Jump to content

Moto X 2014 (was "Motorola IHDT56QA1")

NateC

By NateC
in Motorola

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 246
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

atomic50
atomic50

According to the spec, the Sprint Moto X (2014) should be model XT1092 with specs below:   GSM/GPRS/EDGE (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz); UMTS/HSPA+ (850, 900, 1700 (AWS), 1900, 2100 MHz); CDMA (850/19

WiWavelength
WiWavelength

Teaser article is on The Wall:   http://s4gru.com/index.php?/blog/1/entry-373-teaser-x-marks-the-spot-for-the-first-sprint-ccarrpp-fully-compliant-handset/   AJ

S4GRU
S4GRU

Moto + case = 3x the EVO LTE reception without case   Robert via Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Posted Images

djw39 Member Level: 3G EVDO

djw39

Posted
Posted

Not a Moto screw-up. Confirmed by Sprint that it was out of their hands: https://twitter.com/sprintcare/status/512420169277124608

And confirmed by Punit Soni it was a carrier decision. So there's that.

 

"Why carriers carry or not carry phones has a lot to do with their portfolio, requirements and how OEMs slot into them." - from the Google+ thread already linked

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nrbelex Member Level: 3G EVDO

Nrbelex

Posted
Posted

And confirmed by Punit Soni it was a carrier decision. So there's that.

 

"Why carriers carry or not carry phones has a lot to do with their portfolio, requirements and how OEMs slot into them." - from the Google+ thread already linked

 

Haha, why am I not surprised they're completely at odds.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
djw39 Member Level: 3G EVDO

djw39

Posted
Posted

I guess I'm kind of in the camp of "it's not different enough from the Nexus 5 anyway". I was hoping for something closer in size to last year's Moto X, but with the additional LTE bands. Oh well, on to waiting for Sony announcement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WiWavelength Member Level: LTE Advanced

WiWavelength

Posted
Posted

People don't really switch carriers for phones anymore.

 

Read the Twitter and Google+ feeds.  Plenty of people still hitch their wagons to specific devices.  Those people may be morons, but they exist in significant numbers, nonetheless.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
smorcy11 Member Level: 3G EVDO

smorcy11

Posted
Posted

I guess I'm kind of in the camp of "it's not different enough from the Nexus 5 anyway". I was hoping for something closer in size to last year's Moto X, but with the additional LTE bands. Oh well, on to waiting for Sony announcement.

 

screen is better, camera is better, better hardware, possibly better antenna, more premium feel/look - I think there's a lot it's got going for over last year's N5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NateC Member Level: 1x Advanced

NateC

Posted
  • Author
Posted

screen is better, camera is better, better hardware, possibly better antenna, more premium feel/look - I think there's a lot it's got going for over last year's N5.

 

That's certainly debatable.  According to Anandtech's review of the 2014 Moto X:

  • Nexus 5 screen is significantly brighter
  • Nexus 5 screen has superior grayscale accuracy
  • Nexus 5 screen has significantly better saturation accuracy
  • Nexus 5 screen has better GMB accuracy

The only thing that was rated in the Moto X's favor was white color temperature accuracy, and it was an extremely negligible difference (they are practically identical).

 

As far as the camera is concerned, the Moto X 2014 camera was also very unimpressive in Anandtech's review.  They didn't compare against the Nexus 5 directly though.  In any case, I don't think you can really say it's definitively better than the Nexus 5 camera from what we currently know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
S4GRU Member Level: LTE Advanced

S4GRU

Posted
Posted

If Sprint decided not to carry the new Moto X, I'm only left to believe they decided it was too similar to the new Nexus and wasn't worth having two phones cannibalize each other.  That's my guess.  If it was Moto's decision, then it seems like AT&T exclusivity may be the reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MacinJosh Member Level: LTE Advanced

MacinJosh

Posted
Posted

So how often does a device go through the FCC and then never get released?

Not as often as you think. Since Sprint LTE devices started showing up, this is like number 5 or 6, I think.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone 5S using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nexuss4g Member Level: 3G EVDO

nexuss4g

Posted
Posted

The Motorola X is going to go on sale in a few weeks on a major rural carrier that is using the CCA model.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

Will Sprint activate this model on its network ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
smorcy11 Member Level: 3G EVDO

smorcy11

Posted
Posted

That's certainly debatable.  According to Anandtech's review of the 2014 Moto X:

  • Nexus 5 screen is significantly brighter
  • Nexus 5 screen has superior grayscale accuracy
  • Nexus 5 screen has significantly better saturation accuracy
  • Nexus 5 screen has better GMB accuracy

The only thing that was rated in the Moto X's favor was white color temperature accuracy, and it was an extremely negligible difference (they are practically identical).

