Nexus 6 Rumours and Speculation

Status
Not open for further replies.
deaglecat said:
Nexus 6 will be niche due to size and cost.
Click to expand...

Nexus devices have always been relatively niche anyway, I very rarely see anyone with a nexus device in the real world, it's mainly iphones and samsung devices.

But you're right that the size will put some people off. However I don't agree with people about pricing. It seems many on the internet are slating the pricing, but I think that comes more from the fact that they're used to nexus devices being "cheap" as opposed to the actual price.

I mean the handset is cheaper than a note 4 and the specs are pretty much the same give or take. The nexus 6 is a flagship device with a pretty premium build compared to the usual plastic fantastic previous devices.

The nexus price (using usa pricing) is cheaper than other flagship devices, so I'm struggling to understand the outcries regarding price. It's not as though it's more expensive than any other phone, and for what you get the price seems reasonable in my opinion. I'm sure the negativity is simply because people were expecting "cheap" prices for a nexus device.

I mean were people expecting a phone like this to cost 300 quid?! For what you get with this phone in terms of specs the price is more than fair. You're not paying more money for less when you compare it to similar spec phones. Infact you're paying less for better specs. For me the iphone 6 plus is overpriced, but again it seems acceptable because people expect apple to charge a premium, when I guess the issue here is people expected google to sell "cheap"....

To be honest nowadays people complain about everything (not aimed at you), they could have made this phone 5" and £200 and people would have complained that it was too small, and overpriced, when for x amount more you can get a bigger phone lol.
 
Last edited:
I have a Nexus 4 that is getting a little long in the tooth so I've been eagerly awaiting this year's effort. What a disappointment. There are plenty of other huge, ridiculously expensive phones out there. Fair enough if they'd done this alongside a normal update to the nexus line but this being the only new phone is a big disappointment :( Seems there is a big gap in the market now.
 
mark2410 said:
then i ask if you were asked what the spec of the two respective cameras you would state them as what?
Click to expand...

I don't think you've understood what I've said. I haven't said that what you've stated isn't the specification. I'm saying that just because the masses might think that a 16MP camera is automatically better than a 13MP camera based solely on the virtue of its megapixel count, doesn't validate it as being correct.

So to answer your question directly, if you asked me what the spec of the camera was, I'd say one is 13MP and the other is 16MP.

But asking me what the spec is, isn't asking me which one is better, you're just asking for the factual information that is known at present.
 
Is a UK price for the Nexus 9 really to much to ask? We wait ages for an announcement, and then they don't even tell us what it will cost.....
 
spoffle said:
I don't think you've understood what I've said. I haven't said that what you've stated isn't the specification. I'm saying that just because the masses might think that a 16MP camera is automatically better than a 13MP camera based solely on the virtue of its megapixel count, doesn't validate it as being correct.

So to answer your question directly, if you asked me what the spec of the camera was, I'd say one is 13MP and the other is 16MP.

But asking me what the spec is, isn't asking me which one is better, you're just asking for the factual information that is known at present.
Click to expand...

but i didnt ask which was better in terms of images produced. i never claimed the 16 one was better, i simply said it had the better spec. which i do not feel is inappropriate to have stated.
 
mark43 said:
Is a UK price for the Nexus 9 really to much to ask? We wait ages for an announcement, and then they don't even tell us what it will cost.....
Click to expand...
Getting annoyed by the typical lack of any pricing regarding the device too.
 
mark2410 said:
but i didnt ask which was better in terms of images produced. i never claimed the 16 one was better, i simply said it had the better spec. which i do not feel is inappropriate to have stated.
Click to expand...

But it doesn't have the better spec. This is the issue, so the fact that you never said the higher MP would produce better images is irrelevant. You have still claimed it's the "better spec" and went on to try and validate your statement by claiming that the masses would follow this train of thought.

Objectively, the 16MP sensor has a higher resolution. That's it. There's nothing better about it based solely on the resolution. It's just a matter of fact that it produces images comprised of 16 million pixels, and the only reason the masses would think the 16MP was better based solely on its number, is because the masses incorrectly believe that MP number determines image quality.
 
spoffle said:
But it doesn't have the better spec. This is the issue, so the fact that you never said the higher MP would produce better images is irrelevant. You have still claimed it's the "better spec" and went on to try and validate your statement by claiming that the masses would follow this train of thought.

Objectively, the 16MP sensor has a higher resolution. That's it. There's nothing better about it based solely on the resolution. It's just a matter of fact that it produces images comprised of 16 million pixels, and the only reason the masses would think the 16MP was better based solely on its number, is because the masses incorrectly believe that MP number determines image quality.
Click to expand...

