x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Hidden picShow menu
  • Home
  • News
  • New Motorola Moto X+1 (codenamed Victara) to be sold by all four major US carriers

New Motorola Moto X+1 (codenamed Victara) to be sold by all four major US carriers

Posted: , by Florin T.

Tags :

New Motorola Moto X+1 (codenamed Victara) to be sold by all four major US carriers
As you may have heard, Motorola is preparing a successor to its Moto X from last year, one that should be called Moto X+1. According to @evleaks, the upcoming handset is codenamed Victara, and will be sold by all four major mobile carriers in the US: Verizon, AT&T, Sprint and T-Mobile. A Moto X+1 for AT&T was already mentioned at Motorola’s website earlier this month (although the name’s been deleted since then).

Like the original Moto X, the new X+1 is expected to come with lots of backplate options, including some made out of wood, and leather.

Last week, Motorola announced its first new smartphone of 2014: the Moto E, which is an affordable handset that costs only $129. We are expecting the Moto X+1 to be more expensive, as this is supposed to be Motorola’s next-gen flagship. Unfortunately, details about its features are completely missing at this point. We also don’t know if the new handset will have a design similar to that of the Moto X (but we’re guessing that a drastic change in looks won’t happen anyway).

Motorola Mobility is in the process of being acquired by Lenovo, which agreed to buy the company from Google for almost $3 billion. But this shouldn’t change Motorola’s software strategy, so its upcoming smartphones will still offer near-stock Android.

The new Moto X+1 should be announced in the second half of the year.

New Motorola Moto X+1 (codenamed Victara) to be sold by all four major US carriers

source: @evleaks

44 Comments
  • Options
    Close






posted on 19 May 2014, 17:42 6

1. akki20892 (Posts: 3901; Member since: 04 Feb 2013)


Nice move Moto.....you r rising again. Good good

posted on 19 May 2014, 17:48 4

2. sip1995 (Posts: 1592; Member since: 07 Feb 2014)


Agreed, this should be a lesson to Nokia and Microsoft for the stupid exclusives.

posted on 19 May 2014, 18:28

7. PhoneArenaUser (Posts: 5498; Member since: 05 Aug 2011)


Isn't Motorola now exclusively only for U.S. ?

posted on 19 May 2014, 19:30 1

13. TheLolGuy (Posts: 483; Member since: 05 Mar 2013)


Thats only because Motorola lost it's branding strength in pretty much all markets including the US.

They aren't exclusive to the US because they want it that way, they just need to get a firm grip on it's home market before they walk out onto the international stage again.

Well... I guess I should say China is the home market now, and not the US. lol

posted on 19 May 2014, 20:52 1

18. sgodsell (Posts: 3890; Member since: 16 Mar 2013)


Huh? Have you not seen that the moto g has been sold in many countries around the world. The same holds true for the moto e now. Not to mention the moto x is being sold in North and South America, as well as some EU countries.

posted on 20 May 2014, 09:12

38. surethom (Posts: 714; Member since: 04 Mar 2009)


Loved the Motorola Atrix but Motorola dont seem to launch much outside America.

I so wanted the Moto X but only 16gb version was released here in the UK 6 months later, any thing under 32gb on a highend smartphone will be getting full within a few months. Hope the X+1 comes to UK in 32gb version

posted on 20 May 2014, 00:58

30. Chuck007 (Posts: 1147; Member since: 02 Mar 2014)


Not anymore. Motorola started to sell the Moto G and Moto X here in Hong Kong around two months ago.

posted on 20 May 2014, 06:46

31. TheGenius (Posts: 339; Member since: 06 Mar 2014)


All 3 moto's are being sold in India as well.!

posted on 20 May 2014, 09:10

37. surethom (Posts: 714; Member since: 04 Mar 2009)


Motorola has always been more America focused & only releases a couple of phones outside America & only months later i.e. Moto X only 16gb version & 6 months later.

