Motorola Moto X priced at $149.99 in Canada
And that bring us to Friday when one of our loyal readers sent us a photograph that he took from a Walmart type store called The Real Canadian SuperStore. And inside the Real Canadian SuperStore is something called The Mobile Shop where a version of the Motorola Moto X is just $149.99 with a signed two-year pact from Rogers. Is this as low as the phone gets, or are The Future Shop and Best Buy Canada cooking up an even lower price?
Thanks, Anonymous Tipster!
1. flynfree (Posts: 374; Member since: 09 Jun 2013)
I still better get the nexus 4, than moto eks.
2. Mxyzptlk (limited) (Posts: 3510; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
I think there's far better options for that price point. The X phone's specs are midrange at best. A phone this important to Motorola should have the specs to back up all of the promotion it's getting.
3. Zero0 (Posts: 583; Member since: 05 Jul 2012)
Midrange at worst, I'd argue.
GPU is quite good, CPU is passable (how many digits of pi does my phone need to calculate, and how many times am I going to compile Gentoo on my phone?), screen is good (720p non-Pentile ~= 1080p Pentile), camera is good in terms of hardware, battery is fairly sizable. Meanwhile, the form factor is compact, yet the screen is roomy.
And of course, my favorite spec: not made by overworked/abused laborers in China.
16. g2a5b0e (Posts: 2165; Member since: 08 Jun 2012)
Are you kidding me? 720 non-pentile is not approximately equal to 1080 pentile. The pixels on any 1080 screen that is smartphone size are indistinguishable. One would be hard-pressed to know by just looking at it whether or not it's pentile. On a 720 screen, the pixels are not necessarily indistinguishable to someone with good eyes. The difference can be seen by some folks. Compare the screen of Moto X to that of S4 & tell me once again that they are approximately equal. That's just not the case.
19. Zero0 (Posts: 583; Member since: 05 Jul 2012)
From what I've seen, PenTile allows the pixel density to be fudged a little bit, so supposed ~440ppi of a 5" 1080p PenTile display is bull. Maybe that's incorrect, but still, there's a little bit of discoloration.
As for telling the difference, if you had a 1080p phone and a 720p phone right next to each other, sure, you could tell. But at what point does that matter? Because when such a display is on its own, it looks nearly the same. The difference can still be seen, I suppose, in terms of lag and/or battery drain, but those are the less pleasant side of overkill specs.
6. sprockkets (Posts: 1160; Member since: 16 Jan 2012)
I thought apple trolls didn't care about specs...
9. Gigabinzle (Posts: 37; Member since: 30 Aug 2013)
Wait, so the iphone has the specs for the hype ? no it does not
11. Sniggly (Posts: 6946; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
I'd tell you that the phone only costs a few dollars less than a Galaxy S4 and more than an iPhone to build.
I'd tell you that the cost reflects a high end experience marked by ease of use, convenience, and truly smart, unique features that you cannot find on another phone.
I'd tell you that you never gave a flying crap about specs when the iPhone was the subject of discussion.
I'd tell you all of this, but you'd ignore facts, you'd ignore reason, and you would, after your babbling nonsense, say, inexplicably, "hook line and sinker."
Just like you always do.
13. RH234 (Posts: 15; Member since: 21 Aug 2013)
You're the one babbling. Just shut up and let people express their views
18. Sniggly (Posts: 6946; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
I'm assuming you're new here, and don't know Mxy nor what we put up with here when it comes to him. Stick around for a few articles, especially related to Motorola, and you'll see what I mean.
31. RH234 (Posts: 15; Member since: 21 Aug 2013)
Apologies. I was in a bad mood. Wrong of me to comment as well on your comment. Peace
32. Sniggly (Posts: 6946; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
Nah, not wrong of you to comment. If I was actually trying to suppress someone else's right to comment, you'd be well within your rights.
14. Mxyzptlk (limited) (Posts: 3510; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
I'd tell you that you are wrong. It being made in America is costly enough. Why else is the little customizing program so limited.
So basically it's a nexus phone labeled as a Motorola device, gotcha.
The iPhone didn't require mega specs like androids do. They don't force so many tasks onto a phone. The iPhone just works.
You know what that magic word is called? Opinion. Get over it and stop being so angsty.
17. Sniggly (Posts: 6946; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
I would point out that the American manufacturing process only adds about 5 dollars to the per unit cost. And that the current limitations have nothing to do with cost, so much as it has to do with the fact that the program is so new, and Motorola is, rather intelligently, starting out smaller in order to not stall out, so to speak.
The Moto X goes beyond even being a Nexus. The Nexus merely showcases the latest Android version. The Moto X has features not necessarily meant for all Android phones to have, features which require the specific combination of hardware and software that Motorola has.
You're being completely disingenuous again. You know that as of Jelly Bean Android runs on part with iOS in terms of smoothness, unless maybe the phone in question has specs from four to five years ago. Even the least charitable, most stupid description of the Moto X is that its hardware is a "year old." If you've used a Galaxy S3, Evo LTE, he'll, even a RAZR M, you'd know that these phones with "last year's specs" still run fantastically.
You mistake my frustration for angst. I'm frustrated because you deliberately ignore anything explained to you about concepts like these discussed here, and you continue to post your bull in order to get people arguing with you.
You and I both know that's why you do it, and at this point the only reason I even bother with you anymore is because I feel a passing reader should see precise reasons given why you're a lying piece of crap.
21. Mxyzptlk (limited) (Posts: 3510; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
Yeah you're right Sniggly. The only reason why I bother posting is just so I can argue with you. Oh however did you expose me.
Get over yourself. You always complain in Motorola articles whenever you see a comment you don't like. How dare someone have an opinion.
Those phones you listed all have high end specs that are still somewhat relevant. The Motorola X does not have the same specs like the phones you listed. The recent price war is proof that the X is mostly a midrange phone.
Jellybean is not as smooth as iOS is. Not even close. There's still some lag and slowdown in several devices that run Jellybean.
22. VZWuser76 (Posts: 1352; Member since: 04 Mar 2010)
I'm pretty sure my S3 has the same processor as the X, minus the 2 low power cores. Like I said the other day, the 8x processor is essentially a quad core. There are the 2 main cores + the 2 dedicated low power cores. But let's face it, those low power cores are only there for Touchless controls, not tasks while the screen is on.
As far as fluidity, most reviewers are giving that nod to the X (and some to the new Droids as well). The reason why is lack of a skin over android (or a minimal one in the case of the newer Moto's) and software optimization. A skinless version of android is the reason why Nexus devices (which generally are not spec monsters) can still run with the flagships. Add to that software optimization. If software is setup universally for hardware in one case, and then optimized for a specific set of hardware in another case, the latter will outperform the former. It's no different with people, try focusing on 5 different things and then try focusing on one, and see which is done better and more efficiently.
The manufacturer skins seem to be getting back to the days of Sense 3, where the added animations and such bogged down the device horribly. But rather than optimizing the software to have less of a drain on the hardware, they keep throwing more powerful hardware at the problem. The only problem with that is battery tech isn't advancing like cpu and screen tech is.
24. g2a5b0e (Posts: 2165; Member since: 08 Jun 2012)
No. The Moto X uses a variation on the Snapdragon S4 Pro clocked at 1.7Ghz. This is the processor that was in the DNA. The S3 uses a Snapdragon S4 Plus clocked at 1.5Ghz. The Plus is a version before the Pro.
25. VZWuser76 (Posts: 1352; Member since: 04 Mar 2010)
Ok, was there a huge difference in performance from the Plus to the Pro? I guess I was going by the fact there both S4 processors, but I forgot I had read that the 8x uses upgraded cores (same as in the SD600) over last years S4.
26. g2a5b0e (Posts: 2165; Member since: 08 Jun 2012)
I guess it depends on your definition of huge. The Plus probably isn't efficient enough to decently push the pixels on a 1080 screen.
27. VZWuser76 (Posts: 1352; Member since: 04 Mar 2010)
Myself I don't see the point of pushing that resolution on a smaller screen. There is a difference side by side between 720 & 1080, but it also negatively affects both performance & battery life. When that can be overcome, it would be worth it to have the extra detail. But with phones moving to non removable batteries, power hungry processors & higher resolution screens mean more frequent trips to the charger. That higher definition screen & more powerful processor isn't worth anything if they're not running.
So either we need to follow Moto's lead and try to optimize the hardware we have, or follow Moto's lead and treat every flagship device like their Maxx series and equip them with batteries that can easily make it through one full day. To me it's ridiculous that every OEM isn't aiming for that, instead trying to have the most powerful phone, or the thinnest, at the cost of usability. It mirrors the camera industry, with megapixels overshadowing the quality of the lens, which should be the main focus. But it takes a company or two to step out on the ledge and give it a try.
30. g2a5b0e (Posts: 2165; Member since: 08 Jun 2012)
Well, any jump in screen resolution is going to negatively affect performance & battery life. That was the case when phones went from QVGA to VGA, from qHD to HD, & everything before, between & after. But, I do agree with you. At some point, you have to say enough is enough. I thought HD was going to be that point with phones & now we have FHD. With FHD, the point of diminishing return has been reached. It is definitely time to focus on other things, battery life being chief among them. I'm buying a FHD phone this fall, but having said that, I will be very annoyed if WQHD phones start debuting next year.
29. Sniggly (Posts: 6946; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
I didn't say that you post in order to argue *with me,* just that you post in order to argue in general.
But of course, you hardly respond in detail to anyone else but me, so I must be doing something right.
