backtop


Print 34 comment(s) - last by MemberSince97.. on Aug 22 at 6:14 PM

The Moto X+1 will reportedly launch alongside the Moto 360

Earlier this week we were given a sneak peak at the successor to the Moto G: the aptly named Moto G2. Today, we’ve been given a glimpse at the Moto X’s successor.
 
According to images obtained by Android Police, these photos of the Moto X+1 are of a “near-final prototype.” The look of the Moto X+1 is clearly evolutionary even though the screen size has reportedly been increased from 4.7” to 5.1”. 

 
The Moto X+1’s display is expected to get a nice resolution boost, increasing from the current 720p to a full HD (1080p). Other features include a Snapdragon 800 processor (instead of the more recent Snapdragon 801, likely in an effort to keep pricing attractive), 2GB of RAM and 32GB of storage. Also expect to see a 12MP rear camera and a 5MP shooter up front for video chats.
 
The Moto X+1 will reportedly launch alongside the long-awaited Moto 360 smartwatch that was first announced back in March. The Moto 360 runs Google’s Android Wear operating system, which is targeted at wearable devices.

Source: Android Police



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Nice...
By retrospooty on 7/25/2014 12:38:37 PM , Rating: 2
Looks like a decent phone. The Moto X was just a bit underpowered and low res for a flagship.

Interesting they dumped the special CPU's they had. This is a good thing. The Moto X had that extra core that was supposed to be low power for the always listening... Moto X's battery life wasnt anywhere near stellar and now that feature is available for all Androids.

Also like - The article above doesn't show it but it looks pretty thick, so probably a good size battery.

You can see it here... http://phandroid.com/2014/07/25/moto-x-plus-1-leak...




RE: Nice...
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 7/25/2014 12:40:35 PM , Rating: 5
Given its tapered shape, the thickness doesn't really bother me. I think this obsession with thinness is going a bit too far. I'd rather have reasonably thickness smartphone with a decent battery.


RE: Nice...
By retrospooty on 7/25/2014 12:46:57 PM , Rating: 2
Me too. Or go like the Maxx series and give the option to the buyer.


RE: Nice...
By quiksilvr on 7/25/2014 5:39:39 PM , Rating: 2
What's so nice about this phone? This phone came out last year...it's called the Nexus 5.


RE: Nice...
By ritualm on 7/25/2014 8:13:45 PM , Rating: 2
Nexus 5 shares the same problem with too many phones these days - it's too thin - and that really hurts its ergonomics, let alone battery. Gotta charge them twice a day and using them is an exercise in frustration.

I'd rather have a chubby phone than one diagnosed with a chronic case of anorexia.


RE: Nice...
By BRB29 on 7/28/2014 7:28:03 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Nexus 5 shares the same problem with too many phones these days - it's too thin


The Nexus 5 is not too thin. I've tried the phone and almost bought one. It's about the same thickness as the HTC One.


RE: Nice...
By Reclaimer77 on 7/28/2014 11:33:25 AM , Rating: 2
This guy just makes up crap all day long basically.

I've never heard anyone complain that the Nexus was "too thin". And I sure as hell don't see anyone claiming they have to be charged twice a day or have poor battery life in general.


RE: Nice...
By ritualm on 7/28/2014 4:20:50 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
This guy just makes up crap all day long basically.

Yeah, you personally wouldn't do it when it works for you. /s

Nexus 5 is too thin. There's no point carrying a phone so light you can't feel its presence in your pockets.


RE: Nice...
By atechfan on 7/25/2014 12:52:20 PM , Rating: 3
I agree. I always laugh at every Nokia phone review that mentions how "heavy and thick" they are. I want a phone to be a bit thicker, both for battery size, and just general durability. You can only go so thin before it becomes fragile.


RE: Nice...
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 7/25/2014 12:59:03 PM , Rating: 2
With the exception of some of the budget models out there, most of the smartphones on the market seem to be of reasonable thickness and weight to me.

I think we're just getting spoiled with the thin and light craze -- sort of how we treat the human form these days :)


RE: Nice...
By Omega215D on 7/25/2014 1:09:48 PM , Rating: 2
Apple, Samsung, Sony and a few Chinese manufacturers are pushing for devices thinner than 8mm. People keep clamorimg for this without any regard to battery life and ergonomics. I've had HTC phones that were 10mm thick bit never felt like it due to shape, of course the battery size was meh ( at least the phone lasted a day though).

My motorola droid razr m and moto x are great to hold while my HTC One M8, while still good ergonomically, could have been a little flatter on the sides.


