Google still can't get the basics right on Pixels

Pixel 9 Pro Fold next to Pixel 9
(Image credit: Andrew Myrick / Android Central)

I'll preface this by saying I like using Pixels; I switch between several dozen phones a year, but when I'm done with all the reviews and need a daily driver, I inevitably pick up a Pixel. The decision comes down to two things: clean software and consistent cameras. While most Android skins have decent interfaces these days, there's still a lot of overt styling, and I prefer what Google does in this area with Material You.

And while Google doesn't have the outright lead in cameras these days — the Find X7 Ultra, Vivo X100 Ultra, and Xiaomi 14 Ultra take better photos and videos — the Pixel 8 Pro takes the most consistent photos, and it does a great job with portrait shots and moving objects.

Hardwired

Android Central's LLoyd with a bionic eye

(Image credit: Nicholas Sutrich / Android Central)

In Hardwired, AC Senior Editor Harish Jonnalagadda delves into all things hardware, including phones, audio products, storage servers, and routers.

That said, Google's phones aren't without issues. I've had a litany of problems with Pixels over the years; the panel on the Pixel 2 XL had washed-out colors, it didn't take much to break the Pixel 3 XL (I did it twice in two months), the oleophobic coat on my Pixel 4 XL wore out in under three months of use, and the volume rocker on the Pixel 7 Pro detached randomly one day. Last year, the Pixel 8 Pro decided to charge sporadically, and the USB-C port was to blame — this was an issue on the Pixel 6 Pro as well.

Look, most phones have some issue or another, but the percentage of hardware-related problems I've had with Pixels is significantly higher than any other brand. With Google now guaranteeing seven years of updates, it needs to do better in this area, and if the messaging around better durability is any indication, it looks like the brand is taking this seriously.

While that's undoubtedly good, Google for some reason just can't seem to nail the basics. Some of this is down to the choice of hardware; Google used Samsung's Exynos 2400 as the foundation for the Tensor G4, and other than newer cores, it is nearly indistinguishable to the Tensor G3.

Google made it clear that it doesn't want to chase performance numbers, and the brand instead chooses to focus on the TPU that powers all the AI features on its devices. That's fine by me; I don't use the Pixel 8 Pro because it is the fastest, but because it has a good overall experience. But what's annoying is that Google doesn't do any meaningful thermal management — even on the Pixel 9 — and that makes the device prone to throttling and overheating. To its credit, Google is adding a vapor chamber to the Pixel 9 Pro, and while that is a positive move, it isn't available on the standard model. 

The Peony pink Google Pixel 9 next to the pink Google Pixel Buds Pro 2

(Image credit: Nicholas Sutrich / Android Central)

Google initially indicated in the spec sheet shared with reviewers that the global models of the Pixel 9, 9 Pro, and 9 Pro XL included a Wi-Fi 7 modem, with the Indian versions limited to Wi-Fi 6. The Google Store page in India reinforces that, but Google reached out to clarify that the Indian models use Wi-Fi 7 starting this generation. 

There's also the arbitrary feature gating; Google randomly decided to not include features like 8K video and Night Sight video on the standard model, limiting these to the Pro variants. In a similar vein, the base models still come with 128GB of storage, and that's ridiculous in 2024; even mid-range phones now start at 256GB, and at this point, Google is just nickel-and-diming customers in this regard.

Hilariously, the base models of the Pixel 9 Pro and 9 Pro XL have an unnecessary 16GB of RAM and woefully inadequate 128GB of storage, and there isn't another brand that offers this configuration. It's clear that Google is trying to emulate Apple, and is using a similar pricing strategy to upsell storage variants.

Comparing the Google Pixel 8 Pro to the Google Pixel 9 Pro XL

(Image credit: Nicholas Sutrich / Android Central)

There's also the question of pricing; the Pixel 9 Pro starts at $999 and the 9 Pro XL at $1,099, and that's for phones with 128GB of storage; you'll need to pay another $100 to get 256GB models of these devices, and Google doesn't have anywhere as generous trade-in offers as Samsung.

Granted, these are minor irritants, but they matter on a flagship. There really isn't much to distinguish most flagships these days — at least on the hardware front — so every misstep is amplified. Google says its devices are the best at AI — and they are — and so it's asking a premium. Again, that's justified; ultimately, it's down to the brand to dictate what its phones cost.

But Google needs to understand that if it wants to price its phones in line with Apple and Samsung, it needs to deliver equivalent features; I'm just not sure it is doing that.

Correction: A previous version of this article stated that the Indian models of the Pixel 9 generation came with Wi-Fi 6; Google indicated the same in the materials shared with reviewers and on its store listing. A Google spokesperson has now confirmed that this is incorrect, and that the Indian models have Wi-Fi 7. This article has been corrected to reflect this. 

Harish Jonnalagadda
Senior Editor - Asia

Harish Jonnalagadda is Android Central's Senior Editor of Asia. In his current role, he oversees the site's coverage of Chinese phone brands, networking products, and AV gear. He has been testing phones for over a decade, and has extensive experience in mobile hardware and the global semiconductor industry. Contact him on Twitter at @chunkynerd.

