Google's $649 5" Pixel 2, $849 6" Pixel 2 XL smartphones want to be your main squeeze, wit...

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 77
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 29,206member
    gatorguy said:
    Google does seem to have nailed the camera stuff in the last two generations of Pixels, but otherwise too much money for too little innovation IMHO. Not a product that interests me and I'm not alone. 
    There's a place for you in heaven for saying this. ;)
  • Reply 42 of 77
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 18,586member
    georgie01 said:
    gatorguy said:

    Google was just recently threatened with criminal charges (yeah not the typical civil ones) by government agencies for continuing not to cooperate with FBI and other investigative/law enforcement demands for user data, so that part of your post is bunk. 

    Second part is bunk too as Apple does use "your" data for ad purposes, minimally within the App Store. So while not up to Google levels they do collect user data and monetize it in some limited ways. Anyway, not pertinent to this article to begin with so discussion of this belongs in a different thread if you'd like to pursue it further. 
    You have often taken an opposing argument toward Apple fans and have tried to remain reasonable so your posts are usually fine despite the obvious delight you get in trying to correct others. However, you’ve really gone overboard trying to argue that Apple’s interest in user data is in any way remotely similar or comparable to Google’s. It is laughable to argue, and you know it. So it sounds like you’re contradicting just for the sake of contradicting.
    It absolutely is NOT comparable to Google's and I did not even hint that it was. On the contrary I made clear it was not. What I was informing the OP is that despite his belief it was not non-existent. He was using that as an argument for why no one needs to know what data Apple has collected on it's users or have a way of easily reviewing, correcting or deleting it with assurance which is what he was dinging Google for. 

    He also was of the mistaken belief that Google like Apple does not resist government demands for user data except under very strict conditions and with lawful support. That makes both part 1 and part 2 of his post bunk doesn't it, ignoring scale of course? 
    edited October 2017 derekmorr
  • Reply 43 of 77
    LukeCageLukeCage Posts: 146member
    tzeshan said:
    Did Google mention the acquit ion of HTC design engineers?  Now Google can proudly renounce that Pixel is truly designed by Google and manufactured by HTC as it copied Apple's method. 
    Yes they mentioned acquiring 2,000 former HTC engineers and this was a sign that they are serious about hardware. 
  • Reply 44 of 77
    LukeCageLukeCage Posts: 146member
    sog35 said:
    These Google products make ZERO sense.

    this is like Kia selling $100k cars.

    It actually does, apart from Samsung no one else is playing in the premium Android smartphone market. Why should google let Samsung take all that profit when they themselves control the platform?
    macky the macky
  • Reply 45 of 77

    In another demo, Google showed how the new phone will constantly listen for music to let users quickly see what is being played. Notably, the song is recognized through on-device machine learning, as Google says no data needs to be transferred back to the company for this to be accomplished.

    That's obviously BS.  I'm pretty sure they aren't installing a digital fingerprint of every song ever made on to each phone so that this can be done without sending data out.
    StrangeDayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 46 of 77
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 4,994member
    Joke of a phone. Remember when Google mocked Apple by emphasizing the headphone jack during the Pixel one keynote? Why doesn't a single one of these fucking companies at least stay committed to their "stance", instead of mocking then turning around and following Apple's lead less than 12 months later, each and every time? If you think removing the headphone jack is insane, is anti-consumer, and is truly the wrong thing to do- then commit to it and keep it in your devices. Don't use it as a cheap way to bash Apple then go ahead and drop it the first chance you get like the hypocritical cowards that you are.
    GG1StrangeDaysRonnnieObrucemcwatto_cobramuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 47 of 77
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 4,741member
    "We don't set aside better features for the larger device," said Google VP Mario Queiroz in a clear dig at Apple, earning laughter and applause from the audience at Wednesday's keynote.

    So you have a mediocre phone in a small case and a lot of wasted potential in the larger case?

    The people were right to laugh... At how deluded Google really is.
    Doesn’t the non-Plus model of iPhone have OIS now? As far as I can tell there wasn’t some major design change to accommodate it. Seems more likely than not that it was exclusive to the Plus model as an upsell. 
    What nonsense. The chief of Apple engineering said in an interview they used the space saved from the headphone jack to include better camera components, battery and water seals. Additionally, these things get smaller and better every year. It’s natural to start bigger where you have room and optimize. 

