Two new pictures of the DROID RAZR HD leak out
0. phoneArena 02 Aug 2012, 14:28 posted on
Check out Motorola's upcoming flagship device for Verizon in images that are surprisingly good compared to standard "blurry-cam" leaks...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
4. MingLiangChen (Posts: 13; Member since: 06 Jul 2012)
It looks good , I hope the carbon fibre pattern doesn't go symmetrical though. It looks like a phone with carbon fibre sticker on the back.
6. taz89 (Posts: 2014; Member since: 03 May 2011)
It's different which is good I think just not sure about the size of the bezels
29. nnaatthhaannx2 (Posts: 820; Member since: 19 Oct 2011)
I agree. The size bezel on my current razr is huge and it looks the same here.
The bottom one actually looks BIGGER than the current one. Looks like Moto is moving in the wrong direction. And I hate those on screen buttons!!! GRRR!
52. taz89 (Posts: 2014; Member since: 03 May 2011)
Yh top and bottom bezel look right.. Side just seems tad bigger than they should be... Personally love the builds of the RAZR and MAXX and probably the best built phones out there... Just hated the huge bezels on them.. The RAZR which is a 4.3" device is almost same size as the 4.8" s3...hopefully this phone in person will look much better.
26. PAPINYC (Posts: 2237; Member since: 30 Jul 2011)
Why? You're not looking into a mirror, it doesn't reflect anything back at you. Or, cuz' it's not made of shatter-proned glass and comes in your two favorite color variations black and Martha Stewart White(tm)?
85. Mxyzptlk (Posts: 3325; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
Ripoff is what I am thinking of as well.
3. TheLibertine (Posts: 484; Member since: 15 Jan 2012)
Like it. 2,530 mAh plus 28nm-chip could mean great performance AND terrific battery life. Motorola's first 720p phone and some unique design/material choice. And Jelly Bean will be soon to follow,while ICS isn't' bad.
5. Carlitos (Posts: 309; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)
that would be awesome. Only it wouldnt be motorola first 720p phone if you mean by the screen resolution.
9. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5559; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)
the Atrix HD was their first 720p device.
12. SuperAndroidEvo (Posts: 3857; Member since: 15 Apr 2011)
See this is why Moto suffers. Android 4.0.4? Why not have STOCK Jelly Bean then update it with your own flavored skinned Jelly Bean.
This is where OEMs fail I think. Nice device but outdated OS.
15. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5559; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)
this is a leak of a pre-production unit and just because these pictures hit the web today doesn't mean that they're new. Moto's skin is the closest to stock you're going to get and if they've really gotten so far along with it running ICS then i'd rather them just go ahead and release it and update it to JB later. if it weren't so close to a possible launch then i'd say get JB on there and we'll talk.
20. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5610; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)
It kind of looks like the version of ICS that was released to the non-HD RAZRs, which tends to confirm your pre-production theory. Given how close to stock Android Moto has moved, it should be relatively easy to move straight to JB. But then who knows once the carrier (VZW) gets involved.
23. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5559; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)
yeah, ICS for the Razr was pretty much ready so, so long ago but Verizon held it back. i would imagine that the experience of using this thing should be like using an Atrix HD but on a 4.8" display.
31. jackhammeR (Posts: 1548; Member since: 17 Oct 2011)
oudated os? ICS is outdated??????? Are you sleeping and typing on your keyboard or what??
64. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5559; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)
ICS is still quite nice but technically it is outdated.
18. dmckay12 (Posts: 243; Member since: 25 Feb 2012)
The Motorola MT917 was Moto's first HD phone.
24. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5559; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)
i really meant in the states, my bad for not clarifying that.
27. ObjectivismFTW (Posts: 211; Member since: 03 Jul 2012)
28nm won't make much more of a difference from 32nm because of transistor leakage, so I'd expect most of the advantages here to be from the bigger battery, that said, this phone uses LCD technology, which uses much more power than AMOLED, so I'd say that this phone should have just about the same, if not, a bit more battery than the Galaxy S3, with it's 2100mAh.
Personally, I think the V design here is really unappealing, but it's excusable -- Motorola never got looks down that much anyway. And I kinda wish it had a bigger screen, looks 4.3 inches here.
