Weird flex but OK... Motorola's comeback is a $1,500 Razr flip-phone with folding 6.2" screen At a pseudo-rave slash launch party in Los Angeles on Wednesday night, Motorola revealed the 2019 Razr, an update on a flip phone that wowed people 15 years ago. Today, perhaps... not so much. Back in the old days, the Razr was the consummate flip phone – a well-engineered piece of kit that took design cues from the StarTAC …
The G range isn't as simple as that, there's the G7 Play ( cheap ), G7 ( normal ) G7+ ( nicer ) although they're all budget-mid.
The G7+ ( not sure about the Play or the G7 ) comes with NFC and a rear fingerprint scanner, a massive screen, decent performance.
I don't know anything about the G8 except that it doesn't have wireless charging as I'm not in the market for a new phone for another year, but I wanted to know that.
I want one too. But it's too expensive, so I'll probably get something better value (Pixel?). However, I predict that these will sell like hot cakes (assuming they don't have major reliability issues like Samsung did).
People (particularly millennials or hipsters) want something a bit different to the ubiquitous "slab" which all smart phones look like today. And it flips.
Just my prediction, let's see what happens next year when they are actually available.
Indeed. Mine fits in my pocket just fine. I'm not seeing the advantage here.
Back in the day when decent ones were available on the gray market, I did prefer slider phones - but that was because they offered full mechanical keyboards.
A folding touchscreen is about as appealing to me as, say, edible furniture: it's not that I can't imagine use cases, it's just that they're extremely implausible, of very small incremental value, and likely to have bad failure modes.
I don't see this doing well. As a novelty, it's far too expensive, even if it proves reliable. Yes, there are some people willing to spend stupid amounts of money on a phone, but that market is limited. Making it a Verizon exclusive in the US won't help with that. On the other hand, it's not exclusive enough to be a Veblen good. It's conceivable some tastemaker will get it to go mainstream but I wouldn't bet on it.
...and you don't think that a mega-slab won't be one of the offerings in this kind of product line in due course?
I mean, as a manufacturer, you'd be pretty stupid making your first release a huge piece of kit that already has somwhat less of a customer base and significantly more hardware expense.
I want a folding tablet too one day, but this looks like a good start.
What's your point? I assume you go onto Koenigsegg reviews and go saying "2 million quid for one of those? If it was 15 grand I might perhaps consider it. It's just a car. "
Why even bother reading the review (price was in the headline), as you knew straight away that you are in the budget category. Nothing wrong with that, it's your choice.
Do you walk into a Ferrari showroom and carefully explain to them that your 8 year old Ford is good enough for you?
The point of advertising is to sell or upsell an item. The point of revues is to clarify and amplify the advantages or disadvantages of a new item. This Reg revue achieved its aims of clarifying and amplifying the advantages to my satisfaction so well done The Reg. However, the presentation was not enough to overcome the prices disadvantage. As for the car showroom reference, since showrooms are few and far between and since both family cars have done well under 6000 miles, my need to visit car sales points is not so clear. This may not stop me from reading a car revue, though perhaps not of a Ferrari or similar, where both my wife and I would face access issues and for us, reliability counts for far more than image.
What's your point? I assume you go onto Koenigsegg reviews and go saying "2 million quid for one of those? If it was 15 grand I might perhaps consider it. It's just a car. "
Buy a £2million Koenigsegg (assuming I could pronounce it to be able to ask the salesman for one), and in a couple of years time I'd still have a supercar worth £1.n million. Some depreciation, but that's the cost of ownig a big boy's toy.
Buy a £1200 mobile phone and in a couple of years time I'd have a worthless lump of disposable consumer tech. Total depreciation, the price of being a sucker for the latest shiny thing on the market.
"It's ok to be taken aback by a preposterously high price, especially when the phone's namesake wasn't priced so highly (in relative terms)."
I agree the price is preposterous, and I am in fact taken aback. But actually, when the Razr came out in the US, it initially was something ridiculous like $700. That cash for (other than looking cool) was a typical "dumb phone" (although with good reception)... camera, texting, calls, that's it. My mom wanted one bad; she checked in a few months, $400 or something; a few more months, $250. Basically about 10 months after it was $700, it was like $90, the store was already wanting to clear the remaining ones out to make room for the new phones.
"What's your point? I assume you go onto Koenigsegg reviews and go saying "2 million quid for one of those? If it was 15 grand I might perhaps consider it. It's just a car. ""
Yeah but the Koenigsegg is a nice supercar; it's appearance will stand out, it's faster, handles better, brakes harder than pretty much any other car. This is a phone that folds in half, with no outstanding specs other than the folding in half, that Motorola is having a go at pricing way up. I don't blame them for doing it, if people buy a phone as soon as it comes out at any price, go for it. But it's fair to call them out for the price.
My wife was seriously wedded to her Razr, refusing for may year my entreaties to get a smart phone, and as a piece of design it was hard to beet, from the lazer cut keypad to the display panel on the outside. I still believe that if it had a continouos upgrade program (better screen, camera and processor) it would have a niche today
Not sure about this one. I like the outside notification screen, but the folding screen seems like an overkill where two screens would of been easier and more flexible (sic). And the price....
This post has been deleted by its author
This post has been deleted by its author
@xpz393
The Reg's domain suffix dictates that it's actually spelt "laser"
Irrespective of where you are in the world, laser is the only correct spelling.
It is an acronym of the following phrase:
Light Amplification by the Stimulated Emission of Radiation
There is nowhere in the world where stimulation is spelled with a Z
This post has been deleted by its author
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
