Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Don't know if this has been posted yet, but a reliable Motorola source says the Moto X will sell at a very low price unlocked (the earlier rumors of $299/$349 prices sound all the more possible!), and will launch around late August.

http://www.phonearena.com/news/Excl...mewhat-simultaneously-with-new-DROIDs_id45629

Oh baby.

PS. The Android world is ridiculously exciting to follow this year. More so than any year before. So much happening...
 
I think the only two questionable factors for me are battery life and price. With these recent price rumors, that seems to have cleared itself up. The only remaining question for me is battery. I am in no way a power user compared to some of you; just web surfing, minimal wifi tethering, and the occasional game. If Moto's custom chip and software optimization along with the 720p screen (which I don't mind in the slightest) can deliver good battery life, then I think they have a winner. I will for sure be picking one up if this is the case.
 
I think it's fair to say that battery life / efficiency are pretty high up on the priority totem pole. I bet the most controversial component of the phone will be the screen type, as evident in this thread already :p

However, I don't see how they could have both went LCD and kept this new notification implementation that uses one of the additional low power cores. Wouldn't going LCD defeat the purpose of the chip? Well, I guess only part of its purpose.

Still looking like a go for me.
 
Last edited:
I think it's fair to say that battery life / efficiency are pretty high up on the priority totem pole. I bet the most controversial component of the phone will be the screen type, as evident in this thread already :p

However, I don't see how they could have both went LCD and kept this new notification implementation that uses one of the additional low power cores. Wouldn't going LCD defeat the purpose of the chip? Well, I guess only part of its purpose.

Still looking like a go for me.

I think the screen type used will only effect people on forums. The average consumer has no idea what amoled is.
 
I think the screen type used will only effect people on forums. The average consumer has no idea what amoled is.

The average consumer does care about screens, or else they would have all switched to galaxies from their iphones considering we are practically getting bombarded by Samsung marketing here almost 24/7 in tv channels, transit stops, highway billboards, newspapers, and shopping malls.

Not to mention my bank is now giving galaxy deals to new customers lol. Marketing has done wonders for that amoled.
 
The average consumer does care about screens, or else they would have all switched to galaxies from their iphones considering we are practically getting bombarded by Samsung marketing here almost 24/7 in tv channels, transit stops, highway billboards, newspapers, and shopping malls.

Not to mention my bank is now giving galaxy deals to new customers lol. Marketing has done wonders for that amoled.

The quality of the AMOLED display in my Galaxy Nexus suffered from the graininess that came with the subpixel arrangement, but I appreciated the fact that blacks were actually black. The pixel density of the S4's display plus AMOLED makes it absolutely fantastic, in my opinion.
 
The AMOLED on the S4 was very impressive. Sharp and clear and bright actually although still not as bright as LCD. Now that they have pretty much caught up to LCD it becomes a preference thing. I value the whites, accurate colors and brightness much more than the "popping" colors and the deep blacks.
 
The AMOLED on the S4 was very impressive. Sharp and clear and bright actually although still not as bright as LCD. Now that they have pretty much caught up to LCD it becomes a preference thing. I value the whites, accurate colors and brightness much more than the "popping" colors and the deep blacks.

I agree and while I like LCD better, it is not a make or break personally.
 
The quality of the AMOLED display in my Galaxy Nexus suffered from the graininess that came with the subpixel arrangement, but I appreciated the fact that blacks were actually black. The pixel density of the S4's display plus AMOLED makes it absolutely fantastic, in my opinion.

S4 does have a fantastic display except once I see that the trees in the video I shot look dark green when they are light green in reality, I know the oversaturation is still there.

Also i load xda developers in browser and the graininess shows instantly unless zoomed. I haven't seen that on a 720p lcd of the nexus 4 or the 640p of iPhone 5. Both showed zero graininess even at zero zoom.

Basically it's a step up from gs3, but I disagree that it is on part with lcd. A proper lcd will still destroy it easily save for "dat blacks".
 
What's wrong with AMOLED? Serious question.

There are positives and negatives.

I believe there was a post about it on here a while back. The Super AMOLED displays use a different subpixel ratio, I'll link the image to it:
This is a pic of the Galaxy Note 2's subpixels which uses amoled:
Samsung_Galaxy_Note_2_subpixels.jpg


As you can see the red blue and green are all different sizes, this gives not so good colour on the screen as well as the "pixels", not....um....accounting for as much I guess? So the quality of a 441PPI IPS display would look better than AMOLED, the sub-pixels are smaller, and more even.

Sorry the second part was explained very well, anyone want to add anything, or correct me, do so? :D
 
There are positives and negatives.

I believe there was a post about it on here a while back. The Super AMOLED displays use a different subpixel ratio, I'll link the image to it:
This is a pic of the Galaxy Note 2's subpixels which uses amoled:
Image

As you can see the red blue and green are all different sizes, this gives not so good colour on the screen as well as the "pixels", not....um....accounting for as much I guess? So the quality of a 441PPI IPS display would look better than AMOLED, the sub-pixels are smaller, and more even.

Sorry the second part was explained very well, anyone want to add anything, or correct me, do so? :D

The reason the blue pixel is bigger then the others generally is that the blue pixels degrade faster and lose there brightness so they have to be bigger to compensate. The pixel arrangement on the Note 2 was really good alot better then the GS3 anyway.
 
I'm weighing this against the upcoming Nexus 5 (lg g2)

I'm worried about it's size. I don't see any real contenders against the moto x at its size. I would choose it over the mini gs4 and mini one, that's about it right?

I see the g2 is LCD, likely a similar experience to the iPhone, which I'm used too.
 
Last edited:
Debating if this is worth selling my high end HTC One Dev Edition for.

It's a mid-ranger, but the fact that it's so close to stock and will likely get updates from Google far sooner than from HTC...

Hm.
 
Might be a Moto X smart watch launching along. Probably acts as some kind health and fitness tool. Maybe you can control music and calls with it.
 
Am I being stupid for wanting to sell my HTC One for the Moto X? It's a mid-range phone! :eek:


The white one. : drool :


BQHdjSMCAAESz0G.png
 
I find it interesting that moto x is a midrange, while verizon is billing the droids as full price flagships and it seems that they will be nearly identical hardware wise. Battery aside of course.

Is everybody underestimating this chip? Is verizons price crazy, or is the rumored moto x price crazy?

I'm leaning towards verizon is crazy, because the upcoming nexus will probably be priced similarly.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.