The DXO rating of 98 report:
https://www.dxomark.com/google-pixel-2-reviewed-sets-new-record-smartphone-camera-quality/
https://www.dxomark.com/google-pixel-2-reviewed-sets-new-record-smartphone-camera-quality/
**** The Official Google Pixel 2/Pixel 2 XL Thread ****
- Thread starter sesevans
- Start date
I mentioned a comment from The Verge yesterday to the effect that Google's biggest problem with the Pixel 2 will be keeping it in stock.
Hands on with the Pixel 2 XL from TechCrunch:
https://techcrunch.com/2017/10/04/hands-on-with-googles-pixel-2-xl/
https://techcrunch.com/2017/10/04/hands-on-with-googles-pixel-2-xl/
Some Sony SBH80's almost 2 years old now. Quite tempted by the Pixelbuds tbh. (Who ever it is getting angry about Oreo having a Bluetooth problem... it doesn't. Two different headphones, my bike helmet, my car, all work fine. Unfortunately you have a Bluetooth problem)
A good point, I was thinking this myself. I don't know if I can get £550 or so for my year old Pixel XL, so really it's only costing me £200 to upgrade. I'm fine with that.
I don't think they're competitors tbh. GoPro is an action camera for adrenaline junkies (yes, of course others use it too) where as the Clip is for new parents capturing moments. Two camera's probably couldn't be for much different target audiences than that.
Thinking some more about Clips, you might be surprised to learn that the number one use case for GoPro and Yi cameras is family despite their sporting image, and this is the market that Google is going after. What makes Clips different it seems is its functionality.
The idea with Clips is to position it during an event or gathering and leave it to gather the best photos and video clips. This is Google using its AI chops to best effect----note the AI is kept local and not sent off automatically to the Google cloud for processing.
If it works well I think it will cut into GoPro quite significantly.
All in all not an amazingly exciting presentation, but still interesting with some interesting products. I don't think we expected the Google Home Max did we? If their sample guy is to be believed, that could be a handy replacement to an entire stereo for someone like myself (well, if I had a stereo.)
The Pixelbook looks nice, but pricey for a Chromebook.
The Pixel 2 and XL are kinda what we expected and at the price we thought (the sensible ones of us anyway). I don't really get the people saying the Dx0 of 98 means nothing? That's like saying benchmarks mean nothing. I know they aren't necessary 100% accurate measure, but it still a measure. Last years Pixel topped the chart and was an amazing phone. How was the Dx0 inaccurate. 98 sounds kinds of amazing, and only a couple of days after the Note 8 had claimed the crown. (Oh, and the iPhone 8 I see, both at
I got my order of B&W XL in, 15-17 November. Tbh, the black probably looks a little better, but the B&W is more recognisable
Thinking overnight and boiling it down to one or two elements, I think what truly sets the Pixel 2 apart are the new features such as Google Lens which offers the best image recognition and the fact that Google uses AI to do with one camera that everyone else needs two. The OLED displays are a good move too.
I do like the Always On display feature that gives me key info on the screen even when the phone is off, with no apparent hit to battery life. I note that Apple did not include this feature in the X which seems odd.
I note the press refer to the black and white XL as the "Panda" or "Stormtrooper" design. I prefer Pandas.
I am sure you will get your free Mini with your pre-order.
I am also sure it convinced some fence-sitters to hit that Buy button. I think volumes will be much bigger for the Pixel 2s than many expect. Before the launch, The Verge said that Google's biggest problem will be keeping up with the demand.
Just the facts. That 98 on the review speaks volumes to me.
Perhaps this link might change your focus? I used to be all about hardware and each and every improvement. But increasingly I am coming around to the view that the magic going forward is really in software made possible by AI and machine learning and it is here that I believe Google is in the lead and will be hard to catch. I say this as I have tried to point out merely the facts of what sets them apart, without bias. See if this helps.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-05/google-pixel-2-heralds-the-ai-age/9018636
To be clear, Home overrides the phone when you give it a voice instruction. Google Assistant detects the presence of Home and cedes control to it.
I expect this has been mentioned before but I found out one or two things today:
1. Last night I was given an estimated delivery date by the Google Store for my Pixel 2 XL Panda of 12-14 December, even though the official launch date is 19 November. Hence I visited Carphone Warehouse and after receiving an estimated delivery date of 20 November, I cancelled my Store Panda order and switched it to CW. I have not dealt with CW in years and wonder how reliable they are for this SIM free order with free home delivery? Anyone find them to be reliable on such delivery dates? I did not ask but expect that unlike the Store, they will charge my card up front rather than when the phone is dispatched? But the 3 week delivery date improvement, in theory, was too good to pass up.
