Deal: 1st Gen Motorola Moto X (2013) now at just $189.99 on Ebay

Deal: 1st Gen Motorola Moto X (2013) now at just $189.99 on Ebay
The original Motorola Moto X is now priced at just $189.99 on Ebay. For this money, retailer cell-force will sell you a Verizon-compatible brand new Motorola Moto X (2013) with 16GB of internal storage space. 

If you are not a Verizon customer, you'll be able to use the smartphone on other networks as well, as the device comes with unlocked GSM capabilities. For a brand new (non-refurbished) original Motorola Moto X, this a decent price.

The 2013 Moto X comes with a 4.7-inch AMOLED panel running a resolution of 720 by 1280 pixels (HD) at a PPI of 316. Under the hood there's a toned down version of the Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 Pro chipset, a mobile SoC that features a 1.7GHz dual-core Krait CPU and an Adreno 320 GPU. Other specs include 2GB of RAM, a 10MP primary shooter, a 2MP secondary camera on the front, and a 2200mAh battery. 

It should be mentioned that the smartphone lacks a microSD card slot, meaning that if you're planning to take advantage of this recent deal, you'll have to make sure that you don't need too much internal storage space. The 16GB version of the smartphone only comes with 12GB of user-accessible storage space. For more details on the handset, check out our full Motorola Moto X review.

The 2013 Moto X currently runs Android 4.4 KitKat, but the manufacturer promised to update the smartphone to Android 5.1 Lollipop, the latest version of Android, in a few weeks.

The original Motorola Moto X was released back in August 2013, meaning that the smartphone is nearing its second anniversary. By 2015 standards, the original Moto X can still be considered a mid-range Android smartphone.


FEATURED VIDEO

55 Comments

1. QWERTYslider unregistered

Decent phone. I owned it. But, $89 is a deal. $189 in 2015 is NOT a deal.

2. medtxa

Posts: 1655; Member since: Jun 02, 2014

the fu*k! where is the famous no micro sd no removable battery = fail! lol?

6. QWERTYslider unregistered

It's obviously a BUDGET phone. Your trolling = FAIL

10. medtxa

Posts: 1655; Member since: Jun 02, 2014

budget phone!? huh? first it's not budget phone second you must buy it secondhand for $89 lol ok though should all budget phone are FAIL MORE if they don't have those two MUST feature because what else they got?, I'm just amazed that you to even buy this phone considering your obsession love for microsd and battery seriously shame on you to leave your life principal(lol) just for discounted price LOL. logic=FAIL

4. Mxyzptlk unregistered

Not really decent since it can be a lot better.

11. Scott93274

Posts: 6034; Member since: Aug 06, 2013

Yes, a phone that's nearly two years old could be a lot better. That being said, the current iPhone could be a lot better, it could have more than 1 GB of RAM, competitively priced storage, a Octacore processor, expandable storage, removable battery, larger sized battery, 2K resolution, less restrictive OS, sapphire glass, smaller bezel... The hardware really isn't that impressive compared to the competition but you still spent money on it. The Original Moto X was under powered compared to the competition, but it provided a superior user experience. Even now, mine still performs exceptionally well, it lasts all day with features like active listening that's only half baked into iOS where the phone must be charging to make use of otherwise the battery wouldn't last half a day. So yeah, there are better phones out there after being on the market for nearly two years, I'm so happy that you were smart enough to figure that one out and felt so inclined to inform everyone of this revelation. Good for you!

14. Mxyzptlk unregistered

Yet the iphone has higher benchmarks than some of your favorite Android phones. Ignorance is blinding. An iPhone doesn't need that because it's optimized so well. Lol just stop while you can Scotty.

17. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

In the posting JUST BEFORE THIS ONE you complained that 2013 Motor X only had modest specs, and here you're basically saying specs don't matter as long as the device is optimized, which is what they did with the 2013 Moto X and why it was able to run with it's competition on what some consider lesser specs. You're arguing the iPhone doesn't need the specs to run well and them saying the X doesn't have enough specs yet what they did was take a page out of Apple's playbook and focus less on specs and optimized the software for a better user experience. And it worked, I used for quite awhile, trading off between it and my Maxx, and never had any issues with it performance wise. In fact these phones have been some of the snappiest that I have experience. So apparently specs only matter with you when they support your argument otherwise it's all about optimization, and like I said that's why the X doesn't need the specs, because they optimized and focused on user experience, just like Apple does, but now you're saying it doesn't have enough specs, so which is it? Regardless the phone runs fine against it's competition, but you seem to be saying 2 things that are in conflict with each other.

