Yeah, Apple killed headphone jacks on the iPhone. But they also:
1) Gave you lightning headphones that work on all iPhones
2) Have 3rd party lightning headphones that all work on all iPhones
3) Gave you a lightning to 3.5mm headphone adapter that worked on all iPhones with whatever regular 3.5mm headphones you previously used with your phones
4) Made better bluetooth earbuds for moving away from wired headphones entirely
Android manufacturers have not matched that with USB-C audio. They just copied "Step 0) Remove the headphone jack."
The Pixel 3 will include USB C headphones and a dongle . They have worked with Bose and other manufacturers on new bluetooth headphones that have additional functionality (switching between apps, talking with the assistant app). 
And there are _very_ few third-party options that work with the Pixel lineup -- not necessarily Google's fault, but early adopters of the no-3.5mm trend are being punished while the market catches up.
Also, I already have headphones. I don't want Google's USB C headphones. They wouldn't need to include any of this junk with the phone if they didn't remove the jack in the first place.
Yeah, they'll include a dongle that will break in less than a year with very casual use. Ask me how I know.
Also, I already have headphones. I don't want Google's USB C headphones. They wouldn't need to include any of this junk with the phone if they didn't remove the jack in the first place.
This is not the model I have, but I've something very similar by Anker https://www.amazon.com/Roav-Bluetooth-Noise-Cancellation-Int...
EDIT: Sidenote, I don't know how much I'd trust cheap bluetooth adapters re: security... there is a non-zero chance it's spewing my conversations out, ripe for anyone w/ the proper equipment to listen in. <Tin Hat />
Supply chain issues notwithstanding, I think you're pretty safe with a CSR bluetooth chip - they're in everything. Whether it's a clone or an original though, no idea.
You can say that's not Google's fault, and that it doesn't apply to Pixel devices specifically. But like it or not, Google chose to vomit their platform across dozens of manufacturers and thousands of devices. If they didn't want the kind of chaotic inconsistency exampled above, they should have gone with the iPhone/Pixel approach from the beginning.
If the headphone cable breaks and you buy replacement USB-C earbuds from another manufacturer, will it work with Google’s phones? Or will Google’s earbuds work with your partner’s non-Pixel phone?
The point I want to make is that’s not a question you need to ask with Lightning or 3.5mm headphones. With USB-C you do.
I think what you're really saying here is that you like the fact that the IPhone has huge market share. That's a fair position to hold, but I personally vastly prefer open standards that can be implemented by anyone to closed ones.
EX: "Why USB-C audio still doesn't work" https://www.pcworld.com/article/3284186/mobile/bring-back-th...
Other manufacturers are doing... less well.
Uh... Apple's solution is Lightning-only, Google's is a standard USB thing. Surely the argument goes exactly the other way.
> If the headphone cable breaks and you buy replacement USB-C earbuds from another manufacturer, will it work with Google’s phones?
Yes, it does, because this is a standard USB-C signal. You're asserting stuff that simply isn't true.
Since some phones can output an analog audio signal over the USB-C connector (and ship dongles without a DAC), while others output digital only and rely on the dongle including its own DAC, the argument absolutely does not go the other way. Any lightning headphones or lighting to 3.5mm dongle will work on any phone with a lightning port.
EDIT: Here's a separate complaint - if you want to charge an iPhone while you have headphones plugged in, there are at least splitter/dongle accessories for that. USB-C Android phone? Good luck.
>Android Police reported that Google quietly pulled the listing for the one adapter it had in its online store without ever selling it. The product is also unavailable on the manufacturer’s website. According to Android Police, a few units did ship from Amazon, but the reviews were so bad that the product was quickly pulled.
Comments on that page point to this one on Amazon, looking very similar but a lot cheaper, with positive reviews: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07FCZY1ZB/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_T2qV....
