Pixel 3 XL Unboxing Video (Leak)

[Itsa_Me_Mario]

I'd rather have more battery, especially with more screen, if that's the trade off to put in wireless charging. Outside of trying the wireless charging I my wife's car, I would never use it.

I don't disagree at all.

 

[mustang7757]

the note 9 has big battery plus wireless charging and water resistance..

 

[ClintRo]

Yea, not buying the wireless charging is the reason for lower battery... 1mm thick.... damn you could eliminate the camera hump and have extra room for both wireless and more battery...

https://forums.androidcentral.com/e...k0iaQ7j_sakxkLGhEaAvnvEALw_wcB&token=gPW9PuaQ

 

[Itsa_Me_Mario]

Yea, not buying the wireless charging is the reason for lower battery... 1mm thick.... damn you could eliminate the camera hump and have extra room for both wireless and more battery...

https://forums.androidcentral.com/e...k0iaQ7j_sakxkLGhEaAvnvEALw_wcB&token=a9heRpNE

View attachment 288783

That's more than 12% of the thickness of the entire phone. Reducing the volume available by that much and only reducing the battery by 2% makes you think it is an inefficient trade off?

 

[Itsa_Me_Mario]

the note 9 has big battery plus wireless charging and water resistance..

Yep, the P3XL has about 15% less battery capacity, which if it was apples to apples, would mean about 1 less hour of usage per user than the Note 9. It's not apples to apples, so they're probably very similar in real world usage. I definitely agree, all other things being equal, more battery is good. But that is where what I was saying about engineering innovation comes into play. I've seen "10 years of hardware experience" thrown around, but that's including the Nexus products that Google didn't design and a bunch of devices that weren't phones. And let's face it, no Nexus or Pixel has ever shown off a new hardware innovation.

 

[mustang7757]

Yep, the P3XL has about 15% less battery capacity, which if it was apples to apples, would mean about 1 less hour of usage per user than the Note 9. It's not apples to apples, so they're probably very similar in real world usage. I definitely agree, all other things being equal, more battery is good. But that is where what I was saying about engineering innovation comes into play. I've seen "10 years of hardware experience" thrown around, but that's including the Nexus products that Google didn't design and a bunch of devices that weren't phones. And let's face it, no Nexus or Pixel has ever shown off a new hardware innovation.

I usually have about 3 cups of coffees a day, I'm on my 4th Speaking as of now

 

[atakin77]

Yep, the P3XL has about 15% less battery capacity, which if it was apples to apples, would mean about 1 less hour of usage per user than the Note 9. It's not apples to apples, so they're probably very similar in real world usage. I definitely agree, all other things being equal, more battery is good. But that is where what I was saying about engineering innovation comes into play. I've seen "10 years of hardware experience" thrown around, but that's including the Nexus products that Google didn't design and a bunch of devices that weren't phones. And let's face it, no Nexus or Pixel has ever shown off a new hardware innovation.

Wasn't the Nexus 5 the first phone with wireless charging? Believe it was but if not, it was one of the first.

Not trying to harp on this, but painting the picture that Google is new to phones and should be given a pass is just not true. The nexus line was introduced almost a decade ago and Google has been very involved in the design of all of their phones. They now directly employ the engineers whereas in the past they'd contract that with a third party and work very closely with those teams. Google didn't just call someone and ask them to build a Nexus and sit back and wait until release to see what they were getting. They even bought Motorola to get phone patents.

 

[Itsa_Me_Mario]

Wasn't the Nexus 5 the first phone with wireless charging? Believe it was but if not, it was one of the first.

Not trying to harp on this, but painting the picture that Google is new to phones and should be given a pass is just not true. The nexus line was introduced almost a decade ago and Google has been very involved in the design of all of their phones. They now directly employ the engineers whereas in the past they'd contract that with a third party and work very closely with those teams. Google didn't just call someone and ask them to build a Nexus and sit back and wait until release to see what they were getting. They even bought Motorola to get phone patents.

Yeah I think I get where you're coming from I just disagreed on their level of involvement in the particulars with the Nexus program and I would emphatically disagree that Google has ever innovated anything in the smartphone space that is a new hardware feature not developed in parallel or direct partnership with a different OEM.

The Nexus 5 was definitely not the first phone with wireless charging. The Nexus 4 had wireless charging as well and it was also not the first.

If Google does jumping to the hardware space as a contender serious about trying to innovate, my best guess is that the first place they would try to do so would be in developing a system-on-a-chip that can make their software shine even more.

