I have criticized the design of the Watch while also acknowledging that I’m glad Google is expanding its hardware ecosystem, because as you said, competition is a good thing. I have no doubt the cameras on the Pixel will still be better than the 14 Pro as that is an area Google has excelled for many years now. But, that forces Apple to keep pushing with their cameras.
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.
Hands-On With Google's New Pixel 7, Pixel 7 Pro and Pixel Watch
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Doesn’t matter. Increase sales for apple equates to increased market share which equates to more profit.
Saying they have no competitors is dumb at best.
Samsung alone outsell Apple and it’s not all budget phones…
I never said Apple has no competition. In fact, I’ve acknowledged the strength of the Pixels cameras as pushing Apple’s camera’s forward.
I have been wondering since two days ago whether you were a troll, intentionally being obtuse, or simply have a very naive and simplistic view of how competition, and the markets operate.
The laws of supply and demand suggests that in order for Apple to sell more devices, they would need to lower prices, which may not necessarily lead to higher revenue / profits overall.
It would make more sense for Apple (and for any rational business for that matter) to price their products in order to maximise profits, and I believe this is what they already do. So I don't bat an eyelid when Apple prices products like the AirPods Max or Magsafe Duo at their respective prices. They are what they are in order to maximise profits after accounting for manufacturing and R&D costs and the likely addressable market.
Samsung may outsell Apple, but Apple still brings in the lion's share of profits in the smartphone market. And the tablet market. And the PC market. And pretty much every other market Apple operates in. Which brings me back to my earlier comment to you - why would I ever opt for profitless market share over higher profits?
If I am honest, both watches are very different.
Garmin Fenix/Epix is a Sports/fitness watch with a bit of smart watch thrown in.
Apple Watch/Ultra is a Smart watch with a bit of fitness/sports watch thrown in.
I have both, so before the Apple crew all start piling in, I would ask you to go to your PC/Mac after a workout and log in to your Apple Fitness or health accounts online and check all the details of your last workout. Oh, we can't, there is no such facility.
Login on line to your Garmin account and scroll through pages and pages of data from your last workout, there is so much more than Apple provides on their phone, but, you can get the same info on a phone using the Garmin connect app. Try looking on your AW at your heart rate in real time, or the steps you take in real time, try to not charge your AW for 10 days. You can't.
They are both different watches, I love em both, but a lot of the people here that are comparing the Garmin watch with an Apple Watch, just are going on hearsay or what they have read. Apple has a long way to go in the health and fitness stakes compared to Garmin.
Both work brilliantly with an iPhone, the screen on the AW is by far and away better than my Fenix, (The screen on the Fenix on the photo below makes it look a lot better than it is, there is a reason that the battery life is so long and that is the very low contrast on the face)
I suspect it would still be a lot better than the screen on the Epix. Notifications and integrating with the phone, again, I don't think anyone could beat Apple. Apple Pay on AW, Brilliant. Google pay on Fenix isn't supported by most banks in the UK so for me is useless. Looks? For me, even the AW Ultra looks better than the Garmin.
Both are fabulous at what they are meant to do, I will keep both.
Last edited:
Why do you automatically equate more market share as less profitable?
There are plenty of android devices being sold to the same demographic and target audience which apple could swallow up. If you think they have 100% market share in the premium smartphone market you are deluded.
You are just coming across like a fanboy defending every single negative with absolutely no logic or intellectual thought.
It’s pointless
I am a fanboy for arguing why Apple does not have a larger market share? Now that is a first for me.
I think you are obvious confusing smartwatch with smart sportwatch. The Apple Watch is a fantastic smartwatch, as other brands on the market. Name a better smartwatch…smart sport watches like the Garmin, sure, Apple isn’t quite there, but I don’t think Apple’s sole aim with the Ultra was to create a direct Garmin replacement. It’s an Apple Watch that can last longer, take more abuse, and provide an alternative for some of the more extreme athletics. It does that very well.
To be honest this is kinda insufferable at this point.
Enjoy your apple products. I hope you find something else to love as much as Apple some day.
The Pixel watch has a non-cellular version that is $349. The cellular version is $399.
The SE has a non-cellular version that is $249. The cellular version is $299. Those are for the 40mm sizes.
If you go up to 44mm, then the price for the SE is $279/$329.
The Pixel watch is also made from stainless steel, has an always-on display, and can take ECGs.
The SE is made from aluminum, has no always-on display, and cannot take ECGs.
The cheapest Apple Watch made from stainless steel starts at $699.
You're not comparing the same things. Google also released the Fitbit Versa 4 recently, which starts at $229, cheaper than the SE. Why not mention that?
Without ever having tested the watch and how well the software on it runs, I don't see how the age of the internals is really relevant. Along with the Pixel phones, Google seems more focused on software and user experience than hardware.
What’s insufferable is how personal you’re taking this. Talking about forum members etc. This is an Apple forum for Apple enthusiast by and large, thus we generally aren’t excited by Google or their hardware. Relax mate, just take a breath.
No….when you are bashing the product so quickly and childish because it’s not your little precious apple….that’s called being triggered.Less triggered, and more amused, personally.
At this point, the only real competition Apple has, is Apple itself.
Sorry "serious smart watch" and "real smartwatch market" ? - Pray tell the criteria ?
Last edited:
Nothing in how Google has rolled out the Pixel 6 and 7 and this Pixel Watch suggests they will give up after two years, did you read that recent interview, maybe it was from The Verge, the interview with the guy in charge of the Pixel Watch, the tone is that this watch is a big part of their ambient computing vision.
Right now I think having the Google assistant on your wrist is a selling point, obviously it depends on how you use the watch, ultimately, the leader in voice is going to have a big advantage.
I don't think any of us can envision what will be the product that takes down the smartphone, I hope Apple has devoted a decent amount of money to their Skunkworks division, a group within that division should have the destruction of the Iphone as their goal, in the next five years, what are we looking at it, rollable phone screens, a Star Trek like communicator that does everything without a screen, would the Apple bean counters allow such a device, could they make as much money without you clicking ads, the next big thing will arrive, question for Apple is, will they develop it.
I just wanted to say, after using both iOS and Android for years, that the Pixel phones are worlds better than the iPhone 14 and 14+. At least on paper. If you aren’t tied into apples ecosystem stock Android on the Pixels is actually very very good, in its own way, and the hardware destroys the iPhone 14. I’m real curious to see the detailed camera specs and results for things like Astro mode on the 7 pro.
I have a 14 pro max and the cameras are disappointing, once again, and barely improved from my 11 pro max. Same white balance issues at night, same piss poor focusing (what is that LiDAR sensor doing, anyways?), same low detail/high noise/muddy skies, etc. I think it’s long last time for Apple to take photography seriously and poach some of the talent at Google, and some of the camera companies and admit they don’t know what they are doing in this regard. I’ve always wondered what gcam could do on an iPhone, seems we have every google app on iOS except for that one. A damn shame it hasn’t been ported over.
I have a 14 pro max and the cameras are disappointing, once again, and barely improved from my 11 pro max. Same white balance issues at night, same piss poor focusing (what is that LiDAR sensor doing, anyways?), same low detail/high noise/muddy skies, etc. I think it’s long last time for Apple to take photography seriously and poach some of the talent at Google, and some of the camera companies and admit they don’t know what they are doing in this regard. I’ve always wondered what gcam could do on an iPhone, seems we have every google app on iOS except for that one. A damn shame it hasn’t been ported over.
You are correct, the premium Apple charges is a big part in their meteoric stock rise,
Can you provide some comparison photographs, skeptical the average person could determine any difference between the two cameras.
Obviously, taking in consideration your lack of knowledge regarding Android.
First lesson : Google doesn't use desert names anymore.
I'd say that when it comes to point and shoot both the iPhone and the Pixel take fantastic photos, but if you take the average user as a benchmark I don't think the iPhone comes anywhere near the utility and quality of a Pixel -- for photos anyway and judged against the whole set of features you get from a Pixel. Video is a different story.
The ability to easily remove people and objects (Magic Eraser), AI-powered motion blur, photo unblur and more realistic skin tones make me very jealous when I look over the fence. My iPhone can copy/paste people and objects out of a photo or video, which is a nice gimmick but I doubt it's a use case many people actually have regularly.
Google pioneered night sight long before the iPhone and Apple still hasn't rolled it out on all of its phones (SE). Portrait mode on a Pixel allows you to adjust the direction of a light source after you've taken the picture, which is neat.
I will say this: For all the deserved mockery, Google has actually been really good at pushing out innovative features that I would love to see on my iPhone. And as a general observation, it doesn't hurt to admit that.
Last edited:
Not the same thing.I wish the iPhone could take pictures like this.
These Awesome Photos of the Milky Way Were Taken on an iPhone 14 Pro
One iPhone 14 rumor that never panned out was some sort of astrophotography feature, but that hasn't stopped users from showcasing just what the...www.macrumors.com
In a 1vs1 the Pixel will consistently take the better shot. The difference will be way more visible if there's even slight wind. Pixel's Astrophotography mode does a lot of stuff to clean up the photo, make sure stars are not blurred due to movement and so on.
I don’t have time at the moment but you can look at any Astro test on YouTube, even old pixel 3’s are way better than a 14 pro max.
Actually you'll have to refer back to Apple's first ever watch, it was truly ratchet to put in in context. While an apple user myself, sometimes you have to be fair and commend google for at least trying on its first watch. For instance, I use a Garmin watch because the battery it's counted on weeks no hours like the all new expensive apple watch ultra, also remember crash detection had been in google for a while but apple claims it a "their innovation". Iphone 14 and pro are exactly the same of the previous same thing just with a worse battery life. Siri does an awful job and most apple users still on gmail, google maps, et al.