Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have seen it, and it's not that great. That doesn't make it bad, just not as crisp, bright, and clear as others. It particularly struggles in daylight (a longstanding problem that's been mostly solved, but Motorola abandoned the solution to that problem so they could solve a different problem, namely the screen cracking).
Incidentally, how's the camera? Shockingly bad cameras have always been my big sticking point with Motorola (not sure if they're using different sensors or if they're doing some weird image processing to make everything look like garbage).
Well I guess we'll have to disagree. The way you word it makes it sound like it's blurry and dim and cloudy. I think it's great. The colors aren't as brilliant as the V10 or the G4 but those are the best screens in the industry (and a little TOO "colory" for me).
Re: Camera
I used to think it was really good until I saw the V10 camera. In good lighting, it's fantastic. It still struggles in dimmer lit areas and no OIS STILL. Just add that already, Moto.
That V10 really blew my mind on the camera. It is simply the best, even the front facing selfie camera is just mind blowingly good. I've never seen a front facer that can come close to that bad boy and it has this wide angle thing going on that lets you capture much more.
If you can't tell, I am REALLY in love with the V10 (but still love my Turbo).
You shouldn't laugh at other people's choices, but rather be happy with your choice.
I own a 1600 SF house and drive a three year old Subaru. We don't waste money to keep up the Joneses. But do appreciate some high end stuff. I bought my iPhone 5s a year ago and just replaced Mrs5150's 5 with a 6. We both can afford to spend that kind of money. And honestly we enjoy the build quality, the performance and the camera quality (as we are photo hacks). I am 65. And FYI, we pay $100 a month for two phones, Unlimited calls and texts with 5 gigs with AT&T.
And you know what, if you are happy with your $40 phone I am good with that. We would not. Most of my purchasing regrets had to do with going cheap. I have never missed the extra money spent on better quality stuff. The money is gone and you don't see it. What you see and live with is the purchased item. We enjoy our iPhones. Even after two years.
And no doubt your $40 phone was also made in a sweat shop.
Who said i can't afford the "high end" phones? I shouldn't laugh at people paying for extremely overpriced phones? You also shouldn't assume people don't buy them because they can't afford to. I don't buy them because it's a waste of money. The guy with a $500 iphone can get on the internet just like i can with my $40 phone. The guy with the $500 iphone can make calls and texts just like i can with my $40 phone.
Yes my $40 phone was made in a sweat shop but i'm not helping a corporation make a huge amount of profit off of my purchase. My phone is a basic smart phone you are paying $500 for a "luxury" phone that helps apple make billions in profits while the workers live in slums and poverty.
Instead of arguing about which phone screen is clearer, perhaps the thread could get back on topic?
Well the main topic has been addressed so really this thread is over. The OP now knows why phones are expensive: they've always been this expensive, but companies offered subsidies with contracts.
And, we are discussing, not arguing. This is what adults do.
Third, we are talking about phones and why they are expensive. Not entirely off-topic.
Fourth, this is an internet forum. Sometimes threads get a little Off Topic. When they get TOO far off, a mod will usually step in and tell us to focus. lol
Who said i can't afford the "high end" phones? I shouldn't laugh at people paying for extremely overpriced phones? You also shouldn't assume people don't buy them because they can't afford to. I don't buy them because it's a waste of money. The guy with a $500 iphone can get on the internet just like i can with my $40 phone. The guy with the $500 iphone can make calls and texts just like i can with my $40 phone.
.
Do you laugh at people who drive luxury cars? And yes it is true that a Nissan Versa does all the same things as a BMW or a Mercedes-just not quite as well.
Do you laugh at people who drive luxury cars? And yes it is true that a Nissan Versa does all the same things as a BMW or a Mercedes-just not quite as well.
Who said i can't afford the "high end" phones? I shouldn't laugh at people paying for extremely overpriced phones? You also shouldn't assume people don't buy them because they can't afford to. I don't buy them because it's a waste of money. The guy with a $500 iphone can get on the internet just like i can with my $40 phone. The guy with the $500 iphone can make calls and texts just like i can with my $40 phone.
Yes my $40 phone was made in a sweat shop but i'm not helping a corporation make a huge amount of profit off of my purchase. My phone is a basic smart phone you are paying $500 for a "luxury" phone that helps apple make billions in profits while the workers live in slums and poverty.
I'd beg to differ there. Those sub $100 phones are pretty much total crap. Having used the overpriced phones, they're definitely more than worth it in comparison. Doesn't mean you need to go all the way up to a $500-$800 phone by any means but those sub $100 junkers are firmly in the pennywise, pound foolish range depending on use. My backup phone is a Galaxy Nexus, which is still better than most of the <$100 phone these days. When I decided to try out how well my LG G2 would do in a washing machine, I lasted three days using the Galaxy Nexus. At least it has 4G and a decent screen, things I'd be surprised if your $40 does have, but it's just so painfully slow trying to run Android with 1 GB of RAM I couldn't take it . It was so bad I went out and spent an extra $400 on a Note 5 rather than wait three weeks for the Moto X Pure to be released.
I'll be the first to admit that the Note 5 to me is not even close to being worth $400 more than the Moto X Pure. Maybe $50 or $100. Paying $400 extra not to use that damn Galaxy Nexus for three extra weeks, however? So worth it. If you're fine strictly doing one thing at a time rather than juggling between Maps, Spotify, email, and PDF and Excel documents while on the phone with clients, maybe the answer is different. I also really appreciate the higher resolution 5+ inch phablet screens. Again, depends on use. I'm more than happy to give up some one-handed ease of use for the extra real estate.
I purchased a Moto X Pure edition (got a bit of a discount too) and it's quite nice. I moved on from a Samsung Note 3 that I liked, but had become slow compared to the faster processors now available. I'm keeping the Note 3 as a backup phone just in case, but I can personally attest to the Moto. No bloat, runs fast, turbo charging, good battery life, and importantly, much less expensive than the iPhones & Samsungs, and with a lot of bang to the buck.
Really? No, not really.
Clearly, the poster was discussing various choices buyers may make to get something they want and are willing to pay for.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
