Discuss all Moto Droid Razr/Maxx HD rumors/release date/speculation/news

[ben7337]

Depends how you hold the phone I suppose. I've never found that to be an issue the way I hold it. I'm more annoyed by the new 4.X menu buttons that always in the upper right side of apps. I add menu back as always on and usable softkey on my GNex just cause of that. Suppose if you can't do that you start biasing your hold higher??

Hah, at the end of the day I would prefer something that will never happen in a 4 softnav bezel button device that includes an always usable menu key.

The rom I'm running puts the menu app in the bottom right for most apps. It is a bit annoying there, but still usable I suppose. I should work on customizing it more though.

However regardless of that, I have a galaxy nexus, it is exactly as wide as the moto razr hd, and is just a few mm taller and maybe a fraction of a mm thinner. Despite that, if I try to touch the bottom areas where there would be soft keys, I find it hard. The keys need to be on the screen just that bit above the bottom. There is no other way to hold the phone. One handed, as a man with above average sized hands, I can't reach the bottom right of the phone where you think these soft buttons would be great, without holding the phone in a way that makes me feel like a slight gust or knock could very easily cause it to tip out of my hand and drop. Holding the phone the way I hold every phone, with the aim to be able to reach the entire screen with my thumb, I can just reach the screen. reaching below it to the bottom of the device requires sliding the device higher and into a precarious grip.

Admittedly I can stretch and reach the bottom of the phone, holding it just low enough to reach the bottom while holding it well, but this makes my unable to reach the notification bar which I pull down fairly often. Plus since most people have smaller hands than me, I can totally understand motorola sticking to soft keys at that size. I'm not saying it pleases everyone, but that I think a lot of users would prefer it to having keys lower down.

 

[Sandroidfan]

We haven't heard the last (or first?) of "edge-to-edge." The London press announcement touts the word "edge" whereas today's invite was all about "display."

I hope so. But it already seems it will be just about Intel version of Razr M for Europe.

 

[jasaero]

The rom I'm running puts the menu app in the bottom right for most apps. It is a bit annoying there, but still usable I suppose. I should work on customizing it more though.

However regardless of that, I have a galaxy nexus, it is exactly as wide as the moto razr hd, and is just a few mm taller and maybe a fraction of a mm thinner. Despite that, if I try to touch the bottom areas where there would be soft keys, I find it hard. The keys need to be on the screen just that bit above the bottom. There is no other way to hold the phone. One handed, as a man with above average sized hands, I can't reach the bottom right of the phone where you think these soft buttons would be great, without holding the phone in a way that makes me feel like a slight gust or knock could very easily cause it to tip out of my hand and drop. Holding the phone the way I hold every phone, with the aim to be able to reach the entire screen with my thumb, I can just reach the screen. reaching below it to the bottom of the device requires sliding the device higher and into a precarious grip.

Admittedly I can stretch and reach the bottom of the phone, holding it just low enough to reach the bottom while holding it well, but this makes my unable to reach the notification bar which I pull down fairly often. Plus since most people have smaller hands than me, I can totally understand motorola sticking to soft keys at that size. I'm not saying it pleases everyone, but that I think a lot of users would prefer it to having keys lower down.

You must hold the phone totally different than me. I have somewhat large hands also. But I hold the phone with the bottom rested on my pinky and three other fingers cradling the back. I sorta lift and lower the phone with my pinky to help my thumb stretch the complete tall length of the device. Can touch the VERY bottom near the charge plug easier than the very top. And much easier than the very top opposite my left handed use on the right side where many of the built in menu buttons have moved.

If you do a four primary finger back cradle hold I could see it being very difficult reaching top and bottom below screen on 4.5" devices even with long thumbs.

 

[caneaddict]

Motorola's new Droid range: Meet the Family -- Engadget

The droid razr hd maxx is listed as CDMA / LTE (Verizon) GSM / HSPA+ / WCDMA (global roaming)

does this mean it will work on both CDMA and GSM? Would I be able to insert a local GSM SIM (is there a sim slot?) while traveling internationally so as not to have to pay Verizon international roaming rates? I understand Verizon will probably lock the phone and I'll have to unlock but I'm just wondering if the phone can physically be used (ie SIM card slot for using GSM network)?

 

[OfTheDamned]

Motorola's new Droid range: Meet the Family -- Engadget

The droid razr hd maxx is listed as CDMA / LTE (Verizon) GSM / HSPA+ / WCDMA (global roaming)

does this mean it will work on both CDMA and GSM? Would I be able to insert a local GSM SIM (is there a sim slot?) while traveling internationally so as not to have to pay Verizon international roaming rates? I understand Verizon will probably lock the phone and I'll have to unlock but I'm just wondering if the phone can physically be used (ie SIM card slot for using GSM network)?

