Related
Since most of us chose the ONE S for the good performance in a smaller form factor, I figured the Moto X would be a natural upgrade from the ONE S (rather than the ONE Mini, which is not much of an upgrade, with its 4.3" screen and 1GB RAM). I was right - the Moto X is great for one-handed operation and is superior in every way except one: the camera.
Even with the negative press about the camera, this is surprising, because you expect technology to march on. What I didn't expect was how much better the HTC camera in the "obsolete" ONE S is versus Motorola's.
This is mostly evident in low-light shooting, such as indoors. The HTC is much better at capturing detail, and usually exposes correctly. The Motorola introduces washed-out colours and grain, even after the so-called "update" that was supposed to fix these issues.
The pluses of the Moto X are many: better reception and call quality, better loudspeaker, LTE, bigger screen with 720p, nicer curved design that sits naturally in your hand, and updated software (though if you flash a ROM the last one doesn't matter).
Not that the ONE S is bad in any of these areas (it's not), but Motorola is known for its radios and call quality, and they continue that tradition.
The ONE S is still a great phone and I was planning on keeping it for another few months at least, but there was a recent price drop for the Moto X. Because I use my phone for emails and browsing first, as a phone second, and as a camera a distant third, this is still an upgrade for me. I am disappointed that Motorola/Google dropped the ball with the camera though.
If you use the camera often, keep the ONE S!
ChrisAG said:
Since most of us chose the ONE S for the good performance in a smaller form factor, I figured the Moto X would be a natural upgrade from the ONE S (rather than the ONE Mini, which is not much of an upgrade, with its 4.3" screen and 1GB RAM). I was right - the Moto X is great for one-handed operation and is superior in every way except one: the camera.
Even with the negative press about the camera, this is surprising, because you expect technology to march on. What I didn't expect was how much better the HTC camera in the "obsolete" ONE S is versus Motorola's.
This is mostly evident in low-light shooting, such as indoors. The HTC is much better at capturing detail, and usually exposes correctly. The Motorola introduces washed-out colours and grain, even after the so-called "update" that was supposed to fix these issues.
The pluses of the Moto X are many: better reception and call quality, better loudspeaker, LTE, bigger screen with 720p, nicer curved design that sits naturally in your hand, and updated software (though if you flash a ROM the last one doesn't matter).
Not that the ONE S is bad in any of these areas (it's not), but Motorola is known for its radios and call quality, and they continue that tradition.
The ONE S is still a great phone and I was planning on keeping it for another few months at least, but there was a recent price drop for the Moto X. Because I use my phone for emails and browsing first, as a phone second, and as a camera a distant third, this is still an upgrade for me. I am disappointed that Motorola/Google dropped the ball with the camera though.
If you use the camera often, keep the ONE S!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One S rulez !
If you spend time to read reviews before you buy, you'll know the camera on Moto X isn't that great. Most folks on Earth tend to think HTC camera bad which is very wrong, HTC camera isn't perfect but always give you surprised result.
One S camera is equipped with 8M 1/3.2" BSI, f/2.0, 28mm and most importantly an imagechip. The spec. is still at top-tier after two years from now, don't think Moto X could beat it easy. I want to upgrade my phone but most mid-end phone nowadays their camera is still behind One S but flagship model is just too expensive to me which made me continue to stick with One S, might be one more year til 2015. Very bad.
I'll look for M8 mini and Galaxy S5 mini later.
TheEndHK said:
If you spend time to read reviews before you buy, you'll know the camera on Moto X isn't that great.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I did read the reviews, but thought the bar had been raised across the board since 18 months separates the release of the phones. This may be true for some manufacturers, but not others. Plus, a recent software update claimed to improve the camera, but evidently not enough. Hopefully a further update will improve things, but I'm not holding my breath.
ChrisAG said:
I did read the reviews, but thought the bar had been raised across the board since 18 months separates the release of the phones. This may be true for some manufacturers, but not others. Plus, a recent software update claimed to improve the camera, but evidently not enough. Hopefully a further update will improve things, but I'm not holding my breath.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The main problem on Moto X is no dedicated ISP(imagechip) and it can't be improved simply though some software updates. The ISP performance inside Qualcomm CPU is always very poor.
