Slashdot Mirror
How Google Software Won 2018 (engadget.com)
Google is relatively new to the hardware game -- at least compared to rivals Apple and Samsung. But it's not just what's outside that matters. An analysis, by Engadget : The Pixel 3 is the best example. Physically, the phone is a more premium version of the Pixel 2. But aside from that, nothing about the Pixel 3's design makes me yearn for the phone. In fact, the 3 XL even has one of the biggest screen notches in the market, which some people find hideous. And yet, the Pixel 3s were still one of our favorite phones of the year, and ended up on our best gadgets list. But if you can stomach the notch, or don't mind using the smaller phone, then boy, will you be blown away by Google's software. Let's start with my favorite -- Call Screening.
On the Pixels, you can have Assistant field calls for you without having to answer the phone or even say a single word. It's easy to dismiss this feature as simply a glorified voice messaging system, but it's so much more than that. Assistant will ask your caller what they want, transcribe what they're saying in real time and suggest actions for you. Say you realize it's your doctor calling. You could ask them more questions, dictate a real time reply, or use a preset action like hang up or promise to call back. Can your voicemail do that? I don't think so.
[...] Nowhere is the importance of software exemplified as effectively as it is in Google's imaging algorithms, which are so powerful they helped the Pixel 3 nab the smartphone camera crown in our tests. Not only can the phones capture clear, colorful pictures with just a single rear camera, but the Pixels produced the nicest Portrait mode effects using pure software alone. And with the magical Night Sight mode, Google easily kicked Apple and Samsung's butts in low light photography, turning dark, noisy pictures into shots that look like they were taken in daytime. [...] Counter-point: DxOMark's Pixel 3 camera score shows AI isn't enough.
On the Pixels, you can have Assistant field calls for you without having to answer the phone or even say a single word. It's easy to dismiss this feature as simply a glorified voice messaging system, but it's so much more than that. Assistant will ask your caller what they want, transcribe what they're saying in real time and suggest actions for you. Say you realize it's your doctor calling. You could ask them more questions, dictate a real time reply, or use a preset action like hang up or promise to call back. Can your voicemail do that? I don't think so.
[...] Nowhere is the importance of software exemplified as effectively as it is in Google's imaging algorithms, which are so powerful they helped the Pixel 3 nab the smartphone camera crown in our tests. Not only can the phones capture clear, colorful pictures with just a single rear camera, but the Pixels produced the nicest Portrait mode effects using pure software alone. And with the magical Night Sight mode, Google easily kicked Apple and Samsung's butts in low light photography, turning dark, noisy pictures into shots that look like they were taken in daytime. [...] Counter-point: DxOMark's Pixel 3 camera score shows AI isn't enough.
The name "Google Assitant" is very pertinent here. It's not your assistant, it's Google's assistant. This means that Google knows (in detail) what someone is calling you about/for. But nobody cares about inviting Google into their life like this any more, do they? I mean it's not like it is the government doing this. Except that the government can subpoena or ortherwise make representation to find all this out and because Google isn't a telecommunications provider, the rules and regulations regarding long term storage, etc, of your data that would apply to your local telco do not apply.
DxOMark is the most obvious paid reviewer website ever. I don't have proof, but man that top 10 can't fool anyone.
What is impressive of software that doesn't let you do what you want? Seriously. I can't even record my calls. Simple feature that should be easily enabled on my phone. But no. It is disabled by Google software on their hardware. Can we stop giving credit to companies who cant't get the basics right. The software prevents me from using MY phone legally. Google even went out of their way to disable the feature. How can this even be considered great.
The other day I was just talking and Google assistant jumped in telling me it can't help with my request. There was none made. I'm not impressed I'm bored. I have real tasks to handle on a regular basis where Google software gets in the way.
If my doctors calls I would much prefer to automatically record the conversation in case I misinterpret his instructions not have a stupid assistant possibly give them the wrong message.
Not to mention the hardware/software integration is over rated and flaky especially that stupid dongle. I think /. is looking for stories on a slow day.
DRM? No thanks, I'll just get it somewhere else...
...their 'Assistant' can detect that it is a scam artist or robo-caller on the line and can try and waste as much of their time as possible. They simply will not go away until it becomes very expensive to find those 'suckers' that P.T. Barnum told us about. If it costs them 10 minutes of a real person's time (even if it is some poor guy in India) every single time they robo-call someone and they get nothing in return (because you were just pretending to look for your 'lost' credit card), then they will eventually stop trying. Call blockers or Do Not Call lists or laws will do nothing to stop them.
They have to be. I don't care who does it but it has to be done.
Corporatism != Free Market
Thatâ(TM)s the reason I wouldnâ(TM)t use Android or Windows.
Not all data is created equal and mine is worth paying an Apple tax to have a privacy advocate in one of the worlds largest companies.
Is it really that difficult to understand? It says the article is from Engadget. They are more than a 1 person company (I would home any slashdot terrible would know that by now). Clearly the "our" refers to the group of employees responsible for the Engadget reviews.
"How x won y". What a stupid, mindless, clickbait title. It means nothing.
I don't respond to AC's.
Yeah.
"Is that Jim?"
"Hi, this is Jim's personal assistant. How can I help?"
"I would like to talk to Jim."
"What would you like to talk to Jim about?"
"He'll never find out now. But do him a favour, clear his calendar after Wednesday."
*click*
Given that it was an article written by Engadget staff wrapping up their year, I'd imagine "our" refers to them.
It's both strange and enlightening that you would assume it was referring to you... Possibly explains why so many people take everything personally.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC