[arjie]

'One bad move' is a charitable way to talk about Motorola. They required signed kernels for their bootloaders, promised unlocking, didn't do it, then promised newer versions of Android and didn't do that either. Then they released a new phone and repeated this.

Today, years after some of these phones were released, they _still_ haven't released the keys so that people can easily run custom versions of Android on their phones and not a year ago they released a software upgrade that kept you on Gingerbread and locked you out of some methods to install custom ROMs.

They will prove they are serious when this phone has Nexus-like hackability. Until then, caveat emptor.

[ok_craig]

Those are good points, but the comment I was responding to wasn't about them. It was about not trusting the company because of one bad product.

It also wasn't about hackability (your last sentence), it was about the phone simply generally sucking due to lack of updates.

But even if hackability is what you're waiting for, that's my point - if they do eventually provide it, re-evaluate at that time. I'm not sure it's healthy to write them off indefinitely because what you wanted, they didn't provide back then, when the company was obviously very different.

[catenate]

I'd like a minimal smartphone, which comes unlocked or has some other way of assuring I won't ever get into this situation again. I think this is fair, since I have had to live with the consequence. Locking down the OS version of a phone is very much enough for me to never do business with that kind of company again. I would never buy a computer with an OS I couldn't upgrade, and Android phones are computers.

Further, I'd like a phone whose processing power is devoted to Android apps I choose, rather than carrier's undeleteable bloatware. I was hoping for something like a Nexus 5 this year, since the Nexus 4 seemed to have these traits.

I worry that the Moto X would replace a Nexus 5 in their roadmap, and that their desire to compete with the S4 will lead them to mimic it instead of having the kind of product I'd like.

So I see Google focusing so much effort on a Moto phone as a problem for me and what I want, not something to look forward to. Google once had the product I should have bought (Nexus 4), especially at that much lower price point.

I don't believe that Moto is any different now, because I haven't seen them implement better policies. From my POV, the burden of proof is on them to demonstrate they changed, since they decided to screw over me, and everyone else with a Photon. I don't need to give them any more money, unless they are obviously the very best phone available for me, and my wants aren't what people or the carriers apparently want.

[arjie]

A good point. Not very sensible forgoing a good product out of spite. However, I find it acceptable to demand exceptional service and keeping consumer pressure on a company that made poor products until it releases a good one. If you screw up, you have to be way better than the competition, and your promises are dirt.

In that respect, OP's done all right by ensuring that Motorola's past failures are front and center so that they understand the value of doing these things.

That said, the Motorola Photon Q 4G LTE (I'm not making that up) does have an unlockable bootloader so they are making progress.