Do you want mid-tier Pixel?

[Ake_boon]

From the latest episode of TechLinked, Riley said that he wanted mid-tier Pixel phone. But as James has said, "That's what Pixel a is for". And I totally agree.
Pixel is somewhat a developer phone. To give developer a mid-tier hardware and that's wasn't meant to cover the future, I think is a wrong move.
Riley also said "Stop compete with Apple", but I think that's totally what Pixel is for. The flagship of Android. I don't think most people would agree with Riley here but I have no idea.

When asked why he didn't go for Pixel a, Riley said "I don't like it". So that doesn't explain much. I think most people would agree with James that Pixel should be flagship, but I could be wrong. So I wonder what you guys think?

Do you think

1) Pixel should be a mid-tier phone 

2) Pixel should keep flagship status

and why?

 

Thanks

[Roswell]

They already have mid-tier Pixels with the 3a and upcoming 4a.

[Zodiark1593]

I think Pixel should be whatever Google thinks is best, whether mid tier or top end, or both. I felt the 3A was a pretty well balanced device, and because it was more conservative in the SoC department, boasted excellent battery life, and was overall quite practical.  
 

Hardware isn’t the only thing that makes a Pixel. There is the software side to consider as well. 

[Jumballi]

1) pixel should be mid tier, just like how the microsoft surface isn't a high tier laptop compared to it's competition, the pixel should be google's insight on how an android integrator might want the most basic systems of android and how to better integrate google services into it.

2) it should still be a flagship though, we're entering a point where ultraphones are becoming a thing, and these premium phones should not be the standard we build the average consumers phone. google taking a step back and still calling it a flagship give those phone both status and cheaper phones a bit more breathing room.

[Ake_boon]

27 minutes ago, Vitamanic said:

They already have mid-tier Pixels with the 3a and upcoming 4a.

Yea, and I think they should keep it that way. Riley said he wanted Pixel to be mid-tier, and when asked why don't you get the A he said "I don't like it" and Pixel should stop try to compete with Apple. I just don't know if there is a reason to that.

[Ake_boon]

28 minutes ago, Jumballi said:

1) pixel should be mid tier, just like how the microsoft surface isn't a high tier laptop compared to it's competition, the pixel should be google's insight on how an android integrator might want the most basic systems of android and how to better integrate google services into it.

2) it should still be a flagship though, we're entering a point where ultraphones are becoming a thing, and these premium phones should not be the standard we build the average consumers phone. google taking a step back and still calling it a flagship give those phone both status and cheaper phones a bit more breathing room.

I think there is a different between Pixel and Surface. True that Pixel should be a representation of what Android is. I just think that with phone with that status it should have latest CPU not the mid-tier one. Surface wasn't really "How window supposed to run" but more like good alternative hardware for window to run on.

[Roswell]

6 minutes ago, Ake_boon said:

Yea, and I think they should keep it that way. Riley said he wanted Pixel to be mid-tier, and when asked why don't you get the A he said "I don't like it" and Pixel should stop try to compete with Apple. I just don't know if there is a reason to that.

Ah okay, I understand now. I haven't seen it yet and thought he was saying something else.

[Darkseth]

18 hours ago, Ake_boon said:

Do you think

1) Pixel should be a mid-tier phone 

2) Pixel should keep flagship status

and why?

Both. Google should bring 4 phones every year.

2 sizes for Flaggship/High End

2 sizes for Midrange.

So everyone can decide if they want to spend more or less, for a smaller or bigger phone.

 

1) It should. People are willing less and less to spend so much Money, especially when prices go up.
Google's "Pixel-Stock Android" is so well optimized and so slim, it will run very great on decent midrange SoCs. And Midrange SoCs are becoming better and better (compared to a few years ago). Most people don't need the absolute highest benchmark numbers, when the 200-500€ phone does everything 99,9% of all people need it to do.

 

2) In my Opinion, Pixel never had a flagship status. Google wanted it to be one, and copied Apple's prices. But they fail to realize: They are not apple. They don't have the right to take up Apple's prices. Even if they could make a Phone without compromises (it has too many, more on that later), but Apple does have a monopole: iOS.

If you want iOS, you gotta buy what Apple serves you: The latest iPhone. Too expensive? Well, buy an older one.

If you want Android? There's plenty competition. Samsung too expensive? There's oneplus, oppo, google, xiaomi, realme, lg, sony, htc (idk if they still bring out phones lol. htc is dead. LG maybe?).

Google wants 1000 for a 128gb Pixel phone? Oh jokes on you, i can just buy a Oneplus 7T for 500-600. Or a Samsung flaggship from 6 months earlier the year, that costs only 600 instead of 900+.

Android can be substituted. And right now: A Oneplus 8 Pro completely destroys a Pixel 4 XL, for the exact same Price of 900 bucks.

Now, why Pixel don't have a Flagship status: Price is way too high from the start, and has too many flaws. And the biggest of them is: The price never drops, except for those Deals (which should be the normal Price).

Take the Pixel 4 for example. No 3 cameras? Why? Main camera + Wideangle + Tele. Standard. You don't get that. And instead the more usefull Wideangle, you get  telephoto.

Main sensor, despite delivering good thanks to software, is a 4 year old sensor. Put a better sensor in it, imagine how incredible the Pictures were then?

Battery Life is so bad, it's basicly unuseable for most powerusers. Only 6gb Ram when others put in 8gb (Yes, you CAN use that!!), only 64gb non-expandable storage, and 100€ more for 128 as the maximum? 128gb should be the base storage for THAT PRICE.

A useless radar sensor, that Google will ditch after a year. Just like Google ditched their completely useless Pill-gestures, replacing them with an iPhone copy that is unintuitive, and forces other manufacturers to use that (Oneplus Gestures were SOOO much better than this shit...). Will they change that again? Who knows.
Google is quite inconsistent with Software.

 

The Pixel lineup has just too many Flaws, to be "on the top". There are a few things it does remarkably well. Updates naturally, and Camera (i don't like the "pixel look" that much, so i'm fine with a non-pixel).

And That's what google needs to realize: Not making Money by selling pixel while not even promoting it in any way (here in Germany, aside from tech-geeks, noone knows what a Pixel is). Google sells services. So they need to compete with price, and bring the phone to the masses, just like Xiaomi did it.
They don't need to be the cheapest. But they need to drop 200 bucks off the MSRP for their "Flaggship Models".

 

In addition to that: Midrange options. Same experience, 3 years no worries for Updates, best camera in the price range..

If the Rumors are true, and the Pixel 4a will come for 299-349€ (after Taxes), and it packs 128gb + 6gb Ram.. it will be very difficult for me to recommend anything else. And i'm really not a "Pixel fan".

 

 

So yea... a 300-350€ Pixel with a great experience for a few years is what People need right now. Especially thanks to Covid-19, where People's Jobs are on stake, and they don't want to spend so much.

[Aniallation]

In my opinion I think that Pixel should be the "best of stock Android" that Google had set out the Nexus line to be from the beginning, but that it shouldn't be priced as high as Apple or even Samsung's devices either because they simply don't have that "status". We had reached a solid point at the Nexus 5 mark where you could get a flagship spec device without all the bloatware/ugly skin and be sure of software support for a great price, the only problem was the crappy camera. Now Google has gotten that part of it figured out, but I don't see how that justifies the price becoming over twice as expensive.

[EL02]

They will still sell overpriced products whatever route they go. Even the 3a was overpriced at $400. The battery life wasn't solid, the screen was kinda meh.. and google still decided to go with a sd670 for $400. The only thing that was above average was the camera. I don't get it why youtubers praised that phone so much.

Personally, I would like to see more competition in the "budget" sector(if we can call it so).

[Lord Vile]

On 5/21/2020 at 5:39 AM, Jumballi said:

1) pixel should be mid tier, just like how the microsoft surface isn't a high tier laptop compared to it's competition, the pixel should be google's insight on how an android integrator might want the most basic systems of android and how to better integrate google services into it.

2) it should still be a flagship though, we're entering a point where ultraphones are becoming a thing, and these premium phones should not be the standard we build the average consumers phone. google taking a step back and still calling it a flagship give those phone both status and cheaper phones a bit more breathing room.

That’s what’s the a line is for though. pixel high end a model mid tier 

[Jumballi]

13 hours ago, Lord Vile said:

That’s what’s the a line is for though. pixel high end a model mid tier 

What makes an ultra/luxury  brand? what is a product that does nothing more but just costs more.
Think handbags, there's a golden ratio for size to material to cost. At some point Louis Vuitton bag just charges you for superfluous add ons like extra premium leather. So what if there was a phone CPU that performed 10% better but cost 50% more.
Technology has long since surpassed what we'd call essential performance, now we pay for excess and luxury, and google recognizes that I think. lower what the cost is for a flagship, and let apple and samsung make the ultra phone for the luxury users

[Lord Vile]

1 hour ago, Jumballi said:

What makes an ultra/luxury  brand? what is a product that does nothing more but just costs more.
Think handbags, there's a golden ratio for size to material to cost. At some point Louis Vuitton bag just charges you for superfluous add ons like extra premium leather. So what if there was a phone CPU that performed 10% better but cost 50% more.
Technology has long since surpassed what we'd call essential performance, now we pay for excess and luxury, and google recognizes that I think. lower what the cost is for a flagship, and let apple and samsung make the ultra phone for the luxury users

Why not do both? They’re already making the a line