x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Options

Motorola Moto X Review

0. phoneArena 05 Aug 2013, 05:54 posted on

Enter a new era in Motorola’s history, where they intend on bringing to market a single new flagship device that would take on the competition. Instead of seeing different lines of Motorola made Android phones, the Moto X is that diamond in the rough device that Motorola is banking on to attract consumers to Motorola’s new approach to the business. In an era where cutting edge Android smartphones are leaving long lasting impressions, it’ll be intriguing to see whether the Moto X will have the guts and execution to redefine the game...

This is a discussion for a review. To read the whole review, click here

posted on 08 Aug 2013, 02:14

107. poping (unregistered)

battery life review pls...


posted on 08 Aug 2013, 08:54

111. kabhijeet.16 (Posts: 805; Member since: 05 Dec 2012)

I saw a review from Marques Brownlee on youtube. He explained that it easily lasts all day long & more (more than 24hrs). With Google Now always ON, it has such a great battery performance. if I shut down Google Now always on feature, this device shall last more than 2 days easily.... Thinking of getting Moto X or Motorola Droid Maxxx(3500mah)

posted on 08 Aug 2013, 09:12

112. johnriii (Posts: 238; Member since: 17 Oct 2011)

i'll have to check that out on youtube. hard to believe, since google now is a battery eater like none other. I turned it off after the first day. without it on, I get about a day and a half of medium to heavy use on my S4.

posted on 08 Aug 2013, 03:34

108. itsdeepak4u2000 (Posts: 3718; Member since: 03 Nov 2012)

That's why Motorola is behind in Camera... Day pictures are good but bight pictures are very blurry. ClearPixel didn't worked, leave it to others.

posted on 08 Aug 2013, 06:23

109. itsdeepak4u2000 (Posts: 3718; Member since: 03 Nov 2012)


posted on 11 Aug 2013, 16:13

121. gazmatic (Posts: 795; Member since: 06 Sep 2012)

fail device

better off waiting for the nexus 5 with snapdragon 800

posted on 11 Aug 2013, 23:07

122. taikucing (unregistered)

The only thing stupid about this device is the price.

posted on 16 Aug 2013, 11:46

124. sandyerror (Posts: 2; Member since: 16 Aug 2013)

This phone have awesome features,and 4G technology is great, Camera result is also good, but i have found another site that give me inside description in details and also provides ratings too ,

posted on 16 Aug 2013, 11:47

125. sandyerror (Posts: 2; Member since: 16 Aug 2013)

should i buy it or not?

posted on 17 Aug 2013, 14:42

126. cnwwyo (Posts: 126; Member since: 26 May 2011)

Why don't they address reception in these reviews anymore? Reception is a big factor in decision when purchasing a new phone.

posted on 19 Aug 2013, 02:59

129. pocketdrummer (Posts: 31; Member since: 19 Nov 2012)

Here's my take on this phone (decide for yourself what it's worth).

Either the price is too high or the feature set is too low. I don't say this because the specifications are lacking. I say this because the phone doesn't really offer anything substantial.

The bezels are thin which brings the form factor closer to the point of sanity (looking at you LG), but they also created a phone that is thicker than competing handsets (with bigger displays). That said, LG takes the bezel shrink cake with the LG G2 (though they would have been better off with a 5" display).

The hands free option is great for driving, but the usefulness of it will eventually taper off along with its novelty. Ask anyone with an iPhone how often they really use Siri. Most will say it was fun for a month or two, but they're back to poking virtual keys on their display.

Speaking of the display, I don't really have too much to complain about. It's a 4.7" AMOLED display using an RGB layout (not that crappy pentile matrix). It's 720p, but it's also a PHONE, so it's not like anyone using the phone in a normal setting will ever care that it isn't 1080p. There is still the inherent issues with AMOLED, though. Color reproduction isn't as accurate as LCDs and burn in may occur.

Storage: 16gb standard w/ 32gb available.
I bought an iPhone 3GS when it came out with 32GB. I was under the impression this would have been the norm by the next year.... or the year after that... or the year after that. Nope, 16GB is still standard. Ridiculous. Also, no expansion available.

Customization: Fantastic if you never use a case to protect your phone. Which means about 30% of us will actually care what it looks like once the Otterbox has been strapped on. There's one thing that irks me, though. Why not include a removable back cover? You could sell back covers for additional profit, you could include a removable battery, etc. Missed opportunity.

Software: There's nothing here that would convince you to buy this phone over something else. Especially if you use your phone to take a lot of pictures. You will be relying heavily on the Google Play store for anything exciting.

Camera: FAIL!
10mp RGBC sensor... and it's lifeless and full of artifacts. The video is stuck on 1080p at an abysmally low frame rate. They would have been better off locking it at 720p @ 60fps if anything. Also, the white balance is all over the place, constantly oscillating throughout the entire clip. At least the auto-focus isn't as nervous as the HTC One (and any other HTC phone for that matter).

