The decision between the iPhone 7 and the Pixel really comes down to software. I just ordered a Pixel XL because I prefer Android, because I like the VR support, and because I prefer Google's online services to Apple's. I also like the USB C support and the standard headphone jack. Whether one phone is a bit faster than the other doesn't really matter to me.
As noted, the Pixel has 4GB of RAM. It also doesn't have a weak processor. It may or may not be weaker than the A10 Fusion, but it's just about the best mobile processor available outside that (at least on paper).
The issue from what I understand is more that Android requires more power and doesn't have the same unity between hardware and software as iOS. Though anyone who's used both high end Apple and Android phones should be able to tell you that there's no real discernible difference. Benchmarking scores are all well and good, but when a phone instantly does everything you want it to the differences are irrelevant. It also has some features the iPhone 7 doesn't have.
That said, it is over-priced. The iPhone 7 / 7 Plus are too, but the Apple brand is big enough to support the pricing, I'm not sure Google (as a hardware brand) is.
This is not true.
The current king of Android speed S7 got absolutely demolished by the iPhone7 in real world tests.
It took the S7 3 minutes and 14 seconds. It took the Iphone7 only 1 minute and 40 seconds.
Those are significant real world differences.
In real world use all the higher end smartphones are now so well-spec'd and nicely built with very good OS'es there's not all that much difference for most folks IMHO. Sure there's some that would absolutely benefit from an iPhone's better speeds and zippier performance, but like with really nice luxury cars most drivers won't ever need to go from 0-60 in under 5 sec, or drive at a top speed of 160+. They won't really be missing out on much if anything by forgoing performance engines, but still getting some upscale driver features.
I think people here aren't going to like this, but iOS/Siri is more of a liability for Apple than it's ever been since the first iPhone. Pixel is basically trying to sell itself on software and artificial intelligence. They are selling this as their A.I. phone. You can giggle about the spec wars, but you're missing the big picture that Google has surpassed Apple in software years ago, and Google is going to drive their "information" advantage into a hardware war that wont be about who has the faster CPU or most RAM.
I can only imagine in 2030 it's really about what company has the bigger server farms, artificial neural networking and machine learning algorithms that determines which product makes consumers lives the easiest. Not some display resolution or wide color gamut.
Google has the long game here. We're still figuring out what Apple has besides their phone at this point.
You're imagining a world where everyone stops working except Google. The truth is that Google is far better at services. But Android itself is a major liability. Who in their right mind would spend what the Pixel costs with not just inferior specs, but running the liability that is Android. From a purely value equation, a consumer is risking their privacy, risk malware, and risk a purchase that will most likely not be kept up to date and abandoned in a a few short years as precedent has shown. And all in an uglier package.
Google is fantastic at services and will no doubt continue to exceed in that, but the vessels to their services in Android is a major problem. No amount of specs in hardware or free services will offset that fact for people who are willing to pay for a premium product. It HAS to be a premium product to have a premium asking price.
And those great Google service are also available in a truly premium product like the iPhone. So again, who in their right mind would pay a premium price for a second rate product? As long as any device runs Android it is not a premium product, it will always be a second rate product. Look at Samsung, a company truly able to compete hardware wise with Apple, ...but their Galaxy line no matter how great their hardware, are always seen as second rate to the iPhone for that very fact. That it runs a second rate software. A shiny package can't change that.
Android looks destined to be an OS for a low margin, low cost commodity gadget than what Samsung or the Pixel pretend it to be.
As noted, the Pixel has 4GB of RAM. It also doesn't have a weak processor. It may or may not be weaker than the A10 Fusion, but it's just about the best mobile processor available outside that (at least on paper).
The issue from what I understand is more that Android requires more power and doesn't have the same unity between hardware and software as iOS. Though anyone who's used both high end Apple and Android phones should be able to tell you that there's no real discernible difference. Benchmarking scores are all well and good, but when a phone instantly does everything you want it to the differences are irrelevant. It also has some features the iPhone 7 doesn't have.
That said, it is over-priced. The iPhone 7 / 7 Plus are too, but the Apple brand is big enough to support the pricing, I'm not sure Google (as a hardware brand) is.
I 100% agree with you. We are at a point where the technological ability of hardware far exceeds most software. Going bigger has a diminished real world effect.
The same can also be said for display technology. There is still room for improvement, but, for the most part, what the human eye is capable of distinguishing has long been passed.
As noted, the Pixel has 4GB of RAM. It also doesn't have a weak processor. It may or may not be weaker than the A10 Fusion, but it's just about the best mobile processor available outside that (at least on paper).
