4 ms·

Not sure what is going on with your power button, but if it's outside warranty repair $300 for a replacement device is pretty good. On my fifth Android handset

Not sure what is going on with your power button, but if it's outside warranty repair $300 for a replacement device is pretty good. On my fifth Android handset, I have really not found the incompatibility you point out to be an issue. Sure, some companies, like Samsung, try to offer some exclusive features. Just avoid them. I have to use an iPhone for work, there are a lot of critical annoyances, like how poorly cursor selection works, and then some apps don't support the space bar cursor. Everyday things like changing settings are so much nicer in Android. My 3 year old Pixel 2 has been a fantastic daily handset, absolutely no complaints, before that my Note 2 was also excellent, though I was glad to get away from Samsung's attempts at exclusive features (the Pixel is "pure Android", albeit with some self-contained on-device "AI" features that are actually useful). Although there are a lot of cheap Android devices to choose from that can drag down the brand reputation, I would really push back against the suggestion Androids are exclusively "cheap" in the pejorative sense. Most are Just Fine at least. Apple is generally much more conservative in rolling out features, and offers less configuration options, so I guess it's a safer choice, but if Apple weren't such a status symbol I think most people would be more than happy with the lower cost (3a, 4a) Pixel line.

alisonkisk 6y ago
> My 3 year old Pixel 2 is no longer guaranteed to receive security updates.
- davidy123 6y ago
  Neither are Apple handsets, though it's true Apple has been good about providing them for around five years. In both cases, it remains to be seen what updates will be available longer term, people expect most major providers to provide security updates past the guaranteed period. Also worth mentioning, after three years most people who purchased a new handset will have upgraded. If they spend $400 on each handset, their long term expenditure will be lower, and they'll always have an up to date handset (the early cheap Androids were pretty bad, but a decent smartphone is a commodity these days, the main thing more money buys is better image capture, though Pixel kind of defies that for now). The hardware is probably still good, except maybe the battery, which becomes cost ineffective to replace (in this sense, the company that provides the most easily serviceable devices wins, which I heartily endorse). At that point, many Androids can have a third party OS installed for new features. Not so with Apple.
gambiting 6y ago
About your first paragraph - No, that's absolutely shit. My friend was one of the first to buy a Pixel 4 in the UK, and unfortunately dropped it and broke the screen. He contacted Google for a repair, and their response literally was that they don't repair Pixel phones, but they can sell him a new one at a slightly(by about £100) discounted price as a "good will gesture". That's absolutely unacceptable . Imagine if a car manufacturer sold you a car and then just didn't offer a repair option for out of warranty issues.
- davidy123 6y ago
  That's surprising, but there are many third party options to get it repaired. You can even DIY for $115 including required tools. I know someone whose iPhone XR glass back broke after a year (they had a super robust case), Apple's response was it was not cost effective to repair. Ultimately devices designed to be repaired is the best answer (and maybe not have glass backs?), but I don't think there's that much difference in many cases here.
maccard 6y ago
We'll I'm claiming that my pixel 3 is _in_ warranty, and google are claiming £300 for a replacement (not $300 sorry, that was a typo). The phone is less than two years old, but I don't know what recourse I have. > Sure, some companies, like Samsung, try to offer some exclusive features. Just avoid them. If your advice is to ignore the largest manufacturer and manufacturers of the most high end devices, that says a lot about the state of the ecosystem. Samsung and huawei have both had massive incompatiblies with other devices and android products - work profiles, pay, fit being my examples. > Although there are a lot of cheap Android devices to choose from that can drag down the brand reputation, I would really push back against the suggestion Androids are exclusively "cheap" in the pejorative sense I never claimed they were cheap. My experience is with flagship devices and premium manufacturers, who in many cases are the same price as apple - a galaxy s20 is £900, a oneplus 8 is £800.
- davidy123 6y ago
  Vendor discretion whether something is in warranty is a pain point, I've seen people bitten from all vendors. If they don't respond to pressure (for example, finding other people with the same problem for a united voice), it might be a minor problem. If you don't want to take it apart yourself (don't blame you) you could find a local authorized dealer who could hopefully fix it for not much money. I wish they would just offer hardware like this on a subscription. I don't mean to avoid Samsung (or any other Android) devices altogether, just don't use anything that takes away your portability within the Android ecosystem (which, granted, has various lines in the sand when you rely on Google, outside going no-identity, which is impossible on iPhone). It was easy enough to do when I had my Note2, there are many people within user communities who care about things like this and make sure it's possible without much effort; for example by putting pressure on vendors to enable choice for what apps are used for what purposes. In my experience, Samsung offers its own App Store, I just ignored it, I used Google's calendar instead of Samsung's default enhanced one, etc. There are some cases, per your examples, where there's a distinct branch in what's supported. Samsung and Huawei are really competitors to Apple more than Google in this case. I can only say that like repairability is the best answer to some questions, interoperability is the best answer to others. Being locked in to any ecosystem, especially over time as our digital lives become linked to health and wealth, is bad for everyone. My last comment, about "cheap" perceptions, was intended for another comment in the thread, sorry about the confusion.

alisonkisk 6y ago

> My 3 year old Pixel 2 is no longer guaranteed to receive security updates.

davidy123 6y ago
Neither are Apple handsets, though it's true Apple has been good about providing them for around five years. In both cases, it remains to be seen what updates will be available longer term, people expect most major providers to provide security updates past the guaranteed period. Also worth mentioning, after three years most people who purchased a new handset will have upgraded. If they spend $400 on each handset, their long term expenditure will be lower, and they'll always have an up to date handset (the early cheap Androids were pretty bad, but a decent smartphone is a commodity these days, the main thing more money buys is better image capture, though Pixel kind of defies that for now). The hardware is probably still good, except maybe the battery, which becomes cost ineffective to replace (in this sense, the company that provides the most easily serviceable devices wins, which I heartily endorse). At that point, many Androids can have a third party OS installed for new features. Not so with Apple.

gambiting 6y ago

About your first paragraph - No, that's absolutely shit. My friend was one of the first to buy a Pixel 4 in the UK, and unfortunately dropped it and broke the screen. He contacted Google for a repair, and their response literally was that they don't repair Pixel phones, but they can sell him a new one at a slightly(by about £100) discounted price as a "good will gesture". That's absolutely unacceptable . Imagine if a car manufacturer sold you a car and then just didn't offer a repair option for out of warranty issues.

davidy123 6y ago
That's surprising, but there are many third party options to get it repaired. You can even DIY for $115 including required tools. I know someone whose iPhone XR glass back broke after a year (they had a super robust case), Apple's response was it was not cost effective to repair. Ultimately devices designed to be repaired is the best answer (and maybe not have glass backs?), but I don't think there's that much difference in many cases here.

maccard 6y ago

We'll I'm claiming that my pixel 3 is _in_ warranty, and google are claiming £300 for a replacement (not $300 sorry, that was a typo). The phone is less than two years old, but I don't know what recourse I have. > Sure, some companies, like Samsung, try to offer some exclusive features. Just avoid them. If your advice is to ignore the largest manufacturer and manufacturers of the most high end devices, that says a lot about the state of the ecosystem. Samsung and huawei have both had massive incompatiblies with other devices and android products - work profiles, pay, fit being my examples. > Although there are a lot of cheap Android devices to choose from that can drag down the brand reputation, I would really push back against the suggestion Androids are exclusively "cheap" in the pejorative sense I never claimed they were cheap. My experience is with flagship devices and premium manufacturers, who in many cases are the same price as apple - a galaxy s20 is £900, a oneplus 8 is £800.

davidy123 6y ago
Vendor discretion whether something is in warranty is a pain point, I've seen people bitten from all vendors. If they don't respond to pressure (for example, finding other people with the same problem for a united voice), it might be a minor problem. If you don't want to take it apart yourself (don't blame you) you could find a local authorized dealer who could hopefully fix it for not much money. I wish they would just offer hardware like this on a subscription. I don't mean to avoid Samsung (or any other Android) devices altogether, just don't use anything that takes away your portability within the Android ecosystem (which, granted, has various lines in the sand when you rely on Google, outside going no-identity, which is impossible on iPhone). It was easy enough to do when I had my Note2, there are many people within user communities who care about things like this and make sure it's possible without much effort; for example by putting pressure on vendors to enable choice for what apps are used for what purposes. In my experience, Samsung offers its own App Store, I just ignored it, I used Google's calendar instead of Samsung's default enhanced one, etc. There are some cases, per your examples, where there's a distinct branch in what's supported. Samsung and Huawei are really competitors to Apple more than Google in this case. I can only say that like repairability is the best answer to some questions, interoperability is the best answer to others. Being locked in to any ecosystem, especially over time as our digital lives become linked to health and wealth, is bad for everyone. My last comment, about "cheap" perceptions, was intended for another comment in the thread, sorry about the confusion.