steven n.

rogifan_new said:

1983 said:

So basically just another Google bashing article here then.

Amazing how things that are supposedly so unimportant get so much ink here. Sure tech sites cover Google hardware. I have yet to see these new phones get much outside of tech press though. Interesting too how market share doesn’t matter except when it’s someone not named Apple. Then low market share is  equated to failure.

gatorguy said:

I think the writer's main story premise may be wrong, making the entire article suspect. 

Neither LG nor HTC built the Pixel 3/3XL AFAICT. Google used Foxconn according to industry sources, as consistently reported since back in May, so all the talk around LG and HTC's smartphone business is nice and all but really has little to nothing to do with this years Pixel 3's. 

HTC may have still have had some early engineering work invested, and probably did, since Google didn't take control of the team behind it until early this year, perhaps in January? I'd have to check the news.  By generation 4 next year Google will be out of excuses, it's all on them whether they can demonstrate any design prowess or not. But HTC and LG building this year's Pixels as assumed in the article? I don't think so. The two designs being so very similar should have been an obvious red flag that two different manufacturers hadn't designed and built them. Just looks at last year's models compared to this year. 

IMO Alphabet has picked a bad time to jump into the business with both feet, but whatever. Smartphones have become a bit boring to be honest, not much flashiness and oooh features being seen the past year or so from anyone. What there is seems more related to AI/computational enhancements for things like phone calls, photos, and smart device control.  If Alphabet can actually pull an oooh-and-aahh phone out of its hat next year it will come as a stunner, but I'm not holding my breath. IMO smartphones are stagnating more than stunning us. 

franklinjackcon said:

This article is looking at Google through an Apple lens rather than a Google one. Pixel is just one element in Google's mobile strategy. They make more money by getting their services into the hands of more people - whether they are using a Pixel, a Galaxy, an iPhone, a desktop or a home device. The Pixel phones are ugly as anything on the market but they focus on bringing the standard of camera right up and providing a platform to showcase their services. If this drives all of their Android partners to work harder then Google wins. Apple makes money from hardware sales, Google makes it from eyeballs and ears. Also, I don't think you can say that Google has failed in hardware. Chromecasts, Nest, and Home devices are all incredibly successful. Google's business model doesn't require it to make a profit on the hardware, it's a channel for its services and advertising.