Each Pixel model has been a compromise, hardware wise, relative to One Plus, and Samsung's home-grown CPU devices. Also one-off hardware issues appear sporadically in Pixel models.
That is true. They are plagued with modem issues, heating issues, battery drain, and other problems. From what I read on the internet, users living in colder environments are the ones who are mostly happy.
While I understand hardware problems are due to mediocre internals, what I don't understand is why there are plenty of software problems. There is way too little happening on the Pixels (which is a good thing) compared to phones from other brands, yet the software has many of the same problems seen on other brands, and more.
I'm anxious about owning the Fold over its useful lifetime, as it could really turn into a crap storm. The screen implementation seems modest, so that's a plus, but I speculate there will be issues with internal components that impacts me, within 6 months, based on my prior Pixel experience. I am $pending for the extra coverage, to mitigate my worry.
People are happy paying for being Beta testers.
Google's middling hardware is admirable for average users, more recently vs early generations. ["Q" comes to mind...hardly usable TV STB/gaming.]
Yes, Pixels are not meant for heavy use. So if you aren't a heavy user, you'll probably not complain as much.
The software updates (security) + Fi wireless service (no spams, simplicity) + photo app (novel) + discounts / trade-ins / rebates / freebies are beneficial. The rebates can negate the flagship prices, in my view mainly for those who invest in the ecosystem.
TL;DR: Case too expensive, superior 3rd party available. Phone excels due to ecosystem, hardware is designed for average users. Pay $ for ecosystem.
Not sure if these count as 'eco-system'.
When Google launched the first Pixel, it was a very average device, but with a unique benefit: unlimited Google Photos storage in original quality for life. Google offered that not just from a marketing perspective, but also because they knew their hardware was mediocre. Now that benefit too has been taken away.
Somehow, the iPhones' success that catapulted Apple to becoming a trillion dollar company is playing into the minds of other brands.
The iPhones are way too overpriced for what they offer (which is what made Apple a trillion dollar company), but the branding and marketing has ensured that consumers continue to view it as a premium product.
Yes they have something unique to offer and perform some things better than any other phone in the market, but the premium people are paying is NOT necessarily for a better experience, but for several other reasons such as being locked into an ecosystem (past purchases, subscriptions, other devices from Apple, etc.), unaware of how much better Android has become (they still think Android devices lag , stutter, freeze, etc.), owning something less common (iPhones sell more only in the USA and Japan; everywhere else it is Android that has a larger market share), etc.
There are some seriously annoying things about iPhones that people simply live with. Yet iPhones post positive growth most years. This is the same path that Google is unfortunately trying to chart for itself. Looking at the design choices being made for Google apps, there is more reason to believe this is true.
Fortunately, unlike iOS, Android is open source and available for adaptation by other brands. So far, most of them are doing a better job than Google.
If people choose Pixel because of a lack of choice in the market (or misconceptions about products from other brands), it is another story though.
