We got got to check out Motorola's new Droid RAZR Maxx and boy is it thin. The 8.9-mm-thin device feels great in the hand, if not a little too large given its exceptionally skinny body. Regardless of its super thin enclosure, the 4.3-inch Super AMOLED screen is crisp and bright, with great viewing angles and solid color reproductions. The 1.2 GHz TI OMAP4 processor under the hood made everything run super smooth. Reps on site praised its purported 21 hours of talk time — though we're admittedly still a bit skeptical of given its absurdly thin footprint. We'll put it to the test ourselves when the device eventually becomes available.


There are 44 Comments. Add yours.
you guys make this sound like the droid razr never even came out…
you know, the phone that came out on 11/11/11 with the exact same dimensions and specs (but with less battery and space)… less than 3 months ago..
Posted on Jan 09, 2012 | 10:33 PM EST reply Recommend (11) Flag actions
the Razr was 7.11mm thick (at its thinnest) and this is 8.9mm (also at its thinnest)… they made the camera part flow into the rest so the back is more flat.
Posted on Jan 11, 2012 | 11:34 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
is this the first phone put out under google controlled moto?
Posted on Jan 09, 2012 | 10:33 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Google doesn’t own Moto yet. Not even close to making products together (or even under supervision) yet.
Posted on Jan 09, 2012 | 10:36 PM EST reply Recommend (3) Flag actions
720p?
Posted on Jan 09, 2012 | 10:35 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Same specs as the RAZR. so qHD I’m assuming. They made no point about it being 720P.
Posted on Jan 09, 2012 | 10:36 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
same as original droid razr
Posted on Jan 09, 2012 | 10:43 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
So ugly, horribly pixelated Pentile garbage.
Posted on Jan 10, 2012 | 12:13 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
pixelated, really? even for pentile qhd on 4;3" isn’t it a bit of an overstatment?
Posted on Jan 15, 2012 | 12:48 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Not really an overstatement… it is Strikingly pixelated in person. Colors are bright, blacks are deep, pixels are big.
Posted on Jan 16, 2012 | 10:54 AM EST via mobile reply Recommend Flag actions
So why didn’t they just make the original RAZR the RAZR MAXX?
What a slap in the face.
Posted on Jan 09, 2012 | 10:35 PM EST reply Recommend (4) Flag actions
My thoughts exsctly… Motorola loves to slap it’s early adopters in the face.
Posted on Jan 16, 2012 | 10:55 AM EST via mobile reply Recommend Flag actions
Its early adopters*
Posted on Jan 16, 2012 | 9:32 PM EST via mobile reply Recommend Flag actions
Way to soon to be releasing this phone. Google needs to stop manufactures from pulling this crap. Makes people never want to pull the trigger and sign a 2 year contract when the same phone with a spec bump is right around the corner.
Posted on Jan 09, 2012 | 10:36 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
Not exactly a spec bump. Just a spec trade-off: bigger battery but thicker phone.
Posted on Jan 09, 2012 | 10:55 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Its not thicker, its the exact same phone chassis.
So either some major battery breakthrough just happened at motorola, or they are full of crap. Since when can you fit twice the battery power in the same space after 2 or 3 months?
Posted on Jan 09, 2012 | 10:57 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
It is thicker, the original was 7.1mm, this one is 8.9mm. It’s sporting a 3300mAh battery
Posted on Jan 09, 2012 | 11:04 PM EST reply Recommend (4) Flag actions
Damn it, trusted the Verge Product database. Bad idea considering how hectic things are for them im sure
Posted on Jan 09, 2012 | 11:17 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Where did you find the mAh of the battery?
Posted on Jan 10, 2012 | 12:04 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Never mind, I just found it on Moto’s site. It is 3300mAh. Thats pretty badass.
Posted on Jan 10, 2012 | 12:06 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Well that explains why the Razr’s battery was not removable.
Posted on Jan 10, 2012 | 12:13 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
what tommydaniels said.
