Pixel 5; Your Thoughts?

[dizmo]

So I'm getting a new phone this year, and while none have really grabbed my attention as must haves (the Note20 Ultra is up there, but with COVID I'd rather not be dropping that much cash), rumors of the next Pixel have been rather enticing for me. It seems like they're finally hitting a lot of the points that a proper flagship should have, save for the SoC. However, since Pixels are mostly known for their camera, I don't see this as a huge downside, especially given the nice drop in price over something like the S20, or a similar device. If they can still have a snappy system with a lower grade SoC, I don't see a huge issue with that. It seems like they're going back to a more Nexus like approach.

 

Here are the rumored spec:

• Snapdragon 765G
• 8GB RAM
• 6.67" screen
• 120hz refresh rate
• Potentially reverse wireless charging
• $699 base price

 

What do you think? Would you be down for something like this, or would you be more interested if it had a very premium build, Soli, a Snapdragon 865+, and 12GB of RAM for an extra ~$400?

 

Are you upset that there might not be a smaller size?

 

I was going to hold out and grab an S20+ when they have some Black Friday sales, however seeing the spec of this phone it might have moved into the lead for me...provided they don't completely screw up the battery.

[BobVonBob]

The few percentage point difference in SoC performance isn't something I care about with my phone, and I prefer larger phones anyway.

 

Now hole punch camera, that's a problem. Worse than notches ever were.

[Donut417]

11 minutes ago, dizmo said:

What do you think?

Currently an iPhone user though I used to do Android. Personally as far as SOC's go, as long as the phone feels snappy Id say any CPU would be fine. I personally dont use mine as a gaming device and if I do game on my phone its Candy Crush Saga or those type of games. 

 

To me as long as you have a decent amount of ram and decent amount of storage that's really what matters. If I did go back to Android a Google Pixel or a OnePlus phone would be what I go with. Im not a fan of Samsung phones. 

 

Screen size it would be a bit bigger than the iPhone XR I have. Personally I dont think I would notice much. To me at the 6 inch ish mark you get a decent size, and its pretty good for web browsing and watching videos. 

[Applefreak]

I want my Note 7 back.

[Donut417]

1 minute ago, Applefreak said:

I want my Note 7 back.

Most countries have laws against owning Hand Grenades I believe and that's pretty much what that phone was. 

[Applefreak]

4 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

Most countries have laws against owning Hand Grenades I believe and that's pretty much what that phone was. 

So was the one ring....

[dizmo]

54 minutes ago, BobVonBob said:

The few percentage point difference in SoC performance isn't something I care about with my phone, and I prefer larger phones anyway.

 

Now hole punch camera, that's a problem. Worse than notches ever were.

Why do you find the hole punch worse than the notch? It's significantly smaller.

49 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

Currently an iPhone user though I used to do Android. Personally as far as SOC's go, as long as the phone feels snappy Id say any CPU would be fine. I personally dont use mine as a gaming device and if I do game on my phone its Candy Crush Saga or those type of games. 

 

To me as long as you have a decent amount of ram and decent amount of storage that's really what matters. If I did go back to Android a Google Pixel or a OnePlus phone would be what I go with. Im not a fan of Samsung phones. 

 

Screen size it would be a bit bigger than the iPhone XR I have. Personally I dont think I would notice much. To me at the 6 inch ish mark you get a decent size, and its pretty good for web browsing and watching videos. 

What don't you like about Samsung phones? They've been my favorite by far so far, the Note5 still being my favorite device I've ever owned.

8GB should be plenty, and I don't reeeeeally care too much about storage; I can't imagine they'll put anything less than 128GB in the base model and that's enough for me. I'm definitely looking for a larger screen on my next phone. I have a 5.8" screen now and it's way, way too small.

[Donut417]

1 minute ago, dizmo said:

What don't you like about Samsung phones?

First smartphone I ever had was a Samsung Moment. It was a pile of dog crap. Had at least 5 replacements from Sprint as well did my Sister. My sister had numerous of the S series Samsungs and it seemed like she always had issues. My sister had an S7 as well as my mom. Both of them had issues with the device. My sister moved to Apple, I moved to Apple, my mom moved to a Motorola device. As a result of my experience and my sister and mom's experience I won't buy Samsung phones. 

 

Now their Displays, TV's and SSD's Im totally cool with, just not their phones. Probably wouldn't buy one of their tablets either. 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, dizmo said:

So I'm getting a new phone this year, and while none have really grabbed my attention as must haves (the Note20 Ultra is up there, but with COVID I'd rather not be dropping that much cash), rumors of the next Pixel have been rather enticing for me. It seems like they're finally hitting a lot of the points that a proper flagship should have, save for the SoC. However, since Pixels are mostly known for their camera, I don't see this as a huge downside, especially given the nice drop in price over something like the S20, or a similar device. If they can still have a snappy system with a lower grade SoC, I don't see a huge issue with that. It seems like they're going back to a more Nexus like approach.

 

Here are the rumored spec:

• Snapdragon 765G
• 8GB RAM
• 6.67" screen
• 120hz refresh rate
• Potentially reverse wireless charging
• $699 base price

 

What do you think? Would you be down for something like this, or would you be more interested if it had a very premium build, Soli, a Snapdragon 865+, and 12GB of RAM for an extra ~$400?

 

Are you upset that there might not be a smaller size?

 

I was going to hold out and grab an S20+ when they have some Black Friday sales, however seeing the spec of this phone it might have moved into the lead for me...provided they don't completely screw up the battery.

In my view, companies have convinced most of the public that they need these high end phones with lots of RAM and the latest processors to do normal every day tasks like social media, messaging, taking photos/video and talking on the phone. Very few people need phones like the Note20 Ultra 5G or whatever it's called, most if its power is wasted on the general public. Even 'gamers' can get by with midrange hardware. And the amount of time and R&D devoted to these MASSIVE camera systems is absolutely ridiculous. But that's a rant for another day.

 

I like the Pixel 4a specs - give me the basics and fundamentals and throw out the gimmicks. Don't need Soli, wireless charging, face unlock, IP68 (get a case), none of that. A slab of silicon and plastic shouldn't cost more than my mortgage payment. Just my two cents though. 

[dizmo]

2 hours ago, Stylized_Violence said:

In my view, companies have convinced most of the public that they need these high end phones with lots of RAM and the latest processors to do normal every day tasks like social media, messaging, taking photos/video and talking on the phone. Very few people need phones like the Note20 Ultra 5G or whatever it's called, most if its power is wasted on the general public. Even 'gamers' can get by with midrange hardware. And the amount of time and R&D devoted to these MASSIVE camera systems is absolutely ridiculous. But that's a rant for another day.

 

I like the Pixel 4a specs - give me the basics and fundamentals and throw out the gimmicks. Don't need Soli, wireless charging, face unlock, IP68 (get a case), none of that. A slab of silicon and plastic shouldn't cost more than my mortgage payment. Just my two cents though. 

They are improving though, and that's impressive in it's own right. Not really sure what you'd rather they focus on. Phones are their job.

Cameras in particular have come leaps and bounds from where they were 10 years ago. Even year over year they're seeing serious improvements.

 

I kind of agree with you on the Pixel 4a, which is why this interests me. While I couldn't give a fuck less about Soli, wireless charging is something I'd want, and I simply can't stand a phone with such a small screen. I'm not super picky on what the phone's made of since it'll be in a case, but case availability is important and if it's made of less-than-adequate materials it can lose a lot of rigidity. I've owned an Asus phone that they skimped on the aluminium with, to fit a large battery into a thin chassis. It's the only phone I've bent through regular use.

 

As for the mortgage payment, kind of depends where you live I guess I think if you're going for a flagship phone, it's going to have a flagship price. Take the Note, for example. There's a considerable amount of engineering and R&D that goes into those devices. Those costs don't magically disappear.

2 minutes ago, huilun02 said:

$700 for a SD765 device?

 

What in the fuckity fuck?

 

Google can keep wondering why their overpriced crap isn't as popular as they'd like it to be.

I mean, to be fair we don't know the whole device. It's possible it has a lot of storage, a massive battery, or a unique material for the chassis. One of the phones in their teaser is definitely different than the 4a, so I'm hoping they did something unique or interesting there.

