In other words, you might not want to trust them because they killed off a Pixel Pass that 25 people signed up for, a Google Podcasts app that was basically a browser in an app shell that was given a proper replacement, a niche business presentation screen in Jamboard, and Stadia…freaking Stadia. They gave you all of your money back and let you keep the controller, guys.
It's not a good look when right off the bat it dismisses what is valid concerns by treating the opposition like they're just whining.
For real I was going to say this reads like a Google marketing AstroTurf. Just watched the linked MKBHD video and it's not unfair; definitely not "weird"
The thing is, google guarantees 7 years of support, they can't cancel that. The services they closed had no promise on the longevity
In 2015 Google said "With Google Photos, you can now back up and store unlimited high-quality photos and videos for free". This is no longer true, even considering their vague corporate speak promise of "unlimited high-quality". By Google's own wording within the Google Photos app the options are "Original quality" or "Storage Saver". There is no high-quality unlimited option.
But it's not even about explicit promises. It's about the constant erosion of user trust. Having to read into the details and interpret marketing vs legal speak does nothing to alleviate that Google has done this to themselves.
This lacks context and they did keep this promise after a fashion. They never promised it would be consistent across any phones but the pixel line at the time, and additionally never said it would continue on new pixel phones.
There's a lot of asterisks attached to that sentence. My point being that no one wants to think about all the ways Google is going to wiggle out of its commitments each time they make a new one. It erodes trust and I'm glad that they are getting more and more negative press about it. They need to be held accountable. Their strategy of making a product at a loss while they drive out all competition until they realise it's not a billion dollar product and promptly shut it down while shafting everyone who grew to rely on it needs to stop.
Stadia was amazing. I blame everyone but Google on its demise. You could literally play CP 2077 without a console but people still stuck to PlayStation and Xbox. Google handled the shutdown so well. I played around $500 worth of games got the money back. Kept two controllers and bought a steam deck with that money
Cloud gaming is bad for history. If the game was only released for the cloud, and that game is shut down, or the cloud service shuts down, that game is gone forever.
They want to push it, because it gives them control over every aspect of the experience. They know everything you do in the game, you can't mod it, you can't pirate, you can't play offline, you can't do anything unless they say you can.
You should blame me then. Once I saw that Google wasn't going to honor steam library on stadia, and then charge full price for games on stadia, I noped out and never signed up.
I say this is a cloud gamer who uses G-Force now, and shadow. I was their target demographic. And they're pricing model just noped me out of it
Once I saw that Google wasn't going to honor steam library on stadia
That is such a weird complaint.
Google doesn't own Steam. Google has nothing to do with Steam. Why would Google give you free games just because you purchased those same games on a competing platform?
Are you also complaining that Sony isn't honoring your Steam library on the PlayStation? Are you complaining that Microsoft isn't honoring the Steam library on the XBox?
Heck, are you complaining that Steam isn't honoring the Nintendo Switch library on the Steam Deck?
I mean: what gives?
That's a good question. In my view Google was selling remote compute, remote graphics rendering, and charging a subscription fee for that. Just like GeForce now. Remember GeForce now and shadow, we're both remote game streaming platforms that existed before stadia.
So Google comes along and says hey for a little bit more money than GeForce now, we're going to let you render and stream games from our data centers. Just like GeForce now just like shadow.
Unlike those other platforms, you can't bring your own library, you have to also buy the games from us, at full retail price. Even if the game is cheaper on steam.
So it was both a subscription service, and a wall garden with higher than normal prices.
It's like subscribing to Netflix, and also having to buy the movies to watch. Pick your lane Google
Anyway I understand your position, I'm just trying to articulate as a cloud gamer at the time stadia came out, I was enthusiastic, but disappointed with their pricing model which didn't seem competitive.
I think their options were to a, charge a monthly subscription, and allow people to bring their own libraries, like the steam library.
Or b. Charge for games, and then stream for free.
Doing both puts them in a significant market disadvantage, and I didn't want to own games that were tied to a Google platform, because Google has a long storied history of shutting down platforms after a few years. I didn't want to own games on a platform that would disappear. 100% Google's reputation prevented me from trying out their platform because I didn't trust them to be around for more than a few years
You didn’t need the premium subscription to stream your games. You could stream at 720p for free if you purchased the game. Blame Google’s marketing for making it seem like you did though
I had no idea, thanks for pointing that out.