As far as OS, I think ICS for now is fine. I really hate Moto for not even announcing this device yet, however. It was going to be this vs. the Galaxy S3 for me, but Moto twiddled their fingers, I'm guessing, because there seems to be no 'WOW' anything here that would warrant longer development times, which isn't bad, but this phone really should've released by now. No reason releasing it after iPhone 5..
33. PhoneArenaUser (Posts: 5471; Member since: 05 Aug 2011)
"...this phone uses LCD technology..."
Are you sure?
35. ObjectivismFTW (Posts: 211; Member since: 03 Jul 2012)
Yes. The Atrix HD used ColorBoost, and LCD based technology, so it would make no sense for Motorola to debut this technology for their first next-gen device, then drop it immediately for their flagship. I'm sure ColorBoost will be attached to Moto just like S-LCD is to HTC, AMOLED to Samsung, etc.
41. PhoneArenaUser (Posts: 5471; Member since: 05 Aug 2011)
But Razr Maxx was using OLED based display. Anyway, I wish LCD. :)
42. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5559; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)
there's a chance that they're using an HDSA display to appease the enthusiasts loyal to the renewed Razr brand but it's seeming more and more likely they're more in favor of this ColorBoost technology they're using.
38. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5559; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)
the OMAP4 used a 45nm manufacturing process so yes, the 28nm would make a noticeable difference over other Razrs including the MAXX. AMOLED Displays are indeed more power efficient but not enough to make a device equivalent to one with 430mAh more in battery department. that's nearly a quarter of the Galaxy SIII's entire battery capacity.
the looks are subjective. i really like Moto's designs and this is no exception. it's certainly not 4.3" there's shots of it out there next to the original Razr, it's certainly bigger. i'd say it hits the 4.8" mark.
if it comes out with everything it's seeming to have then it will be worth it.
45. ObjectivismFTW (Posts: 211; Member since: 03 Jul 2012)
Yes, over the other Razrs, but this phone is not trying to top those phones, it's trying to top the GS3, OX, and iP5 probably. The Atrix HD used Snapdragon S4, with 20mAh less than than the OX, of the same processor, but the battery was worse than the One X by a pretty noticeable amount, so considering that the software was optimized for the phone, the only other thing that could fall on is Moto's manufacturing. Remember, Kurogiii, the Razr Maxx and Razr HD used AMOLED, not LCD, so this is a step-back.
Try and use a newer example if you want to compare processors.
As far as AMOLED to LCD compared, the Razr will be better than GS3 in battery life, obviously, but when you consider the screen tech, which killed the battery for the Atrix, that 430mAh may as well be cut to 215mah, which adds to maybe 30mins to a but under hour of battery?
As far as screen size, my fault, thanks for the correction, but asthetics, well that's subjective, so no real agreement can be reached there.
CORRECTION: Razr and Razr Maxx, Not Razr HD used AMOLED.. Lol Moto confuses me with this.
56. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5559; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)
i know that but the original comment you responded to was a statement of Moto's progress versus their past devices. the SLCD-2 display that the One X is equipped with has less battery consumption than the LCD technology the Atrix HD uses. if there's a difference in battery life that's why. yeah but the S4 buries the difference in power consumption from AMOLED to LCD so it really doesn't matter much. the S4 is more efficient with power than the SAA displays of the previous Razrs and the OMAP4 that the Razrs used are nearly twice as big so yeah, there'll be improved battery performance.
now how do you project that i wonder? all of my findings about the Atrix HD's battery life are so mixed that i don't really see how you can say for certain. MobileTechReview (one of my personal favorites) says it lasts 30-40 minutes less than the SIII, Phone Arena assures that it gets through the day and Engadget was apparently disappointed with it. another factor you may want to consider is that Motorola uses more metals in their construction and while that does make the phone more durable it also draws more heat than the mostly plastic construction Samsung uses and extreme temperature changes drains batteries quicker so your mileage may vary. i know my Razr gets pretty hot sometimes and that'll drain the battery. i use this really accurate battery app called battery widget reborn and it shows me the temperature and how long the battery has in a persistent notification. my Razr has gotten to 114 degrees Fahrenheit before. that's pretty toasty. enough for it to give me a notification that the phone is too hot.
59. ObjectivismFTW (Posts: 211; Member since: 03 Jul 2012)
No, I wasn't refering to Motorola's older products when I said 32nm, I was simply citing a another common manufacturing process. Remember, Tegra 3 is 40nm, and we don't see much of a battery difference between that and S4, if at all, due to Nvidia's masterful manufacturing. If your saying ColorBoost drains battery quicker, then your just futher proving my point, so thanks lol, and what your saying is that the S4 is more efficient with power, but the Atrix still showed signs of poor battery life EVEN WITH the S4, so which arguement are you making? And once again, I said there would be improved battery performance a few times, but given the hardware choice that I (and apparently you) have pointed out, it all leads to the same conclusion: The Razr HD will not be as power efficient.
As far as the reviews, I try not to look at PhoneArena because they will often say the differences between devices are negligible, even though in real life you can observe a clear difference, especially with displays. But there are many more reviewers out there:
/259591/motorola_atrix_hd_revi ew_dazzling_display_low_price. html
And of course .. Engadget...
Look at more review sites dude.
Futhermore, your whole rant of metals and plastics helps my arguement so, thank you, but I know that already.
The funny thing is, we argued extensively over the Atrix HD, over mostly the same topics. Ever look back and see which arguement surfaced?
62. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5559; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)
Nvidia has their 4+1 method of battery saving but i don't see how Nvidia is relevant here at all. by all logic the ColorBoost and S4 equipped Motorolas should be more power efficient than AMOLED and OMAP4 equipped Motorolas and my Razr lasts the day, in fact the Atrix HD should be at least as good or better in the battery department. the only thing on the contrary is a comment here or there about the Atrix HD having bad battery life and i've found comments saying the opposite too so i think i'm going to go with the ladder group being that the facts back them up.
the Razr HD won't be quite as power efficient but that's negligible being that the difference is buried by the larger capacity battery and then some.
i don't care to. anyone can start a tech blog. i just go to the more renowned ones, the highly reviewed reviewers if you will. they're good enough for me.
now back on subject.
there may be a battery bug with the Atrix or something. wouldn't be the first time that's happened but don't act like that's something that generally afflicts Motorola because it's not. Motorola devices are generally just fine with software optimization, they're even serious enough about extending battery life to come up with Smart Actions. Motorola can fix a bug, it's no big deal but as far as hardware is concerned the Razr HD should have noticeably better battery life than the SIII. we'll see whether or not the same bug that may have cropped up in the Atrix HD shows up on the Razr HD.
i was merely speculaing as to why the Atrix HD's battery life drains like it does for certain people but not others. maybe it's a bug.
i'm not trying to argue with you for the sake of arguing like you usually seem to do with me. you're actually pretty smart but your bias clouds your judgement. the Razr HD has a really, really large battery, like i said before the difference in the SIII's Battery and the HD's battery is nearly an entire quarter of the SIII's battery's entire capacity. i think we can expect it to perform noticeably better than the SIII regardless of screen technologies. now when you start defying logic is when you start assuming that the Razr HD will be like the Atrix HD in regards of it's battery life which may or may not be bad when Motorola has never had any particularly badly optimized software and is using the much more efficient fourth generation Snapdragon. i'm happy to speculate as to why the Atrix may have bad battery life but it's not right to assume the Razr HD is going to be effected by a battery drain issue that's afflicted one device and hasn't even happened consistently it seems. until it's confirmed i prefer to stick to consistent fact.
66. ObjectivismFTW (Posts: 211; Member since: 03 Jul 2012)
I don't know why you keep referencing the old OMAP 4, firstly you seem to be providing no sources to your CPU power-efficieny claims, so those would be nice.
he only thing on the contrary is a comment here or there about the Atrix HD, the ladder group being that the facts back them up."
As far as the whole battery issue, you literally make no sense in your interpretations of those reviews. Here a hint, click (ALT+F) and enter the word "battery" and take a look at each review one more time, because I don't want to post each quote here. By your interpretation, no reviewer offers no amount of information about battery life sufficient enough to validate a conclusion. There is more than a comment "here and there" about battery life, in fact, most of the ones I posted dedicate an entire section to battery life, detailing their experiences with the battery using real life situation.
And once again, what groups of people are you talking about that claim the Atrix has a good battery? Your just spurting out claims with no sources at all.
And yes, because Time Magazine, PCWorld, Geek.com, PocketNow, and IntoMobile were just started by random techies. Dude, your methods of debating lie on some absurd basis that you decide what is valuable and what is not, it's so egoistic and self-serving IDK how you even consider yourself a techie. All of those review sites I mentioned were credible. Who are you to say they are not? Do you even know the history of those sites? Please enlighten me.
"the Razr HD won't be quite as power efficient but that's negligible being that the difference is buried by the larger capacity battery and then some"
430mAh seperate this and the Galaxy S3, the very efficient AMOLED vs ColorBoost(which doesn't even prove to be as efficient as SLCD2, which is under AMOLED in efficieny) + the plastic internals of the GS3 split this by a good half, if not, more. So of course the Razr HD will sport better battery life, there's no doubt, but you won't be walking around with a 12-hour battery, dude.
Your Battery-Bug Bullsh*t - (I censored that)
Here you are again, assuming, assuming, assuming, with NO BASIS**** Look at that ! You even convinced yourself that there is a battery bug on the Atrix HD with no proof, none, zip. Pathetic. You will go to any means necessary to prove Motorola is superior.
I don't argue for the sake of arguing, I don't even argue. I put up facts, and articles, and you just talk, talk, talk (Gimmee dat !).
"Atrix has a really really large battery" - Really really large? Like REALLY?
"i think we can expect it to perform noticeably better than the SIII...... software and is using the much more efficient fourth generation Snapdragon."
You went from saying any battery differences between the One X and Atrix are due to the screen technologies, but now, all of a sudden, screen tech doesn't matter. You went from saying the Atrix HD has a bug, but now Moto optimizes their software well ! =D
70. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5559; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)
because the original post was about the different things Motorola has done to improve so we're using their last flagship as a basis of comparison. what are you talking about? you mean when i mentioned Nvidia's 4+1 approach? the Tegra III uses a 5th low powered companion core that does all of the background tasks when the device is sleeping among other thing things that's how it's more power efficient despite it being made on a 40nm manufacturing process.
yeah, that's exactly what i did. you think i wasted time searching through all those reviews for mentions about the battery life? the sections are not really that extensive, it's mostly just here's how long the battery last, here's what i think about it.
i told you guy. MobileTechReview and Phone Arena don't have anything really bad to say about it. they say it gets them through the day just fine. i just picked those two out from the reviews i had actually seen before this discussion and like i told you i don't go to many tech blogs.
if being a techie to you means reading every tech blog on the internet then no, i don't really hold myself in such regard. i just picked out the ones i think are more credible. apparently i'm not the only one that does so considering the popularity factors at work here.
the display technologies do make a difference in battery consumption but not really as much as you seem to think. my sister's SIII actually lasts a good 11 and half hours so i'd say the Razr HD actually goes over that 12 hours there. xD
okay, so explain to me why the Atrix HD has bad battery life then. i'd say i'm not the only one making assumptions. what was that you said? the only other thing that could fall on is Moto's manufacturing? what makes you say that when there's no basis behind it? it doesn't line up with consistent fact. no Motorola device in recent memory has been a power hog, in fact they've generally been just fine. you're just too quick to pass of bad judgement on Motorola for no real good reason.
i haven't needed to use any articles here. i'm pretty sure you know about SoCs and Display Technologies enough to not have to find links about them for you and i had given you the names of the blogs i referenced about the Atrix HD before you took it upon yourself to google a bunch of reviews. what else do you need from me? just tell me. i'm sorry but are you trying to mock me? you really get bent out of shape in these kinds of discussions huh guy? xD
if you look back you'll see i was talking about the Razr HD's battery and yes, like really guy.
the Atrix HD and the One X has an 80mAh difference in battery size so yeah and i said it was negligible when i was talking about the SIII and the Razr HD because they have a 430mAh difference. generally they do optimize their software well, so does Samsung but even Samsung devices get bugs.
72. ObjectivismFTW (Posts: 211; Member since: 03 Jul 2012)
I know Nvidias 4+1 bro. You are alot of other "techies" share the same inconsistencies when judging CPU power, emphasizing nanometers when there are SO many other things that actually judge the actual efficiency of the CPU. L-Caches, Pipelines and Clusters, but even other things that we, the public don't get incite into, but conclude after seeing performance, like capacitors, MOSFETS and circuitry.
"the sections are not really that extensive, it's mostly just here's how long the battery last"
Thats a HUGE generalization of it, and the reviews actually give more information than just mentioning a sentence, which, apparentlybut wouldn't you believe that there are numerous tests behind that.
