Pixel 4 Thoughts
As Google leaks it's own device to death a number of things are known about the Pixel 4. There are some interesting changes on the horizon and a lot of the usual complaints.
The first of the gripes is face unlock. Personally, I don't get the hype. Maybe the Pixel 4 will change my mind. But I somehow doubt it.
By far, the most annoying thing about this feature is how the Apple community responds to it. I read article after article from Apple friendly sites complaining about the lack of such a feature in prior generation phones and mocking how "technologically far behind" Google was without it. Now, that they are adding it, we hear everything from "this proves Apple was right" to complaints about copying.
So, I'll start by saying... Google's biggest interest in making sales of Android handsets. Their own, or others. With so many people saying that the lack of such an unlock method was the primary reason for them to avoid Pixel phones, it sounds a lot like Google is just pandering to the masses.
I also don't think that this "proves Apple right" either. Just as removing the headphone jack on the Pixel 2 didn't prove them right either. In fact, I feel like this is an almost identical situation. When Apple first released their face unlock feature it was half baked. It was slower than Touch ID (and Android finger print scanners) easier to fool. And it remains easier to exploit by the likes of say, law enforcement.
This is to say nothing of the fact that it was a Plan B from the get go with Apple having originally wanted an in-screen Touch ID scanner.
Now, the technology has come along (yes, thanks in large part to Apple driving up competition in the area... but more on that in a moment). But, that also means that Google's 1st generation of the same sort of tech may be faster and more accurate than Apple's proving that Apple was in fact wrong, at least about the timing.
You may wish to circle back to what I said about competition improving on the tech because of Apple. But, while that certainly serves as a catalyst Microsoft has proven with HoloLens that it isn't a requirement by any means. They were out of the gate with something years ahead of the competition and by all accounts they seem to remain there. Or put another way... Apple's implementation is only in the past few cycles being met or exceeded by others. But, if they had simply kept iterating on it themselves and not releasing until it was ready, then they might still be ahead of the competition.
In short, I'm STILL not sold on using my face to unlock my phone. And of course, all of the people praising it today will call it old fashion when Apple finally gets their Touch ID screens implemented and abandon facial based unlocking due to it's inferiority.
Similarly, I'm not sold on the near screen gestures.
I'd have loved to see the Pixel 4 simply be an iterative bump on the Pixel 3; new SoC, finally upgrade the RAM, bigger battery, and a dual camera array on the back and then the rest as software magic.
This new crap, combined with the likes of the Pixel 3a leaves me concerned that pricing will get out of hand on the Pixel 4, or bring further division to the product lineup. Like the XL and non-XL version losing the sort of hardware parity they had in the past. Because, honestly, I like the form factor of the smaller models they've been putting out and I don't want to lose big ticket features just because I don't want the phablet.
And, I already feel like the Pixel 3 was absurdly priced. But, the Pixel 4 already sounds a lot more substantive.
In fact, I think the price point for the Pixel 3 has been problematic from the beginning. With the Pixel 2, I could deal with the fact that new SoCs were just around the corner and only 4GB of RAM because there were very few phones with more on the market and the phone did very well with those specs. When the Pixel 3 hit the streets it was more expensive than the Pixel 2 despite being in the same boat; SoC on the verge of being outdated, 4GB of RAM which was now embarrassingly low and a single camera when, right or wrong, everyone expected multiple.
You look at the Pixel 4, and it finally ups the RAM, goes with 3 cameras on the back and then throws in cutting edge stuff like the gesture detection and a complex face unlock tech and it starts sounding unlikely that the price will be anywhere reasonable.
With the Pixel 3 dealing with its issues, I could be tempted to grab one of those instead once it hits a discounted state again.
[edit]
OH CRAP! I forgot to mention the nonsense about the bezel.
To each their own of course. But, my opinion has always been that notches and pin hole cameras are examples of finding a solution to a problem that shouldn't exist. The screen is arguably the most important part of the device. It should be a clean, continuous surface. If notches weren't a problem, no one would be complaining about the "huge" one of the Pixel 3XL. Phones *should* have bezels for the foreseeable future, so that the notches don't need to invade and sacrifice that experience to get other necessary tech in. Yet another reason way in which Apple was (in my opinion) wrong, despite so many following suit.
The first of the gripes is face unlock. Personally, I don't get the hype. Maybe the Pixel 4 will change my mind. But I somehow doubt it.
By far, the most annoying thing about this feature is how the Apple community responds to it. I read article after article from Apple friendly sites complaining about the lack of such a feature in prior generation phones and mocking how "technologically far behind" Google was without it. Now, that they are adding it, we hear everything from "this proves Apple was right" to complaints about copying.
So, I'll start by saying... Google's biggest interest in making sales of Android handsets. Their own, or others. With so many people saying that the lack of such an unlock method was the primary reason for them to avoid Pixel phones, it sounds a lot like Google is just pandering to the masses.
I also don't think that this "proves Apple right" either. Just as removing the headphone jack on the Pixel 2 didn't prove them right either. In fact, I feel like this is an almost identical situation. When Apple first released their face unlock feature it was half baked. It was slower than Touch ID (and Android finger print scanners) easier to fool. And it remains easier to exploit by the likes of say, law enforcement.
This is to say nothing of the fact that it was a Plan B from the get go with Apple having originally wanted an in-screen Touch ID scanner.
Now, the technology has come along (yes, thanks in large part to Apple driving up competition in the area... but more on that in a moment). But, that also means that Google's 1st generation of the same sort of tech may be faster and more accurate than Apple's proving that Apple was in fact wrong, at least about the timing.
You may wish to circle back to what I said about competition improving on the tech because of Apple. But, while that certainly serves as a catalyst Microsoft has proven with HoloLens that it isn't a requirement by any means. They were out of the gate with something years ahead of the competition and by all accounts they seem to remain there. Or put another way... Apple's implementation is only in the past few cycles being met or exceeded by others. But, if they had simply kept iterating on it themselves and not releasing until it was ready, then they might still be ahead of the competition.
In short, I'm STILL not sold on using my face to unlock my phone. And of course, all of the people praising it today will call it old fashion when Apple finally gets their Touch ID screens implemented and abandon facial based unlocking due to it's inferiority.
Similarly, I'm not sold on the near screen gestures.
I'd have loved to see the Pixel 4 simply be an iterative bump on the Pixel 3; new SoC, finally upgrade the RAM, bigger battery, and a dual camera array on the back and then the rest as software magic.
This new crap, combined with the likes of the Pixel 3a leaves me concerned that pricing will get out of hand on the Pixel 4, or bring further division to the product lineup. Like the XL and non-XL version losing the sort of hardware parity they had in the past. Because, honestly, I like the form factor of the smaller models they've been putting out and I don't want to lose big ticket features just because I don't want the phablet.
And, I already feel like the Pixel 3 was absurdly priced. But, the Pixel 4 already sounds a lot more substantive.
In fact, I think the price point for the Pixel 3 has been problematic from the beginning. With the Pixel 2, I could deal with the fact that new SoCs were just around the corner and only 4GB of RAM because there were very few phones with more on the market and the phone did very well with those specs. When the Pixel 3 hit the streets it was more expensive than the Pixel 2 despite being in the same boat; SoC on the verge of being outdated, 4GB of RAM which was now embarrassingly low and a single camera when, right or wrong, everyone expected multiple.
You look at the Pixel 4, and it finally ups the RAM, goes with 3 cameras on the back and then throws in cutting edge stuff like the gesture detection and a complex face unlock tech and it starts sounding unlikely that the price will be anywhere reasonable.
With the Pixel 3 dealing with its issues, I could be tempted to grab one of those instead once it hits a discounted state again.
[edit]
OH CRAP! I forgot to mention the nonsense about the bezel.
To each their own of course. But, my opinion has always been that notches and pin hole cameras are examples of finding a solution to a problem that shouldn't exist. The screen is arguably the most important part of the device. It should be a clean, continuous surface. If notches weren't a problem, no one would be complaining about the "huge" one of the Pixel 3XL. Phones *should* have bezels for the foreseeable future, so that the notches don't need to invade and sacrifice that experience to get other necessary tech in. Yet another reason way in which Apple was (in my opinion) wrong, despite so many following suit.
Comments
Post a Comment