I have to side with r/Android on this one on the Pixel 4. I have a Pixel 2 and I'm unimpressed with the specs for $800. Hoping a 4a version comes out next year and I'll buy that I guess. Seems...
I have to side with r/Android on this one on the Pixel 4. I have a Pixel 2 and I'm unimpressed with the specs for $800. Hoping a 4a version comes out next year and I'll buy that I guess. Seems weird to offer 64 GB.
Those who find the price worth it - what am I missing?
I stopped going to r/Android because of their endless pessimism. Their fixation on bulletpoints per dollar is a big part of it because that seems to be this stupid framework they've collectively...
I stopped going to r/Android because of their endless pessimism. Their fixation on bulletpoints per dollar is a big part of it because that seems to be this stupid framework they've collectively adopted to bitch about phones they've never used. They've always hated the Pixel phones on the basis of price. You can see the sentiments from the Pixel's reveal on that subreddit still. It's always centred around complaining about the price, mainly because it was the end of the ultra-cheap Nexus line. That subreddit has never forgiven the Pixel line for it, and all the complaints now are just the same as these ones from three years ago. Honestly, r/Android has my money as one of the worst "normal" subreddits on the entire site.
I'm glad I didn't listen to that subreddit and got the Pixel. I still have it right now, in my pocket. It's the best smartphone I've ever owned, and that's not something I was expecting. Previously, I was lucky to not hate my phone after 18 months due to extreme slowdown, buggier performance, completely out of date software, or bad battery life retention. HTC, LG, Samsung, Moto... all were awful "flagship" phones by the time I got rid of them. The only phone that I actually enjoyed before the Pixel was the Nexus 4, and I sold that prematurely for the Moto X just because I was feeling the upgrade and the promises. That was a good phone for a while... until the charging port broke itself for the fifth time and I gave up fixing it. Also, the slowdown.
But I still have the Pixel. It may not be quite as fast or last as long on full charge as the day I got it but it's still outperforming any of the other phones I had. I rarely ever experience slowdown, and the battery still easily lasts me a full day without any coddling. The camera is still excellent and can take good quality pictures with little effort or thought. I'm still receiving OS updates faster than even the news cycle sometimes.
It's a smartphone that has been so easy to use that I don't even think about it anymore. I didn't realize it until much later in my ownership but that's my dream phone: one I don't have to think or care about. It's just my phone, and I never have to coddle it. I remember having to carry around all kinds of chargers or extra batteries for previous phones, or trying to sideload the latest OS because HTC wasn't officially releasing it outside of certain markets, or trying to figure out why a game would or wouldn't work on the Moto X but it would work on the Moto G, or toggling my GPS up and down on the HTC before it finally kicked on and started working, even replacing my iPhone 7 twice because I wasn't sure if the mic issue was hardware-based or not (I still have the issue, ugh). Gone are the days where I spend hours worrying about why my phone isn't loading something anymore, dying on me while I leave work, wondering when I'll get an OS or security update, or trying to fiddle with a bad GPS chip or charging port.
Three years in, and my Pixel isn't draining my battery when it sits idly on the table. Previous phones would experience battery drain when doing nothing—not with my Pixel. Three years later and when it says 7% battery left, I know I can reliably lock it and then not worry about it dying in the next five to ten minutes. In fact, when I was lost in Amsterdam, I knew that was enough battery to look up directions back to my room, and then check in every so often on the half-hour walk home without worrying about it dying on me.
When I want to take a picture immediately, double-pressing the power button brings up the camera within a few seconds. It's not as quick as it used to be but it's still a lot faster than it used to be with previous phones. There's no crashing when it does come up, which happened all the time on my old Samsung and Moto phones after a while.
Even getting the latest OS updates is a whole layer of security that most people don't really consider. The most recent Android OS added a quick emergency button to the power menu longpress, and I love it. I never have to use it but I know I can reliably access it in a state of panic—especially since I may activate the fingerprint scanner to open the phone and skip the lockscreen's emergency button by accident.
A good device is far, far more than a feature list. It's about the overall experience and lifestyle it can provide, and the Pixel delivers in spades. From my limited experience with the 2 and 3 models, they continue in that tradition just fine.
r/android always bothers me; because there's clearly an overriding spec-sheet mentality on that community. Specifications are useful indicators up to a point, but aren't themselves a direct...
r/android always bothers me; because there's clearly an overriding spec-sheet mentality on that community. Specifications are useful indicators up to a point, but aren't themselves a direct measurement of utility of something; they're an implicit derived value from which performance can be roughly gauged.
