Should Moto change its low end approach to hardware for the Moto X2?

[Eli_C]

The Moto X is/was a great phone. At least based on reviews. I don't own it, don't know anyone that owns one, and actually haven't seen one in the wild. Almost got my wife to buy it with her last upgrade, but she wanted (and needs) a LifeProof case and they don't make anything like it for the Moto X.

There are really only 2 players in the cell phone market, Apple and Samsung. Apple has (IMHO) great design and build quality and focus on the user experience. They are not always chasing the best specs, but their phones perform very well and are always near the top in benchmarks. Samsung is always racing to up the ante in the spec war. However there build quality and user experience are lacking.

Moto should focus on user experience, design and build quality. But can the user experience be enhanced with better specs? Will Moto have a better chance at selling more phones if the specs are better? I know I am reluctant to spend to much or waste an upgrade on a phone with 2+ year old components.

 

[benjamminh]

SMH.

Sent from my XT1080 using AC Forums mobile app

 

[Golfdriver97]

The Moto X is/was a great phone. At least based on reviews. I don't own it, don't know anyone that owns one, and actually haven't seen one in the wild. Almost got my wife to buy it with her last upgrade, but she wanted (and needs) a LifeProof case and they don't make anything like it for the Moto X.

There are really only 2 players in the cell phone market, Apple and Samsung. Apple has (IMHO) great design and build quality and focus on the user experience. They are not always chasing the best specs, but their phones perform very well and are always near the top in benchmarks. Samsung is always racing to up the ante in the spec war. However there build quality and user experience are lacking.

Moto should focus on user experience, design and build quality. But can the user experience be enhanced with better specs? Will Moto have a better chance at selling more phones if the specs are better? I know I am reluctant to spend to much or waste an upgrade on a phone with 2+ year old components.

Moto did focus on user experience. Through Active Notifications. The X is also a great example of how spec sheets and benchmarks don't always tell the whole story.

 

[Kevin OQuinn]

Only if the better specs help the UI remain smooth and fluid (assuming the next one has a 1080p display), and doesn't take away from the awesome battery life. Also, anything to improve the camera experience is a PLUS in my book.

The Moto X in its current form is an awesome performer. I never noticed any slowdowns anywhere no matter what I was doing.

 

[Ry]

What low-end approach?

Posted via Android Central App

 

[Jerry Hildenbrand]

 

[Eli_C]

Criticize all you want, but despite being a good phone, its financially been a failure for Moto. The phone can get great reviews, but unless a lot or regular people (not the kind of people that read these boards) buy the phone, its not going to be a success.

I agree, as I stated in the original post that Moto focused on user experience and design, and by all accounts build a very good phone. So why hasn't it done better? What can Moto do to improve the X2? How do they get people to buy the X2 vs the iPhone 6 or the SG5?

 

[Kevin OQuinn]

Criticize all you want, but despite being a good phone, its financially been a failure for Moto. The phone can get great reviews, but unless a lot or regular people (not the kind of people that read these boards) buy the phone, its not going to be a success.

I agree, as I stated in the original post that Moto focused on user experience and design, and by all accounts build a very good phone. So why hasn't it done better? What can Moto do to improve the X2? How do they get people to buy the X2 vs the iPhone 6 or the SG5?

Marketing. Plain and simple. They need to do more than Samsung for it to be a commercial success.

This is the same argument for any company not Samsung or Apple. There are plenty of great devices out there, but without the marketing muscle it's hard to make a dent in marketshare. Also keep in mind that not selling 100,000,000 or however many doesn't mean it's a failure. HTC said the One (M7) was the best selling device they've ever made. So clearly their financial problems lie elsewhere. That or being the best selling HTC isn't that big a deal to begin with.

 

[Golfdriver97]

The last sales number I could find was a little over 500k back in November. Is 500k disappointing? I don't think so considering that it was only available in North America upon release. It was about that time that it started to move to Europe, and Motomaker spread to other US carriers.

I agree with Kevin that it is more a marketing failure than a selling failure.

 

[UJ95x]

I don't see where the Moto X could have been considered low end. Cost of manufacturing was still around the same as the other devices, and Moto dropped the price soon after release. Despite having "weak" specs on paper, the phone performed far better than a lot of the flagships that did have quad-core CPUs and 1080p displays.
All they need is a better camera, everything else will probably follow the same strategy as the Moto X. (Which was not low end by any means)

Sent from my Galaxy S4 running SlimKat 4.4.2

 

[ljxdaly]

i have the moto x. there is nothing low end about this device. the only other sort of hero devices i have are the s4 and nexus4....i don't have the current crop. but, the moto x is far slicker than the s4 and nexus4.

i've had it for 4 months...never once have i seen a stutter. never had to reboot. never a lag. never a hang. and best battery life i've had.

it has taught me that high end could actually mean yesterdays specs put together more smartly.