You know who else doesn't honor steam library? PlayStation or Xbox. What a weird take
At the time stadia came out as a game streaming platform Geforce now, and Shadow already were established, both of those services charged a subscription but let you bring your own library.
Google's Offering required you to subscribe AND buy full priced retail games that you couldn't use elsewhere, so it wasn't competitive with geforce now and shadow.
It's not a weird take..... because Geforce now and shadow are both still in business now, and stadia is not, they were not able to convince cloud gamers to take their offer.
Stadia did not require you to subscribe. You could just buy the game and play. Unlike GeForce. You don't even know what the fuck you are talking about.
Stadia subscription only brought in 4k and monthly games. The base was free. And you down vote my comment like you fucking made a point. Learn to Google before commenting dumb ass
Edit: not only that the base was free there were free to play games like destiny 2 where the only thing you needed was a Google account.
I didn't realize they allowed people to stream purchased games for free, my mistake, thank you for the correction. According to IGN article, the free games were if you had a subscription.
It's a mystery why cloud gamers didn't flock to google then. My core point about stadia not being competitive with geforce now and shadow stills stands, even though I got the details wrong about being about to stream purchased games for free.
Another stadia user here.
I loved the service but he neglected to tell you cyberpunk looked like hot garbage compared to its PC equivalent.
I pretty much only used it for Destiny, and I too spent hundreds of dollars supporting the platform only to get it all back.
The convenience was wonderful, but worthless if they didn’t have what you wanted to play, and Google became less and less interested in working with developers as time went on.
Weird ass complaint man
I'm just articulating why I, as a cloud gamer at the time they release their product, stayed with different providers. They didn't exist in the vacuum, GeForce now, and shadow, both existed, allowed you to use a pre-existing libraries, didn't charge per game.
GeForce now was cheaper, Shadow was more expensive but provided better resolution.
So Google comes into the mix, and their option, while I wanted to try it, wasn't palatable for me as a cloud gamer at the time.
Scenario 1: buy the game on steam, play it on local hardware, or GeForce now for $5 a month
Scenario 2: buy the game on steam, play it on shadow, or local hardware, for $20 a month
Scenario 3: by the game from Google for more than it costs on steam, only be able to play it on stadia, and pay I think it was $15 a month.
You can see why I chose scenarios 1 and 2 instead.
Without a doubt it was amazing and me and my family were extremely sad, but in the end what is there to be mad about with stadia... I was part of something different, I was also a founder and played all the time. I think I owned all the games before I didn't 😂
I just got a nice discount on my Pixel 8 preorder with my Stadia refund.
Because the opposition frames the situation as Google never keeping any promise ever, in addition to refusing to acknowledge Google's positive precedent with Android updates.
If you view the Android update situation in isolation, you'll see that in the 10+ years Google has sold Pixel and Nexus phones, they have kept each one of their Android update promises.
I dunno, I kinda don't disagree with them. Companies discontinue products all the time, and Google just seems to get a lot more flak for it.
Apples discontinued the iPod, and a bunch of different hardware devices. I'm about as worried that they'll discontinue the iPhone as I am that Google will discontinue the pixel line.
Google discontinue a lot more than almost anyone else though. It’s a meme at this point how often they kill things off. Does a website like this exist for any other company?
Well, no, but that doesn't mean that it's an accurate assessment.
Additionally, have you ever actually read what they put on that site? If Google changes the name of a product, then they "killed" the original. If they merge a product into another, then they killed one or both.
Did you know they killed Google street view? It's now just a tab in maps. They also at one point had "leaving reviews of businesses" as a separate system, which they also killed by making it a core feature.
But yes, Google does kill more products than some other companies. They also make more products available than others. Apple has never developed a car, a series of bipedal robots, or blood sugar monitoring contact lenses.
So yeah, it's a meme. I don't generally take memes as honest statements of fact.
I'm not sure I get your point, people should not doubt Google's promise not because they don't discontinue product but because everyone does?
I think more Pixel's a true flagship product. Big Tech corps are always launching likely contenders, then they evaluate them over time and if the benefits don't realize or they find a better product it gets discontinued.
But some products are proven. The only way Alphabet and Apple would discontinue their flagship phones is if there's some kind of mass turn away from mobile phones. Same as how Alphabet is not going to exit the search engine field.
More that the concern feels hyperbolic. You should feel as much concern of Google canceling a flagship product as you do about apple doing so. I don't see iPhones, pixels, or say, Kindles going anywhere soon.
It just doesn't feel like a reasonable concern, proportional to how much attention it gets.
I doubt people takes apple claim for granted either, they do have a class action lawsuit due to them volontarily throttling their phones.
The article makes valid points but completely misses the real point. The real point, that has been pointed out every single time Google kills another product, is that every time they do that it erodes user trust. This point has been harped on for years, with more and more people agreeing with it the more and more Google kills products.
Is it any surprise then, that we're finally reaching a critical mass of users not trusting Google? It's less update this specific promise being untrustworthy, then the entire company being untrustworthy and this just happens to be the point that the dialogue had changed.
not as if the Pixel 8 is just a small Pixel 8 Pro – it isn’t.
The phones are nearly identical. The Pro has more RAM, a different secondary camera, and a third camera.
Apple absolutely should be (and is frequently) criticized for artificially locking features to certain models.
Obviously it's a good thing to have increased software support. 7 years of security updates is, on its own, a big deal. Google deserves credit for that. But they also deserve to be called out on their bullshit, same as Apple or any other company.
What are you talking about? Apple should be lauded for at least having the phone tiers that they have. There's choice for every type of buyer. The 15 pro vs pro max is 3x zoom and 5x zoom. That's IT. You get the same features between each pro phone and get to choose the size that works for you.
Google has hamstrung the smaller phone with a worse screen, much worse camera system (video boost is locked to 8 Pro), no temperature sensor, slower wireless charging speeds, less RAM, gorilla glass Victus 1 vs 2, and an annoyingly glossy back glass.
I bought an 8 Pro for the camera system because I didn't want to be locked out of the better ultra wide and telephoto, but I wish I could have gotten that in a smaller size.
We’re now at the point where tech media has turned and will now have you believe Google should be questioned, is untrustworthy, and that their promise means nothing
This is worse than even the most insufferable apple fanboy.
Google! Untrustworthy!
God I can’t imagine why anyone would think that
I've been involved with different companies setting up their cloud presence and negotiating prices, and while Google is a contender, they have to aggressively price themselves at the large corporate level because a lot of people in the room don't have trust in them. Why would we onboard to your platform if we don't think you're going to be around very long? It'll take us years to fully migrate, and then once we're in you could shut it down on a whim.
I'm not saying that's a deciding factor at the corporate level for people, but it is a discussion factor that other contenders like AWS or Microsoft azure do not have. So their retail graveyard definitely impacts them at every level
God I can’t imagine why anyone would think that
This made me laugh out loud
In defense of Google, I have a first-gen Pixel that still gets unlimited Google Photos uploads.
This phone is seven years old and Google had kept its commitment that photo uploads would remain free for the life of the phone.
Also in defense of Google - I'm still grandfathered in to the $8 plan for YouTube premium because I signed up and have remained subscribed since 2013 when they offered promotional pricing at the beginning of Google Play Music. Years later, they added YouTube Red (now Premium) to the subscription which REALLY sweetened the pot. But they've never bumped my subscription price up.
I pay $0 for uBlock Origin lol
Not for long. I've been getting the "You're using an ad blocker" banner for the couple of days. I'm not losing my Gmail account over it.
Sounds like the very thing to motivate you to ditch your gmail account, don't let them hold you hostage!
Ah yes, let’s defend Google for not raising the price of features that were free to begin with like listening with screen off and background listening? Not really sure how much lower the bar can get here
I signed up for the original family plan, and they raised my prices multiple times.
They also killed off YouTube premium light.
I think you're only paying the original price cause of a glitch.
Same here. At $8 it's an amazing value. I plan on keeping it until they kill off parts of it or raise the price.
At $8 it’s an amazing value
Except it's not
IDK why people are downvoting. I could see it being decent for YT Music but for YT Premium you’re literally paying for features free software can do for free. So it’s not really a good deal by any metric.
I don't think this is a good POV. The biggest reason I prefer to pay for YT Premium is so creators still get revenue from me watching their videos
Except if you want to support creators and ensure they get all the money there’s far better ways that aren’t paying for adblocking lmao.
YouTube makes more money than ever, they are being greedy AF.
Alright, can you elaborate on these ways? You could support a particular creator via Patreon, or by buying their merch, sure. What if somebody you've never watched before releases a very good video that you stumble upon and watch? What if you don't have the financial resources to be a part of dozens of separate patreons?
As far as I'm concerned, YT Premium is the best way for me to support all of the creators behind the videos I watch. For me, I also like YT Music so this ends up being a pretty good deal overall
You can easily buy memberships for channels, which gives more money than premium. In fact, most memberships for channels I frequent are $0.99 a month, so you can definitely afford to support 10-15 of them for the same price as premium.
That’s great that it’s a good deal for you, but it doesn’t change the fact that google took features that were free to use and locked them behind a paywall. So by default it’s a bad deal on that front alone.
I don't think that's what a bad deal is. I make decisions based on what is a good deal for me and things I care about.
With YT Premium for $10/mo I get:
support unlimited amount of creators based on watch time
no ads
YT Music (which is pretty good imo)
Support infrastructure behind service
Without YT Premium for $10/mo I get:
support 10 creators directly
ads (or constantly fight battle to block them)
Now, I fully agree that removing features that were previously paid is a dick move, but those aren't why I have YT Premium anyways. I just don't think it is an objectively "bad" deal
I envy you. My OG Pixel has broken down :(
The Pixel hasn't left the house since 2018. All it has done since then is run SyncThing and upload the photos/videos taken by my current phones.
Maybe will consider doing that on my Poco F1 (which is spoofed as a Pixel XL) once I get a new daily driver
Ah heck yeah, I'm doing the same.
I've never heard of Syncthings, could you tell me more about it?
Sounds interesting!
It's a free app that syncs files to a central location. In my case, I sync any photo or video I take on my Pixel 7 to my Pixel 1. The Photos app on my Pixel 1 then uploads the new photos to Google Photos.
Hey I do exactly the same, high 5!
Really cool! Apart from the photos ending in Google photos, I thought you'd use a local backup or something :-)
What's the point of syncing with an OG pixel with unlimited free Google storage if you are not using it?
Ha ga that's true!
So they don't check the metadata to verify the phone who actually took the picture?
Be prepared to pay when it dies. I assumed it wouldn't count when I got a new phone. It does. So now they want me to sign up for a plan. Well, now they want me to pay more for a higher tier. I got a nas instead. I'm cancelling the plan.
I forgot that I had years of free uploads from my Pixel 2. That eventually expired. But I never had to pay for those uploads.
I also had 100 extra GB for two years for being one of the first Google Maps guides, populating the map with the first photos of businesses etc. When that expired, I did have to start paying. Google are smart - they got me addicted to having all my files right there wherever I was. It's only $20ish per year for that tier, I have been happy to pay for it. I think this might be what happened to you. You may have had some sort of promotion that expired.
Yes, but it was meant to be for life. It may be I’m misremembering, ut it seemed like when the phone died, he storage was now counted.
I never had to do this with all the media I uploaded via my Pixel 2 back when it has those benefits. Everything I uploaded that way counts zero toward my storage cap, to this day.
Maybe I’m just using lots of storage as I’ve got kids and that means lots of photos and videos. However, it seemed odd at the time, however it’s a few years since I noticed.
This article is unintelligible. I don't see a single point being made. It's filled with whataboutism and making up arguments to debunk.
Google, apple, and Samsung are all untrustworthy. Google and apple also make some pretty good phones, albeit pricy ones.
Paraphrasing MKBHD: Buy the phone for what it has today, not what it might have tomorrow.
I'd believe the promise of 7 years of updates from any other company but definitely not Google. In the words of Logan Roy
The thing is that they've clearly promised 7 years now, walking back on the promise would cause them massive issues with consumer protection agencies everywhere they sell - they might be toothless in the US, but Google also sells Pixels in Japan and the EU.
[This comment has been deleted by an automated system]
For me, this kinda breaks both ways:
7 years of security updates is a promise that my phone won't regress from where it was when I bought it - I typically buy a mid-ish range phone (currently running a Pixel 7a) when they are brand new, and run it for ~3 years before I start to want an upgrade. Lack of security updates usually forces the issue, so a phone with 7 years of security updates guarantees that I'll want to upgrade before I'm forced to, and will be able to pass the phone along to a relative. Where I am, a claim like "we will provide security support until X" is backed up by consumer law, so I'd be entitled to a full refund if they fail to meet that guarantee.
Buying a phone because the manufacturer promises "feature drops" or because you expect that a future version of the OS will have some amazing features you want is like buying a preorder game - you are a fool for trusting marketing without concrete details
So there are two arguments being made in this situation. The first is that because Google kills off services and products all of the time, that taking their word for a 7-year promise is foolish. In other words, you might not want to trust them because they killed off a Pixel Pass that 25 people signed up for, a Google Podcasts app that was basically a browser in an app shell that was given a proper replacement, a niche business presentation screen in Jamboard, and Stadia…freaking Stadia. They gave you all of your money back and let you keep the controller, guys.
C'mon guys they had a "proper replacement" and let you keep the controller! They're not all that bad! 👅🥾
I'll never forgive them for Google Play Music.
I do however believe they're going to stick to their word here though. They make the processor and the OS, it'd have to take some extreme ignorance to fuck that up. It's not like they're reliant on Qualcomm to release new drivers for the chip, one of the big reasons devices stop being updates.
What a fucking bootlicker.
Fool me once shame on me. Fool me 154 times. Shame on you!
It's not a good look when right off the bat it dismisses what is valid concerns by treating the opposition like they're just whining.
For real I was going to say this reads like a Google marketing AstroTurf. Just watched the linked MKBHD video and it's not unfair; definitely not "weird"
The thing is, google guarantees 7 years of support, they can't cancel that. The services they closed had no promise on the longevity
In 2015 Google said "With Google Photos, you can now back up and store unlimited high-quality photos and videos for free". This is no longer true, even considering their vague corporate speak promise of "unlimited high-quality". By Google's own wording within the Google Photos app the options are "Original quality" or "Storage Saver". There is no high-quality unlimited option.
But it's not even about explicit promises. It's about the constant erosion of user trust. Having to read into the details and interpret marketing vs legal speak does nothing to alleviate that Google has done this to themselves.
This lacks context and they did keep this promise after a fashion. They never promised it would be consistent across any phones but the pixel line at the time, and additionally never said it would continue on new pixel phones.
There's a lot of asterisks attached to that sentence. My point being that no one wants to think about all the ways Google is going to wiggle out of its commitments each time they make a new one. It erodes trust and I'm glad that they are getting more and more negative press about it. They need to be held accountable. Their strategy of making a product at a loss while they drive out all competition until they realise it's not a billion dollar product and promptly shut it down while shafting everyone who grew to rely on it needs to stop.
Stadia was amazing. I blame everyone but Google on its demise. You could literally play CP 2077 without a console but people still stuck to PlayStation and Xbox. Google handled the shutdown so well. I played around $500 worth of games got the money back. Kept two controllers and bought a steam deck with that money
Cloud gaming is bad for history. If the game was only released for the cloud, and that game is shut down, or the cloud service shuts down, that game is gone forever.
They want to push it, because it gives them control over every aspect of the experience. They know everything you do in the game, you can't mod it, you can't pirate, you can't play offline, you can't do anything unless they say you can.
You should blame me then. Once I saw that Google wasn't going to honor steam library on stadia, and then charge full price for games on stadia, I noped out and never signed up.
I say this is a cloud gamer who uses G-Force now, and shadow. I was their target demographic. And they're pricing model just noped me out of it
That is such a weird complaint.
Google doesn't own Steam. Google has nothing to do with Steam. Why would Google give you free games just because you purchased those same games on a competing platform?
Are you also complaining that Sony isn't honoring your Steam library on the PlayStation? Are you complaining that Microsoft isn't honoring the Steam library on the XBox?
Heck, are you complaining that Steam isn't honoring the Nintendo Switch library on the Steam Deck?
I mean: what gives?
That's a good question. In my view Google was selling remote compute, remote graphics rendering, and charging a subscription fee for that. Just like GeForce now. Remember GeForce now and shadow, we're both remote game streaming platforms that existed before stadia.
So Google comes along and says hey for a little bit more money than GeForce now, we're going to let you render and stream games from our data centers. Just like GeForce now just like shadow.
Unlike those other platforms, you can't bring your own library, you have to also buy the games from us, at full retail price. Even if the game is cheaper on steam.
So it was both a subscription service, and a wall garden with higher than normal prices.
It's like subscribing to Netflix, and also having to buy the movies to watch. Pick your lane Google
Anyway I understand your position, I'm just trying to articulate as a cloud gamer at the time stadia came out, I was enthusiastic, but disappointed with their pricing model which didn't seem competitive.
I think their options were to a, charge a monthly subscription, and allow people to bring their own libraries, like the steam library.
Or b. Charge for games, and then stream for free.
Doing both puts them in a significant market disadvantage, and I didn't want to own games that were tied to a Google platform, because Google has a long storied history of shutting down platforms after a few years. I didn't want to own games on a platform that would disappear. 100% Google's reputation prevented me from trying out their platform because I didn't trust them to be around for more than a few years
You didn’t need the premium subscription to stream your games. You could stream at 720p for free if you purchased the game. Blame Google’s marketing for making it seem like you did though
I had no idea, thanks for pointing that out.
You know who else doesn't honor steam library? PlayStation or Xbox. What a weird take
At the time stadia came out as a game streaming platform Geforce now, and Shadow already were established, both of those services charged a subscription but let you bring your own library.
Google's Offering required you to subscribe AND buy full priced retail games that you couldn't use elsewhere, so it wasn't competitive with geforce now and shadow.
It's not a weird take..... because Geforce now and shadow are both still in business now, and stadia is not, they were not able to convince cloud gamers to take their offer.
Stadia did not require you to subscribe. You could just buy the game and play. Unlike GeForce. You don't even know what the fuck you are talking about.
Stadia subscription only brought in 4k and monthly games. The base was free. And you down vote my comment like you fucking made a point. Learn to Google before commenting dumb ass
Edit: not only that the base was free there were free to play games like destiny 2 where the only thing you needed was a Google account.
Lots of hostility and name calling, are you ok?
Also, I didn't down vote your comment.
https://www.ign.com/wikis/stadia-google-game-console/Google_Stadia_Price_Breakdown%2C_Release_Date%2C_and_Launch_Games
I didn't realize they allowed people to stream purchased games for free, my mistake, thank you for the correction. According to IGN article, the free games were if you had a subscription.
It's a mystery why cloud gamers didn't flock to google then. My core point about stadia not being competitive with geforce now and shadow stills stands, even though I got the details wrong about being about to stream purchased games for free.
Another stadia user here.
I loved the service but he neglected to tell you cyberpunk looked like hot garbage compared to its PC equivalent.
I pretty much only used it for Destiny, and I too spent hundreds of dollars supporting the platform only to get it all back.
The convenience was wonderful, but worthless if they didn’t have what you wanted to play, and Google became less and less interested in working with developers as time went on.
Weird ass complaint man
I'm just articulating why I, as a cloud gamer at the time they release their product, stayed with different providers. They didn't exist in the vacuum, GeForce now, and shadow, both existed, allowed you to use a pre-existing libraries, didn't charge per game.
GeForce now was cheaper, Shadow was more expensive but provided better resolution.
So Google comes into the mix, and their option, while I wanted to try it, wasn't palatable for me as a cloud gamer at the time.
Scenario 1: buy the game on steam, play it on local hardware, or GeForce now for $5 a month
Scenario 2: buy the game on steam, play it on shadow, or local hardware, for $20 a month
Scenario 3: by the game from Google for more than it costs on steam, only be able to play it on stadia, and pay I think it was $15 a month.
You can see why I chose scenarios 1 and 2 instead.
Without a doubt it was amazing and me and my family were extremely sad, but in the end what is there to be mad about with stadia... I was part of something different, I was also a founder and played all the time. I think I owned all the games before I didn't 😂
I just got a nice discount on my Pixel 8 preorder with my Stadia refund.
Because the opposition frames the situation as Google never keeping any promise ever, in addition to refusing to acknowledge Google's positive precedent with Android updates.
If you view the Android update situation in isolation, you'll see that in the 10+ years Google has sold Pixel and Nexus phones, they have kept each one of their Android update promises.
I dunno, I kinda don't disagree with them. Companies discontinue products all the time, and Google just seems to get a lot more flak for it.
Apples discontinued the iPod, and a bunch of different hardware devices. I'm about as worried that they'll discontinue the iPhone as I am that Google will discontinue the pixel line.
Google discontinue a lot more than almost anyone else though. It’s a meme at this point how often they kill things off. Does a website like this exist for any other company?
https://killedbygoogle.com/
Well, no, but that doesn't mean that it's an accurate assessment.
Additionally, have you ever actually read what they put on that site? If Google changes the name of a product, then they "killed" the original. If they merge a product into another, then they killed one or both.
Did you know they killed Google street view? It's now just a tab in maps. They also at one point had "leaving reviews of businesses" as a separate system, which they also killed by making it a core feature.
But yes, Google does kill more products than some other companies. They also make more products available than others. Apple has never developed a car, a series of bipedal robots, or blood sugar monitoring contact lenses.
So yeah, it's a meme. I don't generally take memes as honest statements of fact.
I'm not sure I get your point, people should not doubt Google's promise not because they don't discontinue product but because everyone does?
I think more Pixel's a true flagship product. Big Tech corps are always launching likely contenders, then they evaluate them over time and if the benefits don't realize or they find a better product it gets discontinued.
But some products are proven. The only way Alphabet and Apple would discontinue their flagship phones is if there's some kind of mass turn away from mobile phones. Same as how Alphabet is not going to exit the search engine field.
More that the concern feels hyperbolic. You should feel as much concern of Google canceling a flagship product as you do about apple doing so. I don't see iPhones, pixels, or say, Kindles going anywhere soon.
It just doesn't feel like a reasonable concern, proportional to how much attention it gets.
I doubt people takes apple claim for granted either, they do have a class action lawsuit due to them volontarily throttling their phones.
The article makes valid points but completely misses the real point. The real point, that has been pointed out every single time Google kills another product, is that every time they do that it erodes user trust. This point has been harped on for years, with more and more people agreeing with it the more and more Google kills products.
Is it any surprise then, that we're finally reaching a critical mass of users not trusting Google? It's less update this specific promise being untrustworthy, then the entire company being untrustworthy and this just happens to be the point that the dialogue had changed.
Could've fooled me.
The phones are nearly identical. The Pro has more RAM, a different secondary camera, and a third camera.
Apple absolutely should be (and is frequently) criticized for artificially locking features to certain models.
Obviously it's a good thing to have increased software support. 7 years of security updates is, on its own, a big deal. Google deserves credit for that. But they also deserve to be called out on their bullshit, same as Apple or any other company.
What are you talking about? Apple should be lauded for at least having the phone tiers that they have. There's choice for every type of buyer. The 15 pro vs pro max is 3x zoom and 5x zoom. That's IT. You get the same features between each pro phone and get to choose the size that works for you.
Google has hamstrung the smaller phone with a worse screen, much worse camera system (video boost is locked to 8 Pro), no temperature sensor, slower wireless charging speeds, less RAM, gorilla glass Victus 1 vs 2, and an annoyingly glossy back glass.
I bought an 8 Pro for the camera system because I didn't want to be locked out of the better ultra wide and telephoto, but I wish I could have gotten that in a smaller size.
This is worse than even the most insufferable apple fanboy.
God I can’t imagine why anyone would think that
I've been involved with different companies setting up their cloud presence and negotiating prices, and while Google is a contender, they have to aggressively price themselves at the large corporate level because a lot of people in the room don't have trust in them. Why would we onboard to your platform if we don't think you're going to be around very long? It'll take us years to fully migrate, and then once we're in you could shut it down on a whim.
I'm not saying that's a deciding factor at the corporate level for people, but it is a discussion factor that other contenders like AWS or Microsoft azure do not have. So their retail graveyard definitely impacts them at every level
This made me laugh out loud
In defense of Google, I have a first-gen Pixel that still gets unlimited Google Photos uploads.
This phone is seven years old and Google had kept its commitment that photo uploads would remain free for the life of the phone.
Also in defense of Google - I'm still grandfathered in to the $8 plan for YouTube premium because I signed up and have remained subscribed since 2013 when they offered promotional pricing at the beginning of Google Play Music. Years later, they added YouTube Red (now Premium) to the subscription which REALLY sweetened the pot. But they've never bumped my subscription price up.
I pay $0 for uBlock Origin lol
Not for long. I've been getting the "You're using an ad blocker" banner for the couple of days. I'm not losing my Gmail account over it.
Sounds like the very thing to motivate you to ditch your gmail account, don't let them hold you hostage!
Ah yes, let’s defend Google for not raising the price of features that were free to begin with like listening with screen off and background listening? Not really sure how much lower the bar can get here
I signed up for the original family plan, and they raised my prices multiple times.
They also killed off YouTube premium light.
I think you're only paying the original price cause of a glitch.
Same here. At $8 it's an amazing value. I plan on keeping it until they kill off parts of it or raise the price.
Except it's not
IDK why people are downvoting. I could see it being decent for YT Music but for YT Premium you’re literally paying for features free software can do for free. So it’s not really a good deal by any metric.
I don't think this is a good POV. The biggest reason I prefer to pay for YT Premium is so creators still get revenue from me watching their videos
Except if you want to support creators and ensure they get all the money there’s far better ways that aren’t paying for adblocking lmao.
YouTube makes more money than ever, they are being greedy AF.
Alright, can you elaborate on these ways? You could support a particular creator via Patreon, or by buying their merch, sure. What if somebody you've never watched before releases a very good video that you stumble upon and watch? What if you don't have the financial resources to be a part of dozens of separate patreons?
As far as I'm concerned, YT Premium is the best way for me to support all of the creators behind the videos I watch. For me, I also like YT Music so this ends up being a pretty good deal overall
You can easily buy memberships for channels, which gives more money than premium. In fact, most memberships for channels I frequent are $0.99 a month, so you can definitely afford to support 10-15 of them for the same price as premium.
That’s great that it’s a good deal for you, but it doesn’t change the fact that google took features that were free to use and locked them behind a paywall. So by default it’s a bad deal on that front alone.
I don't think that's what a bad deal is. I make decisions based on what is a good deal for me and things I care about.
With YT Premium for $10/mo I get:
support unlimited amount of creators based on watch time
no ads
YT Music (which is pretty good imo)
Support infrastructure behind service
Without YT Premium for $10/mo I get:
Now, I fully agree that removing features that were previously paid is a dick move, but those aren't why I have YT Premium anyways. I just don't think it is an objectively "bad" deal
I envy you. My OG Pixel has broken down :(
The Pixel hasn't left the house since 2018. All it has done since then is run SyncThing and upload the photos/videos taken by my current phones.
Maybe will consider doing that on my Poco F1 (which is spoofed as a Pixel XL) once I get a new daily driver
Ah heck yeah, I'm doing the same.
I've never heard of Syncthings, could you tell me more about it? Sounds interesting!
It's a free app that syncs files to a central location. In my case, I sync any photo or video I take on my Pixel 7 to my Pixel 1. The Photos app on my Pixel 1 then uploads the new photos to Google Photos.
Hey I do exactly the same, high 5!
Really cool! Apart from the photos ending in Google photos, I thought you'd use a local backup or something :-)
What's the point of syncing with an OG pixel with unlimited free Google storage if you are not using it?
Ha ga that's true!
So they don't check the metadata to verify the phone who actually took the picture?
Be prepared to pay when it dies. I assumed it wouldn't count when I got a new phone. It does. So now they want me to sign up for a plan. Well, now they want me to pay more for a higher tier. I got a nas instead. I'm cancelling the plan.
I forgot that I had years of free uploads from my Pixel 2. That eventually expired. But I never had to pay for those uploads.
I also had 100 extra GB for two years for being one of the first Google Maps guides, populating the map with the first photos of businesses etc. When that expired, I did have to start paying. Google are smart - they got me addicted to having all my files right there wherever I was. It's only $20ish per year for that tier, I have been happy to pay for it. I think this might be what happened to you. You may have had some sort of promotion that expired.
Yes, but it was meant to be for life. It may be I’m misremembering, ut it seemed like when the phone died, he storage was now counted.
I never had to do this with all the media I uploaded via my Pixel 2 back when it has those benefits. Everything I uploaded that way counts zero toward my storage cap, to this day.
Maybe I’m just using lots of storage as I’ve got kids and that means lots of photos and videos. However, it seemed odd at the time, however it’s a few years since I noticed.
This article is unintelligible. I don't see a single point being made. It's filled with whataboutism and making up arguments to debunk.
Google, apple, and Samsung are all untrustworthy. Google and apple also make some pretty good phones, albeit pricy ones.
Paraphrasing MKBHD: Buy the phone for what it has today, not what it might have tomorrow.
I'd believe the promise of 7 years of updates from any other company but definitely not Google. In the words of Logan Roy
The thing is that they've clearly promised 7 years now, walking back on the promise would cause them massive issues with consumer protection agencies everywhere they sell - they might be toothless in the US, but Google also sells Pixels in Japan and the EU.
[This comment has been deleted by an automated system]
For me, this kinda breaks both ways:
C'mon guys they had a "proper replacement" and let you keep the controller! They're not all that bad! 👅🥾
I'll never forgive them for Google Play Music.
I do however believe they're going to stick to their word here though. They make the processor and the OS, it'd have to take some extreme ignorance to fuck that up. It's not like they're reliant on Qualcomm to release new drivers for the chip, one of the big reasons devices stop being updates.
What a fucking bootlicker.
Fool me once shame on me. Fool me 154 times. Shame on you!