LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksWhy are they making phones without expandable storage slots?
Why are they making phones without expandable storage slots?
Shame about the memory options. £120 makes it a cracking budget phone, but an extra £30 to go from 8 to 16GB of storage when an 8GB SD card costs less than £10 even on the high street is disappointing.
Tough call, very tempted due to the good screen res on and price but might be a bit tight. Will need a review to find out how much space is left for the user.
Probably to a) Save a bit of cost b) Get people into using/paying for their cloud storage.Originally Posted by mud_z
Though I reckon I'd pay an extra £20-30 for a version of this phone with an SD slot.
8GB memory is just too limiting.
Indeed I echo ALL the sentiments of extra memory. I use my S3 as my mp3 player, and quite often a camera too. Sometimes use it to field record sounds and then edit them. If I had no extra memory, I'd struggle to do all of this without constantly transferring files across. Now, if I do need to transfer some files, it's quite easy, but I find it nicer if I transfer a few gig on one go whilst doing something else
Old puter - still good enuff till I save some pennies!
FFS,this is a £120 phone with fantastic specifications,and is cheaper than the £135 quoted before. Its even splashproof. If people really want massive amounts of storage then spend the money on a phone with an SD card slot then instead of being tight arses. People just need to find some reason to complain.
Even the whole MP3 player thing is taking the mickey. You will drain the battery on your phone quickly anyway,so its better to get an MP3 player(which probably will sound better too),which should last much longer than a phone. Who the heck would want to watch movies on a tiny 4.5" screen??
Outside one mate who bought a 64GB iPhone 5 as a phone and music player,I know no one else who has needed more than 8Gb to 16GB for their phone,and they are all fairly active users of the non-phone functions of their phones. Even with my prosumer Canon S95 I can get hundreds of pictures in RAW and thousands in jpeg on 4GB of storage,and the jpegs are not that compressed either.
Maybe,Google should not be bother,and we can still be charged the £350+ ripoff price for such types of phones which we had to endure for years,because its all the same bitching and moaning.
I expect the next set of complaining to be about the 1GB of RAM not be enough even though KitKat uses less RAM.
Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 14-11-2013 at 11:37 AM.
in theory it should run nice with kitkat eh?
Indeed, but as I said, it depends what you use it for, and what data you put on it.
Limiting what I do means there's a lot of apps I wouldn't use, but if I was concerned about running loads of apps, I'd be more concerned if RAM was limited than about SD slots. But I'm not. I agree about the camera, too. About the only thing I'd use the camera for is "emergency" use, like taking photos if I have a car crash. So, I don't care about storage of photos.
What I would use it for is easy access to a variety of documents, much of which are PDF. That, and making and receiving the odd phone call.
Essentially, at the moment, I use an old HP iPaq, with an SD slot, and a cheap phone, which is about due for renewal. Replacing both with a single device would be an option. But frankly, if I could replace my iPaq with an identical (new) device, I would.
What part ofis "bitching and moaning"?Spec looks good for the price. For me, though, no SD slot = no interest.
And phones with an SD card slot can be had for a LOT less than this. So why the hell should people pay a lot more for a top end phone just to get an SD slot? If Huawei can do it in a phone retailing at half what this costs, then so could Motorola/Google. But for whatever reason, they decided not to.
Nothing, absolutely nothing, in what I said is either a complaint, or being a tight arse. I said it was a good spec for the price, FFS. It's just not suitable FOR ME because it will not do one of the few things I would require of a phone.
That was it. One line. Good price, good spec, not for me.
Yet you feel the need to go about calling people like me "tight arse"? You need to reread our rules. Soon.
Bloody hell..I have to agree with Saracen, that's twice in my life and I feel a little woozy. But, all joking aside, yup it's the same for me. I use my phone instead of carrying more devices. I get on my bike and off I go, why would I want to have devices that weigh me down? I don't want to carry unnecessary stuff...so a phone that CAN double as my mp3 player is a win win. As I have an S3 now, I personally wouldn't want to get a lower spec phone to be honest, but IF I was in the market, the no SD slot would put me off.
