Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Android Oreo Helps Google's Pixel 2 Smartphones Outperform Other Android Flagships (hothardware.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the better-than-ever dept.

MojoKid highlights Hot Hardware's review of Google's new Pixel 2 and Pixel 2 XL smartphones: Google officially launched it's Pixel 2 phones today, taking the wraps off third-party reviews. Designed by Google but manufactured by HTC (Pixel 2) and LG (Pixel 2 XL), the two new handsets also boast Google's latest Android 8.0 operating system, aka Oreo, an exclusive to Google Pixel and certain Nexus devices currently. And in some ways, this is also a big advantage. Though they are based on the same Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 processor as many other Android devices, Google's new Pixel 2s manage to outpace similarly configured smartphones in certain benchmarks by significant margins (Basemark, PCMark and 3DMark). They also boot dramatically faster than any other Android handset on the market, in as little as 10 seconds. Camera performance is also excellent, with both the 5-inch Pixel 2 and 6-inch Pixel 2 XL sporting identical electronics, save for their displays and chassis sizes. Another notable feature built into Android Oreo is Google Now Playing, an always-listening, Shazam-like service (if you enable it) that displays song titles on the lock screen if it picks up on music playing in the room you're in. Processing is done right on the Pixel 2 and it doesn't need network connectivity. Another Pixel 2 Oreo-based trick is Google Lens, a machine vision system that Google notes "can recognize places like landmarks and buildings, artwork that you'd find in a museum, media covers such as books, movies, music albums, and video games..." The Google Pixel 2 and Pixel 2 XL are available now on Verizon or unlocked via the Google Store starting at $649 and $849 respectively for 64GB storage versions, with a $100 up-charge for 128GB variants.

60 of 91 comments (clear)

  1. surprise surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    google optimizes *their* mobile os for *their* hardware.

    1. Re:surprise surprise by guacamole · · Score: 1

      This is not a case of some sort of optimization hidden deep in Google's OS that's meant benefit just Google brand hardware. Pixels and Nexus phones are now running Android 8, and those are the only phones having Oreo, besides phones running custom third party firmware.

      Nobody is stopping Android hardware manufacturers from providing Android 8 on their hardware.

  2. Boot speed Android Linux vs. GNU/Linux by DrYak · · Score: 1

    They also boot dramatically faster than any other Android handset on the market, in as little as 10 seconds.

    And my Xperia running Sailfish X (by the former Nokia engineer who were developing Maemo/Meego before the whole Elop/Microsoft blunder happened), boots even faster, in a couple of seconds.
    Yay for GNU/Linux OSes ! (in this case, using systemd as a init system).

    The whole "boot loader unlocked" warning that Sony displays is actually longer than the OS boot procedure.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
    1. Re:Boot speed Android Linux vs. GNU/Linux by Kopp · · Score: 1

      How is booting time that important ? My phone is usually up for weeks or months before I reboot it (most often because of updates...)

    2. Re:Boot speed Android Linux vs. GNU/Linux by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      I was wondering this myself. The boot times for laptops and desktops aren't of great importance, and the boot times for smartphones are at least an order of magnitude less important than that.

  3. Fragmentation is not a good thing by shilly · · Score: 1

    A strategy of deliberately fragmenting the user-base across OS versions based on the hardware they're running is not good from a UX, security or privacy perspective

    1. Re:Fragmentation is not a good thing by PhrostyMcByte · · Score: 1

      Phone vendors fragment themselves already. They try to differentiate themselves with custom launchers and apps for everything. I'd love for my V30 to get this new software without getting a hacked OS or APK, but I really don't see Google as being a primary contributor to fragmentation.

    2. Re:Fragmentation is not a good thing by BronsCon · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Google could put an end to it by simply not allowing it in the license agreement. Of course, more than a handful of features have made their way from vendor overlays into vanilla Android, and I'm not sure Google would have considered those features for inclusion had they not been proven beforehand, so maybe there's some benefit to the current system.

      I'm honestly torn on the issue. On one hand, the vanilla experience does lend itself to system updates more readily than what we have now; on the other hand, innovation has to come from somewhere and most of what Google adds to Android isn't originating from within Google.

      Perhaps, at the very least, Google should require vendors to submit any proprietary drivers so that Google can release vanilla builds for every device; they would also need to require that any carrier- or vendor-specific apps be released on the Play store, to prevent any model-specific features from being locked behind those apps. Then, you could have the vanilla experience on any phone without losing and vendor- or model-specific functionality which may have made you choose that phone in the first place.

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    3. Re:Fragmentation is not a good thing by Kjella · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well project Treble is supposed to make it so that they can update Android separate from the vendor implementation, from what I understand one side effect is that all phones could run stock Android. Whether vendors will let you is another story, but hopefully at least now you'll get timely and long lasting updates.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    4. Re:Fragmentation is not a good thing by swillden · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Google could put an end to it by simply not allowing it in the license agreement.

      No, they really couldn't. Google has to walk a fine line, especially with Samsung, but with several of the major players. Push too hard and they're perfectly capable of pulling an Amazon... but far more likely to be successful. Even the smaller players could potentially band together, or make a deal with Amazon.

      You think Android fragmentation is bad now? It's nothing compared to what we'd have if Google pushed too hard and lost control. Eventually it would re-consolidate, I think, though probably not entirely. In the short term it would be a mess.

      Of course, more than a handful of features have made their way from vendor overlays into vanilla Android, and I'm not sure Google would have considered those features for inclusion had they not been proven beforehand, so maybe there's some benefit to the current system.

      This is true.

      most of what Google adds to Android isn't originating from within Google.

      This is not true. Google does pick up a lot of ideas from other OEMs, but it's definitely not the majority.

      Perhaps, at the very least, Google should require vendors to submit any proprietary drivers so that Google can release vanilla builds for every device

      Treble is a better approach, I think. The idea is to provide a standard hardware interface that is tested and validated, both with a set of low level tests (the Vendor Test Suite) and by flashing a vanilla AOSP system image and running the app-level API tests (the Compliance Test Suite). So Google doesn't have to release vanilla builds, you (or your favorite community) can just build your own -- assuming, of course, that you can unlock your device's bootloader.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    5. Re:Fragmentation is not a good thing by guacamole · · Score: 1

      And how did you conclude that Google encourages fragmentation in the OS? The bottom of this story is that Google's phones are the only ones released with Android 8. There is nothing stopping other hardware manufacturers from shipping phones with Android 8. In fact, Google would only encourage that.

    6. Re:Fragmentation is not a good thing by jabuzz · · Score: 1

      Fake news I am afraid. Brand new Xperia XZ1 Compact brought last week according to Settings/System I am running Android 8.0.0.

    7. Re:Fragmentation is not a good thing by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      You think Android fragmentation is bad now? It's nothing compared to what we'd have if Google pushed too hard and lost control. Eventually it would re-consolidate, I think, though probably not entirely. In the short term it would be a mess.

      Or they would just abandon the platform since they have no product differentiation. This was one of the (many) reasons windows phone failed; every phone was pretty much the same as every other phone in that there was no customization of the OS permitted at all, and they all had to run on the same qualcomm SoC and other hardware components, only being allowed to change the camera, display, battery, and outside casing. They were also required to use the same navigation button layout fixed on to the display (i.e. no soft buttons) with the back button, start screen, and a search button that was forced to use shitty bing (FWIW Google ditched the search button back in 2011.)

    8. Re:Fragmentation is not a good thing by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      Google could put an end to it by simply not allowing it in the license agreement.

      I'm glad they don't, personally. But if they did, the license agreement is only for Google apps, not for Android itself.

    9. Re:Fragmentation is not a good thing by BronsCon · · Score: 1

      the license agreement is only for Google apps, not for Android itself

      There is, in fact, a license agreement for Android, as well. It just happens to be very permissive at the moment, but Google could change that tomorrow if they wished.

      We should be thankful for every day that they don't.

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    10. Re:Fragmentation is not a good thing by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      Android proper is open sourced under the Apache 2.0 license, (and the kernel under the GNU GPL2 license). Google cannot change the licensing for versions they've already released. They could, of course, remove future versions from those licenses and do whatever they wish -- but everyone could just continue to use the old versions or their forks.

      Google Apps, however, are not open sourced.

    11. Re:Fragmentation is not a good thing by BronsCon · · Score: 1

      They could, of course, remove future versions from those licenses and do whatever they wish

      Which is precisely what I was implying.

      but everyone could just continue to use the old versions or their forks.

      With no updates from Google. Old versions with no security patches (okay, the community might handle that -- maybe it's even likely) and no feature updates, might be fine on old hardware, but isn't that the situation we're all complaining about right now? That's hardly an improvement, then, you see?

      Forks might add new features, but they won't be the same features Google adds to new versions, so we'll end up with fragmentation. Isn't that also what we're all complaining about right now?

      So yeah, people could keep using the old version, which is what many people are complaining about being forced to do already, and people could develop multiple forked versions, which is the other thing many people are complaining about already. Or, everyone could just use Google's version and actually see the problems they're complaining about solved.

      So yes, what you propose could happen. Hell, it's probably the most likely outcome, but it would leave us with the very same issues we have today. And Google could still license future versions under more restrictive terms, knowing full well that our alternative to adopting those more restrictive terms is the status quo.

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    12. Re:Fragmentation is not a good thing by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      That's hardly an improvement, then, you see?

      I wasn't saying that it would be an improvement, only that manufacturers are likely to go that route if Google gets too pushy about what they can or can't do.

      Isn't that also what we're all complaining about right now?

      Not all of us. I'm not. As a user, I don't see fragmentation as being a huge issue. I understand how it is annoying to developers, though.

      people could develop multiple forked versions

      Not only could they, they already have. I have one running right now.

    13. Re:Fragmentation is not a good thing by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      Google could put an end to it by simply not allowing it in the license agreement.

      Here we go again.

      If Google did that, manufacturers would migrate to another OS. If Google had those terms from the beginning Android would be a fading memory. No company (Samsung, HTC, and so on) is going to cripple their options by signing some restrictive license with Google. The only reason Android was a success is because:

      1) Manufacturers own all the source. It's theirs sitting on their servers to do with as they please. Google can't take it away.
      2) They have wide reign with regards to customizing the OS.

      Perhaps, at the very least, Google should require vendors to submit any proprietary drivers so that Google

      Sigh. See above.

      so that Google can release vanilla builds for every device

      Do you think it's reasonable for Google to manage the builds for patches, minor, and major releases for hundreds (thousands?) of Android devices?

      Do you think it's reasonable that Google could test all of those builds across all of those devices?

      Tens of builds across thousands of devices? Tested and quality assessed?

      (Answer: no).

      innovation has to come from somewhere and most of what Google adds to Android isn't originating from within Google

      You ought to go look at the activity on AOSP then decide where the "innovation" is coming from.

    14. Re:Fragmentation is not a good thing by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      Or they would just abandon the platform since they have no product differentiation.

      Exactly right. It's more likely though they'd just get out of the business entirely. Even if they somehow managed to build an OS on feature parity w/ Android they'd have to figure out how to get devs to write apps for it.

    15. Re:Fragmentation is not a good thing by BronsCon · · Score: 1

      Here we go again.

      Indeed. Sadly, that was in a thread for another article, and not posted here.

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    16. Re:Fragmentation is not a good thing by shilly · · Score: 1

      The article says: "the two new handsets also boast Google's latest Android 8.0 operating system, aka Oreo, an exclusive to Google Pixel and certain Nexus devices currently. And in some ways, this is also a big advantage"

      Sounds like encouraging fragmentation to me. YMMV

  4. Re: Is this slasdot, or is this googlevertisement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You're an idiot. Nerds might be interested in new tech products and their benchmarks versus other similar products. By your standard, any post that discusses new products in a favorable way is an advertisement, regardless of how much the product might be of interest to nerds. I actually like to know when new products are released, and there have always been stories like this posted on Slashdot. Of you don't like the article, don't read it.

  5. Re:Shazam without network by Desler · · Score: 1

    Yeah it’s a database stored on the phone.

  6. Re: Actually, moderation IS censorship by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

    ... And yet I'll still be able to read it if I so choose to do so, which would explain any downmods. You are simply asserting a falsehpod with an air of (false) authority.

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  7. Wow, great. by nightfire-unique · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I mean it's great that it can monitor your audio 24/7 and can make some nice numbers flash up in a benchmark and all...

    But, uh.

    Replaceable battery? Rugged/IP68? SD card slot? Headphone jack? You know.. things that actually matter?

    --
    A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
    1. Re:Wow, great. by youngone · · Score: 2

      Replaceable battery? Rugged/IP68? SD card slot? Headphone jack? You know.. things that actually matter?

      Also:

      Google's new Pixel 2s manage to outpace similarly configured smartphones in certain benchmarks by significant margins (Basemark, PCMark and 3DMark).

      Why would I care? Any mid-price Android phone works fine in 2017.

      They also boot dramatically faster than any other Android handset on the market, in as little as 10 seconds

      I can't remember the last time I restarted my phone. If it takes 60 seconds twice a year why would I care?
      Also, that's a pretty ugly phone. Also it costs way too much.

    2. Re:Wow, great. by swillden · · Score: 3, Informative

      Replaceable battery? Rugged/IP68? SD card slot? Headphone jack?

      There are phones on the market that have all of those things. You should buy one of them.

      You know.. things that actually matter?

      You know those phones I mentioned above? You should check the sales figures on them. The features you mention are important to you -- and that's fine, you should buy what serves your needs, and the great thing about Android is that you have lots of choice -- but they apparently aren't important to most people. You're trying to claim that they are, but objective evidence clearly indicates that you're wrong.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    3. Re:Wow, great. by jabuzz · · Score: 1

      What's the sales figures for Android phones without a headphone socket? My guess is that phones with a 3.5mm jack wildly outsell those without. As for waterproof that has been an increasing trend in the Android market starting with the Sony Z four years ago. Removal batteries I will give you but the rest I would argue you are dead wrong the market has spoken and it's said all those features are important.

    4. Re: Wow, great. by jabuzz · · Score: 1

      Except most middle tier Android phones feature a 3.5mm stereo jack and microSD card expansion. A growing number are waterproof. So true of Samsung S8, A5 (2017), A3 (2017) and S7, Sony XZ and XZ1 lineup as well in fact for Sony going right back to the Z about four years ago no. LG do the G6 and V30.

      The one thing that has disappeared and the market seems to have accepted is lack of removable battery.

      Heck even Apple have succumb to the make it waterproof concept, so a top tier phone that is not waterproof in 2017 is seriously behind the curve. The lack of removable storage has been somewhat dealt with by providing larger capacities of internal storage and I predict in the future 200GB+ capacity phones will make removable storage go away across the entire market.

      I also consider the lack of removable battery a sane choice for most people, as they can now go a whole day and often more on a single charge. Longevity of the battery is an issue but if those glass Li batteries make it to market then that will be a moot point too.

      However I can never see the point in removing the 3.5mm stereo jack and I predict it is here to stay for a long time at least in Android land. I would not be surprised if down the line it makes a reappearance in Apple land too.

    5. Re:Wow, great. by swillden · · Score: 1

      What's the sales figures for Android phones without a headphone socket? My guess is that phones with a 3.5mm jack wildly outsell those without.

      Since there are so few models without an audio jack, it's really not yet possible to tell what the market thinks about that. We'll see over the next couple of years.

      My personal take (YMMV, of course): I've been using the Pixel 2 XL for a few months now, and the only place I even sort of miss the audio jack is in the car, but I just put the dongle in there. My truck has Bluetooth audio. For headphones, I already mostly used Bluetooth, but I've found USB-C headphones to be a perfectly good alternative when I want wired (which is rarely). The only potential problem I see with USB-C is that you can't use headphones while charging (without a hub), but honestly I almost never think about charging. Between the big battery and fast charging, I don't even plug the phone in at night. I just plug it into the fast charger in the car/truck whenever I'm driving somewhere. 30-40 minutes of rapid charging per day is all the phone needs to keep running.

      As for waterproof that has been an increasing trend in the Android market starting with the Sony Z four years ago.

      The Sony Z was only IP57. The Pixel 2 is IP67. There are a few phones on the market that provide your requested IP68, but there's hardly a great deal of evidence that consumers think the difference between IP67 and IP68 is critical.

      the rest I would argue you are dead wrong the market has spoken and it's said all those features are important.

      Really? The rest of your list consists of ruggedized and SD slot. The first claim is laughable; the trend is toward super-slim all-glass bodies. On the second, there are wildly successful devices both with and SD slots. Personally, 64 GB is enough storage for me.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    6. Re:Wow, great. by PoisOnouS · · Score: 1

      Have you experienced the display grain many complain about with the 2XL? It's the one thing holding me back from choosing the larger phone.

    7. Re:Wow, great. by swillden · · Score: 1

      Have you experienced the display grain many complain about with the 2XL? It's the one thing holding me back from choosing the larger phone.

      Once I heard people complaining about it and looked for it, I can see it. Sometimes. The only thing that has ever actually bothered me about the display is that at the default brightness setting it's a little bit dim. I turn the brightness to about 75%, though, and it's fine. And I've never had a situation where I couldn't set it bright enough (other than cases like full sunlight where no backlit phone display is bright enough).

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    8. Re:Wow, great. by swillden · · Score: 1

      They also boot dramatically faster than any other Android handset on the market, in as little as 10 seconds

      I can't remember the last time I restarted my phone. If it takes 60 seconds twice a year why would I care?

      Well, you should be restarting your phone at least monthly, when the monthly security update arrives. Your phone does get regular security updates, right?

      The ultra-fast boot time is really nice for me, because I run pre-release builds and get updates daily, sometimes more. In the bad old days (three years ago) an update meant ten minutes of installing, two minutes of booting, and then a one-hour "optimizing apps" marathon, during all of which my phone was unusable. ART got rid of the "optimizing apps", A/B got rid of the long installation time (installations still take 10 minutes, but it happens in the background while the phone is still running fine) and now fast boot, my phone is only out of service for about 15 seconds when I tap the "Install update" button.

      I'm not saying you should care, but for me it's a great feature.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    9. Re:Wow, great. by PoisOnouS · · Score: 1

      Appreciate the reply. I have only seen the smaller phone in store. When they get a 2XL display model, I'll compare them and decide if I can live with the grain effect. I tend to be a little OCD and I might have to stick with the Samsung panel on the smaller phone. I've spent 3 years on a similar panel.

    10. Re:Wow, great. by lexman098 · · Score: 1

      Replaceable battery? Rugged/IP68? SD card slot? Headphone jack?

      There are phones on the market that have all of those things. You should buy one of them.

      Not that I personally care about any of these features, but there is in fact just 1 android phone ever released that has all of those if you include the need for a fingerprint reader (modern phone).

    11. Re:Wow, great. by thejynxed · · Score: 1

      Almost no phone on the market gets updates, as a percentage. Even some flagship models in the very recent past were left to languish after the first 6 months of release.

      --
      @Mindless Drivel: 100% of Twitter posts ever Tweeted.
    12. Re:Wow, great. by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      Replaceable battery? Rugged/IP68? SD card slot? Headphone jack? You know.. things that actually matter?

      Those are all hardware features. Hardware is difficult and costs. Software is easy and cheap.

    13. Re:Wow, great. by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      I've been using the Pixel 2 XL for a few months now

      So you're either a Google employee or stole it from a Google employee. It was released on Oct 17.

    14. Re:Wow, great. by swillden · · Score: 1

      I've been using the Pixel 2 XL for a few months now

      So you're either a Google employee or stole it from a Google employee. It was released on Oct 17.

      I'm a Google employee.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  8. Is it a Google phone? by u19925 · · Score: 2

    A while ago, people had issues with "Google" Nexus 5 after the Android OTA upgrade. Despite the fact that Google called this as Google Nexus 5 and was sold from Google website, it refused to take the blame and told customers to contact LG as it was LG which made the phone and it was responsible for any issue with the phone. Pixel 2 is made by HTC. Who will be responsible for servicing and support? I upgraded by Nexus 5 to iPhone. 11 months later, I had issue with headphone jack (it was detecting as headphone connected even when it was not). I took it to Apple store and told them that I am traveling and need urgent fix. They gave a brand new phone. Can we expect Google to do the same? If not, you are just buying an HTC phone advertised by Google.

    1. Re:Is it a Google phone? by Trongy · · Score: 1

      IIRC, when the OTA update failed, Google did support the Nexus 5s sold through its website, but not those Nexus 5s that were sold by other retailers.

  9. Lack by markdavis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    >"with both the 5-inch Pixel 2 and 6-inch Pixel 2 XL sporting identical electronics, save for their displays and chassis sizes"

    And they also share the:

    * Lack of headphone jack
    * Lack of wireless charging
    * Lack of swappable batteries
    * Lack of SD card support
    * Lack of serviceable battery?

    But not the lack of price... so, go ahead and cough up $650 or $850, anyway, because we are giving the public what they want. And to think I am STILL using a Nexus 5 which has at more than half of the above lacking features, and was around HALF the price.

    1. Re:Lack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      My last Android tablet cost me $50 and includes 1GB/mo of mobile Internet service for free, fantastic!

      But it runs an old Android 5.0 vendor locked ROM that I can't OTA update ever since rooting and I can't replace it with an up-to-date open source ROM. So, I'm always in fear of having my tablet hacked. Android 5.0 also had memory leaks that I wish I could fix but alas can not.

      With respect to Android theoretically being open source, it's really very disappointing how locked up we are in practice.

    2. Re:Lack by trawg · · Score: 1

      But not the lack of price... so, go ahead and cough up $650 or $850, anyway, because we are giving the public what they want. And to think I am STILL using a Nexus 5 which has at more than half of the above lacking features, and was around HALF the price.

      Ditto. I waited for the Pixel announcement before upgrading from my Nexus 4, because I wanted to see if they were going to make something significantly better. The Pixel looks great but not 2x as much as the Nexus 5X I ended up getting.

      I wasn't seriously looking at the Pixel 2 (I only got my 5X like a year ago) but was still interested to see if it was going to be worth it. Basically though my take is if I'm going to drop a fortune on a phone, I think I'd rather it be an iPhone at this point - the new neural process & features & camera I think are more appealing to me. And I say that as someone that has had a Nexus One, 4 and now 5X.

      It will be hard to leave Android but killing the Nexus line and just cloning iPhone doesn't make me feel inclined to stick with it.

  10. Where does the song catalog come from? by saccade.com · · Score: 1

    I don't get this claim: Google Now Playing, an always-listening, Shazam-like service ... displays song titles on the lock screen if it picks up on music playing ... Processing is done right on the Pixel 2 and it doesn't need network connectivity. Where does it get the song catalog to match to, if not the Internet?

    1. Re:Where does the song catalog come from? by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Internal storage? It is just a bunch of hashes.

  11. Welcome to Slashdot, Sergey! by Trogre · · Score: 1

    I hope you enjoy your time here. Feel free to take a look around and stay as long as you like, but I suspect in the end you'll find that this site isn't for you.

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  12. so advanced... by harvey+the+nerd · · Score: 1

    Google pixel2 - with features so advanced, although you think you own it, it actually owns you...

  13. Re:Actually, moderation IS censorship by dreamchaser · · Score: 1

    You really don't know what censorship means, do you? It does not apply to private entities. It applies to Goverment only. If you do not like /.'s moderation system then don't load the page. Pretty easy to do.

  14. Exclusive? by Troed · · Score: 1

    Sony Xperia XZ1, Android 8.0 Oreo

    On the market since weeks.

    https://www.androidcentral.com...

    --
    it's in my head
  15. Small Version Please! by Daetrin · · Score: 1

    Please please please make a "small" version of the Pixel 2! I was fine with the 3.7" of the Nexus One, but the 4.7" of the Moto X was tolerable as well! I'd happily accept anything in that range!

    Also, a curved back like the Moto X and a headphone jack would be great too! K THX BYE!

    (Yes, i know i'm shouting into the wind and the odds of getting what i want are probably indistinguishable from zero.)

    --
    This Space Intentionally Left Blank
  16. Re:Actually, moderation IS censorship by stdarg · · Score: 1

    Wrong, censorship applies to everyone. What is the deal with people trying to limit these sorts of concepts to the government only? Free speech is the other big one that some people think only has meaning with the government.

    Let me ask you this, why does the term "self-censorship" exist if it only applies to governments? What is the definition of that term? Are you suggesting that it's a fanciful term that anthropomorphizes government?

  17. Re:No SD kills it dead by markdavis · · Score: 1

    >Nail in the coffin for casual users right there

    As long as it has 64+GB of storage, it is probably the least important of what I listed, for me. The problem in the past was that 32GB was just not enough, especially when half of it is gone for the OS and other reserved space. So that is finally becoming less of an issue.

  18. Re:Actually, moderation IS censorship by farble1670 · · Score: 1

    Wrong, censorship applies to everyone.

    You might want that to be the case, but it's not. A private entity can censor you whenever and however they want within their system. That's why Twitter can block your account if they don't like what you are saying. It's why if you get up on a box of canned beans at your local grocer and start raving about Trump they'll have you thrown out and possibly arrested.

  19. Re:Actually, moderation IS censorship by dreamchaser · · Score: 1

    Try reading a dictionary at least once in your life. Informally, sure you can use that term, but there is absolutely nothing wrong with a private entity 'censoring' your speech.

  20. Re:Actually, moderation IS censorship by i286NiNJA · · Score: 1

    And here I declare that taxes aren't just for the government and you must pay me.
    I also declare that independent human flights is a god given right and now we can fly
    I declare that the bill of rights isn't only for americans!
    Pissing in your mouth is freedom to deny me my freedom is like being hitler.
    PS you are hitler, if not worse.

  21. Re:Actually, moderation IS censorship by stdarg · · Score: 1

    You might want that to be the case, but it's not.

    vs

    A private entity can censor you whenever and however they want within their system.

    I'm guessing you misunderstood what I said, or responded to the wrong post, because you're actually agreeing with me (despite your first sentence).

    My point: when private entities censor you, that is censorship. I was disagreeing with someone who said "You really don't know what censorship means, do you? It does not apply to private entities. It applies to Goverment only."

  22. Re:Actually, moderation IS censorship by stdarg · · Score: 1

    You already have shown that you understood what "censoring" means with respect to a private entity, so I'm not sure why you think I (or you) need to read the dictionary, but here you go...

    the suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security

    Notice how it doesn't limit that to the government. Hey the dictionary agrees with me! What's your take on this startling new development?

  23. Re:Actually, moderation IS censorship by stdarg · · Score: 1

    Coming back to the replies to my comment, reading yours feels like I've stumbled across someone having a bipolar episode. Yes, I'm worse than Hitler because I said the concept of censorship applies to private entities suppressing expression as well as government. Great argument, very well put!