busa2006
Well-known member
The Moto X is high end. No two ways about it.
Posted via Android Central App
totally agree
The Moto X is high end. No two ways about it.
Posted via Android Central App
I switched from the flagship HTC one to the Moto X. I am very happy. The spec war can suck it.
Motorola got so many things right on this phone.
I'm not missing my higher specced HTC one at all.
Posted via Android Central App
I'm currently an iPhone users who's been looking for the right Android to try and I think the Moto X may be it. I'm also currently a T-Mobile customer so I'll be jumping ship and moving to AT&T (most likely) since I don't really want to pay $649 after tax for it out of pocket!
My question is, regardless of how the Moto X performs, it is closer to a mid-range device vs a high-end or flagship device. At $249 for a 32 GB model it has high-end price tag. My question is, is it worth the 2-year contract or does that just seem like too long of a commitment for the Moto X? Has anyone used their upgrades on the Moto X?
I'm starting to like this device more and more. Moto really did do a good job and it shows. Hopefully this is the beginning of a good future for upcoming phone releases by the company.
Sent from my GT-P7510 using Tapatalk 2
C'mon. Moto X has midrange specs. We know it performs wonderfully, and feels great in the hand, but it pales in comparison to Q4 2013 devices on the spec sheet. Deal with it already. You obviously liked it enough to buy it, but you're kidding yourself if you think it has Q4 2013 flagship specs. Someone coming from an iPhone should be accustomed to a device that performs well without burning up the spec sheet. That said, if you're not in a terrible rush I'd suggest you wait to see how vanilla Android performs on a device that DOES burn up the spec sheet...ala Nexus 5/Kitkat. Most likely save yourself a bunch of cash too.
So I didn't take the time to read every post but I wanted to jump in with my 2c on my experience with my Moto X. First off I love this phone, it is super fast and smooth and has given me the best experience so far of any Android device i've ever used. It does have a few bugs but the first OTA that is out or being deployed shortly (depending on the carrier) resolves these. Motorola made a lot of great design decisions with this phone and it shows. I'll address a lot of the issues 1 at a time that people keep bringing up with the specs.
-Dual core vs Quad core.....well this isn't an issue at all because the reality is that prior to ICS Android didn't even really properly support dual core chips. So yes there is kernel support for quad core but the OS itself really can't take full advantage of the 2 extra cores. What you get instead (even the Moto Engineers said this) is firmware tweaks where they attempt to load balance processes across each core while keeping all 4 cores clocked as low as possible as to not kill your battery. If you look at most benchmarks though, there really isn't a performance benefit to quad core over dual core except in synthetic benchmarks. I mean desktop computers barely utilize quad core chips and they do tons of multitasking, dual core is perfectly fine for mobile devices and should remain that way for a while. Even the new iPhone 5S is still dual core and the A7 is a pretty fast chip so don't let manufacturers trick you into think its junk if it isn't quad core. The S4 Pro chip that the X uses is actually a Snapdragon 600 chip, just the dual core model so it's still the new Krait 300 arch.
-Companion cores are like the M7 from Apple but better......So while Apple made a big deal about the M7 being this amazing thing, Motorola beat them to the punch with the Moto X. It has a contextual computing core that handles notifications for active display as well as all the sensor processing data but there is also a dedicated language chip for voice processing. Now we don't quite know the extent of what the voice processing chip does exactly and if 3rd party apps can use it or not but regardless both these chips help give the Moto X great battery life when it doesn't get heavy use.
-720p vs 1080p.......Well this is an interesting one here, the Moto X's 720p screen uses a full 720p display and has almost the same ppi as an iPhone 5/5S aka retina display. Yes you may notice a small difference if you stare at both a S4 and a X at the same time but in day to day use, you won't see the individual pixels and since you aren't taxing the GPU as hard, you'll get great fps from the Adreno 320 gpu. The final note is to cram in 1080p worth of pixels into a display, a lot of manufacturers don't use "full 1080p" displays, they kind of cheat and use something akin to a pentile display (i forget the actual name off the top of my head) but basically not every pixel is a real pixel. So while the ppi is very high aka 400+, its not "true 1080p".
