Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Pixel 2 and 2 XL announced

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 615 posts

Re: Google Pixel 2 and 2 XL announced

#131

Post by kuschku »

rmwaite wrote: post #109
drenvuk wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This was an unnecessary change no matter how you slice it. Just look at the other options: bluetooth or an adapter. With bluetooth you have to pair it and remember to charge the headphones. With an adapter you have to remember to bring it everywhere if you want to listen to a podcast or music or audio book. They say they're making a simple device but they're making my life more complicated. This is one of the few tim…

then use another type of connector for headphones. aux does not have to be the only connector forever. what makes this so special that it is the only connector that people refuse to upgrade? EVERY OTHER CONNECTOR has gone through improvements. new USB standards. new video. everything. why is this any different?

AUX has been replaced, there is a new standard in the industry – but no one uses it for consumer products.

AUX is the only standard used by both consumers and professionals, and losing that would be very annoying.

Re: Google Pixel 2 and 2 XL announced

#132

Post by deep_concern »

robterrell wrote: post #49
legohead wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love my Pixel, but they just lost me as a customer for this reason. I'm not totally against removing the headphone jack, but it's not time yet -- the transition has been done poorly.

Why is it not time yet? When I lost my Pixel on a trip, I switched to an iPhone 7 + airpods and it's been great. I don't want to go back to wired headphones. Apple certainly seems to have nailed it. I can't imagine Google + HTC can't too.

Because they don't need to remove it. A headphone jack wouldn't stop you from having your airpods.

Re: Google Pixel 2 and 2 XL announced

#133

Post by noncoml »

lopespm wrote: post #45

Honest question: for those of you who own a mobile device without a headphone jack, do you find it to be an encuberment? Personally I still find it a bit hostile to not have the jack available, since often times I find myself charging the phone and using the headphones (when watching videos for example), so having an adapter dongle for such a frequent task seems counterintuitive to me. I believe that if a device is c…

iPhone 7+. It is annoying as I cannot plug my phone’s headphones to my laptop.

Was “forced” to switch to Bluetooth.

Re: Google Pixel 2 and 2 XL announced

#134

Post by oflannabhra »

endorphone wrote: post #50
MBCook wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is meaningless. They have declared themselves the standard but that number doesn’t actually measure anything. I mean the fact they sell cameras alone means they’re not unbiased. https://daringfireball.net/linked/2017/09/22/dxo-ratings-are... Wait for real camera reviews.

John Gruber's stance on DXO is utterly meaningless, and it's farcical that you seriously cite it. Measuring the technical capabilities of an imaging device is patently obvious and justifiable. From dynamic range to optical and electronic resolution, noise at different light levels, etc. You can question their methodology, but saying that it "doesn't measure anything" is nonsense, and citing a guy who laughably claims…

Gruber's conclusion is correct, even though his reasoning is not. DxO scores are crap, because they do not adequately control scenes in their comparisons.

Most DSLR reviews have a consistent scene that pushes the envelope of what a sensor can capture, and all cameras are benchmarked against that scene. Here's an example: https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d7500-review-speed-an...

Re: Google Pixel 2 and 2 XL announced

#135

Post by kuschku »

rmwaite wrote: post #72
bpicolo wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everybody with a pair of wired headphones would appreciate a standard jack, too.

Then don't buy this phone. Headphones will soon all be either wireless or use USB C or lighting anyway. And if there are headphones that do not, use an adapter.

I bought headphones from Sennheiser with lifelong guarantee once, and I plan to use them until I die, just like my parents used their Sennheisers for decades.

There’s many people exactly like that.

Re: Google Pixel 2 and 2 XL announced

#136

Post by kuschku »

Zee2 wrote: post #127
codq wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you can arrive to your destination with 50% battery. There's really no argument that paints headphone jack removal as a net positive. Samsung has proved you can waterproof a phone with one (and an SD card!).

Wait, what? Am I understanding you correctly, that you mean the adapter will use more battery? USB-C allows for analog audio passthrough, unlike Lightning.

The adapter doesn’t allow charging while passing audio through, unless you use yet another adapter.

Re: Google Pixel 2 and 2 XL announced

#137

Post by frahs »

codq wrote: post #63
ggreer wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead of buying a new car, you could just use the adaptor that comes with the phone.

So you can arrive to your destination with 50% battery. There's really no argument that paints headphone jack removal as a net positive. Samsung has proved you can waterproof a phone with one (and an SD card!).

I think by adapter, he meant USB-C -> Audio jack dongle, not a bluetooth adapter. So battery wouldn't be an issue.

Re: Google Pixel 2 and 2 XL announced

#138

Post by user-on1 »

Klathmon wrote: post #86
JosephLark wrote: post #65

Edit up top: The identification is done on-device. The Verge article didn't mention this. > And this year’s Pixel will take advantage of the phone’s always-on microphones to listen for music (not just the phrase “OK Google”) and display what you’re listening to on the screen, even if it’s something on the radio. This sounds creepy. So now when excessive microphone data is seen to be going out to the cloud, they can j…

Other articles did mention that this will be local. I have a feeling they are using federated machine learning for this to have a lot of the processing done locally and not need to activate the radios for as much of the processing as possible. They have been making big strides in that area lately and this might be the start of some of the major applications of it (I think they are using it in their keyboard predictio…

so there's going to be a huge database of songs on my mobile!!! i don't think anybody asked for it... sounds like trickery... this is going to take up some storage space now...

anyone know how many gb or mb this occupies in my phone... can v jus clear this data...

Re: Google Pixel 2 and 2 XL announced

#139

Post by the_common_man »

noncoml wrote: post #122

Why would anyone pay money to buy a phone from an advertising company?

Yeah, I feel Google should re-invent itself and make some bold decisions to move out of it's ad business. They seem very capable of making excellent products. Will their shareholders be up in arms if they got out slowly from this add business?

Google Apps, Android, Pixel etc are really excellent products.

Re: Google Pixel 2 and 2 XL announced

#140

Post by deanCommie »

jimmies wrote: post #98
Grazester wrote: post #5

Its DX0 score is 98

I own a Pixel but this DxO stuff is really dodgy. In the portrait pic of the girl, the difference between the Pixel 2 [1] and the iPhone 8 [2] is night and day, with the Pixel 2 looking like shit. She so pale, and the fake bokeh looks like a 5 year old smearing all over, it's simply not pleasant to look at. And the whole push on adding the fake bokeh """scores""" to justify changing the scores so every fucking newly…

Uhhhhhhhhhhh are you serious? The iPhone 8 results look SO much better...
Post reply on HN