I cannot wait until the wood backs and moto maker are available on Verizon. Until then my HTC Incredible has to hold out a bit longer.
Is motorolla still blocking rooting? Getting tired of jumping through hoops that other companies let us access easily.
Is motorolla still blocking rooting? Getting tired of jumping through hoops that other companies let us access easily.
You will be able to get a "Verizon developer edition" with unlocked bootloader... eventually.
No one answered my earlier post but im guessing the google play edition of the phone will not come with the customizations?
I think only the ATT version is bootloader locked, all the other ones are unlockable.
You will be able to get a "Verizon developer edition" with unlocked bootloader... eventually.
If we were to demand moto sell us a phone at 1/2 the price of the flagships, and we assume something like a 2.85x margin (apparently the S4 is ~$225 to build, and retails for $640. I guess most of that is samsungs gigantic marketing budget), prices for the hardware would have to be a mere fraction of what's in the s4.
If we want off contract for $400, since there's a huge $500MM marketing budget, let's assume the same 2.8x margin. That means the total BOM + manufacturing for the motox would be: $400/2.8=$140. That's $85 less, 62% of the costs of the S4, meaning that 'last years parts' have come down 39% in price. That sounds a bit unbelievable.
Consider, further, that there are only 2 parts where Moto made a decision to use 'last year's' instead of top of the line, the screen and the processor. The screen in the S4 was $75, and the processor was $20, $95 dollars between the two. Since most of the other parts are the same or comparable, that means that the MOTO WOULD HAVE TO PAY NEGATIVE $10 FOR THE TWO to get to $140 from $225.
Even if the Screen and Proc savings were as much as HALF (i find that to be unlikely, happy to be proven wrong), that's $47.50 in savings over the S4, a cost of $225-$47.50=$177.50*2.85=$505 retail.
Unless someone shows me otherwise I can't see the justification for the price gripe. Samsung isn't passing shit along to you, the customer, at a 2.85x profit margin (all marketing).
I could make the argument based on these numbers that the moto X at it's current price is actually a FEAT given US vs China labor rates.
Again with the specs talk, and the "good for $350." The teardown of the S4 says the complete opposite. There's no way the phone could possible retail for $350 (from the Android OT):
All of that based on the same 2.8x assumption.
Regardless of the cost to Moto, the consumer should not be paying the same price for a Moto X as people do for an S4.
But if the phone runs better in real world situations why not? Its worth it imo. And the S4 is super cheap plastic which doesnt seem to be the case with the Moto X.
I dunno about the plastic part. They both looked and felt the same time of cheapness to me when I used it. The Moto only seemed more rugged because it was thicker. In fact the Moto looked like it had a cheap gel case on it when I used it, it was only when it's flipped over that it was obvious it was part of the phone.
I also wouldnt say the phone runs better in real world situations. Benchmarks (the complete opposite of real world) had it running faster, but I noticed the Moto opened apps slower than my HTC One when opened side by side. Also bear in mind my One had power saving turned on with my CPU downclocked.
I believe he also works for an operator, and he got to play with a model when the Moto rep came by.Where did you go to use the phone? I did a training on the phone when the Moto rep came last week and it was definitely snappier than the One and the S4 and had much better build quality. Also the phone is just more comfortable. I have a 4S now and the only reason why is the experience. Not because it does more or less than any other phone. And alot of customers that come in have the same thing. Its a well the S4 is cool but its confusing because there's alotta useless crap on it. The Moto X is just almost the perfect phone.
All of that based on the same 2.8x assumption.
Regardless of the cost to Moto, the consumer should not be paying the same price for a Moto X as people do for an S4.
Where did you go to use the phone? I did a training on the phone when the Moto rep came last week and it was definitely snappier than the One and the S4 and had much better build quality. Also the phone is just more comfortable. I have a 4S now and the only reason why is the experience. Not because it does more or less than any other phone. And alot of customers that come in have the same thing. Its a well the S4 is cool but its confusing because there's alotta useless crap on it. The Moto X is just almost the perfect phone.
I believe he also works for an operator, and he got to play with a model when the Moto rep came by.
Yep, a rep came in. Part training and part hands on use.
I left extremely disappointed with the phone. However I will say that I don't know if his phone was a pre-release build or not. It had a small sticker on the top right of the screen with a serial number on it (not an IMEI), so it's possible.
After using it for a while I could not, under any circumstances, recommend anyone to buy this. Especially when there are cheaper and better phones already out there. It's slightly slower, has a screen thats only "ok", has a dodgy camera (which i'm sure could be fixed with software tbh), looked cheap...and I mean REALLY cheap, and had issues with the voice commands. As far as it being snappier the a One or S4. I cannot agree at all, especially with my (albiet not scientific) side by side comparisons.
Again though, could have been pre-release build.
Oh, thank god we have an OT now.
I was trying to ask something in the other thread: albeit carrier-locked, why wouldn't the phone work with other GSM carriers' SIMs outside the US, if the frequencies are the same? I don't care about LTE as long as 3G works fine.
Do you think it's possible?
clearly everyone should get hands on the phone before purchasing, but isn't that the idea with everything?
It should be you would have to get the phone unlocked first tho.
Where, and how?
To get it unlocked from the carrier you have to have the phone for 6mo-1year to get it unlocked. Or you can goto http://cellphoneunlock.net/ but that costs around $30-40 (i forget the exact price.
I cannot wait until the wood backs and moto maker are available on Verizon. Until then my HTC Incredible has to hold out a bit longer.
Bugs me how people refer to LTE as 4G. Seems a couple of American carriers are to blame for that though.
Bugs me how people refer to LTE as 4G. Seems a couple of American carriers are to blame for that though.
too pricey.
Why's that?
Will wait for Galaxy Note 3. Also, Moto Maker being ATT exclusive is wack as fuck
For a company that vowed to change the way smartphones are priced, $200 on contract is a complete letdown.
Why not beat the big phone players on price?
Where did moto vow to change the way smartphones are priced? I remember tons of rumors to that effect, but don't remember it ever coming from moto (not saying it didn't happen, I just honestly don't remember)
It's a love letter to the phone.
In a May interview with AllThingsD, Motorola's CEO complained about the absurdity of cell phone prices.