derFunkenstein wrote:That includes around 45-50 minutes of Pokemon Go and music in the background (don't judge me; it gets me out of the house and some exercise daily )
There are dozens of us.
Personal computing discussed
Moderators: renee, David, mac_h8r1, Nelliesboo
derFunkenstein wrote:That includes around 45-50 minutes of Pokemon Go and music in the background (don't judge me; it gets me out of the house and some exercise daily )
just brew it! wrote:I have a long commute (over an hour each way) on public transit. If I surf on the phone the whole way, it is typically down to around half by the time I get to the office. Unless I charge it at work, it is marginal whether it will make it through the day. I just leave it in a wireless charging cradle whenever I'm at my desk, and that takes care of it
...
The only real beef I have with the G4 (other than the battery life) is the Bluetooth glitches (stuttering). And I'm not sure if that's a performance issue, or just something stupid in their Bluetooth hardware/firmware implementation.
meerkt wrote:derFunkenstein wrote:but it basically always lasts me all day.
Why aspire only to "all day"?
And with non-removable batteries there's also battery charge cycles to worry about.
just brew it! wrote:I have a long commute (over an hour each way) on public transit. If I surf on the phone the whole way, it is typically down to around half by the time I get to the office. Unless I charge it at work, it is marginal whether it will make it through the day. I just leave it in a wireless charging cradle whenever I'm at my desk, and that takes care of it
derFunkenstein wrote:just brew it! wrote:I have a long commute (over an hour each way) on public transit. If I surf on the phone the whole way, it is typically down to around half by the time I get to the office. Unless I charge it at work, it is marginal whether it will make it through the day. I just leave it in a wireless charging cradle whenever I'm at my desk, and that takes care of it
Oh, yeah, that 40% extra is probably not going to cut it. You might be down to 65% but you'd probably still need to charge it to use it comfortably on the way home. Sooo...nevermind I guess.
DancinJack wrote:Yeah, umm, an hour of web browsing should not deplete half of your battery in 2018. But partially due to the old(er) battery and old chipset you're really at a disadvantage.
derFunkenstein wrote:I personally don't keep phones long enough that it matters too much, but I understand this line of thinking. Even when I had a flip phone that would probably last a week on a charge, I still charged it every night. Never know when you're going to need it, was what I thought.
derFunkenstein wrote:just brew it! wrote:I have a long commute (over an hour each way) on public transit. If I surf on the phone the whole way, it is typically down to around half by the time I get to the office. Unless I charge it at work, it is marginal whether it will make it through the day. I just leave it in a wireless charging cradle whenever I'm at my desk, and that takes care of it
Oh, yeah, that 40% extra is probably not going to cut it. You might be down to 65% but you'd probably still need to charge it to use it comfortably on the way home. Sooo...nevermind I guess.
ludi wrote:THIS is a job for...
https://www.target.com/p/anker-powercor ... lsrc=aw.ds
Kretschmer wrote:I don't consider my Pixel 2 to be worth the premium unless you really, really want the camera. It's small, compromised (large bezels, no 3.5mm, no SD Card, fragile, etc.), and doesn't feel like a camera with premium design. Sure it's nice to have three years of software support, but buying two comparable $250-300 phones will give you longer coverage with cash left over in your pocket.
Kretschmer wrote:I don't consider my Pixel 2 to be worth the premium unless you really, really want the camera. It's small, compromised (large bezels, no 3.5mm, no SD Card, fragile, etc.), and doesn't feel like a camera with premium design. Sure it's nice to have three years of software support, but buying two comparable $250-300 phones will give you longer coverage with cash left over in your pocket.
ludi wrote:Kretschmer wrote:I don't consider my Pixel 2 to be worth the premium unless you really, really want the camera. It's small, compromised (large bezels, no 3.5mm, no SD Card, fragile, etc.), and doesn't feel like a camera with premium design. Sure it's nice to have three years of software support, but buying two comparable $250-300 phones will give you longer coverage with cash left over in your pocket.
Given that Android is increasingly attractive to malware and garbageware developers, I would be hesitant to buy any Android phone other than a Pixel. The 2-3 years of OS and security updates are worth at least the cost of the 2-3 cheaper, abandonware phones you'll otherwise buy in the same timeframe. Or you can go with a Samsung flagship and get a decent level of support, but much of the Samsung reskin borders on garbageware. Beyond that you're pretty much buying throwaways, especially if the hardware was made by LG.
And unless you don't use your camera, that's a pretty compelling feature. Besides taking good pictures in general, my Gen1 Pixel has low light performance that exceeds the iPhone6 and subsequent 6S that my wife has owned (although both are pretty close to the Pixel).
DancinJack wrote:Kretschmer wrote:I don't consider my Pixel 2 to be worth the premium unless you really, really want the camera. It's small, compromised (large bezels, no 3.5mm, no SD Card, fragile, etc.), and doesn't feel like a camera with premium design. Sure it's nice to have three years of software support, but buying two comparable $250-300 phones will give you longer coverage with cash left over in your pocket.
I'll preface this by saying I also think the Pixel phones are too expensive, sure, but there simply is no other phone that gets you the same combination of stuff a Pixel does. Legit software updates for a minimum of two years, stock Android, class-leading camera, top of the line (at least as far as SoC goes) specs, Google (first party) support, generally good build quality (if not the most attractive devices out there), and IMO that stuff is worth it to me if you're buying an Android phone. I'd much, much rather spend 700-900 bucks on a Pixel than two 250-300 dollar phones from whomever.
Anyway, I hope someone sees my link above. 350 bucks for a brand new OG Pixel is a really good deal.
derFunkenstein wrote:Well, the camera and software support are worth it for me. I had wanted a Pixel 2 XL but the early reviews put me off the display and seeing people complain of permanent burn-in later on confirmed it. LG's POLED mobile displays are apparently trash.
I wish some of those other compromises weren't there. It'd be nice if the display had been bumped up to 5.2" or 5.3" so that the bezels were smaller, and it'd be great if it had an SD slot, but for my uses those aren't deal breakers. A garbage camera, OTOH, is. The best camera is the one you have with you, and as far as cell phone cameras go, the Pixel 2's is nice.
As for my mother in law, who is on my Verizon plan, I just picked up a Moto G6 on Amazon for $235. Her OG Droid Turbo is on its last legs, and it never got updated beyond Marshmallow anyway. This should be quite an improvement for her needs.
Pville_Piper wrote:My biggest hang up about Android is that security is an absolute mess.
Kretschmer wrote:This is a completely reasonable post. I guess I'm bitter about how mundane the Pixel 2 experience is coming from a OnePlusOne and a Moto G4+ The camera is great, but everything else feels like a sidegrade (performance for my limited use cases) or downgrade (fragile build quality, smaller screen, no 3.5mm jack).
If you have a pocket to spare, something like a Canon G9X MkII would be a nice camera upgrade for your trips. https://www.amazon.com/Canon-PowerShot- ... B01N9MCH0E
derFunkenstein wrote:Kretschmer wrote:This is a completely reasonable post. I guess I'm bitter about how mundane the Pixel 2 experience is coming from a OnePlusOne and a Moto G4+ The camera is great, but everything else feels like a sidegrade (performance for my limited use cases) or downgrade (fragile build quality, smaller screen, no 3.5mm jack).
If you have a pocket to spare, something like a Canon G9X MkII would be a nice camera upgrade for your trips. https://www.amazon.com/Canon-PowerShot- ... B01N9MCH0E
Well, when I want to carry something extra with me, I have a Nikon D3300, a couple batteries, its kit lens, and a 55-200mm lens in a small shoulder bag. That bag goes everywhere with me when I'm on a trip. But when I'm out and about and I want to grab a picture, I only ever have my phone. Since I don't use my back pants pockets (sitting on your wallet is for suckers) I rarely have a spare pocket.
DancinJack wrote:I'm confused how Funks post was "completely reasonable" while mine was derided. I guess thems the breaks!
derFunkenstein wrote:DancinJack wrote:I'm confused how Funks post was "completely reasonable" while mine was derided. I guess thems the breaks!
Cos I'm cool. And you're right $350 for a 1st gen Pixel is a great deal, even if it only ever gets 1 more year of updates from Google. LineageOS will keep it current for a long time.
Kretschmer wrote:Is Nokia Abandonware? Lower-end Samsungs?
Usacomp2k3 wrote:/me shakes his head at the Android fragmentation still in existence; Worrying about length of security upgrades is so 2010's.
DancinJack wrote:You're not wrong, but iOS and Android, more precisely their underpinnings, construction, and purpose, could not be more different. When one company controls all the hardware and all the OS code, of course updates are going to be simpler. Of course! It's just not why Android exists and what its meant to do. It's a ridiculous situation that OEMs can't update phones on a regular basis, but shaking your head at it at this point seems a little odd. We all know what is going on.
Usacomp2k3 wrote:To me it is similar to the windows conundrum. Microsoft can handle security updates for a large number of different devices over a fairly long period, even over multiple service pack levels and OS versions. Why can't Android do something similar? For things like the pixel, there is no "OEM" that has to update anything, it is the OS itself. Why is it still broken if that has been the largest issue for at least the last 6 years?
I'm just saying, Joe the consumer shouldn't have to think about such things.
derFunkenstein wrote:You're right, they shouldn't have to worry about it. Android One devices are similar to the Microsoft analogy, but most of Android is weirder than that. Google only distributes source, which is then customized by the device makers and tailored for the specific device. So every device model has a different build of the OS. Imagine if that was the case for Windows.
Usacomp2k3 wrote:... For things like the pixel, there is no "OEM" that has to update anything, it is the OS itself.
...
I'm just saying, Joe the consumer shouldn't have to think about such things.
ludi wrote:IOW Google's control over Android isn't like Microsoft's control over Windows because Google wants to operate on the Linux model, not the Windows model. And that's why it matters which company is supplying your Android phone, not which company is supplying the Android base code.
Usacomp2k3 wrote:Thanks for the clarification. I was missing that extra layer. So in the case of the Pixel, Google is providing both layers, but for the S9, Google is providing the lowest layer and Samsung provides the next layer?
I guess the follow-up question is can security updates be made to the lowest layer independent of the higher layer? Sounds like not.