I'm seeing people complain about the battery size being only 2800mAh. To me, that's not the important metric: what matters is how long it lasts—screen on time—which is a combination of many factors, primarily the size of the battery yes, but also software optimization, hardware power consumption, and design decisions to make the most out of the battery's available capacity. Same goes for RAM, GHz in a CPU, and screen resolution. They're indirect specifications.
The consensus opinion on r/androiddoesn't seem to get this.
This kind of measurement is great in an ideal world, but the fact of the matter is that that number can change drammatically depending on the software that's running on it. I have had software...
'm seeing people complain about the battery size being only 2800mAh. To me, that's not the important metric: what matters is how long it lasts—screen on time—which is a combination of many factors, primarily the size of the battery yes, but also software optimization, hardware power consumption, and design decisions to make the most out of the battery's available capacity.
This kind of measurement is great in an ideal world, but the fact of the matter is that that number can change drammatically depending on the software that's running on it. I have had software updates that have crippled battery life, and I've even had a phone that had it's battery life nearly doubled. Having a bigger capacity battery is especially important if you are planning on changing the firmware at some point in the future (which is something that seems to be more common with r/android than the general population), which is often not as well optimized for the specific phone as the manufacturers' firmwares are.
Exactly. The Nexus 6 had a bigger battery than the Pixel but a worse battery life after all. The Pixel was the first Android phone to be made to suit the OS and launcher on the level of an iPhone....
Exactly. The Nexus 6 had a bigger battery than the Pixel but a worse battery life after all.
The Pixel was the first Android phone to be made to suit the OS and launcher on the level of an iPhone. The initial skepticism makes sense, there wasn't quite another phone like it before. One would think they would have learned that lesson but they're still so stuck looking at tables and bulletpoints that they fail to consider the overall end results when everything comes together. You can see the exact same sentiments being expressed in that Pixel announcement thread I linked as you do for the new Pixel 4. It's unbelievable how much that subreddit cannot get over their fixation on spec sheets.
I think I've punished my OG pixel far more than you then. If I saw 7% in the middle of a foreign town with no idea how to get back to my hostel, I'd be desperately on the hunt for somewhere to get...
Three years in, and my Pixel isn't draining my battery when it sits idly on the table. Previous phones would experience battery drain when doing nothing—not with my Pixel. Three years later and when it says 7% battery left, I know I can reliably lock it and then not worry about it dying in the next five to ten minutes. In fact, when I was lost in Amsterdam, I knew that was enough battery to look up directions back to my room, and then check in every so often on the half-hour walk home without worrying about it dying on me.
I think I've punished my OG pixel far more than you then. If I saw 7% in the middle of a foreign town with no idea how to get back to my hostel, I'd be desperately on the hunt for somewhere to get charged
I mean, I was. But I haven't experienced this phone jumping from <10% to completely dead instantly. It always counts down to 1% and then finally off entirely. That indication is all I expect to...
I mean, I was. But I haven't experienced this phone jumping from <10% to completely dead instantly. It always counts down to 1% and then finally off entirely. That indication is all I expect to call it reliable because then I know 3% is the true DEFCON 1 level of panic, not the entire range of 1-10%.
Same dude, I got mine preowned for half price and have gotten an enormous amount of value out of it. May want to look into a new battery if that issue ever presents itself, but otherwise it's...
Same dude, I got mine preowned for half price and have gotten an enormous amount of value out of it. May want to look into a new battery if that issue ever presents itself, but otherwise it's still doing everything I want from it.
Yeah, especially with Google Photos not offering unlimited storage at original resolution. I can buy a knockoff device and get the same Google Photos unlimited "high quality" storage, why would I...
Yeah, especially with Google Photos not offering unlimited storage at original resolution. I can buy a knockoff device and get the same Google Photos unlimited "high quality" storage, why would I bother buying a Pixel now? Looks like I'll be getting a Pixel 3 pretty soon since my Pixel 2 only has free original resolution until 2020.
Edit: If anyone was wondering, using "high quality" means your photos will be resized to 4920 x 3264 (16 MP), and all videos will be resized to 1080p.
For point B, I would think that the app wouldn’t need to know the difference. On iOS, when they switched to FaceID, it just uses the same API as TouchID so an app never knows. I’m sure Google is...
