I just really find it funny that Google just 1 year ago on last models phones where bashing APple for not having a Headphone jack, and now here they are with no headphone jack. They have a Adapter that's more then DOUBLE the price of Apple's at $20, to Apple's $9. Worse they don't even include some headphones. I mean really??? A so called Premium phone, and all they do is throw in a over priced Adapter. HAHAHAHAHA You're paying more for less. What happened in this new warped world where Google's hardware costs are worse then Apple?
Android zealots are so anti-Apple that in many ways it deeply resembles politics in America.
Likewise, quite a few folks here are so anti-Google that Apple working with Google in any way doesn't compute.
Based on the folks I know at Google and Apple, there is a level of shared respect among elites despite the rivalry that the rabid fans don't get and never will because they won't ever be elites at anything...
The folks that work at Google and Apple are some of the very best tech folks in the country. Their suckiest tech contributions are far better than DED's best.
I've made more money than Project Ara.
/shrug
There was a lot of cool tech in Ara that was developed and none of that is lost. They measurably moved the ball forward in terms of interconnects and protocols that will likely enable cool new things in the future.
I met Regina Dugan once while she was still at DARPA. Smart lady. I knew a couple folks at ATAP including Johnny Lee (distantly from back when we were playing with the wii mote) who is really brilliant and Project Tango seems pretty successful even if overshadowed by ARCore. If you knew anything about the underlying technology you'd be impressed with what Apple, Microsoft and Google have accomplished in this field.
I've also had the pleasure of conversing with Vint Cerf as a colleague of mine worked with him on some things of mutual interest. He's at Google and you may have heard of him.
But you will never know such greatness and will not ever have advanced the ball forward by contributing anything meaningful like many of the wonderful folks at Google.
It's okay though, most folks don't.
They just aren't smug about it.
Was the national anthem playing while you were writing that?
"In this bizarro world of starry-eyed Google-fandom, it appears that nobody cares about snappy performance, premium phone prices, inadequate hardware specs or having a phone that looks like a cheaper copy of last year's iPhone".
That might be the case but it is quite irrelevant from an Android handset perspective. The "bizarro world of starry-eyed Google-fandom" is literally miniscule in the bigger Android picture and we should not lose sight of that. Dedicating so many words to the Pixel release and partly linking its supposed failings to Android at every turn, ignores the fact that other vendors in fact do have almost everything you criticise the Pixels for lacking, including adequate specs, great pricing, sleek design and snappy performance - and I dare say that, on occasion, for half the price of an iPhone 8 too. This piece, although a dig at Google, is just as much of a dig at Android.
Those vendors ship units in the hundreds of millions, not the single digit millions of Google. They also sometimes add features to Android specifically to address its weak spots.
Mostly though, people simply don't run into problems that make them aware of many of the supposed limitations of Android. My 249€ Android opens and switches apps with no perceivable difference to an 800€ iPhone 6. I suppose the same can be said of newer phones for most users.
By the time AR actually becomes a household feature (if it ever does) Android handsets might have just as large a user base.
Although it's stating the obvious, those worlds of 'starry eyed fandom' also exist for Apple, Samsung, Huawei and many other vendors. In the case of Apple specifically, the same claims could be made on pricing and lacking features just a few weeks ago but many people in that world didn't care either.
I didn't read all that, but pretty sure the only time you mentioned the Pixel 2 XL's larger, sharper screen was as a negative, which is ridiculous. The resolution and use of OLED almost certainly makes it better than the iPhone 8 Plus's (I'll admit I haven't used either, but do have both QHD OLED devices and True Tone devices at home and I know which I prefer.)
Also, in real world use that 4GB of RAM will likely be absolutely fine. It certainly is on my S7 Edge, a phone which runs basically just as fast as my iPad Pro 10.5 for all intents and purposes.
The Pixel 2 XL is overpriced, but this article looks to be seriously biased.
Strictly speaking, none of the above is industrial design, albeit the industrial design of the external package has a great influence on these circuit board designs, especially at Apple.
There are pros and cons to both the Moto X and Apple circuit board designs. TL;DR—in my opinion, they reflect their companies' respective economic situations, i.e., Apple can afford to use a smaller circuit board because it's making a premium-tier product with a high profit margin, and because that product sells in high volume.
Moto X Pros:
(Mostly) single-sided. The vast majority of the parts can be attached to the board in a single pass through placement and reflow (soldering), putting less thermal stress on the components. It also provides additional volume for the battery under the circuit board and better physical isolation of RF-sensitive circuit blocks.
