DS Forums

 
 

anyone got a Pixel?


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 21-12-2016, 11:12
Gigabit
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,875
Apple did discount the first iPhone. They dropped the price and there was a huge uproar.
Gigabit is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 21-12-2016, 11:19
jonmorris
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: a land filled with trolls
Posts: 12,010
Apple did discount the first iPhone. They dropped the price and there was a huge uproar.
The first iPhone didn't sell that well, but there were a number of reasons. Firstly, price. Secondly, only being available on one network. Thirdly, smartphones weren't yet something that ordinary people wanted to buy (just as most hadn't bought a Symbian, Palm, Windows etc based device, unless for work).

I don't think O2 cut the price much. It was a thing in the US if I recall.
jonmorris is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 21-12-2016, 12:53
AxeVictim
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 2,642
I got the first iphone from the O2 store for £170.
That was when you could sign up to a contract after you left the store.
Of course i didn't bother signing up and jail broke the phone so i could use it on other networks.
AxeVictim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-12-2016, 15:12
jonmorris
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: a land filled with trolls
Posts: 12,010
I got the first iphone from the O2 store for £170.
That was when you could sign up to a contract after you left the store.
Of course i didn't bother signing up and jail broke the phone so i could use it on other networks.
It was quite mad what was possible then. Reminds me of when networks sold PAYG phones for a huge discount, only for phones to be mass unlocked and exported - and the SIMs resold for a profit.
jonmorris is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 21-12-2016, 16:00
Gigabit
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,875
Wait, £170? Why didn't I know about this "hack"?

Where were you supposed to sign up to the contract if not in store?
Gigabit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-12-2016, 16:10
Aye Up
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: North West
Posts: 4,881
Wait, £170? Why didn't I know about this "hack"?

Where were you supposed to sign up to the contract if not in store?
The device wasn't directly subsidised by the network, in eseence the first iPhone was bought at cost by the customer. That said Apple also enforced a revenue sharing agreement on those networks, so those that did sign up to iPhone contracts, a portion of that went back to Apple, even if O2 et al paid nothing towards the cost of the handset. Naturally that model went quickly the way of the dodo, handset subsidy stayed and revenue sharing went.
Aye Up is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 21-12-2016, 17:47
AxeVictim
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 2,642
Wait, £170? Why didn't I know about this "hack"?

Where were you supposed to sign up to the contract if not in store?
They asked if you wanted sign up instore or online.
You just went to the O2 website and signed up for an iphone contract...or not lol.
AxeVictim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-12-2016, 18:16
Heanor_Man31
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 395
The first iPhone didn't sell that well, but there were a number of reasons. Firstly, price. Secondly, only being available on one network. Thirdly, smartphones weren't yet something that ordinary people wanted to buy (just as most hadn't bought a Symbian, Palm, Windows etc based device, unless for work).

I don't think O2 cut the price much. It was a thing in the US if I recall.
The recessed 3.5mm headphone socket, the lack of 3G and 2 megapixel camera certainly didn't help either.
Heanor_Man31 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-12-2016, 12:07
blueisthecolour
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: South
Posts: 10,839
Bar Apple, I don't think that many people buying an Android phone want to pay a fortune. Samsung has had some success increasing prices, and is now considered an Apple rival.

Most other companies can't get away with it. LG, Sony, Motorola. And then you have Huawei trying to offer high performance for less money, followed by Honor and all the Chinese phones on Amazon etc.

Google has now tried twice to establish itself as a premium handset maker and seemingly not done that well. Always great phones but they sell best when at a very competitive price.

Does Google have, or expect to have, the same brand value as Apple? It will always do well for search and Google apps, but hardware?

Bar the amazing image sensor, most of the Pixel hardware is available elsewhere for less.

The assistant is still rather 'meh' too.
I wouldn't say it's the case that people aren't willing to pay Apple prices for an Android phone, it's more that in most cases they don't need to. The Pixel range may be the pinnacle of the Android range but (from what i've read) it's not so superior from the cheaper alternatives that people feel the need to spend the extra money. Whereas if you want a new Apple phone you have no alternative but to pay for the latest range or accept something that is clearly dated.

