At the heart of Google’s new marketing campaign is a razor sharp jab at Apple:
3.5mm headphone jack satisfyingly not new
That headphone jack is an ingress point for water. Obviously, that’s a problem that can be solved (as Samsung does), but Google chose not to, and made a point of chastising Apple for going down that road.
Google is pouring on the marketing here. Spend a few minutes with the official Pixel page. Is this hype, or is this progress?
UPDATE: This is one of those posts where I just shouldn’t have hit enter. Lots of pushback, deservedly so, but we don’t delete posts, so all I can do is say I’ll try to do better.
How does Apple “water-resist” the lightning port then? How is that more resistant than the headphone jack? (seriously asking, I’d like to know!)
Hasn’t Samsung been making phones for a while though that are both water resistant and yet still have a 3.5mm headphone jack?
I mean, that’s a counter argument that keeps coming up whenever water resistance is brought up as a reason for Apple removing the 3.5mm headphone jack on the iPhone 7…
You guys at the Loop are better than this. This is just sloppy work honestly. There are MANY manufacturers who have phones that have both a headphone jack AND are water resistant with even higher ratings than the iPhone 7’s water ratings… So please don’t equate this phone having a 3.55 standard port to it not being able to have water resistance in some off hand attempt to justify Apple’s move to remove a ubiquitous standard port that is used by many many accessibility devices and all sorts of other devices. Don’t love Apple so much that you willfully compromise your integrity and lie to your readers. You are better than that and I for one will not continue to be a reader here if this nonsense continues.
Main ingress point for water isn’t the headphone jack, which is relatively easy to seal. The most difficult ingress to block off is the screen.
“Higher ratings than the iPhone 7’s water ratings”
You know the manufacturers make their own water resistance claims, right? Its not like the Note 7, which is IP68, was tested by a standards body and proven to perform better underwater than the iPhone 7’s IP67 rating.
Because all the testing I’ve seen has shown the iPhone 7 outperforming the Note 7 in water submersion tests. Apple chose an IP67 rating, because Apple wanted to be more conservative. Samsung chose an IP68 rating. IP ratings exist primarily for marketing purposes. Its not some grade given to a product after extensive testing by water submersion authorities.
Since Gundotra’s 2010 attack on Apple as Big Brother, I don’t see their marketing as especially strategic, informative, endearing or smart. A string of mostly-relevant shots that the fanboys like, and approximately zero guide to where they’ll be heading next year.
Dropping the “Nexus” name is but a tiny example of lack of strategy or even continuity. Omitting water-proofing, which has both costs & benefits, is somewhat incidental to the game.
If Apple can make wireless earphones as good as they made the replacement of Flash years ago, Google will have yet again claimed prime real estate at the old highway that was re-routed outside of town.
This is marginally off topic, so sorry in advance; but I’ve had my 7Plus for about a week and honestly don’t miss the headphone jack at all. I haven’t really given it a second thought. As far as the PIXEL Phone goes..eehhh good luck with it.
I agree with almost everything you said, but I would not really second the “IP ratings are for marketing purposes” idea… Most people have no clue what these ratings even mean. The rating IP68, without a specific indication of the maximum pressure that can be sustained, is almost meaningless since it does not even include a ceiling (well, bottom) for submersion. All the “8”means is: submersion below 1 meter up to a specific pressure. For all we know it could be 1.01 meters and the same pressure as a device rated IP67.
These ratings have a meaning in industrial applications where engineers write proper specifications. They are not for an audience that makes up nonsense like “nits”, just because they are too dumb to even pronounce Candela per square meter (which actually means something concrete und understandable) properly, or those considering “carb” the same thing as carbon dioxide…
Maybe the mechanical home button, but I highly doubt the headphone jack is any bigger an ingress than lightning or mini-USB. For example, the Samsung S5 was waterproof. IT required a cover on the mini-USB port, but not the headphone jack. The headphone jack is a red herring being thrown out to defend its removal.
Is it just me or does the Pixel’s lack of water resistance make this Google Photos ad much more ironic? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Al4nZThwZY
I hear ya. Maybe I didn’t say it right. I don’t mean it like marketing mumbo jumbo. I mean, the IP rating system was developed to give a clear and defined metric to communicate a products water resistance capabilities. Rather than in the olden days, simply calling something “waterproof.”
I see google have made an iPhone
The same way they would “water-resist” the headphone jack, had they kept it. There’s nothing magical about the lightning port. The iPhone 7 is only more water resistant because it has one less ingress point, one less spot to worry about waterproofing. It’s like saying it’s “twice as loud” because it has two speakers. It’s more water resistant because it has less holes.
Actually the iPhone 7 is louder because you can turn the volume up to 11.
Why didn’t they just make ten be the top number and make that a little louder?
Or a very close (much closer, anyway) approximation of one.
These go to 11, it’s one louder isn’t it?
You couldn’t be more wrong. If you actually look into the design specs of the lightning port it actually was designed to be waterproof. The pins are resistant to corrosion and will not short if water goes inside the port. The headphone jack was not designed to be water proof.
The lightning port it actually was designed to be waterproof. The pins are resistant to corrosion and will not short if water goes inside the port. The headphone jack was not designed to be water proof.
I said Apple could add water resistance to the headphone jack the same way they made the lightning port water resistant. That’s not wrong. Or are you suggesting that there’s no way they could redesign the headphone jack so the “pins are resistant to corrosion” and so it won’t “short if water goes inside?” Because that is wrong.
They could have modifyied the headphone jack to resist water but why should they is the better question I guess. The adapter that comes with the iP7 works fine for those who need it. I’m sure waterproofing wasn’t the only reason to remove the headphone jack. Also, it was interesting to see a video on youtube where a guy put an iPhone 7 and Samsung S7 in deep water. Even though the S7 technically has a better waterproof rating it failed when the iPhone 7 was still working fine. Also note the S7 has that extra ingress point of the headphone jack. You can see that video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K05cTPeFfyM
“They could have modifyied the headphone jack to resist water”
So then I wasn’t wrong. Thanks for the confirmation.
Haha. My original comment was that you were wrong about the lightning port not being special. Not that the headphone jack couldn’t be made waterproof. The headphone would need to be modified. The lightning port does not because it was designed to be waterproof. So you’re still technically wrong. Sorry not sorry.
I actually said there’s nothing “magical” about the lightning port. And that’s not wrong, water resistance isn’t magic.
I wanted to make another point. In the link to that video you said, “note the S7 has that extra ingress point of the headphone jack” as a reason for it’s failure. Well, that supports what I said in my initial post; “The iPhone 7 is more water resistant because it has less holes.”
Maybe I shouldn’t have started with the “you couldn’t have been more wrong” part of my comment because it seems to have sparked something in you that NEEDS to prove that you are 100% correct. I think it’s safe to say that if I omitted that first line in my initial comment this whole back and forth would probably gone very different. I honestly don’t care about this anymore. Apple got rid of the headphone jack. It’s better for waterproofing the phone and probably other reasons like space saving and design symmetry. Whatever. Deal with it.
I agree that if you hadn’t said “You couldn’t be more wrong” it wouldn’t have gotten this far. In fact, I probably wouldn’t have even responded because without that line your post is good information that adds to the discussion. Weird, huh?
Hope I didn’t ruin your day by making you angry at some stranger on the internet.
Lol. I’m good. Same to you.