This phone would deserve its rating if it were $50 cheaper. However, I can't say there's enough substance here to warrant an 8.

posted on 20 Aug 2013, 16:54

130. andersonsousa (Posts: 1; Member since: 20 Aug 2013)

I want to know something.
i've seen that the post processing from motorola breaks the image when it's make in the low light situation. This post processing affects only the camera app from MotoX or also affects othre camera apps that we have on android?

posted on 24 Aug 2013, 17:38

132. bossmt_2 (Posts: 449; Member since: 13 Oct 2009)

Sadly people who hate on this phone just don't get it.

Yeah if it was cheaper it would be better, but that's like saying if my girlfriend was hotter she'd be better. You know the cost to build these devices? Moto X 225, Galaxy S3 237, iPhone5 207, Is the Moto X as good of a "bang per buck" as the s4 in terms of pure parts? No. But with the X you're getting a phone that out of the box uses minimal internal space and ram while with the S4 you're getting a phone that requires extras.

Could the X be better? Yes, could it be cheaper? Yes .Is it midrange? NO

What people don't realize is your eye can only handle so much. To the average user you can't tell the difference between a 1080p 5 inch screen and a 720p 5 inch screen because at some point your eye cannot discern the added pixels. At 18 inches, aka why would you be lookign from further away, 300 ppi is retina, meaning that 300 and 400 will look the same. . On a screen that small the extra PPI is like the 1 extra calorie in pepsi one vs diet pepsi. Neat gimmick but there is no taste difference because you replace a few granules of artificial sweetener with a drop of high fructose corn syrup.

So the end game question in terms of real life usage, is the Moto X not high end because they focused on the user experience with the specialized processors simply because they don't have a slightly larger screen?

posted on 25 Aug 2013, 15:24

133. pocketdrummer (Posts: 31; Member since: 19 Nov 2012)

Actually, I seriously doubt you'd complain if someone could magically make your girlfriend hotter. Where's the downside?

And that's a weird comparison to make, because looks aren't the Moto X's problem. It's the lack of substance. The resolution was turned down to 720p so the processor could still offer a zippy experience and a decent battery life. However, there are phones that cost the same as the Moto X with a faster processor and a 1080p display and still manage to put down similar battery life. So where's the upset to those decisions?

That said, I would be just as happy to have a new phone with a Snapdragon 600 or 800 and a 720p display. You're right that 1080p isn't worth it on such a small device. Pairing that with a 600 or 800 would have made this phone ridiculously fast. The processor isn't even an S4 Pro... just the old S4.

Also, stop using "retina" as a metric. It's a buzz word and means nothing unless you're talking about Apple products.

The user experience is also a bit troubling. It's mostly stock Android, which is great if you're a purist. But, it also means that most Google Play version phones will offer similar experiences with exceptions to the voice and gesture features. I can only speak for myself here, but I almost never use voice commands when I use my phone. It's fun for a little while, but then when you're in public (where I use my phone the most) you look like a weirdo talking to your phone. Not to mention, voice to text allows everyone around you to hear what you're texting. Not good. Also, I need to look more into that driving mode that allegedly turns on automatically. Is there a way to disable that? Does it read your text messages aloud? What happens when you're driving with you family in the car and your girlfriend sends a juicy message about what she wants to do to you when they leave? Now grandma knows what kind of kinky business you're into.

All I'm saying is that this phone will need heavy marketing and to push it's looks in order to sell at this price point. It doesn't have the battery life to justify the specs. And it will be a hard sell when Snapdragon 800 chips are paired with 1080p displays and longer battery lives.

And if specs don't matter, then go back to a Nokia 3310. Otherwise, specs DO matter and we should judge by the system as a whole, not by specific parts. The Moto X is a decent phone (except for the camera), but it's going up against heavy weights at the same price. $50 less would be enough to pull people away from the popular (safe) choices.

posted on 25 Aug 2013, 17:54

134. KingKurogiii (Posts: 5711; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)

something you've got to realize is that this custom arranged SoC was being developed before the announcement of the Snapdragon 600 & 800 and it in fact uses a S4 Pro just in a dual core configuration instead of a Quad-Core so it still retains all the high end specs that really matter like the Adreno 320 GPU and 2GB of RAM. most Quad-Core Phones rarely ever kick into using the two additional cores except for when they're called for in benchmarks which i'm sure is where you're gathering your basis of comparison in terms of value...

actually "Retina" used in this terminology is a very sound philosophy that's based on actual facts, numbers & studies.

maybe you've forgotten but the GPE phones aren't subsidized or sold through carriers, the Moto X is and is sold through both CDMA carriers where you don't have the option to bring a GPE phone. there are practical aspects to Touchless Control, most notably while driving and also Assist is an option. have a GF that's known to send something juicy every now and then? you're planning on taking a road trip with the Family? turn off Assist. it's all case by case, person to person situations.

evidently it has the battery life to justify the specs because that's what like 3 or 4 out of 5 critics say about it and you're in the mindset that this phone will be marketed to spec heads when Moto very clearly came out to say that it's NOT. it will be marketed in the ways it matters and heavily as Google has invested a hefty marketing budget into the X's marketing campaign.

that last statement of yours was one of pure ignorance and that's all i'm going to address about it.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories