Which is best Android Phone?

[Kazukian]

I disagree. The Pixel was intended to compete with the iPhone (and grab their market) but typical of Google, they miss the boat and made a device that has limited nerd appeal. It has the stock android OS (nobody really gives a shit about stock android), the design is polarizing (Google geeks love it, everybody else I showed it to thinks it's ugly), it's supremely expensive (most people buy couple hundred dollar phones at best, or finance $800 devices and still don't know what it's worth at worst), and when I tell people it's not waterproof like the S7 or iPhone7, and doesn't have a memory card, they ask me why. It's just not going to sell well to the general public. They want Galaxy, iPhone or cheap.

I agree, most aren't that focused on cameras, and that seems to be it's (the pixel's) biggest feature.

The next gen really needs to step up the game. The pixel is a "parts bin" phone from HTC, like all the different GM car variants in the 70's and 80's, all just sort of generic.

They're a good phone, but no compelling reason to select it over an iPhone or Galaxy, the S8 sounds like they're going to combine the Note & S series phones, and it looks like a winner.

 

[Commodus]

I disagree. The Pixel was intended to compete with the iPhone (and grab their market) but typical of Google, they miss the boat and made a device that has limited nerd appeal. It has the stock android OS (nobody really gives a shit about stock android), the design is polarizing (Google geeks love it, everybody else I showed it to thinks it's ugly), it's supremely expensive (most people buy couple hundred dollar phones at best, or finance $800 devices and still don't know what it's worth at worst), and when I tell people it's not waterproof like the S7 or iPhone7, and doesn't have a memory card, they ask me why. It's just not going to sell well to the general public. They want Galaxy, iPhone or cheap.

But it's not strictly stock Android, remember? Google Assistant and the app drawer approach are specific to the Pixel, among a couple of other things. I'd also dispute that it's supremely expensive, since it's in the ballpark of comparable phones.

I do agree that Google faces an uphill battle, but I want to see how well the Pixel fares in Google's quarterly results before predicting anything. One of the key differences with this phone is that Google is actually marketing it properly, to the point where it gets as much attention as iPhones and Galaxies in some places. Part of why the Nexus line remained mostly niche was Google's naively optimistic "don't worry, the internet always solves everything" approach to marketing. If we just put up some web ads, people will buy Nexus phones in droves, right? The Pixel line may sell well simply because people actually know it exists.

 

[vi edit]

I moved from a Nexus 5x on Fi to a Pixel on Verizon last week due to Verizon's heavy discount on the Pixel. My 5x was rebooting a couple times a day and Fi was annoying me with missed and dropped calls. No way I would pay $750 for it outright. But $360 ($15 x 24) for a 128 gig Pixel (non-XL) was decent.

It's as close to an iPhone as Android has gotten. I couldn't find an XL 128 anywhere. And mine was the last 128 gig that was in town. So they either under produced the big ones, or it's been very popular. Much like an iPhone, it's a device of compromise for the sake of use. It's fast, functional and feels premium. It's not weighed down by some of the touch wiz bloat and redundant apps Samsung includes. No it doesn't have an FM tuner, water proofing, or an IR blaster. But I'd argue that "most" people aren't shopping for that either. Water proofing is nice. But it's never been something I've needed in 20+ years of using cell phones.

Verizon has made a big push of these phones with sales. Not sure if that is Verizon footing the subsidy bill or Google on the back end. Regardless, it's getting more screen and promotion time than any Nexus phone ever did. Hell, in the Verizon store I bought mine at, it was the first phone on display as you walk in. It got prime real estate all by itself.

 

[Elixer]

I disagree. The Pixel was intended to compete with the iPhone (and grab their market) but typical of Google, they miss the boat and made a device that has limited nerd appeal. It has the stock android OS (nobody really gives a shit about stock android), the design is polarizing (Google geeks love it, everybody else I showed it to thinks it's ugly), it's supremely expensive (most people buy couple hundred dollar phones at best, or finance $800 devices and still don't know what it's worth at worst), and when I tell people it's not waterproof like the S7 or iPhone7, and doesn't have a memory card, they ask me why. It's just not going to sell well to the general public. They want Galaxy, iPhone or cheap.

The way I see things, this is pretty much spot on, the Pixel is Google's attempt to out-do Apple, yet, they fumbled. This phone would have been a very good alternative, but, lots of lower priced phones have more features at a much lower price.
If they wanted to make a top of the line phone, they should have done that, instead of being cheap on the parts (or complete lack of parts) one has to wonder what were they thinking?

 

[DefDC]

I've been with the Note line since the N3. When I had to turn over my Note 7, I was going to be objective on new phones, as I have no real allegiance to Samsung. The Note always checked the most boxes for me. The Pixel and V20 were both intriguing. I was also willing to go with a lower priced Moto to get me by until the Note 8 or something interesting in the next generation. At the end of the day, the S7 Edge ticked enough boxes for me. (And I figure it'll hold enough value to ditch for an N8)

As I used my Note 7,I was unaware how much I loved wireless charging and water resistance. My waterproof speakers have been retired. I watch the news in the morning shower now, with video. Although a water tragedy hasn't happened since the PDA days, it's nice to no longer fear a puddle, toilet, or steamy shower. I also fish. Now I can, with confidence, pull my phone out at the bank or in a boat and take a pic.

I have always insisted on having an SD card. I skipped the N5 for this reason. I guess others don't max out their phones as much as I do. I take a lot of photos, video, and use a lot of storage all the time. But, I have kids and work in IT, so I guess I'm a bit more of a hardcore user. I just don't understand the people who aren't interested in removable storage, or even argue against it. Until phones are at 128 GB minimum, I will always preach for expandable memory. I understand Apple has proven people don't care. However, people don't miss what they never had.

Even though the 7 Edge is fairly close, I *REALLY* miss my Note 7. Wireless charging, water resistant, fast, gorgeous screen, with a free 256GB SD card. Amazing.

I miss my removable battery from past phones, but I understand that ship has sailed, at least for the current batch of phones which would interest me. If the V20 had been waterproofed, that might be my phone right now. Same with Pixel.

TL;DR

Galaxy 7 Edge by a narrow, SD wielding, water-resistant margin.

 

[Raduque]

Galaxy 7 Edge by a narrow, SD wielding, water-resistant margin.

Basically, this. The Note 7 was basically perfect. At least the S7edge is going to get the UI enhancements the Note 7 had.

I'll also never understand why somebody would argue against removable storage. And then they usually push "the cloud" as a reason to have no removable storage and low built-in storage. Because everybody has a billion gigs of data, or can afford thousands in overages.

 

[jlee]

Basically, this. The Note 7 was basically perfect. At least the S7edge is going to get the UI enhancements the Note 7 had.

I'll also never understand why somebody would argue against removable storage. And then they usually push "the cloud" as a reason to have no removable storage and low built-in storage. Because everybody has a billion gigs of data, or can afford thousands in overages.

Or most people don't have the need to have 100Gb+ of data on their phone?

 

[Red Storm]

I'll also never understand why somebody would argue against removable storage. And then they usually push "the cloud" as a reason to have no removable storage and low built-in storage. Because everybody has a billion gigs of data, or can afford thousands in overages.

I don't really get the argument about data usage when it comes to SD cards. Phones now have a good amount of internal storage space (or at least offer models that do), how does a mSD save data? I do utilize cloud storage as well as local storage at home. I either copy stuff locally from my computer, or from the cloud via wifi at home. In either situation, I'm not using mobile data.

I personally don't care for mSD anymore after experiencing three mSD card failures over the years. I'll take larger internal storage (which is much faster than a mSD too), and backup to the cloud and my home PC.

 

[Raduque]

I don't really get the argument about data usage when it comes to SD cards. Phones now have a good amount of internal storage space (or at least offer models that do), how does a mSD save data? I do utilize cloud storage as well as local storage at home. I either copy stuff locally from my computer, or from the cloud via wifi at home. In either situation, I'm not using mobile data.

I personally don't care for mSD anymore after experiencing three mSD card failures over the years. I'll take larger internal storage (which is much faster than a mSD too), and backup to the cloud and my home PC.

I take tons of pictures and videos. I also like to play games, which are multi-gigs these days. I can (and do) also carry around my entire music collection (that's constantly growing) on my 256gb uSD card. I can also simply pop out my uSD card and throw it into a new phone when I upgrade, and have all my music and pictures instantly transfer over a million times faster than even the fastest internet connection.

The point is, that I'm artificially limited by a phone without a uSD slot.

Or most people don't have the need to have 100Gb+ of data on their phone?

And that justifies an artificial limit? Most people don't need 1440p screens, 2ghz+ Octocore processors, 4gb ram and a desktop-class GPU, but phones still have it.

 

[DefDC]

That's the thing. *NO* phones have a reasonable amount of on board storage by default. Most people just buy the base model and don't know any better. They don't know it would only cost the manufactures a few dollars more bump these things up to 128gb standard, if there is no expandable memory. Why give the option of 4K shooting when you have 16 and 32gb base models? Just a few high end games will max out a high end phone in no time.

I guess it is a brilliant business model to get people to buy a higher capacity phone the next time around, but that's a different discussion. All phones are built for planned obsolescence. There's not much we can do about that, except call them out when it's particularly egregious.

 

[sweenish]

I take tons of pictures and videos. I also like to play games, which are multi-gigs these days. I can (and do) also carry around my entire music collection (that's constantly growing) on my 256gb uSD card. I can also simply pop out my uSD card and throw it into a new phone when I upgrade, and have all my music and pictures instantly transfer over a million times faster than even the fastest internet connection.

The point is, that I'm artificially limited by a phone without a uSD slot.


And that justifies an artificial limit? Most people don't need 1440p screens, 2ghz+ Octocore processors, 4gb ram and a desktop-class GPU, but phones still have it.

That's cute, your music collection still fits on a microSD.

Fact is, "best" is subjective. For me, it's a 128 GB Pixel XL. It's not for you. Neither of us is wrong or right. You chose a phone that literally bastardizes Android (devs have to do stuff special for Samsung phones more often than not, and that's still the case today) and doesn't prioritize updates in exchange for mSD and the ability to safely drop the phone in the toilet. I choose a stock experience that gets updates fast and allows me to easily do what I want to it in exchange for a set amount of storage and "only" being able to use it in the rain.

Now, there are always going to be contenders for "best," and that's understandable. But it always, always boils down to individual needs. Just because the Pixel doesn't meet some of your specific needs (that are not representative of the whole population) doesn't make it objectively inferior. It simply doesn't suit you.

I don't care about "normies." We're not choosing for normies. If we were, ignoring the built-in 24/7 customer support of the Pixels is just being willfully ignorant.

And as far as your argument about taking pictures and videos and needing all that storage for that; that's a moot point on the Pixel with it's full-resolution, infinite backups.

 

[Yakk]

After the Note 7 which stood head and shoulders above all the competition, and still would today, I have to go with the S7 regular or edge.

With a good incentive from Samsung I'll probably be updating to the S8. If the incentive isn't good enough I have no issue keeping my S7 as my work/home phone for a few years.

 

[DefDC]

Cloud-based anything isn't THE solution to anything while we still have data caps and spotty reception. Not everywhere has wifi and not everyone wants to use public wifi. I'm often working in the middle of a data center which has zero reception of any kind. When I fish, I'm off the grid. Local storage still has its place. While cloud based stuff is nice, it's not a cure-all.

 

[sweenish]

So while you're fishing, you need all that storage? How? How much storage does one need to get through a work day? I don't see these as a valid arguments at all. For the record, I think it's pathetic it's taken this long for even 128 GB to be an option, but I fail to see how your arguments have any bearing on what is a case-by-case preference.

Pixels will route traffic through a Google VPN for privacy if the public wi-fi is open, just so you know. Maybe some people will think that's worse, but at least you're safe from anyone that might be trying to snoop the wi-fi.

 

[poofyhairguy]

So while you're fishing, you need all that storage? How?

The wife said she never wants another phone that I can't put all the Harry Potter audiobooks on. It's like a security blanket for her.

 

[Raduque]

That's cute, your music collection still fits on a microSD.

Fact is, "best" is subjective. For me, it's a 128 GB Pixel XL. It's not for you. Neither of us is wrong or right. You chose a phone that literally bastardizes Android (devs have to do stuff special for Samsung phones more often than not, and that's still the case today) and doesn't prioritize updates in exchange for mSD and the ability to safely drop the phone in the toilet. I choose a stock experience that gets updates fast and allows me to easily do what I want to it in exchange for a set amount of storage and "only" being able to use it in the rain.

I don't prioritize updates. I don't buy phones because of what they might, maybe do sometime in the future possibly, I buy them because of what they do in the moment. I will happily trade the Pixel's meh features for actual usable features that are important to me.

Now, there are always going to be contenders for "best," and that's understandable. But it always, always boils down to individual needs. Just because the Pixel doesn't meet some of your specific needs (that are not representative of the whole population) doesn't make it objectively inferior. It simply doesn't suit you.

I don't care about "normies." We're not choosing for normies. If we were, ignoring the built-in 24/7 customer support of the Pixels is just being willfully ignorant.

I agree absolutely that there's always contenders and everybody's needs from a device are different. Note that I never said the Pixel was "objectively inferior"; I said it was "not objectively 'the best Android device'". Big difference.

I care about "normies". I am choosing for them; they come to me for recommendations. They also dictate the market; there's about a billion more of them than there is us.

Pixel's has 24/7 customer support? Don't make me laugh. Google's CS is second in terribleness only to Valve's.

And as far as your argument about taking pictures and videos and needing all that storage for that; that's a moot point on the Pixel with it's full-resolution, infinite backups.

I addressed this - It's not very "infinite" if your data is finite - most people I know have 2-6gb of data and rarely use wifi.

Oh, and I also picked the S7 Edge because of MST - I can pay everywhere that Android and Apple Pay can't - and wireless charging. No Google device will ever have either of these.

 

[Capt Caveman]

fwiw - the update to 7.1.1 to my Nexus 6p made me return my Pixel XL. The camera with the 7.1.1 update is now almost as fast as it was on my Pixel XL. So, yes I'm a big fan of fast updates. And I want to have all of my pics in the cloud so I can view/access my pics from multiple devices.

And looks? I don't care, my phones are going to be in a case.

 

[sweenish]

Rarely uses WiFi, even at home?

I call BS on that. And if that's the type of person you're basing your recommendations on, that's heavily flawed.

It's not like the phone immediately starts backing up that 4K video the second it's done processing, either.

Early reviews of the Pixel CS are the opposite of what you're implying, and I think you're arguing with outdated information on that front in general.

"Objectively not the best" is still taking the objective metric too far. Not that different, and not enough of a technicality to escape the greater point I was making. Because objectively, the Pixel has all the relevant specs to put it into the discussion. Subjectively, the best phone is the one that suits your specific needs.

And yet you still spend your first paragraph defending your choices. I DON'T CARE. They are your choices. The Pixel is not for you, and that's fine. Yet here you are, feeling some sort of burning desire to put it down and prop up your choice as more than just your choice. Downplaying legitimate Pixel advantages while constantly pointing at the differences you prefer for your phone.

It's fine to highlight the differences; that's exactly what this thread needs. My issue is with how you frame them. I don't know how you're not seeing this.

And you're lucky to not need to prioritize updates any longer. The worst of the security issues with Android have been put to rest from 6.0+, and glaring basic features like TRIM have long been part of the core OS. Then there's Play Services, updating Android when OEMs won't. But I like getting new features while they're still new, and having a barebones OS I can mold as I please. Different strokes is all that is, and you keep not wanting it to be.
EDIT: Pulled a paragraph

 

[sweenish]

The wife said she never wants another phone that I can't put all the Harry Potter audiobooks on. It's like a security blanket for her.

I get the safety blanket argument. I have my set of apps and playlists that are always on my phone.

But not while fishing. I imagine I fish with different goals in mind.

 

[DefDC]

I get the safety blanket argument. I have my set of apps and playlists that are always on my phone.

But not while fishing. I imagine I fish with different goals in mind.

I have a large hike while fishing in some remote spots. The middle of the lake has no reception. The data center I work in has no reception. Multiple friends houses have terrible or no cell reception. Clouds are hit or miss.

If you're on a campus, or someplace similar, blanketed in wifi, congrats! Enjoy your clouds! You're covered!

Many of us don't live in a wifi bubble. Enough that Samsung heard our SD complaints.

I REALLY hate the loss of the removable battery. Constantly being in shoddy reception areas is savage to my batteries. I cycled through half a dozen Note 3 batteries and still killed at least 3 of them.

The loss of the removable battery means I will be replacing my phone annually. I'm old enough that it's not a status symbol, but it is essential for my day to day living.

 

[Red Storm]

I have a large hike while fishing in some remote spots. The middle of the lake has no reception. The data center I work in has no reception. Multiple friends houses have terrible or no cell reception. Clouds are hit or miss.

If you're on a campus, or someplace similar, blanketed in wifi, congrats! Enjoy your clouds! You're covered!

Many of us don't live in a wifi bubble. Enough that Samsung heard our SD complaints.

I REALLY hate the loss of the removable battery. Constantly being in shoddy reception areas is savage to my batteries. I cycled through half a dozen Note 3 batteries and still killed at least 3 of them.

The loss of the removable battery means I will be replacing my phone annually. I'm old enough that it's not a status symbol, but it is essential for my day to day living.

You only need wifi at home. You aren't swapping data while out fishing with a mSD, so reception there for cloud access doesn't matter. At home is where you copy the data to your mSD and stick it in your phone, the same applies to cloud storage, you pull data down to your phone while at home.

Micro SD made way more sense back in the 16GB max days, but phones now have much larger internal storage capabilities. Before I head out for the day I usually make sure I have a movie or two synced from Plex Cloud, a good number of Google Music playlists cached, some TV episodes from Netflix and/or Amazon Prime downloaded, and any and all photos and videos taken backed up to Google Photos. This is all taken care of overnight while my phone charges. I am a heavy cloud storage user and I don't care about data caps or mobile reception, because I really only interact with my cloud stored files at home over wifi. You don't have to use mobile data for the cloud, it's a convenient option in a pinch though.

 

[Raduque]

Different strokes is all that is, and you keep not wanting it to be.
EDIT: Pulled a paragraph

You're the one who came in with your first post in this thread starting off with a smug statement. To me, the entire tone of your argument is "Pixel is better, and I have one, so I'm better". And because you won't leave it alone, I'm going to take it too far and say the Pixel is junk and I hope it fails.

I'm out of here.

 

[Zaap]

Basically, this. The Note 7 was basically perfect.

The Note 7 certainly showed what a 2016-17 flagship could and should be. (it's recall problems aside that is). Personally, I find it hard to go back to anything less. That phone was a full on, no compromise with anything. (Factoring in that removable batteries are probably gone for good for any mainstream flagship). Yes, believe it or not, you CAN have it all, if someone wants to design it and put it out and not fall back on the fact there's not much other competition. (Fantastic design that's unique to the device, forward thinking, polished and no sacrifices to function. Virtually every modern feature plus unique extras: wireless charging, waterproo, mSD, edge screen, a freakin' wacom digitizer and pen, fingerprint scanner, iris scanner, thin and modern design etc.) and nothing stupid had to be given up like the headphone jack, card slot, or 2013 calling wanting its bezels back.

I'll also never understand why somebody would argue against removable storage. And then they usually push "the cloud" as a reason to have no removable storage and low built-in storage. Because everybody has a billion gigs of data, or can afford thousands in overages.

I don't get these arguments either, they're always kind of silly to me. "Please, please mega-corporations! Charge me more for less! I love it!"

Most people DON'T have 128GB base model phones. Most people don't have unlimited data, they have a couple gigs that has to last them all month. I find it just silly to argue that my phone should have ARTIFICIAL limitations to 2016-17 technology, against my own logical usage, because it's good for the bottom line of some damn mega-company.

I don't want to waste money on a 128GB model of any phone (IF the phone I want even has a variant in that amount). Adding storage up to 256GB because it's 2016 not 2006 is cheap and easy and as obvious a solution as having external storage in a standalone camera.

The 'speed' argument isn't valid to me as I've never found I notice any speed issues with an mSD card on a phone. It's not like it isn't perfectly fine for what it's intended for- capturing large 4k video files, playing back content, storing game data files etc. I'd rather have my phone have all the content stored separately on removable, and keep the internal storage running lean and clean with just system and application files. Mixing those things on one drive to me is counter-intuitive from the way I'd run a computer, and phones are more and more like mini-computers.

These silly shuffles people talk about doing- "well I put this on my phone, and that and I'm ready to go..." Well that's nice. I don't compromise ANYTHING on my phone and I'm not constantly shuffling around any content. I keep all the games I want on it, all the music I want, most of the movies I want, tons of books, videos of shows I'm currently working on, and I don't have any hesitation or worry shooting tons of 4k videos of my kids and whatever else.

Also listing off 'advantages' of cloud storage AS IF it were again some weird either/or proposition. Congrats on whatever 'advantage' someone thinks they have to JUST having cloud storage. Newsflash: it's not an either/or. I have the SAME 'advantage' because having an SD card doesn't mitigate also being able to use the same cloud storage. This is akin to arguing that because you like using bluetooth headphones or something that my having a headphone jack means I can't ALSO be using BT headphones if I so chose. It's another of these "WOW! REALLY!!!?" features that we already freakin' had, without removing something useful.

It's 2017 in a few days. YOU CAN have both. It's not an either/or. Just like decent design/function. The butt-ugly pixel didn't actually have to sacrifice a decent forward thinking design to have any of the function is does have (and all the function it doesn't like wireless charging/waterproofing etc) it's just that it was a rushed mish-mosh, slapdash effort that barely has any unique design to it as an individual product. Personally, my $ won't support that. If google would actually take the time next time to design a decent phone as well as pack it with nice features, I might be interested.

 

[Raduque]

I don't get these arguments either, they're always kind of silly to me. "Please, please mega-corporations! Charge me more for less! I love it!"

Most people DON'T have 128GB base model phones. Most people don't have unlimited data, they have a couple gigs that has to last them all month. I find it just silly to argue that my phone should have ARTIFICIAL limitations to 2016-17 technology, against my own logical usage, because it's good for the bottom line of some damn mega-company.

I think it's actually more "I'm so arrogant that my usage pattern is perfect and it's what everybody needs to do".

 

[Zaap]

I think it's actually more "I'm so arrogant that my usage pattern is perfect and it's what everybody needs to do".

Like I say though, it's a strange argument of something being 'better' when it's the SAME option everyone has, just MINUS an option others have that they use IN ADDITION to what someone is arguing for. That's what I mean when I say I don't get weird "either/or" arguments that really aren't. And believe me, I've seen loads of these presented over time.

"I prefer to plug in my phone to charge it, therefore: wireless charging is stupid! Either/Or!!"

Yeah, because I can't ALSO plug in my phone to charge it, as well as use wireless that you don't have...