Technology The 'Everything Google that isn't Android' thread

dilla

Trumpfan17 aka Coonie aka Dilla aka Tennis Dog
The Pixel Book is $720 near me for the 8/256 model.

I wish Android had a better selection of tablets. More importantly, I wish Google themselves released a Nexus tablet. No way people's 2013 N7s are still going on strong 5+ years later.
 

masta247

Well-Known Member
Staff member
I wish Android had a better selection of tablets. More importantly, I wish Google themselves released a Nexus tablet. No way people's 2013 N7s are still going on strong 5+ years later.
I think Android tablets are pretty much dead at this point. The Galaxy Tab S seems to be somewhat of a thing still due to the great display, but I've hardly seen or heard about anyone buying them. The hardware on Android tablets is actually weaker than on Smartphones, which is completely counter-intuitive and plain stupid. Maybe if they packed stronger chips (which the tablet form-factor allows due to a much larger battery and much better cooling) than flagship phones do, sort of like Apple does, it would make some sense again.

I hardly see any reason to purchase an Android tablet as is. iPads do tablet apps better and are in a completely different league in terms of performance, actually giving people reasons to get one in the first place.
 
Last edited:

dilla

Trumpfan17 aka Coonie aka Dilla aka Tennis Dog
I think Android tablets are pretty much dead at this point. The Galaxy Tab S seems to be somewhat of a thing still due to the great display, but I've hardly seen or heard about anyone buying them. The hardware on Android tablets is actually weaker than on Smartphones, which is completely counter-intuitive and plain stupid. Maybe if they packed stronger chips (which the tablet form-factor allows due to a much larger battery and much better cooling) than flagship phones do, sort of like Apple does, it would make some sense again.

I hardly see any reason to purchase an Android tablet as is. iPads do tablet apps better and are in a completely different league in terms of performance, actually giving people reasons to get one in the first place.

Well, these Android tablets are using smartphone processors, right? The iPad is too, but how are they still benchmarking slightly higher than the iPhones or even other Android devices? Must be the GPU that's different between the iPhone X and the iPad Pros?

I think Microsoft has the right idea with the Surface Book/Tabs. A proper desktop OS on device that's the size of a tablet. For those that prefer macOS, an iPad running macOS would be fantastic. I like iOS as it is, though. I've started editing PDFs on my Pro and have also designed some brochures/pamphlets using the templates on Pages. It works just fine, but I still prefer to do the latter on a desktop. But it works just fine on the iPad.
 

masta247

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Well, these Android tablets are using smartphone processors, right? The iPad is too, but how are they still benchmarking slightly higher than the iPhones or even other Android devices? Must be the GPU that's different between the iPhone X and the iPad Pros?
The iPad Pros are using larger versions of those mobile chips, with more cores, higher clocked and are also configured for higher TDP (They are basically allowed to use more power to reach higher performance), which is the logical choice, as any hardware maker uses higher performance chips in bigger devices with bigger batteries. You don't have to worry about throttling, excess heat trapped in a tiny smartphone case, or draining a tiny battery too fast, as tablet batteries are three times as large.
Any hardware maker other than Android hardware makers, who use old, mid-range smartphone chips in tablets. At this point I think the fastest Android tablet is equipped with a 3-year old Snapdragon 820.

The upcoming Galaxy Tab S4 will use the old Snapdragon 835. That's going to be significantly slower than their current phones, and very confusing.
 
Last edited:

dilla

Trumpfan17 aka Coonie aka Dilla aka Tennis Dog
The iPad Pros are using larger versions of those mobile chips, with more cores, higher clocked and are also configured for higher TDP (They are basically allowed to use more power to reach higher performance), which is the logical choice, as any hardware maker uses higher performance chips in bigger devices with bigger batteries. You don't have to worry about throttling, excess heat trapped in a tiny smartphone case, or draining a tiny battery too fast, as tablet batteries are three times as large.
Any hardware maker other than Android hardware makers, who use old, mid-range smartphone chips in tablets. At this point I think the fastest Android tablet is equipped with a 3-year old Snapdragon 820.

The upcoming Galaxy Tab S4 will use the old Snapdragon 835. That's going to be significantly slower than their current phones, and very confusing.

lol the 820 in my S7?

And yeah, I use my Pro like a notebook in short bursts and I never feel the heat. To be honest, neither did my Air, but it was obviously not as fast and responsive as the Pro.

Does Android have a note taking app? Notability and Good Notes are the two most popular iOS and macOS apps for note taking but I've been using the native Notes app Apple has put out and it is fantastic for literally just writing text. Those other apps offer shapes and charts and such but since I just write down patient notes and just things to look up, Notes does just fine.

It even makes my handwriting searchable. And I write like shit.

I don't know how Apple made the stock app as good as it is but even if Google just acquired some tech company that has a platform for decent note taking options and features, it may go a long way for students to look at the Android tablets that are cheaper.

Also, Apple updated their MBPs. Six cores, lol. I obviously have no need but it will be a year this weekend of owning my 15" MBP and I kind of feel butthurt at missing out on hexa core i9s. Very similar to my 2010 MBP and opting for the cheaper Core 2 Duo and then 2011 models turning the whole lineup in to i5/7s.
 

THEV1LL4N

Well-Known Member
They're also updating Duo, which is good. I think most people will just stick with Zoom anyway in the short and mid-term. Google should've been on it and opened Meet up to more people sooner and enhanced/promoted Duo earlier.

I like this advert though because it's effective and nice to see Google promote a service. Probably won't see it on TV though and will only be available on their YouTube channel meaning most people won't see it unless the explicit go onto YouTube.


I guess many laypeople won't know they mean by encrypted though. The graphics/filters make it easier for everyone to understand what demographic this is targeted towards (i.e. Duo being for casual, smaller groups while Meet is more enterprise-based).
 

masta247

Well-Known Member
Staff member
  • Has anyone got access to Google Meet?
  • Thoughts on the video conferencing platforms that are available to us?
  • What are you using?
We use Zoom and Skype for Business. Personally using WhatsApp and FB to get in touch with friends and family. I have to admit the last time I used Google's messenger was back in the days when they were force-installed with Android and I still remember the rage with which I attempted to get rid of them. Sour memories remained. The biggest obstacle today from my perspective is that nobody I know uses Meet, and that's always been the case with Google's messengers/video conferencing platforms.

I use the tools that others do, and actually kind of wish everyone just got onto the same one or two main platforms as I dread having too many messenger apps installed. I know it wasn't perfect, but I kind of miss the days when Skype was pretty much the only thing and everyone had to use that one to use video.
 
Last edited:

dilla

Trumpfan17 aka Coonie aka Dilla aka Tennis Dog
We use Zoom and Skype for Business. Personally using WhatsApp and FB to get in touch with friends and family. I have to admit the last time I used Google's messenger was back in the days when they were force-installed with Android and I still remember the rage with which I attempted to get rid of them. Sour memories remained. The biggest obstacle today from my perspective is that nobody I know uses Meet, and that's always been the case with Google's messengers/video conferencing platforms.

I use the tools that others do, and actually kind of wish everyone just got onto the same one or two main platforms as I dread having too many messenger apps installed. I know it wasn't perfect, but I kind of miss the days when Skype was pretty much the only thing and everyone had to use that one to use video.
I remember Messages being in a lot of custom ROMs for my S3 which were also TouchWiz based. So I'd have two messaging apps and every time I got a text I'd get double notifications. I'd have to uninstall Messages everytime I flashed a new ROM. And in the days of CM and nightlies, that was every few days via auto update and install.

Still haven't used Meet ever, or any video chat for a few years now. I may have FaceTimed my sister a few times while she was away but even the several Hangouts I'd do with college friends after we moved across the country came to an end a few years back and we just message daily on Hangouts.

I know, today's times are more business/work oriented reasons for using them but this might be one service I have no interest in. My sister used Zoom daily for her classes but those are finished now too. I picture the next few months being strictly businesses using video chat while the more casual users and educational use tapering off. We'll see how companies like Google or Zoom use this time. To either bring more features for the Fall semesters or to refine already existing services. Or do nothing and try to make more profits from it lol
 

Casey

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Yesterday I started my new job at a new startup where we're building the next generation of group messenger. Our founder sold his last startup to Yahoo for $30mill when he was 17 years old. So watch this space. It's the hardest market to crack but I think we have a fighting chance.
 

THEV1LL4N

Well-Known Member
Yesterday I started my new job at a new startup where we're building the next generation of group messenger. Our founder sold his last startup to Yahoo for $30mill when he was 17 years old. So watch this space. It's the hardest market to crack but I think we have a fighting chance.
It looks like a little Twitter or social media site within a Group Chat and it's got some good features. My one questions about it is, why would people want to have to download another separate app just for group chats that already take place in other apps like WhatsApp and Telegram? Are those features enough of an incentive? Google Allo had some great features but it was destined to fail because the average user does not care about all the cool useful features and it was too late to the game. I'm interested to see what Sphere can come up with.

Similar to how Facebook copied Google+ features, and how Instagram copied Snapchat features, competitors could deploy features from up-and-coming platforms to stop them in their tracks.
 

Casey

Well-Known Member
Staff member
There are many reasons but here's three:

1) WhatsApp sucks for group chat. It wasn't designed for it. It has very little helpful tooling to help manage groups, and lots of people won't use it because everyone's phone number is on display. Additionally, feature dev is basically non existent, tying profiles to phone numbers is considered old school, and there is a very strong chance FB will fill it with ads soon.

2) Platforms have a limited lifespan that is dependent on the mobile curve and pace of innovation. Or to put it simply, the apps that teens want to download and use now are not the apps that 20 years old want to use, are not the apps that 30 year olds want to use. And there are many other variables other than age. For example, having a good camera on a phone was a milestone moment that directly led to the creation of Instagram and Snapchat. There are more milestones like this to come, whoever leverages them to build a platform will build the next billion dollar app.

3) There is a culture shift happening towards companies that operate transparently and build features out in the open with their user community. Monzo is the best example of this, and with me having been there for nearly 4 years is essentially why I was hired to lead on similar efforts at my new job.

