Google Pixel and Pixel XL

Gigabit said:
But my argument was precisely that Google's strategy clearly doesn't work very well because their most successful and well known products are precisely the ones they've stuck with and iterated.
Click to expand...

I agree with with your underlying message, I was just offering an alternative reason why Google act like they do which is different to the "manager gets a fat bonus" idea.
 
AndyCr15 said:
Yes, every iOS device has it. No Android option, as that's not Apples way and a big reason why I've never owned an iPhone. Every iOS and Android device could have Duo.



What? Do you have a link for this, as this is news to me? I know they dropped a certain business element of it, but it's still going strong for me.
Click to expand...

Not exactly dropping it completely but aiming it at business use instead of consumer

http://www.androidpolice.com/2017/0...meet-chat-new-apps-meet-chat-bot-coming-soon/
 
Can anyone recommend a car holder for the regular Pixel with a case?
I am using the Incipio Dual case which adds a bit of thickness.

I watched the Brodit review by AndyCr15 but it seems it will only fit naked Pixels.
Thanks
 
Gigabit said:
But my argument was precisely that Google's strategy clearly doesn't work very well because their most successful and well known products are precisely the ones they've stuck with and iterated.
Click to expand...

Gigabit, in my opinion, you are really digging a new hole here for you to occupy all by yourself. And I am not talking about the hole on an entirely other topic that you believe AndyCR15 has dug (which is clearly debatable). Nor am I talking about the success or otherwise of having a number of messaging apps like Allo and Duo, or GMail or Inbox.

You appear to be saying that Apple is more successful than Google because Google takes more of an experimental approach to new ideas and Apple iterates on proven ideas. You are basing this on past behaviour. Two comments: 1. Get a grip. 2. Factually not correct.

1. Get a grip. We are talking about the two most successful and highly valued companies in the world. Apple is an amazingly successful company, there is no doubt. So is Google. Apple has been in existence for many more years than Google. Apple is a vertically integrated hardware and software and services company. Google was founded as a software company that has more recently grown into hardware. They compete and co-operate. They have the two most successful businesses the world has ever seen.

2. Factually not correct. You appear to be claiming that Google's main strategy is the spaghetti on the wall approach vs Apple's endless iterative approach. It is not that black and white. Their strategies appear to overlap much more than they differ.

Nearly two thirds of Apple's revenues come from iPhone sales and they are soon to release their tenth anniversary iPhone device, the iPhone 8. They have clearly endlessly iterated on the iPhone and quite successfully, now generating a very respectable service business. They have a very successful tablet and computer business and a great retail strategy with their stores. They are clearly working on a number of new ideas they keep under wraps of which we know very little. Why? Because they are probably the most secretive company that ever existed!

Google has a similar strategic approach but adds at least two wrinkles: a. The 20% free time given to employees to innovate---the spaghetti approach can be used if other employees back an idea. b. "Other Bets", some of which have been made public and others that are incubating at various stages within the secretive Google X laboratory. These ideas include the very public Waymo self driving cars, Project Loon communication balloons, Verily---life science group with a number of global pharmaceutical company collaborations, Google Fibre (now scaled back) and other projects that are not known publicly. You may have read recently that one investment banker wrote a note to say that if Waymo were a separate public company, apart from Google, it would be worth $ 70 billion already. Compare and contrast Google's public list of Bets to Apple where although they may well be working on similar ideas, the public is not aware.

But to say that Google's overall strategy is not in many ways similar to Apple's is clearly wrong. Google iterates endlessly on search. They often make hundreds of iterations to search every year. Same for YouTube. And we may also only be seeing the tip of the iceberg here because they too may be endlessly iterating internally on new ideas before they "throw the idea" on the publicly-viewed wall for you and me to see. Waymo is a good example to back my claim. They started working on self driving vehicles in 2009 but did not reveal this to the public for a number of years. During this time they iterated endlessly internally with sensor, radar, LIDAR, road testing, etc. By the time the public found out about their self driving vehicle, Google had "driven" their cars more than 700,000 miles autonomously (no driver intervention) and computer simulated more than an additional 1 million miles in their labs on their computers.

You say Google does not have a "cohesive vision". Again I say, get a grip. Their vision has made them the second most successful company in the history of the world. Their founders are still very engaged. Their founders once said that Google is "not a traditional company nor does it strive to be." Their cohesive vision happens to be over a longer time frame than you give them. Many of their ideas may never come to fruition. Many might require many more years in testing before they can truly be judged a success or failure. Sometimes an idea is really ahead of its time and needs time for it to become successful. My personal view is that Google Glass falls into this category.

Google generates sales of $ 100 billion per annum and has nearly $ 100 billion in the bank. It can take a long term view of success and failure.

I say give them time before you reach any further conclusions about their "vision" and "cohesive" strategy, success or otherwise. They are likely to prove your initial conclusions wrong.
 
Well regarding the whole Duo/Allo thing, I made my wife install them on her iPhone and she prefers Allo at least to iMessage. I also agree that if Google put some effort into marketing these apps then they would be far more popular than they are now. It's not just about Android and iOS either, when using Allo most contacts of mine who use Android phones still have invite next to their names because they haven't moved on from Hangouts!
 
