Google I/O to see Motorola X with Key Lime Pie?
Motorola DROID RAZR M. The device will run Android 5.0, Key Lime Pie, and will be the first Motorola handset that lets the world know that the company is owned by Google. The model will be available on multiple carriers, so it won't be a Nexus model. The UI will feature some Motorola add-ons. To reiterate, this will not be a Verizon exclusive and appears to be Motorola and Google trying to compete with the Samsung Galaxy S III and the Samsung GALAXY Note II.
Google doesn't usually introduce non-Nexus devices at Google I/O, so some traditions might be broken here. And remember, this is purely speculation at the moment. Still, it gives Motorola, Android, and Google fans-heck, fans of smartphones in general-something to think about over the next four months.
source: DroidForums.net, TalkAndroid via Pocketlint
5. MeoCao (unregistered)
lol, best news of the day, hope it's true.
16. richardyarrell2011 (banned) (Posts: 510; Member since: 16 Mar 2011)
Motorola and Google trying to compete with Samsung. Everyone wants to be like Samny. I wish Motorola luck another boring stock android device. They do better keeping there light skin let Nexus take that stock mantle. Either way the Galaxy S4 or Galaxy Note 3 they will not be.
21. jroc74 (Posts: 5528; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
And I hope they wont be a Note or Galaxy phone. Samsung has pros n cons, Moto does too. I prefer the pros of Moto to Samsung. And I can deal with the cons of a Moto phone vs a Samsung phone.
22. cripton805 (Posts: 1164; Member since: 18 Mar 2012)
"And I can deal with the cons of a Moto phone vs a Samsung phone"
That makes sense.
25. jroc74 (Posts: 5528; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
Yea....the cons of a Moto phone vs the cons of a Samsung phone.
I did just say they both have pros n cons....
35. gmracer1 (Posts: 646; Member since: 28 Dec 2012)
Cons of a Moto phone? WTF are you smoking? You must be talking about Moto's from 2-3yrs ago. Current Moto's = Kevlar backings, reinforced metal bodies (which are sealed), and a nanocoating on both the outside and inside (circuitry). ALL Samsungs = extremely cheap, plastic bodies.
I do like the S3 and I think it's the best phone Samsung has ever made, but I think all their other phones were garbage.
I also prefer MotoBlur and the internal hardware. Plus I think Moto makes better radios.
39. MeoCao (unregistered)
I think Moto phones are not as successful as SS b-c they are more expensive and Moto's poor sales and post sale job.
Looks like Moto has learned from the past and I'm very hopeful about the new Motorola.
40. remixfa (Posts: 14255; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
lol. Moto uses mostly qualcomm and Nvidia parts. Nothing special about them.
44. Sniggly (Posts: 7285; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
Actually, one thing that Motorola does do special is they skirt FCC regulation limits for "safe radiation" in their radio output. The result is that their phones usually kick ass in reception and call quality.
I just picked up their sliver bluetooth, and I have to say, out of all the bluetooths I've owned, this one sounds the best.
45. MeoCao (unregistered)
I think Moto's phones are better built, SS has more gimmicky features.
But SS's advertising, promotion and distribution just destroy Moto's.
74. remixfa (Posts: 14255; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
I was speaking to the internals of Moto phones. Most everything inside of them is built by someone else. Externally yea, Moto's build quality can be quite good. Internally its very hard to compare to Samsung.
58. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5685; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)
it's not so much what kind of radios they are but how Motorola makes them perform between how the phone is designed, the kernels they use, there's different factors other than what kind of radios they're using. Motorola isn't just blowing out hot air when they say the Razr HD gets better reception than the SIII.
89. jinwons (Posts: 95; Member since: 24 Nov 2010)
Believe or not, Note 2 has better reception than Razr HD. And GS3 is on par with Razr HD on reception with JB update. Samsung is surely able to build great radio if they really want.
123. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5685; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)
i don't believe you because there is a Razr MAXX HD, a Razr M and 2 Galaxy S III's in my household and with my experience with all of them i still believe Motorola is ahead of Samsung in this area. this is Motorola here, get real. why do you think Motorola would tout this advantage if it wasn't there? if they wanted to lie about something they could've done a better job than that.
127. jinwons (Posts: 95; Member since: 24 Nov 2010)
Did you read my post correctly? I said Note 2 has better reception, not GS3.
128. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5685; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)
"Believe or not, Note 2 has better reception than Razr HD. And GS3 is on par with Razr HD on reception with JB update. Samsung is surely able to build great radio if they really want."
i don't believe Samsung is even on par with Motorola much less ahead of them and that's based on experience from multiple Samsung and Motorola devices including their current flagship devices. i can't speak for the Note II but i doubt it's that much better than the SIII. i'll ask you again. why do you think Motorola would tout this advantage if it isn't there?
129. jinwons (Posts: 95; Member since: 24 Nov 2010)
I'm not arguing your experience or Moto's reputation with radio. I also had Samsung, Moto in my possession. Though Moto usually had a little higher dbm, it didn't matter much in practical usage in terms of signal holding, call quality. And where is link for Moto touting their better reception than S3? I like to see if they did any objective testing or just marketing claim.
My point is that Note 2 has outstanding signal reception among Sammy devices, which edges out some of Moto's latest. And it's not only me saying this. There are many forum threads where people switchng from Moto devices to Note 2 experienced better reception with Note 2. I agree that Moto has better reputation with cellular radio, but that doesn't necessarily mean future devices will follow the same trend. That's all I'm saying.
73. phonemirer (Posts: 111; Member since: 07 Dec 2012)
it was kevlar or carbon, anyway, razr maxx back has an awesome badass look, i think it is better than s2
116. carlosechev07 (Posts: 39; Member since: 16 Oct 2012)
I'm ok with your declaration, Moto's building quality is superior than Samsung cheap plastic body.. but Sammy designs are sexies than Moto..!!
118. carlosechev07 (Posts: 39; Member since: 16 Oct 2012)
I'm ok with your declaration, Moto's building quality is superior than Samsung cheap plastic body.. but Sammy designs are sexies than Moto, but I Like too much the small bizels that Moto has featured in Razr M, (a 5 inch display + edge to edge) = big super-portable phablet..!!
77. Dr.Phil (Posts: 1014; Member since: 14 Feb 2011)
Whoa whoa whoa, I think that everyone needs to remember something very important here: the Motorola of the past is not necessarily the Motorola of the future. This is going to be the first real phone that will showcase it's new owner, Google. Therefore, when it comes to things like hardware and even software, we cannot know what really to expect. Now, that's not to say that some of the things we have come to expect from Motorola will be thrown out the door such as razor thin aesthetics combined with premium materials. What it does mean is that you can expect some of the cons of Motorola devices in the past are definitely going to be addressed such as the software.
Now, what would be really cool (though not likely right now) is if Google announced the Motorola X as its flagship device for its own carrier (Dish-Google). A man can dream...
26. Berzerk000 (Posts: 4179; Member since: 26 Jun 2011)
Nobody wants to be like Samsung, they just want to compete, which is normal in business. It's just Motorola is being the first to take a step further than the rest of the competitors and be a direct competitor by releasing on all carriers.
PA got mixed up in the reporting, in the original article at DroidForums they say that it will have additional Motorola software add-ons to stock Android, and not be pure stock Android like PA said.
But anyways, you're right. This Motorola X won't be the Galaxy S4 of the Note 3. They'll be completely on par with it, maybe the Motorola will be better to some, and the Samsung will be better to some, but on all levels Motorola will be the biggest competitor to Samsung in the Android world with this X phone.
Samsung has extra software features (that most of hardly get used, honestly), so does Motorola along with much faster updates to the newest Android version.
Samsung has removable battery, Motorola has better build strength with water resistance along with bigger batteries.
Samsung will have their flagships across all carriers, so will Motorola.
You call them advantages, everyone else calls them trade offs. There is no definite advantage to choosing Samsung over anyone else, especially since we've gotten to a point in time where power is a null statement when all new processors are extremely powerful (with graphics to match) and can run anything for the next 2 or 3 years without breaking a sweat. So there will be ZERO difference in everyday performance, something Samsung has held over everyone with their Exynos chips, until now.
All Samsung has now is sales, which relates nothing to actual quality. Unless you work for Samsung, you shouldn't be bragging about that. And if this Motorola X phone succeeds, Samsung's sales will be dropping over the course of 2013.
