Can the Google phone work with Apple Photos seamlessly? And will I have to use Google photos along with Google Mail, Google Calendar and Google Chrome?
Not in a hundred years.
I'm pretty sure if Apple wanted to make things more convenient for dual platform smartphone owners and develop Play Store apps to enable using those services Google would welcome it just as they have other Apple apps. You should suggest it. More voices mean more likelihood it happens.
Can the Google phone work with Apple Photos seamlessly? And will I have to use Google photos along with Google Mail, Google Calendar and Google Chrome?
Not in a hundred years.
I'm pretty sure if Apple wanted to make things more convenient for dual platform smartphone owners and develop Play Store apps to enable using those services Google would welcome it just as they have other Apple apps. You should suggest it. More voices mean more likelihood it happens.
I would never suggest this because I detest everything made and operated by Google. My opinion and everyone else can have theirs.
The conceit of this article is that it claims the processing advantage for the iPhone isn't important because "you're getting a smartphone that can more than handle most tasks a user may present it in either case" while also proceeding to claim that the difference in cameras and displays are important simply because of the spec difference. The reality is that the "handle most tasks" dismissal is equally true for the cameras/displays too.
I was also struck the offhand dismissal of a 66% CPU performance advantage.
I can imagine that potential customer for such devices, are using their smartphone mainly for browsing, taking pictures and interacting with social media. For such use the performance of CPU of both devices is excellent. I don't mind if something takes 0.15 sec or 0.20 sec, i won't notice the difference
If I am using my smartphone a lot for heavy workloads (video editing, top games, ...), I would not look at both devices, I would buy a flagship. So
indeed in a comparison between the iPhone SE and the Google Pixel 6a
the performance is not the top priority.
I dare even say that for the market that both devices are targeting, the screen size is really important and there the Pixel 6a wins clearly.
I recently replaced my 11pro with a 13pro and the increase in browser performance (on WiFi) was definitely perceptible. That’s a smaller CPU difference than what’s involved here. You have to go back to the iPhone X or XS to get similar CPU performance as the pixel.
I agree that iPhone XS web browsing is adequate, but there is a very perceptible difference even with web browsing.
I’m not saying the pixel isn’t the right choice for some users — it does appear to have a better screen and better camera system. I’m just saying the CPU difference is more meaningful than the write up made it seem.
Not an Android user, but impressed by the product - not spec by spec - but by the aesthetics and a more contemporary overall package and design. I hope Apple will update the next SE to be more in line with what consumers expect.
Exactly. Many like that. LG was like that, but they left the mobile market. Samsung and Google are like that as we can see. It is not about spec by spec, but about design and functionality to the task. Sure at the top of game we will have other challengers and Apple is probably on the top, but that is not exactly what regular people need for daily. That is why in Europe adoption of iPhone is far lower. It is simply game of cost effectiveness to actual use.
It is better to pay lower price for solid product and renew every few years. Sure Apple supports mobile devices for 5 years and they do work that long and longer, but their displays go yellow tint within 2 years and they become as slow as it gets with new iOS version with every release (not to mention battery life dropping). If we are to live with those factors then okay, but let's get less expensive models with solid key functions (excellent sound, very good screen, good camera and system with security updates). We will change that every 3 years for number of reasons anyway. Some do change Apple mobile devices more frequently to have 15 minutes of bragging rights and paying premiums to Apple. Most people do not do that.
We use both Android and iPhone in household. In fact, one person has two phones and one is new iPhone and another is Android... at the same time. Both are renewed evey few years either. There is a space for both.
Can the Google phone work with Apple Photos seamlessly? And will I have to use Google photos along with Google Mail, Google Calendar and Google Chrome?
Not in a hundred years.
Why? Is everybody in need of this? So do not be picky. Be mature.
The conceit of this article is that it claims the processing advantage for the iPhone isn't important because "you're getting a smartphone that can more than handle most tasks a user may present it in either case" while also proceeding to claim that the difference in cameras and displays are important simply because of the spec difference. The reality is that the "handle most tasks" dismissal is equally true for the cameras/displays too.
I was also struck the offhand dismissal of a 66% CPU performance advantage.
Because most phones are used to make calls - not to play with apps. So performance by numbers is pointless in most of uses. If you play on it that is okay - go the top performance model, but do no expect most people go for it. They do not care.
Not an Android user, but impressed by the product - not spec by spec - but by the aesthetics and a more contemporary overall package and design. I hope Apple will update the next SE to be more in line with what consumers expect.
"What consumers expect"... because the Pixel 6a exceeds in a few areas, consumer expectations will always be unsatisfied. If the 6a came in under all of the specs, with the SE holding the crown, how would consumer expectations fare then?
I do admit, Google is doing a fantastic job, as are other phone manufacturers. I own a Motorola G as a testing device, and I'm impressed by it. It was just a $350.00 phone, but performs equally as well as my 2018 XR. iOS is still far superior to Android in terms of pure elegance of the UX, but the gap has been closing fast! Android has really caught up.
So, with hardware and software now being excellent in both camps, all that's left is the UX on the device and with (paid) services... the ecosystem.
Give it to your teenage kid and see there face drop……
Yes. Give it to your kid an average commuter car like Toyota instead of Porsche and see the face drop too. What is your point? Spoiling juvenile people with expensive toys? See the outcomes later when you have your own kids.
So, with hardware and software now being excellent in both camps, all that's left is the UX on the device and with (paid) services... the ecosystem.
Well, and also the interconnectedness of hardware & software that allows for things like handoff, airdrop, and quick-syncing between devices like AirPods that the Google system will never be able to touch.
Can the Google phone work with Apple Photos seamlessly? And will I have to use Google photos along with Google Mail, Google Calendar and Google Chrome?
The conceit of this article is that it claims the processing advantage for the iPhone isn't important because "you're getting a smartphone that can more than handle most tasks a user may present it in either case" while also proceeding to claim that the difference in cameras and displays are important simply because of the spec difference. The reality is that the "handle most tasks" dismissal is equally true for the cameras/displays too.
I was also struck the offhand dismissal of a 66% CPU performance advantage.
Because most phones are used to make calls
I can’t tell — are you saying that tongue in cheek or do you really believe it?
In case you’re serious — I think browsing, photography, and non-telephonic communication (instant messaging etc) are the main uses. A12-level performance is *adequate* for those tasks, but 66% greater CPU performance does make a perceptible difference.
by way of analogy, 0-60 in 6 seconds is definitely adequate. But you can absolutely perceive the difference between that and 4 seconds.
Comments
It is better to pay lower price for solid product and renew every few years. Sure Apple supports mobile devices for 5 years and they do work that long and longer, but their displays go yellow tint within 2 years and they become as slow as it gets with new iOS version with every release (not to mention battery life dropping). If we are to live with those factors then okay, but let's get less expensive models with solid key functions (excellent sound, very good screen, good camera and system with security updates). We will change that every 3 years for number of reasons anyway. Some do change Apple mobile devices more frequently to have 15 minutes of bragging rights and paying premiums to Apple. Most people do not do that.
We use both Android and iPhone in household. In fact, one person has two phones and one is new iPhone and another is Android... at the same time. Both are renewed evey few years either. There is a space for both.
In case you’re serious — I think browsing, photography, and non-telephonic communication (instant messaging etc) are the main uses. A12-level performance is *adequate* for those tasks, but 66% greater CPU performance does make a perceptible difference.
by way of analogy, 0-60 in 6 seconds is definitely adequate. But you can absolutely perceive the difference between that and 4 seconds.