Hacker News Reader

Comment by rootusrootus | Hacker News Reader

For Pixel in particular it really feels like they've started copying the iPhone's hardware choices in some ways, for no real reason that I can discern. The notch, eliminating the headphone jack, etc. Then they even matched it on price (heck, isn't the Pixel actually more expensive than an iPhone if you match them on flash size?). I was a Google phone fan back in the days of the Nexus 4, but these latest attempts feel like Google trying to force their market position up rather than embracing their niche.

View on HN

I don't have any personal experience with this, but I saw this article about Google killing the headphone jack:

https://www.pcworld.com/article/3284186/mobile/bring-back-th...

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."

All true. I would like to tack on, that Apple recently stopped providing the included 3.5mm headphone adapter with newly purchased iPhones (include iPhone 7 and 8 purchases)[0].

[0] https://9to5mac.com/2018/09/12/iphone-xs-tidbits-airpower/

Sure, but they gave it a few years until they did so. Nowadays, I don't even use the adapters. I've bought wireless headphones or lightning-earphones.

A big gap for some people is that the wireless headphones can't be used on airplanes.

Wait. Really?

Well airplane mode shuts bluetooth and other radios off, so yeah, if you respect airplane mode you cannot use wireless peripherals.

Just not true. I fly all the time for work (4 flights a week), KLM eve announce that you can enable Bluetooth once flight safe mode is enabled and use Bluetooth headphones.

That's KLM-specific. There are no messages like that on many other airlines and the whole idea of airplane mode is RF protection. I'm happy that they basically say: it's bullshit, just ignore it, but officially most airlines still request no Bluetooth.

I have not been asked to switch Bluetooth off specifically on any flight. They ask that you enter flight safe mode. After that provided flight safe mode is on they don’t give any further instruction. On an iPhone at least you can enable Wi-Fi and Bluetooth and remain in flight safe mode. Many flight have Wi-Fi now, considerably more powerful than Bluetooth....how do they work safely?

My cynical answer would be: it never really mattered, so this is a way to allow new tech without scraping the whole idea. Especially given the number of possible radio bands and nobody publishing what the protested ranges were supposed to be.

Regardless of it mattering or not it is simply not true that that you cannot use them on flights, airlines actually announce that you can use them during safety announcements.

Again: some airlines do.

Some airlines make announcements, they are allowed on all airlines I have travelled on in the last 2yrs (when I started travelling a lot..)

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?

2013 FAA allowed Bluetooth and wifi on flights[0]. Here's a recent article on the subject of what the major airlines will allow [1]. And a screenshot for doubters of me activating Bluetooth while in airplane-safe mode, which has been a feature of every modern phone me and my friends have [2].

[0] https://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsI...

[1] https://traveltips.usatoday.com/rules-using-bluetooth-airpla...

[2] https://photos.app.goo.gl/riJejAkyxp9MRpsi7

That is not true. You can enable Bluetooth whilst in flight safe mode. KLM even an ounce this on their flights. I own airpods and Bose QC35s and use both wirelessly on flights all the time.

Yup, also heard this on my flight some days ago: "Feel free to enable Bluetooth after selecting flight mode."

Did you dictate this via speech recognition?

"an ounce"

Typing without autocorrect, one of the more common mistakes I make is clipping the spacebar instead of c/v/b/n.

Come to think of it, I don't think autocorrect would catch this anyway.

Nope iPhone keyboard plus not proof reading...

As of 2013, this is incorrect in the US. Here's a FAA press release:

https://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsI...

> You can also continue to use short-range Bluetooth accessories, like wireless keyboards.

I use my BT headphones when traveling all the time.

Maybe the poster meant that you cannot plug in your wireless headset to the aircraft's entertainment system, as you can with a 3.5mm jack.

I can't say, but IME all major American airlines hand out free wired headphones on flights.

Only on international flights.

> Only on international flights.

It's not only on international flights. They'll do it on reasonably long domestic flights as well (e.g. JFK→DEN).

