Leaked Images Show Google Pixel 2 XL Smartphone With Minimal Bezels

3square said:
the ****? really? doesn't those two things goes hand-in-hand? i think you are putting lipstick on a pig buddy.
Click to expand...

I think you're misinterpreting my post. They don't go hand-in-hand, because when you purchase a phone, naturally one is attracted to the color and or form factor a phone. But eventually, if the user experience is poor with the operating system, no one cares about the hardware anymore. That's why long term, hardware wears off and software is what brings the user back. IOS being a great example of that, how intuitive and simplistic it is to use.
 
Definitely not as attractive head-on as the previously leaked photos would suggest, but still looks fine by 2017 standards. As usual, it'll be the software extras that Google throws in that'll set it apart. Unlimited free full-resolution photo and video storage for life is already a huge selling point and would have gotten me to switch if I hadn't already fallen in love with my Apple Watch!
Hopefully Google will be able to accomplish something a more progressive design next year with their HTC design acquisition.
 
Oh snap! MacRumors picked this story up. Awesome!

While I don't think that the Pixel 2 XL design (pictured in OP) is as impressive as the showings from Samsung, LG, and even Apple, at least the bezels are justified by the dual front-firing speakers. My current phone has front-firing speakers (the first device I've ever owned to feature them), and let me tell you guys -- it's not a gimmick. I didn't understand the hoopla until I listened to them myself. They're amazing.

Definitely stoked for this device. Been waiting on it all year. Let's hope that Google doesn't make just 50 units, causing a months-long backorder like that of the original Pixel.
 
OldSchoolMacGuy said:
So? Local storage is still far more useful in almost every use.

Look at you trying to deflect and justify the fact that Google doesn't offer a 256GB option. If Apple did that, the Android fanboys would absolutely lose their minds and slam them non-stop for the omission. It's hilarious that when Apple lacks something it's world ending but when Android lacks it, there's a perfectly good solution.

Enjoy uploading your photos to the cloud while the rest of us enjoy twice the native storage for about the same price.
[doublepost=1507042208][/doublepost]

Hahahahah. So your justification for the fact that Google gives you LESS storage space is at least they don't make some money on it.

Who cares about uncompressed cloud storage? Apple offer that too. Fast local storage is still far more useful to 99% of users than cloud storage which requires processing power, battery life, and data usage to make use of to store some silly images.
.
Click to expand...
OldSchoolMacGuy said:
So? Local storage is still far more useful in almost every use.

Look at you trying to deflect and justify the fact that Google doesn't offer a 256GB option. If Apple did that, the Android fanboys would absolutely lose their minds and slam them non-stop for the omission. It's hilarious that when Apple lacks something it's world ending but when Android lacks it, there's a perfectly good solution.

Enjoy uploading your photos to the cloud while the rest of us enjoy twice the native storage for about the same price.
[doublepost=1507042208][/doublepost]

Hahahahah. So your justification for the fact that Google gives you LESS storage space is at least they don't make some money on it.

Who cares about uncompressed cloud storage? Apple offer that too. Fast local storage is still far more useful to 99% of users than cloud storage which requires processing power, battery life, and data usage to make use of to store some silly images.

You also seem ignorant to the fact that local storage can be used for stuff other than pictures. Google and Apple may give you cloud storage for storing photos but increased local storage can be used to store ANYTHING, not just photos, again making it far more useful.
Click to expand...
I agree that local storage is more useful, which is why I always get a phone with an SD card slot. Large, low cost storage for all media.
I was merely pointing out that Google offering free, unlimited, uncompressed storage seemed like a good deal. But since Apple also offer this , then it not anything special.
 
Ima just leave this here.

To me, this looks like a Nintendo DS type of phone. To each their own. I find the Pixel 2 back not appealing. I find the iPhone X the same in front or back.
 

Attachments

  • chasetriton_BY7oc5wgNSs.jpg
    chasetriton_BY7oc5wgNSs.jpg
    199.4 KB · Views: 100
I don't like those 3 soft buttons at the bottom. They need to do away with those. I know on games and videos they tend to go away (depending on the app), but there are too many apps where they just stay like that. I do like iOS's implementation better.

This is one gripe I have about the NextBit Robin I've used on and off in the past.
 
SoN1NjA said:
How y’all gon’ say the Pixel 2 XL is ugly when the iPhone X got this big ass forehead

Smh...