    But I know, you think it’s all magic and a mustache-twirling Schiller trying to rip you off. 
    brucemcwatto_cobra
  • Reply 48 of 77
    GG1GG1 Posts: 164member
    slurpy said:
    Joke of a phone. Remember when Google mocked Apple by emphasizing the headphone jack during the Pixel one keynote? Why doesn't a single one of these fucking companies at least stay committed to their "stance", instead of mocking then turning around and following Apple's lead less than 12 months later, each and every time? If you think removing the headphone jack is insane, is anti-consumer, and is truly the wrong thing to do- then commit to it and keep it in your devices. Don't use it as a cheap way to bash Apple then go ahead and drop it the first chance you get like the hypocritical cowards that you are.
    Don't forget the non-removable battery. What a stir that caused. And now all major Android smartphones (except LG) have non-removable batteries.
    watto_cobralostkiwiSpamSandwich
  • Reply 49 of 77
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 4,741member
    Doesn’t the non-Plus model of iPhone have OIS now? As far as I can tell there wasn’t some major design change to accommodate it. Seems more likely than not that it was exclusive to the Plus model as an upsell. 
    Last year’s iPhone 7 gained OIS in the smaller phone. Along with water resistance. 
    Right. As far as we know though there was no major design change to accomodate it, 
     Christ. How many times must I link to this....Yes, there was. The removal of legacy headphone jack. He attributed this to it directly. 

    https://www.buzzfeed.com/johnpaczkowski/inside-iphone-7-why-apple-killed-the-headphone-jack

    But he’s far more interested in the ripple effect of advancements the removal of the audio jack set off in the iPhone.

    “It was holding us back from a number of things we wanted to put into the iPhone,” Riccio says. “It was fighting for space with camera technologies and processors and battery life. And frankly, when there’s a better, modern solution available, it’s crazy to keep it around.”

    watto_cobra
  • Reply 50 of 77
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 4,741member

    Pretty ironic how Google mocked Apple last year for removing the 3.5mm headphone jack and now they have done the same thing. 
    Didn’t Phil Schiller once mock wireless charging? All companies mock something until they do it.
    And Steve Jobs mocked big phones and small tablets. 
    Yes because the ones of the day had poor resolution. That changed. 
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 51 of 77
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 4,741member

    georgie01 said:
    gatorguy said:

    Google was just recently threatened with criminal charges (yeah not the typical civil ones) by government agencies for continuing not to cooperate with FBI and other investigative/law enforcement demands for user data, so that part of your post is bunk. 

    Second part is bunk too as Apple does use "your" data for ad purposes, minimally within the App Store. So while not up to Google levels they do collect user data and monetize it in some limited ways. Anyway, not pertinent to this article to begin with so discussion of this belongs in a different thread if you'd like to pursue it further. 
    You have often taken an opposing argument toward Apple fans and have tried to remain reasonable so your posts are usually fine despite the obvious delight you get in trying to correct others. However, you’ve really gone overboard trying to argue that Apple’s interest in user data is in any way remotely similar or comparable to Google’s. It is laughable to argue, and you know it. So it sounds like you’re contradicting just for the sake of contradicting.
    Yes if only we had a word for such contrarian behavior on a site dedicated to one topic...hmm, what would we call such a person...
    randominternetpersonwilliamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 52 of 77
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    cpsro said:
    "Free" photo storage comes with a perpetual, world-wide, royalty-free license for Goople to store and use your data for any purpose, even after you've deleted it and cancelled your account.
    *cough* FUD-worthy *cough*

    What's yours remains yours.... 
    It remains yours in the sense that Google can't openly distribute it. But how long that account and all its contents live in Google infrastructure is another matter. You can't force Google to remove your data, not can you check if they actually removed all  of your data
    Why can't you do so the same way you remove your data from Apple and confirm they did so?
    Apple does not have ad generated revenue, since they do not sell their customers to advertisers.
    In other words, Apple have no business model that would require that.
    Also, as you might remember, Google did not raised problems with FBI sending them request to hand out customer data. Apple did.
    Google was just recently threatened with criminal charges (yeah not the typical civil ones) by government agencies for continuing not to cooperate with FBI and other investigative/law enforcement demands for user data, so that part of your post is bunk. 

    Second part is bunk too as Apple does use "your" data for ad purposes, minimally within the App Store. So while not up to Google levels they do collect user data and monetize it in some limited ways. Anyway, not pertinent to this article to begin with so discussion of this belongs in a different thread if you'd like to pursue it further. 
    "while not up to Google levels".
    EXACTLY.  So it is not bunk, then?

    "not up to Google levels"
    This should be put in bold text. You deliberately downplayed that important difference and concentrated on "Apple collecting something, and Google collecting too, therefore they are equally bad" type of logical fallacy. Otherwise, if it was not your intent, then why even bother to mention that?

    No, Apple does not collect like Google. We touched on that before, and AGAIN you provided the same old and tired fallacy you did several times here.
    No, Apple does not collect data to the extent Google does. Period! There is no BUT after that. And please stop using WEASEL WORDS in order to make those two cases seemingly closer to each other, than they otherwise are.

    It ls also nice that you equated Apple Store targeting (in providing apps which is part of the Apple infrastructure) with Google targeting that helps Google to show you crappy banners of some crappy advertisers with some BS that you had no intention of looking at. Kind of intellectually dishonest, if you ask me, but I guess is was find by you....

    Could you provide that link about Google being threatened with criminal charges, btw?
    edited October 2017 watto_cobra
  • Reply 53 of 77
    Pretty ironic how Google mocked Apple last year for removing the 3.5mm headphone jack and now they have done the same thing. 
      until they do it.
    Except that implementing Apple wireless charging and REMOVING jack are two different things.
    One can be done differently, another one can only be done or not done. You can't remove that jack differently.
    Also, it is worth noting that Apple does these things on its own schedule. These posers, however, do that EXACTLY AFTER APPLE demonstrates viability of something they just implemented. And then it goes like this:
    Stage 1 - Mocking
    Stage 2 - Laughing
    Stage 3 - Acceptance
    Stage 4 - implementation.
    edited October 2017 watto_cobra
  • Reply 54 of 77
    Pretty ironic how Google mocked Apple last year for removing the 3.5mm headphone jack and now they have done the same thing. 
    Didn’t Phil Schiller once mock wireless charging? All companies mock something until they do it.
    Not sure how "Schiller notes that the wireless charging systems still have to be plugged into the wall, so it’s not clear how much convenience they add."
    can be seen as mocking, but I guess it can be...depending on the bias. But, he is technically correct. Wireless charging NEEDS to be plugged in for it to work. Cable is a much more effective solution. Wireless charging is not, on the other hand,

    watto_cobra
  • Reply 55 of 77
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 18,586member
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    cpsro said:
    "Free" photo storage comes with a perpetual, world-wide, royalty-free license for Goople to store and use your data for any purpose, even after you've deleted it and cancelled your account.
    *cough* FUD-worthy *cough*

    What's yours remains yours.... 
    It remains yours in the sense that Google can't openly distribute it. But how long that account and all its contents live in Google infrastructure is another matter. You can't force Google to remove your data, not can you check if they actually removed all  of your data
    Why can't you do so the same way you remove your data from Apple and confirm they did so?
    Apple does not have ad generated revenue, since they do not sell their customers to advertisers.
    In other words, Apple have no business model that would require that.
    Also, as you might remember, Google did not raised problems with FBI sending them request to hand out customer data. Apple did.
    Google was just recently threatened with criminal charges (yeah not the typical civil ones) by government agencies for continuing not to cooperate with FBI and other investigative/law enforcement demands for user data, so that part of your post is bunk. 

    Second part is bunk too as Apple does use "your" data for ad purposes, minimally within the App Store. So while not up to Google levels they do collect user data and monetize it in some limited ways. Anyway, not pertinent to this article to begin with so discussion of this belongs in a different thread if you'd like to pursue it further. 
    "while not up to Google levels".
    EXACTLY.  So it is not bunk, then?

    "not up to Google levels"
    This should be put in bold text. You deliberately downplayed that important difference and concentrated on "Apple collecting something, and Google collecting too, therefore they are equally bad" type of logical fallacy. Otherwise, if it was not your intent, then why even bother to mention that?

    No, Apple does not collect like Google. We touched on that before, and AGAIN you provided the same old and tired fallacy you did several times here.
    No, Apple does not collect data to the extent Google does. Period! There is no BUT after that. And please stop using WEASEL WORDS in order to make those two cases seemingly closer to each other, than they otherwise are.

    It ls also nice that you equated Apple Store targeting (in providing apps which is part of the Apple infrastructure) with Google targeting that helps Google to show you crappy banners of some crappy advertisers with some BS that you had no intention of looking at. Kind of intellectually dishonest, if you ask me, but I guess is was find by you....

    Could you provide that link about Google being threatened with criminal charges, btw?
    Your rationale for Apple not having an easy way to review or delete user data was  "Apple does not derive any ad-generated revenue" as tho that's the only reason not to know what data Apple has connected to you. Besides being far from the ONLY reason a person might want to know "who" Apple believes they are and what information they've connected to them it's also not true that Apple has no involvement at all in monetizing user data. You were wrong no matter how much you would like to protest and modify the argument after the fact. FWIW I actually agree that there's a huge difference between Apple and Google's interest in user data. We have no disagreement on that point. 

    As for your request for proof of criminal contempt threats against Google for not handing over user data:
     https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/09/justice-department-goes-nuclear-on-google-in-search-warrant-fight/

    I think you could actually have discovered this for yourself, but even if not why would you claim Google wasn't challenging governments demands for user data without actually looking to find out whether that was true? It leaves me with the impression you weren't interested in truth in the first place but had other motivations for writing what you did. Having an opinion without backup of fact is one thing. Making a claim of fact as you did without actually knowing it to be so in the first place is just making stuff up and hoping no one notices which doesn't benefit any reader.  That's how FUD gets spun around and around and around... 


    edited October 2017 singularity
  • Reply 56 of 77
    canukstormcanukstorm Posts: 1,476member
    badmonk said:
    No OLED
    No FaceID
    No Apple A11 chip prowness
    The camera differences will turn out to be debatable....

    They'll sell millions, not tens of millions...

    But ultimately the scale of manufacturing of Apple and Samsung will doom them.
    Google's prowess is in Cloud services & AI.  Google is betting on Cloud AI vs Apple betting on on-device AI.
  • Reply 57 of 77
    GG1 said:
    boeyc15 said:
    Does it include an FM radio?


    I know this was said in jest, but I always thought it would be a nice to have feature and AM. I never heard a good argument why not--- please share if anyone has a good analysis. I do understand that it is NOT always a trivial undertaking though, but certainty not new/exotic/extreme engineering to design in if there was a desire to do so.

    https://www.cnet.com/how-to/unlock-the-secret-fm-tuner-in-your-android-phone/

    FM: needs a good external antenna (such as wired earphones - explained in the article that you linked)

    AM: needs a really really good external antenna (I doubt wired earphones will be good enough unless you listen next to an AM station's transmitter); this is based on the much lower carrier frequency resulting in a much longer wavelength (requiring a much longer antenna)
    Bingo! Very nice explanation, ty. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 58 of 77
    tzeshantzeshan Posts: 1,665member
    slurpy said:
    Joke of a phone. Remember when Google mocked Apple by emphasizing the headphone jack during the Pixel one keynote? Why doesn't a single one of these fucking companies at least stay committed to their "stance", instead of mocking then turning around and following Apple's lead less than 12 months later, each and every time? If you think removing the headphone jack is insane, is anti-consumer, and is truly the wrong thing to do- then commit to it and keep it in your devices. Don't use it as a cheap way to bash Apple then go ahead and drop it the first chance you get like the hypocritical cowards that you are.
    I read that a headphone is not included with the Pixel 2.  Did Google include a headphone with the original Pixel? 
  • Reply 59 of 77
    randominternetperson said:That's obviously BS.  I'm pretty sure they aren't installing a digital fingerprint of every song ever made on to each phone so that this can be done without sending data out.
    They said the phones will come with "tens of thousands" of song fingerprints. 
  • Reply 60 of 77
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 18,586member

    In another demo, Google showed how the new phone will constantly listen for music to let users quickly see what is being played. Notably, the song is recognized through on-device machine learning, as Google says no data needs to be transferred back to the company for this to be accomplished.

    That's obviously BS.  I'm pretty sure they aren't installing a digital fingerprint of every song ever made on to each phone so that this can be done without sending data out.
    tokyojimu said:
    randominternetperson said:That's obviously BS.  I'm pretty sure they aren't installing a digital fingerprint of every song ever made on to each phone so that this can be done without sending data out.
    They said the phones will come with "tens of thousands" of song fingerprints. 
    Thanks for that Tokyojimu. I hadn't even looked yet to see how it worked but your post prompted me to

    "It detects ambient songs playing around you, then leverages the Pixel 2's onboard machine learning capability to compare that sound structure to a database of more than 10,000 popular tracks and figure out what it is you're hearing. Best of all, the database is stored locally so the entire recognition process requires zero interaction with Google's servers, preserving your privacy and ensuring it'll work even if you don't have an internet connection."
Sign In or Register to comment.