 

[Eli_C]

I think everyone is forgetting that there was a significant marketing campaign. Remember the creepy "lazy phone" guy. IMO it was very poor marketing, but there was a lot of it.

If you don't want to compete with better specs, you need a better price. Apple and Samsung have a tight hold on the market. Its going to take a lot to get people to try it.

In regards to sales of the Moto X, Moto has been pretty tight lipped (usually not a good sign) and all reports are that sales are disappointing. I know it was a NA launch only, but compared to GS4:



its not even a drop in the bucket, and Apple eclipses that.

IMHO Moto makes a better product then Samsung and I would like to see them succeed. The quest is how to do that and I disagree that its as simple as more marketing (though better marketing would help)

 

[Ry]

HTC put out a solid phone that had "current" specs last year. Looks like they threw as much, if not more marketing behind it than Motorola did with the Moto X. Where has that gotten HTC?

Throwing in specs like a Snapdragon 600/800, 1080 resolution, 5" or greater screen would go against everything the Moto X stood for.

 

[sooner7]

Please actually use the Moto X as a daily driver and then come talk to us about what "low end" means. It has the S4 Pro chipset architecture in dual core form with a high end GPU only pushing a 720p display. Also that low end 720p has more real subpixels than the S4's "amazing" 1080p display, with no purple banding like on the S4. Trust me, I own both. This phone is not low end by any means, all it needed was a better camera in low light.

 

[Eli_C]

I think the Moto X is a good phone, but believe it could be better. I agree that the camera is the #1 thing that needs to be improved.

By most accounts of users and reviewers the phone performs very well. So I am not knocking the phone. I am critical of the $$$ they tried to get for the phone out of the gate (regardless of performance). I'm not going to invest in a Moto X now, but plan to get a Moto X2 (most likely). All of the other phones coming to market this year are just getting to big.

 

[UJ95x]

I think the Moto X is a good phone, but believe it could be better. I agree that the camera is the #1 thing that needs to be improved.

By most accounts of users and reviewers the phone performs very well. So I am not knocking the phone. I am critical of the $$$ they tried to get for the phone out of the gate (regardless of performance). I'm not going to invest in a Moto X now, but plan to get a Moto X2 (most likely). All of the other phones coming to market this year are just getting to big.

They lowered the price soon after, and even brought it lower than the Nexus 5 for some time. As I mentioned above though, the Moto X didn't cost them less to produce than it did Samsung to produce the GS4/Note 3 or Apple the iPhone 5S. The Moto X performed better than the other $600 phones, so why wouldn't they charge as much?

Sent from my Galaxy S4 running SlimKat 4.4.2

 

[Ry]

I think the Moto X is a good phone, but believe it could be better. I agree that the camera is the #1 thing that needs to be improved.

By most accounts of users and reviewers the phone performs very well. So I am not knocking the phone. I am critical of the $$$ they tried to get for the phone out of the gate (regardless of performance). I'm not going to invest in a Moto X now, but plan to get a Moto X2 (most likely). All of the other phones coming to market this year are just getting to big.

By calling it a "low-end" approach, you're already knocking the phone IMO.

 

[Golfdriver97]

I had an S3 that was over clocked, AOSP ROM, and a battery friendly kernel flashed. I had to be cautious about my use. My X can run circles around my old S3. And we are talking roughly the same hardware. So I would more turn the point of the conversation on its head and ask why Sammy and HTC can't do the same thing?

From a Liquid Nexus 5

 

[Golfdriver97]

Screenshots for the X. Hardly had the screen on all day, but you can kinda get the idea...

From a Sprint Moto X using AC Forums app

 

[Citizen Coyote]

I don't see where the Moto X could have been considered low end. Cost of manufacturing was still around the same as the other devices, and Moto dropped the price soon after release. Despite having "weak" specs on paper, the phone performed far better than a lot of the flagships that did have quad-core CPUs and 1080p displays.
All they need is a better camera, everything else will probably follow the same strategy as the Moto X. (Which was not low end by any means)

Are you really claiming that simply putting a new camera in will suddenly make the Moto X2 a best seller? The specs of the X did its performance no harm given how well Moto designed the software and user experience, but I feel it's naive to think Joe Q. Public doesn't look at specs when making phone buying decisions. Why else was the X advertised as having "8 cores"? Rebranding a phone but keeping the specs the same doesn't work; even Apple couldn't pull that one off (the 5C is a disappointment in sales, and it's just a rebranded 5). No matter how well the X performs now, the general public likely would respond poorly to a flagship device with older components inside. Hopefully Motorola will update the internals (and improve the camera, yes) while keeping everything else about the phone the same. I really can't think of a more perfect device.