I do accept though that for image conscious phone buyers that there is less risk of being seen to have an 'inferior' phone when you buy a second tier Android than if you get a older model iPhone.
blueisthecolour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-12-2016, 12:38
kidspud
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 11,488
I had a look at the pixel yesterday and to me the placement of the fingerprint scanner on the back is a fundamental flaw in the design.

That means you have to pick the phone up to unlock it, not have a thumb option, and I assume not be able to put a case on it.
kidspud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-12-2016, 12:38
ihatemarmite
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,058
well for me durability is huge as I buy a phone outright and then go SIM only. I am on a 30 day rolling at £8 from BT mobile right now because I have BT BB. I need a phone to last me at least 3 years. I fancied the Pixel as thought maybe it's well made and has a great camera and I quite like the iPhone type design. (my fav design is the HTC but it loses points on its camera).

I bought a nexus 4 which only lasted 18 months before it became pretty unusable. Switched that for the S5 which is ok still, if very slow and sometimes temperamental (reboot required). Battery life has improved since I removed 1 app that I thought was causing bother. It's a medical app that I need so it's a nuisance not to have it. I have a spare battery too, which is a nice feature.

I need decent screen and swipe typing as lack mobility in my fingers. Apparently gboard now works well on iPhones, but gmail doesn't: it reads all my emails as 'unread' on my iPad so I have had to stop new mail notifications. Google suggests loads of other people with the same problem and no solution. I dislike manually checking for new mail.
Samsung s7 obvious choice but its design and colours looks so cheap and bling to me.
ihatemarmite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-12-2016, 13:34
Synthetic42
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 1,509
I had a look at the pixel yesterday and to me the placement of the fingerprint scanner on the back is a fundamental flaw in the design.

That means you have to pick the phone up to unlock it, not have a thumb option, and I assume not be able to put a case on it.
You get used to it pretty quick, in my case at least it's exactly where my finger falls when I pick it up.

Also we now have double tap to wake, so you dont need to pick it up anymore if you just want to wake to check notifications etc
Synthetic42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-12-2016, 13:34
Mick Jones
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Derby (using Waltham)
Posts: 244
I had a look at the pixel yesterday and to me the placement of the fingerprint scanner on the back is a fundamental flaw in the design.

That means you have to pick the phone up to unlock it, not have a thumb option, and I assume not be able to put a case on it.
Wrong. A lot of phones, including my Nexus 6P, have the fingerprint sensor on the back and every case that I have seen for such a phone has a cutout there.
Mick Jones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-12-2016, 13:50
LostFool
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 59,670
I like the idea of the Pixel but the price is a deal breaker. I don't want to carry around a phone worth that much in my pocket. I'll be looking for a mid-range Droid phone in the New Year and the Moto Z Play is currently top of my list. I've had the X Play for 18 months but the battery is staring to fade away.
LostFool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-12-2016, 14:43
LuvJamTarts
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 215
the fingerprint scanner at the back is actually the perfect place for it. It works brilliantly.
LuvJamTarts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-12-2016, 16:29
jonmorris
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: a land filled with trolls
Posts: 12,010
the fingerprint scanner at the back is actually the perfect place for it. It works brilliantly.
I agree. I really dislike the Apple/Samsung/Blu/HTC way, but it's personal preference.

I rarely unlock a phone I'm not picking up and swiping down/up for notifications is useful too. Or the Honor 8 that is also a button and can do different tasks.
jonmorris is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 22-12-2016, 17:36
Stiggles
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Posts: 9,292
I had a look at the pixel yesterday and to me the placement of the fingerprint scanner on the back is a fundamental flaw in the design.

That means you have to pick the phone up to unlock it, not have a thumb option, and I assume not be able to put a case on it.
Use the passcode if you don't want to lift it.

I'm used to fingerprint readers on the side or bottom of the screen, and the pixel one is by far the best. When you pull it out your pocket, your finger is there so it's unlocked as you take it out. With apple etc, its not that easy.

A case can be put on just as a case can be put on any other phone that has a reader. Just has a cut out!
Stiggles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-12-2016, 19:15
jonmorris
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: a land filled with trolls
Posts: 12,010
NOBODY* would make a case for a phone without a cutout for a rear fingerprint reader!

Of all the reasons to say it's no good on the back, a case covering it is not one of them.

* Excluding some dodgy fake case maker in China selling them for 30 cents each, made in advance of the product being announced or something.
jonmorris is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 22-12-2016, 21:00
kidspud
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 11,488
the fingerprint scanner at the back is actually the perfect place for it. It works brilliantly.
Really. I'm not sure how you work that out. It seems the completely wrong place to me.
kidspud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-12-2016, 21:10
jonmorris
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: a land filled with trolls
Posts: 12,010
As I said, it's personal choice.

I have two phones with it on the front, and find it annoying because if I pick up a phone from a table or out of a pocket, I am perfectly positioned to press on the back.

But on the front, I can use my finger to unlock on a desk - which is fine, except it's not something I do. I can just tap on the display to see notifications, and if I'm going to read anything then it won't be flat on a table.

I think Samsung is possibly going to move the reader if it gets rid of the home key, and if Apple wants to reduce the bezel then it will probably do so too.

I am not sure what HTC and others will do, but it seems most phones are now opting for the back.

I am not sure if there's any reason that a phone maker couldn't do both? Best of both worlds then.
jonmorris is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 22-12-2016, 21:38
kidspud
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 11,488
As I said, it's personal choice.

I have two phones with it on the front, and find it annoying because if I pick up a phone from a table or out of a pocket, I am perfectly positioned to press on the back.

But on the front, I can use my finger to unlock on a desk - which is fine, except it's not something I do. I can just tap on the display to see notifications, and if I'm going to read anything then it won't be flat on a table.

I think Samsung is possibly going to move the reader if it gets rid of the home key, and if Apple wants to reduce the bezel then it will probably do so too.

I am not sure what HTC and others will do, but it seems most phones are now opting for the back.

I am not sure if there's any reason that a phone maker couldn't do both? Best of both worlds then.
Considering every other thing you do with a phone needs your finger on the screen, I'm surprised you find it so difficult to get your finger there to unlock it.

When working at my desk, my phones spends all its time laying on the desk so having the sensor at the front makes far more sense.

Apple and others will build the reader into the screen as that is the obvious next step.
kidspud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-12-2016, 21:43
jonmorris
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: a land filled with trolls
Posts: 12,010
But I don't use my phone ON the desk. It lies on the desk.

I can glance at it to see notifications (and they appear without me going near the phone, at least on some models) so when I pick up, my grip means a finger is right there on the reader.

At home, my phones are often unlocked automatically anyway, so I could either double tap the screen or just press the power button.

The desk scenario is pretty much the only time I'd use the front. But bear in mind, most of the phones I have don't have any physical buttons on the front at all. Everything is on-screen.

And I accept not everyone likes that either.
jonmorris is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 22-12-2016, 23:12
LuvJamTarts
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 215
Really. I'm not sure how you work that out. It seems the completely wrong place to me.
"It seems".....have you actually tried it?

Its perfect. The majority of the time youll be picking the phone up to use it and your finger automatically gravitates to that position and opens it in milliseconds.
LuvJamTarts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 15:06
chenks
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: North Ayrshire
Posts: 11,396
i've got a Pixel (not the XL version).
great phone.

much better than the Nexus 6P that i had before it.
(and before that i had Nexus 6, Nexus 5, and Nexus 4).
chenks is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 15:53
ihatemarmite
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,058
had another look yesterday and prefer the way it looks to the S7 but the S7 looks to me like a better phone with better screen. I think it's shiny bling-ugly though but can put it in a wallet flip case.
Pixel, like iPhone, looks better outside a case. I think prosaic and practical outstrips aesthetics! Cheapest S7 I've seen in CPW £500. Hoping that drops in a few months, but expect it depends on the £ and what Samsung do next to recover from the Note.
ihatemarmite is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:46.