It could well be that we build something really cool with awesome features and a tight user community and we still fail at attracting millions of users. We are all fully aware of that - that's the risk of any startup. But we have enough of an investment from big VC firms to give it our best shot.
 

dilla

Trumpfan17 aka Coonie aka Dilla aka Tennis Dog
There are many reasons but here's three:

1) WhatsApp sucks for group chat. It wasn't designed for it. It has very little helpful tooling to help manage groups, and lots of people won't use it because everyone's phone number is on display. Additionally, feature dev is basically non existent, tying profiles to phone numbers is considered old school, and there is a very strong chance FB will fill it with ads soon.

2) Platforms have a limited lifespan that is dependent on the mobile curve and pace of innovation. Or to put it simply, the apps that teens want to download and use now are not the apps that 20 years old want to use, are not the apps that 30 year olds want to use. And there are many other variables other than age. For example, having a good camera on a phone was a milestone moment that directly led to the creation of Instagram and Snapchat. There are more milestones like this to come, whoever leverages them to build a platform will build the next billion dollar app.

3) There is a culture shift happening towards companies that operate transparently and build features out in the open with their user community. Monzo is the best example of this, and with me having been there for nearly 4 years is essentially why I was hired to lead on similar efforts at my new job.

It could well be that we build something really cool with awesome features and a tight user community and we still fail at attracting millions of users. We are all fully aware of that - that's the risk of any startup. But we have enough of an investment from big VC firms to give it our best shot.

That's really interesting, especially point #2 about capitalizing on reaching "peak-_____" and how Instagram took advantage of phone cameras reaching a point that made them competitive to point and shoots. I never thought of it that way or from that perspective.

I used WhatsApp many years ago because, funny enough, you told me about it. Maybe back in 2010 or 2011, whenever it first came out. It wasn't as popular in the US but I know the rest of the world farts on SMS while the US is still struggling to get RCS off the ground for Android. I think iMessage filled that void, but that's another story. But since Facebook bought out WhatsApp several years ago, I've had no inclination to use it. My desire was decreasing over time but that was the nail in the coffin for me; I just don't like the company and its practices despite how pervasive their analytics are in the other non-Facebook things that I do. So if they do start injecting ads, I'll be chuckling in the distance. It'll wither away with the younger, and even middle-age, crowd much like Facebook is currently doing.

The alternatives aren't as big, though. I know Discord is popular with gamers but even for discussion, it can get pretty hectic. It serves its purpose, but still for a specific group of people. It's a different kind of messaging app. Telegram, I heard, was great, but you need to convert everyone you know to using it, so good luck with that.

I still use Hangouts with several longtime friends. I'm sure I'm the only one they use the service for, but it's been going on nearly ten years with college friends and several others along the way. They still use WhatsApp for talking to everyone else.
 

Casey

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Does anyone have a smart security system such as Nest, Ring or anything else? Thoughts?
Yes.

I have two Nest cameras. One is built into the Nest Hub Max, so the viewing is of my living room. The other is currently pointing outside, as we've had some issues with our neighbours so the landlord wanted it there and he has remote access to it as well.

My smart home setup is currently:

Google Nest Hub (smaller one, no camera) - Kitchen
Google Nest Hub Max (larger one, with camera) - Living Room
Nest Indoor Camera (mounted on wall by window)
Google Home (original)
Google Home Max (Living Room, connected to TV via aux)
Google Home Mini (Spare Bedroom)
Lenovo Smart Clock (basically a mini Nest Hub, bedside table) - Bedroom
Nest Thermostat (Mounted in the hallway)
Philips Hue Bulbs (3 in the kitchen, one in the living room, one in the spare room)
Philips Hue Go x 2 (Bedside Tables in bedroom)

My TV is a 50" 4K Philips Ambilight - this has three rows of Philips Hue LEDs across the top and sides, the colours match in real time to what's happening on the TV. The Chromecast is also connected via HDMI-CEC, which means you can say "Hey Google, turn the TV off" and it'll do it.

I'd like to get a Smart doorlock, and a Nest Hello doorbell. The issue with the doorbell is that in the UK, Google won't replace it if it gets stolen, which they do in the US. But I may end up getting one anyway at some point - there's various skins and brackets which you can install them into to make them more covert.
 

THEV1LL4N

Well-Known Member
A few of my family members always go on about their Ring devices. I think Nest have the better like-for-like products but Ring have a better range. Really hope Nest can come up with more this year.

I've installed the Nest IQ Outdoor cam for the front driveway and will be doing the same for the back garden. Thinking of maybe installing a Nest Hello as well as that will alert us to who is at the door and will be at face level. But that might be overkill with two cameras at the front? I'll probably end up doing it anyway and replacing the Google Home Mini with a Nest Hub.

I purchased a wall mount for the original Nest Mini but it doesn't stay securely mounted now as people keep knocking things into it, which is annoying.
 

Latest posts

Donate

Any donations will be used to help pay for the site costs, and anything donated above will be donated to C-Dub's son on behalf of this community.

Members online

No members online now.
Top