This is totally subjective, but I don't get why anyone would buy a Pixel. It's overpriced, and one of the ugliest phones in the market. Sure the camera is the best available, but I just can't get past the looks.
>The Pixel is a premium 5" phone, not a budget one.
what makes it premium other than the fact that they're charging lots of money for it? i can't find a real differentiator over something like the oneplus 3, which costs half as much.
i agree with you that it's better than the 5X, but comparing it to this year's competition, it doesn't look so good.
> I wanted to see what you valued in smartphones to make that comment.
Ah, I see -- then you should have asked that! For anything, what I recommend is not tightly correlated to what I would use myself, because the best solution is very context-dependent. In order to recommend something, I need to know what the requirements are.
In any case, I say that about the Pixel because the camera is really the only significant feature of the Pixels that comes close to justifying the asking price.
My existing (6 year old) smartphone only has another couple of years in it, though, so I've been giving a lot of thought about how to replace it. I've looked hard at the offerings on the market currently, and to be honest, there isn't a single one that appeals to me at all (there are a couple, such as the PinePhone, that look interesting but aren't in production yet).
I've spent a year developing a prototype of a home-built smartphone that does meet my needs, but I've recently decided against going that route at all. Instead, I'm just building a pocket computer (running plain old Linux) and will use a feature phone for my communication needs. Not having to use Android is hugely attractive to me.
Maybe you just haven't met anyone with one or even noticed people who do own them. I've owned almost every pixel phone. In my opinion, they're some of the best Android phones available with great cameras and less crapware pre-installed.
> The Pixel is beyond a joke, given its high pricepoint
As a tech professional who can afford to be a little fiscally irresponsible once in a while... the Pixel has been by far the best phone I've ever owned.
This is the first Android phone I feel has really challenged Apple's obsessively airtight design. I have never noticed a stutter, the camera is absurdly fast and shoots great photos, and the battery lasts nearly twice as long as my 5X.
Google has historically provided the cheaper, higher-barrier phones, but they're attempting to catch up while users are becoming lukewarm on Apple. I think they nailed it.
> Funny how many users are mentioning price as their main reason for dismissing the Pixel
It's easy to make an excellent phone to retail for $700.
It's much less easy to make a good phone to retail for $300.
This means that a lot of people, probably the majority, have to make-do with sub-par, or second-previous-generation from eBay, or order something from the Chinese market.
Hence the cynicism when Google unveiled yet another $700 phone. It's like another 200 mph supercar from Bugatti, pretty to see and technically fantastic but irrelevant to the market as a whole. Next time Google, how about taking-on a challenge?
Lol ok. I have a pixel 5a and honestly, I regret getting it over a $200 moto g power. Those phones are fantastic and you can slap a third party rom like lineage on there and use it basically forever.
> It doesn't seem premium Android phones have something spectacular to differentiate. Sure, you can spice up the camera, make the body more glossy, and add a beautiful screen.
... you so realize that your hot take is the minority opinion, right? The vast majority of customers consistently choose phones based on hardware features.
> But the software is just another commodity that would be available for 1/3rd the price. That's why Google Pixel would always feel exorbitant even when the price is almost close to Apple iPhone.
Google's phones always launch with the cutting edge version of Android and receives consistent updates. Isn't that the experience exclusivity you're clamoring for?
Bump up the price of Pixel by additional $100, and you get an 5 years guarantee upgrade.
Not to mention the Pixel isn't that powerful. iPhone 6s despite being 5 years ago, is probably as fast or still faster than some of the sub $300 Android Phone released today. ( Excluding Chinese Brands )
> the Pixel needs a few releases before I would trust it staying around
Genuinely honest: Android's been out there for a long while. Even if the Pixel was the last Pixel ever, why would that be a problem from me as a user? When it's time to replace, I'm going to look at the other Android phones too anyway.
> Is anyone making different decisions based on the headphone jack?
Not me. I already use wireless headphones at the gym and while running. The only loss is I cannot charge and listen at the same time which is something I rarely did anyway.
Given how Google abruptly leaves projects behind, the Pixel needs a few releases before I would trust it staying around. Flagship priced Android phones are also a tough market because you can get decent ones at very low prices.
Come on, seriously? That phone is at most 2 years old. It's not like the specs of that phone are in any way deficient; I guarantee you there is no app that you needed to run that couldn't run on that phone. Phones are resource intensive to manufacture - we should be aiming to keep them for 1/2 a dozen years or more. This mindset of replace with new and shiny "just because" [you're addicted to spending money] is bad for the planet.
> I have a pixel 2 now. it's good enough for everything I use it for, but it really didn't justify its launch price. it's basically a nexus phone with a fancy chassis and nicer camera.
I have a pixel 3a. The "a" series seems to be the same thing, but also at nexus prices.
I remember the Ars Technica review of the 3a saying something like "there were some worries that sales of the 3a might cannibalize sales from the flagship line, to which we can only say... yeah."
> The subtitle captures how out of touch I am with regular phone users. I'll be upgrading from a Pixel 2, and had a Nexus 7 before that. My purchase cadence seems different than what I perceive to be typical for iPhone users in particular.
I think the point is, why not just get the much cheaper 4a?
> I don’t get it, it’s a phone, with a camera. The camera just needs to be good enough, and for most people it’s been good enough for years.
Imho this is due to the fact that they don't have much to improve on. This is why we get 4k+ screens / 120hz screens on mobiles, 108mpx sensors are already rolling out already, &c.
It's a dick size contest, it doesn't make sense and no one actually need these things but it's the only way to make people buy the next iteration.
> The majority of people who want a smaller phone do so because phones aren't so important to them.
Like the other person, I say this is a ridiculous claim. I'd go as far as say most techies I know want a smaller device than what's available in the Android land, and would be willing to pay a premium. Small size has been the second most important feature of the Pixel line, right after the great camera.
> I don’t know about the battery life as mine hasn’t been useful enough yet to last
Mine doesn't even last as a glorified spotify controller mostly chilling in idle.
> for $200 I’m not expecting edge compute
What _are_ you expecting then? The hardware doesn't let you replace your phone and it isn't more convenient either. Pixel phones respond to "OK Google" faster than you can press this thing's button.
This is totally subjective, but I don't get why anyone would buy a Pixel. It's overpriced, and one of the ugliest phones in the market. Sure the camera is the best available, but I just can't get past the looks.
reply