If the rumors are true, Motorola is about to blow away the iPhone (1 Viewer)

Hanson · Aug 31, 2012

New Motorola Phone Is Said To Have Edge-To-Edge Screen

Quote:

The phone would be the most high-profile product debut for Motorola Mobility since the company was purchased by Google for about $12.5 billion. The model also would be one of the first full-screen phones in the U.S., meaning it uses the entire front of the device as a display. The approach maximizes the screen viewing space by eliminating the black frames or bezels around the display.

Sounds like a game changer. Hopefully, they won't kneecap it with bad battery or weird heating issues. Even if it's just Razr internals with Jellybean, this is going to be huge.

Sam Posten · Aug 31, 2012

They make bezels for a reason =p
Will see tho, I imagine it is less necessary on a phone than it is on a tablet.
And one feature doesn't make a killer product. Intriguing but saying it will blow a phone away is a bit of a stretch. Will see tho!

Hanson · Sep 1, 2012

The conventional wisdom propped up by the tech media is that Apple is the cutting edge of design and that others follow. A bezel-less phone would leapfrog Apple and put them in the rear view mirror. I'm sure a lot of people would hold off on their iPhone upgrade when Motorola unveils the most cutting edge phone tech available. It would launch them ahead of Apple in design and cool factor. It would change a lot of perceptions and make Motorola a household name again.

And yes, no bezel. Top or bottom.

No room for a speaker? Already solved.

http://www.theverge.com/2012/5/15/3021319/kyocera-urbano-progresso-bone-conduction-au-hands-on

Moving the mic to the bottom edge is no problem. Senors and FFC? Maybe either a thin strip at the top (although that's kind of cheating), or maybe they found a way to have it sit under the glass. That would be mind blowing.

Jellybean uses soft buttons, so no need for any bottom bezel.

Now you can have a very comfortable 4.65" screen with easy one handed operation. And this is Motorola -- they are very good at engineering. So it shouldn't come out unfinished. I like cutting edge more than polish, so I lean towards Samsung and their specs, but Motorola's phones have been very polished other than a misstep with the Bionic.

And we all know that the carriers hate the iPhone. Which is why Verizon would push something like this like crazy. It's insanely marketable.

This is the kind of product that would make a lot of people think that Apple is falling behind without Jobs at the helm. And that would be a huge blow to Apple.

Sam Posten · Sep 1, 2012

And -I'm- the one who uses too much hyperbole?

Hanson · Sep 1, 2012

There are a lot of iPhone owners who look enviously at the Galaxy S3. Some have even made the switch. For many, the only thing holding them back is that they're locked into the iOS ecosystem. Because of that, they may upgrade to the new iPhone, albeit begrudgingly. The edge to edge screen is the kind of differentiator that will be the tipping point for many iPhone owners who are grumbling about the tiny screens and the completely yawn inducing taller form factor. Anything that blunts iPhone sales at launch will have a huge effect on Apple, affecting their 3Q and 4Q sales numbers.

Hyperbole is in the eye of the beholder

Sam Posten · Sep 1, 2012

If you say so. Ron is the only person I know in that situation you describe and he is both a jailbreaker and a constant twiddler, I don't know any other non engineers who fit that description. For the record I only have one friend who has gotten an S3 lately and she is a longtime android user, she took it back this week and is waiting for the iPhone, She hated it. Said it was too big and no better than her last phone other than the size of the display, which was a two edged sword.

Hanson · Sep 1, 2012

Speaking of hyperbole, almost everyone in your world owns an iPhone and the ones that don't hate their Android phones. I don't think that lines up with the real world.

Is that a prerequisite for knowing you?

Sam Posten · Sep 1, 2012

Apparently. Her husband is a big android fan, he was surprised at her reaction too.

Sam Posten · Sep 1, 2012

Also, i dont doubt there are squeaky wheels out there who are unhappy with the iphone but the numbers dont back your assertion that there is a flood of people just dying to move away.
And Moto is down close to but ahead of RIM's satisfaction levels these days to boot:
http://www.theacsi.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=281:press-release-may-2012&catid=13&Itemid=357
Which is funny when all you hear about is how much people love their keyboard bberrys right?

Hanson · Sep 1, 2012

Satisfaction with what they have now does not necessarily translate into what they will choose when they upgrade. I was very satisfied with HTC phones, having owned 3 WM models and the Evo. Yet when it came time to upgrade to my second phone, HTC's offering paled to the Galaxy S2. So I jumped ship.

And I'm sure you're asked about what smart phone to get as much as I do. The more of us that move to Android (not you) have a lot of influence on users buying smartphones, especially the new users who are graduating from flip phones.

ManW_TheUncool · Sep 2, 2012

I guess that means the screen will never be free of fingerprints, smudge, oil, dirt, etc.

Will have to actually see/try it to know if it'll be a truly better design or just a not-so-well-thought-out gimmick in the end...

_Man_

RobertR · Sep 2, 2012

If Apple follows their recent modus operandi, they'll wait to see if the product is a success, and then respond not with a better product, but with lawsuits. It's so sad when a company chooses to spend so much energy and resources on lawyers instead of making things.

Craig S · Sep 2, 2012

Originally Posted by RobertR /t/323420/if-the-rumors-are-true-motorola-is-about-to-blow-away-the-iphone#post_3969584
If Apple follows their recent modus operandi, they'll wait to see if the product is a success, and then respond not with a better product, but with lawsuits. It's so sad when a company chooses to spend so much energy and resources on lawyers instead of making things.

Oh please. Apple is the defendant in at least as many lawsuits as it initiates. ALL tech companies play this game with IP because they have to - it's the competitive landscape that exists today because the Patent Office seems willing to grant patents on just about anything. Any publicly-owned company has a fiduciary duty to its stockholders to aggressively patent its IP, to seek licensing fees on it's legally-granted patents, and to bring legal action when it feels they are being infringed.

Apple won the case against Samsung because they were able to present a compelling case that their patents and trade dress were being infringed. Looking at Samsung's early post-iPhone phones it's as clear as the nose on your face that at that time they were copying the iPhone.

And don't forget Apple's been on the losing side as well. Remember last year when they settled a patent suit brought by Nokia by paying damages AND agreeing to pay an ongoing fee per phone sold?? I don't recall there being a big uproar against Nokia then.

These suits are going to continue unless there is a major overhaul of the patent system. And that's just not going to happen, for reasons I won't go into because it's all about politics.

Craig S · Sep 2, 2012

Originally Posted by ManW_TheUncool /t/323420/if-the-rumors-are-true-motorola-is-about-to-blow-away-the-iphone#post_3969577
I guess that means the screen will never be free of fingerprints, smudge, oil, dirt, etc.

Will have to actually see/try it to know if it'll be a truly better design or just a not-so-well-thought-out gimmick in the end...

_Man_

Exactly. Using a bezel-less phone one-handed (as iPhone and Android users do all the time) I can see a lot of potential for unintended inputs. Could be a frustrating experience if not designed right.

Either way, the iPhone will be just fine.

RobertR · Sep 3, 2012

Craig S said:
Oh please. Apple is the defendant in at least as many lawsuits as it initiates.

Just because other companies engage in the same kind of nonsense doesn't justify Apple's behavior. Have any of Apple's competitors tried to outright BAN the Iphone, the way Apple is trying to ban Samsung products? There are far too many historical examples of this sort of attempt to use government power to restrain competitors to be naive enough to believe that Apple's actions are purely defensive, and that they wouldn't do this sort of thing if no one else did.

Sam Posten · Sep 3, 2012

Yes they have, multiple times. Try to keep up here

http://m.bgr.com/2011/12/09/sales-of-apples-iphone-ipad-banned-by-german-court/

RobertR · Sep 3, 2012

Sam Posten said:
Yes they have, multiple times

And this justifies Apple's actions how, exactly?

Robert Crawford · Sep 3, 2012

Originally Posted by RobertR /t/323420/if-the-rumors-are-true-motorola-is-about-to-blow-away-the-iphone#post_3969902
And this justifies Apple's actions how, exactly?

There aren't any innocent parties involved in this tech war. From my personal perspective, I don't give a rat's ass about any of these companies, especially, since I don't own any stock in any of them. Therefore, I pick the phone that best meets my needs and that I'm able to use with less muss and fuss as possible. I'll leave the hyperbole and heated discussions to those that appear to have a rooting interest for whatever personal reason(s). I believe most people are in the same boat as I am in that regard, which means they don't have a rooting interest one way or another.

Crawdaddy

Craig S · Sep 3, 2012

Originally Posted by RobertR /t/323420/if-the-rumors-are-true-motorola-is-about-to-blow-away-the-iphone#post_3969902
And this justifies Apple's actions how, exactly?

You seem to be trying to make this into a moral or ethical issue, when it is nothing of the sort. It is a legal & financial issue.

Once again - Apple (like almost all of their competitors) is a publicly-traded company. That means Apple's leadership has a fiduciary duty to their stockholders to maximize profits as much as possible as long as they obey the law. In today's technology sector, that includes leveraging their IP (intellectual property) to the fullest extent. That breaks down to (1) seeking to patent any idea/invention of theirs that they can build a case for, (2) once those patents are granted, defending them aggressively, including lawsuits and petitions to the ITC.

This is the way business is done. The above paragraph applies to Apple's competitors as well, and they all engage in the same behavior. Apple has more cash on hand (by far) then any other company in the world, so right now they are the biggest target of this kind of litigation. They are sued regularly, not only by competitors with legitimate patent portfolios that they use in making their products, but also by an increasing number of patent trolls who don't actually make any products at all. Yes, they just won a big case, but they have lost as well.

I really don't know what Apple's detractors want here. They seem to think the current patent litigation landscape was invented whole cloth by Apple, and that if Apple just "played nice" and stopped suing people who use its patented tech and copy its designs, then the problem would go away. Yeah, right. I don't even know how to argue with this kind of mindset. It is just so out of touch with reality.

You want to vent some moral outrage?? How about aiming it at the patent trolls, which in most cases are shell companies (set up & run by greedy IP lawyers) that exist only to sue companies that actually develop and make products. Or how about talking to your congressperson and Senators to demand real patent reform? Because until we tear down the current patent system and reinvent it for the modern era, all of this mess is just going to continue.

RobertR · Sep 3, 2012

Craig S said:
You seem to be trying to make this into a moral or ethical issue, when it is nothing of the sort. It is a legal & financial issue.

The "I did nothing wrong because it was legal" excuse doesn't hold water with me. Patent law (and the companies that exploit it) is indeed wrong, because it INHIBITS innovation and results in wealth not from productive work, but government-granted privilege. I quote from an historical example:

In late 1764, while repairing a small Newcomen steam engine, the idea of allowing steam to expand and condense in separate containers sprang into the mind of James Watt. He spent the next few months in unceasing labor building a model of the new engine. In 1768, after a series of improvements and substantial borrowing, he applied for a patent on the idea. August 1768 found Watt in London about the patent and he spent another 6 months working
hard to obtain it. The patent was finally awarded in January 1769. Nothing much happened, in terms of production, for a few years until, in 1775, after another major effort supported by his new business partner Matthew Boulton, Watt secured an Act of Parliament extending his 1769 patent until the year 1800...
Once Watt's patents were secured, a substantial portion of his energy was devoted to fending off rival inventors. In 1782, Watt secured an additional patent, made necessary in consequence of ...having been so unfairly anticipated, by [Matthew] Wasborough in the crank motion. More dramatically, in the 1790s, when the superior and independently designed Hornblower engine was put
into production, Boulton and Watt went after him with the full force of the legal system. In contrast to Watt, who died a rich man, the inventor Jonathan Hornblower was not only forced to close shop, but found himself ruined and in jail.
Prior to the start of Watt's commercial production in 1776, there were 510 steam engines in the U.K., most using the inefficient Newcomen design. These engines generated about 5,000 horsepower. By 1800, when Watt's patents expired, there were still only 2,250 steam engines used in the U.K., of which only 449 were
the superior Boulton and Watt engines, the rest being old Newcomen engines. The total horsepower of these engines was 35,000 at best. In 1815, fifteen years after the expiration of the Watt patents, it is estimated that nearly 100,000 horsepower was installed in the U.K., while by 1830 the horsepower coming from steam engines reached 160,000. The fuel efficiency of steam engines is not
thought to have changed at all during the period of Watt's patent; while between 1810 and 1835 it is estimated to have increased by a factor of five. After the expiration of the patents in 1800, not only was there an explosion in the production of engines, but steam power finally came into its own as the driving force of the industrial revolution. In the next 30 years steam engines were modified and improved, and such crucial innovations as the steam train, the
steamboat and the steam jenny all came into wide usage. The key innovation was the high-pressure steam engine -development of which had been blocked by Watt by strategically using his 1775 patent.
Many new improvements to the steam engine, such as those of William Bull, Richard Trevithick, and Arthur Woolf, became available by 1804: although developed earlier these innovations were kept idle until the Boulton and Watt patent expired. None of these innovators wished to incur the same fate as Jonathan Hornblower.In fact, it is only after their patents expired that Boulton and Watt really started to manufacture steam engines. Before then their
activity consisted primarily of extracting hefty monopolistic royalties. Independent contractors produced most of the parts, and Boulton and Watt merely oversaw the assembly of the components by the purchasers.

Saying Watt acted "within the law" doesn't change the fact that everyone except Watt was MUCH better off when he couldn't bludgeon competitors with his damn patents. So it is in today's environment.

I really don't know what Apple's detractors want here. They seem to think the current patent litigation landscape was invented whole cloth by Apple, and that if Apple just "played nice" and stopped suing people who use its patented tech and copy its designs, then the problem would go away.

WHAT "problem"? Better phones put out by companies striving to put out the best possible product, instead of wasting resources on lawyers? People sometimes forget that it's MAKING things that people want that's what it's all about, not using legal decrees to protect corporate profits.

You want to vent some moral outrage?? How about aiming it at the patent trolls, which in most cases are shell companies (set up & run by greedy IP lawyers) that exist only to sue companies that actually develop and make products.

Aren't they just acting "within the law", Craig?

until we tear down the current patent system and reinvent it for the modern era, all of this mess is just going to continue.

Now we agree. I think the concept of patents should be done away with, period.

Home Theater

Entertainment & Streaming Content

Physical Media

Home Theater Equipment and Hardware

Other Diversions

Bargains and Classifieds

Home Theater Forum

Archives

If the rumors are true, Motorola is about to blow away the iPhone (1 Viewer)

His Own Fool

Crawdaddy

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread

Sign up for our newsletter

and receive essential news, curated deals, and much more

Forum statistics