19. Mxyzptlk unregistered

Yes they optimized it but those modest specs show their age now. Motorola had trouble updating the X because of that custom chipset they used for the X. Lol the X is not comparable to the iPhone. It's like comparing apples to oranges. At least the iPhone offers simplicity, ease of use, and a far better camera. If you're trying to compare the X to the iPhone in regards to optimization then stop where you're at lol. The iPhone goes beyond specs in terms of optimization.

20. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

You've got a lot of lol's when in reality, aside from the camera, the difference in performance between the X and the iPhone is measured in milliseconds. And the X is showing it's age because of the modest specs? And how is the 5s doing? Any older phone will have lesser performance. But I know plenty of people, both on the net and in real life, that have absolutely no issue with the X's performance even after almost 2 years. The point is, when people bring up specs, you say they're irrelevant when the iPhone is compared to something like a Galaxy or Note series, but when it's compared to a Motorola phone, now all of the sudden they matter. Yes the 2013 X took longer to update, it had a custom chip, just as the iPhone uses. The difference is Motorola has more than a handful of phones to update. Apple only updates the past 3-4 models spanning a few years. Motorola has to update more than that for just their current year, so it takes more effort to get all the phones they need to update done. Motorola has released around 10-15 phones since 2013, all with different hardware configurations. So does it take more effort to update that many phones vs the 4-6 phone Apple has had to update in the same time. And let's not forget, they have to take someone else's software (Google's) and optimize it for their devices. Apple only has to optimize their own software for their own devices. So obviously it's going to take more effort for Motorola to update their current crop than it will Apple.

23. Mxyzptlk unregistered

The X was at a flagship price even though it came with outdated specs. The game is different on Android than it is on iOS. It's the way it is whether you choose to accept it or not. The iPhone has a custom chip yet it gets updates right when Apple releases them. Don't even try and compare. Apple updates the past few iPhones for a few years which is more than enough time to upgrade. What are you getting at? Reselling an iPhone gets more money than reselling an Android phone unless you're Samsung. What is your point? "And let's not forget, they have to take someone else's software (Google's) and optimize it for their devices" Making excuses again? Look at the Samsung S6. Look at the Kindle devices.

25. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

The X had a custom chip, which in conjunction with a lighter build of Android, meant they were able to run as well as competing phones with so called newer specs. The game is different on Android? What does that matter? A custom chip is actually going to cost more than one off the shelf, and since no one had anything like it available at the time, they had to go custom. Exactly, because Apple controls BOTH the hardware and software, Motorola doesn't. They get the newer build of Android from Google and then set about making it work with their hardware. In Apple, both elements are controlled, in Android, Google pushes out a general OS and its up to the OEMS to make it work with their device. What am I getting at? Since 2013, how many devices has Apple had to support in terms of updates? Maybe 5 or 6? And how many has Motorola had to support? Probably 2-3 times that amount, and they have to deal with updates that are universal which then have to be adapted to their hardware, which in the case of the X was custom which required more effort. What does resale have to do with what we were talking about here? I never brought it up. Yes, let's look at them. Phones with overlays like Touchwiz and Sense and whatever LG and Sony are using, range from near stock to an almost forked version of Android, which is what Amazon's Kindle uses. Samsung's Touchwiz is the most changed of any of the overlays, which is in a sense their own software. Some of the changes made in Touchwiz are things that get adapted later I to Android, sometimes they don't even make changes to Android that Google does because they deem them unnecessary. What they've done is essentially made a forked version of Android that still falls under Google's guidlines., and is essentially their own software. I've had many people on forums tell me they had to look at the version number to tell if their phone actually had Lollipop on it because of the changes made in Touchwiz. And with Amazon's Kindle, it is a completely forked version if Android, their own version and so their own software. They took AOSP and made it their own. The difference between them and Motorola is, they can pretty much do whatever they want in terms of changes, Amazon more than Smasung. There is very little Motorola has done to the core of Android on their devices, but it also means that they are more limited in what they can do when adapting the software to their hardware if they want to keep a stock experience. Samsung, since they've significantly changed the experience has more leeway to make changes, because it's their own experience. And Amazon has an even more changed experience over Samsung's, and they aren't bound by Google's guidelines either, so they can do what they want, however they want. The further you go away from Google's Android, the less guidelines you have to deal with, but in cases like Samsung's TW, it can also require higher specs to run as efficiently.

