Motorola DROID MAXX 2 Review

3. sgodsell (Posts: 6485; Member since: 16 Mar 2013)

It doesn't matter it still has excellent battery life and a great display, in a small enough form factor. Besides if you don't like the Verizon version, then get another version of the Maxx which is the Moto X Play.

7. roldefol (Posts: 4741; Member since: 28 Jan 2011)

Dear Hiring Manager:

I am interested in the position of Copy Editor - Reviews. Although I have no professional experience in copy editing, I am confident that I can successfully reduce verbal clutter and increase the professionalism of your reviews.

Please feel free to contact me at this post. Your readers deserve better.

Sincerely,
Bill D. Cat

27. joey_sfb (Posts: 6794; Member since: 29 Mar 2012)

There an unmentioned con that rules them all, not an Apple branded gadget.

8. roldefol (Posts: 4741; Member since: 28 Jan 2011)

The rating is fair. This is a midrange device through and through. The screen is good but not great, the camera is good but not great, and the performance is poor with the Adreno 405/1080 combination. Battery life is its main strength. It doesn't match the well-rounded prowess of its predecessor.

25. zeeBomb (Posts: 2318; Member since: 14 Aug 2014)

Yeah the ratings pretty good. Maybe should have gotten more so an 8, but the turbo having the same score would be strange wouldn't it. The camera nice, but if Motorola perfected their camera software.

10. roldefol (Posts: 4741; Member since: 28 Jan 2011)

They've done a decent job of evaluating each phone on its merits. They clearly don't feel the LG V10 is worth the price for what it gives you, or compared to the much cheaper G4. The Moto G 2015 received a 9, because it's a great phone for the price. Obviously it's not equal to the similarly-rated Galaxy Note 5, but for what it is, it's pretty great. This Maxx 2 could be better, even for a midranger.

13. vuyonc (Posts: 1083; Member since: 24 Feb 2014)

They almost went in that direction when they gave the 1st generation Moto G a score of 9 ironically -_-

26. ibend (Posts: 6747; Member since: 30 Sep 2014)

and now they throwing 5-6 score to all cheap chinese phone, lol

12. iushnt (Posts: 2976; Member since: 06 Feb 2013)

The Amoled on nexus 6 was so worse than that of Galaxy S6. Now I am understanding why PA favors Apple and Samsung.

14. roldefol (Posts: 4741; Member since: 28 Jan 2011)

Conveniently ignoring some of this year's most popular devices.

Nexus 6P 8.8
Moto X Pure 9.1
Moto G 9.0
LG G4 9.0

Just from that short list, I would say what PA looks for in an Android device is well-roundedness. Just being unbreakable isn't enough. Just a great screen isn't enough. Just great battery life isn't enough. Just a great camera isn't enough. But combine a good design, good screen, good performance, decent battery life, and a good camera, and you have a good review.

15. uzimafioso (Posts: 467; Member since: 15 Jul 2014)

Not really. I remember a few months ago when PA ratings would make some sense. Nowadays they actually don't. This phone is a higher end mid-range offering (not a SD 410 series) at a decent price tag. It has an expandable card slot. A good enough camera. Is the newly crowned battery life champ. Ample multimedia experience. The same goes for Turbo 2. They get 7.8 and 8. The X Pure has everything identical to both these phones except the chipset (which lies between 615 and 810) and a better screen (for argument's sake) and lower battery life. It gets a 9.1 so if that was fair then the Turbo 2 should be around 8.8 and Maxx 2 should be at 9.3.
However if you see the latest trends PA has gone nuts. All phones have been given 5-8 points. Samsung A-something. 1+2. LG V10. All Chinese devices. Everything. The funny thing is that the Note5 at its price is still a 9.0 (I'd put it at 8.5 and Note 4 at 9.3) and you can get 2 Maxx 2s for that and it's still a solid multimedia package (since Samsung decided to walk backwards with ditching MicroSD cards and putting weaker speakers than last generations) and I honestly think Note 4 was a better deal than Note5.
So it's definitely not about well roundedness (is that even a word?) but rather about some really strong Kush that John V is on.

16. o0Exia0o (Posts: 903; Member since: 01 Feb 2013)

Problem is the not the devices but the reviewers. John V., in my opinion, has always given low ratings to android devices whereas Michael H., who no longer seems to have a strong affiliation with PA, usually gives the higher ratings. But MOST of the commenters are correct that Apple and Samsung are the OEMs that seem to get the consistently higher ratings here on PA.

19. uzimafioso (Posts: 467; Member since: 15 Jul 2014)

PA has never ever rated any Apple phone below 9, yes they gave the 5c a 9. The lowest Apple device would be some iPad Mini 3 or something and that's an 8 so it doesn't really matter. I know that when I read an Apple review by PA it's over-rated but damn talk about discrediting your own reviews. Especially since the newer generation iPhones have worse audio output than the 5s, the camera has almost stayed the same, battery life has been meager (since they want to sell 3rd party power banks) and worst of all they still have a 16gb base model. I'm using an iPhone 4s 32gb at the moment and iOS 9.1; funnily enough my cousin's 6 Plus stutters when opening the app switcher while my 4s doesn't. At all. So I think Apple is also walking backwards now. Disturbing really...

23. roldefol (Posts: 4741; Member since: 28 Jan 2011)

The problem with your comparison of the Turbo 2 (8.0), Maxx 2 (7.8), and X Pure (9.1) is that you're looking solely at specs and not at the overall feel of the product. You're ignoring the intangibles, the "does this feel like a really nice phone?"

Having handled all three devices, I think their assessment is correct. The X Pure feels the most premium, the most comfortable in hand, and has a simple, bloat-free software experience. The Turbo 2 feels blocky and unwieldy, but still premium. The Maxx 2 feels cheap, but is more comfortable to handle (my opinion) than the Turbo 2. Both are chock full of bloatware, which I feel detracts from the software experience.

On the whole, though, I think people are getting way too picky about fractions of numbers here and there. Just because you personally like one device more than another doesn't mean the PA reviewer will rate them the way you like. No review is completely objective.

18. o0Exia0o (Posts: 903; Member since: 01 Feb 2013)

The problem here is not the review its self but the consistency or should I say standard of the reviews. Certain OEMs seem to pull constant high numbers on their reviews while other OEMs tend to not fair as well. It also comes to certain reviewers seem to give low marks to a device that does not feature the OS of the reviewers choice. When I look at a device I tend to trust the user reviews on how a device should be ranked before a PA posted review.

21. Planterz (Posts: 2119; Member since: 30 Apr 2012)

I don't disagree, but one factor to consider is that user reviews are done by people who own one device, or maybe a few (usually older). It's very unlikely that that a regular "user" owns anywhere near the number of recently-released devices that a site such as PA gets their hands on. These websites can base their review scores in comparison to other devices on the market, whereas users typically don't have that luxury.

A "user" review is likely to have some bias as well. If a person likes the device, they'll probably give it an inflated score to justify the money they spent on it. Conversely, if a person hates it and feels like they wasted money, they're going to give it a score lower than perhaps it deserved.

In the case of this review, there's practically zero reason to buy it over a Moto Pure/Style (which costs a mere $16 more) except for the longer battery life. The review score reflects that fact, even if it's not mention in "Cons".

22. roldefol (Posts: 4741; Member since: 28 Jan 2011)

I suspect the screen resolution has something to do with it. The 3630 mAh unit in the Maxx 2 significantly outlasts the 3760 mAh unit in the Turbo 2. Supposing the two SoCs are equally power-hungry, the difference is the screen.

If nothing else, at least this phone is true to its roots. It just doesn't feel as premium as the Razr Maxx, Razr Maxx HD, or Maxx.

30. baldilocks (Posts: 1364; Member since: 14 Dec 2008)

No issues with my 5X after the update. And the fact that updates are happening montly with the 5X is a plus for me. Let alone the fact that the superior CPU/GPU in the 5X will keep things running much more smoothly for longer.