I hope this is appropriate to ask here. I am receiving my new Z3 today (exchanged due to camera defect) and I am debating whether to sell it and buy a Motorola X (2014) instead. Part of this is because after owning the Z3 and seeing too many issues with the camera (defective camera, water-colored camera quality, pink spots on specific background) and bad QA (screen leak), this keeps me on the edge about continuing to own this premium phone. I absolutely love everything else about the phone, the build quality, screen, etc.
Then I looked at the Moto X (2014) and noticed it had similar specs, minus some other features. It is definitely a little cheaper. The big thing is I do not want to go above 5.2" screen at the moment--it is already too big for my pockets. I don't know much about the new Moto X and its problems, but the Z3 makes me feel uneasy about the purchase. One of the big thing for me is the phone camera and quality (MP is not too important). Before selling the Z3, I want to know what you think. Thanks in advance.
My first Z3 had screen leak but new one is perfect. Both are great devices. The Z3 has far greater batter life and AMOLED is prone to burn in for heavy users and eats through battery on web pages though.
abhinav.tella said:
My first Z3 had screen leak but new one is perfect. Both are great devices. The Z3 has far greater batter life and AMOLED is prone to burn in for heavy users and eats through battery on web pages though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Greatly appreciate your input. :good:
Xperia Z3 got stereo speakers but Moto X don't.
Sent from my D6653 using XDA Free mobile app
I was having the same debate but picked the Z3, even though some ave camera issues all I hear is the Moto X 2014 camera is a very sub par camera, as well as having a super small battery that some say barely gets them though the day. I think the Z3 is a much better device overall.
In this scenario. The Z3 is the Mercedes and the Moto X is the Honda lol. Meaning the X is not a bad device but the Z3 is just way more luxurious.
Had a quick look at the Moto-X while at my local Costco. Not digging the design and build quality at all. The Z3 really feels like a premium device next to the X.
While I'm sure the Moto is a great handset overall, one really needs to question the decision to include a low-capacity battery and exclude a SD card slot.
Sony truly is the miniaturization experts. I have a Sony A7 camera and it still boggles my mind how they've been able to cram a full-frame sensor into such a small camera body. Likewise, only Sony can figure out how to cram a 3100mah battery, SD card slot, 20mp camera, and stereo speakers into a phone with similar overall dimensions to other flagship phones that lack all of the aforementioned.
If you do buy the X, buy it directly from Moto, they offer one time screen replacement just like HTC.
Got the Z3 today. Shot this with the HTC One M7 (with the purple haze issue). Notice the USB flap has a larger gap on the left than on the right. Nothing I can do to adjust that. That's Sony's quality assurance for you. :/
Hello guys.
I'm using a Nexus 4 now and after about two years it's starting to get broken.
I tought about getting a new phone but I have few requirments, hope you guys can help me with it.
1 (and the most important). smaller form factor than the Nexus 4's has.
2. Good battery life.
3. A well supported phone ( Roms, Guides, etc.).
I can get along with 720P and not having a 810SD xP...
I almost don't play games on the phone and the S4 Pro of the N4 is more than enough for me.
Thanks in advance!
Wassupdog said:
Hello guys.
I'm using a Nexus 4 now and after about two years it's starting to get broken.
I tought about getting a new phone but I have few requirments, hope you guys can help me with it.
1 (and the most important). smaller form factor than the Nexus 4's has.
2. Good battery life.
3. A well supported phone ( Roms, Guides, etc.).
I can get along with 720P and not having a 810SD xP...
I almost don't play games on the phone and the S4 Pro of the N4 is more than enough for me.
Thanks in advance!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Moto X 2013 or Sony Xperia Z1/Z3 compact. The Moto X has a 4.7" screen like the Nexus 4, but is smaller and lighter. In specs it appears thicker, but that's because the back is curved, and the phone is extremely comfortable to hold and use. Battery life is average, which makes it better than the Nexus 4, which is piss-poor. Some ROMSs are available, but lots of people stick with rooted stock, as it's very fast and minimal, but with some cool features. As for the Sonys, the Z3 Compact is the king of small Androids. Great specs, dual front speakers, very small, and almost absurdly good battery life. The Z1C isn't as nice, but is still a very good phone, and cheaper. Development is somewhat weak for the Sonys though, but at least they're rootable. There's the Galaxy Alpha as well, which is nice and small and thin, but I can't speak for development.
I'd go with the Moto X if you want something cheaper, or the Z3 Compact if you can afford to spend that much.
Planterz said:
Moto X 2013 or Sony Xperia Z1/Z3 compact. The Moto X has a 4.7" screen like the Nexus 4, but is smaller and lighter. In specs it appears thicker, but that's because the back is curved, and the phone is extremely comfortable to hold and use. Battery life is average, which makes it better than the Nexus 4, which is piss-poor. Some ROMSs are available, but lots of people stick with rooted stock, as it's very fast and minimal, but with some cool features. As for the Sonys, the Z3 Compact is the king of small Androids. Great specs, dual front speakers, very small, and almost absurdly good battery life. The Z1C isn't as nice, but is still a very good phone, and cheaper. Development is somewhat weak for the Sonys though, but at least they're rootable. There's the Galaxy Alpha as well, which is nice and small and thin, but I can't speak for development.
I'd go with the Moto X if you want something cheaper, or the Z3 Compact if you can afford to spend that much.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you very much.
I thought about the Z3 Compact but I don't like Sony's phone and they seems to be "Bricky"..
And I don't like Samsung too.
I think I'd go with the Moto X.
Thanks .
Wassupdog said:
Thank you very much.
I thought about the Z3 Compact but I don't like Sony's phone and they seems to be "Bricky"..
And I don't like Samsung too.
I think I'd go with the Moto X.
Thanks .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There was a seller on eBay that had the 32gb Verizon branded (but compatible on all GSM networks) Developer Edition for only $200, but he upped the price to $300 just a few days ago. Right before I got my tax refund(s). Another seller has them for $250.
You can improve the battery life on the Moto X by turning off the "active" and "always listening" features. Also, since it's an AMOLED display, use a dark background and any dark themes available.
The Moto X is a seriously great phone. Too much attention is focused on specs, and not enough on simple usability and ergonomics, and the Moto X 2013 is possibly the nicest Android phone to hold, use, and carry in the pocket. I want one so badly, but I just can't justify buying one, since my own Nexus 4 is still going strong.
Planterz said:
There was a seller on eBay that had the 32gb Verizon branded (but compatible on all GSM networks) Developer Edition for only $200, but he upped the price to $300 just a few days ago. Right before I got my tax refund(s). Another seller has them for $250.
You can improve the battery life on the Moto X by turning off the "active" and "always listening" features. Also, since it's an AMOLED display, use a dark background and any dark themes available.
The Moto X is a seriously great phone. Too much attention is focused on specs, and not enough on simple usability and ergonomics, and the Moto X 2013 is possibly the nicest Android phone to hold, use, and carry in the pocket. I want one so badly, but I just can't justify buying one, since my own Nexus 4 is still going strong.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I will look up for this thanks!
And you're right, I think that the OS feel of the phone is more important than 8-core or 4-core processor.
Wassupdog said:
I will look up for this thanks!
And you're right, I think that the OS feel of the phone is more important than 8-core or 4-core processor.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think I've seen a single complaint about the performance of the Moto X 2013. It's certainly not impressive on paper, but whatever they did with their "X8" processor definitely works. I don't think you'll be disappointed.
As much as I like the S8, there are a few minor things that keep it from being great. Here's a quick mock up of what I think would have been the perfect S8:
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Better fingerprint sensor location
Power/volume buttons on one side, no bixby
16:9 5.1" screen
Obviously it doesn't matter what any of us think, but imo it would be nice if someone (google) were to make something like this. Anyone agree?
You left off the front facing stereo speakers. See. ZTE Axon 7 for reference.
I actually like the tall screen and the finger print scanner... so no, I dont agree
stan54 said:
As much as I like the S8, there are a few minor things that keep it from being great. Here's a quick mock up of what I think would have been the perfect S8:
Better fingerprint sensor location
Power/volume buttons on one side, no bixby
16:9 5.1" screen
Obviously it doesn't matter what any of us think, but imo it would be nice if someone (google) were to make something like this. Anyone agree?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
right on man!:good:
I like how its been designed. People are reacting a bit over too much over the fingerprint sensor location... it aint all that bad positioning afterall.
nobody seams to understand why the finger print sensor is where it is....... the battery would have to be thinner or shorter... this location maximizes your battery size... so deal with it
I'm ok with the current design... but it's okay to dream...
dmcgrath009 said:
nobody seams to understand why the finger print sensor is where it is....... the battery would have to be thinner or shorter... this location maximizes your battery size... so deal with it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the placement of the finger print sensor was mainly because they failed to achieve what they originally wanted which was a fingerprint sensor on the front display. Rather than delay the launch, they put it in an area that made the most sense without having to redesign. It's not the ideal location, but it's not terrible either.
OP I like the design. Switching from the Nexus 6, the side buttons would be great. As for the aspect ratio, I'm starting to like the S8 being more narrow, makes it feel like the phone isn't quite as big as it is while still having a lot of screen real estate. Well done though, if that was the actual S8 I would definitely have gotten it as well.
Finger print location isn't bad. If you hold your hand out like you are using samsung pay its great positioning.
I think most are complaining because they are In the habit of where the scanner it. Need to accept and use the new location to form new habit.
I'm not so sure decreasing the 18.5:9 to 16:9 would make it go all the way down to a 5.1" screen. Maybe 5.4". But I wholeheartedly agree with all of this
Someone did something similar with the Pixel. I would've bought it if it looked like this.
ChazzMatt said:
You left off the front facing stereo speakers. See. ZTE Axon 7 for reference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Every thread you come in with that ZTE Axon 7 and stereo speakers. Let it die already.
STEREO SPEAKERS FOR THE WIN
ChazzMatt said:
You left off the front facing stereo speakers. See. ZTE Axon 7 for reference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Rado_vr6 said:
Every thread you come in with that ZTE Axon 7 and stereo speakers. Let it die already.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope. I will not. In fact reviewers agree with me. One of the complaint reviewers have had about the otherwise mostly excellent S8 is Samsung's puzzling decision for mono speaker. They own Harman Kardon!
https://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2017/04/22/samsung-galaxy-s8-review/#6425a0d73e5e
Cons: Badly positioned volume controls, idiotically positioned fingerprint sensor, pointless Bixby button and a meek mono speaker
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://mashable.com/2017/03/31/samsung-galaxy-s8-specs-compromise/
The phone only has a mono speaker
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.iretron.com/blog/posts/samsung-galaxy-s8-my-first-full-day/
I am disappointed that there are no stereo speakers,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And not only a complaint within a review, that's ACTUALLY the TITLE of an article...
http://www.androidauthority.com/samsung-stereo-speakers-761093/
Is Samsung ever going to put stereo speakers on a flagship?
Is Samsung ever going to put stereo speakers on a flagship?
But stereo speakers aren’t an under-utilized talisman for the vocal minority. Stereo speakers are the way we should hear audio from our smartphones. Heck, stereo is the way we should hear audio from any source. But Samsung’s continued resistance to putting stereo speakers on a flagship phone seems more ingrained than even the company’s love of bloatware.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I will continue to bring attention to such a design deficit. It's a great feature that even the Moto Nexus 6 also had. All top tier phones should have stereo speakers, especially if we are paying this much money.
It's just ZTE did it best and for least money, and most recently -- with a BMW-designed frame at that. Other manufacturers should follow that example. Google did it before and should do it AGAIN.
ChazzMatt said:
You left off the front facing stereo speakers. See. ZTE Axon 7 for reference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
IMO a single high quality front facing speaker that handles all the sound output of the phone is the best compromise. Phone speakers will never sound good so two mediocre speakers that take up valuable space won't sound better, just slightly louder - plus that leaves room for more battery capacity - and things like the headphone jack...
snick8467 said:
Finger print location isn't bad. If you hold your hand out like you are using samsung pay its great positioning.
I think most are complaining because they are In the habit of where the scanner it. Need to accept and use the new location to form new habit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most people are coming from older galaxies and iphones so they don't have a habit of using a rear sensor. They are complaining because it's in a horrible place and even with muscle memory you have to strain to reach it and avoid not smudging the camera. You can "accept it" - I'll keep my dignity, thanks.
Syn Ack said:
I'm not so sure decreasing the 18.5:9 to 16:9 would make it go all the way down to a 5.1" screen. Maybe 5.4". But I wholeheartedly agree with all of this
Someone did something similar with the Pixel. I would've bought it if it looked like this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Damn that's a nice design - I actually like it more than my samsung concept and hope the pixel 2 is half as good. Only thing I don't like is the tall screen. Tall aspect ratios turn one handed phones into two handed ones without the benefits of an actually bigger screen.
I thought about the screen size and 5.1" is doable. The s8 is so tall that it's like an optical illusion making you think it's bigger than it is. In reality the s7 and s8 are the same width so imagine the s7 with the top and bottom bezels cut in half. Kind of like this:
Looks like a 2013 LG G2, doesn't it? That phone really was way ahead of its time...
I don't know why people need such speakers on a phone.
They sound ****ty nevertheless and won't be used for any music consumption unless you are one of those ghetto kids who has his cellphone on blast in public transport.
The speaker is simply there to make "rinring" in case someone calles and even this is disabled my most people because it's too intrusive compared to a vibration feedback.
Speakers need space to work and I can see better usage of that space instead of putting stereo speakers in a cellphone. Really you can't even fit some decent speakers in there because they need so much room. Ever seen a subwoofer? You won't but that thing in a cellphone because it's 95% empty space inside there.
Use some headphones or connect the phone to your living room system for gods sake
First I will agree with you, then I'll disagree with you.
HzMeister said:
Damn that's a nice design - I actually like it more than my samsung concept and hope the pixel 2 is half as good. Only thing I don't like is the tall screen. Tall aspect ratios turn one handed phones into two handed ones without the benefits of an actually bigger screen.
I thought about the screen size and 5.1" is doable. The s8 is so tall that it's like an optical illusion making you think it's bigger than it is. In reality the s7 and s8 are the same width so imagine the s7 with the top and bottom bezels cut in half. Kind of like this:
Looks like a 2013 LG G2, doesn't it? That phone really was way ahead of its time...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, the LG G2 was ahead of it's time. And I'll give you specific proof via Motorola laughable efforts during that same time...
The 2013 LG G2 was the first Android with 1080p and rear camera OIS, and why the LG Nexus 5 was based on the LG G2 instead of any Motorola designs that year, even though Google owned Motorola. Whenever I compare phones or critique phones, it's usually based on hardware specs. "Software" is more opinion based. I have my opinions on software, there are things I like, love or hate -- but hardware doesn't lie. At the time, Motorola was NOT a top tier hardware/design manufacturer.
* 2013
Within ONE week of each other Motorola and LG released their 2013 flagship phones (August 1 and August 7). Motorola released the 2013 Moto X and LG released the 2013 LG G2. The 2013 Moto X HARDWARE was an excellent clone of the 2012 LG Optimus G (G1)/LG Nexus 4: 4.7", 720p, 2GB RAM -- with not even Snapdragon 8XXX chipset. Both the 2012 LG and the 2013 Moto X used Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 Pro. Seriously, for HARDWARE SPECS they just copied LG's Nexus phone from the previous year. The 2012 LG actually had 768p resolution and 13MP camera vs. the 2013 Moto X 720p and 10MP camera.
But when you compare the specs of the two 2013 "flagship" phones to each other, the Motorola is clearly a mid-tier design.
2013 LG G2 vs 2013 Motorola Moto X
http://www.phonearena.com/phones/compare/LG-G2,Motorola-Moto-X/phones/7969,7885?ft=2
The 2013 LG G2 was cutting edge specs. 5.2" 1080p, Snapdragon 800, 2GB RAM, rear camera OIS. And the 2013 LG Nexus 5 was based on that design -- just a little smaller (4.95"), so it wouldn't be an exact clone. LG had run into problems with that the previous year, where the LG Nexus 4 was an almost exact copy of the LG Optimus G (G1). Why would people pay $600 or more for the LG Optimus when they could get the LG Nexus 4 for almost half the price through Google? So, for the 2013 LG Nexus 5, they tried to differentiate their flagship from the Nexus phone through display size.
* 2014
Then in 2014, the 2014 Moto X (gen2) was an excellent copy of the 2013 LG G2, but otherwise not exceptional specs. Yeah, Motorola did it again. Just copied LG's previous year flagship phone: 5.2", 1080p, 2GB RAM, only updating it with a slightly newer Snapdragon 801 chipset than LG had used, the Snapdragon 800. OK, it did have stereo speakers to improve on the LG G2...
Whereas, at the same time LG was introducing the 2014 LG G3 -- with 1440p, 3GB RAM, and laser-focused rear camera. LG was again moving to the next level of hardware specs while Motorola was looking to the past.
2014 LG G3 vs 2014 Motorola Moto X (gen2)
http://www.phonearena.com/phones/compare/LG-G3,Motorola-Moto-X-2014/phones/8347,8897?ft=2
But REALLY, you should be comparing the 2014 Moto X to the EXCELLENT 2013 LG G2! Motorola couldn't even make a copy as good as the LG G2! And they had a YEAR to copy and paste. For instance, Motorola put in a puny 2300 mAh battery, while LG had put in a 3000 mAh battery into the 2013 LG G2. Both 5.2", 1080p, 2GB RAM. What, is 3000 mAh too big?
2014 Moto X vs 2013 LG G2
http://www.phonearena.com/phones/compare/Motorola-Moto-X-2014,LG-G2/phones/8897,7969?ft=2
* LATE 2014
Only with the late 2014 5.95" Shamu (Moto Nexus 6) and 5.2" Quark (Droid Turbo, Moto Turbo, Moto Maxx) phones did Motorola finally join the ranks of top tier manufacturers like Samsung and LG. 1440p AMOLED, 3GB RAM, 64GB internal memory, turbo charging (Quick Charge 2.0), Qi wireless charging. The larger phone had stereo speakers and rear camera OIS, not sure why Motorola left them off the smaller phone. The smaller 5.2" Quark had 21MP camera and 3900 mAh battery. Yes, the SMALLER phone had a LARGER battery. Because Google always skimped on their Nexus batteries for some strange reason.
(I haven't updated the OS specs below, it's still on the the last versions when I used this comparison, but the hardware specs have not changed on the two phones.)
I bought THREE of the Moto Maxx XT1225 phones. It was basically the 5.2" version of the Moto Nexus 6.
How do you fit a 3900 mAh battery into a 5.2" display phone? Easy. You just put it in. See that's the FALLACY I am going to bash you on in the next point. There's ALWAYS ROOM for what you want to put into a phone. ALWAYS.
And I'll explain in my next point...
HzMeister said:
IMO a single high quality front facing speaker that handles all the sound output of the phone is the best compromise. Phone speakers will never sound good so two mediocre speakers that take up valuable space won't sound better, just slightly louder - plus that leaves room for more battery capacity - and things like the headphone jack...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1) Then why didn't Samsung put in a a single high quality front facing speaker? Instead they put in a bottom firing speaker. You don't even know the speaker Samsung has on their S8/S8+.
What you think is the "speaker" is the earpiece to listen to phone calls.
2) But, let's pretend Samsung did put in a "a single high quality front facing speaker".
Why would you use "a single high quality front facing speaker" but then inexplicably downgrade to " two mediocre speakers" for stereo? Oh, here's a solution! How about TWO of those " single high quality front facing speaker" -- that way you would have TWO high quality front facing stereo speakers! You already have them on hand, yes? (In your scenario.)
Glad to be of help! Wow, that was VERY hard to figure out.
Oh, and maybe you could buy a STEREO MANUFACTURER with expertise to help out your obviously incompetent engineers who you think would try to put in " two mediocre speakers" . Maybe Samsung should buy Harman Kardon? Oh, they already have! Again, glad to be of help!
Samsung's own press release of the ownership tranfer shows MOBILE as a reason to buy Harmon Kardon:
HzMeister said:
plus that leaves room for more battery capacity - and things like the headphone jack...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
MORE ROOM FALLACY
Oh, please. The "more room" fallacy. Let's put this to rest once and for all. It's the equivalent of politicians under investigation who resign to "spend more time with their families". That's not the real reason, it's just the only excuse they can come up with that sounds acceptable to people who don't know any better.
Apple said they ditched the iPhone headphone jack for "more" room. NO, they wanted to sell their massively expensive bluetooth wireless earbuds.
Motorola ditched the headphone jack last year for their 2014 5.5" Moto Z Force phone (June 2016), allegedly for the same reason "more room"...
Yet they included the headphone jack in their 2014 5.5" Moto Z Play (August 2016) released later in the same year. Oh, and GUESS WHAT? The Moto Z Play had a slightly larger battery (3510 mAh) than the Moto Z Force (3500 mAh). That's right -- the phone WITH the headset jack even has a bigger battery.
So, more room for WHAT? The dimensions are almost identical. I see .02 mm and .03mm difference -- that's HUNDREDTH OF MILLIMETERS -- for a larger battery AND a headset jack.
And Motorola now admits they LIED. Apple will never admit that, but Motorola is admitting that... because in the upcoming 2017 Moto Z2 Force -- GUESS WHAT? -- they are ADDING BACK the headset jack. Yes, after ditching the headset jack for their flagship phone in 2016, Motorola is bringing it back.
And I'm pretty sure it will also have the same standard components of most 2nd half 2017 flagship phone -- 1440p, Snapdragon 835, 64/128GB internal memory, 4/6GB RAM, microSD card, blah, blah, blah.
Manufacturers have included headphone jacks, larger batteries, whatever they want in past years. Headphone jacks have NOT grown in size.
Internal electronic components have only shrunk in size. RAM, internal storage, CPU chipsets get SMALLER each year.
If a manufacturer claims they are ditching headset jacks or microSD cards for "more room" they are LYING or their engineers are INCOMPETENT. In Apple's case they are lying.
Now, go back to my 2014 Moto XT1225. 5.2" 1440p AMOLED and a 3900 mAh battery. I own three of these phones. Was released as the Droid Turbo XT1254/Moto Turbo XT1225/Moto Maxx XT1225/Moto Maxx XT1250. All had 3900 mAh battery.
How did Motorola put a 3900 mAh battery into this 5.2" phone? They just did. At the time, they said people were worried about battery life and putting in a bigger battery was addressing that issue. Read that again. People are NOT demanding credit card thin phones. People want bigger batteries. So, it makes the phone a hair thicker. So what. It just makes it easier to hold in your hand!
Here's the difference between a 5.2" phone with a 3900 mAh battery and 5.2" phone with 2300 mAh battery. The only thing wrong with the 3900 mAh battery phone is Motorola should have lost the capacitive buttons on the Quark phones and instead included the front facing stereo speakers they put on the 2014 Moto X. I don't understand why they didn't do that.
5.2" 2014 Moto X with front-facing stereo speakers
When Motorola released the Quark phone end of 2014, especially with the loud PR of the Droid Turbo a lot of people were very ANGRY at Motorola. They had bought the "flagship" 2014 Moto X (which was mostly a copy of the 2013 LG G2, except for the addition of front facing stereo speakers) with only 2,300 mAh battery and then a few months later Motorola unleashes this BEAST?
