Can Moto X save Motorola? Yes!!

[anon(847090)]

There are a lot of negative about Moto X but the problem is all those Negative comes from GEEKS.
This is why Moto X will save Motorola! Watch this video. Please! Watch this video before posting a reply.

Moto X Features: Explained! - YouTube

some negative comments listed below!!

Are you smoking what Google-Motorola smoking....? do you see FAIL!!!
What has Google just done?!?
etc etc......

If you have watched the above video you will understand what Motorola is trying to achieve here?

Yes, most of us here are geeks and we value spec vs price unlike the average consumer who value feature Vs price.

Edit 1:
People complaining about processor. Do you guys even know what natural language processor and contextual processor do??

Contextual processor: The contextual computing processor handles the sensors, display and touch interaction,
but it also appears to function as the primary processor when the phone is in standby mode,
including showing status and notification information on the display.

Natural Language Processor: The natural language processor deals with audio, noise estimation
and noise cancellation;

phones like N4 would use 2 cores for all of the android related task and apps use the same cores too.
The other 2 cores is useless unless some customized Apps/Android use it.

Contextual processor is used in half of what you do with smartphone leaving the other 2 processor cores to apps.

I dont know if people understand this but this is an optimized quad core processor.

 

[B. Diddy]

Wholeheartedly agree. Thanks for the vid link!

 

[Aquila]

I'd also point out that all (as in 100%) of the negatives I've seen listed are preconceptions based on a spec sheet, not speaking to it's importance. If the dual core out performs or performs just as well as the quad core, which one sucks? The screen is indeed not 1080p, but no one is arguing that it needs to be and very few people have actually seen it to decide if it is a nice looking screen or a sub-par one or the best screen they've ever seen. Specs are useful for trying to explain highs and lows in user experience, but they do not tell the full story of a device in any way. It is not over priced nor under spec'd nor 2011 spec'd nor "a huge fail" IF it offers an equal to or superior user experience to the majority of customers who choose it. Throwing specs at a device is not the only way to improve performance, but it is the fastest way to delve deep into your diminishing rates of return on performance.

 

[tdizzel]

Can the Moto X save Motorola? NO!! And this video nails why at about the 5:40 mark. They want to sell it based on features. 99% of people will buy it based on features, and the biggest feature they're emphasizing will not be available to the vast majority of people. How will the phone save Motorola when people walk into their carrier's store, say "hey I wanna buy that phone that I can design myself" and then they end up buying something else when they find out they can't really design the phone themselves?

 

[tdizzel]

I'd also point out that all (as in 100%) of the negatives I've seen listed are preconceptions based on a spec sheet, not speaking to it's importance. If the dual core out performs or performs just as well as the quad core, which one sucks? The screen is indeed not 1080p, but no one is arguing that it needs to be and very few people have actually seen it to decide if it is a nice looking screen or a sub-par one or the best screen they've ever seen. Specs are useful for trying to explain highs and lows in user experience, but they do not tell the full story of a device in any way. It is not over priced nor under spec'd nor 2011 spec'd nor "a huge fail" IF it offers an equal to or superior user experience to the majority of customers who choose it. Throwing specs at a device is not the only way to improve performance, but it is the fastest way to delve deep into your diminishing rates of return on performance.

Then I guess you've only read about 60% of the complaints. Is the spec thing the biggest complaint? absolutely! But people are mentioning lots of other things that they don't like about it.

 

[Aquila]

Then I guess you've only read about 60% of the complaints. Is the spec thing the biggest complaint? absolutely! But people are mentioning lots of other things that they don't like about it.

If you're referring to the carrier exclusives, that's not something wrong with the device, that's something wrong with the availability. And on that, you're 10000% right, having any carrier exclusives is fairly fail and unduly restricts consumer choice. This should have been available through carriers, through moto maker, maybe the play store, carrier unlocked or carrier specific with full customization options available in some way through all channels.

 

[tdizzel]

If you're referring to the carrier exclusives, that's not something wrong with the device, that's something wrong with the availability. And on that, you're 10000% right, having any carrier exclusives is fairly fail and unduly restricts consumer choice. This should have been available through carriers, through moto maker, maybe the play store, carrier unlocked or carrier specific with full customization options available in some way through all channels.

And unfortunately for them they have upset a large portion on the techies with the specs, and they will end up upsetting a large portion of non-techies because of the exclusivity stopping people from getting the most unique feature of the phone. They just flat out screwed this one up.

 

[B. Diddy]

I still do not understand how so many people can pre-judge a device based only on what they've heard or read, and not based on actual experience. Folks, give it a chance. If it really doesn't perform well, then by all means, heap on the criticism. But to make doomsday proclamations based on words is a bit overzealous, in my opinion.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using AC Forums mobile app

 

[TheLibertarian]

Like many nerds here, I was letdown the X phone didn't pack more technology than a NASA rocket. But then I considered how logical it was the create this device.

Know how Apple sells tens of millions of iPhone's? By building a product for consumer masses, not niche groups like us tech junkies.

Why can't this phone be priced like a flagship? Does it not offer its own unique experience and feature set? General consumers won't compare the S4 Pro and S600 processors. Consumers buy into an experience, and that's clearly what Motorola and Google are banking on.

I think this phone is quite well done. It's a device plainly thumbing it's nose at the tech spec war and presenting consumers an alternative way to gage the value of smartphones. Again, I turn to Apple, a company with little interest in spec sheets, but rather created a vast ecosystem that consumers pay top dollar for.

This phone may not be the device we all dreamed up, so you know what? Buy something else. That's the beauty of Android. Maybe we don't believe that nonsense idea about creating a software experience, and maybe we wanted the latest and greatest hardware. And there's nothing wrong with that because unlike Apple, we have choices.

Good day.

 

[mech1164]

And unfortunately for them they have upset a large portion on the techies with the specs, and they will end up upsetting a large portion of non-techies because of the exclusivity stopping people from getting the most unique feature of the phone. They just flat out screwed this one up.

They sure as heck did with this one. Not only that but they knew they would. That's why the did that gawd awful non presentation. They intentionally tried to limited the damage by just doing a closed presser. This way the ones to see it were the ones that had to and not get the immediate blowback from the public. Well sorry Googlrolla, that was a fail to. I get that the unwashed masses will not know what Moto has done here. Though all their tech friends will and WE AREN'T HAPPY! They knew the eagerness of the anticipation was getting to beyond fever pitch. And the silence didn't help squelch the rumors. So in the end they have no one to blame but themselves for what they have wrought. What is sad is it wouldn't have taken much to have changed this. Either price it down with the mid term specs or put a darn S600 in it. If they had used the current cpu make it so it's future proof. IE make it just use 2 cores for now then later in it's time have an OTA that would activate the others. For most they would not have noticed. For the people who are called upon for recommendations it would have made a world of difference. The next couple of months are going to be interesting. I'm still not confident Moto did the right thing here. Time will tell.

 

[Aquila]

Either price it down with the mid term specs

This is the problem though... it doesn't have mid-range specs. That's where people are asking you to look beyond core count into capabilities. Read Jerry's posts on the subject. The $5 or so difference between the S4 based custom processor they used and the S600 wouldn't have budged the price by $300 or whatever it is people wanted to see.

 

[mech1164]

I think this phone is quite well done. It's a device plainly thumbing it's nose at the tech spec war and presenting consumers an alternative way to gage the value of smartphones. Again, I turn to Apple, a company with little interest in spec sheets, but rather created a vast Apple ecosystem that consumers pay top dollar for.

And if they had priced it accordingly to fight the spec war it would have been cheaper. Pricing it at top dollar just killed it for many. They could have driven a stake into the overpriced off contract pricing and done them and all of us a giant favor. Unless Google pulls a rabbit out i'm not at all confident about this now.

 

[mech1164]

This is the problem though... it doesn't have mid-range specs. That's where people are asking you to look beyond core count into capabilities. Read Jerry's posts on the subject. The $5 or so difference between the S4 based custom processor they used and the S600 wouldn't have budged the price by $300 or whatever it is people wanted to see.

If that's the case put the darn best cpu in then. Most of the belly aching would have subsided then. By intentionally doing this they gave false hope with no communication. As they said the extra dsp's were not exclusive to the cpu. In other words "We want this in other systems to". Blow the extra 5 bucks if you want to make it at a premium price. Give me lesser then I expect it cheaper period. If Moto can pull this off good for them. As of now color me blah.

 

[maxman1]

And I believe that many of the users griping about the Moto X features, hardware specs, price, etc., etc. think the iPhone is a high tech phone that's worth the price.

