dual Core< Quad core. 720P<1080P. Plastic< Aluminum. And when matching phones, Moto X S4 One and the Iphone 5 are all priced the same or cheaper it is going to lose. These are the ones who have money to blow, and a $200 is not an issue. These "Specs" are things they are more familiar with than "voice commands" since everyone has used a computer before and have seen the jargon already.

    The other portion are those looking for budget phones, from free to $100. Which is a no go for the Moto X.
    I see this for phones, laptops, desktops, and tablets on a daily basis.
    Despite all the marketing the Moto X simply is NOT for the average joe, not with a price tag of $200. Which is a darn shame.
    Remember the average joe simply doesn't understand the benefits of always ready voice commands, or quick glance (which many devices can have with a simple lockscreen widget some out of the box). Some barely know a thing about smartphones how will they know what to expect?
    All they will see is the price, and or the specs.

    A lot of reviewers I think still attach geeks to the stereotypes of the past where buying a smartphone for specs was truly all there was because the experience with android 2.3 and older simply was lacking and everyone's custom android version was unstable.
    This is simply not the case anymore. Most flagship phones will deliver the specs, and experience with no problems. The phone "looking at specs" only is no longer as big of a gamble as it once was. So reviewers? Stop playing the "experience card" and "geek" justification card.

    On a separate note I want to make it clear: I think a price of $200 is a really good price, and I don't think it's expensive by any means. It's assembled in the USA and that is something I strongly support. I think always ready voice commands are also cool. I've always wanted to talk to the computer in the sky.

    Funny but true: see how it takes a geek to understand the value of what Motorola thinks of as "average joe" features?
    Your post is 100% opinion not backed by any facts.

    I think you're underestimating how much research they actually did to arrive at the feature set they did. Features like quick glance and the touch less controls are being advertised so heavily because of that research. That also plays into you not understanding the purpose of things like quick glance.

    These features would not have been Motorola's focus unless they had research to back up their inclusion. That's how Google works.

    Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
    TheLibertarian likes this.
    08-06-2013 01:39 AM
  21. ultravisitor's Avatar
    These features would not have been Motorola's focus unless they had research to back up their inclusion. That's how Google works.
    Yeah, but people seem to not really care about the fact that Google is a hardcore data-driven company and could possibly influence Motorola in that respect. All people think is "OMG NEXUS SELLS FOR CHEEP GOOGLE OWNS MOTO THAT MEANS MOTO PHONES MUST BE CHEEP!11Q!"
    TheLibertarian and Paisley like this.
    08-06-2013 01:44 AM
  22. asanatheist's Avatar
    Your post is 100% opinion not backed by any facts.

    I think you're underestimating how much research they actually did to arrive at the feature set they did. Features like quick glance and the touch less controls are being advertised so heavily because of that research. That also plays into you not understanding the purpose of things like quick glance.

    These features would not have been Motorola's focus unless they had research to back up their inclusion. That's how Google works.

    Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
    Maybe you didn't read in that I teach workers how to use their smartphones and mobile devices? I've been in the tech industry for 6 years now. As in first hand experience I see what they go through everyday. Trust me most of them won't realize they will have such features available in the Moto X unless Motorola runs advertising in the same league as Samsung and Apple which is certainly doable with Google backing them up.
    The average Joe (my students) IS NOT going to sit around researching a phone for weeks on end. They will go to the store, pick out what they like and go home. That's why I said the customization is Moto's biggest selling point and also their worst mistake since they sold that exclusivity to AT&T. The voice commands and quick glances won't be strong enough selling points.
    .
    I stand by my statements: When it comes down to it, it will be a specs war at the store (remember specs are something many average joes are familiar with from their time with PC's. NOT voice commands or quick glances OR it will be a price war. Or both. Remember the voice commands on the Moto X are the same as any other 4.2.2 or newer android OS. The only difference is you can access this phone's voice commands from anywhere by just talking.
    08-06-2013 08:21 AM
  23. eyesopen1111's Avatar
    Again, you have completely ignored the fact (and it IS a fact) that the majority of the population cannot see the difference between the two screens, and a good 720p screen will be indistinguishable from a 1080p screen for nearly all buyers.

    I'm not sure why you're attempting to disagree with scientific facts concerning visual acuity and the ability to distinguish pixels beyond a certain point. I guess it speaks to how much you want to bash this device.

    Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
    Please cite or link the article supporting your position that people can't distinguish a quality difference between 720p and 1080p smartphone displays. I can't find one anywhere. Let's see this proof that common sense, the marketplace, and even other MotoX supporters on this thread openly deny. People may or may not see the pixels, but what's at issue is that they can tell that the 1080 first class screen is superior to the 720p class screen. Honest. Hold the two screens side by side, and I bet you can, too.