31. Mxyzptlk unregistered

The game is different on Android. Android experience is going to be the same for everyone because there's so many different user interfaces and skins available on Android. The experience isn't always simplistic like it is on Android for some users. Your point? What is your point here? It's not like Motorola is running a custom UI on their phones now. It's mostly stock. iPhones can last for a few years because of their specs and the simplicity of iOS which is why they sell better on the secondhand market. That part of my comment fits more in our responses below, the one where you tried to dismiss the best buy page I put up. What is your point?

32. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

That made zero sense. The experience is the same for everyone because of all the different interfaces and skins. The second part of that sentence contradicts the first. FFS, let's try this again for the short bus crowd. Which is going to take more effort,setting up your own software to work with your hardware, or making someone else's software work with your hardware when the software wasn't optimized for that hardware. No, they're not really. The point was those who do skins, like Samsung, actually have an easier time because they can make their overlay look however they want it, so they don't have to follow Google's guidelines as closely as someone who runs a stock experience. With a stock experience, you need to make it work with your existing hardware and also make sure it runs the same as it does on say a Nexus device. On a skinned version, you can make it run however you want to. So you're saying that Android devices don't last as long? I'm the only one in my family who upgrades their devices. I've got a brother who replaced his Droid Incredible last fall. That's just over 4 years. I've got a niece who contemplating upgrading her LG Revolution, that's at 3 years old. And I've got a nephew who just replaced his Motorola Droid last spring. So iPhone doesn't have a lock on longevity. Do you have any response other than that? The point was it's actually easier to skin or fork Android and do what you want with it than it is using stock, having to adapt how your device works and stay within Google's guidelines. Whereas to a lesser extent skinned and a larger extent forked Android, you can make it work however you want to. It's also the reason why many times skinned Android doesn't have to upgrade with each version, some of the skins have already corrected the issues that cropped up later in stock Android.

36. Mxyzptlk unregistered

Your argument doesn't make sense. All I see is you complaining because I said the Moto X isn't worth it. Now you are giving me a lecture about custom skins, user interfaces, and short buses. Maybe you should get off your high horse. This is all because I said the Moto X is a modest phone with modest specs. I am not lying when I say it. I'm not the only one who has said that about the Moto X. You just choose to come at me because I'm more vocal about Motorola. Yes iPhones generally last longer. That's just the way it is.

38. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

Maybe, if you actually believe what you're saying here, you'd actually call out other companies who do the same thing. LG doesn't have a metal body either. There have been plenty of other OEMS above had issues updating. There have been other companies selling products for much more than they're actually worth, I don't hear you bitching any of them out. Yet every time a Motorola artcle comes up, you take your shots. Call some others out as well, otherwise you're being biased. You say the Moto X isn't worth it, and you seem to think anyone who feels differently is wrong. When others say the same thing to you about the iPhone, you say it's worth it to you. Maybe the Moto X is also worth it to other people.

40. Mxyzptlk unregistered

What are you talking about? I've called out other companies before. You're grasping at straws now. You asked why someone should choose the M7 over the X. Other companies have nothing to do with this. Take your head out of your rear end. It isn't and I'm not the only one who says it. It's not worth it plain and simple.

43. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

Maybe once here or there. Seriously look at how many times you're in Motorola articles. If you cared as much about these things as you claim to, you'd be after the others that do the same thing. If you do ever bitch others out, it's more the exception than the rule. OK, how can you argue if a deal is good or not without having something to compare it to. Seriously, explain that to me. There has to be something to compare it to otherwise it's a meaningless argument. "That's (the Moto X) isn't a good deal." Compared to what? See what I mean? Without something to compare it to, that statement means absolutely nothing. OK, and I think you guys are getting fleeced when you pay that much for an iPhone compared to what it costs and offers, and others agree with me on that, so apparently the iPhone isn't worth it either.

45. Mxyzptlk unregistered

Again I do call out other companies. You're blinded by ignorance which is why you don't see it. You're just whining because I said this was a bad deal. I don't need to compare it to anything. You can say that but the record sales and the high demand for iPhone on the secondhand market says otherwise.

47. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

That's rich. How many times have others repeatedly made the same point over and over, yet you ignore what they have to say and dismiss them as wrong. So why is it a bad deal then? You say parts of it are inferior right? Inferior to what? You can't say something is inferior without comparing it to something else. It's unbelievable that you can keep going on and on that you don't have to compare it to anything, but yet call it inferior. Here's the definition of inferior. lower in rank, status, or quality. "schooling in inner-city areas was inferior to that in the rest of the country" Even in the definition's example they use a comparison. So what? I could just as easily say it's not a good deal as you have. It doesn't have as much ram, as high of a screen resolution, and battery life as it's competition. You're trying to use your shared mentality argument again to price you're right, even though below you said that didn't matter. So if others sharing your opinion doesn't make you right, it's a useless statement.

48. Mxyzptlk unregistered

I don't think you know what you're arguing about. You claim I never call out other companies. You were wrong and now you're trying to pull yourself out the hole. Says who? Since when did I have to follow your unspoken rule about what classifies as a deal? I don't need a point of reference even though I did post a point of reference with the M7 at Best Buy. The one you tried to dismiss. Your point? That example doesn't prove anything except you trying to cover your rear end. So it's a useless comment now? Lol you're bleeding ignorance here. It being a shared mentality is enough. You're trying so hard to defend the Moto X against a comment I made and it's funny.

50. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

My god, that was the biggest pile of be I've ever read. So you call out an occasional company once in awhile, but hit Motorola every chance you get, and that's supposed to mean you're not biased. OK whatever. So it's an unspoken rule to follow the definition of a word when you use it? Saying something is inferior means it has a lower rank. Ranking is done by comparing things. And I didn't dismiss your M7 example. You jumped on me when I told you that I used a comparison of both devices at the same place. If you recall, I said that regardless, they were both the same price and ran similar. Then you threw a hissy fit that the X was inferior because it didn't have a metal build or dual front speakers. Then you said you didn't need to compare it to anything to prove your point, after you did just that. You're all over the map lately. It's enough for what? What are you trying to accomplish with your comment? You called me clueless for inferring that you bringing up other meant you were trying to show that meant you were right. So if that wasn't your intention, what was it?

52. Mxyzptlk unregistered

Apparently you haven't read your own comments. You're full of crap as I have called out other companies before. You act like Motorola is the only one I call out. It isn't. Bs. You just pulled the point of reference out of your rear end. You are trying to get yourself out of the hole with it. I only compared it to the M7 because you threw a hissy fit and asked for a better deal. My intention was to show you i wasn't the only one who shared the same idea. You're just not getting it.

55. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

Read what I said. I said, so you've called out a few companies here and there. So did I not say that you have called out other companies? What I then said was, comlaritively, you call out Motorola more by a wide margin. And many of the things you call them out for I haven't seen you call out others for in articles alluding to the same issues. Yup, I pulled it out of my rear. I googled inferior definition, and posted what it said. Talking about digging myself out, you're arguing the definition of a word that I posted from a source, but you disagree. I wanted a better deal? WTF are you talking about? It's not a better deal, it's 2 phones that were competitors in 2013 selling for the same price now as they did back then. So you're arguing that other people agree with you, that's great. But like you said in post 44, it wasn't about showing that you were right. So why bring it up in an argument. You bring up points to support your side if the argument, unless you were lying when you said that.

26. Scott93274

Posts: 6034; Member since: Aug 06, 2013

But you say in post 3, "it's not a deal". Everyone on this site knows for damn sure that there's no such thing as a deal from Apple when it's common knowledge that they charge more for their product than any other phone manufacturer in the industry, but YOU still pay more for their product knowing full well that the hardware costs significantly less. "Ignorance is blinding"

27. Scott93274

Posts: 6034; Member since: Aug 06, 2013

And before you start getting all smug about a typo in comment 26, "less" should have been "more", I would still like to know your reasoning why it's acceptable to pay more for Apple branded devices with unimpressive hardware than it is for other OEMs. I want an honest, actual answer, not some idiot comment pointing out a typo and completely ignoring rational reasoning.

29. Mxyzptlk unregistered

You just brought attention to it yourself. I don't care about your strawman argument typos. I think I explained that already. Why do you continue to ask the same question over and over?

28. Mxyzptlk unregistered

What manufacturer doesn't charge more when the hardware costs less? It's called making a profit. You're ignorant if you think only Apple does it. Yes I pay more for an iPhone because it is worth it. If I wanted to sell it I can and still make some back because iPhones retain their value. Apparently you're not getting that.

3. Mxyzptlk unregistered

That's not a deal.

9. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

I suppose you think it should've launched at that price. Because we all know that any Motorola phone shouldn't sell for more than $200 new, no matter how high end it is.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.