Yes the whole Razr line, including the non-HD versions are capable of using CDMA/LTE and GSM/HSPA+. LTE requires a sim card and the same slot will work with a GSM sim card, once unlocked.

 

[caneaddict]

Yes the whole Razr line, including the non-HD versions are capable of using CDMA/LTE and GSM/HSPA+. LTE requires a sim card and the same slot will work with a GSM sim card, once unlocked.

THANK YOU!! I've been waiting for a good top end phone i can use on verizon and still use local sim internationally.

The only down side i see to this phone now is the camera. I'm not familiar with the Razr camera but I've been told it's no where near as good as the S3, OneX, 4S, and Nokia.

 

[IHateMyTreo]

Yes the whole Razr line, including the non-HD versions are capable of using CDMA/LTE and GSM/HSPA+. LTE requires a sim card and the same slot will work with a GSM sim card, once unlocked.

It's been awhile since I tried this in Europe, but OTD is right. You have to get your US carrier to unlock the phone in order to use a foreign SIM card. Some carriers were easier to deal with. For example, with some carriers, if you are a customer in good standing for a certain period of time, they would unlock. Not sure if you can still buy unlock codes - I did that with an old Blackberry and it worked fine. And I'm not sure what the unlock policy is today; they may still try to force you to pay their roaming fees, but with VZW at least you can buy a global roaming package and data bucket month to month.

 

[OfTheDamned]

THANK YOU!! I've been waiting for a good top end phone i can use on verizon and still use local sim internationally.

The only down side i see to this phone now is the camera. I'm not familiar with the Razr camera but I've been told it's no where near as good as the S3, OneX, 4S, and Nokia.

This is kind of where the "Jack of all trades and master of none" rule comes into effect for smartphones. Since you are dealing with a device that can do so much, there are going to be some things that don't function as well as others. With some phones the battery life is horrible, others have terrible screens, others are horrible with reception and some have lesser cameras. Moto has improved their cameras quite a bit, but they still aren't their strongest feature.

Here is a thread with photos taken from the Razr or Razr Maxx.

http://androidforums.com/motorola-droid-razr-razr-maxx/556874-post-your-picture-taken-razr-maxx.html

Are you going to win a photo contest? No, but for quick shots they do well.

 

[Deleted User]

A lot of people have been making that comment or similar about the Razr M. Personally, I think it was a good move on Moto's part. Not everyone wants a huge phone or cares about a huge screen. The problem is that people still want the specs and most of the smaller phones out there don't have the specs that the larger phones do. At $99 (after rebate) you still get a device with Motorola build quality and great specs, but without the huge device size. I can easily see this being the smartphone of choice for a lot of women or teens.

I completely agree. It is a great "smaller" phone. It's about 90% of the HD performance wise, just a smaller screen without HD. I know my wife would like it as she thinks the Razr screen is just fine. She thinks the Razr is too tall. She uses about 500mb of data so not a power user either.
At $99 I'd have purchased that for her vice the Razr Maxx, but she can NEVER remember to charge. 1st thing she does when we go anywhere is to unplug my DX and plug in her Razr. Good thing it's a Maxx or it would be dead since it gets charged about once ever 3 days.

 

[Deleted User]

Anyone have demension of the phone besides thickness of 9.3 for the Maxx?
I wonder on the weight really.
My DX is 9.9 mm. Is that at the hump or thinnest part? IF the RHDM is .6 mm thinner than my DX without the extended battery, SWEET.

 

[Sandroidfan]

Anyone have demension of the phone besides thickness of 9.3 for the Maxx?
I wonder on the weight really.
My DX is 9.9 mm. Is that at the hump or thinnest part? IF the RHDM is .6 mm thinner than my DX without the extended battery, SWEET.

According to GSMarena, Maxx HD dimension numbers are
Dimensions: 131.9 x 67.9 x 9.3 mm
Weight: 157 g

And for HD,
Dimensions: 131.9 x 67.9 x 8.4 mm
Weight: 146 g

Motorola DROID RAZR MAXX HD - Full phone specifications

BTW, M seems to be quite smaller than these two but with similar spec. It's growing on me. Its battery time is not bad either, probably helped by smaller screen. Probably the best mid-range phone on verizon now.

 

[OfTheDamned]

Anyone have demension of the phone besides thickness of 9.3 for the Maxx?
I wonder on the weight really.
My DX is 9.9 mm. Is that at the hump or thinnest part? IF the RHDM is .6 mm thinner than my DX without the extended battery, SWEET.

