What do you want to see in Pixel 2017

[xocomaox]

It really only needs smaller bezels and a larger storage option. Ideally expandable storage to keep price down.

 

[cydewaze]

It's so funny how nobody cared about water resistance until Samsung and apple started calling it a feature...now the pixel is inferior for not having something that most people will never need.

Like any feature, the need for it depends on you.

I'm an avid cyclist, and I loved being able to toss my S5 in my jersey and not worry about it. Only got caught in the rain with it twice, but once would have been it with my old Moto. Now I'm back to stuffing my phone in a ziplock bag before I head out, which makes it clunkier to deal with if I need to use it (calls, maps, etc).

Another friend who rides stuck his cellphone into a ziplock bag and got caught in the rain. The bag leaked and his phone was toast. That makes me paranoid enough to invest in a proper waterproof phone pouch.

 

[xocomaox]

Easy. Make the bottom of the phone the same thickness as the top and there's now space for a bigger battery. And you get a slightly more bottom-weighted phone in the process.

The Pixel's battery is pretty much in the middle of the phone, so making a thicker battery isn't going to make it more bottom-weighted.

 

[ottscay]

I just set up my wife's Pixel - I'd go for improved weather proofing for sure, and a bit better bezel ratio to screen size would be nice. And if the bezels must be so large I'd like to see stereo sound. Otherwise, I'm pretty impressed with the little 5" device.

 

[ottscay]

This would make me not purchase the phone.

Agreed - I hate Samsung-style buttons on the chin. On-screen FTW!

 

[rslifkin]

Agreed - I hate Samsung-style buttons on the chin. On-screen FTW!

The other fix would be to use the big chin and make the screen taller. Like going to 5.2" / 5.7" but without changing the overall size of the phone.

I'm coming at this from the perspective of "wasted space". If that space at the bottom isn't screen, there's no reason for the buttons to be using screen space that could be displaying something else.

 

[ottscay]

The other fix would be to use the big chin and make the screen taller. Like going to 5.2" / 5.7" but without changing the overall size of the phone.

I'm coming at this from the perspective of "wasted space". If that space at the bottom isn't screen, there's no reason for the buttons to be using screen space that could be displaying something else.

I understand - I know the bezels really get to some people, and I'd certainly love for the screens to use them for some free extra screen size, or even just stereo forward-facing speakers ala the Nexus 6p.

But I'm just personally not as bothered by the bezels as others are - the internal space behind the bezels isn't wasted, and if you make the side bezels much thinner you have to give up the 2.5D glass edge, which I appreciate far more than the large chin bothers me. I do have a soft-spot for the Nexus 6/Moto X designs that had more favorable screen to bezel ratios, but those had tradeoffs too, including being thicker and wider (and so harder to hold for their size), and frequently having smaller batteries than similarly sized models.

 

[Aquila]

The other fix would be to use the big chin and make the screen taller. Like going to 5.2" / 5.7" but without changing the overall size of the phone. I'm coming at this from the perspective of "wasted space". If that space at the bottom isn't screen, there's no reason for the buttons to be using screen space that could be displaying something else.

I'd have an issue with the distorted aspect ratio if they did it that way.

 

[rslifkin]

I'd have an issue with the distorted aspect ratio if they did it that way.

Depends on how they implement it. If they basically add just enough to the screen to account for the buttons and most apps still use the 16:9 portion of the screen above the buttons, I'd see no issue. But now you don't have the buttons intruding on the screen space you want to use for other things.

 

[wordfool]

I'm an avid cyclist, and I loved being able to toss my S5 in my jersey and not worry about it. Only got caught in the rain with it twice, but once would have been it with my old Moto. Now I'm back to stuffing my phone in a ziplock bag before I head out, which makes it clunkier to deal with if I need to use it (calls, maps, etc).

Oh gawd... you just reminded me of another reason to potentially not get the pixel. I totally forgot that I never currently have to worry about using my cellphone in my handlebar mount in the rain. It's amazing that in just a few years you forget how normalized certain features become. Having to put a phone in a ziplock baggie is so 2014!

 

[Aquila]

Depends on how they implement it. If they basically add just enough to the screen to account for the buttons and most apps still use the 16:9 portion of the screen above the buttons, I'd see no issue. But now you don't have the buttons intruding on the screen space you want to use for other things.

That'd break immersive mode, causing it to letterbox rather than actually use the whole display. My preference would be to leave the screen alone and encourage developers to properly use the display space.

 

[thatguy97]

That'd break immersive mode, causing it to letterbox rather than actually use the whole display. My preference would be to leave the screen alone and encourage developers to properly use the display space.

I remember letterboxing being terrible on the iPhone 4 with video.

 

[rslifkin]

That'd break immersive mode, causing it to letterbox rather than actually use the whole display. My preference would be to leave the screen alone and encourage developers to properly use the display space.

I guess that could get annoying on the white faced pixels.

 

[Impulses]

It's so funny how nobody cared about water resistance until Samsung and apple started calling it a feature...now the pixel is inferior for not having something that most people will never need.

There's nothing wrong with that IMO, some people did care so they bought a Sony or whatever, Samsung didn't *just* start making weather resistant phones either... The S5 was weather resistant but it partially relied on port plugs etc. They skipped it over on the S6, people asked why, so they then brought it back for the S7.

I get what you're saying about people being two faced about it, but unless you're keeping a log or you're calling out people you know personally it's kind of a baseless gripe/accusation.

For me personally it's something that would be nice to have but far from a deal breaker. I'd even rank wireless charging above it since that's a convenience I'd take advantage of much more frequently.

