Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Google

Google's $1,799 Pixel Fold Arrives in Late-June (techcrunch.com) 45

Google today officially launched its first foldable smartphone, the Pixel Fold. From a report: The design affords a lot more screen real estate. The internal display is 7.6 inches, with a 6:5 aspect ratio. The resolution is 2208 x 1840 OLED at 380ppi, with a refresh rate of up to 120Hz. [...] The bar on the rear of the device houses a three-camera system: a 48-megapixel main, 10.8-megapixel ultrawide and a 10.8-megapixel telephoto with 5x optical Zoom and 20x Super Res Zoom. The front-facing camera, meanwhile, is 9.5 megapixels. The real secret sauce in the Pixel Fold experience is, unsurprisingly, the software. Google has, after all, been working on it for at least half a decade. The app continuity when switching between the external and internal screens is quite seamless, allowing you to pick where you left off as you change screen sizes. Naturally, Google has optimized its most popular third-party apps for the big screen experience, including Gmail and YouTube. The system is powered by the same Tensor G2 chip you'll find in the Pixel 7, 7a and Pixel tablet.


This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google's $1,799 Pixel Fold Arrives in Late-June

Comments Filter:
  • by war4peace ( 1628283 ) on Wednesday May 10, 2023 @04:48PM (#63512091)

    Compared to my S22 Ultra, it has worse screen resolution, worse cameras, slightly better optical zoom, way worse maximum zoom, worse front facing camera, slightly better refresh rate, and is almost twice the price.

    Yes, I know, apples to oranges (weee, it can FOLD), but meh. Is the crease still visible? I bet it is.

    • Folding is the future of phones. It's amazing having a mini tablet in your pocket that's the form factor of a phone most of the time. It really needs a pen though, and they still need to make it less bulky, but it's already amazing.

      • I'm kind of with you on that. I'd love a device like this, but the Samsungs I've looked at cost about twice what I'd be prepared to pay because the screen is pretty obviously going to crease badly fairly quickly.
        Once someone figures out how to produce these robustly and can sell them at a more reasonable price I think they'll wind up being the default form-factor.
        • They seem to hold up pretty well after the Fold1 already. But almost two grand for a phone is a joke of course.

          • That's interesting.
            I pick one up for a look every now and again at a Samsung Kiosk in a local mall and they always have a hard line through the screen but that may well be because the general public are not being careful with them.
            If I bought one I'd treat it with kid gloves.
        • I got my Z Fold 4 refurbished, but it's like-new, and that saved some $600 or so. It's still insanely expensive, it's true.

          • If I could justify the price I'd probably buy one, but I just can't.
            I understand why people buy them though.
      • BetaMax is the future of video recording...

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by u19925 ( 613350 )

        Seriously? How? The usability of foldable is very poor. It can't work as tablet or a phone. Imagine alarm rings in the morning. I just reach out and click stop/snooze. Now, I will have to pull out from the charging cord and get the phone, open the phone and click on stop/snooze. I am wondering how will I attach in my car phone holder. I get dozens of notifications a day when my phone is lying on my side and I am working on my computer. It is much easier to glance at my phone and determine whether it is an i

        • Why would you not use the front screen for all of that? Folding phones have a normal screen on the outside front cover which acts as a regular phone screen - you don't have to ever unfold the phone if you don't want to.
        • >It can't work as a tablet or a phone.

          I think you're picturing the wrong kind of device. It's a smartphone when closed and a tablet when open.

          Though it's true it's a bit narrower than a normal phone when closed, and a bit smaller than your regular tablet when open, it's actually bigger than phones used to be pretty recently, and gives you the advantages of carrying two devices in one. Plus it's great as an art tablet, better than drawing on the other Note phones, as it's bigger when opened.

          You may be pic

          • Don't worry, when a fruit based company comes out with it, the op will suddenly think it's the best thing since sliced bread - only they could have thought to have an external screen
      • It might just as well be the future of phones, but for sure it ain't their present.

      • What it really needs is to come down in price to something reasonable - that price is preposterous, and certainly not worth the folding capability for most of us.
    • Add to that that your S22 can have 2 real SIM cards, and the pixel only has one slot, you've got a winner. I have a use and actually a need for two SIM cards in my phone. Apple and Google are pushing eSIM but it's not there yet...
  • No thanks. (Score:4, Funny)

    by backslashdot ( 95548 ) on Wednesday May 10, 2023 @05:09PM (#63512155)

    My God, it has a (double??) crease down the middle, it is so prominent that they even show it in the PR shots. If I wanted to look at a crease I would ask my partner if I could stare at her naked ass. After being told no and called creepy, I would go in the bathroom and hold a mirror behind my butt.

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Haven't used one myself but people who have had folding phones claim that you quickly get used to the crease and ignore it.

      I'd be interested if it was half the price.

      • by dgatwood ( 11270 )

        Haven't used one myself but people who have had folding phones claim that you quickly get used to the crease and ignore it.

        I'd be interested if it was half the price.

        What I've never understood is why companies are designing screens that bend, rather than using two separate panels. Make the "hinge" be a pair of hinges so that it spreads apart slightly as it "folds". Use a couple of raised metal bumps on the top and bottom of the hinge area (outside the active display region) to prevent that folding process from putting any pressure on the edge of the glass. This would effectively shift the fold point out in front of the phone by a mm or two.

        I think it should be possib

        • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          Microsoft tried the two screen approach, but it didn't prove to be very popular. Displaying a web page over two screens gives you a massive bezel down the middle, not ideal for reading.

          If the crease bothers you then you can use the phone in split screen mode, with the split in the centre where it won't be very noticeable. Many phones have curved screens anyway so developers tend to avoid going right to the edge of the app's "window".

          • by dgatwood ( 11270 )

            Microsoft tried the two screen approach, but it didn't prove to be very popular. Displaying a web page over two screens gives you a massive bezel down the middle, not ideal for reading.

            I'm not sure why that would necessarily have to be the case, beyond that they were presumably using off-the-shelf display parts. In theory, it should be possible to put OLEDs right up to one edge of the display.

      • I have a Galaxy Fold 4, it's not my primary device .. got it for some work related thing. The crease is NOT visible when looking at it straight on, which makes it "good enough." The Google phone's crease looks much worse. If Samsung could lower the price of their foldables they'll be a hit.

    • I agree with the sentiment. The crease is like goatse.cx in the sense that I can't unsee it.
  • Thanks. I'll wait for prices for foldable devices fall to something reasonable: while potentially interesting and useful, they are most certainly not worth to me anything remotely close to $1,000+, and I don't get kicks out of displaying my wealth in public.
  • by peterww ( 6558522 ) on Wednesday May 10, 2023 @05:11PM (#63512161)

    I keep telling people I want something that's smaller than a tablet, yet folds up into something twice as thick, and costs 3x the price. This is perfect! I hate it.

  • by fermion ( 181285 ) on Wednesday May 10, 2023 @05:13PM (#63512167) Homepage Journal
    The pixel 5 lasted a year. Google Glass lasted a year. At least no one is going to say $1300 for an iPhone is extravagant.
    • I still use my Pixel 5. The size works for me. So does the physical fingerprint scanner on the back (waaay better than Pixel 6 or 7 sensors). Oh and I have Graphene OS on it, saves my battery.
    • 1300 for an iPhone is extravagant.

      1800 for this POS is just ridiculous.

      • You pay for uniqueness as an early adopter of new technology. The pricing here is in line with the Galaxy Z fold which sold surprisingly well. Clearly people have enough disposable income for "ridiculous".

    • People with actual disposable income. I.e. not the people living paycheck to paycheck but desperately trying not to look poor by buying the latest iPhone, but actual normal 1%ers of which there are plenty.

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Pixels are refreshed every year, just like the iPhone, Galaxy S line, and every other phone out there.

      The Pixel 5 didn't "last a year" any more than the iPhone 10 did. It gets 3 years of guaranteed OS upgrades, and continued security patches after that. So it's actually still getting the OS upgrades at this point.

      • by fermion ( 181285 )
        Wow, three years. What a self own. iOS 16 can be installed on an iPhone 8, 2017
        • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          Arguably it's better. With iOS you must get the latest iOS version, even if it runs like crap on your iPhone. Apple was actually fined for that.

          With a Pixel you get 3 years of OS upgrades, and from the on only security updates (and of course app updates). So your Pixel doesn't get super slow because an Android version made 6 years after release is needed just to keep it secure.

  • by greytree ( 7124971 ) on Wednesday May 10, 2023 @05:24PM (#63512195)
    I would be interested in a 3.8"x3.8"x0.5" phone that would fit nicely in my back pocket and be robust enough to handle a 2m fall on concrete.

    But that would require imagination from the manufacturers and would not sell to the millions of sheeple who have been persuaded to buy ridiculous phablets.
    • May I add the request for a battery that holds more power than what's required for an hour of standby?

      • If the sheeple can be coaxed out of their obsession with slimness, devices can be made thick, so be sturdy and have a good battery.
        • That's something I'd like to know, who the hell actually wants a slim phone? I have never met anyone who said that this is a reason why they'd pick one phone over another one.

          Twice so since you have to wrap those tinfoil-thick phones in inches of padding so they don't crumble when you put them in your pocket.

    • Industry hardware manufacturers like Panasonic and Zebra make barcode scanners and other warehouse type hardware that run android, are around that form factor, impervious to water/dust/dropping and have replaceable batteries. They cost more for lower specs and usually run outdated Android versions which might be why they don't try to market them to consumers.
  • People who will be thinking of buying this are imo fairly likely to be aware of how Samsung progressed with their versions of foldable devices. Unless those thinking of buying are wealthy enough to see this as basically just another toy, then by all means they should go for it. Wealthy customers help push innovation.

  • A 1800 bucks phone? I've bought computers that can do more for less.

    Can it even still call? Or is that just yet another app that could crash any minute?

  • by sremick ( 91371 ) on Wednesday May 10, 2023 @07:24PM (#63512531)

    Not that I'm going to buy one, but to be fair...

    While I agree that $1800 is an eye-watering high amount to spend on a phone, and that it'd be nice if they were more-affordable so that more people could have them, it's worth taking a historical look here. Consider the first FLIP phone, the original Motorola StarTAC which came out in 1996 for $1000. $1000 in 1996 dollars, adjusted for inflation, is equal to $1816 today. Over time that StarTAC came down in price to the point where even poor me had one and they became extremely common and popular in and of themselves, let alone all the other brands and models of flip phones that came out later for even less money.

    • I'd not be surprised if it is launched at an enthusiast price and then drops when Samsung Fold5 releases, but I guess we'll see. I bought a Surface Duo and while I like it more than most, its growing pains software wise and steep initial price make me think the smart move here will be to wait a bit. The GPF is very much what everyone expected MS to make for a Surface Duo 3 and will probably be better supported than MS will manage if they even bother making a SD3. These foldables are more useful than a ph

Life is a healthy respect for mother nature laced with greed.

Working...