Pixel 10a is a textbook definition of the “e-waste” we don’t need in the world

[Redaktion]

The Pixel 10a isn't a bad phone, but should it exist in the first place? This minimally updated rehash of the Pixel 9a struggles to show its value as discounted rival options steal the spotlight, and concerns about electronic waste get louder.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Pixel-10a-is-a-textbook-definition-of-the-e-waste-we-don-t-need-in-the-world.1256311.0.html

[sbinalla]

This is embarrassing opinion piece that I wouldn't expect from NotebookCheck.

[Johnf]

How many  from a pixel of 9a to a 10a? I just jumped from a pixel 7 to an 11. That's over 4 years of changes and it's noticable.

Perhaps that's the market google intends. People who buy  lower cost phones aren't as interested in fancy features as replacing a phone they've probably had for years, either because it's broken or just getting too old and slow.

[Daniel001]

An extremely baffling opening angle that sunk my opinion of notebookcheck overnight. In a world where e-waste really matters,  calling a perfectly good phone with 7 years of OS and security updates e-waste simply because it's "not different enough" from last year is truly irresponsible, anti-consumer behavior and and only contributes negatively to the discussion.

[Keep going, well done]

This is embarrassing opinion piece that I wouldn't expect from NotebookCheck.

Lmao, I was about to say I like this new contributor, Martin Filipov. It's been a long time since I agreed with any Checkmag article. Pretty much the majority of the posts they do I agree. ^_^

[markiz]

maybe calling it e-waste is not really well thought through. Because as someone said, most will not be upgrading from 9A, but from older ones.
Nevertheless, and it's not just google at blame here, releasing something just so you can say it's "new", when it is in fact nothing new worthy of mention, is despicable. But we consumers are to blame.

Google is an awful hw designer, and they are a-holes for keeping basic functionality down, just because they can't innovate, so they have to keep some strategic reserve. Like, maybe next year (or the year after that?) they increase battery to 6000 (when competition will already be at 8000 or 10000) and call it an upgrade.

[VaruLV]

Some butt hurt Google fans/bots here complaining about article and the message it conveys :D!
I totally agree with the author.
And its not Google, its, as he mentioned, other big players in the market that do this every year, again and again, while ever so slightly rising prices with zero benefits to customer.
Calling out manufacturers has been long overdue, glad someone is doing it.

[In agreement with author]

Daniel001, did you even bother reading the article properly?

He literally states he still uses a iPhone 13 pro.

He shares this frustration with apple too. The difference is that apple has marketshare so they can afford being complacent but Google don't with the pixel.

I will say marketshare is regional like in Japan apparently Pixel do very well, but even there iPhone still dominates and is number 1.

Having "fake" competition doesn't mean anything if all they do is do nothing and barely compete at all. Samsung just sits their blatantly copying apple. You cannot blame Chinese OEMs when they see another Asian OEM do the same and get away with it.

[Njorr]

What an embarrassing opinion, either the author is completely out of touch or it's just a piece to rage bait.

[Daniel001]

Daniel001, did you even bother reading the article properly?

He literally states he still uses a iPhone 13 pro.

He shares this frustration with apple too. The difference is that apple has marketshare so they can afford being complacent but Google don't with the pixel.

I will say marketshare is regional like in Japan apparently Pixel do very well, but even there iPhone still dominates and is number 1.

Having "fake" competition doesn't mean anything if all they do is do nothing and barely compete at all. Samsung just sits their blatantly copying apple. You cannot blame Chinese OEMs when they see another Asian OEM do the same and get away with it.

What does any of this have to do with e-waste, can we get back on topic

[N.]

rotfl, it appears this 'intense and broad discussion' includes A LOT FEWER participants that the number of nicks might suggest :)