Old puter - still good enuff till I save some pennies!
Once again, I have 12 gb of my music on my 16 gig SD card. I have had a need before to go on a long journey on public transport, I listened to most of the 12 gb over a weekend away. Not the usual useage I grant you, but it was my choice to get a phone with decent audio and replace the headphones so I could use it as my music player. Each to their own and all that
Old puter - still good enuff till I save some pennies!
Threatening me just because I don't agree with people,has never worked and my comment was made as a general one towards the thread in general.
I would love a Core i7 4770K for £150,but it is unlikely I would even want to spend that on a CPU.
Heck,I would like a Lambo for £5000.
Does that make me a tight arse?? Hell yeah and I am proud of being one.
Its a point I have not hidden for all the years I have been here. I hate paying OTT for anything.
This is the problem in the UK.Plenty of people are tight arses and bargain hunters,but never want to admit it as socially its not a cool thing,and again this is a general thing looking at the amount of complaining in this thread. Yes I also know you spent hundreds of quid on kitchen equipment.
Moreover,if people want phones with that level of spec with an SD cards ,look at the nearest comparable ones which are well over £150.
That 720P screen alone will be a very expensive part. Don't believe me,look at the cost breakdowns of phones. High resolution,high PPI phones screens are not cheap.
Don't believe me - actually look at the phone market.
If anyone bothered to look at the phone market they would very well know the Moto G has to have shortcuts for that price range.
Find a phone a with a quad core SOC and a 720P screen for under £150 which is not EOL.There are none,unless you want to buy some dodgy Chinese imports with no warranty.
If people want SD card slots,quad core SOCs and 720P screens,then pay the extra for the feature most people in that price range don't care about.
Google know this very well,so they emphasised other features for the very low price.
Thank goodness.
People forget(and you of all people know this),how much smartphones cost 11 to 12 years ago.
Edit!!
How much did an iPaq cost new?
£288
http://www.trustedreviews.com/HP-iPA..._Laptop_review
$500
http://reviews.cnet.com/search-resul...-30571424.html
£170 to £215
http://reviews.cnet.co.uk/pdas/hp-ip...view-49295305/
Using an inflation calculator,the last one at £170 in 2008 would equate to around £192 in 2012.
Add,another £20 to £30 pound for a cheap phone,and that would give you around £215 to £225.
The Moto G costs £120.
If it cost £200 I could even understand all the complaining in this thread.
Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 14-11-2013 at 12:28 PM.
Another tempting phone - not too large either. But as ever, I await real life battery results. This phone is at the top of my 'might buys' so far.
Right for all the people who want billions of Gb of storage,look what I found:
http://www.gsmarena.com/acer_liquid_e2-5418.php
The only place which sell it for under £200 Pixmania who are located in France:
http://www.pixmania.co.uk/smartphone...=1&merch=1
It uses a MediaTek MT6589 SOC which is probably slower than the one in the MotoG(could be wrong here) and uses a 960X540 screen not the 720P unit in the Moto G. However,it does have an SD card slot,but has only 4GB of onboard storage and costs £30 more.
However,most people here would avoid Pixmania like the plague for their non-existent customer service.
OK,can anyone else find some deals on 720P phones which are non-EOL and under £160 and have an SD card slot??
I would like to be proved wrong.
Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 14-11-2013 at 12:45 PM.
First, Cat, that wasn't a threat, that was a warning. And you've been here long enough to know you don't go around calling other people names. There's a certain amount of lattitude in heated political or current affairs debates, but it is utterly uncalled for in a thread like this, on a subject like like. It is simply being gratuitously offensive for the sake of it.
Second, if you think it's about you not agreeing with me, you need to reread what's been said, here and in other threads. For example, on SSDs where my view is that, nice as they are, they aren't worth what they cost to me. I don't expact many people to agree with me, and I'm not disappointed in that. But they don't go around calling me a tight arse.
Noxvayl clearly disagrees, or at least, doesn't understand why that issue us a red line for me. But he queried it perfectly politely, and got a perfectly polite reply, and something of an explanation
As for "general comment", one person (me) made an issue of it, a couple more agreed, and it doesn't matter which of us is being a tight arse, if you pick up on a specific issue any of us have raised and go about referring to that viewpoint as "tight arse", you can assume people raising that point are going to take it as referring to them. Some legalistic "I didn't directly name you" stance isn't going to cut any ice.
Again, not a threat, a warning. I don't threaten. I warn, and if the warning isn't heeded, it's followed either by a final warning or a suspension, depending on situation.
How much did that S3 cost in reality?? Its an expensive phone now even on PAYG or unlocked and even if free on contract in reality,its going to cost more than £150 anyway. Heck,unless your provider gave you some insane retention deal,the Moto G is in a different price range.
Argos have it for £200:
http://www.argos.co.uk/static/Product/partNumber/5189005.htm?CMPID=GS001&_$ja=cgid:8710646702|tsid:41408|cid:177979502|lid:47487827582|nw:g|crid:3179 8812422|rnd:3990507731605238062|dvc:c|adp:1o1
So for £80 you have an SD card slot and a bit better specs overall.
That makes it 67% more expensive.
Yet,the people complaining are using vastly more expensive devices.
You get what you pay for,and for the price there are going to be short cuts. Perhaps again,look at the price breakdowns of the parts for such a phone. Really please look at them. The screens cost a lot.
The previous cheapest phones at launch to have them were the Nexus4 and the LG Optimus 4X,which were £250 price range phones. They were considered "cheap" to have quad core SOCs and 720P screens.
Its amazing that a large company has managed to put this in a £120 phone. This phone will eventually hit £100. This is the first phone at launch in the UK to have a 720P screen and cost well under £200.
The 720P screen is the reason why the phone has less features than a £200 S3 which has an SD card slot. The S3 was insanely expensive at launch and probably is not made NOW.
Hence,the £200 pricing is EOL pricing.
However,that £200 pricing also fits into the inflation adjusted price for some of the cheapest iPaq models too.
Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 14-11-2013 at 12:49 PM.
It varied. Quoting one figure is a bit like asking, now, how much does a CPU cost - there's a huge range.
In my case, though .... £119, for the one I'm referring to. And yes, new. And yes, it was a very good deal.
You're missing my point, still.If it cost £200 I could even understand all the complaining in this thread.
If it was £20, my comment would have been the same .... good price, good spec, but for me, no use because no SD slot. Without an SD slot, and the capability that adds, it is simply of no use to me, whatever the price, because it won't do one of the few things I would want of such a device.
Again, what complaining?
It's for the maker to decide what features to include or exclude. And at that spec and that price, it's a bargain IF it has the features an individual will want. Most people, I suspect, won't care about expandable memory. But some do, and for that reason alone would rule this phone out. Which makes me wonder why, given the rest of the spec, such a low cost difference was ruled out. Maybe, as was said earlier, it's to drive people to Cloud services. Maybe, and more likely in my opinion, it's because they sat there with a price point in mind for a "budget" phone, and with a matrix of features, and costs, and this was one of the features that lost out to make the price point.
And, for me, that's a shame because it's a red line issue, but I certainly don't expect my needs to be their design criteria.
And my guess is, this will sell very well.
As I said, I looked at Huawei, at several of their models, all if which have good spec for the price. I might yet go that way. Or just not bother. But I'd rather buy Motorola (or rather, I would have, and did, pre-Google, anyway). What I'll probably do is buy another dirt cheap, non-Smart phone and just hang on to the iPaq 'til it dies, and then maybe scour eBay, when I need to. This Moto might have been what swung it, but not without SD card slot.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