    In the spirit of putting up or shutting up, it's only fair that I offer proof of my claims about the Antutu benchmark squabble regarding the HTC One and MotoX. Here are some published facts.

    http://vr-zone.com/articles/moto-x-p...lot/46182.html

    The article notes: "With an AnTuTu score of 18753, though, the Moto X falls short of beating some of the top Android handsets out there (ex. Samsungs GS4s and HTCs Ones score in the high 24000s)."

    See also, http://www.idigitaltimes.com/article...ung-galaxy.htm which also notes the HTC One Antutu score as being in the 24000s.

    Could anyone with a link showing the One with an AnTuTu in the low 20,000's please link? I couldn't find anything like that, and since both these sources were testing stock HTC's, I doubt that significantly lower scores are out there on non tampered devices.

    And I'm still waiting to see how the MotoX battery life performs in a looped - movie battery run-down test. Let's see its actual battery life performance in movie watching or game playing scenarios, not just just checking the time with the new lockscreen. If MotoX's battery life estimates are based on estimated battery savings from using the new lockscreen a lot, then they may be overstated when it comes to calling, video chatting, gaming, browsing, media watching, music playing, and everything else that takes more juice than using your phone as a pocket watch.

    Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4
    08-06-2013 08:23 AM
  24. Rigelian's Avatar
    Here's a link that discusses the ability to distinguish the difference between a 1080p and 720p smartphone screen. The bottom line conclusion is that you can't, at normal viewing distances. http://blogs.tribune.com.pk/story/16...ally-worth-it/

    This becomes a bit more complex when you consider the fact that the Moto X has a non-pentile pixel arrangement and the S4 does.

    Posted via Android Central App
    08-06-2013 09:21 AM
  25. Farish's Avatar
    Please cite or link the article supporting your position that people can't distinguish a quality difference between 720p and 1080p smartphone displays. I can't find one anywhere. Let's see this proof that common sense, the marketplace, and even other MotoX supporters on this thread openly deny. People may or may not see the pixels, but what's at issue is that they can tell that the 1080 first class screen is superior to the 720p class screen. Honest. Hold the two screens side by side, and I bet you can, too.

    In the spirit of putting up or shutting up, it's only fair that I offer proof of my claims about the Antutu benchmark squabble regarding the HTC One and MotoX. Here are some published facts.

    AT&T Moto X phone: decent AnTuTu score, 4.7-inch display, and no SD slot - VR-Zone

    The article notes: "With an AnTuTu score of 18753, though, the Moto X falls short of beating some of the top Android handsets out there (ex. Samsungs GS4s and HTCs Ones score in the high 24000s)."

    See also, LG G2 vs. HTC One vs. Samsung Galaxy S4: LG Flagship Specs Fastest Android Phone According To AnTuTu Benchmark Test [REPORT] - International Digital Times which also notes the HTC One Antutu score as being in the 24000s.

    Could anyone with a link showing the One with an AnTuTu in the low 20,000's please link? I couldn't find anything like that, and since both these sources were testing stock HTC's, I doubt that significantly lower scores are out there on non tampered devices.

    And I'm still waiting to see how the MotoX battery life performs in a looped - movie battery run-down test. Let's see its actual battery life performance in movie watching or game playing scenarios, not just just checking the time with the new lockscreen. If MotoX's battery life estimates are based on estimated battery savings from using the new lockscreen a lot, then they may be overstated when it comes to calling, video chatting, gaming, browsing, media watching, music playing, and everything else that takes more juice than using your phone as a pocket watch.

    Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4
    The article on VR Zone was using the leaked benchmarks, it was written July 22.

    Because of that they could be lower or higher due to the beta environment of it.

    Here is an example of what I mean and also answers your other question.

    Here is the prelimary benchmark of the HTC One from XDA.



    Notice it is a much lower score than you have stated.

    Maybe some benchmark optimizations were added in after the fact.

    The reason why people are using GL 2.7 benchmark is because in the Galaxy S4 cheating scandal, Anandtech came out and stated that version wasn't compromised yet.

    Also just to prove it to you further:
    Here is another benchmark listing for the HTC One that shows 22678.
    HTC One benchmark scores are here, ready to blow your mind - GSMArena Blog

    Since GL 2.7 is not currently known to be compromise it is quite possible that it is accurate.

    It is also very possible that you will use whatever benchmark you feel will make your argument stand better.
    08-06-2013 09:28 AM
94 1234

Similar Threads

  1. Google Maps doesn't remember my recent searches. Why?
    By Calidoc in forum Samsung Galaxy S4
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10-29-2016, 03:35 PM
  2. Chromecast no longer detected by my TV
    By ejtsang in forum Google Chromecast
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 08-24-2016, 11:13 PM
  3. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-02-2013, 05:56 PM
  4. Moto X revealed by Google
    By Fredo_p in forum General News & Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-02-2013, 01:42 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-01-2013, 06:36 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD