Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Evolution of Motorola Phones

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 49 posts

Re: The Evolution of Motorola Phones

#11

Post by Kon-Peki »

nvarsj wrote: post #6

It's not talked about much, but RAZR was a skunk works program inside of Moto started by a small group of engineers independent of management. By that point the company had been largely taken over by cost cutting style management. Lean/6 Sigma was everywhere, and pretty much all research/innovation centres were being shut down. C level was incredibly incompetent. Ed Zander, the most incompetent choice of all, was app…

> Then iPhone came out a couple years later. I still remember the COO/CEOs downplaying it in town halls, saying things like "Where's the keyboard! No one is ever going to use a touch screen based device!".

... knowing full-well that Motorola had no-keyboard Linux-based smartphones that they refused to sell. Back in the 1999-2000 timeframe, Motorola took them to college recruiting events and let kids play around with them. It worked on me. I was in the Arlington Heights labs testing UMTS systems with those smartphones from 2001-2006. We used to stream ESPN videos on them, for "testing". Every once in a while, we'd slip up and accidentally let them connect to the real mobile networks, and saw first-hand what everyone that bought in iPhone in 2007 saw with data rates...

Re: The Evolution of Motorola Phones

#12

Post by Avshalom »

throwboatyface wrote: post #7
SteeCee wrote: post #3

Little weird that, for such a simple article, they completely cut out phones between the Droid and new Razr. I thought the Moto X was iconic. Being able to customize it and buy it online was pretty big at the time.

The period when Google owned Motorola was very interesting. The Moto G was a great budget device that I think was killed by carriers who wanted to push $1000 phablets that required consumers to finance them.

The moto g's continue to be great budget(ish ~200 new) devices.

They're the last two phones I've bought, the first lasted ~3 years before I broke it, still good enough for the internet at large when I did. Replaced it with a G8 a couple years ago, still going strong.

Minimal fucking with android, microsd slot, magnetic compass, enough battery to last a weekend if you're careful.

Re: The Evolution of Motorola Phones

#13

Post by bluGill »

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #8
nvarsj wrote: post #6

It's not talked about much, but RAZR was a skunk works program inside of Moto started by a small group of engineers independent of management. By that point the company had been largely taken over by cost cutting style management. Lean/6 Sigma was everywhere, and pretty much all research/innovation centres were being shut down. C level was incredibly incompetent. Ed Zander, the most incompetent choice of all, was app…

Even by today's standards, the RAZR is a marvel of engineering and industrial design. It's insane how thin it is for 2004 considering the swappable battery and dual display. Only thing holding it back was the sluggish SW and terrible UX, but that plagued most phones of the era. >C level was incredibly incompetent. Please name me a major western consumer electronics company of the era other than Apple that didn't have…

I've often heard it said that a great CEO needs to be a visonary to see the future. (s)He needs as a "right hand man" a great finance person who sees the numbers and reins in all those dreams and ensure they don't overspend and run out of money. The problem is then the CEO retires and his "right hand man" is the obvious choice - but the right hand man doesn't have vision of where to spend money, only where to save money and that lack of vision kills the new development pipeline.

Even companies who make the least innovations (there isn't much you can do to make better soap or toilet paper) still need a visionary CEO to see investments that could pay off (could be automation to reduce costs, something to increase quality, or sometimes there really is a better soap).

Re: The Evolution of Motorola Phones

#14

Post by bluGill »

korroziya wrote: post #10
nvarsj wrote: post #6

It's not talked about much, but RAZR was a skunk works program inside of Moto started by a small group of engineers independent of management. By that point the company had been largely taken over by cost cutting style management. Lean/6 Sigma was everywhere, and pretty much all research/innovation centres were being shut down. C level was incredibly incompetent. Ed Zander, the most incompetent choice of all, was app…

I wish the CEO's had been right. Keyboards > touchscreens. The iPhone allowed normies to ruin everything. Instead of programs, we have apps. Instead of websites, we have walled gardens. Instead of bbs systems and forums, we have IG, Facebook and TikTok. Blame the normies. Edit: Your downvotes mean nothing to me. I've seen what makes you upvote.

The only problem is nobody knows how to make a useful keyboard that fits in my pocket. I hate touch screens in general, but a phone in my pocket is useful in many situations where I wouldn't bring a keyboard.

Re: The Evolution of Motorola Phones

#15

Post by bluGill »

throwboatyface wrote: post #7
SteeCee wrote: post #3

Little weird that, for such a simple article, they completely cut out phones between the Droid and new Razr. I thought the Moto X was iconic. Being able to customize it and buy it online was pretty big at the time.

The period when Google owned Motorola was very interesting. The Moto G was a great budget device that I think was killed by carriers who wanted to push $1000 phablets that required consumers to finance them.

They looked great on paper, but my wife managed to destroy 2 in a couple months. I gave up and replaced with a Samsung that she has had for 4 years (IIRC, I can't remember when she bought it).

Re: The Evolution of Motorola Phones

#16

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

bluGill wrote: post #14
korroziya wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish the CEO's had been right. Keyboards > touchscreens. The iPhone allowed normies to ruin everything. Instead of programs, we have apps. Instead of websites, we have walled gardens. Instead of bbs systems and forums, we have IG, Facebook and TikTok. Blame the normies. Edit: Your downvotes mean nothing to me. I've seen what makes you upvote.

The only problem is nobody knows how to make a useful keyboard that fits in my pocket. I hate touch screens in general, but a phone in my pocket is useful in many situations where I wouldn't bring a keyboard.

Some people still give rave reviews to the Blackberry keyboard

Re: The Evolution of Motorola Phones

#17

Post by i_love_cookies »

throwboatyface wrote: post #7
SteeCee wrote: post #3

Little weird that, for such a simple article, they completely cut out phones between the Droid and new Razr. I thought the Moto X was iconic. Being able to customize it and buy it online was pretty big at the time.

The period when Google owned Motorola was very interesting. The Moto G was a great budget device that I think was killed by carriers who wanted to push $1000 phablets that required consumers to finance them.

[dead]

Re: The Evolution of Motorola Phones

#18

Post by silisili »

bluGill wrote: post #14
korroziya wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish the CEO's had been right. Keyboards > touchscreens. The iPhone allowed normies to ruin everything. Instead of programs, we have apps. Instead of websites, we have walled gardens. Instead of bbs systems and forums, we have IG, Facebook and TikTok. Blame the normies. Edit: Your downvotes mean nothing to me. I've seen what makes you upvote.

The only problem is nobody knows how to make a useful keyboard that fits in my pocket. I hate touch screens in general, but a phone in my pocket is useful in many situations where I wouldn't bring a keyboard.

The moto backflip, despite being a flop, actually had a really cool idea on how to handle that. So did the blackberry priv. For whatever reason, the market just didn't want it. I guess the market has skinnier thumbs than me, because typing on even a 6.6" touchscreen feels like typing with boxing gloves on.

Re: The Evolution of Motorola Phones

#19

Post by nier »

nvarsj wrote: post #6

It's not talked about much, but RAZR was a skunk works program inside of Moto started by a small group of engineers independent of management. By that point the company had been largely taken over by cost cutting style management. Lean/6 Sigma was everywhere, and pretty much all research/innovation centres were being shut down. C level was incredibly incompetent. Ed Zander, the most incompetent choice of all, was app…

Seeing that the original iPhone used Infineon chips gives me the impression that Apple learned from Motorola how NOT to build mobile phones. Wondering how many Motorola employees went to work at Apple back then.

Re: The Evolution of Motorola Phones

#20

Post by kloch »

The first cellphone I bought was a Motorola Alpha https://www.mobilecollectors.net/phone/3802/motorola-microta...

I thought it was odd - and a bit misleading that it had the words "Digital Personal Communicator" on the box. I knew it couldn't communicate digitally but it did get me to imagine what that would be like.

I assume digital referred to the storage of phone numbers + names which was a novel feature at the time. The display wasn't seven segment LED like previous versions, it had low-res green dot matrix LED arrays that could display a few crude alphanumeric characeters.

Post reply on HN