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

Google Pixel Fold

store.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 580 posts

Re: Google Pixel Fold

#131

Post by sidfthec »

deltree7 wrote: post #105
sidfthec wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you use your phone an average of 5 hours a day for two years and then throw it in a junk drawer the hardware would cost less than 50cents per hour of use. I don't understand this type of justification. My fridge would cost around $65k for a 15 year lifetime at $0.50/hour. It just seems like a completely meaningless way to judge the value of something.

You'd pay double the price for double the fridge capacity (if doubling your capacity serves useful purpose for you) You'd pay double the price for double the screen size (if more screen size serves a useful purpose to you) It's really not that hard of a concept to grasp.

I would? I don't see how those have anything to do with the price.

The newly announced Pixel Tablet screen is 4 times larger than the newly announced Pixel 7a, and they're the same price.

Is the Pixel Tablet supposed to be $2k because the screen is 4x larger?

I really don't know what either of you are talking about with these strange thoughts on pricing.

Re: Google Pixel Fold

#132

Post by crazygringo »

sidfthec wrote: post #64
gtop3 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you use your phone an average of 5 hours a day for two years and then throw it in a junk drawer the hardware would cost less than 50cents per hour of use. I use my $800 iPhone about 30 minutes a day, keep it for 4 years, and spend about $1 per hour of use. I'd say the market is heavy cellphone users that use apps that benefit from the larger screen.

> If you use your phone an average of 5 hours a day for two years and then throw it in a junk drawer the hardware would cost less than 50cents per hour of use. I don't understand this type of justification. My fridge would cost around $65k for a 15 year lifetime at $0.50/hour. It just seems like a completely meaningless way to judge the value of something.

The point is not to judge sticker price as an absolute or as percentage of your annual salary, say.

It's to judge it based on the value it gives you per unit of time.

It's the entire justification for investing less in things you use less, and investing more in things you use more. That we generally receive benefits not in one-offs but spread out over time.

Re: Google Pixel Fold

#133

Post by netheril96 »

blep_ wrote: post #88
anonporridge wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'd be dumb not to take 0% financing. Put the money you would have spent buying outright in a savings account yielding 4%.

Where did you find a savings account yielding 4%?

The Fed interest rate is well above 4%. No doubt some banks are offering 4%.

Re: Google Pixel Fold

#134

Post by ISL »

_zoltan_ wrote: post #97
manojlds wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"At the price of one coffee cup" is another thing that gets me. I brew at home and it's 10p for me, is that what you mean?

10p? based on p I think you're in the UK? what kinda coffee is that?here a 3rd wave coffee costs around 42-50 CHF for a kilo and you need 18g for an espresso, so 0.756-0.9 CHF per espresso if I calculate 0 for amortization of equipment.

I've never done this arithmetic before. With a massively inefficient usage of a french-press, I get something like three cups of coffee from a press and perhaps 7 fillings of the press from a bag from my local store. That coffee is $6 USD when it's on sale and $8 when it's not.

Neglecting the cost of the $20 press, the water, the kettle, the rinse-water, the mug, and the heating of the water, that's about $0.33 USD / cup?

Re: Google Pixel Fold

#135

Post by ISL »

What happens when you accidentally get a pebble or grain of sand inside these foldable phones and squeeze/sit on them?

Re: Google Pixel Fold

#136

Post by epolanski »

soared wrote: post #17
spprashant wrote: post #2

That's an ambitious price point. Who are they targeting with this?

The most expensive iPhone is $1699, which is a 14 pro max with a whopping 1 TB of storage. With 128gb it’s only $1099. I agree, seems pretty aggressive.

Does the iphone doubles in size and lets you carry around a minitablet? If not it's a pointless comparison.

A 1000$ iphone is closer to a 300$ pixel 6 than the pixel fold.

Re: Google Pixel Fold

#137

Post by netheril96 »

TobyTheDog123 wrote: post #32

Yeah that price point makes it an instant pass - In all honesty, phones, at least for me, have been reaching a point of diminishing returns. I upgraded from an iPhone 11 to an iPhone 14 recently, and the difference was practically nothing. I didn't think it was possible to experience buyer's remorse after waiting three whole generations, but here we are. I wouldn't be surprised if it's five years before a phone has s…

Your reasoning is flawed. iPhone 14 fits the same use case as iPhone 11, but Foldable fits a different use case than normal phones. You may find Foldable useless but that doesn’t make your reasoning any less flawed.

Re: Google Pixel Fold

#138

Post by VincentEvans »

manningthegoose wrote: post #9

I just don't understand who wants these foldable phones, especially at the $1799 price point. I guess a use case is wealthy frequent travelers who don't want a separate device with a larger screen to watch movies/videos on the go? Someone help me out here.

Eventually all phones will be like that and the price point adjusted for inflation will be comparable to what normal phones cost now. So this is just a way for you to get a device from the future by paying a premium, or alternatively you can just wait.

An iphone was also amazing unique and expensive when it first came out. But by todays standards - a $100 android phone is both more powerful and a lot cheaper.

Re: Google Pixel Fold

#139

Post by teaearlgraycold »

epolanski wrote: post #128
elorant wrote: post #118

1,8k. Yeah, right. For doing what exactly? Watching videos? I'd rather take a tablet, and a phone and still have money in the pocket. I just don't see the use case for these things. Microsoft also produced a foldable device and it tanked.

One could argue the same about every product. 1000$ for an iPhone? To do what chat and watch videos?

That's exactly what I say. I have the iPhone SE.

Re: Google Pixel Fold

#140

Post by mlyle »

r00fus wrote: post #59
xnyanta wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm posting this from my Galaxy Z Fold 3. I'm not particularly wealthy or a frequent traveler. I bought this phone used for 750 bucks in Canada and my main use case for the screen real-estate is reading manga on it, which it excels at. It also then serves as a phone and a media in bed machine. It is fragile and I take good care of it but it is absolutely the most innovative and exciting phone I've had the pleasure of…

I think you hit on something here - if you can get it for 750 (in any currency) it becomes interesting. If it's nearly 2k, it's a plaything for the rich that's both fragile and may have issues that are likely to be poorly supported by the vendor.

Early adopters always have this experience: expensive products, with issues preventing mass-adoption, with uncertain vendor support in the long term.

I'm not sure whether foldable phones will become what everyone uses, but this is typical for new products that have not started zipping up the S curve.

Post reply on HN