The issue from what I understand is more that Android requires more power and doesn't have the same unity between hardware and software as iOS. Though anyone who's used both high end Apple and Android phones should be able to tell you that there's no real discernible difference. Benchmarking scores are all well and good, but when a phone instantly does everything you want it to the differences are irrelevant. It also has some features the iPhone 7 doesn't have.
That said, it is over-priced. The iPhone 7 / 7 Plus are too, but the Apple brand is big enough to support the pricing, I'm not sure Google (as a hardware brand) is.
This is not true.
The current king of Android speed S7 got absolutely demolished by the iPhone7 in real world tests.
It took the S7 3 minutes and 14 seconds. It took the Iphone7 only 1 minute and 40 seconds.
Those are significant real world differences.
That benchmark mostly seems to measure starting up a lot of applications. That's certainly not a CPU benchmark. Android generally launches apps slower, but it's not clear that that matters, given how rarely people start up apps on Android.
Google always price its hardware at much higher profit margin than Apple. Remember Google TV selling for around $400? It failed. Remember Google Glass selling for $2000? It failed. This is a Google liability. Google main business is selling ads. The profit margin is 100%. For hardware 50% is only for highly successful products. Google selling hardware will drag down its profit margin significantly. Some pundits even suggest Google should open retail stores copying Apple like Microsoft. But retail business the profit margin is even lower.
The reason Google sold Motorola at a loss of billions of dollars after buying it for a a couple years because Google can afford losses from Motorola unit.
I think people here aren't going to like this, but iOS/Siri is more of a liability for Apple than it's ever been since the first iPhone. Pixel is basically trying to sell itself on software and artificial intelligence. They are selling this as their A.I. phone. You can giggle about the spec wars, but you're missing the big picture that Google has surpassed Apple in software years ago, and Google is going to drive their "information" advantage into a hardware war that wont be about who has the faster CPU or most RAM.
I can only imagine in 2030 it's really about what company has the bigger server farms, artificial neural networking and machine learning algorithms that determines which product makes consumers lives the easiest. Not some display resolution or wide color gamut.
Google has the long game here. We're still figuring out what Apple has besides their phone at this point.
For this reason, I think Yahoo is a good buy for Apple. Yahoo has gathered information much longer than Google.
The launch screams, "no investment" by Alphabet. Hence it was low key, super short, used only commodity components, available only through Verizon, and priced high compared to it's market, Android competitors (iPhone is not a competitor). Pixel will be a minority product in the US and much smaller in the rest of the world. It packs a lot of pixels into the screens, requiring a much bigger battery - nearly 2X in both cases vs iPhone 7. But this will not cause switching from iPhone. Samsung, with a superior phone, will loss business to Pixel, due to battery issues.
I watched this keynote, it was really pathetic how it felt like a cheap clone of an iPhone keynote, with the exact same phrases ripped out of Apple keynotes from the last decade, from "convergence of hardware and software" to "it just works" to "end to end control" and "vertical integration". The result? A product that looks like a cheap iPhone 6 knockoff from 2 years ago (complete with antenna lines and a chin, even though it doesnt need to accomodate a home button), with worse performance, less features, no brand equity or retail/support, and same price point. And none of the "advantages" that Android fans squeal about compared to the iPhone (SD slots, removable batteries, more ports, etc etc). Well done, Google.
Wide color gamut is not a feature - If the screen is beautiful, the screen is beautiful. Nobody cares about wide color gamut.
Actually, the end result (lack of result, that is) is in the fact that Android doesn't know how to handle color management...without which a "beautiful screen" isn't gonna help, sadly. In the absense of the aforementioned CM, sRGB colors, placed in P3 color space will be oversaturated and incorrect. And, despite what you said, wide gamut along with high contrast and enought color bit depth should bring more realistic colors to PEDs, hence it is not a gimmick.
I was actually surprized when I tried to snap a picture of a flower with my iPhone. The flower had petals of that purple-blueish color, which normally gets displayed wrongly even on a professional level of equipment (like Nikon DXXX level cameras). But because CM was followed through and through, the color of the actual flower and its image were quite close. Calibrated devices, along with a working CM pipeline, is what really allows you to use a screen to its full potential.
Google used the Pixel to launch its Daydream VR. It's too bad that Apple does not have a VR SDK and hardware spec for the iPhone because the iPhone 7 Plus would destroy the Pixel with its vastly better performance and wide color support.
The main things Android and the Pixel have to prove is that their phones will not need to be physically reset constantly when apps or hardware cause the device to freeze. That was my main problem when I was on Verizon before the iPhone was launched on the network.
The second thing that it needs to prove, is that it three short years later the latest Android version will be made available to run on it. Again as a former Android user, that was a major factor in forgetting Android, just as Android and device makers forgot you as soon as you bought their handset. You were abandoned immediately as a concern to them as soon as you were suckered into buying.
Third, is safety. Android has a major malware and privacy problem that doesn't seem to have a solution or even seems to be a concern to Android.
So there you have it. The problem with the Pixel or any other Android device is Android itself.
The Pixel has fail written all over it as you can get a far cheaper device running Android with equal specs. For Android and the Pixel to not be seen as a second rate OS, it has to stop being a second rate OS.
Same reason I left Android as well. Got forgotten with updates and told by Motorola l have to get their newest phone at the time. Of course a pure Android phone should not have that problem but not going back.
The iPhone 7 Plus at the same price nearly doubles the single core score and trounces the multi-core score. Sure the Snapdragon 821 seems to be the best available processor for Android, but it pales in comparison to desktop-class processors built by Apple.
The other problem Android has... Apple can put all of that power to good use with an integrated software/hardware ecosystem. Android has required more horsepower to produce similar results.
Google used the Pixel to launch its Daydream VR. It's too bad that Apple does not have a VR SDK and hardware spec for the iPhone because the iPhone 7 Plus would destroy the Pixel with its vastly better performance and wide color support.
It would need a much higher screen resolution than it does now.
Comments
The truth is that Google is far better at services. But Android itself is a major liability. Who in their right mind would spend what the Pixel costs with not just inferior specs, but running the liability that is Android. From a purely value equation, a consumer is risking their privacy, risk malware, and risk a purchase that will most likely not be kept up to date and abandoned in a a few short years as precedent has shown. And all in an uglier package.
Google is fantastic at services and will no doubt continue to exceed in that, but the vessels to their services in Android is a major problem. No amount of specs in hardware or free services will offset that fact for people who are willing to pay for a premium product. It HAS to be a premium product to have a premium asking price.
And those great Google service are also available in a truly premium product like the iPhone. So again, who in their right mind would pay a premium price for a second rate product?
As long as any device runs Android it is not a premium product, it will always be a second rate product. Look at Samsung, a company truly able to compete hardware wise with Apple, ...but their Galaxy line no matter how great their hardware, are always seen as second rate to the iPhone for that very fact. That it runs a second rate software. A shiny package can't change that.
Android looks destined to be an OS for a low margin, low cost commodity gadget than what Samsung or the Pixel pretend it to be.
The same can also be said for display technology. There is still room for improvement, but, for the most part, what the human eye is capable of distinguishing has long been passed.
That benchmark mostly seems to measure starting up a lot of applications. That's certainly not a CPU benchmark. Android generally launches apps slower, but it's not clear that that matters, given how rarely people start up apps on Android.
The reason Google sold Motorola at a loss of billions of dollars after buying it for a a couple years because Google can afford losses from Motorola unit.
For this reason, I think Yahoo is a good buy for Apple. Yahoo has gathered information much longer than Google.
It packs a lot of pixels into the screens, requiring a much bigger battery - nearly 2X in both cases vs iPhone 7. But this will not cause switching from iPhone. Samsung, with a superior phone, will loss business to Pixel, due to battery issues.
In the absense of the aforementioned CM, sRGB colors, placed in P3 color space will be oversaturated and incorrect.
And, despite what you said, wide gamut along with high contrast and enought color bit depth should bring more realistic colors to PEDs, hence it is not a gimmick.
I was actually surprized when I tried to snap a picture of a flower with my iPhone. The flower had petals of that purple-blueish color, which normally gets displayed wrongly even on a professional level of equipment (like Nikon DXXX level cameras). But because CM was followed through and through, the color of the actual flower and its image were quite close. Calibrated devices, along with a working CM pipeline, is what really allows you to use a screen to its full potential.
http://daringfireball.net/linked/2016/09/14/geekbench-android-a10
The Snapdragon 821 is clocking a geekbench single core score of 1850 and multi core of 4378:
http://wccftech.com/qualcomm-snapdragon-821-asus-zenfone-benchmarks/
The iPhone 7 Plus at the same price nearly doubles the single core score and trounces the multi-core score. Sure the Snapdragon 821 seems to be the best available processor for Android, but it pales in comparison to desktop-class processors built by Apple.
The other problem Android has... Apple can put all of that power to good use with an integrated software/hardware ecosystem. Android has required more horsepower to produce similar results.