Funny thing is, this is what PhoneArena says about the battery:
"We can wish all we want about seeing the 3,300 mAh battery of the DROID RAZR MAXX inside of this one, but instead, the ATRIX HD is mellowed out with an uncannily low 1,780 mAh battery. And of course, we’re not terribly surprised to find its performance well below the competition, as it provides less than a single day of juice. Obviously, it’s enough to get us through a grueling work day, but it’s something that’s going to require nightly charges."
Wtf, you claim that the other reviews don't provide enough information on battery for you to believe it, but PhoneArena barely says a few sentences, yet those few sentences are more credible than the others, which offer more info.. what? That makes absoloutely no sense. The reason you only listen to PhoneArena and MTR is becuase they say what you want to hear. And of course popularity factors, but you give to reason as to why you view one more credible as the other. I'm sure Time Magazine, IntoMobile, PocketNow and PCWorld are just as credible as PhoneArena; there is absolutely nothing to say they are not. And what conclusion can you reach when more people say something is bad than people say it's good, what does that say to you? Someone who is actually looks for the truth would look for the opinions of many, until you do that, none of what you claim can every be substantiated.
11 and a half hours, considering that you didn't even mention how much she uses it, that claim has no substantial basis. Next.
What's the problem with the Atrix HD simply being a power hog? Is the idea of a phone simply having bad battery life too complex for you? I'm basing what I'm saying off the process of elimination, it happens that manufacturers simply do not put enough though into their components, and the result is a poorly-performing device. As far as why, SoCs have so many internal components, switches, mosfets, capacitors, that effect performance that it would be difficult to pin-point, but of course no reviewer will mention that for the sake of keeping things simple. Ran outta space.
73. ObjectivismFTW (Posts: 211; Member since: 03 Jul 2012)
"No Moto device has been a power hog" - This statement is so completely general, it simply cannot be applied to this arguement. No Moto device before the Atrix has used an S4, and many of the other internals. It is a completely different design set, and inconsistencies can arise. Atrix could've been Motorola testing the water, see how they can adapt to these new tools sets, this of course is mere opinion, but given the low-risk nature of the Atrix, it certainly seems plausible.
And I didn't just "google a bunch of reviews", these are reviews I had seen before, in inclusion to the ones you posted, MTR, PhoneArena, and Engadget, only two of which were in your favor. And no, I'm not trying to mock you, it's just the flow of my debates, after a while, when something seems so ridiculous, I will resort to comic relief.
And yes, my Atrix Large battery thing was a typo, I was not saying the Atrix battery was large, I was referencing the childish-lish ways in which you summarized the Razr's battery (Really, Really large???)
once again, flip-flop. First you said that the OX's battery advantage was due to screen technology, but now you are also referencing the 80mAh, which could easily be countered by the Atrix's smaller screen.
77. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5559; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)
what's your point? we know the factors that make the most difference in performance and besides are you assuming what i know about SoCs? i know plenty.
yeah, it's a smaller battery and if they had gotten anything less than it should have i'm sure they would've mentioned it. a day is really all you should expect from this.
when did i say that? the reaso why i listen to PhoneArena and MTR is because i like them and i don't care to look at 10-15 reviews for the same phone. i go to the bigger tech blogs because they've gotten big for a reason. they're good and since i'm no going to read everybody's reviews for things i might as well go with who more people find credible. i don't need you to lecture me. i think i've earned a lot of respect around here for my knowlege. i've never seen you around since before the Atrix post so what you think about how i do things really doesn't matter to me.
well i guess that's with a little over moderate use.
that's an assumption. you don't know any more about why the Atrix HD's battery life drains quickly than i do. your theory holds as much merit as mine, tbh it doesn't really sound that far off from mine so why are you lecturing me about making assumptions?
ohhhhh, my mistake! xD
oh yeah, your funny reference to one of my earlier comments just made this whole thing just so much more light hearted. :P
so why'd you do that? i thought you weren't trying to be personal?
no, i reminded you that there was only an 80mAh difference so since they are so close in battery capacities something like display technologies would make a difference. get it now?
btw this is all in reply to comments 72 and 73.
81. ObjectivismFTW (Posts: 211; Member since: 03 Jul 2012)
My other comment just keeps saying "Loading", so I guess I'll re-type it.