 

$700 really isn't that bad, though. It's only a couple hundred more than a OnePlus with the same SoC would cost, but with a higher refresh screen and a significantly better camera. If they do a couple of other improvements I'd see it being an alternative to consider for sure.

[Guest]

29 minutes ago, dizmo said:

I think if you're going for a flagship phone, it's going to have a flagship price. Take the Note, for example. There's a considerable amount of engineering and R&D that goes into those devices. Those costs don't magically disappear.

That's my point, so much goes into those devices for people that won't use half of its power, yet we're convinced we need it for 'productivity' or something. I know the costs don't magically disappear, I'm saying the asking price for a phone is just too damn high for what most people use their devices for. A 'flagship' phone is just all around a waste of money except for a very niche audience.

 

32 minutes ago, dizmo said:

They are improving though, and that's impressive in it's own right. Not really sure what you'd rather they focus on. Phones are their job.

Cameras in particular have come leaps and bounds from where they were 10 years ago. Even year over year they're seeing serious improvements.

You're right, camera tech has come a long way. But why do we need all that tech in a phone? Like we could cut costs by scaling back the camera, just a little bit, and not putting a hundred lenses into it. Put that extra money into battery life, radio strength, modem speed and general build quality so the phone doesn't become obsolete in just a year or two. I know I sound cynical as fuck, I'm just tired of seeing these $1000+ phones that'll be irrelevant in two years because the attention span of the average consumer is so short.

[Lord Vile]

8 hours ago, dizmo said:

So I'm getting a new phone this year, and while none have really grabbed my attention as must haves (the Note20 Ultra is up there, but with COVID I'd rather not be dropping that much cash), rumors of the next Pixel have been rather enticing for me. It seems like they're finally hitting a lot of the points that a proper flagship should have, save for the SoC. However, since Pixels are mostly known for their camera, I don't see this as a huge downside, especially given the nice drop in price over something like the S20, or a similar device. If they can still have a snappy system with a lower grade SoC, I don't see a huge issue with that. It seems like they're going back to a more Nexus like approach.

 

Here are the rumored spec:

• Snapdragon 765G
• 8GB RAM
• 6.67" screen
• 120hz refresh rate
• Potentially reverse wireless charging
• $699 base price

 

What do you think? Would you be down for something like this, or would you be more interested if it had a very premium build, Soli, a Snapdragon 865+, and 12GB of RAM for an extra ~$400?

 

Are you upset that there might not be a smaller size?

 

I was going to hold out and grab an S20+ when they have some Black Friday sales, however seeing the spec of this phone it might have moved into the lead for me...provided they don't completely screw up the battery.

Dunno because $700 is iPhone 11 territory where you're getting similar camera quality and a much better SoC. Maybe if it was at 500-600 where the XR which has last gen parts in it too then it might be a good deal. 

[dizmo]

6 minutes ago, Stylized_Violence said:

That's my point, so much goes into those devices for people that won't use half of its power, yet we're convinced we need it for 'productivity' or something. I know the costs don't magically disappear, I'm saying the asking price for a phone is just too damn high for what most people use their devices for. A 'flagship' phone is just all around a waste of money except for a very niche audience.

 

You're right, camera tech has come a long way. But why do we need all that tech in a phone? Like we could cut costs by scaling back the camera, just a little bit, and not putting a hundred lenses into it. Put that extra money into battery life, radio strength, modem speed and general build quality so the phone doesn't become obsolete in just a year or two. I know I sound cynical as fuck, I'm just tired of seeing these $1000+ phones that'll be irrelevant in two years because the attention span of the average consumer is so short.

I think most people just want to know they have the best of the best, and since phones are still relatively new in the grand scheme of tech, the price difference from entry level potato to top of the line with all the bells and whistles is really quite small. So they'll make that leap. We'll only see phones grow in price, until we see a similar gap to what we see in computers now.

 

I mean....you can easily pay less for a phone. No one's making these people pay flagship prices. When you pay less, yeah, you'll get a worse camera, etc, like you said. You have all that tech in a phone because there's enough people that find it interesting, or see it as something that they want. Ahh yes. I've seen a lot of people say that they should work on those things, but the simple fact is they don't really have control over battery tech, or modem speed, or how long something is supported (to a point). Battery tech is handled by a different company. Modem speed is up to the SoC, which usually isn't designed by them. Support can be cut off by the SoC manufacturer, and how long they decide to support their product. Build quality is a solid point, but phones are pretty well made these days. You can easily use phones for many years more than most people do, but the way most plans are structured it makes more sense just to get a new one, though that's slowly changing.

 

End of the day, though, it shouldn't really bother you at all; vote with your wallet. If you don't see the point in them, don't buy them, and ignore them.

Leave them to those of us like myself that get a new phone every year or so because the tech is exciting to us.

 

3 minutes ago, Lord Vile said:

Dunno because $700 is iPhone 11 territory where you're getting similar camera quality and a much better SoC. Maybe if it was at 500-600 where the XR which has last gen parts in it too then it might be a good deal. 

Ehhh I never bought that reasoning. Someone who's looking at an Android, especially a Pixel, likely isn't that interested in going over to Apple.

[Lord Vile]

1 minute ago, dizmo said:

Ehhh I never bought that reasoning. Someone who's looking at an Android, especially a Pixel, likely isn't that interested in going over to Apple.

I would say the Pixel is the closest thing android has to an iPhone, it's stock android essentially, supports all the features and has a great camera. Would have thought there's good overlap between them. 

[dizmo]

2 minutes ago, Lord Vile said:

I would say the Pixel is the closest thing android has to an iPhone, it's stock android essentially, supports all the features and has a great camera. Would have thought there's good overlap between them. 

True, I just mean if someone's shopping Android devices, they're probably not really that interested in Apple's.

[BobVonBob]

8 hours ago, dizmo said:

Why do you find the hole punch worse than the notch? It's significantly smaller.

The vestigial extra screen around it. It does absolutely nothing but make the hole punch way more obvious and jarring than a notch ever was. I still hate both, but I hate hole punches more. I'm planning to stick with my Note 9 until under screen cameras exist or it dies.

[Lord Vile]

54 minutes ago, BobVonBob said:

The vestigial extra screen around it. It does absolutely nothing but make the hole punch way more obvious and jarring than a notch ever was. I still hate both, but I hate hole punches more. I'm planning to stick with my Note 9 until under screen cameras exist or it dies.

Plus notches have more functionality like a speaker, FaceID and such. 

[Guest]

20 hours ago, dizmo said:

I think most people just want to know they have the best of the best, and since phones are still relatively new in the grand scheme of tech, the price difference from entry level potato to top of the line with all the bells and whistles is really quite small. So they'll make that leap. We'll only see phones grow in price, until we see a similar gap to what we see in computers now.

 

I mean....you can easily pay less for a phone. No one's making these people pay flagship prices. When you pay less, yeah, you'll get a worse camera, etc, like you said. You have all that tech in a phone because there's enough people that find it interesting, or see it as something that they want. Ahh yes. I've seen a lot of people say that they should work on those things, but the simple fact is they don't really have control over battery tech, or modem speed, or how long something is supported (to a point). Battery tech is handled by a different company. Modem speed is up to the SoC, which usually isn't designed by them. Support can be cut off by the SoC manufacturer, and how long they decide to support their product. Build quality is a solid point, but phones are pretty well made these days. You can easily use phones for many years more than most people do, but the way most plans are structured it makes more sense just to get a new one, though that's slowly changing.

 

End of the day, though, it shouldn't really bother you at all; vote with your wallet. If you don't see the point in them, don't buy them, and ignore them.

Leave them to those of us like myself that get a new phone every year or so because the tech is exciting to us.

I understand that, and frankly I'm not really arguing against what you're saying. I'm just throwing my two cents into where I see the phone industry as a whole; I do buy with my wallet, it just pains me to see friends of mine throw entire paychecks at a flagship phone in order to tweet on a slightly bigger and brighter screen. I know I'm pretty much alone in my thinking, but your main topic was what would I prefer in a phone and if it wasn't obvious, midrange specs for a better price.