New Motorola Moto E images and specs revealed, colorful Moto Shells included
0. phoneArena 10 May 2014, 06:08 posted on
We can now take a look at lots of renders that show the upcoming Moto E, which is expected to be Motorola's next low-cost Android smartphone...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
1. dil2abu (Posts: 238; Member since: 09 Nov 2011)
Even this is gonna rock like Moto G in sales..
9. vincelongman (Posts: 3107; Member since: 10 Feb 2013)
Its rumored to be $99, which would be great value for money
Hopefully this means Lenovo is letting the Moto team continue their good work
25. ihavenoname (Posts: 1645; Member since: 18 Aug 2013)
When we have Moto E and 520, Nokia X is useless.
When we have Moto G and 630, Nokia XL is useless.
45. sgodsell (Posts: 2580; Member since: 16 Mar 2013)
The 52x do not have dual Sims. The 630/635 is still not released yet. Only the 630 will have dual Sims. Remember Android is still selling hundreds of millions of smart phones every quarter (240 million Q1, 2014). Microsoft and Nokia needed to get something into the users hands in emerging markets and it had to be inexpensive and support dual Sims. Everyone knows Microsoft and WP is still playing catch up to Android. So if you looked at the specs of the Nokia X then you would know WP 8 would not even run on a cortex-A5/A7 which is currently running in the Nokia X devices. Also WP 8 never supported on screen buttons or dual Sims, both of which the Nokia X devices once again have. So it was easier for Microsoft and Nokia to just take Android and add a UI that resembles WP and can run Microsoft's existing apps and services. Microsoft already has a number of apps for Android already.
Now you know why Microsoft did what they did. The project name for it was called project Normandy. Microsoft and Nokia felt like they had to stem the growth of Android, because it keeps growing every quarter. Also the moto G is better then any lumia 5xx, 6xx, 7xx, 8xx device hands down.
29. NokiaFTW (Posts: 2058; Member since: 24 Oct 2012)
Nokia should have never released an Android phone. I always was and always will be against a Nokia & Android collaboration. WP as a whole suites the colorful Lumia line up of Nokia. They should release WPs with even lower prices as this will help them increase their already significant presence in emerging markets.
31. sprockkets (Posts: 1599; Member since: 16 Jan 2012)
That's just it - they can't.
Imagine that? WP is too expensive even for the old nokia.
Now that the license fee is free, that changes. But of course, MS owns that division, so that doesn't really change anything either.
46. sgodsell (Posts: 2580; Member since: 16 Mar 2013)
My god you are blaming Nokia for the Nokia X. Let's go with that. Nokia never made any Android smartphone all this time until they announced one this February at MWC. Nokia said for our first android phone we will put the lowest spec cortex-A5 CPU in it with only 512mb of ram, 4gb of storage, a poor 800x480 LCD display, a UI that resembles WP, and no Google apps and services, only Microsoft's. As if Microsoft wasn't 100% behind the Nokia X. Because Microsoft's strict Hardware and software controls for WP bit Microsoft right in the butt. WP couldn't run or be supported on low hardware until WP8.1. Even then they still have strict hardware controls and only support Qualcomm CPUs still.
43. Killua (Posts: 270; Member since: 25 Nov 2013)
Nokia X is already bad enough, and now this. LOL.
2. nazyr1803 (Posts: 90; Member since: 11 Jan 2013)
waiting for it. i want to buy this for my father!!
3. StraightEdgeNexus (Posts: 3683; Member since: 14 Feb 2014)
Looks a lot better than white. I hate White bezeled phones.
4. StraightEdgeNexus (Posts: 3683; Member since: 14 Feb 2014)
Hope moto gets this one right like G and X.
22. jroc74 (Posts: 5643; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
Well they took steps forwards and backwards.
No front camera....but sd card support...
Dual core chip...
If its priced even lower or the same as the G, it will do fine with sales.
30. NokiaFTW (Posts: 2058; Member since: 24 Oct 2012)
IMO the Lumia 525 or 620 are better than the Moto E based on the rumours. However, the Moto G & the L630/635 are pretty closely matched. Both have distinct advantages over the other.
28. StraightEdgeNexus (Posts: 3683; Member since: 14 Feb 2014)
P.S. I think this would end up as India exclusive. Also i have a feeling that this one has front facing stereo speakers.
33. corporateJP (Posts: 2431; Member since: 28 Nov 2009)
Confirmed for not only India, but South America and Asia as well. It is listed in America Movil's database also, so it more than likely will show up in Mexico and Central America, possibly come to the U.S. on one of their eight MVNO's. I could see Aio/Cricket and Boost/Virgin pick it up, it would only make sense.
You dig, Phil Brooks?
36. bon24x7 (Posts: 205; Member since: 30 Aug 2012)
Of course it'll be exclusive to India as it got leaked in Brazil..We all know Brazil is in India..
38. StraightEdgeNexus (Posts: 3683; Member since: 14 Feb 2014)
Yeah you gonna kill me for that? Just read the flipkart news on gsmarena so i thought it would be exclusive...
41. NokiaFTW (Posts: 2058; Member since: 24 Oct 2012)
All Motorola smartphones will be exclusive to Flipkart in India. Only Flipkart will sell Motorola smartphones in India, no other retailer can.
5. xperiaDROID (banned) (Posts: 5629; Member since: 08 Mar 2013)
Not bad...looks simple, chubby and colorful. Not bad at all.
Hope it's $80 or maybe near that price, sometimes miracle can happen right? Make it possible, Motorola.
10. fireblade (Posts: 716; Member since: 27 Dec 2013)
probably about $150. But still better than any cheap phones from Samsung, LG, Sony & HTC.
The good thing is it's not mediatek crap
16. VZWuser76 (Posts: 2886; Member since: 04 Mar 2010)
I think it'll be less than $150, that's about what the Moto G was going for, and this is supposed to undercut that. My guess is $80 to $100 range, and will compete directly with the Nokia X line.
40. hurrycanger (Posts: 1534; Member since: 01 Dec 2013)
$150 will be too much imo.
The Moto G starts from $179, and some carrier in the US offers it for $100 to 130 off contract and includes the charger.
This Moto E offers a lot less than the Moto G, including screen size, look, front camera, flash, and a slower processor.
6. ScottSchneider (Posts: 325; Member since: 06 Dec 2011)
PA.. Ya'll sleep on Saturdays and Sundays... I saw this news in GSMA and was not able to open the photos... Been waiting here for more than an hour for you guys to post it here.. Bytheway.. Thx...
23. StraightEdgeNexus (Posts: 3683; Member since: 14 Feb 2014)
Lol. but whats the real reason for slow day at weekends?
32. ScottSchneider (Posts: 325; Member since: 06 Dec 2011)
If GSMA is from the east n you are from the west, I do understand the time delay... But wat happened to news round the clock...? O.o
7. ThePython (Posts: 689; Member since: 08 May 2013)
It's a great to see the latest Android experience at a very affordable price tag. It brings a lot of opportunities and help the market overall.
27. NokiaFTW (Posts: 2058; Member since: 24 Oct 2012)
Moto G, which is priced at almost a third of what Apple calls their "affordable" iPhone, still has better specs than the 5C. I don't and never will understand any of Apple's business logic. I mean the 5S is sure a great phone, but the 5C? Especially at that price? For me, the Moto G & the L630 are the kings of affordable smartphones.
8. Planterz (Posts: 1704; Member since: 30 Apr 2012)
So it's a shade under half an inch thick, not a quarter inch. I'm no longer interested. I'll stick with my Galaxy Light for a cheap throw-around/backup phone.
54. hurrycanger (Posts: 1534; Member since: 01 Dec 2013)
I have that phone. From ebay it's only $130 now, so I don't see any reason to get the Moto E unless it's like $80 or less (Though $100 is still an acceptable price).
There are the LG Optimus F3 and Optimus F6, too. They all beat this Moto E, and they're also $130 each (from eBay, of course).
13. htcforlife (Posts: 62; Member since: 15 Apr 2014)
The no front camera and no flash for the rear camera are a deal breaker for me
20. boosook (Posts: 1329; Member since: 19 Nov 2012)
People who need a flash and the front camera may get the moto G! ;)
14. AppleAnusSoFragrant (banned) (Posts: 11; Member since: 10 May 2014)
Good phone but Too bad it has only 4gb memory so sad :)
15. Frankiebeans (Posts: 33; Member since: 26 Aug 2012)
i'm sure if you were someone to buy that phone you dont care about space and if you did you can buy a 32 gb micro sd on amazon for $17 or 16 gb for $8. and this is still an amazing deal and more space than anybody with this phone would need.
18. boosook (Posts: 1329; Member since: 19 Nov 2012)
Exactly. Yet the things that matter for a satisfying user experience (hi-res screen, 1gb or ram at least and big battery) are there. This will probably be the only android phone at that price tag with good usability. The ultimate basic smartphone. It will sell a lot imho.
17. Cyberchum (Posts: 587; Member since: 24 Oct 2012)
Good, actually good but had this been a Nokia, fandroids will be all over talking bull about it: no flash, no front-facing camera, large bezels, thick frame,heck, some will call it a brick.
And the price, yes the price will likely hover around 90-100 dollars but only in the U.S and couple of other countries unlike Nokia that is cheap just about everywhere when it's released as a budget phone.
19. boosook (Posts: 1329; Member since: 19 Nov 2012)
Large bezels? Where do you see them? Look, there's a great difference in philosophy between this and the nokia x series. This phone has the things that matter right: a high resolution screen, a good battery and, most important, 1gb of ram. This means it will be a really usable phone, contrary to the nokia x series which will lag due to its lack or ram and has low resolution screens (the 5" screen with a resolution of 480x800 is ridiculous).
Compare this and the nokia x and think they'll have more or less the same price… Motorola is going to have another hit after the moto G.
24. StraightEdgeNexus (Posts: 3683; Member since: 14 Feb 2014)
Works the otherway, go to gsmarena blog, there are tons of nokia fanboys.
26. taz89 (Posts: 2014; Member since: 03 May 2011)
Come on 4gb of which like only 2gb will probably be free. I know it's a budget device but does that mean you should get low storage especially when storage itself cost next to nothing. Basically anyone getting this better have plans not to install apps and games because considering how big apps and games have gotten you ain't getting many on that.
34. corporateJP (Posts: 2431; Member since: 28 Nov 2009)
It has expandable memory.
Too bad the battery is not removable.
They got this one half-right this time.
Still be a killer at the price point.
37. DonJonMcWizzy (Posts: 2; Member since: 18 Apr 2014)
Motorola Moto E = $105
Android 4.4.2 Kit Kat
NO FRONT CAM
SD CARD UP TO 32 GB
4GB ROM, 1GB RAM
BETTER THAN SAMSUNG GALAXY S DUOS 2 = $160
39. Edward_bly (Posts: 278; Member since: 11 Dec 2013)
Things are great for the price, but dang its ugly.
42. Augustine (Posts: 1004; Member since: 28 Sep 2013)
It doesn't show up in the Brazilian retailer site anymore... However, the snapshot in the Brazilian blog shows its price at $250. For the sake of comparison, the Moto G costs in Brazil $290 (that's the Brazilian voracious tax code for you!). Assuming the same proportion, stateside it would cost $150.
While no stellar phone, it seems to be much better than other cut-rate smartphones. Yet, at this price, it'll hardly attract those desiring to upgrade from feature phones. Perhaps it'll attract low-end phone users.
Too bad it's not LTE-compatible and its HDPA+ data rate is not specified. However, it seems to be strikingly similar to the Razr D3, even sized and priced similarly in Brazil, hinting at the E being its update. The D3 had an HSDPA rate of only 7Mbps though, so my guess is that the HSDPA in the E is going to be 21Mbps like in the G.
44. Killua (Posts: 270; Member since: 25 Nov 2013)
I think it's pretty unlikely to be HD screen with 4.3" since it's specs supposed to be lower than Moto G (which is HD but it has 4.5"). qHD is more likely.
48. fzacek (Posts: 2481; Member since: 26 Jan 2014)
I don't like the cheap looking chrome speaker thing under the display. They should have made it the same color as the rest of the phone...
51. RandomUsername (Posts: 808; Member since: 29 Oct 2013)
I agree, chrome sucks. That's why Samsung phones are so ugly.
53. 007india (Posts: 1; Member since: 11 May 2014)
No flash and no secondary camera. Big disappointment. however 1GB RAM with a heavy pricepoint may stem the phone up.
Also Moto G doesn't have datacable. 4GB ROM is very standard. Let us see. Its a 50-50% possibility given the specs. Check Panasonic P31 specs. Except for RAM, the specs are great.
55. antifanboy14 (Posts: 68; Member since: 26 Nov 2012)
This piece of crap is for kids, right?