I've got a USB-C Note 8 (and the same would be true of the newer S9/Note 9 generation) and it's got no problem charging while using headphones, since Samsung—the leading Android handset maker—hasn’t dropped the 3.5mm jack and, indeed, doubled down on it by including premium AKG wired earbuds after other smartphone manufacturers started axing the jack.
the shock is that apple and samsung both decide to make very expensive products, that implements the "cheap" options as a way to lock consumers. ...and there is a fool born every second, as the saying goes.
did samsung had to omit the ADC in their dongle? no. did apple had to omit the other bus protocols in theirs? no. their price and volume could have literally made the dongles cheaper with all the features. but doing so lock all the fools in for upgrades and prevent brand move.
Come to think of it, I don't think autocorrect would catch this anyway.
> You can also continue to use short-range Bluetooth accessories, like wireless keyboards.
I use my BT headphones when traveling all the time.
EDIT to add the official policy: "Air Canada is happy to announce that, beginning on April 1, 2018, passengers on our flights will be able to use their personal headphones (of any kind) on our in-flight entertainment system or their personal mobile devices. This service is available from gate to gate at any time, except, of course, while the safety video is being played. Please note that wireless or Bluetooth headphones may be used only on flights with WiFi, because of their technology."
My flight was definitely a non-wifi flight, so I guess that was the issue?
My Bose AE2 wireless headphones are wireless, but also come with an audio jack for wired connectivity.
It's not only on international flights. They'll do it on reasonably long domestic flights as well (e.g. JFK→DEN).
I mean I don’t think I can prove that literally every airline does allow Bluetooth headphones, but see previous comments where the FAA approved Bluetooth headphones for use in 2013, maybe you could provide a specific airline which does not allow Bluetooth headphones?
Versus "uses a standard that more than one vendor will license".
Yet you seem to think the first is better.
I have a iPhone XS. I had really nice headphones. I despise the headphone adapter, it's horrible in my pockets and I am waiting for the cord to fray just like my Macbook power cables do.
"Go all in on Apple" or "sucks to be you" are very polarizing options.
(And complaining that it's horrible in your pocket is just stupid. If you hate wires in your pocket, you should be first in line to get wireless headphones. I bought QC35s and they've been the best, most used headphones I've ever owned—and I've got some very fancy "high end" cans.)
Even placing it at top right seemed more sensible than splitting in 2. Can't comment on the reality or in day to day use as I never encountered a v20. They were never released here.
Well, except Samsung. Who, IIRC, is has by far the highest flagship sales of any Android handset vendor; they not only kept the headset jack but for the last couple generations have started tearing the premium wired earbuds they are not including as a selling feature.
I don’t know anyone with Pixel earbuds, but their reviews online aren’t stellar.
Except with, you know, the large majority of the phones in the market today.
As long as you use the cables that came with each device, you're great. If you're buying aftermarket accessories, research carefully, and best-case find a review from someone with the exact same set of devices and cables.
I say this as a USB-C laptop owner. The either-orientation plugs are great, the charging from whichever side of the computer is more convenient is great. But just because a cable says it supports DisplayPort alternate mode with multi-stream transport at 4K/60Hz doesn't mean it's going to work.
EDIT - actually more to the point, just because it has USB-C at one end and DisplayPort at the other, doesn't mean it supports multi-stream transport at 4K/60Hz. Right port shapes? Check. Does what you expect it to when you plug it into your gadgets? Flip a coin. And then put your screen into DisplayPort 1.2 30Hz compatibility mode and pretend the low refresh rate doesn't bother you. It's a standards compliant cable, just not the right part of the standard.
I think of bluetooth earbuds as this generations skipping CD's. It's totally unnecessary though. They could have waited.
The new stuff can work 50+ feet away, through walls, etc.
Bluetooth reliability is better than any other headphones, battery life is impressive for how tiny they are, pairing (with iOS/macOS) works better than other bluetooth devices, the charging case is better thought out than other "true wireless" earbuds. Customer satisfaction surveys are ridiculously positive (IIRC 98% or 99%).
I haven't bought them yet myself (just because they cost money), but maybe when the 2nd gen comes out I'll take another look.
