Motorola DROID X 2 images and details leak

By on Feb 16, 2011 at 8:04 AM
mobile February 16, 2011

Motorola’s successor to its first supersized Android smartphone may soon be unveiled following a series of leaked photos and details. User britishturbo on mobile enthusiast forum The MobiZone is the latest to claim knowledge of the upcoming device, and his claimed details gain credibility thanks to the stockpile of images that accompany them. While his post has since been removed from the forum, a cached version of the page reveals specs highlighted by a 1GHz dual-core Tegra 2 processor, 1GB of RAM, the same 4.3-inch 540 x 960-pixel display as the DROID BIONIC, an 8-megapixel camera and the Android 2.2 Froyo operating system. The forum post also claims that the DROID X 2 will become available from Verizon Wireless in the second quarter. This indeed jibes with details we reported late last month, and they make the device sound curiously similar to the LTE-equipped DROID BIONIC. The DROID X 2 will only support 3G according to the report, however, and could come in at a lower price point.

[Via Engadget]

Read

Tags:
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
27 Comments

Related Articles

  • Beentheir

    Needs to be LTE capable.

    • Anonymous

      That’s what the Bionic is for.

      • Beentheir

        Or better yet. The HTC Thunderbolt.

      • Anonymous

        I concur, actually. Thunderbolt gets my nod purely because I don’t have to worry about a locked bootloader. If the Bionic didn’t have one, I might be more likely to get one.

        It’s a shame, too. The specs on the Bionic are amazing (arguably superior to those of the Thunderbolt, Sense’s superiority to MOTOBLUR notwithstanding) and I’d love to be able to install Cyanogenmod on that hardware.

        Oh, well. If you don’t like Motorola’s locked bootloaders, put your money where HTC’s mouth is.

  • Anonymous

    Now the real question is…with this out having twice the RAM of the Bionic…why would anyone buy the Bionic. =/ Quite the dilemma Moto has there.

    Doesn’t look like it has a FF cam…so i guess the choice between this and the Bionic would be do i want more RAM or a FF cam?

    • Anonymous

      LTE.

    • Mauriciom1029

      Aside from the front facing camera theres the lack of LTE. This phones battery will likely be much smaller than the bionics 1930. And doesn’t the bionic closely resemble stock android? Much more So then the X anyway.

  • Remy

    No LTE + No Front Facing Camera = Fail After much love for my Droid, looks like my next phone will be an HTC

  • http://twitter.com/toodifficultcom Daniel

    The lack of front facing camera is sad.

  • Captsoto

    Besides a updated processor whats the difference? Pointless!!!!!

    • Anonymous

      Its targeting the low end of the market. Will likely have a $50-$99 price point.

      In other words, not for you. Thats what the Bionic is for.

      I love how BGR and engadget reads have a hissy fit when a company comes out with a phone that isn’t the highest end, cutting edge tech. 75% of the population doesn’t care…

  • http://twitter.com/jsantostefano J. Santostefano

    This seems like a good option for people who want all the goods but don’t want to pay for an LTE data plan. Really, how much faster do our phones have to be? Why do we need LTE, especially since it technically doesn’t even qualify as 4G? 3G seems fast enough and for $10 less, this seems like a great option for people who want an Android powerhouse without having to pay for slightly upgraded 3G…

    • Anonymous

      Any DROID at any price point is a great a deal for the consumer. This is still light years ahead of the iPhones 5 MP camera and and small screen.

      • Anonymous

        Yeah right, you do realize that the screen is just 1/2 a inch bigger than what the iPhone sports lol. Now when it gets to screen resolution no Droid can come close to the almost one year old Retina display, iPhone also has a higher quality camera sensor and
        that’s why pics on a 8mp sensor on a Droid look like shit.

        I’ll take my 42″ HD TV screen over my old 60 inch standard def any day.

      • KMSuitCT

        You do realize that at this point, the screen resolution point is moot, because with specs this close to each other, the human eye cannot distinguish one from the other. In other words, like most Apple fanboys, you’ve allowed yourself to be convinced that “retina” display means something wonderful that you just must have, when in fact it’s mostly a marketing ploy.

      • Joel

        KM it’s not the word retina display it’s the resolution that the retina display brings with it. Take silences iPhone and zoom in as far as you can on a text… NO pixelation do that with a AMOLED screen or even a qHD and you will still get pixelation. Retina display is extremely crisp. So before you post idiotic fanboy comments do research

    • Lilteddyp

      Where have you you seen something about $10 more for lte?

    • Kaliking

      How do you figure LTE isn’t 4G? And if your not concerned about speed then go back to your old razr. LTE is the future. Faster will always be better!

      • http://twitter.com/jsantostefano J. Santostefano

        Read the industry standards, none of the 4G coverage that any of the carriers in the US are advertising actually qualifies as 4G. It’s just boosted 3G speeds.

  • Its Me!!

    What is that…a tablet? It’s huge.

  • DonC

    If it has no front facing cam or LTE….. Its a FAIL

  • Spdr-Mn

    I’m sorry, but that looks exactly like the current DROID x by Motorola…Why would Verizon release that when it has the Thunderbolt, DROID BIONIC, Merge, and Revolution?…I don’t get this…

  • http://www.youtube.com/jeromeo1980 Jeromeo

    So which one is the NEW one?
    Oh, the one with the front facing camera… Got it.

  • Batteman87

    LTE is still far off for the US. LTE maybe next yr would be more reasonable. Thing still looks like a large screen TV ha ha. If I want to watch TV thats what I have at home so I prefer a smaller one. Can’t wait to see how it does. Love competition!

  • Anonymous

    If LTE costs $10-15 dollars more a month, I bet many users who just browse the web a little will pass. I would pay $5 more, but thats it.

  • Kjk

    Engadget already has an article with updated specs saying these are wrong. Little slow to the punch there, as usual.

  • Jarvy’s

    I have seen this alive and are living in my hands now! :)

blog comments powered by Disqus