Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Google Previews Upcoming Pixel 6 With Custom Tensor SoC, Rear Camera Bar, In-Display Fingerprint Sensor and More
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Mah, who cares. Not sure why Google even bother with designing their own SoCs (unless it's just a copy of ARM cores with some minor tweaks) since they're not even selling their Pixel phones en-masse. I really don't see the significance of this long term since this is Google. They couldn't even figure out wearables that they finally asked for Samsung's collaborations. Google Android tablets are extinct, relying on Samsung to innovate (Samsung Dex).
The only thing I can see is that Google targeting Tensor to go into their Chromebooks, to put another nail against Windows. Right now, it seems there's a race who will kill x86 computers first. Even Microsoft and intel are on the race themselves. Google probably see this as an opportunity since it's a rare golden opportunity when the base dominant x86 hardware itself being challenged instead of just the OS (Windows).
But for phones, I really doubt this will go anywhere. Google is not even interested in selling their phones in more markets.
The only thing I can see is that Google targeting Tensor to go into their Chromebooks, to put another nail against Windows. Right now, it seems there's a race who will kill x86 computers first. Even Microsoft and intel are on the race themselves. Google probably see this as an opportunity since it's a rare golden opportunity when the base dominant x86 hardware itself being challenged instead of just the OS (Windows).
But for phones, I really doubt this will go anywhere. Google is not even interested in selling their phones in more markets.
Google is very much playing the smartphone game like a software company though. What makes a Pixel good comes from its software, not the hardware (which was never special compared to other flagship Androids). The original Pixel pitch was all about Google's computational photography, their late release cycle showcased how well they could optimize the Android software stack, and now they're leaning into their actual hardware experience with TPUs to accelerate all the machine learning that powers their services and features.
The Pixel always seemed like Google providing a template to show how software can be a major differentiator, which is particularly important for the overwhelming amount of Android devices that use mid-tier or budget hardware.
That is true, but that doesn't explain why they are making a phone.
Then why are they making a flagship? And why leverage these features exclusively for Pixel? Why not strengthen the billion+ device ecosystem of budget Android phones with Google's software expertise? Google is making a phone that loses money, competes with their partners, and requires hardware skills they don't have. I know that Google likes to start all sorts of projects that never go anywhere, but after more than five years and billions in capital it's time to end this. It didn't make sense in 2016 and it doesn't make sense now. The only "explanation" I can come up with is Apple envy.
I hate that they want back to asymmetrical front bezels, the pixel 5 nailed the front, why did they screwed the best part of that design? Ugh google
Will at least be interesting to see what case makers do with that camera bar!
Until they get their act together and sell these phones in more countries they will struggle.
It has always been the case in this forum. It is flooded with Android fans for the obvious reasons, and MacRoumors just wants traffic for their business.
The problem with that camera bar is that it'll be very difficulty to design a case around it without the case being thicker than the camera bar itself, which is going to make it very chunky.
Absolutely this. It is quite remarkable how so many people cannot seem to work it out.
I mean the article on a non-Apple product was posted by MacRumors in the first place...
As a technology fan it's good to hear different people's opinions as it helps things sound a little less of an echo chamber.
When my iPhone X died last week, I bought a Pixel 4a. This was my first Android phone. I'll buy the Pixel 6 Pro when it comes out.
True, but the treasure trove of data on your smartphone is too tempting not to mine (think about the location, photos, etc. which is to say nothing of the value of the data on what you’re searching for at any given time).
I’m confused — I didn’t mention patents… But I haven’t had my caffeine yet today so I’m sure I’m missing something
You still haven’t explained why Google should build their own smartphone rather than use their partners’. If the point of Pixel is to “mine data” (I don’t think it is), why pour money in to a Pixel when they can collect data just fine from a Galaxy Phone, or even an iPhone?
I agree that Google themselves seem confused on what the Pixel should be, and underestimated how difficult it is to compete in the smartphone space without more extensive hardware experience. They went from focusing on photos and providing unlimited storage for them only to take that away, then seemingly abandoned the idea of making a flagship and focused on making the Pixel a good mid-tier phone, and now they're back to marketing it as a premium phone because of Samsung LSI's new semi-custom SoC business.
A big part of Apple's success from in-house SoCs is from the Neural Engine, and Google has actual hardware experience with their equivalent: the TPU. It seems they finally have an opportunity to more fully utilize their own machine learning accelerators, and are back to thinking the Pixel should be a flagship. Maybe they're just cool with a multi-billion dollar, wishy-washy experiment?
The iPhone completely transformed Apple as a company, so you're right that it's not too hard to see where they get the inspiration from.
Last edited:
The same why Apple has its own hardware. It's the full vertical integration (i.e. control) of software and hardware. You know exactly what each team is doing. In this case, the software team is likely driving the hardware requirements. And it's a lot easier to do the development of both when they're next door. This chip is also likely to be used in future Chromebooks and and watch and maybe even the tablets.
The 4a was a good choice for Android. My wife has a 3a and other than constantly running out of storage (64gb, no SD) it runs like new and is always up to date. The 12 Pro is my first iPhone, so we have tons of old Androids around the house. Pixel is the only Android brand I would buy.
Vertical integration works for Apple because they are a hardware company. Custom software differentiates their hardware and increases profit margins. Google is a software company, specifically an advertising company. Making custom hardware for their Android software does not help them achieve their goals of OS dominance (thus ensuring Google search dominance). Even if it did help, the amount of money required to build a phone would not make it worth it, given Pixel’s low market share. But I may be overthinking this a little. When Apple introduces a new product, it’s because they have something to contribute to the sector and a long-term plan. I’ve been assuming Google has a reason for making Pixel beyond “hey what if we made a phone” but maybe they don’t.