RE: Nice...
By retrospooty on 7/25/2014 1:15:30 PM , Rating: 2
Yup... I just don't get this trend. The main size factor when considering a phone is the screen and obviously how it affects the overall width and height of the phone. Thickness isn't really an issue. going from 7mm to 10mm isn't much of a difference, esspecially on a 5+ inch phone. If you are used to a smaller phone, the width and height is what gets you, not the "girth".


RE: Nice...
By Solandri on 7/25/2014 1:31:36 PM , Rating: 2
I came from a Sprint-branded Galaxy S - the only version with a slide-out keyboard. The thickness of it always fit well in my hand. The Nexus 5 I got was too thin. I dropped it 3 times my first week owning it because it was so thin. I don't think I dropped my old phone more than 3 times in a year. I ended up buying a case for the Nexus not because I thought it needed a case, but to thicken it up and make it easier to hold.

This was the biggest feature in favor of the Moto X when I was shopping. The rounded back just fits really well in your hand and feels very secure. It feels like a device that's meant to be held, not just look good in product photos. I'm glad to see they retained it in the new model.


RE: Nice...
By Spuke on 7/25/2014 1:59:14 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I think we're just getting spoiled with the thin and light craze -- sort of how we treat the human form these days :)
"I like big butts and I cannot lie."


RE: Nice...
By Reclaimer77 on 7/25/2014 7:31:31 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I agree. I always laugh at every Nokia phone review that mentions how "heavy and thick" they are.


Well of course, nobody can criticize the precious on your watch :)

The Nokia 920 was thick and heavy, but it ran hot and had poor battery life. The battery was small for no reason. Thick and heavy is fine, as long as you're getting something in return.

I'm just assuming you're referring to the 920, since it was UNIVERSALLY criticized for being way too thick and heavy for absolutely no reason or benefit to the end user.

Why would you laugh at that? It's a pretty valid criticism...


RE: Nice...
By Mitch101 on 7/25/2014 9:18:03 PM , Rating: 2
HEAVY???

If its that heavy people try going to a gym or how about getting a Bluetooth headset if its too much to lift.

There is a serious pussification of people today.


RE: Nice...
By Reclaimer77 on 7/26/2014 7:03:11 AM , Rating: 2
I'm not saying the phone was too heavy, reviewers were.

However for a 185 gram phone the battery was nearly 50% smaller than it's Android competition at the time. So it was thicker and heavier for no apparent reason. Motorola was fitting 3300 aAh batteries in 4.5" phones at the same time, while still being lighter and thinner!

OFC reviewers are going to point this out, that's their job. And you're only having a problem with it, like atechfan, because you're a Microsoft homer.

If an Android phone was abnormally thick and heavy, yet had poor battery life and lackluster internals, you guys would be ALL over it.

But because it's Windows Phone, people are just "pussified" lol. Okay, so transparent.


RE: Nice...
By bug77 on 7/25/2014 2:43:48 PM , Rating: 2
For me this concern ended with Moto RAZR and SLVR. Phones have been thin enough since then.


RE: Nice...
By Omega215D on 7/25/2014 1:04:30 PM , Rating: 3
Some reports state that it will be 2900maH, how much truth there is to it remains to be seen.

It may be thicker but it is roinded pff and tapered which should allow it to fit the hand better like the previous Moto X.

I never thought the Moto X was underpowered or had too low of a resolution as the phone still ran smoothly while providing good battery life. I also never found the display to be lacking, especially at normal viewing distances. The Moto X was never really billed as flagship either just priced a little higher than expected (still much lower than flagship devices at the time off contract).


RE: Nice...
By retrospooty on 7/25/2014 1:10:37 PM , Rating: 2
"I never thought the Moto X was underpowered or had too low of a resolution as the phone still ran smoothly while providing good battery life."

It did run fine, because it wasn't stock Android and not all bloated out. As for screen, not bad at 4.7 either. but...

"The Moto X was never really billed as flagship either just priced a little higher than expected (still much lower than flagship devices at the time off contract)."

It was billed as a flagship. It's starting price was $199 on 2yr contract like any other flagship. The price dropped fast when no-one bought it. So it wound up priced right as a good mid range phone, which was a much better fit and where it should have been priced all along.

Anyhow, this years model looks good. I am sure it will be a nice phone.


RE: Nice...
By retrospooty on 7/25/2014 1:11:19 PM , Rating: 2
derp... "was stock Android and was not all bloated out"


RE: Nice...
By Omega215D on 7/25/2014 1:52:11 PM , Rating: 2
The price was pretty high for what it was but the off contract price was still lower than the other flagships. It was also touted as a phone assembled in America which supposedly necessitated the higher initial contract price.

Some tech sites called it flagship while some didn't which is why I considered it wasn't trying to be a flagship device. That's what the Droid line was for, though not on an international level.


RE: Nice...
By retrospooty on 7/25/2014 1:57:09 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, I guess it wasn't a normal "flagship" in some sense, but the Droid line is Verizon only. The X was the highest end only Motorola available on multiple carriers, so therefore it kind of gets dubbed the flagship. That and the "Droid" branded ones weren't any better spec'd. Equal at best.


RE: Nice...
By agent2099 on 7/25/2014 2:15:09 PM , Rating: 3
I really hope they don't get rid of the always listening feature. That is one my favorite things about the Moto X. I typically upgrade phones every year but I still have the Moto X because honestly, I think it is STILL the best phone out there. The combination of software and hardware is unparalleled. I would not trade it for an S5 or HTC.

I owned an S4 and the Moto X was by far the faster device, despite the "underpowered" CPU. Just goes to show you how much specs really matter, it's all about software optimization.


RE: Nice...
By retrospooty on 7/25/2014 2:39:16 PM , Rating: 2
They wont. All Androids (I think over 4.2) have that now via Google launcher... I have it on my G3 right now via Nova Launcher. Had it on my G2 as well.


RE: Nice...
By Belard on 7/26/2014 8:29:05 AM , Rating: 2
I love my MOTO-X. I got mine with a custom config color that is not typical of an Android phone. So it WONT get lost with anything else I have.

I got mine months before the Samsung GS5. I still would have picked the Moto-X. Why:

1 - size. At 4.7, its a great size compared with all the huge 5+" size phones. I hope the continue to make an 4.7" X1, and the + is for the plus size.

2 - The custom-user order factory is closing down in Texas... so the Moto-G2 may replace the X since its almost the same phone with a user-replaceable back. (There are advantages to this).

3 - Texture and feel.. The shape of the phone is GREAT... you can tell when its upside down. And its not the horrible glossy plastic typical of LG and Samsung phone (which are starting to stop that)

4 - Android, almost pure Android... and the CLOCK / Alarm interface is by far, the BEST for any Android or iOS. I hate *HATE* the typical clock UI on phone... they TAKE FOREVER with swipes and presses. What would take 3 seconds on a MOTO-X/G phone could take 30 seconds on Samsung, LG, etc.


RE: Nice...
By piroroadkill on 7/26/2014 9:31:08 AM , Rating: 2
Total disagree. I liked the dual core SoC and 1280×720 display.

If it had a microSD slot and a battery the size of the RAZR MAXX HD, I'd probably have put it on my list. But it has a small battery and no slot. So it came off my list.


RE: Nice...
By MemberSince97 on 8/22/2014 6:14:05 PM , Rating: 2
Nice


huh???
By EasyC on 7/25/14, Rating: 0
RE: huh???
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 7/25/2014 12:33:01 PM , Rating: 2
That was my mistake. It has been corrected.


RE: huh???
By EasyC on 7/25/2014 10:32:27 PM , Rating: 2
Gotta love DT readers. Down rating me for pointing out a mistake.

Why come you dont got a tattoo??


I like the look of this
By themaster08 on 7/25/2014 1:57:28 PM , Rating: 2
I think this is a great looking device. The wood finish on the back is really growing on me. It really makes the device stand out. I currently have a Moto G and it feels great in the hand. The little concaved Motorola logo on the back actually fits well with your index finger whilst holding the device. This device seems to be continuing this trend, which is a nice little touch.

Being really nit-picky, I'm not a huge fan of what look to be the stereo speaker grills. I think HTC's implementation of this looks much better, as it blends in well with the device.




RE: I like the look of this
By retrospooty on 7/25/2014 1:59:06 PM , Rating: 2
"I think this is a great looking device. The wood finish on the back is really growing on me. It really makes the device stand out."

That is the cool thing about Moto... I think the wood is hideous looking, but I can get a different back entirely and we would both be happy with the same phone.


Where is the $500+ flagship
By Milliamp on 7/26/2014 5:31:06 AM , Rating: 2
The $350 or so they charge for the X is not expensive enough for a flagship phone when the most popular phones are $600 to $650.

If most the of demand is at $600 phones why wouldn't you make one?




"I want people to see my movies in the best formats possible. For [Paramount] to deny people who have Blu-ray sucks!" -- Movie Director Michael Bay














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki