Straight from its launch at IFA 2014, we already have the notion that the new Moto X will be one of the darlings of people looking to upgrade their Android devices this holiday season. Most people will get it under contract, with the USD$99.99 price tag looking very nice indeed. But there are those who will want the unbranded, unlocked, direct-sale version straight from Motorola – that one will be called the Moto X Pure Edition.
Most Android fans will see this as a nod to devices having a “pure Android” experience – which usually means a UI that is not heavily tweaked (we’re looking at you, Samsung). Motorola’s Android version is tweaked, but less so than others – maybe a variable for picking the “pure” marketing name.
The Moto X is visibly a flagship level device with flagship level specs – including the Snapdragon 801 SoC that runs four cores at 2.5GHz. That is supported by 2GB of RAM running on the previously mentioned tweaked version of Android 4.4 KitKat. The screen is larger than its predecessor in a big way – with the new device sporting a 5.2-inch full HD screen. Users have the choice of 16GB or 32GB internal storage.
While the pricing under contract has a very nice affordable ring to it, those who want the Moto X Pure Edition will have to trump up USD$499 to get it direct from Motorola. I don’t know is its worth all that just to have a phone that says “Pure Edition” on it. And hey Motorola, what do you then call the ones under contract? Impure editions? (we kid.)
VIA: The Verge
Where’s the wireless charging?
To expensive off contract it needs to come down to at least $ 250 off contract. And a great trade-in program to boot
Even the Moto X did not go down that much. $350 off contract would be perfect.
Well If they expect to get units ahead of the other vendors and get some market share they need to buy the market……otherwise leave the market.
The writer of this obviously is not aware that being locked into a contract is more expensive in the long run. Only losers waste money getting phones locked phones on contract. $500 isn’t as cheap as a Nexus, but it is a great price for a better phone.
@phillipstewart:disqus Please explain this. I have been with my provider for 4 years and don’t see myself changing. So why not sign a new contract and have them toss in a subsidized phone? I have the Note 2 and will pick up the Note 4 now that IFA is over. I fully understand if I were the kind of person who changes phones every year or less. I’m not.
To compare costs, you need to compare the total cost (phone+monthlyservice)over the full two years. It doesn’t look like the Note 4 pricing is out, so let’s look at another phone.
AT&T has the Note 3 for $99 on contract or $645 off.
Contract: $99 + $110 * 24 = $2640
No contract (2 GB data): $645 + $65 * 24 = $2205
But AT&T is expensive all around. Let’s look at other options.
If you want the most inexpensive plans, you have to own your phone. The T-Mobile $30 a month plan is perfect for me. 100 minutes, unlimited texts, 5 GB at 4G speeds. For it to be worth going to their $50/month plan, I’d have to talk 400 minutes.
$645 + $30 * 24 = $1365.
But there are better AND cheaper phones than the Note 3. I recommend getting the latest Nexus phone ($300 or $350) from Google. You could get two Nexus devices for the price of a Samsung Note, so for the same price you could upgrade once a year or get the cost over two years down to about $1000. (I plan to buy the new Moto X for $500 when it is available)
A bit of money upfront will same you a lot in the long run. Hope this helps.
The point is that the price is not subsidized, it is must move to your monthly payments, which would be fine if your monthly bill dropped after two years. But for many contracts, your monthly cost doesn’t go down after two years, so if you stayed on the same plan for 3 years, you could be paying over $1000 for your phone.
I loved the Moto X for its form factor and its pretty intelligent features. I don’t understand why all nice phones have to grow bigger in their next version. 🙁