"what's your point? .............i know plenty"
Your arguement doesn't make it seem like you do.
lke what? If you had actually read the reviews with your eyes open, you should be able to see just fine.
Oh ok, so you that's how you judge reviews.. "They should've mentioned it"
"When did I say that?"
Here: "the sections are not really that extensive, it's mostly just here's how long the battery last, here's what i think about it." - DIRECT contradiction.
And if you want to talk about popularity, talk about engadget. And just because PhoneArena has reached this level of "popularity" doesn't mean it doesn't give unreliable information in videos -- Look at ANY iPhone comparion. And usually they say screen differences are negligible, when in real life, differences can be seen, like I said before.
that's an assumption. you don't know any more about why the Atrix HD's battery life drains quickly than i do. your theory holds as much merit as mine, tbh it doesn't really sound that far off from mine so why are you lecturing me about making assumptions?
"that's an assumption. ... so why are you lecturing me about making assumptions?"
Take the galaxy nexus for example, upon launch, many people had reported having bad battery life, and of course forums turned to the term "battery bug", as you have. But even with Jellybean, the phone's battery life hasn't improved that much. The Gnexus is similar to the Atrix in the way that it was Samsung's first time using the next-gen hardware tool sets, and there were some bunders, obviously. Similar to the death-grip with iPhone 4, and the One X antenna problems. but you can see the patterns certainly, so its not complete assumption
82. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5559; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)
wait so you thought when i said that i meant i wasn't getting enough information from the reviews about the battery life? no. just in terms of realistic usage there's not really a whole lot more to put than that. i'm not contradicting myself, you're just constantly misunderstanding me.
yeah and other blogs don't? i told you i'm not going to them all so if i'm going to pick ones to go to i'm just going to pick the bigger ones. i'd ask how you choose the ones you go to but apparently you go to them all like a worthless no-life.
yeah, i said it has as much merit as mine.
i am though talking to you guy, you're just a pure asshole that's unable to have an intelligent conversation. have a nice life.
84. ObjectivismFTW (Posts: 211; Member since: 03 Jul 2012)
I'm not misunderstanding you, pal. You live inside your own mind, as if your opinion of blogs stand as fact, trying to use your completely self-serving and incoherent theories about screen tech and CPU power as fact, without using ANYTHING to support your arguments, but your own judgement. You claim that no other tech blogs in the world but PhoneArena and MTR are credible, really? That's such a joke bro, the ones I posted were not only credible, but in most cases, well-detailed and well followed. You need to think outside you own head, man. Drop your assumptions of Motorola superiority when there are so many people talking against you, professionals, who test the phones, and conclude with accurate results. I haven't seen anyone here refer to you as "king" as you mentioned in our last arguement, and I see why. You are a Moto Fanboy, through and through, nothing more. You only comment on Moto articles, for the most part, using every little trick in the book to back-up your ideas, and when you have no basis, you claim that your judgement is accurate enough for you to use it as a credible foundation of your arguement. You said Atrix would sell successfully at 150$, or even 200$, didn't happen. Not even at 100$.
You said webdock was a great advantage,
You said battery wouldn't be a problem.
You said camera wouldn't be a problem.
You said software bugs are the reason for bad battery life.
No proof = Unlikely
You claim the phone to be more durable, and with some "proof"
Yet, drop tests say otherwise
See a pattern? get out of your head, dude. Stop making excuses and stop putting down review sites. Your biased opinion is limiting the amount of knowledge you have the potential to obtain.
Listen up pal, do everyone a favor an take your mouth of Motorola's Moto-d**k, breath a few seconds, re-assess your surroundings, my friend.
Am I being personal? Well, TBH, I can't tell, but you know what? I'm being honest, I'd say that's what matters.
And with that................... +1
76. ObjectivismFTW (Posts: 211; Member since: 03 Jul 2012)
And I don't see what your saying the HTC one X has an 1800mAh, the Atrix has 1780mAh.. 1800-1780 = 20?
68. ObjectivismFTW (Posts: 211; Member since: 03 Jul 2012)
And remember, this is all techie talk, nothing personal against you lol (excuse my bad words, I don't use them as a personal offense, they come off quite comically in my head) And for the record, you are probably one of the smartest people that comments on this site, but I think your arguments are fragmented, contradictory, and somewhat nihlistic.
Anyway, I'd like to take a visit to our past Atrix HD arguement of the century.
RememnerYour reasons why the Atrix HD would be competitive at 200$ or even 150$ ? You made this huge craze about webdock -- I won't finish that sentence. You claimed the small battery wouldn't affect it that much, well it kiiiinnnndaaa dooooesssss ssooooooo awwwkkkwaarrdddd....
You claimed camera software and quality would be far superior on the Atrix becuase of Motorola 4.0 ... No HDR and camera quality was average at best, Video Camera was horrendous by most reviews. You claimed kevlar was good, which is..... right, +1 for the King =D... and that the Moto 4.0 was good.. and you know what it is! +1 for King.
The phone wasn't slim at all, not saying it needed to be, but that sort of questions the reason they decided to make the small battery non-removable. GS3 was slimmer, and easier to hold, with a removable battery, so that argument didn't hold weight.
But in the end, most reviewers valued that phone more off it's price that it's features. Most called it "the most impressive phone by Moto yet" which is good at all, but considering it's their first next-gen phone, that seems to not hold much weight either. The bad part is, the HTC ONE X just dropped to 100$ and Atrix dropped to 50$, shrinking the previous 100$ margin. Looking at the pluses and minuses, the One X seems to be a significantly better choice now. So in the end, sales didn't jump, and that was that.
And by the way : "Motorola has never had any particularly badly optimized software"
.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................It starts with an M.. and rhymes with... Motoblur..
71. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5559; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)
ummm...none taken...? xD
oh gosh, you're really going to do this? *sigh* alright then. let's see what you've got here.
well Motorola didn't include it here so oh well. the battery size isn't the problem, it's something else.
i don't remember saying that the camera would be better because of ICS. i went from GB to ICS on my Razr and didn't notice anything different with the camera. it's certainly the case with the Razr and the Razr MAXX. we knew how thick it was when we talked about this before so i don't think i was talking about the Atrix HD specifically. the Atrix HD has trade offs for the One X and the Atrix is outdated so big deal. if the One X is supposed to be better then why did AT&T discount it to the same price as the HD i wonder? wait...why would the One X be a better buy? granted it has a better camera but that's really only the solid thing that's better.
don't be a smartass. everybody has improved their UIs significantly since then. why would Moto suddenly start slacking on optimization when most of their recent devices have been optimized just fine? there was really no point to your statement.
so you don't like to argue for the sake of arguing huh? way to bring back an argument i really didn't care to bring back up. :P
75. ObjectivismFTW (Posts: 211; Member since: 03 Jul 2012)
Motorola didn't include it here, HA, funny when you were talking about it then, you wrote paragraph upon paragraph about how WebDock was super use ful, stating all your wonderful experiences with it, but now that you see you were so wrong, ahh... lets just shrug it off... typical of a fanboy. As far as the Camera problem, we were judging the UIs, which includes camera technology. Now, the Atrix's camera supports more options on ICS because it has better camera tech, but as you can see, even with that tech, Motorola failed at making a good camera, what does that say about the Razr HD? And about thickness, including the Uni-body design here seemed to yield no improvements because the phone was thick and the glass didn't offer much more protection than the Droid Razr, of which the screen takes the most impact off a fall, so the protection seemed to not be there either.
"Battery size isnt the problem" - *sigh*
Yes, you were talking about the Atrix, you want me to go back and cite?
One X was most likely discounted because HTC is suffering from low market income. Now I know your thing "so doesn't that mean the phone is bad?", no, it doesn't. Look at the reviews, bro.
One X - slimmer, easier to hold with a bigger screen and more screen real estate. Bigger battery, better camera, more storage out of the box(Atrix only has 4.8 Gbs), Funny, not once did I see trade-offs in any reviews..
If you don't want me to be a smartass, don't make dumb generalizations like "Motorola has always made well optimized UIs"
Haha you don't care to bring it back up becuase you know what that can say about your arguement.
79. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5559; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)
how does Motorola not including Webtop in a $99 phone make me wrong? it's still useful, i still like it. oh okay, still keeping things non-personal eh? who's contradictive now? xD how does discussing the UI have anything to do with discussing camera tech? you seem to forget the Atrix HD is not a flagship device, it's a high-end economical device. the Atrix HD will be similar to the Razr HD but ultimately the Razr HD is going to be leagues ahead of the Atrix HD.
oh so the battery size is the problem? xD
here i thought you were trying to tell me it was the software. my bad!
go for it.
just because a phone gets good reviews doesn't mean it's going to stay top dollar forever. now that the Atrix HD is here with comparable specs and a $99 price tag what else was AT&T and HTC to do? keep it twice as much?
the ergonomics here are subjective. both feel just fine in the hand. the One X actually feels more slabby than the Atrix HD. some people like that, some people don't. bigger screen, okay...and more screen real estate? lol. xD Oooo! by 80mAh! yeah, i mentioned the better camera. with as much as you can expand memory it really doesn't matter. the same 32GB card that you're never going to fill up would go in that Atrix just like it would that One X. that's because reviews are reviews, not comparisons. the Atrix HD has the better build quality, the closer to stock version of Android (if i had a nickel for the complaints i hear about the stock Sense 4.0 Browser) famed Motorola Antennae, amazing call quality with their Crystal Talk PLUS, trade offs for the Displays, the Atrix has more saturated, cooler colors whereas the One X has warmer, more toned down colors in comparison. completely subjective. i'm sure people will find the on-screen buttons cooler, i know i do.
okay, so i meant in recent memory. no need to be an asshole about it. you know i'm probably not even going to have these discussions with you anymore because you're such an asshole like that. and yes i did just get personal.
no, just sick of arguing with you about it.
48. ObjectivismFTW (Posts: 211; Member since: 03 Jul 2012)
And remember, transistor leakage becomes infintely more apparent when you move to the smaller size manufacturing process. 32nm is basically where the smaller processes don't really yield much better improvement in power consumption, but this is for cellphones only, mind you.
57. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5559; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)
i don't see how that's relevant here. we're comparing phones with 28 and 45nm manufacturing processes. the Kraits in both the HD and the SIII will perform exactly the same and the 45nm A9s in the Razrs haven't crossed that transistor leaking threshold you're talking about.
60. ObjectivismFTW (Posts: 211; Member since: 03 Jul 2012)
I was saying this is response to the person who make that 28nm comment..? And just because I said 32nm is where no real improvement can be observed, it doesn't mean the transistor leakage starts there.
63. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5559; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)
but you don't know what he was basing his statement from. i'd have assumed he was talking about how improved it is compared to Moto's last flagship device. it hardly makes sense any other way.
13. Non_Sequitur (Posts: 1111; Member since: 16 Mar 2012)
I do hope they release it with 2 GB of RAM, though.
14. PhoneArenaUser (Posts: 5471; Member since: 05 Aug 2011)
In my opinion pattern doesn't look good also why so big bottom bezel? Let's hope that those leaks are fake or at least Motorola will change design. :(
69. JC557 (Posts: 982; Member since: 07 Dec 2011)
I kinda like the design as there's no noticeable camera bump. I'm not a fan of the huge bezels though.
83. IamYourFather6657 (Posts: 321; Member since: 01 Jul 2012)
Why the back looks like a galaxy note ?
Samsung's design is so ugly yet Motorola wants to copy them
90. Phullofphil (Posts: 800; Member since: 10 Feb 2009)
I hope that the way the back looks like means that it will be able to be removed and if not than i hope for a water proof phone tho handle atliest a 10 foot depth. But any depth would be cool. Like the depth of a toilet (hopefully toilet that is empty of log rafts and yellow snow melt) LOL. Cool thing would also to take underwater pictures without having to invest in a expensive case!!!!!! Like most of the phones in Japan.
7. MalakiMills (Posts: 256; Member since: 15 Jun 2010)
Like it so far, except for the monster top and bottom bezel.
8. ae4ever (Posts: 5; Member since: 08 Feb 2012)
Wow, love the carbon fiber look! To bad I'm stuck with sprint for another 2 years.
10. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5559; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)
there we go! lookin' good Moto! now g-g-gimme dat! ;D
11. PhoneArenaUser (Posts: 5471; Member since: 05 Aug 2011)
What you think, when it will be released, your guessings? :)
16. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5610; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)
Has anyone seen this phone show up on any of the benchmark sites? I sure hope it gets released with JB out of the box. I am surprised at the relative little amount of leaking that has occurred about the RAZR HD. There have been some leaks, but not like what has been flooding out about the new iPhone. If a release were imminent, I would have expected more leaking to preserve the market.
22. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5559; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)
i think it's been scored on Nenamark. it's consistent with other S4 powered devices.