I think many are waiting for the web/PC option to happen, which I understand is almost here. Even then, it's hard to move away from what everyone is already heavily using. I love Hangouts, I guess mainly because I can use it on my phone, or PC. When they do this with Allo, I will probably try and move the family and friends over.
 
AndyCr15 said:
I think many are waiting for the web/PC option to happen, which I understand is almost here. Even then, it's hard to move away from what everyone is already heavily using. I love Hangouts, I guess mainly because I can use it on my phone, or PC. When they do this with Allo, I will probably try and move the family and friends over.
Click to expand...

exactly this. when at work i can open gmail and those i hangout with are in list at the side of the screen so i can instantly contact them in a little chat window.

i've asked many android users what they think of allo/duo and everyone asked the same question.. what's that?
 
AndyCr15 said:
I think many are waiting for the web/PC option to happen, which I understand is almost here. Even then, it's hard to move away from what everyone is already heavily using. I love Hangouts, I guess mainly because I can use it on my phone, or PC. When they do this with Allo, I will probably try and move the family and friends over.
Click to expand...

Let's be honest, the amount of people not using Allo because of PC support is going to be tiny. I don't know why you are finding it so difficult to understand that nobody uses these products because they aren't marketed. I worked for Vodafone and not a single customer on an Android phone ever new what Hangouts was used for, they just used it for SMS. But nearly every iOS feature new what iMessage and Facetime were. I often got asked if iMessage was on Android.
 
I don't know why you think I'm so bothered about how many people use them? (Granted I said many will switch, and yes that might be a statistically small amount of total smartphone users, but I still think many will... as backed up by BaldJedi agreeing) I don't know why you think me, my family and my friends don't use it because it's not marketed? What is your obsession with it? Or are you once again just trying to make an argument where there isn't one.

I've never used Hangouts to contact someone I've never contacted before. I use it with friends and family. Most of my friends are fairly tech savvy and are aware of Allo, but we're not using it as it doesn't have a PC/web client. When it does, we'll probably switch over. Why on earth has marketing got anything to do with that?

As you suggested above, I think now the ignore list becomes the best option.
 
You and your friends are a tiny minority. The simple fact I am making that you seem unwilling to accept is that nobody uses these products because nobody knows they exist.

Google marketing just sucks. They marketed the Pixel and guess what everyone seems to know what it is.

We've been over this a few times now and I'm going to change the subject.

I for one am glad one Pixel might not have the curved display. I really am not a fan of of curved screens tbh.
 
I think the argument is about mindshare and brand presence rather than whether people use it or not. Clearly some people use newer Google products like Duo and Allo, but they trail the market leaders considerably from everything I can see.

Simply put, more people will have heard of iMessage than any of Google's newer mobile products. Google does not advertise anything properly, from what I can tell, and seems to rely on word of mouth to get their products out there. For the world's biggest advertising company, that's an interesting strategy. How is the mainstream going to know about their products if they don't do more conventional advertising? It's all very well creating a decent product like Allo, but if the majority of the WhatsApp-loving public have never heard of it it will never gain market share.
 
reflux said:
I think the argument is about mindshare and brand presence rather than whether people use it or not. Clearly some people use newer Google products like Duo and Allo, but they trail the market leaders considerably from everything I can see.

Simply put, more people will have heard of iMessage than any of Google's newer mobile products. Google does not advertise anything properly, from what I can tell, and seems to rely on word of mouth to get their products out there. For the world's biggest advertising company, that's an interesting strategy. How is the mainstream going to know about their products if they don't do more conventional advertising? It's all very well creating a decent product like Allo, but if the majority of the WhatsApp-loving public have never heard of it it will never gain market share.
Click to expand...

I wonder about another approach Google might adopt to gain mindshare on messaging apps? I do not believe anyone has mentioned this in the discussion so far.

Namely, whether Google might consider acquiring a brand name in this space that, while struggling, is well-known?

The name that comes to mind is Snapchat (to me a more obvious name than Twitter). As most know, Snapchat came out with a really interesting approach that gained considerable mind-share, esp with millenials. More recently, Instagram, owned by Facebook, has been eating their lunch by incorporating many of Snapchat's features into Instagram Stories. I read that Instagram Stories now has 250 million daily active users but Snapchat has a not too shabby 165 million daily active users.

I wonder if Google believes that it might be worth buying the Snapchat brand to advance their efforts in messaging? A rumour that Google might acquire Snapchat first surfaced a year ago before Snapchat became a public company. Snapchat is one of Google Cloud Platform's largest customers.
 
Last edited:
sesevans said:
...
I wonder if Google believes that it might be worth buying the Snapchat brand to advance their efforts in messaging? A rumour that Google might acquire Snapchat first surfaced a year ago before Snapchat became a public company. Snapchat is one of Google Cloud Platform's largest customers.
Click to expand...

not quite.. it was rumoured several years ago with a $4 billion offer
 
Anyways, back to the Pixel! :D

Anyone find it has poor bluetooth? When I use my Jam Transit headphones it skips so much it sometimes disconnects entirely. With my S8, it's perfect. Really frustrating. Hopefully O will fix it...

As good as the Pixel is, Google can't continue to charge so much for the phone if something like that isn't reliable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom