To be fair she's not a "random analysts" and wasn't speculating. She outright said it was returned to Moto because the "innovation was not enough" DroidForums.net | Android Forum & News
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Did Google Toss the X Phone back over the Wall to Motorola?
- Thread starter cereal killer
- Start date
To be fair she's not a "random analysts" and wasn't speculating. She outright said it was returned to Moto because the "innovation was not enough"
I think it's probably accurate. A lot of components are made in China, and an established analyst has good connections at those suppliers. She might be speculating as to the reason, but safe bet it HAS been delayed.
And while Google may let Moto operate largely independently, and may have bought Moto mainly for the patents, they will still demand certain strategic directions because they have no intention of continuing to bleed cash for those patents.
Just a theory/speculation on my part....Google cares if there is innovation at Motorola because it is a phone company. Without innovation and wow factor Moto dies/loses market share. Perhaps Google is just raising the bar for Motorola. They have been in the press recently saying the current Moto phones being released are not going to be awesome because they were already in the pipeline. That implies when the pipeline is emptied the phones will make you go wow. So Google has an implied promise to deliver on here......
This is where the lines are blurred and I see exactly where you are going with this, but Eric Schmidt's comments leads me to believe they MAY have some influence over this device. The reason I say that is because of past comments by Google's Eric Schmidt
Does this prove that they are directly involved in the project? No. But making those types of comments and then failing to deliver on those could pose some problems. I also don't think anyone said it was going to be a Google branded device, it has been speculated from the beginning that it would have Google's influence not branding.
Again, you make a very valid point, but I wouldn't dismiss the rumor as outright nonsense just yet. The analysts does have some experience (18 years) so that should count for a little something
Just because she has 18 years of experience doesn't mean her speculation as to Google's intentions means squat. Does she work for Google. No. The fact that someone purposefully called attention to her "18 years of experience" screams to me that they were trying to validate her opinion. This automatically reduces her credibility. Furthermore, Eric Schmidt's comments have nothing to do with this rumor. Of course Google has influence over this device. That has nothing to do with this rumor either. The idea that it needs to be "kicked back to Moto" when it was already Moto's to begin with is just silly.
It will of course be subject to final oversight by Google. That is not in dispute. The idea that it has been delayed and that Google plans to kill it off is what I am disputing. Just because some random analyst jumped to the conclusion that Google or Motorola might have delayed a project that has never even been officially confirmed to begin with is ludicrous. In fact, there is no concrete evidence that anything has been delayed or even started yet.
And to Muttt, no I am not playing semantics. My point is that this rumor is not from a credible source, is not backed by any facts, and doesn't even make sense to begin with.
I stand firmly behind my assertion that this story is nonsense, but it obviously has made for an interesting conversation.
Last edited:
I agree with the notion that even mid-level phone processors are more than adequate at this point. Ask anyone and they'd be hard-pressed to identify a task that a second tier device CAN'T do.
I honestly believe the cellphone crown jewels right now are:
1) a great screen (possibly a choice of screen sizes)
2) a top notch radio set (RF360 preferably, if it has great reception)
3) lots of memory (minimum of 64GB without an SD)
4) a flat out ridiculous battery (see RAZR Maxx and then add little more)
5) Liquipel
6) an extremely well built exterior that looked like it was lifted straight out of an art museum from a sci-fi movie.
And the honest reality is that the only one that's hard to do is #6, because looks are subjective. If the phone is beautiful with second-to-NONE build quality with the rest of those features it would absolutely DOMINATE. Even if the price reflected the effort the phone would be an instant "status" device.
Also, I'd add rootable and vanilla Android, but honestly most buyers couldn't care less. It would give it "street-cred" among the geek set which would only help it even more.
I honestly believe the cellphone crown jewels right now are:
1) a great screen (possibly a choice of screen sizes)
2) a top notch radio set (RF360 preferably, if it has great reception)
3) lots of memory (minimum of 64GB without an SD)
4) a flat out ridiculous battery (see RAZR Maxx and then add little more)
5) Liquipel
6) an extremely well built exterior that looked like it was lifted straight out of an art museum from a sci-fi movie.
And the honest reality is that the only one that's hard to do is #6, because looks are subjective. If the phone is beautiful with second-to-NONE build quality with the rest of those features it would absolutely DOMINATE. Even if the price reflected the effort the phone would be an instant "status" device.
Also, I'd add rootable and vanilla Android, but honestly most buyers couldn't care less. It would give it "street-cred" among the geek set which would only help it even more.
Last edited:
^^^that's not a bad list, but of the current crop I would mainly say storage and camera are the main differentiators, and battery.
Displays are all pretty much beyond what the human eye can see - size is strictly a preference (without splitting hairs about viewing in sunlight).
Processors and ram right now are in a no-man's land where it's overkill as far as what 99% of people need and do on a smartphone, but it comes up short at being a mini-pc that might replace a laptop (attaching a monitor and keyboard).
I'll agree I even feel an urge to buy the most ram/cpu I can get - that follows from years of PC buying where you buy close to the top-tier specs to avoid early obsolescence. But I just don't see apps and smartphone OS's demanding the same sort of power advances. Smartphones are about quick and convenient, aside from the mini-pc I mentioned above the usage doesn't lend itself to overly complicated and power hungry functions.
If I'm going to take a flyer on where I see advances and tech coming, it will be applications of the NFC. I'm talking about the smarthome, but aside from the NFC chip and some software updates for it, the tech advances are mainly in your appliances and electronics that would be controlled by your smartphone.
Displays are all pretty much beyond what the human eye can see - size is strictly a preference (without splitting hairs about viewing in sunlight).
Processors and ram right now are in a no-man's land where it's overkill as far as what 99% of people need and do on a smartphone, but it comes up short at being a mini-pc that might replace a laptop (attaching a monitor and keyboard).
I'll agree I even feel an urge to buy the most ram/cpu I can get - that follows from years of PC buying where you buy close to the top-tier specs to avoid early obsolescence. But I just don't see apps and smartphone OS's demanding the same sort of power advances. Smartphones are about quick and convenient, aside from the mini-pc I mentioned above the usage doesn't lend itself to overly complicated and power hungry functions.
If I'm going to take a flyer on where I see advances and tech coming, it will be applications of the NFC. I'm talking about the smarthome, but aside from the NFC chip and some software updates for it, the tech advances are mainly in your appliances and electronics that would be controlled by your smartphone.
If this is true, I'm glad that Google it pushing Motorola to stop being such slackers and start making some devices that are worth a damn. Samsung is clearly being the most innovative with all the features they packed into the GS4. Plus Samsung seems to be putting a lot more effort into flexible displays.
This could hold true, simply because of motos recent history... Also as far as the list...
I too, want a vanilla android experience, but Samsung is leading the way with anything but vanilla... So it's going to crucial that moto and Google go the right way as far as the UI... But which way do you go?
I too, want a vanilla android experience, but Samsung is leading the way with anything but vanilla... So it's going to crucial that moto and Google go the right way as far as the UI... But which way do you go?
See, there's an example where Google should leverage the partnership and take-over updates directly (basically all Moto devices would be "Nexus" phones). Problem is Google is on record to not favor Moto over other partners like that.
My issue is I have the apps and settings I prefer. While HTC and the others have some nice features, widgets and apps I already have what I need. I'm about function. So I prefer vanilla Android.
LoneWolfArcher
Silver Member
So are you officially removing the "rumor" moniker from this?
ONLY If you can verify her statement is true :big smile:So are you officially removing the "rumor" moniker from this?
You make a good point. I truly think google needs to really did deep here. Where Samsung could be slipping is that they may be getting to the point of too much. I love their software innovations but I wish I could choose what I want and dont want. Google is a part of the open source and they have been learning from developers for years. One thing they should incorporate is the feature that scott's clean rom (Aroma) where users can choose what features they want or do not want. Too overload my phone with features I may not use is a waste of space. Also offer a few options where the user can choose a few basic themes (similar to what Sense does). This allow me the user to have a clean phone while still having the option to make the phone my own.
This is concerning to me, if Google has such little faith in a company they desperately needs to be revolutionary right now, then I see them practically giving up on their investment all together. The patents are evidently invaluable, the company hasn't had a great device since the D1, and now the super-duper rumored unbelievable hyper cool phone is a bust.
$25 billion dollar joke.
$25 billion dollar joke.
I honestly think that the way to go is.... Develop and innovate like Samsung, but have all of that stuff available from the play store, written specifically for the phone... And we download it if we want it, and leave it if we don't...
This way it's there, the phone should be capable of carrying and running it all... But up to us if we want the apps on there.
This way it's there, the phone should be capable of carrying and running it all... But up to us if we want the apps on there.
Only problem with that is that the OTB experience would be "ho hum." The consumer likes a phone that can turn the oven on and light a fire if you are lost in the wilderness. Gimmicks sell phones (no pun intended) and Samsung understands that.
I have to be honest I love a ton of features baked into an OS. That's why I was a serial ROM flasher back in the day
"Give me features even if I wont use em!!" :big smile: Who doesn't like to show their phone can do back flips just by clapping their hands?