* Wireless charging case
* More controls (perhaps touch sensitive long-press for Siri)
* Better switching between iOS/macOS (or generally - better support in macOS)
* Stereo mic support
* Native lavalier mic support in iOS camera
* One-device-multiple-airpods support
* Much much much lower price
* Thinner case
* Hearing aid feature (iOS 12 sort of does it via iPhone mic)
All that said, it's my favourite Apple product in past decade.
I can just tap the side of my wool cap with thick-ass winter gloves and it works. If it was touch sensitive, I'd need to take off my gloves, pull the cap over my ear and fiddle with the earpiece. No thanks.
> Be civil. Don't say things you wouldn't say face-to-face. Don't be snarky. Comments should get more civil and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.
> Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents.
> Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something.
The Pixel 3 XL leaks looked so bad, I really thought it would end up being a troll. Nope.
Nothing compelling or exciting, yet so many questions...
o Do people really need a tablet that you can't take with you?
o Why the notch and that huge chin?
o Can't phone speakers be thinner?
o So, you're just going to keep those underwhelming ear-buds from last year?
Google, stick to Software.
What do you mean?
As it is, I will probably go with Nokia, even though they are now on USB-C as well.
>Anything Apple introduces to replace Touch ID must be more secure than that.
And that's the key, on android face-unlock doesn't replace fingerprint, it adds and additional option if you want it.
I personally would absolutely not unless face-id style things became MUCH more powerful.
The only reason I have face-unlock enabled on my android device is for the occasions where the phone is face-up on the table, in it's dock on my desk, or when I lived in a colder climate and I would sometimes be wearing gloves.
I don't want to have to look directly at my screen in most cases, I don't want to have to wait any time at all while I bring the phone toward my eyes to have it unlock, I don't want to have to "focus" on it before it lets me in.
When I use a fingerprint scanner on a mobile device, it is normally unlocked a fraction of a second after it's out of my pocket, and I'm probably not going to buy a phone if it removes a fingerprint scanner as it's just so perfect for me right now.
Now on a PC or tablet, face-id is the way to go! Microsoft's "Hello" system works amazingly well on my surface book, and that is a device where I don't want a fingerprint scanner, because there isn't a single spot on the device that I normally "touch" to wake it. I LOVE how if I wake the device by any means, it unlocks pretty much instantly if I'm looking at the screen, and in the vast majority of cases the screen is pointed right at me. It also works in the dark because it uses similar IR tech as face-id does (I believe).
If you ask me, Apple needs to get face-id on the macbooks and get rid of the horrible fingerprint scanner on there which is never convenient to me.
Don't confuse "security" with "convenience". If I were going for most secure, I wouldn't be using a fingerprint scanner OR face-id, i'd stick solely with "something I know" to get into the device. But I'm personally willing to trade some of that security for convenience, and for me at least, it doesn't get any more convenient than a fingerprint scanner on the back of the device (as far as I know! If someone designs something better, i'd love to see it! But the current iterations of face-id are far from it for me).
It’s a tv show.
By the time I scrolled to the bottom, Chrome made 470 requests and downloaded 42.8 Megabytes (10 additional requests blocked by AdBlock plus extension) and thats just the 'Overview' tab.
Pixel 3 128 $899
XR 128 $799
XS 256 $1149
The iPhone is cool. That’s why it’s being copied.
Apple has really curated their position as the premium choice, and I commend them for that. They learned relatively quickly (though not without missteps) that people would rather buy last year's (or the year before!) flagship at a discount than a brand new budget model. Saves R&D by milking the older model for another couple years, makes a bunch more customers happy, it's really a brilliant strategy.
Hmmm... then why the iPhoneXR?
iPhone SE was probably a similar bet since a lot of people were complaining about the large iPhone 6/6S — not to mention the Plus variants.
I heard Alan Kay sum it up well in a podcast this morning where he was talking about how evolution doesn't have to evolve to be the best anything. Paraphrasing- "If you live in a stupid environment, stupid is the most fit."
If you have a finnger print sensor on the rear why not make a no-notch phone with an edge to edge display and no notch?
Do you think Apple came to the same conclusion? That a notch was a necessity to appear premium? No they didn’t because they were not copying anyone else’s phone design, they included a notch so faceid worked.
"It's not a bug, it's a feature".
I hate the look of the notch, but at least the rest of the iPhone looks super slick. The Pixel Notch instead just made an unattractive design far far worse. Bravo!
The FaceID sensor array just coincidentally came out at the same time, no?
If you really hate that space being used, there are several apps out there that "disable" it by pushing the whole screen to treat that space as if it were bezel.
Doesn't that give everyone the best of both worlds? I prefer the notch in that it gives me more space at the top around it for things like notifications or status icons, and if you hate the look you can black it out and have it look like it's just a big bezel.
Sharp in particular has had fully bezel-less phones for years, I honestly though their camera on the bottom design would be copied way before the weird notch.
I was wrong thought. It's the full screen and part of it is cut out as you can see when watching videos and playing games.
Sad day that it is being copied.
Of course ideally, the notch gets smaller, not like the Pixel.
Pretty much every smartphone for years has had a forward facing, top-mounted sensor array (and a similarly positioned output device), either in a bezel or, if avoiding a full-width bezel, a notch.
(The “sensor array” may just be a camera and light-level sensor, but it's there, for sure.)
Not saying the notch is the same thing but 3.5mm jack certainly is.
No CD/DVD drive
It's almost as if they can spot an emerging trend quite well (the move away from floppy disks, the ubiquity of USB and downloading software, music and video rather than buying physical media)
Obviously, it works for them. An important, if sometimes overlooked, factor of their strategy is that it's not just borrow and iterate, it's a) identify device that will blow up, b) borrow well before it blows up, c) use that lead time to iterate and leap-frog the competition in polish, and d) release right as the market is poised to accept the new device as mainstream.
They can also misjudge any one of those items a bit and still power their way through, especially now that they have such credibility.
Had they not been bought by NeXT (which is what actually happened) and we wouldn't be talking about Apple setting industry designs.
Folded screen of iphone
Trying to get rid of it, while looking cool actually makes using the thing worse.
It's way cheaper to just house the driver below the display, as all the other phones are doing.
While they didn't go fully to the top or bottom, that doesn't alter how the technology itself would work. If they can get close to the horizontal edges, they can get close to the vertical edges.
Yes, they've done their fair share of copying from Apple, but lately they seem to actually believe in their own ideas.
The only thing I can think of is a pop-up camera (done already) or a through-pixel camera (not done yet). If Samsung pulls off the latter the whole smartphone evolution is just done, over, finished.
The next thing will be not to have a phone at all, or a holographic one. ;)
I guess Google really wants to stick with two speakers. And not sure about the Apple's patent about folded OLED and/or others having the expertise to do it.
Disc: Googler but don't work on the related teams.
Even when someone does design a set of truly wireless earbuds that matches the quality of $20 wired earbuds today, its still going to be a total joke as long as those wireless earbuds cost 150-300.
All through this thread you're jumping on anyone who dares criticize any aspect of the Airpods. Speaking in absolutes. "Nobody who has ever used them would say that", "nobody misses the wires", "nobody misses their previous headphones".
I don't like them. I can't wear them. My ears are too small, they slide out. This doesn't distract from their quality.
But I sure as shit miss the 3.5" jack when I have to plug a silly, fragile, unwieldy dongle into my phone to listen to my Earset 3i's. (Sadly, too, their Amazon rating seems to be 2.7/5, and reading the critical reviews, that seems to be almost exclusively because people got counterfeits on Amazon).
Please stop speaking like people are _factually wrong_ for disliking the Airpods or aspects of them.
Or will it be the more typical thing with Android accessories, where you have to buy a Google knockoff and never lose it, and then when you do lose it, you have to buy a seriously off-brand thing from China because Google has lost interest in products they sold a year ago?
Because it sounds like it provides, y'know, Bluetooth audio, which is usually a terrible UX.
I don't miss the cable, but I miss reasonable prices, audio quality, and not having to deal with recharging or audio desynchronization.
It's also pretty nice being able to just connect the phone to a speaker system, rather than having to mess around with per-phone dongles, idiotic "dock" designs, or pairing to random bluetooth receivers.
Sure they've got a wire between each earbud, so it could be argued that they're not 'truly wireless.' I can see how, from the perspective of someone for whom a dongle detracts from the purity of the $20 earbud experience, this could be a sticking point. But I haven't found it to be.
I pray my current phone holds for another couple years, until this fad goes away.
Disc: Googler but don't work on related teams.
Apple has chosen to distribute these around their screens. Most Android phone makers have instead chosen to place them at the bottom.of the screen.
This means that in general Apple has larger edges than Android notch phones on 3 sides but no bottom chin. Android notch phones in general have a smaller distance between the edge of the screen and the edge of the phone but a larger lower chin.
I can't stand the notch design band aid (the S8/9/Note just looks far far cleaner, has much greater usable screen size), and this has all but guaranteed my next phone will be another flagship Samsung.
Pixel Stand: https://store.google.com/product/pixel_stand
Pixel Slate: https://store.google.com/product/pixel_slate
Home Hub: https://store.google.com/product/google_home_hub
It is so weird these days that 95% of the marketing and copy for new hardware is actually marketing and copy about software, not the hardware. They do however have a spec compare page for the phones: https://store.google.com/product/pixel_compare
Even if my perception is wrong, I picture google as a company that is better able to deliver cloud software. Since the hardware is all good enough now, what makes me consider going from Apple to Google is that I prefer google mail and google maps, and the google ecosystem. I also think google is better positioned to take on Amazon and Microsoft and Facebook. Apple is in a distant fifth place behind all those companies. And then you have Sony, which in many respects DOES have a better hardware ecosystem than Apple, for the home (speakers, playstation, cameras, televisions, headphones etc. and vue.) HomeKit and HealthKit are the two places Apple is competitive, and music/movie services are a dime a dozen at the moment, im not committing to an ecosystem if for example I liked iTunes/Beats more than Google Play. Lest we not forget Spotify and Roku are still independent beasts.
And on the other end Apples value proposition is that their store has all the flagship versions of apps (companies tend to treat iOS as their first class citizen) and privacy as a promise. That is a compelling sales pitch; to be treated as just a customer, not as something to be data mined and targeted.
Google REALLY needs to figure out Google Voice, Hangouts, Google News, Google Reader etc. Theres no reason Facebook should be a better feed and messenger, google has all the parts and talent, and cannot for the life of them unify them into a coherent simple product. Stop treating google voice like an afterthought, its a killer product. Google needs to figure out android vs chrome. Its very scary to buy into either of these product lines (at least I know my data is stored in google services regardless.)
Its a very hard decision right now to go Alexa vs Google Home, vs HomeKit. It sucks liking Swift apps, Google Photos, Facebook Messenger, DirecTV, Xbox Live, and Sony TVs. And pretty soon I'll need to have Sony, Disney, Hulu, Apple, Youtube, Netflix, Vudu/MGM, Prime, Facebook, xFinity, DirecTV/HBO/WatchTV (figure your shit out ATT). And that still leaves me without access to anything CBS/Viacom/Paramount, except what comes from DirecTV and VRV. Who am I trusting to make my multi-service experience the most pleasant; Roku, Apple, Google?
Ecosystem commitment is maddening, and paradox of choice has never made not participating more attractive.
If you own almost any Android phone, you have all these services. Heck, if you own an iPhone you can still get all these services (just not as defaults).
Take for example JUST google photos. When I say service, I mean a best in class experience across my phone, my kitchen screen-speaker, laptop, desktop, and living room tv. Google photos does not live up to its full potential from a phone alone.
A service gives me consistent access to the same data, from a variety of interfaces. Each interface is tailored to use cases for that device type. Desktop interfaces are going to be more powerful than tablet, tv, or kitchen screen-speaker.
It's the same reason I prefer Facebook Messenger to text messaging. Works great from any device I sign into.
(Not being able to set defaults is inexcusable at this point as a product, and
borderline anticompetitive. Microsoft is playing an equally dangerous game with Edge.)
And that's what I think the OP was getting at. If Google's main differentiator is services then I have little reason to buy an Android phone. I can get the built in security and privacy associated with iOS and dip into the Google ecosystem as and when I want by downloading individual apps. It works great for me
I'm not sure if it's an iOS limitation or Google choose to artificially limit the app but OP is right that Android provides a better platform for Google services.
Thats just an example though. Current Apple will never treat non-Apple apps with the same kind of integration. Messaging apps, photo apps, map apps, music apps, movie apps. It will never be the same as a place with choice.
"Hey google, gift mum a copy of Almost Famous." (google remembers that my mom likes text messages, and has vudu.)
"Hey google, gift dad a copy of Key Largo." (google remembers my dad likes facebook messages, and has prime.)
Send me a message when Apple starts being friendly to competitors. iOS is a glorified app launcher if you are not a heavy Apple Services user, and Apple Services are substandard. Even iMessage only works from Apple hardware. Useless.
I am being a little silly here, Google and Microsoft are moving TOWARDS Apple-Like ecosystem lock-in, whereas Alexa/Prime and Roku are the more vendor agnostic shells.
I used an Android device full time until about a year ago, so believe me when I say I know how it works, and that I don't really miss it.
> "Hey google, gift mum a copy of Almost Famous." (google remembers that my mom likes text messages, and has vudu.)
These conversational examples always seem bizarrely contrived to me. But either way, part of the argument against this is that I don't want Google to know these things. I value privacy. I don't gift my parents movies often enough to make the trade-off worth it for me - I'll just do it manually the one time a year I do it.
> Even iMessage only works from Apple hardware. Useless.
Very obviously not true. When the vast majority of your friends and family are on iMessage it is, hands down, the best messaging solution. Better than anything Android can offer, because less tech savvy people don't even need to think about it. It is very far from useless for a lot of people. It just isn't useful for everyone.
If I own an iPhone but a Windows PC, iMessage is only a fraction as powerful as something cross platform.
Youre nitpicking a conceptual example. Alexa, Roku, and Android are currently built to let ME have the power to set defaults and mix and integrate services between providers. On iOS either I use the Apple service if I want full integration, or my access to said services is locked into only the app for that service itself and apples extremely limited share menu.
That it is already set up when you buy the device. This can't be understated. Among my friends and family, some have FB messenger, some have Snapchat and some have Whatsapp. The only one they all have is iMessage. And even Android users can participate in group messages by (automatically) downgrading to MMS.
The entire point I am making is that we increasingly access MANY services. Content is a great example, with Netflix, ATT, Disney, National Amusement, Sony, Amazon, and Comcast getting into a pretty nasty battle. Service agnostic hardware is very very attractive, whether that service is messaging/calling, backups, or content consumption. Shells treating all services equally, is a value upon itself. They can still ship from the factory with an in house default. Roku being able to surface and categorize content from many apps, and being able to deep link directly to movies is a much more pleasant experience. Or searching for a movie and being asked which ecosystem/service I want to view it from.
It SUCKS when a company like Apple says "you need Apple hardware to watch our original series" or when "you need ATT wireless to watch this HBO show" becomes a thing.
It SUCKS that I need an Amazon Echo Show 2, Google Home Hub, Facebook Portal Plus and an iPad all set up in my kitchen to answer Video Calls!!..!.. verbally when my hands have egg on them. https://techcrunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/how-smart-... (at least Facebook is considering Alexa and Google Assistant. At least Amazon Echo may allow Android texting and Skype, while also supporting Zigbee.)
Assuming you own an non-Google Android phone, what difference is there? I use Google photos on my Samsung...
On iOS, I will admit there is a difference is not being able set default applications but other than that I don't really see a big difference. Google, of course, works hard to ensure the same experience regardless of device so it's not much of selling point of their own phones.
By comparison, you actually need an iPhone to experience any of Apple's product integration.
In the future, I imagine, at the upload screen, I will be able to type in a friends name, to filter all the photos of a person. In the future, I expect to be able to use voice to be able to say things like "hey google, send my mum the latest photos from bob and sues wedding, that have Molly and I in them" and I expect Google to remember my preferred communication app is different for my Mom and Dad, know which Molly I mean, know what latest means, and act accordingly. Do you imagine Siri will integrate well with Google Photos and Facebook messenger?
That is a disadvantage to me. I prefer not to keep all my eggs in one basket.
What I mean is that services CAN BE hooked into the OS. My messaging service being independent from my messaging app (sms as an example.) What I mean is, by default, Google has best in class services. (Photos and Maps are clearly superior to Apple.)
Being able to SET my default maps service. I need the os to be aware of what kinds of queries my maps app can handle.
Being able to swap out my voice assistant between google, alexa, cortana, m. I need the hardware and os layer listening, ready for me to trigger my voice assistant, but once they do, they should had it off to the service of my choice. Or my Roku being able to deep link directly to content within apps, apps that advertise their content to the os search.
Android is built to allow google, a manufacturer, or a user to swap out services, but still allows the service to feel integrated.
I do think there is a distinction between Android and Google Play Services. GPS is an advantage, and a great set of default services, but im not stuck with them for the life of a device, if I choose to replace them.
The whole range of announced products:
Looks like the Pixel 3 stats aren't up yet, but I assume the Wikipedia editors are working on that.
(Also very useful for figuring out what changes between iPhone/Mac revisions.)
(thanks for the suggestions on close-to-stock-Android hardware)
If you don't consider "completely unusable performance" to be a problem then yeah sure I guess it is "running" it.
"Apple completely ignored performance on older devices for several generations until the complaints got too loud. Now let's act like that never happened, because they have put some effort in now."
> And even in the cases where there is a performance tradeoff, updating isn't mandatory, but it's still an option for those who want it.
Yeah. Except that many of the new Xcode updates to support iOS 12 involve builds that remove older compatibility. So sure, "you can still use your older iOS! Just ignore the fact that if your favorite apps are actively being maintained the chance they'll retain old iOS compatibility will be a rapidly shrinking one".
People always demand new features, but want them on their old devices. Apple at least offers you the option.
Also, I don't see how that is different from an Android device that did not receive updates for 3 years and "your favorite app" that surely will be maintained for all eternity on an outdated system ...
I love innovation as much as the next guy/gal, but getting all those products to 7.5 billion people is probably not (yet) sustainable for our planet. What if we could make (in this case mobile phone) producers (partly) responsible for the waste disposal/recycling of their products?
As for security updates, yes it is a bummer, but not much better than what feature phones and Symbian used to offer, which was basically zero updates.
All the Apple stuff I have access to has been paid by my employer.
I am not doing contracts and their price ranges are out of what I deem as acceptable to pay for hardware as private user.
Less than a percentage point of reduction of purely electronic waste. This is what I mean by "almost all waste claims fall apart when examined."
And I'm not defending the practice of throwing out TVs or computers or anything else after 2 years, just phones.
It was once going to be Google providing them but they changed the site a while back.... that makes me skeptical about when / if you get those updates...
Google has been struggling to get manufactures to do updates and backpedaling on Android One's updates doesn't have me optimistic.
It's pretty disingenuous to compare Android and iOS like it's a 1:1 comparison. Google Play services and several other components get updated independently from the system. A Nexus 4 that is running the last official security patch still works "just fine" and gives you access to the majority of apps on the Play store.
While the update model isn't perfect and a bit concerning security-wise, if you want a device that "just works" for 5 years and won't be artificially crippled, Android wins.
Definitely isn't a full Nexus or Pixel experience unfortunately.
