Bloomberg reviews Google’s Pixel 4: Can’t beat Apple’s iPhone 11; blends into the crowd of iPhone wannabes

Google's Pixel 4, with a "Face Unlock" feature that unlocks the phone even if the user is asleep, cannot compete with Apple's entry-level iPhone 11, much less iPhone 11 Pro and iPhone 11 Pro Max
Google’s Pixel 4, with a “Face Unlock” feature that unlocks the phone even if the user is asleep, cannot compete with Apple’s entry-level iPhone 11, much less iPhone 11 Pro and iPhone 11 Pro Max

Vlad Savov for Bloomberg:

Google’s Pixel smartphones have always been defined by iPhone-beating cameras, backed by the know-how of its software coders. With the release of the Pixel 4, however, the company has lost its lead — through a combination of Apple Inc.’s iPhone 11 camera improvements and its own lack of progress.

Alphabet Inc.’s Google is selling the Pixel 4 through all four major U.S. wireless carriers for the first time. And it’s priced like a premium device: the 5.7-inch Pixel 4 starts at $799 and the 6.3-inch Pixel 4 XL costs $899. That’s at least $100 more than the iPhone 11 but without software like iMessage that many Apple users consider a social imperative in the U.S.

With the iPhone 11 and 11 Pro, Apple closed the photography gap with better low-light image quality. Its camera software also makes those photos easier to take by automatically enabling night mode when required. Apple remains way ahead of any other phone maker when it comes to video quality.

Both Pixel 4 devices have worse battery life than their 2018 predecessors, and both dramatically lag comparable iPhone 11 models.

Google’s longer-term aspirations for its smartphone line remain unclear, more than three years into the initiative.

MacDailyNews Take: Well now, there’s a nice, honest review. How refreshing!

Google’s Pixel 4. Inferior cameras. No iMessage. Slower processor. Poor battery life. Flop.

It’s only a matter of time before Google loses interest and unceremoniously pulls the plug as usual.


    1. iOS – there was nothing like it on the planet. You have seen those images of before and after the iPhone? Before… HUGE variety. After… everything looks like an iPhone, right down to the icons.
      iPad – Windblows tablets were a total flop… and had WINBLOWS, a rip-off of MacOS.
      Apple Watch – again, nothing like it on the planet, until Apple.

    2. Not sure what’s more desperate, the list itself what with all its embarrassing apologies for the mediocricy of most of those feature applications and/or lack of anybody noticing others at all, through paucity of sales. Or your attempt at obscuration by supplying the link at all just in annoyance no doubt, to lamely cover the embarrassingly negative revue of your hero’s phone.

      Let’s be honest to find 15 (often simplistic) examples of prior features amongst 4+ other companies is pretty easy, if a desperate tactic and of course obscures the fact that you could find far more numorous examples of them copying Apple, and notably even more if you chose each one of those companies and compared how they copied off of the other mentioned companies including Apple, a lot fairer set of comparisons … If you were objective but far less convenient when you have a rather sad point to prove. We would be here all day if they did either of those more objective possibilities I mention of course. Now I wonder actually why anyone would be inspired to pursue this Apple v the rest message at all unless they had a very subjective motive… or maybe just jealous or a hate fuelled grudge perhaps. The clue is probably in the ‘PC’ perhaps.

    3. I find it amusing that one of those claims is full desktop browsing. . . Apple iOS has always supported full desktop browsing in Safari. It is not Apple’s fault that websites force a mobile device to be sent a crippled mobile version of their website. Safari can always force a full desktop version of that website by merely holding down the reload button and selecting full desktop version. That full website experience was present in the original iPhone in 2007. The ANDROID phones could not do it until they copied it from Apple. Get your history correct.

  1. The bed wetters just can’t handle this kind of article that points out relevant and interesting facts. Thank you PC Apologist for the link. (How dare I thank a poster using “PC” in their handle).
    Apple has always “pulled” technology from other companies and made it better. The examples are numerous…iPod, iPad, iTunes, and even Apple’s #1 $$ maker.

    Picasso reportedly stated, “good artists borrow, great artists steal.” Some have interpreted this to mean, the great steal the idea and make it their own…borrowers recreate a mirror-like version that doesn’t propel the idea forward…there’s is essentially a copy. Apple’s “stolen” ideas are almost ALWAYS better than the source. AAPL “appropriates” other’s ideas and technology and the result leave other’s in their wake.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.