Since two of the major players have now made it sorta standard I think it's fair to demand it or at the very least state that it's a genuine value add without a pointless brand debate. That being said, even if my phone were weather resistant and officially rated for it I'd treat it like a last recourse and wouldn't fully trust it the way I might trust my camera's weather sealing (Olympus E-M5 II).

For one thing, none of the companies in question have extensive experience with weather sealing electronics (Sony probably has more than most), and for another thing the seals can and will degrade over time. Nevermind that having uncovered ports is a compromise that even cameras with lower ratings usually avoid.

I think some of the ads are overstating how much these seals are to be relied on... Dropping it in a fountain fine, it's an accident, but purposely rinsing a phone under a tap (S5 ad) or going out in a thunderstorm with it (iPhone 7 ad) seems like pushing it, at best.

 

[Impulses]

You do realize Apple has this exact same issue right? With people not getting their iPhone for 2+ months if they didn't pre-order right away?

I get being upset about not getting one but I truly don't understand why everyone thinks Apple somehow is able to get the phone into everyone's hands on release day when that is 110% false.

Apple is moving millions of units more and doing it at least as well, if not better. It's not an apt comparison IMO. Google has Apple's resources (tho not their logistical efficiency) yet the Pixel launch, volume wise, is surely something more along the lines of an HTC or LG flagship launch.

If any of the smaller players made a really good phone but then didn't have enough to sell even after a month they'd be getting crucified, rightfully so, even OnePlus selling at a lower price point has been taken to task over it. Part of what goes with charging flagship prices is making it a seamless experience from the start.

Ordering a Pixel, specially from Play, is anything but seamless or painless a month after launch. They need to fix that, full stop, no excuses.

 

[Impulses]

Def. not defensive much. I just don't get the whole "To compete with Apple they must get it out instantly" idea when ... Apple has never done that either. So I fail to see how they have to ship right away and can't have a backorder but others can. This doesn't go for Apple or Google specifically .. All phones go on back order if popular enough. Samsungs, LGs, etc.

Back order is one thing, that would be a step up from the current situation, but they've had several models the have not been available for back order for weeks at a time... You can claim the blue was limited edition, but there's no excuse for not being able to place a backorder for any XL nor the 128GB 5" black model.

Basically you can order the small silver one, maybe black/32, and you're still looking at several weeks of lead time unless you go 32GB. To their credit they seem to be beating their ETAs by almost half the stated time, the ETAs are usually 3-4 weeks or 4-5 and many many orders seem to go out within 2-3 weeks.

That just shows their system is poorly managed and they don't quite have the logistics down, under promising and over delivering on ship dates is no consolation to the people that can't even order to begin with.

 

[Almeuit]

Apple is moving millions of units more and doing it at least as well, if not better. It's not an apt comparison IMO. Google has Apple's resources (tho not their logistical efficiency) yet the Pixel launch, volume wise, is surely something more along the lines of an HTC or LG flagship launch.

If any of the smaller players made a really good phone but then didn't have enough to sell even after a month they'd be getting crucified, rightfully so, even OnePlus selling at a lower price point has been taken to task over it. Part of what goes with charging flagship prices is making it a seamless experience from the start.

Ordering a Pixel, specially from Play, is anything but seamless or painless a month after launch. They need to fix that, full stop, no excuses.

For me I never crucified the OnePlus for being short -- I just hated their "invite" system. I would rather be on back order than have to wait to get an invite just to buy.

Also as you said -- Google def. doesn't have the logistical efficiency of Apple so they won't be in the same league. Regardless -- acting like Apple doesn't have the same back order issues is far fetched still to me.

 

[Impulses]

For me I never crucified the OnePlus for being short -- I just hated their "invite" system. I would rather be on back order than have to wait to get an invite just to buy.

Also as you said -- Google def. doesn't have the logistical efficiency of Apple so they won't be in the same league. Regardless -- acting like Apple doesn't have the same back order issues is far fetched still to me.

They have the resources to figure it out tho, it's not like we're talking about a cash strapped second fiddle OEM. If anything they should be doing better than Apple since they're just as big but they're handling far fewer orders. Why in the heck should almost sorta matching Apple be the standard they're held to? That's just a straw man argument IMO.

Now if they suddenly reveal Pixel orders went thru the roof and the numbers really are out of this world I'd be happy to change my story, somehow I doubt it tho. If they're having this much trouble now with a smaller launch and a new brand and a single carrier to feed stock to, they're never gonna be able to effectively sell it to 2-4 major carries unless they step their game up.

Apple is not only handling a far larger volume of orders but their supply chain is easily 5x larger and stock will also get diverted to four major carrier's retail stores plus Apple's own stores.

 

[Almeuit]

They have the resources to figure it out tho, it's not like we're talking about a cash strapped second fiddle OEM. If anything they should be doing better than Apple since they're just as big but they're handling far fewer orders. Why in the heck should almost sorta matching Apple be the standard they're held to? That's just a straw man argument IMO.

Now if they suddenly reveal Pixel orders went thru the roof and the numbers really are out of this world I'd be happy to change my story, somehow I doubt it tho. If they're having this much trouble now with a smaller launch and a new brand and a single carrier to feed stock to, they're never gonna be able to effectively sell it to 2-4 major carries unless they step their game up.

Apple is not only handling a far larger volume of orders but their supply chain is easily 5x larger and stock will also get diverted to four major carrier's retail stores plus Apple's own stores.

We can agree to disagree. My point was still acting like Apple doesn't have back order is far fetched. I have yet to see a phone that hasn't had back orders. My comment was to people expecting to order and get it right away when they ordered 1 to 2 weeks after the announcement. It is inevitable you will wait longer. It has been that way with any phone I have bought.

 

[Preach2k]

If they made this Pixel 2 last for two years of updates what makes you think that it will be an 2017 Pixel? The Next one could be in 2018.