09-08-2014 11:19 AM
54 123
tools
  1. someguy01234's Avatar
    I see an overall negative reaction by the public with the unveil of this phone. Most of the complaints seem to be: small battery, no hardware OIS, "ugly", not dual speakers, specs not high enough, no qi charging (mine complaint).

    Many people seems to think this phone should cost less, similar to the original Moto X.

    What I want to know is, why do people think this? Highend flag ship phones are generally $650. Nexus and OnePlus are exceptions, somehow people put the Moto X in the same category, I believe this is due in part to the public not well educated on the extra Motorola features included and think it's just a phone with bare stock Android.

    Assuming the Moto X is being sold for $500, do the extra features found in other flagship such as: One M8, Galaxy S5 and LG G3 worth more than than the $150 price difference?

    Let assume that the new Moto X is being sold for $400. Is the specification that much worse than the One M8, S5 and LG G3 to constitute the $250 price difference?

    Or maybe the people who isn't willing to spend $500 are just too poor to afford it and can only afford Nexus.

    For me personally, there is no other phone I've used that have the useful features of Motorola built in software suite like Active Display, Assist, Trusted Device and Touchless control (Trusted Devices being copied by Google and implemented in Android L and Touchless Control sort of implemented as Okay Google Everywhere). Then there is the MotoMaker customization, America based customer support (well.. for now, unsure what happen when Lenovo takes over) and fast updates.

    I think they are lacking somethings that could have been included; a slighter larger battery, hardware OIS, and qi charging. Personally, I prefer if it was $450.
    09-05-2014 01:44 PM
  2. Ry's Avatar
    It's priced right for initial launch IMO.
    dmark44 and ultravisitor like this.
    09-05-2014 01:45 PM
  3. cgardnervt's Avatar
    I think its a little to high. Had it been a 32gig base model then the $499 would have been fair. With that being said I will likely just over look this device. Unless it gets one hell of a review. No high hopes here though. Time shall tell and it will seal my opinion.
    BobLobIaw likes this.
    09-05-2014 01:49 PM
  4. Aquila's Avatar
    I'd say it's "worth" about $50-100 more than the Galaxy S5 and/or HTC One M8. So the value is good in that context. Compared to the Nexus 5 and you've thrown in a subsidy that makes it difficult to gauge. How much would the Nexus 5 be if a device with those exact specs was sold by Samsung?
    09-05-2014 01:52 PM
  5. heyeaglefn's Avatar
    Price probably doesn't match the value, especially given that the Software changes are probably going to make it to the original X, which you can buy pretty cheap now.


    Battery life will be about the same, no wireless charging, no SD slot, I think it is overpriced since the software will be available elsewhere like the X.
    09-05-2014 01:52 PM
  6. Clocks's Avatar
    Whenever I have used another phone I spend all my time trying to cover up the skin. I install google calendar, use alternative launchers, or more often root and flash different roms. The moto x has been the only device I could simply own and enjoy for what it is.

    However I have felt the pain of the crapamera, and I feel a little smushed on the 4.7" screen. I think $99 on contract (presumably $150 for 32gb) is a decent price for the phone at launch as long as the battery life is similar and the camera is noticeably better. I'm willing to bet the camera is just a "meh" improvement though, which may prompt me to wait until it goes on sale. However I do have an upgrade available on 9/26 so I may just burn it on the new moto x on an impulse

    From a spec standpoint it basically matches the M8, GS5, and G3 (minus the screen res).

    The value is from:
    -Fast updates
    -Customizable looks
    -Near stock experience
    -Lower price

    The potential downsides are
    -nonremovable battery
    -no sd card
    09-05-2014 01:54 PM
  7. Ry's Avatar
    Flagship comparison -

    HTC One M8 32GB (unlocked): $649.99
    LG G3 32GB (T-Mobile): $598.80
    Samsung Galaxy S5 16GB (T-Mobile): $609.60 (regular price $660.00)

    Motorola Moto X (2nd gen) 16GB: $499.99
    09-05-2014 01:56 PM
  8. Woosh's Avatar
    I think its a little to high. Had it been a 32gig base model then the $499 would have been fair. With that being said I will likely just over look this device. Unless it gets one hell of a review. No high hopes here though. Time shall tell and it will seal my opinion.
    Tbh those are my thoughts exactly. This is more of an aesthetic bump from the previous gen. Besides the larger screen there doesn't seem to be any huge difference from before. Yay it has a better processor but the first gen had no problems with lag or anything so why would I need that? The camera might be a little bit better but I have a feeling that when we get the results from reviews that it will be a disappointment when compared to the other flagships.

    I'll say if you go by what the prices the carriers are charging now for the "other" flagships then the price is somewhat fair. If you compare it to a $300 last gen Moto X that they've had numerous sales at that price then I'm not too sure that it's worth another $200+.

    I think $400 would have been a better starting price for them imo.
    BizzyGeek and huntnyc like this.
    09-05-2014 02:08 PM
  9. PFKMan23's Avatar
    Flagship comparison -

    HTC One M8 32GB (unlocked): $649.99
    LG G3 32GB (T-Mobile): $598.80
    Samsung Galaxy S5 16GB (T-Mobile): $609.60 (regular price $660.00)

    Motorola Moto X (2nd gen) 16GB: $499.99
    In this context, which is more or less how I see it, I feel it is priced fairly as compared to it's competitors. I feel that comparing it to the Nexus 5 and the Moto X (2013) is an unfair and odd comparison.
    09-05-2014 04:19 PM
  10. A895's Avatar
    It matches the value superbly well. Undercuts mostly every other flagship from this year on price except the OnePlus One. very other smartphone that launched this year was no less than $550. This includes WP's as well.
    dmark44 likes this.
    09-05-2014 04:24 PM
  11. Citizen Coyote's Avatar
    Flagship comparison -

    HTC One M8 32GB (unlocked): $649.99
    LG G3 32GB (T-Mobile): $598.80
    Samsung Galaxy S5 16GB (T-Mobile): $609.60 (regular price $660.00)

    Motorola Moto X (2nd gen) 16GB: $499.99
    And here's another comparison. The original Moto X launched at $199 on contract for the 16GB version, and $575 unlocked. That phone, while performing as well as the flagships of the day, was blasted by fan sites for being "under powered," "only dual core," and "launching with flagship pricing but mid-range specs." Now here's a phone that matches the specs of many current flagships but is cheaper, and people still think it's too expensive?

    I think the new Moto X is fine price wise. Of course I would have liked it to be cheaper, who doesn't like paying less? But realistically, I expected the $500 unlocked price. People are too spoiled by subsidized Nexus phones and Chinese brands trying to make a name for themselves outside of their home country. Would many people seriously give the OPO or the Xiaomi Mi4 a second look if they cost $600? Or would they get blasted for being "too expensive" as well?
    09-05-2014 05:33 PM
  12. davidnc's Avatar
    Actually the vzw model of the original Moto X 16 gb off contract sold last Sept 11. 2013 for $599.99. I checked my vzw account to make sure.

    So then the Moto X 2nd Gen. 16 gb is not as much at $499.99
    09-05-2014 05:34 PM
  13. BobLobIaw's Avatar
    Flagship comparison -

    HTC One M8 32GB (unlocked): $649.99
    LG G3 32GB (T-Mobile): $598.80
    Samsung Galaxy S5 16GB (T-Mobile): $609.60 (regular price $660.00)

    Motorola Moto X (2nd gen) 16GB: $499.99
    Good comparison. Of those models, the G3 stands out to me as the best value. I think the Moto X 16GB should have been priced at $449, or even $400 is they wanted massive sales at the outset.
    09-05-2014 05:55 PM
  14. someguy01234's Avatar
    And here's another comparison. The original Moto X launched at $199 on contract for the 16GB version, and $575 unlocked. That phone, while performing as well as the flagships of the day, was blasted by fan sites for being "under powered," "only dual core," and "launching with flagship pricing but mid-range specs." Now here's a phone that matches the specs of many current flagships but is cheaper, and people still think it's too expensive?
    Which is why they need to hire celebrities like Kate Perry and Robert Downey, Jr and do a big marketing campaign. Look at Samsung Note 4 commercial, everyone in the video are pretty hipster people:
    09-05-2014 05:58 PM
  15. Ry's Avatar
    Which is why they need to hire celebrities like Kate Perry and Robert Downey, Jr and do a big marketing campaign. Look at Samsung Note 4 commercial, everyone in the video are pretty hipster people:
    Hipster?