Every manufacturer gets a time where there company will be run into the ground. Will this be Samsung's? Definitely *not*. This year, it will probably be Apple who gets the hammer unless they change something within the next 2 years. But, this will show Samsung that they will have some good competition, and hopefully Sammy will oblige Motorola by playing hardball right back at them. Then the consumers are the real winners.
30. jroc74 (Posts: 5528; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
Exactly. I dont try to knock Samsung phones....I just prefer Motorola phones overall. Every phone has pros n cons. If anyone thinks otherwise...I dont know what to say.
60. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5685; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)
couldn't have said it better myself. c':
29. MeoCao (unregistered)
SS did a lot for Android and deserves the success, but the domination of SS is not good for Android.
It's not SS fault but other OEMs must step up to make Android ecosystem balanced and competitive which drives more innovation.
So next to Sony's Xperia Z Moto's new flagship with new business approach is a great news.
31. jroc74 (Posts: 5528; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
And I forgot....I really like what I see from Sony's new phone. I would have to try one first tho before saying if I like it or not.
47. CanYouSeeTheLight (Posts: 1091; Member since: 05 Jul 2012)
You are right, Motorola wants to be Samsung indeed! I bet they are running around their headquarters to switch their superb kevlar and metal body for cheap plastic, and their huge batteries for normal sized batteries. Either way for me a better Nexus manufacturer would be Motorola, Sammy had their shot and they made a plastic phone, as always. A Motorola Nexus with a Kevlar and metal body with Razr M like aesthetics sound like divine to me.
48. jackhammeR (Posts: 1548; Member since: 17 Oct 2011)
google competes with samsung? without google there wouldn't be samsung as we know it.
79. richardyarrell2011 (banned) (Posts: 510; Member since: 16 Mar 2011)
Don't get it twisted if it wasn't for Samsung how popular would android really be...Think about that my friend. Samsung can exist without android and do very well I'm sure. Motorola will never be Samsung even with Google owning them. I love android always will and I love Google also that will always be but Samsung is what has placed android on the pedestal that it is on. Just like HTC placed android on the map with the HTC G1 and again HTC with the EVO 4G, Samsung has taken that mantle from 2years ago and ran with it...
84. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5685; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)
may i remind you that it was the Motorola Droid that truly kickstarted Android adoption among carriers and OEM's.
91. MeoCao (unregistered)
Very true, SS does a great jobs promoting their phones, that's where they destroy other Android OEMs.
But all that promotion means little w/o the support of the whole ecosystem that GG built and controls. The proof is WP:
1. MS pours tonnes and tonnes of money promoting WP but the results are obvious for all to see.
2. Android tablets: Android tablets including SS's do not sell until Nexus 7 made developers make apps for Android tablets.
Sammy is powerful within Android, but it's not above Android.
88. Berzerk000 (Posts: 4179; Member since: 26 Jun 2011)
Samsung can't exist in the smartphone world without Android. They would be overshadowed by iOS in every aspect. Even WP would've taken over Samsung by now if it weren't for Android.
What else do they have? Bada? Is that even on the charts anymore, or is it just in the "Other" category?
It's Android that can live without Samsung. It's HTC that put Android on the map, it's Motorola that started the overall adoption of Android, all Samsung did was show up as a reliable and well known brand that everyone trusted. I'm pretty sure, if Samsung were never in the Android picture, Motorola or HTC would've taken their place and done a pretty good job. It might have slowed things down a bit, but not by much. Eventually, Moto or HTC would've gained the same reliability that Samsung did, taken the market, and they would be the ones you are brown nosing right now.
94. jroc74 (Posts: 5528; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
Uh...no. HTC might have made the first Android phone...but Motorola put Android on the map with the Droid 1.
The Galaxy S line is nice....but to this day some ppl call Android phones a Droid phone. You can thank Verizon and Motorola for that.
50. InspectorGadget80 (Posts: 7035; Member since: 26 Mar 2011)
you have to recheck your spelling before you place your commment. PLUS GOOGLE PURCHASE Motorola for the SAFTEY of ANDROID
80. toondewachter (Posts: 54; Member since: 24 Jan 2012)
If you post a comment about someone's spelling, make sure you don't write mistakes yourself... Just a thought.
78. richardyarrell2011 (banned) (Posts: 510; Member since: 16 Mar 2011)
If you want true storage, and Sd card expansion as well as battery removal with the chance to replace your battery you stick with SAMSUNG. If you want smooth fluidity and great battery management you go Samsung. Samsung and it's Nature UI pimp slaps Motorola and it's UI whatever they are calling it, Bottomline here all manufacturers have so much to do in order to catch up to Samsung it's pretty comical. Even the supposed star of android the Nexus brand can't touch any Galaxy product. People are only fooling themselves.
99. jan25 (Posts: 445; Member since: 26 Feb 2012)
Samsung are pretty much the top dog of the game right now, but the competition isn't so far behind. it is not hard to believe why someone would go for the OneX+ or the Nexus 4 instead of the S3 despite the crazy spec sheet. now if a Moto Nexus comes out with a 5 inch 1080p display, Tegra 4 and one of Moto's crazy big batteries running stock android (it's doable), Samsung's throne will be threatened. even HTC has a good chance of grabbing a big chunk of Samsung's market share if they revised Sense and perhaps focus more on battery this time, since they already do have better displays and great build quality.
112. GALAXY-STORM (Posts: 328; Member since: 13 Oct 2012)
No moto can't. Moto phones are not available globally. What u mentioned can happen in US but not outside of it.
120. CanYouSeeTheLight (Posts: 1091; Member since: 05 Jul 2012)
YOU are FOOLING YOURSELF. Samsung = overrated and that's it. You know why Samsung sells so well? MARKETING, they have a huge budget for marketing while companies like HTC and Motorola have almost no budget for it. A friend of mine bought a Galaxy with a quad Exynos and 2GB RAM and i didn't notice it being faster than my One X like Sammy fanboys like to rave about, and Samsung is miles away from HTC with the screens, my HTC's screen looks like it sits on the glass while the Galaxy's one is recessed not to mention the freaking crosshatch pattern when you look at the phone relatively close, i had it on top of my leg and could still see the crosshatch, while my One X was much crisper. Glad i choose the right one and didn't fall into marketing BS.
121. fanboy1974 (Posts: 1322; Member since: 12 Nov 2011)
I have 27gig left on my 64gig sd card and 3gigs left of internal memory on my Note 2. And every morning I just swap my battery instead of plugging my phone into a jack. How is this over rated?
95. JGuinan007 (Posts: 656; Member since: 19 May 2011)
Don't bother having a braingasm because this isn't true at all and here is why.
1. Google would not introduce a non nexus device at Google I/O
2. Why would Google basically announce to it's Android OEMs at I/O that they are planning to compete hard against them in their markets and give Moto all the advantages
3. A Nexus tablet or phone will be the 1st to get Key lime pie never an OEM
4. Now if the Moto X is a Nexus phone this rumor may hold true.
103. Berzerk000 (Posts: 4179; Member since: 26 Jun 2011)
... Because Motorola is a part of Google now. Of course Google is going to let Motorola have KLP first, because they ARE Motorola.
I don't think Google wants to be competing for the top spot though. They just want to try and push the other OEMs to make better products; so, by pushing hard on the market with a brand new super phone with bunches of new features AND the first to a new version of Android, all the other OEMs are going to be like, "Oh my, we need to do something." And they will push all of their energy into R&D for their future products. Google won't make Motorola number 1, but they'll be sure to put them neck and neck with everyone else.
This way, the consumers win. Google loves consumers, and they want to make them happy.
More competition = more development
More development = better products
Better Android OEM products = more sales
More Android sales = money
Consumers are happy with their fancy tech gadgets, and all the OEMs are happy with their sales. Granted, a few will rise more than the others, but most (if not all) should benefit, whether slightly or greatly. I hear there's about 15% of the mobile market ripe for the taking...
113. GALAXY-STORM (Posts: 328; Member since: 13 Oct 2012)
I agree. 1 android phone sold will be Google' s victory.
122. IHateApple (banned) (Posts: 122; Member since: 26 Sep 2012)
Come On. When are we going to see Google become an OEM and make their own nexus phones? Just like Microsoft is the OEM of the Surface tablet.
3. nnaatthhaannx2 (Posts: 820; Member since: 19 Oct 2011)
I think the name "Motorola X" sounds too much like "Droid X".
Hopefully they find a better name.
7. MeoCao (unregistered)
Motorola X is not the real name for sure. Motorola is company's name so there must be a brand: Razor or something. Droid is Verizon's brand.
I think Motorola will launch a new brand to mark the new beginning, the revival of the company.
9. ayephoner (Posts: 837; Member since: 09 Jun 2009)
you might be right about the brand, but the droid was only 3 years ago and the razr line just launched 14 months ago.
how often does this company need a revival?
10. remixfa (Posts: 14255; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
Those helped Moto not crash and burn. This is the first new flagship phone since Google bought them and took control. This would be relaunching the company as "Goolorola".
11. MeoCao (unregistered)
You should check again, Razr is very old and successful dumbphone brand, Moto reused it for smartphone.
I want Moto to use something radically new b-c Moto has some bad legacy that it has to get rid of.
This is the time as all people are excited about new Moto under GG.
23. g2a5b0e (Posts: 3428; Member since: 08 Jun 2012)
Clearly, he was referring to the Motorola RAZR smartphone line & not the old feature phone series.
101. Sniggly (Posts: 7285; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
Motorola has been crippled by a lack of presence on any carrier but Verizon since their original Razr heyday. They aren't doing nearly as bad as you would think-they have more manufacturer marketshare than Windows Phone and Blackberry combined-but they've definitely been hurt by being Verizon's bi.tch, for lack of a better word.
See, the original Droid kicked the s**t out of most other smartphone sales before it, and the Droid X sold just as well for a while. Then the iPhone came to Verizon, replacing most other phones' top dog status there. From that point, the next big phone to come out was the Bionic, which was bulky, kinda hideous, and had the same issues that the other Motorola flagship phones had at the time. Next to come out was the Razr, which was pretty cool but marketed like s**t and had the same tradeoffs as other LTE phones, the biggest one being battery life.
Then the Maxx came out, which helped, but the phone was overpriced for way too long. After a while, it started selling well (when the price dropped) but now you have the Razr and Maxx HD. Both seem to be doing well (I've certainly sold a pretty good amount of both) but again, this is only on one carrier. The last "flagship" phone Motorola put out on any of the big four carriers was the Photon 4G. Since then they've released the Atrix 2, Atrix HD and Photon Q, which all have caveats for those of us who know anything about smartphones. Hell, Motorola hasn't even released a new smartphone on T-Mobile in almost two years.
The reason why Samsung has surged ahead of all of the other manufacturers so magificently is because they've marketed their phones right and they've had a flagship of some sort on every carrier since the original Galaxy S. They've built up considerable mindshare and created a pretty stable user interface through Touchwiz which, in my opinion, is less overwhelming at first glance than any other Android skin. (Motorola gets props for labelling apps that go in the bottom dock, though, unlike HTC or stock Android). Also, Samsung's latest version of Touchwiz does a great job of paying attention to detail, adding in a hell of a lot of nice little touches like Smart Stay, swipe to call/message and direct dial that you don't have on other phones.
The bottom line is that Motorola isn't really in need of a "revival," per se. They had a great year after the original Droid and a s**tty year after that. They had an okay year last year; as I recall, their market share hasn't budged much. What they need now is to build on the momentum they've built with the quality build materials they've used and really push their top notch hardware out to the other carriers.
117. jroc74 (Posts: 5528; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
Exactly, exactly, exactly...
Especially about having phones on other carriers. At one time ppl said Moto was releasing too many phones. If you look at all 4 major carriers.....that title goes to Samsung.
I think Moto still doesnt have a phone on T Mobile. They might have 2 on Sprint and 1 on ATT. Ppl just looked at what they were doing on Verizon. Moto also got away from the low end side a lil bit...Samsung and HTC didnt.
And Moto STILL doesnt do a Windows Phone. Samsung and HTC do.
46. Sniggly (Posts: 7285; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
I like the name "X". It's strong, it evokes mystery. Droid X was a really cool name, and the Droid X was honestly one of the best phones Motorola ever made. My dad still uses mine, and its coming up on three years old now. I would say the Razr Maxx HD is better, and in a lot of ways it is, but the camera quality on my X was really good, whereas I hear some very unflattering things about the cameras on the new Motorola phones.
56. nnaatthhaannx2 (Posts: 820; Member since: 19 Oct 2011)
What about Nexus 5X? (if nexus...)
.... or ......Motorola 5X?
100. Sniggly (Posts: 7285; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
Nah, it doesn't ring as well. Maybe Razr X. That would be pretty kickass.