 

As far as the camera is concerned, the Moto X 2014 camera was also very unimpressive in Anandtech's review.  They didn't compare against the Nexus 5 directly though.  In any case, I don't think you can really say it's definitively better than the Nexus 5 camera from what we currently know.

 

Personally I prefer the AMOLED screens, but the specs differences on the display are negligible. However, the hardware is better, the camera is 13 MP compared to 8 MP, and it will absolutely be a more premium device. Also, if the antenna is anything of what they've touted, it should be great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
transitwatch889 Member Level: eHRPD

transitwatch889

Posted
Posted

This is highly disappointing. I hope there is an unlocked model that can be simply activated on sprint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lafester Member Level: 1x Advanced

lafester

Posted
Posted

The Motorola X is going to go on sale in a few weeks on a major rural carrier that is using the CCA model.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

This makes the most sense... Hopefully sprint will allow them to be activated as well.
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ffdjd Member Level: Digital

ffdjd

Posted
Posted

It does seem like allot of faith being put on a couple tweets from customer service reps, especially given that there is a variant built on the CCA model.  Let's hope they are right but that there is another variant (nexus x or moto x) built with an 805 or better snapdragon capable of c.a. is on it's way.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GW1973 Member Level: 1x Advanced

GW1973

Posted
Posted

Ok. Is it possible that instead of two Moto X models that Sprint will only carry the Pure Edition Moto X? Personally, I like what I have read so far about it. Could yhe model gound on the FCC site be that phone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
smorcy11 Member Level: 3G EVDO

smorcy11

Posted
Posted

Ok. Is it possible that instead of two Moto X models that Sprint will only carry the Pure Edition Moto X? Personally, I like what I have read so far about it. Could yhe model gound on the FCC site be that phone?

I was under the impression the "pure edition" was the one that you buy straight from Motorola instead of your carrier.

 

Sent from my SM-N900P using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • Wiley_11
      Keep a Word, Drop a Word #7

      By Wiley_11 · Posted

      bubble butt  
    • dkyeager
      Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread

      By dkyeager · Posted

      T-Mobile has saved its 28Mhz mmWave licenses by using the point to point method to do environment monitoring inside its cabinets. The attachment below shows the antennas used: https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/ApplicationSearch/applAdmin.jsp;JSESSIONID_APPSEARCH=LxvbnJuvusmIklPhKy6gVK7f9uwylrZ8LiNf3BqIKlDp3_5GxoBr!300973589!225089709?applID=14787154#   Here are the sites for Franklin county OH: https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsEntry/attachments/attachmentViewRD.jsp?applType=search&fileKey=66518254&attachmentKey=21989782&attachmentInd=applAttach
    • wispiANt
      Network Vision/LTE - New York City Market

      By wispiANt · Posted

      Yep, there is a label on the side of the box but it doesn't provide any useful info that the city doesn't already provide (Crown Castle Solutions is the franchisee). You can see my graphical interpretation of the city's dataset here.
    • dkyeager
      Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread

      By dkyeager · Posted

      T-Mobile UScellular agreement links from SEC filings: https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/821130/000110465924065665/tm2415626d2_8k.htm Look inside for main link. Credit mdav-dos1 on reddit
    • chamb
      Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread

      By chamb · Posted

      Totally agree.  In my county and surrounding counties, TM did not place n-41 on every site.  When I look at the sites in question, I probably would have not placed it there either.  I can find just a few with n-71 only and in most of those cases if you live there and know the probable usage of the residents, you would not do a full upgrade on those sites.  One site in particular is set up to force feed n-71 through a long tunnel on the Turnpike.  No stopping allowed in the tunnel. No stores, movie theaters, bathrooms, so n41 would be a waste.    n25 is not really needed either, so it is not there.  The tunnel is going through & under a mountain with more black bears than people.  TM was smart.  Get good coverage in the tunnel but do not waste many many thousands of dollars with extra unused spectrum. I also see sites with only n71 & n25.  Again this makes sense to me.  Depending on what county we are talking about, they moved much of their b25 from LTE to nr.  Some counties have more n25 than a neighboring county, but luckily, it is plenty everywhere.   When you are in a very rural area, n41 can run up the bills and then be barely used.  I am NOT finding sites that should have had n41 but TM failed to provide it.  They may have to come back later in a few years and upgrade the site to n41.  However, we just may eventually see the last little piece on Band 25 leave LTE and move to n25. I am not sure if the satellite to phone service is using band 25 G block as LTE or nr. We also can possibly have at least some AWS move from LTE to nr at some point.  Yes, everybody wants n41. it is not justified in some cases.  When I travel, I desire some decent service along the entire route but it does not have to be 1 or 2 gig download.   If I can get 50/5 on a speedtest with data that will flow and not stutter, I am very happy. Yes, they will swap out the USC gear.  TM needs to match their existing network. The USCC equipment did the job for years, but it is time to retire it.

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...