I don't care about your opinions. If you say "I don't like Motorola," cool. That's an opinion. If, however, you make factually wrong statements about Motorola (or Google, or anyone else) you're an idiot if you don't expect someone to rebuke you.
Let's face it, you hardly ever do anything but make statements which are meant to be construed as objective fact.
Every phone I listed has the same or worse specs than the Moto X. The S3 and Evo LTE have 720p screens at 4.8/4.7 inch sizes. The Razr M had a qHD display. Each phone listed had a 1.5 GHz dual core Snapdragon processor on board. The primary processor on the Moto X is a 1.7GHz dual core Snapdragon S4 Pro. The S3 had 2 GB of ram, equal to the Moto X and twice what the Evo LTE and Razr M had on board. The Moto X, S3, and Evo LTE all have 16 GB of onboard memory. The Razr M had 8.
So if all of those other phones have high end specs that you consider relevant, then the Moto X should be just as relevant, or more so.
And at this point you're just lying, Mxy, unless you speak of single core phones with 512 megs of ram. Take a Galaxy S3 or Evo LTE (or hell, even an Optimus F3) and play with them. All very smooth, very fast phones.
I've told you before and I'll tell you again. You're free not to like Motorola, or Google, or anyone. But don't expect to blare out bullsheet and watch us all happily swallow it and agree with you.
4. Nathan_ingx (Posts: 3009; Member since: 07 Mar 2012)
You can still do better than that Umericuh!!!
5. PootisMan (Posts: 203; Member since: 02 Aug 2013)
if they would have priced this phone for at least $299 to $399 unlocked and off contract then I'd probably pick one up.
7. Gigabinzle (Posts: 37; Member since: 30 Aug 2013)
seems like every time i open a web browser, things are changing
10. zachattack (Posts: 565; Member since: 31 Jul 2013)
Should be offering this phone for free ~. See the HTC One being 200$ on verizon is because well, the HTC One is still one of the best. The moto X never was or will be one of the best. So a 200$ price tag is just laughable. Kind of like the even more laughable 300$ tag on this years Maxx which is essentially last years phone.
12. Sniggly (Posts: 6946; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
Congratulations, you have successfully plugged your ears and screamed "la la la I'm not listening" at the top of your lungs for the past month, as many tech writers have explained the price and why it's justified.
20. Zero0 (Posts: 583; Member since: 05 Jul 2012)
HTC One has a sharp LCD display and a metal back. The Moto X has a lower resolution AMOLED display which is a bit gentler on battery and offers up a solid software feature. The X also has customization.
CPU and GPU are roughly neck and neck. Yes, the HTC One is a little faster on the processing end (slightly newer architecture), but the Moto X has the edge with its extra-RISC cores to boost battery life, and again, provide more software features.
Battery size is roughly the same (though the rest of the X hardware was built around battery friendliness), storage and battery are non-removable on both devices. The cameras are both awkward, and from a hardware end, probably more or less the same (though a software fix for the X would be nice). The One does have a huge edge on speakers, but the X has a dual LTE antenna.
The difference is a little faster hardware on the One, and more battery friendly hardware on the X. Better software on the X, better build on the One.
Toss in a made in the USA sticker, and you have a Moto X that at least matches the HTC One.
23. VZWuser76 (Posts: 1352; Member since: 04 Mar 2010)
Personally, I'd rather have better battery life, especially with non removable batteries in the mix. And most reviewers are saying the X is just as fluid or more so than it's competition. Why does it matters if 2 cores are missing when it's near the same real world performance? I used to constantly go by benchmarks, but the truth is they don't necessarily translate to superior real world performance. And as far as screen tech goes, yes the One is better. It's crisper, probably with more true to life colors. But try using the Smart Notifications on an LCD, & you'll see the reason why they went amoled. Battery life goes to hell quick. As far as the difference between 1080 vs 720, like others have said you'll see the difference side by side, but on their own probably not. I've compared both my old Rezound and my S3 to the DNA, and side by side it beat them, but on their own I couldn't tell the difference, and that's with 20/20 vision. The only time I saw a noticeable difference in screens was when I went from my Incredible2 (480x800) to my Rezound (720p). That was also going from a 4" to a 4.3" screen. IMHO 1080 should be reserved for screens 5"+. The battery draw from these screens is currently to much to make them worth it, again, IMHO.
28. Zero0 (Posts: 583; Member since: 05 Jul 2012)
All of it. A smartphone isn't a series of numbers, it's an actual experience. Cores and clock speed aren't what matter, what matters is the smoothness of the experience.
I mean, think back to how iPhones compared to earlier Android phones. Android was on the cutting edge of hardware, but Apple's software allowed the iPhone to win out -- they managed to have a less laggy experience on inferior hardware.
Now Android stacks up nicely on the software lag front (because Project Butter is brilliant), so OEMs need to work harder to squeeze more battery life out of these things.