Lets hope this changes under Lenovo.

posted on 19 May 2014, 22:15 1

21. InspectorGadget80 (unregistered)


Very smart move NO MORE EXCLUSIVE put it on every carrier includes pre paid and please add SD CARD slot then i'll go back buying your phones.

posted on 19 May 2014, 18:03 1

3. fsalto98 (Posts: 31; Member since: 25 Apr 2014)


Yeah i hate it when i cant get a phone i want unless i switch carriers

posted on 19 May 2014, 18:05 1

4. sip1995 (Posts: 1592; Member since: 07 Feb 2014)


It's awful....hopefully carriers here, can't sell locked phones.

posted on 19 May 2014, 18:15 4

5. Awalker (Posts: 1577; Member since: 15 Aug 2013)


If the Moto X +1 is the Moto X with a better screen and camera I would buy it.

posted on 19 May 2014, 18:23 2

6. iLoveAmexica (Posts: 47; Member since: 18 Dec 2013)


with a non amoled screen you mean

posted on 19 May 2014, 18:39 6

8. jellmoo (Posts: 1699; Member since: 31 Oct 2011)


Nah. Amoled all the way! Active Display needs it, and it is a killer feature. If they could make a screen like what's on the S5, then it would be amazing.

posted on 19 May 2014, 22:22

26. Berzerk000 (Posts: 4275; Member since: 26 Jun 2011)


My Droid Mini has a LCD and Active Display, I don't even notice a difference in battery life when I have the feature on or off.

posted on 20 May 2014, 07:29 1

32. jroc74 (Posts: 6015; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)


You tell em....there are some Amoled lovers out there...me included. And for me its not for Active Display....just the overall screen I like better than LCD.

posted on 19 May 2014, 19:13

9. fzacek (Posts: 2486; Member since: 26 Jan 2014)


900p or 1080p instead of 720p is probably what he means...

posted on 19 May 2014, 22:16

22. InspectorGadget80 (unregistered)


They say X+1 will have 1080P this time. that's why i skipped the X cause of the low specs

posted on 19 May 2014, 19:15 2

10. fzacek (Posts: 2486; Member since: 26 Jan 2014)


Random question: Why are there no smartphones with a 900 by 1600 screen resolution? The Moto X+1 should have a 900p display...

posted on 19 May 2014, 19:26 3

11. zennacko (Posts: 237; Member since: 16 Jun 2013)


People would whine about that, saying "It's not FHD like its competitors, and only PS4/Xbox One have enough excuses to actually use 900p instead of 1080 or quad-HD resolutions"

Phone size, bezels, and screen resolutions are an endless war on phone sites.
For example, I can't stand anything above 4.5 inches on a phone, meanwhile everyone else seem happy enough with their giant phones that almost can't fit in a pocket anymore (is the Z ultra or the 1520 still "pocket-friendly"?)

posted on 19 May 2014, 20:16 1

15. fzacek (Posts: 2486; Member since: 26 Jan 2014)


I think 900p would be a good medium for phones like the Moto X. It's sharper than 720p yet more battery friendly than 1080p...

posted on 19 May 2014, 22:20

23. grahaman27 (Posts: 361; Member since: 05 Apr 2013)


because 1080P panels are cheaper and a better standard.

posted on 19 May 2014, 19:28

12. shamatuu (Posts: 159; Member since: 02 Nov 2011)


on my list also LG and HTC.

posted on 19 May 2014, 20:07

14. Arte-8800 (banned) (Posts: 4562; Member since: 13 Mar 2014)


Hope this will be a quadcore. Cpu device

posted on 19 May 2014, 22:20

24. grahaman27 (Posts: 361; Member since: 05 Apr 2013)


I would think it would, but why count cores?

posted on 19 May 2014, 22:38

29. fzacek (Posts: 2486; Member since: 26 Jan 2014)


Because a quad-core is better than a dual-core...

posted on 20 May 2014, 07:46

34. dbdrummer88 (Posts: 29; Member since: 24 Feb 2014)


The Moto X outperforms the GS3 in benchmarking tests as an example (Moto x 1.7GHz dual core vs GS3 1.4GHz quad core). The CPU alone isn't what makes for a good or smooth experience. There are more factors than you can count as to what makes the performance and experience better.

posted on 20 May 2014, 09:06

35. fzacek (Posts: 2486; Member since: 26 Jan 2014)


You can't compare two completely different phones. With all other variables being equal, a 1.7GHz quad-core would greatly outperform a 1.7GHz dual-core. Sure, it's also about optimization and all that good stuff, but in a controlled situation a quad-core will always outperform a dual score...

posted on 20 May 2014, 13:09

41. dbdrummer88 (Posts: 29; Member since: 24 Feb 2014)


I completely agree that a quad core is better than a dual core. But a phone doesn't just rely on the CPU. So when a phone specs say they have a dual or quad core, you have to look past just the CPU spec and see what else is helping to help in performance.

I based my initial comment reply to yours "Because a quad-core is better than a dual-core..."

I would rather have the Moto X than the GS3 (back to my example) which shows that the CPU isn't everything. Other factors can be clock speed, FSB, built in memory cache and others too. Just stating that quad core is better than dual core doesn't hold much ground without proof.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories