By 
Ready for one last big sale before Motorola announces the follow-up to the Moto X? The device has gone on sale — as it has many times before — in a back to school promotion that gives considerable savings on off-contract prices for the phone over at Moto Maker. You’ll be able to get Motorola’s 2013 flagship for the following prices depending on which model you opt for:
- 16GB — $299.99
- 32GB — $324.99
- 64GB — $375.99
Not too bad, I’d say. Note that the 32GB pricing also applies to the 32GB Developer Edition that can be had here for all of you tinkerers out there. The Moto X, while not boasting the most amazing technology, brought us a phone that introduced interesting, innovative features, a phone that you can customize however you want, and a user experience that was a breath of fresh air from the usual OEM skins we’ve seen in years past. You can check out our review if you want to know whether the phone was worth its skin in its heyday.
We’re not sure how smart of an investment the Moto X would be at this point with its successor said to be on the horizon, but if you don’t care about a potentially dated experience (the price tag is good enough to dismiss that) then you can get started customizing your own right here.
Hoping Moto doesn’t screw the next one up, they better stick with this 4.7″ form factor. Still the best phone on the market other than the Nexus 5.
“Ok google now”
Is it just, “Ok Google”?
other than the Nexus 5 and a bunch of other phones depending on what you value in a phone*
My Moto X just keeps getting better, with the latest big thing being AutoVoice combined with Tasker. Now I can do virtually anything with Touchless Controls. I think the Moto X is a great deal at this sale price, and the only reason to not get one is that the price might drop further after its successor is introduced. But I don’t expect any significant drop, since this sale price is already 1/2 of the original price, and I expect the successor to start at around the same price point that the Moto X did.
still to much . As time has gone on the specs in that phone have got even more outdated. I know I know specs aren’t everything but the specs in that phone are so low end there is no reason that it can’t go for 199.99 for the 16GB version
Yea, that’s like selling a Nexus 4 for $50 less than the Nexus 5. Pretty much…
The specs on this phone are fine. It’s an HTC One M7 with two fewer CPU cores, but better real world performance due to less thermal throttling. Tests show that real world performance can be comparable to or better than the Nexus 5 due to a combination of thermal throttling and less overhead (lower resolution display).
except it still has a crappy camera
I guess it depends on what you consider to be crappy. To date, my Galaxy S2 (international model) is the best camera on an Android phone I’ve owned. My S4 GPE was horrid in comparison. It sucked when motion was involved (either the shooter or the target) where the S2 didn’t discriminate. I also have constant access to a barrage of iPhones and they seem to be better overall shooters than any Android device.
My Moto X doesn’t compare to my iPhone 5s in terms of camera quality. But it trounces my S4 GPE is mid-light and motion (I live in the Pacific Northwest and have two kids). So in the areas that matter to me, the X is better than the S4. Mount a phone on a tripod with no motion and ideal lighting conditions, and generally speaking, higher megapixels win (which is why the S4/S5 does so well in online camera comparisons and why the HTC One series does so poorly).
None of the phones listed above will substitute for a real camera. I’m reminded of this every day being married to a professional photographer. My wife has used the Moto X and describes it as “tolerably adequate.” That’s the highest praise she’s had for any Android device she’s used aside from my S2 (and an S3, which I believe used the same or a very similar sensor).
The problems with specs and camera comparisons is that most people reading just assume higher numbers equals better without considering what they really mean. For example, everyone is going ga-ga over the LG G3’s 2560×1440 display. Does it add a significant amount of clarify over a 1080p display? It’s clearer, but how much clearer is subjective to the end user. Does the higher overhead cause degraded performance and reduce battery life? Absolutely. Is the trade off worth it? Not in my opinion, but again, it’s subjective. But is definitely not a clear case of “more pixels is better” because there’s an unreported tradeoff.
So when people come out and say that a device’s specs are low end, I’m going to challenge that. The Moto X vs. Nexus 5 comparison I did awhile back was a perfect example. Take the guts of both phones out, mount them on a test bench, and have proper cooling, and the Nexus 5 will absolutely trounce the Moto X. Put those guts back inside a smartphone form factor with zero cooling, and reality sets in. The Moto X remains at 1.7ghz/400mhz (CPU/GPU), while the Nexus 5 drops to 1.25ghz/200mhz in a 1080p game. It’s not pretty.
The problem is that you’re referencing another phone with a bad camera to speak about android cameras as a whole. GPE devices all had poorer cameras than their skinned counter parts because they are stripped of the software that made the cameras good. No one said the GPE devices had a good camera either. A good phone to reference would have been the GS5 or the Note or the G3. Look at any camera comparison online or rankings of top android cameras and you wont see any GPE device or the Moto X. That says something.
Yes the iPhone has one of the best cameras, but there are good android ones, you just arent using them, and I don’t care about megapixels i’m talking about the overall image quality, I went from an Evo LTE to a Nexus 4 and the photo quality plummeted, then I went to a G3 and the photo quality sky rocketed.
I’m not saying the Moto X isnt a good phone, but it does have its compromises, just like my nexus 4 has its compromises.
Also, no one is really going gaga over the 2K display of the LG, almost everyone wishes the display was 1080p instead. I like G3 despite its 2k resolution.
A decent contradiction in your post. You tell me “GPE devices all had poorer cameras than their skinned counter parts,” followed by “Look at any camera comparison online.” The S4 GPE and Touchwiz models show no significant difference in camera quality via online comparisons (since as I mentioned, most online comparisons shoot in ideal conditions). To insinuate that these two cameras perform differently is to give credence to my argument that online camera comparisons don’t get the whole picture (no pun intended). And this argument that you’re accidentally making shoots to ribbons your assertion that the Moto X camera is “crappy.”
I clearly stated that my Moto X doesn’t perform as indicated online because my shooting patterns are different. I specifically cited two instances which are surprisingly common. The Moto X’s camera has a much faster shutter than either version of the S4, which allows it to perform better in lower light (without flash) and when motion is a concern. The S4, either version, will always outperform the Moto X in well lit still photography.
The Moto X flash, btw, is pure and utter crap. It’s unusable in any situation. So to simplify: dark with flash? Use an S4. Well lit outdoor photography? Use an S4. Everything in between? Use a Moto X. However, only the two extremes are typically documented in an online comparison, which makes the Moto X look like comparative crap. Anyone who hasn’t used one extensively will then make posts on the internet about how “crappy” the camera performs :)
You might be correct about the GPE as i was going off memory of a review and did not fact check myself… however my other points remain valid. It doesn’t matter that they use ideal conditions in comparisons, which I dont feel to be the case anyway, most reviewers take a variety of environments from daylight to overcast to nighttime to flash. But even if they only used ideal conditions, it still performs worse than its competitors in ideal conditions.
I’m not saying the camera is unusable, maybe the word “crappy” was harsh. But it is not the standard of android of android cameras, it is not known for its camera, and sites that have spent time extensively reviewing the phone and its camera, say its not the best. So for people who want a top of the line camera, it wont be the best device.
Ok, let me summarize.
You – “camera is crappy.”
Me – “It’s tolerably adequate.”
You – “I stand by what I say, but maybe the word crappy was harsh.”
I think the words you’re looking for are “tolerably adequate” :) Because I certainly never said that it was a high end camera, I merely contested it being “crappy,” which you seem to be backing away from now. The Moto X was a 2013 flagship meant to compete against the likes of the HTC One M7, Galaxy S4, and the LG G2. Each one has strengths and weaknesses, and each camera will perform better depending on the circumstances.
From my understanding, the G2 has the best and most well rounded camera of that bunch. Beyond that, the One was the best at low light, the S4 under good lighting, the the Moto X was the best with motion (and why it appealed to me). I wouldn’t recommend it over any of those other cameras outside of that one usage scenario.
yes, correct. “i stand by what i said” in reference that the device isnt the best device for many people.
Already ordered the 32gb version for my father (he tried to swim with his now dead phone).