Technology Android
- Thread starter THEV1LL4N
- Start date
I didn't think about that. I was thinking USB-C charging for MBPs was gone but, yeah, no reason for the TB4 ports to not also support charging if you don't want to use MagSafe. The more I think about it, I didn't care too much for MagSafe. When I had it on my old MBP, it was nice but with the USB-C cahrger I've been using, I've never really missed it. I'd want it on an iPad or phone, at least the way Apple has done with the iPhone, since I can continue to use the device while its charging without worrying about bending the wire and damaging it or the port of the device. Can't say I've worried too much about that with the USBC charging on my MBP, though.
I'm reading some headlines that are touting the power of some of the AS variants as being as powerful as a 2080 GPU. I'm sure it's sensationalized and I don't care if it is true because that's not going to affect gaming all that much. The glaring issue with the M1 Macs is no support for Boot Camp. Which means I can't boot in to Windows to play PC games. There's also no eGPU support, so that's a two-step hurdle to overcome to game using a Mac. To be fair, I haven't gamed in Windows all that much since getting a Series S but there are still going to be games only on PC or PS5/PC that the Xbox won't see and being able to boot in to Windows and still play it is one convenience I enjoy. If I were to get an M1 Mac, it'd be easier to sell my eGPU since I'd no longer have a use for it. And I don't think I'd get a PC just to game, so I wouldn't use the eGPU on that either.
I'll wait for a thorough review before getting hyped for it. The only benefits I'm seeing with AS-equipped Macs is better battery life. The performance may be greater but I'd only measure it using a game and not productivity suites like PS or FCP or something. After all, the Pro models now seem to be catered to Pro users instead of college kids or filthy casuals, like myself. I think the 16" MBP starts at $2600? Mac pricing was always ridiculous but they've taken it further with the AS Macs. That's definitely going to be a barrier to entry for a lot of people looking for a 15 or 16" machine. The performance between the 14 and 16", though, seems to be the same. Just the screen size and resolution is the differentiator.
I'm reading some headlines that are touting the power of some of the AS variants as being as powerful as a 2080 GPU. I'm sure it's sensationalized and I don't care if it is true because that's not going to affect gaming all that much. The glaring issue with the M1 Macs is no support for Boot Camp. Which means I can't boot in to Windows to play PC games. There's also no eGPU support, so that's a two-step hurdle to overcome to game using a Mac. To be fair, I haven't gamed in Windows all that much since getting a Series S but there are still going to be games only on PC or PS5/PC that the Xbox won't see and being able to boot in to Windows and still play it is one convenience I enjoy. If I were to get an M1 Mac, it'd be easier to sell my eGPU since I'd no longer have a use for it. And I don't think I'd get a PC just to game, so I wouldn't use the eGPU on that either.
I'll wait for a thorough review before getting hyped for it. The only benefits I'm seeing with AS-equipped Macs is better battery life. The performance may be greater but I'd only measure it using a game and not productivity suites like PS or FCP or something. After all, the Pro models now seem to be catered to Pro users instead of college kids or filthy casuals, like myself. I think the 16" MBP starts at $2600? Mac pricing was always ridiculous but they've taken it further with the AS Macs. That's definitely going to be a barrier to entry for a lot of people looking for a 15 or 16" machine. The performance between the 14 and 16", though, seems to be the same. Just the screen size and resolution is the differentiator.
The jury is still out on the new Pixels until reviews are out, but so far the regular Pixel 6 is probably the most competitive Pixel device yet. As expected, but it also actually feels nice to see it come true. So far my least favorite part of it is the dated design, but I'm glad that we're getting solid $600 flagships again. Otherwise they are really undercutting other makers this time around. The Pixel may not be enough to influence global phone markets, but I hope it's an early sign that we're getting back to smartphone price wars again.
Also as expected, the chip is a last gen Exynos with a big core swapped with the bigger core, and a couple of custom Google modules (image processing and 'AI' just as expected). In real use this will likely be indistinguishable from the performance of the S21, for $200 less, just a bit later and less pretty.