I'm scared to root it. Because they don't provide factory images and the update process is very fragile.
It's a far cry from Nexus.
All the other Android manufactures have been so hit and miss I'm not really interested in them as an alternative.
For example, iOS doesn't let you change default apps (e.g. browser). Also their third party keyboard integration is not so great.
At the same time Android just isn't ... feeling good right now with privacy and etc.
I did it for my mom's phone and most recently my own (which until I hit some software issues was running Google stock). It's really easy nowadays, with some tech skills and assuming your phone isn't obscure.
I ran into an apparently common issue where it won't connect to Windows through its bundled USB cable (or any other USB cable...).
Plugging it into my external monitor, which is also a USB hub, solved that problem. Except that in bootloader mode, it is once again unrecognized, making it impossible to unlock.
I have a Xiaomi Redmi 4x, which cost me $140 and has perfectly smooth performance. The camera isn't terrible either, it does the trick. Best of all, spare parts are cheap and easy to find. I completely shattered the screen on my phone, it was only $20 to get a complete new screen assembly (lcd, digitiser, and frame), which I'm fairly sure is OEM. I broke the ear speaker in the process of replacing the screen, only $1 to get a new one shipped from China. I can literally make a phone from parts, I can even buy the motherboard on Aliexpress.
Xiaomi have really good build quality too, and their their custom version of Android isn't terrible.
I also have a Xiaomi bluetooth speaker that I bought for $30, which performs as well as a speaker 2-3 times the price. It's built out of solid aluminium too, so it can take an absolute beating.
Bad Sample: https://i.imgur.com/vD2uC9u.jpg
It would appear that they are used and recycled though, rather than new OEM parts.
For $159 I'm not sure what more you could expect. Band 12 would be nice, but I understand they need to cut some corners.
My only warning for buying Xiaomi phones is to make sure they work on your carrier in your country.
Meanwhile Xiaomi's Android One devices (not MIUI) are just 'fastboot oem unlock' without any key requests, just like good old Nexuses.
I’m willing to bet that 80% of HN users have iPhones :)
Also, where the Nexus phones were supported for at least 3 years the 3T wasn't going to get Android Pie just 2 years after release, but it seems it now will (eventually).
I agree it's been filling the segment, but I'm not sure it's continuing to, sadly. Don't get me wrong, they still seem to be beating Apple and Google in terms of bang for buck, but they're definitely chasing up the ladder after them.
It works fine, but it's so large that it hurts my hand. And OnePlus appears to be committed to making only comically oversized phones. Very sad.
Considering that the Nokia 6 costed me only ~$170 when I bought it a few months back, this is top value.
The "Android One" label communicates 2 years of updates.
Either way, it's a Treble phone with an unlockable bootloader (without any key requests even! just like old Nexuses). I flashed a GSI (unofficial Lineage 16) right after I came home from buying the A2 :)
Of course this Treble stuff is still pretty new and you need to hack around some things — for example, I had to remove some XML file to make Bluetooth audio work, and (when Magisk rooted) SELinux is blocking the Wi-Fi driver from automatically loading so I have to load it from a root shell manually after a reboot :D but that's perfectly acceptable for me.
What does this even mean? I mean, since there are no cheap stock-Android phones clearly anyone who buys a cheap phone doesn't only care about stock Android.
But it's absolutely possible for someone to (1) want a phone at non-"premium" prices and (2) want a phone running stock Android. The fact that they then have to pick at most one of those two because no one but Google makes stock-Android phones and Google have gone premium-only doesn't mean that they don't, or shouldn't, want both.
Alas, most of what's still on the market is either ancient (and not getting new Android updates), or cheap low-res junk, or usually both. The only exception seems to be MediaPad M5, and Huawei screwed that one up by reporting it to the apps as a phone rather than as a tablet; and then there's the whole shared antenna issue (basically if you use Bluetooth, your WiFi is an order of magnitude slower).
And I'm not holding much hope for sub-10" ChromeOS tablets. It seems that everybody just wrote that market off.