There is one simple reason that Google is making smartphones and that is that they don't think any other OEM is properly laying out their vision for how the software on phones should be presented. Google doesn't really have that much invested in repeat buyers of their Hardware division in any other category of product and I don't think that they're going to try to become dependent on the same in this one. If Google can develop a bit of silicone that will make it so you can buy one phone that you can keep for three or four or five years that is much more of a win for them then if you buy one phone from them and one from LG and one Google and one from Apple Etc. I'm having trouble finding the blog post but Google has directly said that they don't see the market of smart phones being viable if it becomes dependent on every person upgrading once every one or two years. with that in mind I think it's somewhat understandable that they're not developing devices that are a major upgrade over their current generation, they're developing devices that might entice somebody who's a couple Generations behind.

I very rarely agree with Andrew Martonik. But I absolutely agree that Google is not even trying to develop phones that are going to appeal for the most Ardent smartphone fanatics who take the entire tale of the tape from the spec sheet. Nothing that they have done in any generation of the Pixel phones or Nexus phones has ever been trying to capture that market. in fact the only time I've seen them really go to the nines in consumer Hardware is the Chromebook Pixels and the Pixelbook.

They're simply playing a different game and I understand that people wish that they would be playing the game that they want them to play but that's unfortunately not where we are and if I'm being realistic and honest I don't think that's ever where we've been with this company.

 

[dsignori]

...
They're simply playing a different game and I understand that people wish that they would be playing the game that they want them to play but that's unfortunately not where we are and if I'm being realistic and honest I don't think that's ever where we've been with this company.

I agree of course, and I doubt many here are actually disagreeing. I also don't think designing is binary either though, which is what I keep seeing in the replies. I don't think it just EITHER (a) design for the experience only or (b) Design with the absolute top specs.

My point is there is plenty of middle ground here. Saying they needed a bigger battery, doesn't put them in column (b), it just means consumer demand is dictating this and most folks want this and would benefit from this. There are plenty of other examples too. I just think it's important to realize that just because a potential user thinks Google blew it by not <adding xzy>, doesn't mean they think Google needs to go all out on specs like Samsung.

There is an option (c) is all

 

[I Can Be Your Hero]

I'd rather have more battery, especially with more screen, if that's the trade off to put in wireless charging. Outside of trying the wireless charging I my wife's car, I would never use it.

It's definitely not a trade-off. Other phones manage to pack bigger batteries and have wireless charging, but Google somehow don't have the engineers to pull it off, or even worse, they didn't want to.

Big battery and wireless charging aren't mutually exclusive.

 

[Itsa_Me_Mario]

It's definitely not a trade-off. Other phones manage to pack bigger batteries and have wireless charging, but Google somehow don't have the engineers to pull it off, or even worse, they didn't want to.

Big battery and wireless charging aren't mutually exclusive.

It is a trade off if you're not changing the chassis in any significant way. If you have x amount of space and decide to add anything, it is always going to reduce available space for something else. Everything about component placement is about managing space and heat. It isn't a TARDIS.

 

[mustang7757]

looks to me Google cutting corners here and there

 

[anon(10092459)]

I agree of course, and I doubt many here are actually disagreeing. I also don't think designing is binary either though, which is what I keep seeing in the replies. I don't think it just EITHER (a) design for the experience only or (b) Design with the absolute top specs.

My point is there is plenty of middle ground here. Saying they needed a bigger battery, doesn't put them in column (b), it just means consumer demand is dictating this and most folks want this and would benefit from this. There are plenty of other examples too. I just think it's important to realize that just because a potential user thinks Google blew it by not <adding xzy>, doesn't mean they think Google needs to go all out on specs like Samsung.

There is an option (c) is all

I agree with the spirit of what I think you're saying. While design isn't "either/or", I do think it's more of which has the greater importance for Google. I'd say that's UX and software.

I know that some in the community feel that Google should be putting out specs and competing directly against their partners in Android, but I have a tough time viewing that as reasonable.

If a user feels that Google "blew it" regarding the 2% reduction battery size, when I look at the competing offerings from Apple the mAh is far less than what Google is offering with the 8+ at 2691 and the X at 2716 and they sold 10's of millions of those phones. So, sincere question... Is battery size really an issue, or is the concern more around power management and longevity?

 

[I Can Be Your Hero]

I agree with the spirit of what I think you're saying. While design isn't "either/or", I do think it's more of which has the greater importance for Google. I'd say that's UX and software.

I know that some in the community feel that Google should be putting out specs and competing directly against their partners in Android, but I have a tough time viewing that as reasonable.

If a user feels that Google "blew it" regarding the 2% reduction battery size, when I look at the competing offerings from Apple the mAh is far less than what Google is offering with the 8+ at 2691 and the X at 2716 and they sold 10's of millions of those phones. So, sincere question... Is battery size really an issue, or is the concern more around power management and longevity?

If Google are again going to charge $850 or even more for the 3XL, I think it's entirely reasonable to expect very high specifications on the phone, similar to the competition around that price range.

And with the iPhone, iOS is a far more efficient platform than Android is and Apple are the only iPhone manufacturers. There is no 3rd party iOS manufacturer, so you can't compare the iPhone X specs to specs from another iOS phone device from another company. So comparing Android to iOS isn't going to work. They're are a range of Android phones at the $850+ price range that the P3XL has to compete with.

 

[osubeavs728]

And with the iPhone, iOS is a far more efficient platform than Android is and Apple are the only iPhone manufacturers. There is no 3rd party iOS manufacturer, so you can't compare the iPhone X specs to specs from another iOS phone device from another company. So comparing Android to iOS isn't going to work. They're are a range of Android phones at the $850+ price range that the P3XL has to compete with.

You only say that because it doesn't fit your narrative. It doesn't matter that there are other high end Android phones in the same price bracket. That's not who Google is trying to compete with. They're trying to compete with and position themselves as an Apple alternative. Therefore, that's who they benchmark themselves against, this is basic business stuff.

 

[Itsa_Me_Mario]

You only say that because it doesn't fit your narrative. It doesn't matter that there are other high end Android phones in the same price bracket. That's not who Google is trying to compete with. They're trying to compete with and position themselves as an Apple alternative. Therefore, that's who they benchmark themselves against, this is basic business stuff.

The entire point of what you just said is lost on the some, an example of which can be examined in the statement, "you can't compare the iPhone X specs to specs from another iOS phone device from another company". It is lost on people that it's not all about specs or the possibility that specs might not even be a driving force in overall quality.

 

[anon(10092459)]

If Google are again going to charge $850 or even more for the 3XL, I think it's entirely reasonable to expect very high specifications on the phone, similar to the competition around that price range.

I hear what you're saying, and no I don't think it's unreasonable to have that thought as a consumer. However, I don't think that equals them "blowing it" either. Samsung literally offered the same phone between the S8/8+ and the S9/9+. No real differences in generations and they sell more phones than anyone on Android (though a few less this year).

And with the iPhone, iOS is a far more efficient platform than Android is and Apple are the only iPhone manufacturers. There is no 3rd party iOS manufacturer, so you can't compare the iPhone X specs to specs from another iOS phone device from another company. So comparing Android to iOS isn't going to work. They're are a range of Android phones at the $850+ price range that the P3XL has to compete with.

I think it's important to remember that our community doesn't represent the avg consumer who couldn't care less about what we're discussing. Ask average Joe what size battery they have in their phone and they'll have no idea. All they know is how long does it last.

Apple is important part of the discussion because they are the sole competitor for all of Android. Google has to consider the grander picture that LG, Samsung, Huawei and whoever else don't have to consider because they don't own Android or the Play Store or the same aspirations. So losing a user to iOS is more important than whether or not we pick a different Android OEM, IMO. I believe they're competing for that user.

Still the original question remains... Is battery size really an issue, or is the concern more around power management and longevity?

 

[anon(10092459)]

The entire point of what you just said is lost on the some, an example of which can be examined in the statement, "you can't compare the iPhone X specs to specs from another iOS phone device from another company". It is lost on people that it's not all about specs or the possibility that specs might not even be a driving force in overall quality.

Indeed. In fact, a recent survey suggests that when people leave Android it's mainly about the user experience. 47% of people that left Android for iOS for that very reason.

https://www.pcmag.com/news/363269/why-do-people-switch-between-mobile-operating-systems

People are willing to pay more for what they perceive as a better user experience. Everything else is just lower on the list.

 

[Mike Dee]

The entire point of what you just said is lost on the some, an example of which can be examined in the statement, "you can't compare the iPhone X specs to specs from another iOS phone device from another company". It is lost on people that it's not all about specs or the possibility that specs might not even be a driving force in overall quality.

Makes sense to me.

 

[osubeavs728]

The entire point of what you just said is lost on the some, an example of which can be examined in the statement, "you can't compare the iPhone X specs to specs from another iOS phone device from another company". It is lost on people that it's not all about specs or the possibility that specs might not even be a driving force in overall quality.

Sadly, I know but we can dream that some folks are out here doin' some learnin'.