Posted on Jan 09, 2012 | 11:08 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I’m calling some serious BS on that battery life number. No way in hell will it get 21hrs of continuous talk time.
Posted on Jan 09, 2012 | 10:50 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Who knows. We’ll have to wait and see on some real world tests. But apparently, it’s sporting a 3500mAh battery. Pretty insane if true — and makes me wonder why they didn’t just make this the DROID RAZR. I’m assuming because it wouldn’t be the thinnest phone.
Posted on Jan 09, 2012 | 10:56 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Same thickness. They are literally just slapping a more powerful battery in the same space.
Posted on Jan 09, 2012 | 10:58 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
It is thicker, the original was 7.1mm, this one is 8.9mm. It’s sporting a 3300mAh battery…haha
Posted on Jan 09, 2012 | 11:06 PM EST reply Recommend (4) Flag actions
I kinda feel like this headline is tongue-in-cheek… like The Verge is winking at us all.
Posted on Jan 09, 2012 | 10:56 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
This is insane. How could they not have just pulled this off with the original phone release 2 months ago?
We are used to andriod phones one-upping each other every month, but phones that one-up themselves are just a massive middle finger to early adopters.
Posted on Jan 09, 2012 | 11:01 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Then it wouldn’t have been the ultra-thin phone that it was in the marketing campaign.
Posted on Jan 10, 2012 | 10:53 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Jacob, you write like the Razr (you know, the one from November) doesn’t exist. Maybe you’ve never held one before, but still, it sounds really weird when you’re writing for the entire site.
Posted on Jan 09, 2012 | 11:02 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
Possibly intentional?
Posted on Jan 09, 2012 | 11:10 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
It’s not the same body as the original 7.1mm Razr. This one is 8.99mm and uses the extra space to house a bigger battery.
Posted on Jan 09, 2012 | 11:08 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
The confusion is this from the original post: http://www.theverge.com/2012/1/9/2694563/droid-razr-maxx-for-verizon
Also the product database shows them both at 7.1mm. Hectic times lead to inevitable slip ups im sure
Posted on Jan 09, 2012 | 11:23 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Posted on Jan 09, 2012 | 11:18 PM EST reply Recommend (4) Flag actions
And of course my dad just let out a big “FFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU**” since he bought his the week it came out
Posted on Jan 09, 2012 | 11:57 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
You know I think the worst part of owning an android phone is the pitiful battery life I deal with on a daily basis. Having a freaking 3300mAh battery just might solve this.
I had hoped to find a device with 4500 mAh but this seems reasonable.
I kind of want to buy it just to encourage manufacturers to start putting bigger batteries into phones. I really hate having a fat extended battery hanging out of the thunderbolt.
Posted on Jan 10, 2012 | 12:13 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I have an HP touchpad. Switching from webOS to android causes battery to drain 30-40% faster. Android is a terrible OS.
Posted on Jan 10, 2012 | 12:15 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Android is NOT a terrible OS, it is a ALPHA on the TouchPad, it is not super-efficient because of it. There were problems with wakelocks from day 1, most of those have been taken care of. You are correct though, I do chew through it faster than on WebOS, even on Alpha 3.5. But I also have cool things to do now with it, with WebOS, all I used was the browser, and with Android, I use RDP, Plants vs Zombies, and quite a few other games, so it’s not quite a 1:1 comparison.
Posted on Jan 10, 2012 | 12:40 AM EST reply Recommend (4) Flag actions
This is a very poor example of which to base your opinion of Android as a whole OS on
Posted on Jan 12, 2012 | 11:08 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
i still don’t want it
Posted on Jan 10, 2012 | 9:07 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Does anyone know a release date?
Posted on Jan 12, 2012 | 11:08 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
So did they fix the screen? You guys (rightfully) slammed the screen on the RAZR.
Posted on Jan 12, 2012 | 12:30 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Why they called this phone RAZR if is not that thin anymore, great job Motorola.
Posted on Jan 15, 2012 | 7:36 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Good Fone !!!!!
Posted on Jan 16, 2012 | 3:49 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Something to say? Choose one of these options to log in.