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
nerd1 - Friday, August 2, 2013 - link
Then you can always get last year's phone at great discount.Azurael - Friday, August 2, 2013 - link
Which is why I have a Nexus 4 and won't be picking up any of the current generation phones when my contract expires in a month...Still, I'd like to have the latest production technology and components in a high end, nicely made phone without these stupid battery sapping gimmicks. The Nexus 4 is the first Android phone I've owned with acceptable battery life, and this seems like a conspiracy to drag things back to the barely making it through a day nonsense my One X, Atrix, Desire Z and Desire have given me.
DBissett - Friday, August 2, 2013 - link
There is such a huge bite of style and glamour associated with this that Mot is obviously trying to market to an audience that's flattered with a "high end" phone based on said style and glamour rather than specs. I can hear it now...."What color would you like than in? How many pixels? What's that?" It's not touchable for 199, maybe 99, but many will get oh so excited they just won't be able to help themselves.nerd1 - Friday, August 2, 2013 - link
So the much hyped 'personalization' is custom backplate that is non-removable.It's WAY better to make backplate removable, which enables easy battery swap AND tons of personalization too, just like old-school phones.
dusk007 - Friday, August 2, 2013 - link
I think this phone is pretty much a fail for gaining significant market share, not because it is bad, but because barely anybody can buy it. I see no turn around here for Motorola.The form factor is IMO the biggest selling point. The reason I would buy it, even though I wished it was 1-2mm thicker and had more battery. 4.7" compact is perfect.
But they had a lot of publicity with many people looking what the first true Google/Motorola Spawn would be like and now they effectively have a paper launch. Marketing the ability to customize the exterior as a feature that won't be available to most people. Everywhere except the US people barely know Motorola still exists but they could have changed that had they actually launched a new device. Instead all they get is a short news piece everybody will have forgotten in a few days. The time actual phones show up in the world few people will even take notice and the killer features that really attract attention are missing too. I can see this device winning if you compare them in store (people that care little about specs and more about feel) without any idea what to buy but it won't get much attention otherwise.
The price is also too high. You cannot go iphone 5 prices without having a reputable brand first. Slightly below the Samsung S4 would still be okay but not this high.
I am really wondering when and what will actually show up in europe. If they wait too long, they compete with the first Merryfield phones on european soil where made in US means little and while the iphone brand isn't as much of a competition the Motorola brand is less known than Siemens Mobile (which died a few years ago I think).
The phone is great. Specs are good enough and the form factor look spectacular. Voice features are nice to have, who knows how well they work. It seems the people that maneuvered the company into a corner where they basically work for one American mobile company only and loose most of their presence world wide, are still active in their sales&distribution department. They should replace them if they ever want to be a big player again.
nerd1 - Friday, August 2, 2013 - link
It is way thicker than other flagship phones @ 10.4mm, yet packs only 2200mAh battery which is non-removable. Isn't moto well known for RAZR-thin phones years ago? Modern samsung, sony and HTC phones are around (or less than) 8mm, and sammy managed to pack 2600mAh battery which is user swappable.amdwilliam1985 - Friday, August 2, 2013 - link
battery size != battery life :)Death666Angel - Friday, August 2, 2013 - link
But all things being roughly equal (which they are in all smartphones of this size), battery life ~ battery life. :)elotrolado - Saturday, August 3, 2013 - link
10.4mm at it's thickest--remember it is contoured not flat. also, the use of 8 variable cores and Android 4.2.2 equals energy efficiency. Moto says 24 hour battery life with normal use.superflex - Friday, August 2, 2013 - link
It looks like a nice phone and I do like the recessed screen and color choices.The slower processor and 16 GB storage option for a premium phone are questionable.
Sealed battery is not a deal killer. Lack of a SD card is not a deal killer on the 32 GB model. Kinda so on the 16 GB model.
The price is crazy wrong though.
The GS4, HTC One and LG G Pro are much better choices for the same money.