A Quick Look at the Moto X - Motorola's New Flagship
by Brian Klug on August 1, 2013 3:00 PM EST- Posted in
- Smartphones
- Qualcomm
- MSM8960
- Motorola
- Mobile
- Android 4.2
- Moto X
- S4 Pro
Thoughts on Moto X
My initial thoughts with the Moto X are that it's a great device, easily one of the best feeling, sized, and shaped devices of this year. The screen is big enough without the device being bulky, and Motorola says that over 70 percent of the front surface of the Moto X is display. I'm still not a fan of AMOLED, but in this case a lot of the features (active display) do need it to be power efficient. The customization options are novel and unique, even if they're limited to AT&T in the USA for the time being. The idea of a wood-backed phone excites me since it means each device will be unique and have different wood grain, and having some way to differentiate one's handset from all the other black squares out there would be awesome. Having the same device available on all the US operators is also a huge win for Motorola, who has been otherwise stuck to endless Verizon exclusives that dramatically limit the reach of its flagships, even if the Moto X isn't a single SKU solution for all the operators (I do not have cellular banding information for each variant). Even now though, we saw the announcement of some Verizon Motorola Droids that basically include the same hardware platform and a number of features from the X.
The fruits of Google's interaction with Motorola are a bit more unclear. The Moto X runs a primarily stock UI, but it isn't entirely free of operator interaction – there's operator branding and light preloading, of course nowhere near the level that you'd get on a phone that goes through the normal interaction, but calling this "unadulterated android" still isn't factually correct, and it's definitely not Nexus with all that operator branding. I find myself puzzled as well that the Moto X isn't running Android 4.3. For other OEM partners, I can understand not having the absolute latest version of the platform running because of UI skinning and features, with a stock UI and operating under Google's umbrella, it's just a bit harder for me to explain away, especially given how far along Samsung and HTC allegedly are with 4.3 builds.
The last bit is pricing. The rumor and buildup led me to believe that Moto X would be priced like the midrange device the silicon inside misgives it for, but at $199 on contract it's priced just like a flagship halo phone with a quad core SoC. I realize specs aren't the be all end all for everyone, but I was hoping the Moto X would be the realization of an Android for the masses movement and platform direction from Google with the price to back it up, which would've been $199 with no contract. I have no doubt we'll see the Moto X move down in cost quickly, and it's premium, it's just surprising to see $199 out of the gate for what is a midrange platform (8960Pro) right now.
I need to spend more time with the Moto X to really pass judgment. I've popped my personal SIM in and will use it as my daily driver for a while and give it the full review treatment.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
162 Comments
View All Comments
jt122333221 - Thursday, August 1, 2013 - link
For you, yes. There will likely be millions of customers who are interested in this device. It may not sell like the S4 or iPhone, but it will succeed if only because of how much marketing is planned.jiffylube1024 - Thursday, August 1, 2013 - link
720p AMOLED with RGB stripe could be a very nice screen (remember, Galaxy S3 was 720p using crappier PenTile tech). Still, I can't help but feel that this is "too little, too late."It looks like the phone has a little lip aorund it too, meaning if you rest the phone its front on a table the screen won't contact the table, which is nice.
However, I almost feel like they should have gone even smaller, like a 4.5" screen with a smaller in-hand size. At least that would address a market niche that's not really being adequately serviced right now (remember, a 4.5" display with on screen buttons gives you about a 4.3" useable display).
This is a bit reminiscent of the new Blackberry 10 phones - OK devices, but way too late to market to make a difference.
Bob Todd - Thursday, August 1, 2013 - link
Nice looking phone, but as you noted the price seems a bit unrealistic, especially if the off-contract price ends up being in the ~$500 range. $150 more than a Nexus 4 seems a bit optimistic considering the similar specs, even with AC Wi-Fi being a nice addition. And the software customizations just make me worry about updates. I'm also baffled at the lack of 4.3 here at launch. Not really sure why I'd want this over a N4, or the N5 which will likely come in a few months. I know those are niche devices for nerds, but I'm sure this thing will be down to $100 in a few weeks after trying to compete with the S4 and One.darwinosx - Thursday, August 1, 2013 - link
When will people realize that all Nexus devices are sold at or slightly below cost?Judging from Brian's comments so far it looks like we can expect another softball review like he did with the Chromecast. Is even Anandtech now reduced to grubbing for Google ad money?
eallan - Thursday, August 1, 2013 - link
People will probably realize it when there is evidence to back up that claim.matt30 - Thursday, August 1, 2013 - link
Yeah. Not true.http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2013/07/3...
Friendly0Fire - Thursday, August 1, 2013 - link
I've not seen conclusive evidence that this is the case, but even if it were... The consumer doesn't care. The economics behind the phone are entirely irrelevant, as well they should.If you have two similar products, one 150 dollars cheaper than the other, with no significant compromise on reliability or quality, it's in the consumer's best interest to pick the cheaper option. Simple as that.
Death666Angel - Friday, August 2, 2013 - link
So all those Chinese companies that sell 720p / 1080p smartphones with everything equal except for the SoC and camera modules but at 30 to 60% the cost are losing money as well? I've bought my wife an SGS3 knock off that has 720p display, 4GB NAND, 1GB RAM, middling dual core SoC, changeable battery and mSD card, 5MP camera with LED flash for 165€ when the SGS3 was still selling for over 400€ here in Germany in December last year. Yes, the SGS3 has a better SoC, camera module, more NAND. But the BOM increase does not justify the 250 to 300€ it costs more.Wolfpup - Thursday, August 1, 2013 - link
As Darwinosx mentions, Nexus is sold with different goals...also, Nexus 4 is supposed to be bad as a PHONE. Also, this is built in the U.S., which makes it my #1 Android phone in and of itself, even if I didn't think it was otherwise pretty neat.Krysto - Thursday, August 1, 2013 - link
Come on Brian. do you really think they could've sold this phone for $200 without massively subsidizing it? Remember the Nexus 4 was also subsidized at $300...it wasn't its "real" price. Europeans quickly learned that.TheVerge were the only idiots (for lack of a better word..such as "morons"), who said it will be $200 UNLOCKED. But that price never made sense, unless Google would subsidize it. But why would it? They're already losing money with Motorola, and they plan to invest half a billion in marketing. So why would they subsidize it?
I agree the $200 price is a bit steep on contract, though, but doesn't it have kind of iPhone specs? So I think they're trying to copy Apple here - make a phone that doesn't have the most cutting edge specs available in other phones, but it's easily sold to the masses because it's "pretty", and for a higher price.