Slightly more surface area, even given the single side used for most parts. This permits the use of larger and easier to place—and hence, cheaper—components. It could also act as a larger heat sink for heat dissipation.
Fewer board layers. A number are still needed to accommodate pinout from high pin density parts like the Snapdragon, but there's more area to work with on each layer to route traces. And fewer layers make for cheaper panels.
Good balance of the phone in the hand is easier to achieve since the mass of the battery and circuit board are more evenly distributed across the surface of the phone.
Moto X Cons:
Fewer circuit boards per panel. This means a greater number of circuit board panels must be processed to build an equivalent number of circuit boards, which could reduce factory throughput. The effect this has on price per circuit board is unclear without knowing the exact stack-up of the Motorola and Apple boards.
iPhone Pros:
Double-sided panel with tightly packed components enables an incredibly small circuit board. More boards per panel means better factory throughput. The narrower the board, the more volume that's available for the battery, too.
iPhone Cons:
Doubled-sided. Two major passes through component placement as well as reflow required.
Intra-board trace layout must be a nightmare. There are hundreds of traces coming out from the pins of the A11 alone which much be routed to memory, SIM, Lightning connector, cameras, display, Touch ID, etc. This also complicates resolving RF desense issues during development (as in, "Why can't you just move that part/trace/via over there?")
More board layers to accommodate the traces for those high pin density components like the A11. More layers equals higher cost circuit board panels.
High part density and small components necessitate high-precision solder masking and part placement, i.e., newer, more expensive factory equipment. Heat dissipation also becomes more of an issue.
Phone balancing becomes trickier with the circuit board and the battery side-by-side.
iPhone Cons:
Doubled-sided. Two major passes through component placement as well as reflow required. Intra-board trace layout must be a nightmare. There are hundreds of traces coming out from the pins of the A11 alone which much be routed to memory, SIM, Lightning connector, cameras, display, Touch ID, etc. This also complicates resolving RF desense issues during development (as in, "Why can't you just move that part/trace/via over there?")
>>>>True, but obviously Apple engineers have succeeded repeatedly year-after-year with highly density iPhone & iPad PCB's. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple are using one of several special (extra cost) PCB construction techniques to achieve the equally high density inner trace routing.
More board layers to accommodate the traces for those high pin density components like the A11. More layers equals higher cost circuit board panels.
>>>>And Apple don't mind paying a premium for it, either. It achieves their goals of a thin phone.
High part density and small components necessitate high-precision solder masking and part placement, i.e., newer, more expensive factory equipment. Heat dissipation also becomes more of an issue.
>>>>Samsung and others use the same small components necessitating the same high-precision parts placement. Solder masking isn't even used anymore in very small components (it is printed directly on the PCB).
I'm not decrying the Apple's use of higher density circuit boards, far from it. I'm merely pointing out that it's a con from a price-per-panel standpoint and a genuine pain for the hardware engineers and circuit board designers to develop when there's so little room to move or add parts, test points, etc. I suspect Apple does a large amount of EMFI simulation prior to releasing any board spin to prototyping, far more than I've had experience with.
And again, it's something Apple can afford to do because of their profit margins and production volumes. I spent almost ten years helping design Motorola cell phones; while the remnants of its cell phone division in Lenovo could utilize such techniques, today they literally can't afford to. The profit margins and volumes necessary to make it cost effective simply aren't there for them. Figuring out a way to remove even a single resistor from a board can make tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars difference in production costs over the production life of a phone. That's peanuts to Apple these days, but it's a big deal to most Android phone manufacturers.
Ack. I didn't mean "solder mask," I meant "solder stencil." Big, stainless steel things that work like silkscreens for solder paste. There's a bit of an art to optimizing the apertures so one gets a smidge more solder paste here and a wee bit less there.
Nice article, DED. This gives some food for thought. Admittedly there are many people (Android fans) out there who are not really happy with the new Google Pixels.
Not sure what "Android fans" you speak of. I follow the Pixel phone on Reddit and see post after post on how it is the best smartphone they ever owned. On the new Pixel there are features not available on any other phone. If those are important to you then you buy the phone. If wireless charging or a headphone jack is important then you do not. If you want iOS then obviously you are not going to buy the phone.
I carry an iPhone but have a Pixel 2 XL on order and excited to get the phone.
Never fails. DED posts an article and we get several single digit posters getting all worked up.
To paraphrase one of them - "sorry to hear Daniel pooped in your cornflakes".
I have more than single digit posts and will reply.
It is obvious the author has never touched a Pixel before. Not just first generation but most definitely the 2. They also do not realize a big issue on the Android side is a fluid experience and no slowdowns over time.
The Pixel gives by far the best Android experience you can get. So if you want Android you buy the Pixel. I carry both an iPhone and Android and I now prefer Android over iOS. There are just now so many things that I just feel Android has better but a huge one is notifications.
A recent experience is upgrading OS. Upgrading to iOS 11 is so much more of a hassle versus Android. On the Pixel it happens in place so no need to make space like on the iPhone or you have to plug your phone into a computer with the iPhone which feels so 90s and a big hassle.
The Pixel just does the upgrade in the background and boot and you are on the new version. But just one example.
My God the one-posters that crawled here have got to be the most stupid people I’ve encountered today.
Not following. The Pixel 2 has the best camera ever tested by DxO by a decent margin. Someone on here posted some photos of the Pixel 2 and they were the best I have ever seen from a smartphone camera and look far better than any from an iPhone. They are doing it with just one camera by using AI. The iPhone has a $27 camera part or 10% of the phone cost and costs as much as the entire SoC. But yet still inferior to the Google camera. Then this article that is filled with falsehoods and just silly things with so many hard to pick which is the more ridiculous and inaccurate.
How do you explain it? Come on man! It must be an Apple fan that is in fear.
Watch the Google show back to back against the Apple show and it was like Google was Apple and Apple was Microsoft or Samsung. I been a HUGE Apple fan for years and find it so sad where Apple has gone.
My God the one-posters that crawled here have got to be the most stupid people I’ve encountered today.
Not following. The Pixel 2 has the best camera ever tested by DxO by a decent margin. Someone on here posted some photos of the Pixel 2 and they were the best I have ever seen from a smartphone camera and look far better than any from an iPhone. They are doing it with just one camera by using AI. The iPhone has a $27 camera part or 10% of the phone cost and costs as much as the entire SoC. But yet still inferior to the Google camera. Then this article that is filled with falsehoods and just silly things with so many hard to pick which is the more ridiculous and inaccurate.
How do you explain it? Come on man! It must be an Apple fan that is in fear.
Watch the Google show back to back against the Apple show and it was like Google was Apple and Apple was Microsoft or Samsung. I been a HUGE Apple fan for years and find it so sad where Apple has gone.
Compare this
to
First DxO scores have been considered kinda dodgy by many for years...in particular the weighting system and in the case of smartphones not measuring using raw which both phones can produce.
Second both sensors are made by Sony and probably cost the about same for single camera. The primary difference is PDAF vs DPAF + Laser and maybe the Pixel one doesnt have a bayor filter.
They probably are the same generation Exmor RS baseline.
Personally, HEIF makes more of a difference to me than portrait blur and I'd rather Apple had included dual cameras on the 8 not because of portrait but because optical zoom matters. I use a moment case and moment tele when I bother to bring it. Having dual lenses on the camera is just much more convenient.
But hey, it's the internet. You are entitled to an ignorant opinion.
"In a departure from its earlier Nexus phones that aimed to deliver Android on a budget-- as well as Google's mantra about seeking to deliver $100 phones for people in developing countries--"
Well, how do you think they are going to pay for those sub-$100 phones? Subsidies via their "premium" phones sold to wealthy consumers in the rest of the world.
I didn't read all that, but pretty sure the only time you mentioned the Pixel 2 XL's larger, sharper screen was as a negative, which is ridiculous. The resolution and use of OLED almost certainly makes it better than the iPhone 8 Plus's (I'll admit I haven't used either, but do have both QHD OLED devices and True Tone devices at home and I know which I prefer.)
Also, in real world use that 4GB of RAM will likely be absolutely fine. It certainly is on my S7 Edge, a phone which runs basically just as fast as my iPad Pro 10.5 for all intents and purposes.
The Pixel 2 XL is overpriced, but this article looks to be seriously biased.
Didn't read the article and its fact-based observations, claims its biased nonetheless. Classic.
My God the one-posters that crawled here have got to be the most stupid people I’ve encountered today.
Not following. The Pixel 2 has the best camera ever tested by DxO by a decent margin. Someone on here posted some photos of the Pixel 2 and they were the best I have ever seen from a smartphone camera and look far better than any from an iPhone. They are doing it with just one camera by using AI. The iPhone has a $27 camera part or 10% of the phone cost and costs as much as the entire SoC. But yet still inferior to the Google camera. Then this article that is filled with falsehoods and just silly things with so many hard to pick which is the more ridiculous and inaccurate.
How do you explain it? Come on man! It must be an Apple fan that is in fear.
Watch the Google show back to back against the Apple show and it was like Google was Apple and Apple was Microsoft or Samsung. I been a HUGE Apple fan for years and find it so sad where Apple has gone.
Wow, lots of textbook Androidkiddies troll posts. The truth hurts. Try to be a bit more creative next time. I mean no one is buying things like: My partner ownes an iPhone and my Pixel is a million times better and now she thinks about switching.
I have been waiting for this piece to be written. It follows the same pattern as previous AI posts. Basically a VERY long screed made up of 1. Some facts that are objectively true 2. Some facts that are objectively false 3. Some things which are opinion presented as fact. 4. Some things which cannot be proven presented as fact 5. A heavy dose of hypocrisy 6. All of the above presented with a level of abject hatred towards all things Google.
I could go through and write a piece refuting this, but honestly it's not worth my time. So setting aside the fact that I think the author literally wakes up hating Google and dreaming of all the nasty things he can say about their products, he misses the point entirely. MacWorld didn't, however:
The long and short is that sure, just looking at the hardware, Apple makes faster, snazzier hardware. However, when you buy a phone these days you're buying hardware AND software. Google has basically decided that it wanted to make hardware that was good enough to not hold back its software. And it's done so. If you actually WATCH The keynote, it's all about AI and Machine Learning. The devices are there to provide a portal into that. We can benchmark and we can spec ourselves to death, but at the end of the day it's whether your phone does what you want it do quickly and efficiently. Sometimes on device (The "Always Listening" music ID works in airplane mode because it doesn't send stuff to google...it's ON DEVICE -- something the author apparently (deliberately?) missed). And sometimes in the cloud. If having the absolute fastest piece of hardware with the most expensive components is what you're about, buy an iPhone. If you want the best AI and integrated ML services, then you're probably gonna buy a Pixel. It's honestly that simple. Just because Google is doing better in AI and ML than Apple, doesn't mean Apple sucks at it. And just because Apple excels at making the sportscar of phones doesn't mean Google sucks at it. They are just focused on different things. In the end, if your phone is fast and smooth and you aren't waiting around on it, and it does cool stuff....you'll love your phone no matter what the spec sheet says. I realize the author cannot wrap his brain around this because it's nothing bug a fog of hate.
I would also be remiss in not calling out the hypocrisy of the author slamming Google over the headphone jack. First of all, as an aside, I'm in the camp that says BOTH companies were wrong to yank it. Lots of ink has been spilled on this so I'm not going into it. Didn't like it when Apple did it. Don't like it that Google did it. But to mock Google for making hay about it last year in their ads? Does anyone remember the Apple "thumb" ad arguing that the old small iPhones were the only suitable size for a phone because of the size of your hand/thumb? A year later out comes the giant plus size iPhone. Were you mocking then? Yeah didn't think so. EVERY company bashes what they don't got...until they add it.
And yeah, mock the camera if you want to, I've seen the shots, and in MOST cases, it is head and shoulders better than the iPhone camera. There are still issues with Google's bokeh, but since it's all done in software with machine learning, I won't have to wait a year for a new physical camera to see that improve. I expect as more and more machine learning happens, the camera software will get smarter about its depth mapping and subsequent processing.
Anyway, none of this is Apple bashing. The Apple phones are spectacular design accomplishments and speed demons...but the AI/Assistant features which are central to Google's phone are just way ahead of Siri on my iOS devices. If you don't care about this, enjoy your iPhone.
I have to say I'm always surprised by the paper-thin skin of the Android community. The moment they read a negative piece about their beloved platform, they sign up and post a dozen comments (usually without paragraphs or line breaks) arguing with commendable emotion but very little skill.
What they fail to understand is that sites like this are feeding off their insecurity. If you like Android then just use it; enjoy it! Invading Mac sites just looks like you lack confidence in your choice of platform and desperately need to convince others. I read a lot of the first or second time posters here, and with every post I thought the same thing: are you trying to convince me, or yourself?
It seems that the rate of Android invaders has stepped up across the internet over the past few weeks. I'm hoping that it's just the usual fear induced by an upcoming iPhone release, and not the symptom of a wider problem. I've only seen this level of invasive desperation twice before:
When Apple was on its knees just before Gil Amelio took over. When IBM was just about to can OS/2
I'm sure Android isn't on its last legs, but you chaps make it look like it's circling the drain.
The chances are you're doing more harm than good. Daniel's article will be forgotten about in 48 hours; the impression left by rabid Android users will last much longer.
The irony is that the level of stretching that the author has to do to bash every single weakness AND strength of the Pixels makes him look very very insecure with his iPhone. This is actually kind of pointless. No one sane believes the Pixel is any real threat to iPhone sales. Some tiny sliver of iPhone users (some of whom I know) have and will make the jump to Pixel and love it. but most will stay locked into Apple's ecosystem and won't even consider leaving. So why so much hate? I would think the author would be happy that Google is applying competitive pressure. For all the fanboys out there, NEITHER platform would where it is right now if they weren't competing with each other. Google is good for Apple. Apple is good for Google. We all win. We could write a VERY long comparison of all the stuff each side 'stole' from the other. At the end of the day, both companies focus on slightly different things and the phones we have are frickin' awesome as a result. I contemplated ordering an iPhone 8/X but at the end of the day, the camera and the AI features were what won the day for me. The phone is 'fast enough'. If I see it lagging and stuttering, I'll be pissed, sure. But from using the Pixel and knowing many people who've owned it, that seriously has not been a problem, specs or no specs.
Wow, lots of textbook Androidkiddies troll posts. The truth hurts. Try to be a bit more creative next time. I mean no one is buying things like: My partner ownes an iPhone and my Pixel is a million times better and now she thinks about switching.
you live in a bubble if you think it doesn't happen. I personally know several switchers who have switched to pixel and not looked back. Different reasons usually. Sometimes it's as simple as wanting something 'different'. Sometimes it's something else, but if you SERIOUSLY Tthink NO ONE is ever wanting to jump from iPhone to Pixel, you live in an alteranate reality. True a sizeable majority will stay locked into the Apple ecosystem, but there is always a percentage that has no problem hopping the fence. Deny if you like.
I didn't read all that, but pretty sure the only time you mentioned the Pixel 2 XL's larger, sharper screen was as a negative, which is ridiculous. The resolution and use of OLED almost certainly makes it better than the iPhone 8 Plus's (I'll admit I haven't used either, but do have both QHD OLED devices and True Tone devices at home and I know which I prefer.)
Also, in real world use that 4GB of RAM will likely be absolutely fine. It certainly is on my S7 Edge, a phone which runs basically just as fast as my iPad Pro 10.5 for all intents and purposes.
The Pixel 2 XL is overpriced, but this article looks to be seriously biased.
Didn't read the article and its fact-based observations, claims its biased nonetheless. Classic.
I read every word of it and I'll say it straight up. But of course it's biased. It's written by an Apple fan and no, it's not all 'fact-based'.
Comments
That might be the case but it is quite irrelevant from an Android handset perspective. The "bizarro world of starry-eyed Google-fandom" is literally miniscule in the bigger Android picture and we should not lose sight of that. Dedicating so many words to the Pixel release and partly linking its supposed failings to Android at every turn, ignores the fact that other vendors in fact do have almost everything you criticise the Pixels for lacking, including adequate specs, great pricing, sleek design and snappy performance - and I dare say that, on occasion, for half the price of an iPhone 8 too. This piece, although a dig at Google, is just as much of a dig at Android.
Those vendors ship units in the hundreds of millions, not the single digit millions of Google. They also sometimes add features to Android specifically to address its weak spots.
Mostly though, people simply don't run into problems that make them aware of many of the supposed limitations of Android. My 249€ Android opens and switches apps with no perceivable difference to an 800€ iPhone 6. I suppose the same can be said of newer phones for most users.
By the time AR actually becomes a household feature (if it ever does) Android handsets might have just as large a user base.
Although it's stating the obvious, those worlds of 'starry eyed fandom' also exist for Apple, Samsung, Huawei and many other vendors. In the case of Apple specifically, the same claims could be made on pricing and lacking features just a few weeks ago but many people in that world didn't care either.
I carry an iPhone but have a Pixel 2 XL on order and excited to get the phone.
How do you explain it? Come on man! It must be an Apple fan that is in fear.
Watch the Google show back to back against the Apple show and it was like Google was Apple and Apple was Microsoft or Samsung. I been a HUGE Apple fan for years and find it so sad where Apple has gone.
Compare this
to
Second both sensors are made by Sony and probably cost the about same for single camera. The primary difference is PDAF vs DPAF + Laser and maybe the Pixel one doesnt have a bayor filter.