Also as expected, the chip is a last gen Exynos with a big core swapped with the bigger core, and a couple of custom Google modules (image processing and 'AI' just as expected). In real use this will likely be indistinguishable from the performance of the S21, for $200 less, just a bit later and less pretty.
Last edited:
Are you not a fan of the design? I think they look pretty good for something that is very different to everything else out there.
I really give Google credit for designing their Pixel phones and various other products with more than just the product itself in mind. I like the sustainable and inclusive approach they are taking and the way that they are using their technology to assist or improve other services.
I really give Google credit for designing their Pixel phones and various other products with more than just the product itself in mind. I like the sustainable and inclusive approach they are taking and the way that they are using their technology to assist or improve other services.
On the one hand, I'm a sucker for the spec sheet. On the other hand, I realize that my phone and the chipset will never be used to its max potential and that a mid-range phone could be just fine. But when you say the Pixel should be indistinguishable from the S21's performance, that's pretty neat, considering it's a $600 phone. I too am happy to see the prices come down a good bit for a decent phone. I don't know if the 6 is considered a mid ranger phone or not, compared to the Pro. I don't even know what I'd consider the S21 when compared to the S21 Ultra, since the latter seems so....extra... Features and price-wise.
I mentioned the trade in deals TMo has for a lot of the big phones out right now. The iPhone 13, the S21, but I just saw that with the Pixel 6's launch, they've added another, up to $900 towards a Pixel 6/Pro.
After asking Reddit about the flaws of the Pixel lineup, in general, the main complaint was bugs not being fixed on time and customer support being lacking. Didn't hear much about QC issues, which was my initial, assumed, concern with the Pixel phones. I hope it does well but I feel we'll see price drops on the S21 and Sixel lineup in the coming months. That might be what makes me upgrade; getting the phone for free with trade-in, or close to free. I'm still happy with my S10+, as i've mentioned 100 times, but $600-900 off a newer phone is worth the upgrade seeing as my S10+ is worth, maybe, $300 on the market otherwise.
I mentioned the trade in deals TMo has for a lot of the big phones out right now. The iPhone 13, the S21, but I just saw that with the Pixel 6's launch, they've added another, up to $900 towards a Pixel 6/Pro.
After asking Reddit about the flaws of the Pixel lineup, in general, the main complaint was bugs not being fixed on time and customer support being lacking. Didn't hear much about QC issues, which was my initial, assumed, concern with the Pixel phones. I hope it does well but I feel we'll see price drops on the S21 and Sixel lineup in the coming months. That might be what makes me upgrade; getting the phone for free with trade-in, or close to free. I'm still happy with my S10+, as i've mentioned 100 times, but $600-900 off a newer phone is worth the upgrade seeing as my S10+ is worth, maybe, $300 on the market otherwise.
Nice. I always wondered how they sounded compared to the Sony WH1000s. I got my xm3s a few months before the 700 headphones came out. And the xm4s came out like a year after the 700s. But at "free," they're going to sound like the best in the world lol
Reddit had a collection of all the Pixel 6 reviews as they were being released. I haven't looked at them but I did read a comment that said MKBHD gave it a 9/10 but would still delay his review a bit.
Android's offerings vary so much based on region, I have no experience with OnePlus and I don't think the brand is that popular here in the US. TMobile even gave them away for free to current customers just to get them on their new 5G network, but I don't think adoption rate was very high.
A comment on Reddit encompassed my feelings towards any Pixel device in recent years. They said they'd wait a few months to see if any quality issues pop up. But by that time, the S22 will be due out and the deals for those would be almost as good as the Pixel's. Unless the Pixel is discounted heavily by the time February rolls around, the have a small window to get those consumers on the fence in to the camp of the Pixel before they decide on a Samsung.
Sony Xperia Pro-I hands-on review - GSMArena.com tests
For those who aren't aware, the camera on this phone is a big deal. This has the latest 7th gen RX100's 1" sensor, just slightly gimped to give vloggers and youtubers a reason to shell out $1200+ for a RX100 proper (the Xperia captures a portion covering 12mpx instead of the full 20mpx). It's the best traditional digital camera sensor in existence. This is what people were saying would be a Sony killer feature if it ever came, and it is now here.
The camera quality appears to be second to none, capturing beautiful shots. Here are some samples:
Sony Xperia Pro-I hands-on review: Camera tech, Xperia Pro-I photos vs. iPhone 13 Pro, conclusion (gsmarena.com)
It's what other makers are striving towards with computational photography, except it's real life and real light captured on a class-leading camera sensor, the old-school way. And finally Sony gave smartphone camera nerds something to be excited about.
For those who aren't aware, the camera on this phone is a big deal. This has the latest 7th gen RX100's 1" sensor, just slightly gimped to give vloggers and youtubers a reason to shell out $1200+ for a RX100 proper (the Xperia captures a portion covering 12mpx instead of the full 20mpx). It's the best traditional digital camera sensor in existence. This is what people were saying would be a Sony killer feature if it ever came, and it is now here.
The camera quality appears to be second to none, capturing beautiful shots. Here are some samples:
Sony Xperia Pro-I hands-on review: Camera tech, Xperia Pro-I photos vs. iPhone 13 Pro, conclusion (gsmarena.com)
It's what other makers are striving towards with computational photography, except it's real life and real light captured on a class-leading camera sensor, the old-school way. And finally Sony gave smartphone camera nerds something to be excited about.
Last edited:
Facebook's new name is Meta: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/28/facebook-changes-company-name-to-meta.html
With the tech that Google uses in its Pixel devices with AI and other stuff, will vloggers and photographers care enough to still get an Xperia device just for this? I know Sony phones aren't popular in the US but even in Europe or Asia, aside from reviewers showing how great the camera quality is, will people still opt to ditch their iPhones and its camera quality in favor of this?
Still, kudos to Sony for doing this but I still feel that most of the mainstream YTers and such will stick to almost-as-good quality camera of the iPhone. One YTer I follow films all his B roll stuff with an iPhone 12. And I watched the MKBHD review of the Pixel 6 and in Night Mode the Pixel was incredible and for everything else the iPhone was better. Will the Xperia take the best of both worlds of those two phones without using any AI/algorithms and get image quality better than both of them?
With the tech that Google uses in its Pixel devices with AI and other stuff, will vloggers and photographers care enough to still get an Xperia device just for this? I know Sony phones aren't popular in the US but even in Europe or Asia, aside from reviewers showing how great the camera quality is, will people still opt to ditch their iPhones and its camera quality in favor of this?
Still, kudos to Sony for doing this but I still feel that most of the mainstream YTers and such will stick to almost-as-good quality camera of the iPhone. One YTer I follow films all his B roll stuff with an iPhone 12. And I watched the MKBHD review of the Pixel 6 and in Night Mode the Pixel was incredible and for everything else the iPhone was better. Will the Xperia take the best of both worlds of those two phones without using any AI/algorithms and get image quality better than both of them?
Lol RIP Facebook
That's the idea. The sensor is huge so it will absorb more light without having to rely on software tricks.
You'll get that phone if you care about the best, natural image quality on a phone.
Honestly, the US and Canada are more about getting phones that are popular. It took me a while to understand why the iPhone was popular before it was actually great at anything, until I moved to Canada and it feels like most phones that are out there just don't exist in most peoples' minds. But this isn't the case where I'm from. A lot of folks in many European markets buy phones based on features that they value. Which is also why I'm assuming Sony phones sell far better outside of those Western countries (and China) where in turn brand and "what will they think about me" matters more than optimally fulfilling your exact needs.
In Sony's more traditional markets people who value camera quality look for the phone with the best camera quality instead of settling for slightly less because it's from a brand you like more. People who value the biggest display will buy a phone with the biggest display, not buy the biggest iPhone. It's probably also why those markets are so completely different and why the variety of devices sold outside of North America is so incomparably bigger. People look at specs and buy the device that does what they care about better, with the secondary thought being "who does it better enough per $", with who makes it mattering way less.
I noticed and was annoyed by how a carrier in Canada will advertise iPhones and the newest Galaxy phones and offer virtually no choice apart from those and like 3 shitty phones nobody even looks at. Carriers in much of Europe will often advertise their variety and choice, where you'll be greeted by 15 or 20 equally showcased devices with "best for pictures", "best for performance", "best value overall package" etc. next to the phones offered. An iPhones will be one of them, a Sony phone will be there, and a Xiaomi phone would be there. These are the markets where Sony phones sell well. People who have the money, who want the best camera quality in a phone that's also an overall great package, will buy it and be very happy with it.
That's the idea. The sensor is huge so it will absorb more light without having to rely on software tricks.
You'll get that phone if you care about the best, natural image quality on a phone.
Honestly, the US and Canada are more about getting phones that are popular. It took me a while to understand why the iPhone was popular before it was actually great at anything, until I moved to Canada and it feels like most phones that are out there just don't exist in most peoples' minds. But this isn't the case where I'm from. A lot of folks in many European markets buy phones based on features that they value. Which is also why I'm assuming Sony phones sell far better outside of those Western countries (and China) where in turn brand and "what will they think about me" matters more than optimally fulfilling your exact needs.
In Sony's more traditional markets people who value camera quality look for the phone with the best camera quality instead of settling for slightly less because it's from a brand you like more. People who value the biggest display will buy a phone with the biggest display, not buy the biggest iPhone. It's probably also why those markets are so completely different and why the variety of devices sold outside of North America is so incomparably bigger. People look at specs and buy the device that does what they care about better, with the secondary thought being "who does it better enough per $", with who makes it mattering way less.
I noticed and was annoyed by how a carrier in Canada will advertise iPhones and the newest Galaxy phones and offer virtually no choice apart from those and like 3 shitty phones nobody even looks at. Carriers in much of Europe will often advertise their variety and choice, where you'll be greeted by 15 or 20 equally showcased devices with "best for pictures", "best for performance", "best value overall package" etc. next to the phones offered. An iPhones will be one of them, a Sony phone will be there, and a Xiaomi phone would be there. These are the markets where Sony phones sell well. People who have the money, who want the best camera quality in a phone that's also an overall great package, will buy it and be very happy with it.
Last edited:
I'd say the average person in NA is less-tech-savvy than most others and that being judged for what phone you have is just part of the equation and the other part is simply sticking with something familiar. This can be influenced by marketing campaigns on TV and billboards, which Apple is, probably, #1 in the US when it comes to the iPhone. Conversely, I don't see many, if any, Mac ads. Samsung is second in presence and I honestly think that's the end of the line as far as which brands advertise on such a large scale. I don't think the average person knows Sony makes phones or what OnePlus is. A distant third, in my opinion, in advertising is Motorola. I'll see a few ads for them here and there but since they make mid level phones and low-end phones these days, it's usually on a subsidiary carrier and not one of the big three ones. It'll be on Boost Mobile or something like that, on plans for people that may not have the credit to get a post-paid plan and contract. So that influences things, too.
Probably to drive up subscriber numbers. If you don't let everyone know that you too have the latest and greatest from the two most popular brands, they'll assume you don't carry it and go elsewhere. "We have the Pixel 6/Moto/Xperia!" isn't going to have people breaking down TMobile's doors to get their hands on one and all these carriers are in a pretty tight race for subscribers. The only other metric they can tout is either the breadth of their 5G coverage or their 5G speeds.
I think it helps that the iPhone and Galaxy flagships do everything pretty well. So if they're popular, people don't mind the difference between cameras of the Pixel/Galaxy/iPhone/Xperia. I think most people who use their cameraphones for a living would be more inclined to pick up an iPhone rather than take a shot on the Xperia. Same with the Galaxies. I'm no professional photographer, or anything for that matter, and I would still be far more likely to stick to a Galaxy or iPhone as my next phone because it's what's popular. I don't know what Sony's track record is for supporting a phone with updates 2 or 3 years from its release and it doesn't look like a risk I would take to find out.
Aside from a pro photographer, I can't see a carrier's campaign to advertise the superior Sony camera working on other customers to entice them to buy a Sony phone. The average customer might be interested, at first, with "the best camera on a phone on the market" but even then I think they'll think they don't need pro quality pictures and would instead stick with the familiar iPhone or Samsung device. That's just my feeling. It sounds like you and I both agree that the Sony would be a real niche product for people who would be brave enough to try out a Sony phone with the best camera instead of sticking with the mainstream choices of Apple and Samsung.
Probably to drive up subscriber numbers. If you don't let everyone know that you too have the latest and greatest from the two most popular brands, they'll assume you don't carry it and go elsewhere. "We have the Pixel 6/Moto/Xperia!" isn't going to have people breaking down TMobile's doors to get their hands on one and all these carriers are in a pretty tight race for subscribers. The only other metric they can tout is either the breadth of their 5G coverage or their 5G speeds.
I think it helps that the iPhone and Galaxy flagships do everything pretty well. So if they're popular, people don't mind the difference between cameras of the Pixel/Galaxy/iPhone/Xperia. I think most people who use their cameraphones for a living would be more inclined to pick up an iPhone rather than take a shot on the Xperia. Same with the Galaxies. I'm no professional photographer, or anything for that matter, and I would still be far more likely to stick to a Galaxy or iPhone as my next phone because it's what's popular. I don't know what Sony's track record is for supporting a phone with updates 2 or 3 years from its release and it doesn't look like a risk I would take to find out.
Aside from a pro photographer, I can't see a carrier's campaign to advertise the superior Sony camera working on other customers to entice them to buy a Sony phone. The average customer might be interested, at first, with "the best camera on a phone on the market" but even then I think they'll think they don't need pro quality pictures and would instead stick with the familiar iPhone or Samsung device. That's just my feeling. It sounds like you and I both agree that the Sony would be a real niche product for people who would be brave enough to try out a Sony phone with the best camera instead of sticking with the mainstream choices of Apple and Samsung.
From a North American perspective, yes. But Sony is still recognized as a significant smartphone brand in many places around the world. The narrowing of the limelight to just Apple and Samsung is largely a local thing that never took place in most markets. It's more of a peculiarity. It also ties back to our discussions about how sheltered this market is to what are the world's most popular smartphone brands like Xiaomi, Oppo, Vivo, Huawei (who were literally the biggest back in 2018/2019) etc. In North America you may hear about them without realizing how enormous they are, and how much of a last bastion NA is, being the only market that these haven't dominated.
In many markets Sony is a very trusted smartphone brand, and they made some of the most competitive Android phones over the years. Their phones are actually typically more expensive than Apple and Samsung and seen largely as less mainstream but more premium brand offering specialty features that go above and beyond. They are also delivering at least two major Android updates to their flagship phones. Many of the local tech forums over there have a culture of glorifying Sony phones, and there has been almost a snobbish attitude around them. If you browse GSMArena (that has more European folks posting) you will see comments generally disregarding the mainstream brands and favoring Sony. Their phones typically come with very lightly skinned stock Android, fancy 21:9 OLED displays, and Sony's best camera sensors, as well as any other premium bells and whistles they can pack to positively differentiate themselves from regular all-arounders like the iPhones and Galaxy series. The con is they don't have the same scale and ecosystem, being more niche indeed. Nevertheless, they make excellent phones.
In many markets Sony is a very trusted smartphone brand, and they made some of the most competitive Android phones over the years. Their phones are actually typically more expensive than Apple and Samsung and seen largely as less mainstream but more premium brand offering specialty features that go above and beyond. They are also delivering at least two major Android updates to their flagship phones. Many of the local tech forums over there have a culture of glorifying Sony phones, and there has been almost a snobbish attitude around them. If you browse GSMArena (that has more European folks posting) you will see comments generally disregarding the mainstream brands and favoring Sony. Their phones typically come with very lightly skinned stock Android, fancy 21:9 OLED displays, and Sony's best camera sensors, as well as any other premium bells and whistles they can pack to positively differentiate themselves from regular all-arounders like the iPhones and Galaxy series. The con is they don't have the same scale and ecosystem, being more niche indeed. Nevertheless, they make excellent phones.
Last edited:
Vanilla Android doesn't vary by region. That's the point. Samsung are just as bad as Apple, in my view. They spend a ton on marketing.
I buy the Pixel for the clean Android experience. Always my preference. Samsung adds a ton of shit and I haven't bought one since the S3.