(By the way, in spite of Verizon's PR LIES, this phone was NOT an exclusive for Verizon, it wasn't even exclusive in the U.S.! The U.S. Moto XT1250 has the same FCC ID, same radio bands as the Droid Turbo and runs on Verizon with a Verizon SIM card, just like a non-Verizon Moto Nexus 6. My Moto XT1225 has LTE bands 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 17 and I run them on AT&T.)
And remember these are 5.2" display phones. When you increase the size to larger displays -- even with current slimmed/zero bezels -- the additional battery thickness would be negligible. Plus, no one is demanding credit card thin phones. A little extra thickness is OK, and with extra thickness comes room for ANYTHING you wish to put in -- stereo speakers, larger battery, etc.
There's always MORE ROOM.
I see PLENTY of room on the Galaxy S8 for a BIGGER battery and HIGH QUALITY front-facing stereo speakers.
So nevermind the design or the engineering that went into the device. With a year design cycle you really think every little detail YOU care about will make it. Instead if complaining, why not use your nonexistent engineering skills to build a better device?
Omg stop with this stereo speaker nonsense. Unless you are a teenager who likes to bug people on public transports or places, or you're trying to party on your phone music, it's useless. If you are an audiophile you would have a- a nice sound system at home be it home cinema or just Sonos like system then you would have either Bose qc35, shure 846 or OPPO PM3 , or any other high end headphones. You just need to have a clear sound when it rings and loud enough for you to hear
Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
HzMeister said:
As much as I like the S8, there are a few minor things that keep it from being great. Here's a quick mock up of what I think would have been the perfect S8:
Better fingerprint sensor location
Power/volume buttons on one side, no bixby
16:9 5.1" screen
Obviously it doesn't matter what any of us think, but imo it would be nice if someone (google) were to make something like this. Anyone agree?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That render looks hideous to me. The S8 as it looks now is much better looking
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
barondebxl said:
That render looks hideous to me. The S8 as it looks now is much better looking
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess not everyone likes an easy to reach notifications tab or fingerprint sensor...
HzMeister said:
I guess not everyone likes an easy to reach notifications tab or fingerprint sensor...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You guessed right.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Just drinking coffee and spotted the good old Moto X Pure in a GoodRX commercial in 2020. Miss the design of this device.
Big Buddha said:
Just drinking coffee and spotted the good old Moto X Pure in a GoodRX commercial in 2020. Miss the design of this device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good find. I still use mine every day, so I embrace it instead of missing it. Moto X Pure Edition easily might just be the best smartphone of the decade. I still can't think of anything that can match its combination of screen, sound, features, and form-factor.
Thanks for the reminder.
Bill720 said:
Good find. I still use mine every day, so I embrace it instead of missing it. Moto X Pure Edition easily might just be the best smartphone of the decade. I still can't think of anything that can match its combination of screen, sound, features, and form-factor.
Thanks for the reminder.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I still have mine, but my Razer Phone 1 is my daily driver. It's almost like a better Moto X Pure, minus the headphone jack... and a boxier design that can lay flat on a table without rocking.
Better, faster display. (And not OLED, so no burn in.)
Better CPU, RAM.
Front facing stereo speakers.
Larger battery.
Metal chassis, not fragile glass like modern flagships.
FanboyStudios said:
I still have mine, but my Razer Phone 1 is my daily driver. It's almost like a better Moto X Pure, minus the headphone jack... and a boxier design that can lay flat on a table without rocking.
Better, faster display. (And not OLED, so no burn in.)
Better CPU, RAM.
Front facing stereo speakers.
Larger battery.
Metal chassis, not fragile glass like modern flagships.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I considered the Razer Phone, but the screen can't hold a candle to the Pure Edition, and that seems to be the problem with just about everything I've researched. There are plenty of affordable device with good speakers that are gimped by screens ranging from crummy to only just OK (Razer Phone 2, HTC 10, HTC U11, HTC U12+, Pixel 2, Pixel 2 XL, etc.) and just as many with great screens that are hampered by awful sound systems. Motorola figured out the formula over five years ago, so I'm not sure why still nobody is getting it right.