Uhh this depends on what kind of headset.

My Bose AE2 wireless headphones are wireless, but also come with an audio jack for wired connectivity.

Interesting, thanks for the info on that. I was on an international Air Canada flight last week and they specifically announced that nothing wireless at all was to be used during the flight, including all headphones.

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."

https://www.aircanada.com/ca/en/aco/home/book/travel-news-an...

My flight was definitely a non-wifi flight, so I guess that was the issue?

Confusingly I think this means that you can only use wireless headphones with the 'provided entertainment' when the flight has Wifi because that's how they get their entertainment to your device. If the flight doesn't have wifi you have to use the in seat entertainment system and therefore can't use wireless headphones (because the entertainment system doesn't support them) not because you're not allowed to have them enabled.

The only real reason to put your phone in airplane mode is to stop it from draining its battery looking for mobile networks.

And, apparently, to stop your phone from rapidly pinging multiple towers at lower altitudes.

Google did all those things.

The Pixel 3 will include USB C headphones and a dongle [1]. They have worked with Bose and other manufacturers on new bluetooth headphones that have additional functionality (switching between apps, talking with the assistant app). [2]

[1] https://www.cnet.com/news/pixel-3-includes-usb-c-headphones-...

[2] https://www.blog.google/products/assistant/headphones-optimi...

I’m not just talking about one manufacturer on the Android side though, I’m talking about compatibility in the whole ecosystem. Google is including headphones that work with their phone, great, it would be embarrassing it they didn’t.

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.

Since the Pixel Phones implement an open standard for USB-C audio actually yes it should just work cross device. Interesting this isn't something that's actually true of lighting headphones. There's no way to use those on any other brand of phone.

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.

In cases like this "should" often translates to 'no' then 'sometimes' then 'mostly' but rarely a simple 'yes'.

EX: "Why USB-C audio still doesn't work" https://www.pcworld.com/article/3284186/mobile/bring-back-th...

Though reading the specifics there, it looks like Google's adapters in particular should work with any other phone because they can handle analog or digital signals. So they're doing well.

Other manufacturers are doing... less well.

Google's adapters can work on most phones, but Google's phones can't work with most adapters :-(

It's unfortunate because it's the "USB-C standard" not to do analog through the pins, but I think this a case where it's ok to break the standards. I'm not sure if there are any IEEE fines for that though.

> I’m talking about compatibility in the whole ecosystem

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.

As described in the above PCWorld link, the problem is that the standard is open ended and the ecosystem didn't all agree on how to deal with analog vs digital audio signals and devices. Some USB-C headphones or adapters will be happy with whatever. Others will not.

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.

https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2018/5/18/17369236/a...

>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.

The more I hear about issues with USB-C the sadder I get. It feels like we had an opportunity for 'one connector to rule them all' but the standards are so loose that what we got was something that looks like one connector but could be one of many, and it may or may not work for a particular use.

See today's Android Police artice on the Moshi adapter that just got re-released today.

https://www.androidpolice.com/2018/10/09/moshi-type-c-audio-...

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....

the standard is pretty clear and give options to make a cheap or expensive product.

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.

What are you even talking about? Samsung has no dongle and continues to put headphone jacks in all of their devices.

> 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.

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.

Yeah, they'll include a dongle that will break in less than a year with very casual use. Ask me how I know.

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.

I'm not a fan by any means of axing the 9mm jack, but to get around jackless electronics, I've been using a tiny (and cheap) bluetooth receiver so I can keep using my old headphones... it's been great, and no more annoying that charging wireless headphones.

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 />

Funny - at least that one doesn't lie about apt-x support. Bluetooth audio sounds like crap to me, I'll be using wired headphones until the patents on non-crap Bluetooth audio expire, I guess.

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.

What confuses me about Bluetooth audio is that I did the math a while ago and unless I got it wrong, reasonably modern Bluetooth should have the bandwidth to stream uncompressed digital audio... So why are we still stuck with this awful lossy compression?

I feel you haven't read the comment I responded to.

I don't think you read the comment you responded to. Wlesieutre correctly points out that the Android marketplace has multiple incompatible standards of USB-C headphone dongle and USB-C earbuds, so they won't necessarily work with another USB-C Android device in your household.

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.

    Yeah, they'll include a dongle that will break in less than a year with very casual use. Ask me how I know.

FWIW, this isn't true in my experience. I've kept mine in my pocket jangling around with my keys and use it frequently, and never had any issues.

    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.

If you already have headphones you like, it seems like this is no different between Pixel/iPhones.

My pixel 2 also came with an adapter for the 3.5mm, and my bluetooth headphones worked fine as always. And I think google also has the pixel earbuds?

See linked article above, you have an adapter that works with your phone, but it might not work with your friend’s phone, or your friends’ adapter/headphones may not work with your phone, and if your adapter breaks and you replace it you’ll need to be careful with finding a compatible replacement. With lightning headphones and adapters they’re all just compatible.

I don’t know anyone with Pixel earbuds, but their reviews online aren’t stellar.

> "With lightning headphones and adapters they’re all just compatible."

Except with, you know, the large majority of the phones in the market today.

Ok, they're compatible with phones that have a lightning port. Unlike the USB-C "one port shape, a million devices and cables implementing various optional subsets of the specification" compatibility mess.

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.

Heh. Your comment made me just realize that my Pixel 2 doesn't have a headphone jack. I've had this phone for months (a year?) And never noticed.

The bluetooth earbuds are starting to get better. The Bragi Pro is much better than the Dash. I don't have experience with Apple's earbuds but I'm going to guess users are facing similar issues with bluetooth connectivity and interference issues.

I think of bluetooth earbuds as this generations skipping CD's. It's totally unnecessary though. They could have waited.

Airpods are fantastic, haven't had any of these issues.

Airpods are insanely good. Virtually no issues with quality or interference and I got them the day they were released. Bose QC35s are also great, just not as reliable as airpods... one thing with airpods is that I think all headphones know when I take them off and to pause music...

The only complaint I've heard about AirPods is the audio quality, in that that they're typical of Apple's earbuds. Better than the $10 generic ones on Amazon, worse than $150 wired earbuds from Sennheiser 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.

AirPod battery life isn't great when you're using the mic too (think a Skype call) but the fact that you can use one at a time while other charges makes it pretty manageable.

Good to know. My first thought for using a mic with a phone was for a "phone call" but I guess "skype call" works too ;)

I tend to make quick phone calls, but Skype/Zoom/etc on my computer calls tend to be of the 30 min - 2 hour variety, so that's where I see the most battery use :-)

I can list quite a few improvements to AirPods:

* 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

* Waterproofing

* 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 think these are fairly minor improvements, most of what makes the airpods great is already there. I’d rule out anything that makes them more complicated (that is their best feature imo) just putting in them and work is amazing, and it’s even better that they pause whatever’s playing when you take them out.

I love the fact that the AirPods don't have touch controls. I live in a place where some kind of headwear is required for over 6 months of the year.

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.

Not saying that should be taken away. If anything, it needs more gestures, perhaps triple tap for playing previous track?

Try not to spread FUD unless you've tried them. Airpods are excellent, and Apple was entirely justified in removing the headphone jack.

Yeah because Apple removing the headphone jack took lots of Courage didn't it?

From the HackerNews guidelines [1]:

> 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.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Bluetooth has been great for the past few years (maybe since BT4?) My airpods and qc35 and car integration work FLAWLESSLY. The same can certainly not be said of older generation devices. I returned some Outdoor Tech Chips 2.0 something something helmet speakers that went static-y every time you turned your head the wrong way.

The new stuff can work 50+ feet away, through walls, etc.

I've had no issues with my AirPods. I believe the W1 chip provides a stronger connection than vanilla BT.

"that work on all iPhones", "that work on all iPhones", "that work on all iPhones".

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.

The operative difference that the person (and your quotes) highlight is they shipped a solution “that works” on all the devices you care about. Using a standard technology is a good idea on paper, but I’d rather get something that “just works”.

"that works" for varying degrees of "works". I happen to think that the lightning-to-3.5 adapter doesn't "just work" in the Apple sense, but is rather "minimally functional", not aesthetic, not graceful.

It's a difference between "I know it works on my device" and "I don't know if it will play sound, answer calls, not work at all, or only work if I turn on usb storage every time"

Given that my discussion was between Lightning and 3.5", I think none of those "comparisons" were particularly apt.

Explain to me how an analog 1/8th inch jack doesn't "just work."

Explain to me how an analog 1/4 inch jack doesn't "just work." After all, that's what's on the end of my good headphones. I never heard anyone complaining about dongles when it was 1/4 inch to 1/8th inch.

I might have agreed with you... except the adapter is very cheap and can be easily replaced if it fails.

(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.)

The Samsung flagship phones retained the jack and has USB C. And no silly notch, just a clean design around the smallest their sensors could be.

LG flagships have a notch, but are great otherwise. I'd argue their notch came first with the LG V10 and V20, but they were bigger and allowed you to use the rest of the screen as a 'second screen' which is what it is marketed as.

The V20 second screen seemed a much better idea though. No need for the main screen to be on, but have a tiny second screen that can remain on for notifications, music player and such.

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.

> Android manufacturers have not matched that with USB-C audio. They just copied "Step 0) Remove the headphone jack."

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.

There is a reports already that currently flagships are the last ones: https://www.google.lt/amp/s/amp.tomsguide.com/us/samsung-dro...

Not to mention they're much easier to get than USB-C ones. Google's official dongle is rarely in stock while Apple's is available in stores all over. I went in for one this week to see if I could live with no headphone jack and the guy just gave me one and told me I didn't have to pay. Yeah you could go to Best Buy if you need a dongle ASAP, but then you get to play the "is this analog or digital" game.

It's pretty pathetic too after they release a whole slew of ads making fun of Apple's design choices... Only to unashamedly copy them in the next iteration.

It's like Google looked at the iPhone X and said "yep, people really seem to dig those notches - we'll make our's EVEN BIGGER!"

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.

> a tablet that you can't take with you

What do you mean?

Google specifically? Or are you thinking Samsung? (they of course have no notch and still have a headphone jack)

Google’s Pixel adverts mocked Apple’s lack of 3.5mm jack.

https://youtu.be/Rykmwn0SMWU?t=42

Google.

https://youtu.be/Rykmwn0SMWU?t=40

A slew of ads or just a small part of that one ad?

Yeah, I honestly appreciate Samsung for not jumping on those trends just for the trends sake. Samsung really lead on the thin bezels, and hasn't adopted another of the more ridiculous fads.

If they at least were more serious about keeping their devices up to date. Not everyone has budgets for buying S models all the time.

As it is, I will probably go with Nokia, even though they are now on USB-C as well.

I'm looking forward to Samsung's NotchPhone coming out some day. I have an iPhone X and think the notch is a non-issue, but I didn't realize Android phone makers had started coping it until the past few weeks when I noticed lots of billboards for Android phones while traveling, all of which had the notch.

Only the didn’t copy the edge to edge screen or m the faceid system. The Pixel 3 XL looks awful. The regular pixel 3 looks balenced at least.

Well Android does have a "face-id" kind of system built in that works with the camera alone. It's not as advanced, but Google's thing is using software to really make it a nice product, and the face unlock works really well for me on my pixel 1 XL.

Isn't the point of the infrared mapping that Apple does on the iPhone that it is significantly more difficult to fool than camera-based solutions? Android has had face unlock for years but you can fool it pretty easily. Anything Apple introduces to replace Touch ID must be more secure than that.

Yes, but it's not as bad as you think (i can't fool my pixel with a picture for instance), and it's never unlocked for anyone else. It also disables it if there are any failed login attempts, and requires a "something you know" method every so often anyway.

>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.

It only doesn’t replace a finger print sensor because it is not as secure as faceid. Fairly sure if you could remove the finger print sensor entirely you would. I don’t buy the convienience arguement at all, look at Picard on the enterprise, he doesn’t use a finger print sensor, the computer just knows it is him, faceid is much closer to this future than touchid..

>Fairly sure if you could remove the fingerprint sensor entirely you would.

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).

Picard uses voice print identification and very bad passwords. And a lot of magic, like the plot sensitive doors that open just as you’re done talking.

It’s a tv show.

Off topic : the launch webpage [1] is hell annoying. Image loops, scroll-jacking, poorly thought out.

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.

W.T.F!

[1]: https://store.google.com/product/pixel_3

I think the idea for the pricing is giving the consumer that it is not a cheap knockoff alternative to Samsung or Huawei. And Google allows heavy discount to Carriers, so consumers "saves" a few hundred dollars when they sign it with a mobile contracts. Compared to Apple you get less than 10% discount from Wholesale.

I'd pay nearly any amount for a Nexus 5 SE. Perfect form factor/size and a beautiful design, just needs a better battery and camera.

The Pixels are cheaper for a flagship phone. But I was surprised they were in striking distance of iPhone pricing. Wow.

Pixel 3 128 $899 XR 128 $799 XS 256 $1149

I was a proud Android user since the g1 days but now will be switching to iPhone due to Google's terrible privacy practices.

> For Pixel in particular it really feels like they've started copying the iPhone's hardware choices in some ways, for no real reason that I can discern.

The iPhone is cool. That’s why it’s being copied.

Completely a conspiracy theory, but what if Google & others theorize that actively making devices worse causes an unexpected psychological response? Apple customers are devoted and willing to spend large amounts of money to upgrade flashy looking devices regularly, that's why Apple is so profitable. Making a sacrifice (the notch, high cost, lack of a headphone jack) to own an "elite" device effectively commits one to continue defending that decision, both to others (potential customers!) and through additional buying decisions later. A kind of self-induced Stockholm syndrome.

Or, without making ridiculous unsupported pop-psych claims, people buy iPhones because they like them better. But I think Apple managing to induce Stockholm syndrome to millions of people worldwide is much more plausible.

It's actually an interesting idea. Of course the negative points should be at least debatable, so that you can say you actually chose to spend more, or to have a notch. Every time someone makes fun of you because you spent a thousand bucks on a phone, you're forced to go into self-defense mode, and that reinforces your identification with the object. Pure speculation, of course :)

I think Apple's pricing only works because the resale is so strong. I've never lost as much money on phones as when I was buying Android flagships. When I can go sell my two year old iPhone 7 Plus for $400, it's a lot easier to stomach the purchase price of an iPhone XS. Not that I'm going to do that this year, mind you, but still.

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.

> people would rather buy last year's (or the year before!) flagship at a discount than a brand new budget model.

Hmmm... then why the iPhoneXR?

Here's an article from a few weeks ago on HN that explains exactly that: https://stratechery.com/2018/the-iphone-franchise/

I think the issue here is that flagship != top of the line anymore. For the iPhone pre-2017, the device targeted at their average customer was also always the latest and greatest. But with the release of the X, Apple introduced a new high-end line meant for enthusiasts, while most people would still be pushed towards the 8 (and now the XR). So the XR isn't really a budget model in the sense that the 5c and SE were, but rather the next entry in the mainstream iPhone continuity, while the XS is the second addition to the "pro" line.

Hedging their bets? Since iPhone XS devices are are a rather large risk and they need something to fall back on in case they don’t do well. If they do, we may not see a successor.

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.

Or faceid, and true edge to edge screen (no chin) combined with a processor 2-3x as quick as the next best thing and an operating system designed from the ground up for speed and privacy are actually worth paying for. So tired of this Apple are scamming us story. Google are charging more for less...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com