    A895 likes this.
    09-05-2014 06:23 PM
  16. someguy01234's Avatar
    I guess what I meant is Samsung commercials are more sexualized, and lots more viewers.
    09-05-2014 11:41 PM
  17. A895's Avatar
    I guess what I meant is Samsung commercials are more sexualized, and lots more viewers.
    Well Samsung also puts up more commercials more frequently and during PrimeTime and they sponsor events. HTC put out a lot of commercials this year and from all reports made some money of the HTC M8 this year so I think Motorola will put out some more commercials like Lazy Phone and hopefully they do some like Apples "powerful" commercial.
    09-06-2014 09:02 AM
  18. b_slow1's Avatar
    For this year, all of the major players have phones that, on the spec sheet, stack up closely to one another. But they all have "extras" that make them unique, so it depends on what you're looking for.

    Samsung offers you removable batteries and an SD card slot. The Note lineup has the S-Pen and 3GB of RAM. (And a sh-t ton of tricks).
    HTC offers front-facing speakers and 32GB of storage. And Blinkfeed!
    Apple offers.... Apple stuff. No idea. Build quality, maybe?
    LG offers the 5.5" QHD screen (if you're into that), 32GB of storage, AND an SD card slot.

    By comparison, Motorola doesn't deliver anything in the Moto X hardware that is "special". But I personally feel that it's software is where the value is. It can do things that other phones can't do. So I guess that's what you're paying for, but maybe people don't like paying for software without being able to justify the purchase with powerful hardware. And Moto's hardware is Average across the board.
    Ry likes this.
    09-06-2014 09:32 AM
  19. delrey1900's Avatar
    I just can't believe there are people complaining about the price of this phone. It finally has a processor that everyone is looking for and a larger screen (debatable if that is a plus or not). Did everyone forget that at launch the OG X went for $599 off contract and $199 on contract? $499 and $99 is more than fair for a high end phone. And yes, it's high end.

    And just because the phone doesn't have QHD, an S-Pen, or front facing speakers doesn't make an failure. You can have your gimmicky phones, I'll take my OG X and possibly the new one with features I'll actually use with lag free performance and fast updates.
    Citizen Coyote, Ry, A895 and 1 others like this.
    09-06-2014 10:10 AM
  20. someguy01234's Avatar
    By comparison, Motorola doesn't deliver anything in the Moto X hardware that is "special". But I personally feel that it's software is where the value is. It can do things that other phones can't do. So I guess that's what you're paying for, but maybe people don't like paying for software without being able to justify the purchase with powerful hardware. And Moto's hardware is Average across the board.
    The customization, leather, wood and other colors. There are no other phones in the market that does this. Also the shape, it will be very comfortable to hold, more than the original X just from the way it look. Also the touchless control, moto display and camera wiggle (all hardware features). Water resistant nano coating. Good build quality, which I am sure is better than S5 and G3. There are lots of hardware features here, not just specs.

    Also almost all Touchwiz tricks are useless gimmicks. The first thing I do when I get my hand on another person Samsung is turn off all Touchwiz features and install Google Now Launcher.

    I just can't believe there are people complaining about the price of this phone. It finally has a processor that everyone is looking for and a larger screen (debatable if that is a plus or not).
    They think Snapdragon 801 is old and slow. They tech crowd wants 805 as minimum. When their phone with 805 lags due to the bloat UI and 1440p display, they assume 801 isn't enough. Also the larger screen is a plus. May 0.2" too much, but still a plus.
    Citizen Coyote, dmark44 and A895 like this.
    09-06-2014 11:16 AM
  21. robjulo's Avatar
    No, it's not worth it and your initial number of $150 more is incorrect. The LG G3 is $579 for a 32gig model. The Moto X is $499 for the 16gig model and is likely to push to $549 for the 32.

    The difference is more like $30 rather than $150.

    IMO, it is priced $100 too high.
    BizzyGeek likes this.
    09-06-2014 11:20 AM
  22. delrey1900's Avatar
    No, it's not worth it and your initial number of $150 more is incorrect. The LG G3 is $579 for a 32gig model. The Moto X is $499 for the 16gig model and is likely to push to $549 for the 32.

    The difference is more like $30 rather than $150.

    IMO, it is priced $100 too high.
    OK, and the g3 only has the camera going for it. The screen resolution has no benefit and the phone does 'lag' from time to time. My OG X doesn't lag with an old school snapdragon. Specs mean nothing if the phone doesn't provide a good experience. The first X proved that.

    Posted via the Android Central App
    KarlDag and A895 like this.
    09-06-2014 11:54 AM
  23. b_slow1's Avatar
    The customization, leather, wood and other colors. There are no other phones in the market that does this. Also the shape, it will be very comfortable to hold, more than the original X just from the way it look. Also the touchless control, moto display and camera wiggle (all hardware features). Water resistant nano coating. Good build quality, which I am sure is better than S5 and G3. There are lots of hardware features here, not just specs.

    Also almost all Touchwiz tricks are useless gimmicks. The first thing I do when I get my hand on another person Samsung is turn off all Touchwiz features and install Google Now Launcher.
    People want to pay for specs. To most, that is the primary objective. They want a phone that won't be "obsolete", never mind the fact that they still upgrade their phones every year anyway.

    You are right though, I should have included the customizable look of the Moto X as a feature. That is important. However, the Touchless Controls, Drive Assist, Notifications, and the Camera thing are SOFTWARE features, and the types of things that I said give Moto X its value. Hardware-wise, 16GB storage is standard. 1080p display was standard last year. 5.2" screen is fairly standard. Snapdragon 801 is fairly standard. And on top of that, no stereo speakers, no removable battery, no SD card slot, and no FM radio.

    Also, I can't really speak to the build quality... All of these phones are about in the same range. HTC One and iPhone are probably at the top of the list though.

    I don't want you get the impression that I hate Moto X though. I have the original, and I love it. But I bought it for the software and for the overall experience. The Gen 2 Moto X is no different. There is no category spec-wise where the Moto X comes out on top. That's OK by me, but for people who want to pay for top-notch hardware, some might think the Moto X is overpriced.
    09-06-2014 12:28 PM
  24. livetoride4666's Avatar
    People want to pay for specs. To most, that is the primary objective. They want a phone that won't be "obsolete", never mind the fact that they still upgrade their phones every year anyway.

    You are right though, I should have included the customizable look of the Moto X as a feature. That is important. However, the Touchless Controls, Drive Assist, Notifications, and the Camera thing are SOFTWARE features, and the types of things that I said give Moto X its value. Hardware-wise, 16GB storage is standard. 1080p display was standard last year. 5.2" screen is fairly standard. Snapdragon 801 is fairly standard. And on top of that, no stereo speakers, no removable battery, no SD card slot, and no FM radio.

    Also, I can't really speak to the build quality... All of these phones are about in the same range. HTC One and iPhone are probably at the top of the list though.

    I don't want you get the impression that I hate Moto X though. I have the original, and I love it. But I bought it for the software and for the overall experience. The Gen 2 Moto X is no different. There is no category spec-wise where the Moto X comes out on top. That's OK by me, but for people who want to pay for top-notch hardware, some might think the Moto X is overpriced.
    If it was 600-700 then yes it would be overpriced. I still don't know how people could say it's overpriced at $499.

    Posted via Android Central App
    09-06-2014 12:54 PM
  25. Aquila's Avatar
    Anyone believing the Moto X 2014 is overpriced surely must be also making the claim that every other flagship device is as well. After all, most are not as or are barely as good and yet are considerably more expensive. The exception being the G3, which is not only a different market - and I'm undecided if it's a rockstar of a device or not (a lot of members here love the G3, a few really hate it).
    Citizen Coyote and A895 like this.
    09-06-2014 01:12 PM
54 123

Similar Threads

  1. Do I Need to Activate Before Updating to JB?
    By mel2000 in forum Android 4.1 / 4.2 / 4.3 Jelly Bean
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-06-2015, 03:47 PM
  2. Doing the subscription continuation trick with the Note 4.
    By prizeferret in forum Samsung Galaxy Note 4
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 10-04-2014, 12:17 AM
  3. Verizon: Moto X (second generation)
    By Ry in forum Moto X (2014)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-05-2014, 01:30 PM
  4. US Cellular: Moto X (second generation)
    By Ry in forum Moto X (2014)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-05-2014, 01:29 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD