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

Google Pixel Buds

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 375 posts

Re: Google Pixel Buds

#161

Post by ants_a »

adornedCupcake wrote: post #115
bb123 wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that the issue here is it would be very hard to create a product that has replaceable batteries of this size and: * Is waterproof * Is small enough to be comfortable * Has a battery large enough to be useful * Has easy battery replacement - this is a really important one to me here. Remember that not everyone using these has the manual dexterity of a healthy 20 year old. These products have to be designed so…

Better to pay a 20y to replace it than throwing the entire thing to the bin.

Agreed. Most people can't replace a wristwatch battery, but wristwatches are not considered disposable items. I don't see why similar approach couldn't work here. Non user-serviceable does not have to mean non-serviceable. Unfortunately large companies consider serviceability a bug not a feature, and not enough consumers vote with their wallets to prove them wrong.

Re: Google Pixel Buds

#162

Post by maccard »

holtalanm wrote: post #145
tabs_masterrace wrote: post #72

The question is, is the battery replaceable? As with Airpods, I won't buy any product that automatically becomes trash after 2 years, and I hope others will too. It is not sustainable and it is time for consumers to refuse this notion. Sure, these little pods won't tip the scale very much, but the practice is sending all the wrong messages.

> I won't buy any product that automatically becomes trash after 2 years I think you overestimate how quickly the battery will deteriorate. I have a pair of bluetooth headphones with a rechargable battery that have been working perfect for 4 years now.

Yep. I've a pair of Somy XM3 headphones that were bought on launch (Jan last year). I'm still getting 25+ hours of battery life out of them (charging them every 3 days, with 8-9 hours of use most days).

Re: Google Pixel Buds

#163

Post by crazygringo »

Hamuko wrote: post #157
crazygringo wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're basically saying that wireless in-ear headphones shouldn't exist then. Everything inside of them is already so miniaturized, there simply isn't space for a replaceable battery, not to mention how you'd maintain waterproofing since, you know, you run and sweat with these in. Have you seen X-rays of the AirPods Pro for example? Can you figure out a way where the battery would become replaceable?

https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/Samsung+Galaxy+Buds+Battery+Rep...

That's fascinating to see that it's technically possible, so thanks for that.

Though it does note that it will lose its original waterproofing capabilities, which seems like a pretty big deal.

But also... it's not like they were designed to be replaceable. This is electronics surgery that I know I could never attempt personally. But it is interesting that you might get electronics shops to do it for you.

Thanks for the info.

Re: Google Pixel Buds

#164

Post by Marsymars »

encom wrote: post #79
tabs_masterrace wrote: post #72

The question is, is the battery replaceable? As with Airpods, I won't buy any product that automatically becomes trash after 2 years, and I hope others will too. It is not sustainable and it is time for consumers to refuse this notion. Sure, these little pods won't tip the scale very much, but the practice is sending all the wrong messages.

You know it won't be. Wireless headphones are disposable. My wired Sennheisers are 10 years old. I've replaced the foam pads on them, which are still available from 1st and 3rd parties. I know someone who just replaced the pads on her Sennheisers which are 25 years old now. I was basically called a luddite here the other day, because I thought firmware updating headphones is madness, but I stand by what I said. Wirel…

Sennheiser does make some nice home theatre (i.e. non-Bluetooth) wireless headphones that use replaceable and rechargeable AAA batteries.

Re: Google Pixel Buds

#165

Post by dmitriid »

clusmore wrote: post #34
po1nter wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I 100% agree with the point you're making but at least Apple's landing page is scrolling smoothly on Firefox (76.0b8 (64-bit) on Windows 10) unlike Google's which is "jumpy".

On the other hand, Google's is 4.5MB whereas Apple's is 55MB. For comparison, the 1 minute YouTube video[1] in 1080p is only 11MB. [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IC9urbiVp4M

Apple's page also features way more animations which are more extensive and complex than a total of may be three on Google's page? And also seamlessly flow into each other.

Re: Google Pixel Buds

#166

Post by marcofatica »

choward wrote: post #159

The scrolling on that site is atrocious. What's up with the "Pixel" branding on the headphones? After the Nexus 6P, I'm never buying another of their phones again. I see "Pixel" and immediately think "not buying that". Do I need a Pixel for these to work? Will I be missing out on features of I don't have one? I can't find anything mentioning what makes these "Pixel" headphones. Google's marketing is awful.

Never had a Nexus, but I had the Pixel 1, liked it so much I got another after I broke it (dropped it so many times, it was very resilient). Then updated to the Pixel 3a. 0 problems whatsoever and it's the best phone I've ever owned. Although, I do much less on my phone these days, mostly web browsing and SMS/calls, definitely not a power user any more.

Re: Google Pixel Buds

#167

Post by Klathmon »

choward wrote: post #159

The scrolling on that site is atrocious. What's up with the "Pixel" branding on the headphones? After the Nexus 6P, I'm never buying another of their phones again. I see "Pixel" and immediately think "not buying that". Do I need a Pixel for these to work? Will I be missing out on features of I don't have one? I can't find anything mentioning what makes these "Pixel" headphones. Google's marketing is awful.

All of your questions are answered on the linked page.

You don't need a Pixel for these to work (they even say they support iOS), and you won't be missing out on features as long as you have an "Assistant Enabled device running Android 6.0 or newer".

Re: Google Pixel Buds

#168

Post by cat199 »

crazygringo wrote: post #148
clusmore wrote: post #20

Off-topic but this website is such a blatant rip-off of the AirPods Pro landing page[1] (EDIT: Discussed at the time [2]), and I _hate_ the UX. I'm not sure what device this is optimised for, but it requires a tonn of scrolling, it's janky, you end up scrolling past the info you want, it breaks basic functionality like Ctrl+F. Why not just make a video instead of a webpage, since that's clearly the effect they're goi…

The entire product is a copy of the AirPods. But you know what? I'm fine with that. That's how competition works, and competition is what brings down prices. And I personally find the scrolling page design (both Apple's and Google's) pretty cool. It would drive me nuts if a site I used daily implemented something like that, like if it became a trend for news sites. But to show off a new product where I'll scroll thro…

> The entire product is a copy of the AirPods.

as if airpods were the 1st rechargable wireless earbuds anyway

Re: Google Pixel Buds

#169

Post by michaelmior »

choward wrote: post #159

The scrolling on that site is atrocious. What's up with the "Pixel" branding on the headphones? After the Nexus 6P, I'm never buying another of their phones again. I see "Pixel" and immediately think "not buying that". Do I need a Pixel for these to work? Will I be missing out on features of I don't have one? I can't find anything mentioning what makes these "Pixel" headphones. Google's marketing is awful.

AFAIK, Pixel is just the brand. I think there's may be minor features that only work with Pixel phones but they supposedly work with other Android phones, iPhones, etc. Personally, I bought a Pixel 2 about a year and a half ago and I really like it.

Re: Google Pixel Buds

#170

Post by dreamer7 »

choward wrote: post #159

The scrolling on that site is atrocious. What's up with the "Pixel" branding on the headphones? After the Nexus 6P, I'm never buying another of their phones again. I see "Pixel" and immediately think "not buying that". Do I need a Pixel for these to work? Will I be missing out on features of I don't have one? I can't find anything mentioning what makes these "Pixel" headphones. Google's marketing is awful.

It is exactly like "Galaxy" in case of Samsung.
Post reply on HN