Moto G LTE vs. Nexus 5 vs. Galaxy S4

[JeffDenver]

after owning a TMO carrier s3 i went with a N4. I t worked OK but i did notice that i couldnt use the phones tether function so i though there was some kind of TMO control over the function of the phone on their network. .

Nope. I think you need a 3rd party (non-TMO) app to use the embedded tether. The tether function is whatever comes with stock Android though...it's not a T-Mobile thing and is not restricted by T-Mobile.

That being said, TMO can detect when you are using it. So if your plan has limits on tethering (mine does) TMO can still monitor your tethering usage. You can circumvent this, but not without rooting.

I still think the moto G LTE or a 1st x is a better device then nexus

I personally can't imagine giving up my speed or camera for a Moto product. Not worth SD or touchless control, especially when I can approximate both on the nexus. The Nexus 5 camera is significantly better than either of those phones.

 

[clevin]

Wireless charging seems a gimmick, to me. Doesn't do anything for me. Camera? A nice camera would be nice, but falls in importance well below other criteria, for me.

agreed, I had this palm pre, which has wireless charging since like 2009, I have numerous those charging stations everywhere in my office and home.

I just don't miss it at all now I don't use it anymore.

The only real wireless charging worth spending money on, is contact free wireless charging, which may be available 5 years down the road.

Current wireless charging waste energy, heat up the phone itself, and generally doesn't feel like a "must have" feature.

I've never quite understood the TouchWiz hate. Had it on our tablets, before I replaced Samsung's perversion of Android with CM, and thought TouchWiz was all right.

Have to agree again, TW pioneered the useful notification panel which is now widely used in all phones, I really don't get why people complain so much about it.

My wife's leaning toward the GS4. I remain in favour of the Moto G LTE. She's placing greater emphasis on retaining WiFi calling. Plus a couple friends of ours have GS4s and are happy with them. Having "stock" Android, runtime and other things are more important to me.

Now, If you just want a basic phone capable of doing simple tasks plus web, Moto G (2014), at this price, is hard to beat.

 

[Old Stoneface]

Now, If you just want a basic phone capable of doing simple tasks plus web, Moto G (2014), at this price, is hard to beat.

I'm going to have to see some in-depth reviews and some real-life user feedback, first. At first blush it would appear to be little more than the 2013 version with 1/2" more screen and 5GHz WiFi. That's okay, but I'm concerned about the only battery life results I've seen, so far, which indicate it has about 28% less runtime than the 2013 version. That handsets runtime was one of its features I found attractive.

 

[clevin]

GSM Arena's test shows new Moto G lasts longer than old one

Motorola Moto G 4G battery life test - GSMArena Blog
Motorola Moto G battery life test - GSMArena Blog

 

[Old Stoneface]

GSM Arena's test shows new Moto G lasts longer than old one

Motorola Moto G 4G battery life test - GSMArena Blog
Motorola Moto G battery life test - GSMArena Blog

That's the "2013" G LTE compared to the original 2013 G. Neither of those is the 2014 G.

 

[clevin]

oops, failed....

 

[Old Stoneface]

Well, I just pulled the trigger on a Moto G LTE.

In the end: Of the choices available, incl. the 2014 G, the (2013) G LTE seemed like the best fit for my needs and desires.

Only question now is "how long?" They're going in-and-out of stock on Amazon at an amazing rate. Current est. is 1-2 months. We'll see.