Sent from my Droid RAZR MAXX using Tapatalk2

 

[mech1164]

And I believe that many of the users griping about the Moto X features, hardware specs, price, etc., etc. think the iPhone is a high tech phone that's worth the price.

Sent from my Droid RAZR MAXX using Tapatalk2

Ah, no.

 

[dpham00]

This is the problem though... it doesn't have mid-range specs. That's where people are asking you to look beyond core count into capabilities. Read Jerry's posts on the subject. The $5 or so difference between the S4 based custom processor they used and the S600 wouldn't have budged the price by $300 or whatever it is people wanted to see.

I really don't understand why Moto scrimped on the CPU. $5 is not that much in the long run. The s600 in the s4 cost $20, so Moto is already paying $15 for their chip, based on the info. In comparison the dual core a6 in the iPhone 5 costs $17.50, at the time of launch, and may be closer to the $15 of Moto at this time. In comparison the Octa core (dual quad cores) in the international s4 costs $30.

In terms of hardware, the iPhone 5 is pretty much a mid range device (in terms of hardware) imo, and has a $207 BOM. The US spec S4 has a $234 BOM. Even though Moto is saying that the screen doesn't matter, and maybe it doesn't really, but it is a substantial savings, the iPhone 5 display costs $44, the s4 display costs $74. Granted, the Moto X is larger than the iPhone display, but has a slightly lower PPI. I don't have the cost of the Moto X display, but if i had to guess, i would say around $54.

The thing for me is that the Nexus 7 has a BOM of $152 and sold for $200. My guess is the Moto X BOM cost is somewhere around $220 based on it's specs. So, using the same margin, around $300 would be the selling price.

I think Moto is trying to be like Apple, selling mid-range spec phones, but optimized for the end user to have a good experience. Apple can get away with this, but in the Android front, it is a tougher sell. It might work, but we shall see. I am sure that the Moto X would run just fine, just like a computer with an i5 and another with an i7 won't make much difference for most people during normal usage. But the i7 sells at a premium. Only Apple has been able to get away with selling a mid range device (hardware wise) at a high end price so far.

Sent from my Verizon Samsung Galaxy Note II

 

[TechTinker]

Then I guess you've only read about 60% of the complaints. Is the spec thing the biggest complaint? absolutely! But people are mentioning lots of other things that they don't like about it.

The only other complaint I heard is that MotoMaker is exclusive to AT&T. Which is stupid, I could agree to some colors / designs to be exclusive. But everything? no.
I sorta think myself as a "Tech Nerd", I like to keep up on phone releases, remember specs and the such. But I am interested in this device. I don't think it's mid-range at all. It feels different, the X8, 4.2.2. Dosen't feel like a typical run of the mill mid-range or even high end phone. If Moto was like ok we got a dual core s4 pro and a 8mp camera and it'll have 4.0 or 4.1 to be nice. I'll agree with the hate. But thats not how its like.

 

[B. Diddy]

It'd be interesting to see what kind of device all of these critics would put together given free rein. Would it be the phone version of this, and cost $50?

 

[Aquila]

I really don't understand why Moto scrimped on the CPU.

Honestly, I think it may have been about either power management or space more so than cost. The problem with comparing to the Nexus lines is that Google subsidizes those, whereas they do not for other Android devices. The margin you're seeing on the Nexus is probably going all or mostly to ASUS. A more accurate comparison would be to the GPe devices, which are $599 and $649 for approximately the same manufacturing cost.

 

[roadkizzle]

If that's the case put the darn best cpu in then. Most of the belly aching would have subsided then. By intentionally doing this they gave false hope with no communication. As they said the extra dsp's were not exclusive to the cpu. In other words "We want this in other systems to". Blow the extra 5 bucks if you want to make it at a premium price. Give me lesser then I expect it cheaper period. If Moto can pull this off good for them. As of now color me blah.

As the idea is, it seems the reason they didn't go with the S600 is because the Pro is a more battery efficient processor. The big question I have is why all the spec junkies are so wrapped up on the quad vs dual core issue.
I'm more than happy with the development issues regarding the two DSPs to enable features that seem like they will actually benefit real world experience while also allowing for less battery usage. I think that these will reduce the reliance on the CPU... especially the contextual processing one.

Still, as everyone with the knowledge knows that the GPU is most important in the UX for mobile devices. That's one reason why the iPhone is so smooth because of its prioritizing the graphical abilities in the phone.