The current iPhone 8 is at $599 / $699, assuming Apple drop its price by $100 this year to $499 / $599, replacing the iPhone 7 $449 / $569 ( While lifting the entry level price yet again by $50 ). How well would this compete with Pixel 3a? I believe A11 Single Core will still be faster than the flagship current Qualcomm SoC. But its Camera and Design are quite dated.
>The Pixel 3a packs a slower processor and plastic construction, among other changes, to bring the price down a ton.
I don't believe Metal casing makes much difference in BOM Cost. The processor is at best, $50 Dollar different? POCOPHONE F1 can be had for under $400 ( £ 329 in UK inc VAT ) with a more powerful SoC. So I assume Google is still making some decent margin at this price.
It is no wonder people are questioning Apple's pricing. The price Gap has never been this wide. I hope Google does well with its 3A.
Very good point. It really makes you wonder: if Google can make a profit on such an overall-good phone at $400 (I have to assume that they aren't just taking a huge loss on every phone, though I suppose that could be a strategy to garner marketshare), and Apple has even shown that they historically can make a profit at $350 with the iPhone SE... what on earth is in the X/XS to justify the $1k price? Stainless steel? Maybe, but even the 4/4S had that. OLED? On the 3a, at a similar (though admittedly slightly lower) quality level. NVMe storage? On most phones these days. Haptic engine? A similar quality one is in the 3a.
The XS might be excused for being a luxury model. But the 3a really makes you wonder about the XR, which is smaller, made of aluminum, uses an ancient LCD screen (same quality as iphones since the 5 with incremental improvements -- that must be a bargain compared to the XS's OLED), and even has a worse camera than the 3a. In fact the 3a even has a larger, nicer screen. Where on earth are those margins going?
" if Google can make a profit on such an overall-good phone at $400"
Are we sure they're making much of a profit from sale of the phone? Google literally pays Apple billions to be the default search engine on the iPhone. If they can chip away at Apple's market share, every user they can convert to Android will save them money and thus generate profit but indirectly. If your goal is to simply convert an Apple user to an Android user you can price the phone very competitively or even afford to take a loss.
> Are we sure they're making much of a profit from sale of the phone?
Yes, I think we can be pretty sure. Like Apple, Google will drop the price of the phone over time. And other manufacturers who must make a profit to survive (like Nokia) sell similarly speced phones for less.
You are paying a premium for Google phone, a premium Google pockets. They are justifying that premium by ensuring some of their software is only available on the Pixel. The outstanding low light performance of the Pixel camera is all done in software, as in the speedy voice recognition (they run the neural network locally on Pixel's because Google has the best neural network compression).
I think it's safe to say Google is leading software engineering company on the planet now, and here are leveraging that to charge a little more for their phones. As they should. Good luck to them.
Undoubtedly Apple is making a greater profit on the iPhone. Though I can’t help but wonder how much cheaper Apple’s phones would be if they monetized their customer base as aggressively as Google.
It’s got to be worth something, as Google didn’t grow into a hundred billion dollar company from phone sales. Their fortune is almost entirely built from targeted advertising.
You're going by specs only, rather than actual quality of components. See videos of blind tests between the XR's screen and the Pocophone for instance. People pick the XR, every time.
This model of Pixels seem to be designed as a low-cost entry point to Google's data-hoover. A profit on each handset, while nice, is not the focus as your information is where the money's made.
Unlike Apple, which won't make any more money off of you unless you sign up for a service.
Gboard's machine learning also doesn't send what you type up to Google. There's no practical difference. Apple iPhoto sharing also stores photos on the server but just does an embarrassingly worse job of being useful. Similarly with iCloud Mail and collaboration suite versus Google's.
The 3a and 3a XL seem like sensible designs, the only disappointment here being how deeply the battery is buried.
This feels like a very dumb question, but are the current Google phones any less usable than other Androids for people who are keen to avoid going all in on Google services?
I have an Android phone and use the Play store with it, but I don't use Gmail, I don't store my contacts in my Google account, I have Assistant disabled, and I generally use an OSM maps app rather than Google Maps. I appreciate that this makes no meaningful difference to my online footprint, but it pleases me. Is there anything about the Pixel hardware or Android builds that would not sit well with this?
> [...] but are the current Google phones any less usable than other Androids for people who are keen to avoid going all in on Google services?
Paradoxically, they are way more usable. They are the only phones (on some Sony too, but with several caveats) where it's easy to compile and install your own AOSP.
Lots of security focused efforts aim at Pixels for this reason. See CopperheadOS and its successor [1].
With the advent of device independent ROMs (thanks to Treble) it will be a bit easier to run generic ROMs on any phone. But there are still many glitches [2].
The pixel phones (and the nexus phones before them) tend to be a little easier on those who unlock bootloaders and load custom ROMs. I use LineageOS on my Pixel, with OsmAnd maps and no Google services. https://lineage.microg.org/
It works quite well! Having not used 'normal' Android (anything that's not Lineage/Cyanogen) for years, I attempted to start out using this phone with the stock Google Android build. I disabled all the bundled crapware (Play Music, Play Movies, Play Games, YouTube) and they all kept re-enabling themselves. If you're looking for a device that will help you avoid Google at least a little bit, look at this page first. https://wiki.lineageos.org/devices/
How's the camera on Pixels w/ AOSP roms? I haven't installed a custom ROM in years now, and my last experiences were on Samsung where custom ROM means destroying your camera's picture quality.
On Pixel and Nexus phones, the Google Camera app works properly if you have either microG or Google Play Services installed. If you're using microG, you'll need to install the Google Camera app manually:
If you're using another camera app, then you'll lose Google Camera's optimized features. This may still be worth it if you prefer to use FOSS software.
The Pixels have a phone squeeze gesture (Active Edge) that can only be used to activate assistant. It can be turned off but it's otherwise pretty useless. Of course if you root you can make it do other things.
If you order it from Google, it's stock Android, so it's the most un-locked-down OEM OS you can get. This may not be the case if you buy it from a carrier.
It's surprising they have both the "Titan M" security chip and a ST33J2M0 security microcontroller.
You would think just one would do for key storage. Skimming the hardware backed keystore overview, it only mentions one secure coprocessor: https://source.android.com/security/keystore
I wouldn't even pay 25 dollars for a 5 year old phone. Was the battery replaced on it? Is it even possible to replace it?
Besides software support the battery is the major issue with phone longevity. I installed LineageOS on my Nexus 5X and gave it to my brother who was more than happy to have it. He'll likely enjoy it for 2 more years before the battery issues become too much to bare.
I used the Nexus phones for 5-6 years, 5 and 5x, now I have the Pixel 1 which I purchased for the equivalent of 280 USD in Sweden. New, but no longer in production. Still works like a charm. And when it stops getting security updates I can hopefully reinstall it.
There is no OS to revive old iphones. So I just can't understand how anyone would pay 250 USD for a 5 year old iphone.
Exactly, i was like "why would someone want my iPhone 6 for $250?!" . May be they can still use some of the internal parts? or this is a far greater marketing push to convert stubborn iPhone 6 users like me to Android(before they move to latest iPhones?)
They probably want to convert iPhone users to Android and are willing to pay for it. Galaxy S7 was released a year and a half after iPhone 6 and only has a trade in value of $75. It looks like market prices are similar for both at around $100 used.