  • Mac58
    To make sure I'm understanding this article, Google can't get the basics right because
    1) it's offering more RAM than it's competitors at the same base price and same storage configuration but because it's trade in values are lower than Samsung it's therefore it can't get right
    2)the tensor g4 is being used and without any real world evidence from you but simply because of this choice this means it's automatically going to throttle and overheat.
    3)it's not offering wifi 7 globally (I could agree with this point as a standalone but the s24+ base also doesn't have wifi 7 and if you are saying these are the basics and the other "flagship" doesn't offer it well it can't be the basics
    4) feature gating. Again if agree with this as well if it wasn't under the title of basics. Not all flagships even have this feature.

    Just reads as a click bait title with no actual factual reasons why the 9 series isn't getting the basics right. Basics for the average consumer are battery life, camera performance, hardware, charging, you know the simple things that every company needs to nail jot some list of arbitrary features the average consumer won't even care about. Respectfully, I disagree and hope you will do better next time.
    Reply
  • Isaiah Armstead
    Mac58 said:
    To make sure I'm understanding this article, Google can't get the basics right because
    1) it's offering more RAM than it's competitors at the same base price and same storage configuration but because it's trade in values are lower than Samsung it's therefore it can't get right
    2)the tensor g4 is being used and without any real world evidence from you but simply because of this choice this means it's automatically going to throttle and overheat.
    3)it's not offering wifi 7 globally (I could agree with this point as a standalone but the s24+ base also doesn't have wifi 7 and if you are saying these are the basics and the other "flagship" doesn't offer it well it can't be the basics
    4) feature gating. Again if agree with this as well if it wasn't under the title of basics. Not all flagships even have this feature.

    Just reads as a click bait title with no actual factual reasons why the 9 series isn't getting the basics right. Basics for the average consumer are battery life, camera performance, hardware, charging, you know the simple things that every company needs to nail jot some list of arbitrary features the average consumer won't even care about. Respectfully, I disagree and hope you will do better next time.
    Spot on!!!! This article reads like a hit piece with a bunch of inaccurate information. He claims they did nothing for thermals, yet they included vapor chamber cooling as well as efficiency gains with both the processor and modem. Like how is it that even good journalism to just trash something not even out yet, that you clearly know nothing about?
    Reply
  • politebat2001
    Wow, the phone has been out for less than 24 hours and we get this already. How about you wait a week before you start chucking grenades? Every other reviewer I've read has said these phones are amazing, so I'm not sure about this. I hope you have a similar hit piece for Samsung with all the crazy stuff they do.
    Reply
  • taino211
    This article is just pure filler. Must be a slow news day. I kept searching for "the basics that Google can't get right with the Pixels" and I'm still searching for that part of the article. While the author seems to have had various hardware issues with Pixels, many have not. I have had a couple of instances where I've had to send a Pixel/Nexus for warranty exchange but not moreso than any other manufacturer. I've sent Samsung devices as well. I wasted 5 minutes of my life reading/commenting on this article that I'll never get back.
    Reply
  • notforhire
    I don't really have a problem with the article. I'm a Samsung guy. And the reason is that I once was a Google guy. I no longer have a dog in the fight. Also, it's silly to fight over phone brands, imho. I will say that with every new Pixel launch, I wait to see what bugs/issues come with the rollout. Google is big enough that if they were serious about making Apple/Samsung level hardware, they would. again...my observations.
    Reply
  • Raxcental
    What do you mean "Google doesn't do any meaningful thermal management — even on the Pixel 9 generation — and that makes these devices prone to throttling and overheating."

    They literally showed off their new vapor chamber. The Tensor G4 also comes with a significantly more efficient modem. You even bring up the new modem indirectly by mentioning WiFi 7 support. To say that Google has done nothing to help with thermals is an absolute lie. Did you even watch the event yesterday? Because it looks like you're just making a bunch of assumptions and pairing it with misleading information.

    Article just seems like its written all for the sake of hating on pixel before these phones have even had a chance yet.
    Reply
  • JudasD
    google has the pixel just right or else we wouldn't be buying it. this article reads like google needs to make their tires even rounder than the competition. sigh.
    Reply
  • onthecouchagain
    Yeah, I have to agree with others, I don't think this article does a good job at calling out Google for their very real shortcomings.

    We all know Google hardware is still catching up to the competition, and we all know their software is sometimes buggy (I call Pixel owners beta-users since they get the first batch of bugs along with that first software update), and these are all great things to call Google out on given the years of bugs we've seen on Pixel devices, but this article is click-bait and grasping at straws. Not a good look for AC.

    I'm all for calling Google out, but this doesn't do it, and actually obfuscates the real challenges and issues Google has.
    Reply
  • Ardrid
    There are plenty of other garbage websites out there if I wanted to subject myself to clickbait articles. I expect better from AC.
    Reply
  • jpalo
    Sometimes the problem isn't in the devices.
    Reply