Droid Razr M = 60.9 x 122.5 x 8.3 mm

Droid Razr HD = 67.9 x 131.9 x 8.4 mm

Droid Razr Maxx HD = 67.9 x 131.9 x 9.3 mm

Droid Razr Maxx = 68.8 x 130.8 x 8.89 mm

Weight on the Razr Maxx is 5.11 oz so the Maxx HD shouldn't be too different. Since the Maxx doesn't really have a hump the thickness doesn't change like the DX or the OG Razr.

 

[Deleted User]

Amazing the HD Maxx 3,300mha is less weight than my DX with 1850mha. And it is actually THINNER than the DX with the HD's 1,400 mha larger battery and .4 larger screen. Technology is great.

BTW, the DX is over 14mm at the camera hump. I hate it when they measure the smallest portion of the phone and tell you that is how thick it is. Not that I dislike the hump since it kept the phone from sliding down the hand, but really? The DX is not 9.9mm thick.
Lets measure the Maxx HD at the part were the edge of the back battery rolls down to the side of the phone and call it 5mm.
------------------

 

[MalikBear]

I'm enjoying my S3 but I know this will be the first phone I sold to get another. Hoping the Hd Maxx will meet or beat the S3!

I want my reception back!

 

[sorka]

I had the SIII for 1 month and it broke on one drop. Something my RAZR never did after multiple drops.
I switched back over to the RAZR, and actually was so happy I did. Motorola interface is so much better to use. The corporate email on the Samsung is a joke and looks like its for a toy, not a corporate user. And I hate the physical button on the Samsung, which lags about 2 seconds.

I'm ready for the RAZR HD, because a great screen is all it really needs for me.

I've dropped my S3 over a dozen times now. Darn thing is just too slippery. So far there's one little tiny scratch on the bottom bezel and that's it. Much more durable than I was expecting.

That said, the S3 can't match Motorola build quality in terms of fit and finish. Motorola phones *feel* military grade with a metal and glass contruction.

 

[sorka]

That seems to be a common response from certain Samsung enthusiasts. It's partly why user feedback is getting harder to rely on for advice. Same story with GNex...months of denial. I really like some of the bells and whistles on Samsung devices, but...

Actually I'm a motorola enthusiast and really wish the razr hd had come out before the unlimited data plan lock out took effect, but it didn't. Still, the S3's reception, call quality, data speed on 3g, etc has been way better than the DX was in fringe areas.

 

[sorka]

A lot of people have been making that comment or similar about the Razr M. Personally, I think it was a good move on Moto's part. Not everyone wants a huge phone or cares about a huge screen. The problem is that people still want the specs and most of the smaller phones out there don't have the specs that the larger phones do. At $99 (after rebate) you still get a device with Motorola build quality and great specs, but without the huge device size. I can easily see this being the smartphone of choice for a lot of women or teens.

The RAZR M is *clearly* the Droid X3 or should have been. Looks similar and has the same size screen. In fact, if the M had been out before the unlimited data plan lockout began, I would have upgraded to that instead of the S3 just because I like Motorola build quality.

 

[jasaero]

Amazing the HD Maxx 3,300mha is less weight than my DX with 1850mha. And it is actually THINNER than the DX with the HD's 1,400 mha larger battery and .4 larger screen. Technology is great.

BTW, the DX is over 14mm at the camera hump. I hate it when they measure the smallest portion of the phone and tell you that is how thick it is. Not that I dislike the hump since it kept the phone from sliding down the hand, but really? The DX is not 9.9mm thick.
Lets measure the Maxx HD at the part were the edge of the back battery rolls down to the side of the phone and call it 5mm.
------------------

Luckily these lack the camera hump. If you are going to make a device a good bit thicker for the camera, it BETTER have a HUGELY standout camera. This aspect is why I was so annoyed with the hump on DX-Bionic and even OG RAZR's. They had marginal to good camera's creating "humps". May as well have just went with a smaller cheaper sensor and not had the hump it wasn't going to be a stand out feature compared to phones without the "humps" in similar touted thickness ranges.

 

[jasaero]

Actually I'm a motorola enthusiast and really wish the razr hd had come out before the unlimited data plan lock out took effect, but it didn't. Still, the S3's reception, call quality, data speed on 3g, etc has been way better than the DX was in fringe areas.

I will be VERY surprised if these new RAZR's are more than marginally better. The baseband and general component use and such are all so similar I don't suspect it's going to be easy for Motorola to have created the drastic differences they were afforded by Samsung's cheap component and baseband choices in previous devices. I'm quite skeptical of people claiming the SIII has horrible performance for them in these respects.

 

[OfTheDamned]

I will be VERY surprised if these new RAZR's are more than marginally better. The baseband and general component use and such are all so similar I don't suspect it's going to be easy for Motorola to have created the drastic differences they were afforded by Samsung's cheap component and baseband choices in previous devices. I'm quite skeptical of people claiming the SIII has horrible performance for them in these respects.

I've had numerous Samsung products in the past and not a single one of them comes close to Motorola's radio quality. Reception, call quality, connection, etc. have all been vastly superior with Motorola when it comes to Verizon's network. GSM may be a different story.

Keep in mind that it isn't just the hardware either, software plays a big part in this as well.

 

[sorka]

I've had numerous Samsung products in the past and not a single one of them comes close to Motorola's radio quality. Reception, call quality, connection, etc. have all been vastly superior with Motorola when it comes to Verizon's network. GSM may be a different story.

Keep in mind that it isn't just the hardware either, software plays a big part in this as well.

None for me either...except the S3. Knock on wood. I was ready to send the S3 back in a heartbeat if the reception wasn't great. I fully expected to be bad based on previous experience with Samsung reception.

 

[jasaero]

I've had numerous Samsung products in the past and not a single one of them comes close to Motorola's radio quality. Reception, call quality, connection, etc. have all been vastly superior with Motorola when it comes to Verizon's network. GSM may be a different story.

Keep in mind that it isn't just the hardware either, software plays a big part in this as well.

It's a VZW Samsung product component choice issue. They have NEVER EVER used a Qualcomm CDMA baseband until the SIII. Well maybe before Android devices at some point they did. But they have been using the same crappy CDMA baseband all along. LTE was a crap shoot for everyone as most did their own thing probably mostly for patent reasons as they are now just using Qualcomm after doing their own 1st gen LTE chips.

You are correct on software/firmware to a degree, but that is a lot of power and battery draw sorta trade-off variety decisions more than anything else. Maybe some signal continuity choices and such also. Really the antenna design is MUCH bigger issue, but that is something anyone making cellular devices should be pretty decent at and Samsung stuff running GSM in the same spectrums as CDMA have no issues.

Basically pretty sure Samsung's bad rap on CDMA and VZW are related MUCH more the the crappy VIA Telecom basebands than ANYTHING else. These same chips are the reason iPhone had such horrible reception problems the first few generations also. VIA Telecom has since improve GSM capabilities on some AT&T samsung devices that used it, but their basebands are still almost useless on CDMA. The article below explains it. You can NOT I repeat NOT expect anything in the same universe with reception on SIII to previous Samsung Android CDMA devices. It is FAR superior and anyone claiming it is similarly as bad just has a defective device or firmware or something.

The Radio Performance Disparity of the Galaxy Nexus on GSM and CDMA - Mobile Central - Binary Outcast

 

[ben7337]

None for me either...except the S3. Knock on wood. I was ready to send the S3 back in a heartbeat if the reception wasn't great. I fully expected to be bad based on previous experience with Samsung reception.

Have you gone to a verizon store and looked at the signal strength of your S3, other S3's there, and the moto phones? I found the s3 has just slightly better reception than the galaxy nexus, but the galaxy nexus on 3g and 4g had at least 1/16the signal strength. Which is majorly disappointing since i live in a rural part of NJ where coverage is not the best I get -93 to -100dbm on 3g at home.

 

[jasaero]

None for me either...except the S3. Knock on wood. I was ready to send the S3 back in a heartbeat if the reception wasn't great. I fully expected to be bad based on previous experience with Samsung reception.

And this difference is TO BE EXPECTED based on the change from VIA Telecom to Qualcomm alone. Even Apple did this.

 

[jasaero]

Have you gone to a verizon store and looked at the signal strength of your S3, other S3's there, and the moto phones? I found the s3 has just slightly better reception than the galaxy nexus, but the galaxy nexus on 3g and 4g had at least 1/16the signal strength. Which is majorly disappointing since i live in a rural part of NJ where coverage is not the best I get -93 to -100dbm on 3g at home.

You can't really base a decision on dbm alone. It's not very telling of how fast your speeds will be or exactly when and where you will actually have trouble getting a connection. You need to have each device in a known troublesome but workable area and do speed tests and the like to really know the difference. The new 2nd gen qualcomm baseband can actually get you WAY more speed with WAY less signal on LTE than the previous ones. 3G speeds are always going to be crappy, but betting the 3G speeds in fringe areas of the qualcomm based SIII KILL what I can expect on my GNex with VIA Telecom.