For point B, I would think that the app wouldn’t need to know the difference. On iOS, when they switched to FaceID, it just uses the same API as TouchID so an app never knows. I’m sure Google is doing something similar to avoid breaking apps.
Ordered an Oh So Orange Pixel 4 and a Nest WiFi 3-Pack. I'm not really sure what's new with the Nest WiFi besides the Google Assistant (compared to the Google WiFi), but I needed a new router...
Ordered an Oh So Orange Pixel 4 and a Nest WiFi 3-Pack.
I'm not really sure what's new with the Nest WiFi besides the Google Assistant (compared to the Google WiFi), but I needed a new router system anyway.
As for the Pixel 4, I'm still on the Pixel 2 and my warranty just let up. I'm excited for Soli, a much better display (90Hz!!!), and the Nueral Chip's improvements for Google Assistant. The camera features are quite exciting too. A bit skeptical of the battery (though my P2 has performed fine with a smaller), but I didn't want to go for the XL due to size and price.
I was planning on getting the Pixel 4 until I saw the battery size. I have a Pixel 1 and the battery runs out pretty quickly (on heavier uses, sometimes before the school day ends) and it is...
I was planning on getting the Pixel 4 until I saw the battery size. I have a Pixel 1 and the battery runs out pretty quickly (on heavier uses, sometimes before the school day ends) and it is actually a fairly new battery. The Pixel 4 has a bigger display, 90hz refresh rate, more powerful CPU, etc. - yet the battery is only a measly 1% better? When I'm not confident that I can get through a long day with the less intensive Pixel, I'd be a teensy bit worried about the Pixel 4. Also no more unlimited original quality storage in Google photos. Also the Soli radar is pretty gimmicky and looks sketchy. Honestly, I'm leaning more towards the iPhone 11 now.
I specifically got an iPhone 11 Pro Max (that name is terrible) because the battery improvements are so huge. I’m surprised Google didn’t increase the battery capacity but I will say that my wife...
I specifically got an iPhone 11 Pro Max (that name is terrible) because the battery improvements are so huge. I’m surprised Google didn’t increase the battery capacity but I will say that my wife uses her Pixel 3a constantly and usually has about 30% left at the end of the day (off the charger at 7:15 AM and back on around 10:00 - 10:30 PM).
Is anyone here actually excited about Stadia? I'd love to hear your perspective because right now it just seems so... pointless? to me. What type of gamer is it supposed to appeal to?
Is anyone here actually excited about Stadia? I'd love to hear your perspective because right now it just seems so... pointless? to me. What type of gamer is it supposed to appeal to?
No, but I've been fairly impressed with google's reality distortion field around it. Every couple of years, a different company tries "CLOUD GAMING" because they insist that no seriously this time...
No, but I've been fairly impressed with google's reality distortion field around it. Every couple of years, a different company tries "CLOUD GAMING" because they insist that no seriously this time the laws of physics don't apply. It's usually with some super secret compression that they insist they have, or extensive colocation. Google's latest idea that they seems to have someone convinced people is a real thing is negative latency. Which of course isn't a real thing, as it would violate causality.
Stadia will be an unresponsive, choppy, artifacty mess just like every other cloud gaming attempt, once people realize that, they'll stop subscribing, and google will quietly abandon it and pretend it never existed, like they do with 99% of their products.
The most impressive part of it is how they somehow managed to make so many people forget the other half dozen times this has been attempted, and the dozens upon dozens of other, actually viable products google has abandoned.
I was part of the Project Stream beta, it was not an unresponsive, choppy, artifacty mess. And I was not hardwired. At the end of the day, even if there were slight artifacts (which doesn't...
I was part of the Project Stream beta, it was not an unresponsive, choppy, artifacty mess.
And I was not hardwired. At the end of the day, even if there were slight artifacts (which doesn't reflect my experience, though I expect this to vary), it's still miles better than what the majority of household's hardware can handle.
Just like all other game streaming technologies, it works acceptably for a third person adventure/rpg type game, it would work well enough for turn based or strategy type games as well, but it's a...
Just like all other game streaming technologies, it works acceptably for a third person adventure/rpg type game, it would work well enough for turn based or strategy type games as well, but it's a nonstarter for games where latency is a big factor like first person shooters or fighting games or platformers. If you push the stick left and the third person character you're controlling moves to the left 100ms later, that's not a big deal. People sort of expect that for those types of games.
If you move a mouse, and your camera view moves 100ms later, then that's not only barely playable, it's nauseating. If you click b, and Ryu throws a punch 100ms later, that's infuriating. Google isn't doing anything fundamentally different here to address that issue. They have a lot of data centers and computing power, and they're very good at technology, but they still can't bend the laws of physics. Unless they're putting a DC next door to my house, one hop away, the speed of light is a significant, fundamental constraint that can't be engineered around.
Besides that fact, investing money into building a library on a platform that google is running is a crapshoot at best. They're investing a lot of money into this thing, but they invested a lot of money into google+, the nexus player, google glass, and dozens of other huge "hot new things" before they got bored and gave up. The company has always had a serious leadership problem in that respect.
I doubt it's 100ms latency. I finished Bloodborne on Sony's older tech PSNow and didn't have a problem. That's arguably much more reflex-dependent than Assassin's Creed. With more data centers and...
I doubt it's 100ms latency. I finished Bloodborne on Sony's older tech PSNow and didn't have a problem. That's arguably much more reflex-dependent than Assassin's Creed. With more data centers and some neural net magic, I can see streaming being a worthwhile competitor to at-home consoles, even for traditionally twitchy games.
Also, you should know that Google Glass still exists. It's not a consumer device but is used in specialized industries.
It won't be 100ms for the network link, but you've got a few ms of input latency, up to 10ms of display latency, the normal processing latency, then add 20-50ms for the network, and you're pretty...
It won't be 100ms for the network link, but you've got a few ms of input latency, up to 10ms of display latency, the normal processing latency, then add 20-50ms for the network, and you're pretty close, even in optimal conditions.
This latency isn't a big issue when you're speaking about multiplayer polling, but when it's 50-100ms between when you move your mouse and when your view changes, it's noticeable. I do steam streaming within my own household over a wired network, and even that amount of added latency makes playing twitch shooters not a fun experience.
Seems reasonable. But most of these will apply in local gaming too, so it's not too useful in the comparison. I plan to do a BL4 run of Bloodborne in the near-future, so for me that will be the...
It won't be 100ms for the network link, but you've got a few ms of input latency, up to 10ms of display latency, the normal processing latency, then add 20-50ms for the network, and you're pretty close, even in optimal conditions.
Seems reasonable. But most of these will apply in local gaming too, so it's not too useful in the comparison.
I plan to do a BL4 run of Bloodborne in the near-future, so for me that will be the acid test of game streaming.
Have you had a chance to try out any streaming services? I've been using one for a while (albeit one that streams a whole VM, so full existing Steam library and no lock in if I decide to leave)...
Have you had a chance to try out any streaming services? I've been using one for a while (albeit one that streams a whole VM, so full existing Steam library and no lock in if I decide to leave) and I'm fairly impressed overall. Latency is generally within 15-20ms, which might be enough to frustrate a serious gamer but is imperceptible to me nowadays.
It's not perfect - there definitely are times that it lags or stutters, and they can be deeply frustrating. I've had to stop playing entirely once or twice when the lag kept coming back every few minutes, which was driving me insane, but given the relatively low monthly cost and the fairly small amount of time I actually have for my extremely casual gaming schedule, it does the job for me.
I'll probably build another PC within the next 12 months or so, but I'm happy enough for now and I'm not in a rush to do so. That's the mark of a pretty solid alternative in my book, even allowing for the drawbacks.
If anyone could pull it off it would be Google, since they're a major backbone of the internet. Microsoft is working on a solution as well, and Amazon probably has something in the can.
If anyone could pull it off it would be Google, since they're a major backbone of the internet. Microsoft is working on a solution as well, and Amazon probably has something in the can.
I kinda don't want video-streaming based game delivery to happen (short reason: it's the ultimate DRM, making it possible to make a game 100% unplayable once it's no longer lucrative to stream) so...
I kinda don't want video-streaming based game delivery to happen (short reason: it's the ultimate DRM, making it possible to make a game 100% unplayable once it's no longer lucrative to stream) so I actually was a bit nervous that Google might actually succeed. But the walls are already crumbling. Early tech demos seem to be plagued by exactly the problems you would expect, their pricing makes no sense and I doubt they can even deliver a launch library impressive enough to get the attention of people who don't care about the tech and just want to play new games. Plus Google is infamous for dropping projects the moment they stop having momentum. Someone actually made a website about it and if you scroll through, it's full of things that make you go "oh right, Google had that at one point and claimed it was the future of everything".
I mentioned it further down, but there are services that'll just stream an entire VM to use as you like, which neatly sidesteps that problem. Anything (like Stadia) where the games are tied to the...
I kinda don't want video-streaming based game delivery to happen (short reason: it's the ultimate DRM, making it possible to make a game 100% unplayable once it's no longer lucrative to stream) so I actually was a bit nervous that Google might actually succeed.
I mentioned it further down, but there are services that'll just stream an entire VM to use as you like, which neatly sidesteps that problem.
Anything (like Stadia) where the games are tied to the service absolutely seems like an insane risk to me, though, unless it's Netflix-style all inclusive bundle pricing.
If you have the bandwidth to pull it off, you can play any games you buy on Stadia on ANY device with a Chrome Browser, including Chromecast and your mobile device. Cross save is built in, because...
If you have the bandwidth to pull it off, you can play any games you buy on Stadia on ANY device with a Chrome Browser, including Chromecast and your mobile device. Cross save is built in, because it's being streamed to you across the internet and it's all the same computer, so updates are near immediate and downtime is next to nil. It would be great for demoing games or for a gamepass like service, fantastic if you didn't want to invest in a console or PC hardware, and amazing if you wanted to do all this from your phone.
I don't quite get the pricing. You pay full (!?) price for games on top of the $10 a month? So after 2.5 years you've roughly spent the price of dedicated hardware on just the subscription service...
I don't quite get the pricing. You pay full (!?) price for games on top of the $10 a month? So after 2.5 years you've roughly spent the price of dedicated hardware on just the subscription service but have to keep paying to play?
All strong arguments, but not unique to Stadia over other streaming services (with the possible exception of maybe slightly wider hardware support, but only if we reach outside the world of...
All strong arguments, but not unique to Stadia over other streaming services (with the possible exception of maybe slightly wider hardware support, but only if we reach outside the world of Windows/OSX/Linux/Android/iOS clients).
Google's hardware events have become less and less about the hardware and more about message since the first Pixel announcement. Some cool stuff here, but it's (I suppose obviously to the...
Google's hardware events have become less and less about the hardware and more about message since the first Pixel announcement. Some cool stuff here, but it's (I suppose obviously to the marketing-savvy) all about a feeling, not the hardware itself.
That said, the voice recorder is a legit awesome bit of a software that I'll definitely be giving a go. And the presentation about the camera tech itself was just really interesting, the guy they had doing the talk was very engaging, and made what has previously (for me) been quite a dry subject matter really fascinating.
Glad I didn't spend any time outside of work watching this though; mostly style, little substance.
I have to side with r/Android on this one on the Pixel 4. I have a Pixel 2 and I'm unimpressed with the specs for $800. Hoping a 4a version comes out next year and I'll buy that I guess. Seems weird to offer 64 GB.
Those who find the price worth it - what am I missing?
I stopped going to r/Android because of their endless pessimism. Their fixation on bulletpoints per dollar is a big part of it because that seems to be this stupid framework they've collectively adopted to bitch about phones they've never used. They've always hated the Pixel phones on the basis of price. You can see the sentiments from the Pixel's reveal on that subreddit still. It's always centred around complaining about the price, mainly because it was the end of the ultra-cheap Nexus line. That subreddit has never forgiven the Pixel line for it, and all the complaints now are just the same as these ones from three years ago. Honestly, r/Android has my money as one of the worst "normal" subreddits on the entire site.
I'm glad I didn't listen to that subreddit and got the Pixel. I still have it right now, in my pocket. It's the best smartphone I've ever owned, and that's not something I was expecting. Previously, I was lucky to not hate my phone after 18 months due to extreme slowdown, buggier performance, completely out of date software, or bad battery life retention. HTC, LG, Samsung, Moto... all were awful "flagship" phones by the time I got rid of them. The only phone that I actually enjoyed before the Pixel was the Nexus 4, and I sold that prematurely for the Moto X just because I was feeling the upgrade and the promises. That was a good phone for a while... until the charging port broke itself for the fifth time and I gave up fixing it. Also, the slowdown.
But I still have the Pixel. It may not be quite as fast or last as long on full charge as the day I got it but it's still outperforming any of the other phones I had. I rarely ever experience slowdown, and the battery still easily lasts me a full day without any coddling. The camera is still excellent and can take good quality pictures with little effort or thought. I'm still receiving OS updates faster than even the news cycle sometimes.
It's a smartphone that has been so easy to use that I don't even think about it anymore. I didn't realize it until much later in my ownership but that's my dream phone: one I don't have to think or care about. It's just my phone, and I never have to coddle it. I remember having to carry around all kinds of chargers or extra batteries for previous phones, or trying to sideload the latest OS because HTC wasn't officially releasing it outside of certain markets, or trying to figure out why a game would or wouldn't work on the Moto X but it would work on the Moto G, or toggling my GPS up and down on the HTC before it finally kicked on and started working, even replacing my iPhone 7 twice because I wasn't sure if the mic issue was hardware-based or not (I still have the issue, ugh). Gone are the days where I spend hours worrying about why my phone isn't loading something anymore, dying on me while I leave work, wondering when I'll get an OS or security update, or trying to fiddle with a bad GPS chip or charging port.
Three years in, and my Pixel isn't draining my battery when it sits idly on the table. Previous phones would experience battery drain when doing nothing—not with my Pixel. Three years later and when it says 7% battery left, I know I can reliably lock it and then not worry about it dying in the next five to ten minutes. In fact, when I was lost in Amsterdam, I knew that was enough battery to look up directions back to my room, and then check in every so often on the half-hour walk home without worrying about it dying on me.
When I want to take a picture immediately, double-pressing the power button brings up the camera within a few seconds. It's not as quick as it used to be but it's still a lot faster than it used to be with previous phones. There's no crashing when it does come up, which happened all the time on my old Samsung and Moto phones after a while.
Even getting the latest OS updates is a whole layer of security that most people don't really consider. The most recent Android OS added a quick emergency button to the power menu longpress, and I love it. I never have to use it but I know I can reliably access it in a state of panic—especially since I may activate the fingerprint scanner to open the phone and skip the lockscreen's emergency button by accident.
A good device is far, far more than a feature list. It's about the overall experience and lifestyle it can provide, and the Pixel delivers in spades. From my limited experience with the 2 and 3 models, they continue in that tradition just fine.
r/android always bothers me; because there's clearly an overriding spec-sheet mentality on that community. Specifications are useful indicators up to a point, but aren't themselves a direct measurement of utility of something; they're an implicit derived value from which performance can be roughly gauged.
I'm seeing people complain about the battery size being only 2800mAh. To me, that's not the important metric: what matters is how long it lasts—screen on time—which is a combination of many factors, primarily the size of the battery yes, but also software optimization, hardware power consumption, and design decisions to make the most out of the battery's available capacity. Same goes for RAM, GHz in a CPU, and screen resolution. They're indirect specifications.
The consensus opinion on r/android doesn't seem to get this.
This kind of measurement is great in an ideal world, but the fact of the matter is that that number can change drammatically depending on the software that's running on it. I have had software updates that have crippled battery life, and I've even had a phone that had it's battery life nearly doubled. Having a bigger capacity battery is especially important if you are planning on changing the firmware at some point in the future (which is something that seems to be more common with r/android than the general population), which is often not as well optimized for the specific phone as the manufacturers' firmwares are.
Exactly. The Nexus 6 had a bigger battery than the Pixel but a worse battery life after all.
The Pixel was the first Android phone to be made to suit the OS and launcher on the level of an iPhone. The initial skepticism makes sense, there wasn't quite another phone like it before. One would think they would have learned that lesson but they're still so stuck looking at tables and bulletpoints that they fail to consider the overall end results when everything comes together. You can see the exact same sentiments being expressed in that Pixel announcement thread I linked as you do for the new Pixel 4. It's unbelievable how much that subreddit cannot get over their fixation on spec sheets.
I think I've punished my OG pixel far more than you then. If I saw 7% in the middle of a foreign town with no idea how to get back to my hostel, I'd be desperately on the hunt for somewhere to get charged
I mean, I was. But I haven't experienced this phone jumping from <10% to completely dead instantly. It always counts down to 1% and then finally off entirely. That indication is all I expect to call it reliable because then I know 3% is the true DEFCON 1 level of panic, not the entire range of 1-10%.
Same dude, I got mine preowned for half price and have gotten an enormous amount of value out of it. May want to look into a new battery if that issue ever presents itself, but otherwise it's still doing everything I want from it.
Yeah, especially with Google Photos not offering unlimited storage at original resolution. I can buy a knockoff device and get the same Google Photos unlimited "high quality" storage, why would I bother buying a Pixel now? Looks like I'll be getting a Pixel 3 pretty soon since my Pixel 2 only has free original resolution until 2020.
Edit: If anyone was wondering, using "high quality" means your photos will be resized to 4920 x 3264 (16 MP), and all videos will be resized to 1080p.
For point B, I would think that the app wouldn’t need to know the difference. On iOS, when they switched to FaceID, it just uses the same API as TouchID so an app never knows. I’m sure Google is doing something similar to avoid breaking apps.
Ordered an Oh So Orange Pixel 4 and a Nest WiFi 3-Pack.
I'm not really sure what's new with the Nest WiFi besides the Google Assistant (compared to the Google WiFi), but I needed a new router system anyway.
As for the Pixel 4, I'm still on the Pixel 2 and my warranty just let up. I'm excited for Soli, a much better display (90Hz!!!), and the Nueral Chip's improvements for Google Assistant. The camera features are quite exciting too. A bit skeptical of the battery (though my P2 has performed fine with a smaller), but I didn't want to go for the XL due to size and price.
I was planning on getting the Pixel 4 until I saw the battery size. I have a Pixel 1 and the battery runs out pretty quickly (on heavier uses, sometimes before the school day ends) and it is actually a fairly new battery. The Pixel 4 has a bigger display, 90hz refresh rate, more powerful CPU, etc. - yet the battery is only a measly 1% better? When I'm not confident that I can get through a long day with the less intensive Pixel, I'd be a teensy bit worried about the Pixel 4. Also no more unlimited original quality storage in Google photos. Also the Soli radar is pretty gimmicky and looks sketchy. Honestly, I'm leaning more towards the iPhone 11 now.
I specifically got an iPhone 11 Pro Max (that name is terrible) because the battery improvements are so huge. I’m surprised Google didn’t increase the battery capacity but I will say that my wife uses her Pixel 3a constantly and usually has about 30% left at the end of the day (off the charger at 7:15 AM and back on around 10:00 - 10:30 PM).
I'm still not convinced that 2800mah battery is enough for Pixel 4.
Is anyone here actually excited about Stadia? I'd love to hear your perspective because right now it just seems so... pointless? to me. What type of gamer is it supposed to appeal to?
No, but I've been fairly impressed with google's reality distortion field around it. Every couple of years, a different company tries "CLOUD GAMING" because they insist that no seriously this time the laws of physics don't apply. It's usually with some super secret compression that they insist they have, or extensive colocation. Google's latest idea that they seems to have someone convinced people is a real thing is negative latency. Which of course isn't a real thing, as it would violate causality.
Stadia will be an unresponsive, choppy, artifacty mess just like every other cloud gaming attempt, once people realize that, they'll stop subscribing, and google will quietly abandon it and pretend it never existed, like they do with 99% of their products.
The most impressive part of it is how they somehow managed to make so many people forget the other half dozen times this has been attempted, and the dozens upon dozens of other, actually viable products google has abandoned.
I was part of the Project Stream beta, it was not an unresponsive, choppy, artifacty mess.
And I was not hardwired. At the end of the day, even if there were slight artifacts (which doesn't reflect my experience, though I expect this to vary), it's still miles better than what the majority of household's hardware can handle.
Just like all other game streaming technologies, it works acceptably for a third person adventure/rpg type game, it would work well enough for turn based or strategy type games as well, but it's a nonstarter for games where latency is a big factor like first person shooters or fighting games or platformers. If you push the stick left and the third person character you're controlling moves to the left 100ms later, that's not a big deal. People sort of expect that for those types of games.
If you move a mouse, and your camera view moves 100ms later, then that's not only barely playable, it's nauseating. If you click b, and Ryu throws a punch 100ms later, that's infuriating. Google isn't doing anything fundamentally different here to address that issue. They have a lot of data centers and computing power, and they're very good at technology, but they still can't bend the laws of physics. Unless they're putting a DC next door to my house, one hop away, the speed of light is a significant, fundamental constraint that can't be engineered around.
Besides that fact, investing money into building a library on a platform that google is running is a crapshoot at best. They're investing a lot of money into this thing, but they invested a lot of money into google+, the nexus player, google glass, and dozens of other huge "hot new things" before they got bored and gave up. The company has always had a serious leadership problem in that respect.
I doubt it's 100ms latency. I finished Bloodborne on Sony's older tech PSNow and didn't have a problem. That's arguably much more reflex-dependent than Assassin's Creed. With more data centers and some neural net magic, I can see streaming being a worthwhile competitor to at-home consoles, even for traditionally twitchy games.
Also, you should know that Google Glass still exists. It's not a consumer device but is used in specialized industries.
It won't be 100ms for the network link, but you've got a few ms of input latency, up to 10ms of display latency, the normal processing latency, then add 20-50ms for the network, and you're pretty close, even in optimal conditions.
This latency isn't a big issue when you're speaking about multiplayer polling, but when it's 50-100ms between when you move your mouse and when your view changes, it's noticeable. I do steam streaming within my own household over a wired network, and even that amount of added latency makes playing twitch shooters not a fun experience.
Seems reasonable. But most of these will apply in local gaming too, so it's not too useful in the comparison.
I plan to do a BL4 run of Bloodborne in the near-future, so for me that will be the acid test of game streaming.
Have you had a chance to try out any streaming services? I've been using one for a while (albeit one that streams a whole VM, so full existing Steam library and no lock in if I decide to leave) and I'm fairly impressed overall. Latency is generally within 15-20ms, which might be enough to frustrate a serious gamer but is imperceptible to me nowadays.
It's not perfect - there definitely are times that it lags or stutters, and they can be deeply frustrating. I've had to stop playing entirely once or twice when the lag kept coming back every few minutes, which was driving me insane, but given the relatively low monthly cost and the fairly small amount of time I actually have for my extremely casual gaming schedule, it does the job for me.
I'll probably build another PC within the next 12 months or so, but I'm happy enough for now and I'm not in a rush to do so. That's the mark of a pretty solid alternative in my book, even allowing for the drawbacks.
If anyone could pull it off it would be Google, since they're a major backbone of the internet. Microsoft is working on a solution as well, and Amazon probably has something in the can.
I kinda don't want video-streaming based game delivery to happen (short reason: it's the ultimate DRM, making it possible to make a game 100% unplayable once it's no longer lucrative to stream) so I actually was a bit nervous that Google might actually succeed. But the walls are already crumbling. Early tech demos seem to be plagued by exactly the problems you would expect, their pricing makes no sense and I doubt they can even deliver a launch library impressive enough to get the attention of people who don't care about the tech and just want to play new games. Plus Google is infamous for dropping projects the moment they stop having momentum. Someone actually made a website about it and if you scroll through, it's full of things that make you go "oh right, Google had that at one point and claimed it was the future of everything".
I mentioned it further down, but there are services that'll just stream an entire VM to use as you like, which neatly sidesteps that problem.
Anything (like Stadia) where the games are tied to the service absolutely seems like an insane risk to me, though, unless it's Netflix-style all inclusive bundle pricing.
If you have the bandwidth to pull it off, you can play any games you buy on Stadia on ANY device with a Chrome Browser, including Chromecast and your mobile device. Cross save is built in, because it's being streamed to you across the internet and it's all the same computer, so updates are near immediate and downtime is next to nil. It would be great for demoing games or for a gamepass like service, fantastic if you didn't want to invest in a console or PC hardware, and amazing if you wanted to do all this from your phone.
I don't quite get the pricing. You pay full (!?) price for games on top of the $10 a month? So after 2.5 years you've roughly spent the price of dedicated hardware on just the subscription service but have to keep paying to play?
No, $10 is for 4K and for a random free game a month.
All strong arguments, but not unique to Stadia over other streaming services (with the possible exception of maybe slightly wider hardware support, but only if we reach outside the world of Windows/OSX/Linux/Android/iOS clients).
Here's a video if you want to watch the actual presentations (about an hour long): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKmsYB54zBk&t=15m39s
Google's hardware events have become less and less about the hardware and more about message since the first Pixel announcement. Some cool stuff here, but it's (I suppose obviously to the marketing-savvy) all about a feeling, not the hardware itself.
That said, the voice recorder is a legit awesome bit of a software that I'll definitely be giving a go. And the presentation about the camera tech itself was just really interesting, the guy they had doing the talk was very engaging, and made what has previously (for me) been quite a dry subject matter really fascinating.
Glad I didn't spend any time outside of work watching this though; mostly style, little substance.