-Device I/O performance......this for me is a big one and goes along with the design decisions Motorola made. They decided to use F2FS as their file system for the user space aka where all our data, apps, etc is stored as opposed to the standard EXT4. F2FS was developed by Samsung and was specifically designed for flash memory. On a PC/Server, a SSD drive has both the flash storage and a small processor/controller that handles a lot of the data queueing, i/o operations, etc....but on a flash memory chip in a smartphone there simply isn't space for that. F2FS was designed with this in mind and in simple terms sort of acts as a software controller. F2FS also has native TRIM support on file deletion (Android 4.3 brings TRIM but it is run every 24 hrs) which greatly helps keep performance consistent over long periods of time. The reason for this is typically after a sector on the flash storage has been written to, when a file is deleted only the "index" is deleted, the actual sector still will retain its value so when the time comes to rewrite to that sector, it needs to be wiped first then written which will slow things up. By clearing the value right away this scenario is avoided and your device won't degrade over time. So basically F2FS is one of the many reasons the Moto X runs so buttery smooth.
Here is a link to some F2FS benchmarks:
[Phoronix] Linux 3.11 File-System Performance: EXT4, Btrfs, XFS, F2FS
Finally, how future proof is the Moto X? Well it has BT 4.0 which is fairly new and while it has basic support now that Motorola developed, it will have the official Android support after the 4.3 update. It has an Adreno 320 GPU which is one of the fastest on the market right now and again after 4.3 is released it will gain OpenGL ES 3.0 which is very new. The device has 2GB of ram which at least for the near future is plenty (I think the only device with 3GB is the Note 3?). The Moto X uses a mostly stock Android which will help keep the overhead low without the additional UI bloat stealing away cpu cycles and system resources. Motorola also really seems to be trying to redefine themselves as a company and fix their image. There have been multiple posts by Punit Soni (head project manager for motorola) where he has tried to personally help people with their issues with the Moto X and has replied that Motorola is going to offer many software updates in a timely manner for this device. Hopefully this means that as long as the device can run a new version of Android that Motorola will update the device to it.
So if you want a quick summary? Yes buy this phone.
C'mon. Moto X has midrange specs. We know it performs wonderfully, and feels great in the hand, but it pales in comparison to Q4 2013 devices on the spec sheet. Deal with it already. You obviously liked it enough to buy it, but you're kidding yourself if you think it has Q4 2013 flagship specs. Someone coming from an iPhone should be accustomed to a device that performs well without burning up the spec sheet. That said, if you're not in a terrible rush I'd suggest you wait to see how vanilla Android performs on a device that DOES burn up the spec sheet...ala Nexus 5/Kitkat. Most likely save yourself a bunch of cash too.
Nice trolling post here...
Posted via Android Central App
C'mon. Moto X has midrange specs. We know it performs wonderfully, and feels great in the hand, but it pales in comparison to Q4 2013 devices on the spec sheet. Deal with it already. You obviously liked it enough to buy it, but you're kidding yourself if you think it has Q4 2013 flagship specs. Someone coming from an iPhone should be accustomed to a device that performs well without burning up the spec sheet. That said, if you're not in a terrible rush I'd suggest you wait to see how vanilla Android performs on a device that DOES burn up the spec sheet...ala Nexus 5/Kitkat. Most likely save yourself a bunch of cash too.
So what exactly are Q4 2013 flagship specs?
Sent from my Moto X
Says the guy with a fraction of my thanks/likes and whom added NOTHING of value to my post...just didn't "like it." Well it's pure fact and I offered the OP my suggestion. I don't sign contracts, but I wouldn't suggest doing it for the Moto X on ATT or Tmobile. Especially in Q4. Only stopped in because it's a "trending topic." Try again buddy.
Have a gander: http://forums.androidcentral.com/moto-x/308805-rant-about-specs.htmlSays the guy with a fraction of my thanks/likes and whom added NOTHING of value to my post...just didn't "like it." Well it's pure fact and I offered the OP my suggestion. I don't sign contracts, but I wouldn't suggest doing it for the Moto X on ATT or Tmobile. Especially in Q4. Only stopped in because it's a "trending topic." Try again buddy.
Have a gander: http://forums.androidcentral.com/moto-x/308805-rant-about-specs.html
It was quite a good thread before it was derailed by senseless bickering. There are a few posts in there that might change your perspective, from some awfully knowledgeable users that have far more thanks/likes than you do (if that's your standard for judging others...)