Only reason the iPhone X “isn’t ugly” is because y’all want that OLED iPhone and ain’t nothing you can do about the design
Click to expand...
To be honest I’m not yet sold on AMOLED (not OLED, get it right) on brightness correct colours and reading ebooks from front to finish. Yes I’ve tried many an AMOLED Android phone and everyone has caused eye strain due to the high TINT settings.

Pixel2 looks ugly. Horrible two tone - that’s so 1999, ugly mix match of black and white on the rear looks like suspenders for a phone. Only the actual face - screen from LG (Google NEVER should’ve parted with LG since the nexus 4; great phone)!

I’m considering LG G6/V30 but the size of the actual phone itself, horrible quality of apps UI/presentation (from icons and apps comparatively), and lack of a fitness peripheral (Fitbit is a joke not going to bother) is holding me back from a final Android try.

What the OS allows, similarly tweak able from old favourite of mobile OS’ S60 (imho set the bar going forward to real modern mobile OS’) especially in terms of apps to circumvent weak security in connected appliances and infrastructure intrigues me (HP The Wolf, Mr Robot type Android apps, real rogue stuff).
 
I like the google pixel 2 for the same reason I like the iPhone 8: front facing speakers. I will gladly accept bezels for improved sound.

On the pixel it feels empty with such large bezels. At least on the 8 there is a hardware home button and fingerprint reader (love it on the front).
 
OldSchoolMacGuy said:
So? Local storage is still far more useful in almost every use.

Look at you trying to deflect and justify the fact that Google doesn't offer a 256GB option. If Apple did that, the Android fanboys would absolutely lose their minds and slam them non-stop for the omission. It's hilarious that when Apple lacks something it's world ending but when Android lacks it, there's a perfectly good solution.

Enjoy uploading your photos to the cloud while the rest of us enjoy twice the native storage for about the same price.
[doublepost=1507042208][/doublepost]

Hahahahah. So your justification for the fact that Google gives you LESS storage space is at least they don't make some money on it.

Who cares about uncompressed cloud storage? Apple offer that too. Fast local storage is still far more useful to 99% of users than cloud storage which requires processing power, battery life, and data usage to make use of to store some silly images.

You also seem ignorant to the fact that local storage can be used for stuff other than pictures. Google and Apple may give you cloud storage for storing photos but increased local storage can be used to store ANYTHING, not just photos, again making it far more useful.
Click to expand...
Wasn't a justification but a point worth noting.

I don't think it's a stretch to say that the majority of users who utilize higher capacity devices do so to store media content of which, photos and videos are the bulk of it. There will always be the.exception with those who have large playlists for offline/high Fidelity listening or just someone who has an extensive app library who keeps them all on their primary device.

You seem to overestimate the amount of resources that the cloud utilizes for remedial tasks.

The cloud works very differently between the two ecosystems which affects how one decides what to store where.

Can you give some examples outside of offline usage where 256 would be necessitated over say, 128?
[doublepost=1507089841][/doublepost]
Gilligan's last elephant said:
I agree that local storage is more useful, which is why I always get a phone with an SD card slot. Large, low cost storage for all media.
I was merely pointing out that Google offering free, unlimited, uncompressed storage seemed like a good deal. But since Apple also offer this , then it not anything special.
Click to expand...
Apple doesn't offer it, not sure what he was talking about. 5gb is free and they function differently.

Google uses drive for backups of which only 15gb is free. This is for app data and system settings. All other content such as media is free with photos and videos being fully uncompressed for pixel users (everyone else is free but with quality limitations).
 
Jsameds said:
This is the alternative to the notch - a bezel. I prefer the extra screen real estate.

123-png.723136
Click to expand...

Exactly!

Everyone talks about how the notch cuts into the screen and is taking away screen real estate.

But what it really does is give you EXTRA screen area in those little ears!

Apple may have chosen an unusual design... but I actually like it. :p
 
DeepIn2U said:
Woah you can read the brochure.
Click to expand...
Woah you tried to correct somebody, DIDN’T KNOW WHAT THE **** YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT, and now you gotta get all defensive because I showed your ass what the **** is up

It’s called personal responsibility—take responsibility for your actions
 
SoN1NjA said:
Woah you tried to correct somebody, DIDN’T KNOW WHAT THE **** YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT, and now you gotta get all defensive because I showed your ass what the **** is up

It’s called personal responsibility—take responsibility for your actions
Click to expand...

I didn't get defensive at all ... however YOU definitely are with your rude comment above! Dude don't get your britches caught up in a bunch. Just cause you quoted what Apple is calling an OLED display on their page - means you can read a brochure as in quoting what you see.

I'm correcting you because OLED is the first release of such technology and Apple has just been reported to using code to mitigate screen 'burn-in' from using AMOLED ... I highly doubt ANY of the original manufacturers use OLED vs AMOLED.

Links stating it's AMOLED:
https://www.oled-info.com/apple-announces-iphone-x-58-flexible-super-amoled
https://www.gsmarena.com/apple_unveils_iphone_x-news-27227.php
https://www.gsmarena.com/apple_iphone_x-8858.php
Display Type: Super AMOLED capacitive touchscreen, 16M colors


https://www.oled-info.com/apple-announces-iphone-x-58-flexible-super-amoled

https://www.gsmarena.com/apple_unveils_iphone_x-news-27227.php

https://www.gsmarena.com/apple_iphone_x-8858.php
Display Type: Super AMOLED capacitive touchscreen, 16M colors


Note the iPhone X resolution and have a look here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMOLED

Then understand specifically that Wide Color Support and Color Accuracy is touted as to why Apple went with "OLED" technology in iPhone X along with other benefits.


AMOLED VS OLED
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-OLED-and-AMOLED-What-are-its-advantages

Specifically:
  • They produce faster refresh rate as well along with dark and inky blacks.
  • AMOLED ones provide exact color contrasts.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMOLED
AMOLED Disadvantages:
AMOLED displays are prone to screen burn-in, which leaves a permanent imprint of overused colours represented by overused images.
Click to expand...

I believe LG currently makes "OLED" for Apple. I feel looking at the LG V30 will give us a BIG clue to what is used in iPhone X's display:

Source submitted for reflection (not proof):
http://www.androidauthority.com/lg-v30-poled-vs-samsung-super-amoled-797330/

Before we go any further, we should sort out what differences, if any, there are between LG Display’s OLED, POLED, or P-AMOLED, and Samsung’s Super AMOLED or Infinity Display as the company now likes to call it. As there are numerous terms floating around these days.

The short answer is that the basic underlying technology is very similar, baring some lower level manufacturing choices and, of course, how software configures and handles the display. Both are OLED displays, which means they are built from a matrix of organic light emitting diodes. Both are also built on active matrix technology (the AM in AMOLED), so that each pixels can be driven individually. The LG V30, Galaxy S8, and Note 8, are also all designed with a swanky looking curved edge, revealing that these panels are also build on a flexible plastic rather than a rigid glass substrate (the P in POLED or P-AMOLED).

Essentially, both LG Display and Samsung Display are basing their latest smartphone panels on plastic OLED designs. The differences boil down to manufacturing materials and methods, sub-pixels layouts, calibration, and software. But even these smaller hidden differences can make panels look quite unique.
Click to expand...


Samsung Disply & Apple alleged terms of deal:
Source: https://www.cultofmac.com/423273/apple-reaches-deal-with-samsung-to-buy-oled-iphone-displays/
Source 2: http://www.androidauthority.com/poled-vs-amoled-792869/

OLED and yet AMOLED is mentioned. I think Apple is just being simplistic here.

According to the alleged terms of the deal, Samsung Display will supply in the region of 100 million 5.5-inch OLED panels annually, with the value being estimated at $2.59 billion. Samsung bosses have refused to confirm the deal for privacy reasons.

Samsung, a leader in OLED display research and AMOLED production, was previously reported as being “on the fast track” to building a dedicated facility for supplying displays to Apple. Samsung Display took up 23 percent of global display shipments in 2015 for screens smaller than 9 inches.
Click to expand...


OLED in it's traditional sense and use of the word is VERY old and lagging technology in-of-itself ... yet AMOLED based technologies has continually evolved. Unlike you I'd like to try researching vs just quoting something online. Yes I see discreptancies in naming for OLED vs AMOLED when referring to the iPhone X's screen beyond Apple's internal websites: which is EXACTLY the reason why I'm rebuttaling your post and one link referencing "a brochure". this isn't an insult it's simply me checking resources and stating maybe you should try doing the same. I have NO issue stating I'm wrong ... but come up with more than one source as the proof before claiming you've proven me wrong.
 
I haven't owned a Google phone since the Nexus 4 mostly because of Googles ordering system. They sell out so fast like these which are already sold out and will takes weeks to get if ordered. By the time I can get one in a few days, I've lost interest because it's 5-6 months later.

Google never learns.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Back
Top