2. CW told me to expect a separate delivery of the GH Mini at home within 2 weeks of receiving my Panda. There are no vouchers, etc to redeem. It just happens.
3. Google Clip camera does not have a firm delivery date yet in the UK, only the US.
4. Google Lens was available for me to see and play with on their store only Pixel 2. Identified a flower from a picture I had recently taken on my Pixel XL. Did not have a chance to play with its AR capabilities, but will do so soon.
1. Last night I was given an estimated delivery date by the Google Store for my Pixel 2 XL Panda of 12-14 December, even though the official launch date is 19 November. Hence I visited Carphone Warehouse and after receiving an estimated delivery date of 20 November, I cancelled my Store Panda order and switched it to CW. I have not dealt with CW in years and wonder how reliable they are for this SIM free order with free home delivery? Anyone find them to be reliable on such delivery dates? I did not ask but expect that unlike the Store, they will charge my card up front rather than when the phone is dispatched? But the 3 week delivery date improvement, in theory, was too good to pass up.
2. CW told me to expect a separate delivery of the GH Mini at home within 2 weeks of receiving my Panda. There are no vouchers, etc to redeem. It just happens.
3. Google Clip camera does not have a firm delivery date yet in the UK, only the US.
4. Google Lens was available for me to see and play with on their store only Pixel 2. Identified a flower from a picture I had recently taken on my Pixel XL. Did not have a chance to play with its AR capabilities, but will do so soon.
Glad to hear about your CPWH experience as I mentioned earlier today that I cancelled my Google store Panda XL (ie, Pixel 2 XL black and white) order with a 12-14 December estimated delivery date when I found today at the CPWH store that they estimated a 20 November estimated delivery date. As you know, the XLs official launch date in the UK is 19 November. I was unsure of CPWH reputation as all my previous SIM free purchases for Nexus and Pixel have been through the PlayStore.
I figure the estimated delivery date has a good chance as Google will be keen to supply its partners here with physical product on launch day when people walk in to their stores. CPWH also said that their pre-orders get priority even over store deliveries. Sure hope that is true.
Did anyone else catch Google's thinking behind removing the headphone jack on the Pixel 2s?
According to an interview given by Mario Queiroz, Google's Product chief, to TechCrunch, Google wants to make future Pixel phones with thinner bezels around the display, and removing the headphone jack "sooner rather than later" will make it easier to "make the shift."
So why Google didn't make the shift now and give the Pixel 2 phones the ultra-narrow bezels it wants to add to its future Pixel phones?
Apparently, Google wanted to have two front-facing speakers on its phones, which wouldn't allow for the ultranarrow bezels that you'd find on the iPhone X or Samsung's Galaxy S8 and Note 8 phones, according to TechCrunch.
And of course removing the headphone jack allows Google to sell the Pixel Bud earphones, competing of course with Apple's AirPods.
Google did say the Pixel 2 phones will come with a USB-C headphone-jack adapter — in case your wireless headphone batteries die, or if you plan on keeping your wired headphones.
Hmmm...
According to an interview given by Mario Queiroz, Google's Product chief, to TechCrunch, Google wants to make future Pixel phones with thinner bezels around the display, and removing the headphone jack "sooner rather than later" will make it easier to "make the shift."
So why Google didn't make the shift now and give the Pixel 2 phones the ultra-narrow bezels it wants to add to its future Pixel phones?
Apparently, Google wanted to have two front-facing speakers on its phones, which wouldn't allow for the ultranarrow bezels that you'd find on the iPhone X or Samsung's Galaxy S8 and Note 8 phones, according to TechCrunch.
And of course removing the headphone jack allows Google to sell the Pixel Bud earphones, competing of course with Apple's AirPods.
Google did say the Pixel 2 phones will come with a USB-C headphone-jack adapter — in case your wireless headphone batteries die, or if you plan on keeping your wired headphones.
Hmmm...
Last edited:
There was one quote in the Verge story which you highlight that also made me think of another possible reason for Google's removal of the headphone jack. The quote is:
"Seamless fast pairing? You need Android N or higher, which most Android phones don’t have."
I have commented many times on a major difference between Apple phones and Android phones. With Apple users can update the operating system quickly and within a short time, a majority of their phones get the update. In contrast, Android OS updates are much slower to reach the majority of Android users. I mentioned recently that Android N is on 0.2% of all Android phones currently, even though N has been out for many weeks.
Google wants to get its OS updates out to users quickly but lacking a proprietary system like Apple, they rely on OEMs and operators. OEMs do not have a strong incentive as margins are thin on phone sales to begin with. Google is faced with a dilemma and needs to solve it or otherwise, creating great software with AI capabilities will only reach a few Android users and given the time it takes to reach more than this handful, gives its competition time to match Google's latest and greatest.
If Pixel Buds (being GA capable and having an intriguing translation capability) were to become a raging success (eg, like Chromecast has become), it would create strong momentum for users to want to own a phone with the capability to use Pixel Buds and hence Android N hosted phones would become more sought after. OEMs would be faced with either losing sales to Pixel phones or quickly upgrading to Android N.
How successful can Pixel Buds become?
I have read your post and wonder if the bottom line of your "gripe" is ultimately just pricing? Reasonable people can hold reasonably different opinions about Pixel 2 pricing.
But your emphasis throughout your post is hardware and in my opinion, you missed the forest for the trees. I did not see a single reference to software. Perhaps I was listening to a different Press conference than you? If you listened to the last Apple presentation, it was loaded with talk about chip speeds and screen resolution. Google spent little time on product specs.
I am of the view that we have reached a near-term limit on what can be made new in hardware -- it is becoming an increasing commodity-driven business, esp with the invasion of Chinese OEMs into international markets. Sure we can tweak around the edges of hardware but to be a Pixel 2 owner, I believe you are increasingly buying into Google's vision that the real quantum leaps now will be in software: esp AI and machine learning. Google's CEO spent ten minutes talking about how AI was helping Google Maps and translations. Simply put, Google wants a radical rethink about how computing should work.
Catching up to Apple and Samsung? Google said that they were not the first to do email or search but that their approaches redefined what email and search should do. The result speaks for itself. Will they repeat in the hardware business? Their answer: AI.
The AI makeover was on full display at the presentation. Pixel 2 phones come with an image recognition app called Lens that can help a user find info about from a film poster or ad simply by pointing the camera. The new "smart speaker" uses AI to adjust its sound for the layout of a room. The new wireless headphones let you get instant translation of different languages.
My bottom line: Buying a Pixel is a buy-in to Google's re-imagining what a smartphone can do.
It is "great" enough to support their vision of how computing should be reimagined: AI (apart from the England v Slovenia score).
I did not say that improvements to hardware cannot follow. Apple is putting that processing power locally into the A11 chip for example. It seems to me that Google is taking a different approach......Google is famous for skating to where the puck is going to be rather than where it is now (I heard that quote a few years ago and still think it is applicable today). Why?
I have posted previously for example about TPU (tensor processing unit). There’s a common thread that connects Google services such as Google Search, Street View, Google Photos and Google Translate: they all use Google’s Tensor Processing Unit, or TPU, to accelerate their neural network computations behind the scenes. In the Google Cloud, Google has said recently that TPU delivered 15–30X higher performance and 30–80X higher performance-per-watt than contemporary CPUs and GPUs. Compared to Apple, Google's strength is in the cloud and the services it can run with it. Siri for example is not considered as good as Google Assistant for example.
Google's AI display on its new hardware mostly depends on what goes on in the Google Cloud. That is where their advantage lies and where they believe computing is headed. Their bet on their acquisition of Deep Mind from the UK seems to be paying off and supports my view of where they are heading (eg the WaveNet algo):
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-how-a-400-million-bet-is-starting-to-pay-off
Meanwhile I agree with you that the acqui-hire of 2,000 HTC mostly hardware engineers was a smart move to at least hedge their bets, if not much more.
I think we've all come to that conclusion
You can think that if you want. But you would be wrong.
More important what happened a few months ago perhaps?
https://www.theverge.com/2017/6/13/15791918/google-hires-apple-chip-architect-pixel-phones
Not answered in Google presentation. Available on Pixel 2s in US first and then "coming soon to UK", etc so doubt if you will see it anytime soon on other phones. Is that artificial limiting? Who knows at this point? Might be that "supply constrained" is the real reason but not sure.