They probably are the same generation Exmor RS baseline.
Personally, HEIF makes more of a difference to me than portrait blur and I'd rather Apple had included dual cameras on the 8 not because of portrait but because optical zoom matters. I use a moment case and moment tele when I bother to bring it. Having dual lenses on the camera is just much more convenient.
But hey, it's the internet. You are entitled to an ignorant opinion.
Well, how do you think they are going to pay for those sub-$100 phones? Subsidies via their "premium" phones sold to wealthy consumers in the rest of the world.
1) https://daringfireball.net/linked/2017/09/22/dxo-ratings-are-horseshit
That was written when the 8 had the highest score, by a guy who covers Apple. They were horseshit then, they're horseshit now.
2) Ah yes, the classic troll trope -- "I've always been an Apple fan!"
You lost bro!?
1. Some facts that are objectively true
2. Some facts that are objectively false
3. Some things which are opinion presented as fact.
4. Some things which cannot be proven presented as fact
5. A heavy dose of hypocrisy
6. All of the above presented with a level of abject hatred towards all things Google.
I could go through and write a piece refuting this, but honestly it's not worth my time. So setting aside the fact that I think the author literally wakes up hating Google and dreaming of all the nasty things he can say about their products, he misses the point entirely. MacWorld didn't, however:
https://www.macworld.com/article/3230303/internet-of-things/hey-siri-google-assistant-is-winning-the-ai-game-and-its-not-even-close.html
The long and short is that sure, just looking at the hardware, Apple makes faster, snazzier hardware. However, when you buy a phone these days you're buying hardware AND software. Google has basically decided that it wanted to make hardware that was good enough to not hold back its software. And it's done so. If you actually WATCH The keynote, it's all about AI and Machine Learning. The devices are there to provide a portal into that. We can benchmark and we can spec ourselves to death, but at the end of the day it's whether your phone does what you want it do quickly and efficiently. Sometimes on device (The "Always Listening" music ID works in airplane mode because it doesn't send stuff to google...it's ON DEVICE -- something the author apparently (deliberately?) missed). And sometimes in the cloud. If having the absolute fastest piece of hardware with the most expensive components is what you're about, buy an iPhone. If you want the best AI and integrated ML services, then you're probably gonna buy a Pixel. It's honestly that simple. Just because Google is doing better in AI and ML than Apple, doesn't mean Apple sucks at it. And just because Apple excels at making the sportscar of phones doesn't mean Google sucks at it. They are just focused on different things. In the end, if your phone is fast and smooth and you aren't waiting around on it, and it does cool stuff....you'll love your phone no matter what the spec sheet says. I realize the author cannot wrap his brain around this because it's nothing bug a fog of hate.
I would also be remiss in not calling out the hypocrisy of the author slamming Google over the headphone jack. First of all, as an aside, I'm in the camp that says BOTH companies were wrong to yank it. Lots of ink has been spilled on this so I'm not going into it. Didn't like it when Apple did it. Don't like it that Google did it. But to mock Google for making hay about it last year in their ads? Does anyone remember the Apple "thumb" ad arguing that the old small iPhones were the only suitable size for a phone because of the size of your hand/thumb? A year later out comes the giant plus size iPhone. Were you mocking then? Yeah didn't think so. EVERY company bashes what they don't got...until they add it.
And yeah, mock the camera if you want to, I've seen the shots, and in MOST cases, it is head and shoulders better than the iPhone camera. There are still issues with Google's bokeh, but since it's all done in software with machine learning, I won't have to wait a year for a new physical camera to see that improve. I expect as more and more machine learning happens, the camera software will get smarter about its depth mapping and subsequent processing.
Anyway, none of this is Apple bashing. The Apple phones are spectacular design accomplishments and speed demons...but the AI/Assistant features which are central to Google's phone are just way ahead of Siri on my iOS devices. If you don't care about this, enjoy your iPhone.
Appears you do have time, just nothing interesting to say.
Huh, who said that a while back, I wonder? Oh, right; Steve Jobs at D… 7, I think it was. Talking about buying the thing that would become Siri.
Okay, thanks for admitting that Android is held back by its hardware (and coding).
Google's all about the integration. Can't have their products doing things without their knowledge, now can they?
Both Apple and Dell were "wrong" to yank ADB and PS/2 ports, too. In two more years no one will cry over 3.5 mm.
Yes. Because hands DON'T go that big.
Ah yes, software camera features–a photographer's dream…