Also... I never want to spend £1200 on a phone ever. Not because I can't afford it, but because it's obscene. The Pixel cost me £600, plus I got the Bose 700s (not that I actually wanted them). I pay £8 a month for my contract and get unlimited minutes and texts (that I barely use) and 30GB of data (of which I use about 5GB)
I believe that. We were just talking about perceptions of people in certain markets and how it can differ from the reality of it. I don't browse phone forums, like GSMarena, at all so I'm not aware of the reception Sony phones actually have in markets that actually sell it. I'd love to see it sold by a carrier here in the States but I can't remember the last one I saw on display at a carrier store.
I can understand that. I had an S3 back in the day and I remember TouchWiz getting in the way of a lot of things like the smoothness of the OS and it was also a hurdle when it came to software updates since it was an extra layer on top of stock Android that had to be optimized for Samsung phones. But I will say that Samsung's UI has come a long way from the TW days and that OneUI is pretty good. Maybe hardware specs have improved so much that running a custom UI is not as burdensome for the hardware anymore but I can't complain about Samsung's custom UI anymore, like I did with the S3. But I also can appreciate the look and feel of stock Android. I do still enjoy some bells and whistles that Samsung has.
One thing while watching MKBHD's video on the Pixel was him mentioning how the hardware of the Pixel is nothing special from current flagships but that Google's software and services that are exclusive to the Pixel is what really makes the phone. I never thought of it that way but when I thought about it, it made sense. It's miles ahead of others. There's the photo processing AI algorithm or whatever it is, that makes night shots so great. But I believe the phone has the ability to call and make reservations for places or make appointments? A bunch of stuff that Google has been working on for years seems to come to fruition on the Pixel devices and remains an exclusive feature to the phones. So while the hardware may not be anything exciting, Pixel users still have some really futuristic features that no other phone is going to get any time soon.
8 pounds lol. We pay $42 a line for for unlimited everything and even on a data-heavy month I might breach 40GB of LTE data. I'd gladly pay $11 for just 30GB and unlimited everything else. Carrier prices are fucked in the US
Google Pixels don't use stock Android the way the Nexus phones did and the way we understood it back then. Pixels use Android ported to the Pixel with a Google overlay and additions, just like Samsung phones use a Samsung overlay with Samsung's additions.
The main difference at this point is that Samsung preinstalls more of its ecosystem stuff. Infamously including apps that are essentially duplicates of what most people want to use, so you end up with two browsers, two e-mail clients etc. Otherwise they mostly just look different, with Pixels looking closer to stock Android and Samsung's additions go beyond what Google does on top of stock Android. This doesn't tangibly impact performance or anything like that at this point though.
But yeah the Pixel 6 is a great deal. And I miss European carrier prices. I just checked, and back in Poland you get a monthly prepaid unlimited promo plan with 15GB of 5G data for 5PLN, which is less than one dollar and fifty cents per month. Considering the local purchasing power it's the equivalent of $5.
But I also worked on a project building fiber optic Internet infrastructure, which is literally 10x+ more expensive and even more complicated (due to red tape) to build in the western countries than it is there.
The main difference at this point is that Samsung preinstalls more of its ecosystem stuff. Infamously including apps that are essentially duplicates of what most people want to use, so you end up with two browsers, two e-mail clients etc. Otherwise they mostly just look different, with Pixels looking closer to stock Android and Samsung's additions go beyond what Google does on top of stock Android. This doesn't tangibly impact performance or anything like that at this point though.
But yeah the Pixel 6 is a great deal. And I miss European carrier prices. I just checked, and back in Poland you get a monthly prepaid unlimited promo plan with 15GB of 5G data for 5PLN, which is less than one dollar and fifty cents per month. Considering the local purchasing power it's the equivalent of $5.
But I also worked on a project building fiber optic Internet infrastructure, which is literally 10x+ more expensive and even more complicated (due to red tape) to build in the western countries than it is there.
Last edited:
Donate
Any donations will be used to help pay for the site costs, and anything donated above will be donated to C-Dub's son on behalf of this community.
Members online
No members online now.