I know very little about these things but when I was buying a compact camera a few years back I read up a lot on a few models I was looking at, and I remember people moaning that in one case the more expensive model produced worse images because the MP was too high! Something about trying to cram too much on such a small sensor. Like I say, I know little on the subject but thought it interesting.
 
spoffle said:
But it doesn't have the better spec. This is the issue, so the fact that you never said the higher MP would produce better images is irrelevant. You have still claimed it's the "better spec" and went on to try and validate your statement by claiming that the masses would follow this train of thought.

Objectively, the 16MP sensor has a higher resolution. That's it. There's nothing better about it based solely on the resolution. It's just a matter of fact that it produces images comprised of 16 million pixels, and the only reason the masses would think the 16MP was better based solely on its number, is because the masses incorrectly believe that MP number determines image quality.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately the typical person goes on numbers.

It's been the marketing thing for years, I remember when it used to be dynamic contrast ratios that were quotedfor tvs, then hz, now it's resolution, hell some people even take the train of thought that "64 plate equals better" :D regardless of the car, the newer plate is better than the older car lol.

Average joe walks into carphonewarehouse to ask about which phone has the better camera then Spiky haired Dave the salesman, will say the one with more megapixels lol

People on forums are generally a minority, the average person rarely scrutinizes anything, and is mostly blissfully ignorant. They generally buy something and are happy with it unless there's an obvious fault. Whereas people on forums will generally replace things if there's say some minor backlight bleed or whatever the case may be.

God I wish I was like that, as unfortunately I research everything, and tend to spot the most minor faults in things and then constantly replace them in search of that elusive perfection.....
 
Last edited:
spoffle said:
But it doesn't have the better spec. This is the issue, so the fact that you never said the higher MP would produce better images is irrelevant. You have still claimed it's the "better spec" and went on to try and validate your statement by claiming that the masses would follow this train of thought.

Objectively, the 16MP sensor has a higher resolution. That's it. There's nothing better about it based solely on the resolution. It's just a matter of fact that it produces images comprised of 16 million pixels, and the only reason the masses would think the 16MP was better based solely on its number, is because the masses incorrectly believe that MP number determines image quality.
Click to expand...

i would argue that the quoted specifications as dished out in the product advertising does indeed consider the mp count to be a valid spec.

i made no assertions to that spec meaning it would have the superior image quality.
 
mark2410 said:
i would argue that the quoted specifications as dished out in the product advertising does indeed consider the mp count to be a valid spec.
Click to expand...

I never said it wasn't a valid specification. :confused: What's give you the impression that I said and meant that?

i made no assertions to that spec meaning it would have the superior image quality.
Click to expand...

Of course you did, you said the "better" spec. When an image sensor's job is to take images or video, then "better" can really only mean better images.

So maybe you should choose your words more carefully if that isn't what you actually meant, because "better spec" isn't particularly ambiguous.
 
CJ84 said:
Unfortunately the typical person goes on numbers.

It's been the marketing thing for years, I remember when it used to be dynamic contrast ratios that were quotedfor tvs, then hz, now it's resolution, hell some people even take the train of thought that "64 plate equals better" :D regardless of the car, the newer plate is better than the older car lol.

Average joe walks into carphonewarehouse to ask about which phone has the better camera then Spiky haired Dave the salesman, will say the one with more megapixels lol

People on forums are generally a minority, the average person rarely scrutinizes anything, and is mostly blissfully ignorant. They generally buy something and are happy with it unless there's an obvious fault. Whereas people on forums will generally replace things if there's say some minor backlight bleed or whatever the case may be.

God I wish I was like that, as unfortunately I research everything, and tend to spot the most minor faults in things and then constantly replace them in search of that elusive perfection.....
Click to expand...

Exactly, it's awful and just goes to show even more so that the views of the general masses don't really mean all that much, and should not be used to validate anything as being true, just because it's a popular/common point of view.
 
spoffle said:
I never said it wasn't a valid specification. :confused: What's give you the impression that I said and meant that?



Of course you did, you said the "better" spec. When an image sensor's job is to take images or video, then "better" can really only mean better images.

So maybe you should choose your words more carefully if that isn't what you actually meant, because "better spec" isn't particularly ambiguous.
Click to expand...

because the other chap some pages back stated that exactly that the relative spec was not "better", that was his argument and hence the ensuing protest from myself that counting the mp count was a spec to reference. im sorry if you thought i was explicitly claiming you had made argument. the posts and pages have been flying by.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom