Skip to main content

Google wants us to invest in an ecosystem we can’t trust

The Google Pixel 7, Pixel Watch, and Pixel Tablet all have something in common other than being Google-branded products with generic names. They’re part of an explicit attempt by Google to build a Pixel ecosystem of its own. The company wants to take on Apple and Samsung by luring people in with the idea that by buying Pixel devices and using Google services, they can have a similar experience as someone buying an iPad, an iPhone, and AirPods.

It’s a hard sell. Google’s new Pixel products don’t exist in a vacuum. They exist in a world where Google has attempted various iterations of its ecosystems ‘for real this time’ before scuppering them. It also comes weeks just after Google disbanded the Pixelbook and Stadia teams without warning. It also comes with the company’s now standard slew of quality control issues. An ecosystem is built on trust, but Google has torched its reputation over and over.

Related Videos

Google’s product-killing reputation means it has no trust

Stadia controller
Rich Shibley/Digital Trends

Google’s propensity for killing off products has turned it into an online meme. The Killed By Google site chronicles services the company has championed before dumping. It reached levels of self-parody hitherto unseen when the company killed off its Pixelbook division, only then to champion a large-screen Pixel experience. This happened the same week it killed off its Stadia cloud gaming service and then pushed out premium cloud gaming-focused Chromebooks just two months after emphatically denying it would ever do so.

Both incidents underline the point that simply because a product line appears to be an invaluable part of Google’s strategy, that doesn’t protect it from being canceled. That is fatal to an ecosystem play. Now, a new report from The Information claims that Google is diving into hardware full-throttle to beat back Apple. I wouldn’t hold my breath.

Follow-up is important

Google Pixelbook Go keyboard
Riley Young / Digital Trends

Buying into an ecosystem also requires some sort of follow-up. You need to have the confidence that when your product breaks 3 to 5 years later, there’s a new one that’s 3 to 5 years better. Even Microsoft, for all its flaws, has provided that with Surface. There’s no guarantee there’ll be a Pixel Watch 2 next year or even the year after, nor is there the same for a Pixel Tablet 2. 

If we do hone in on that Pixel Tablet point, it’s also worth noting that the existence of the Pixel Tablet in fact highlights that failure to follow up. Google launched the Pixel C, failed to follow up on it, and immediately pivoted to Chrome OS tablets. The company launched the Pixel Slate, failed to follow up, and pivoted back to regular clamshell laptops. How did that go? You guessed it — Google failed to follow up on it and pivoted to tablets four years later. How much confidence should one have in Google following up on the Pixel Watch a year or two from now based on that track record?  

To be very fair to Google, it’s kept at Pixels longer than one would expect given their market performance, but one has to imagine the bean counters are getting increasingly nervous.

It’s not early days anymore

Malarie Gokey/Digital Trends

The other part of trust also comes down to the hardware itself. Google has the habit of tossing in one game-breaking flaw in otherwise excellent devices, as a treat. Whether it be the limited RAM of the Pixel 3 series, the poor batteries of the Pixel 4, or the heating issues with Pixel 6 and Pixel 7, the company is reliable in its unreliability.

There’s the defense of Google that these are growing pains for a company starting out. It’s the company’s first smartwatch, it’s never done its own processor before, it has a small retail footprint. Those are Google’s problems, not ours. If its smartwatch is not as good as what currently exists on the market, then it is not as good. If Tensor is inferior to current processors in terms of efficiency, power, and thermals, then it is inferior.

The Google Pixel 7 Pro standing up.
Joe Maring/Digital Trends

If the Pixel is having quality assurance issues with software and hardware, then it is having QA issues. Certainly, there are good reasons to delve into why these issues are being experienced for those inclined to be sympathetic or analytic — but those are neither here nor there. For those spending real money, it’s trivial.

To wit, Google’s ecosystem is combined with very good ideas. The Pixel Buds A and Pixel 6a work well together. If it had finally rolled out Chrome OS’s Android integration, that would be another piece of the puzzle. If Android tablets had Android 13 en masse, that’s yet another piece. And yet, I can’t help but feel that a fun part of buying into the Google ecosystem is not knowing which puzzle piece will be taken off the board for some shiny new picture. It’s ultimately Google’s world, and you’re just living in it.

Editors' Recommendations

The Google Pixel Fold may not be as expensive as you thought
Alleged renders of the Google Pixel Fold in black.

Google’s long-in-development foldable phone — the Pixel Fold — is reportedly eyeing a late June launch. A recent leak predicted that the Pixel Fold will hit the European shelves priced at 1,700 Euros, which equates to roughly $1,800 based on current conversion rates. That’s not easy to digest, especially for a first-gen foldable phone and considering Google’s own shaky history with its Pixel hardware and software.
But it appears that the Pixel Fold’s price won’t be inexplicably exorbitant at all. Leaker Yogesh Bear shared on Twitter that the foldable phone could actually cost anywhere between $1,300 and $1,500. Assuming that turns out to be true, the Pixel Fold could undercut the Samsung Galaxy Fold 4 and its successor by a healthy $500.

In fact, such an asking price would put the Pixel Fold in roughly the same ballpark as the higher storage configurations of phones like the Galaxy S23 Ultra and Apple’s iPhone 14 Pro Max. Of course, Google won’t be able to match the asking price of foldables from Chinese brands, but it would at least look competitive in the Western markets.
Now, a price of around $1,300-1,500 makes a lot of sense. First, the biggest deterrent for foldable phones is their high asking price. There’s a reason Samsung managed to sell bucketloads of its flip-style foldable phones because they cost nearly half vis-a-vis the phone-tablet hybrids in the Galaxy Z Fold series.

Read more
Google Pixel 8: all the latest rumors and what we want to see
Google Pixel 8 leaked render.

The Google Pixel 8 and Pixel 8 Pro are on their way. Google's fallen in a pretty reliable release pattern for Pixel phones, meaning we can safely expect a new lineup of flagship Pixels each year. In 2023, that means the Pixel 8 and 8 Pro.

The Google Pixel 7 and Pixel 7 Pro are two excellent devices -- possibly two of the best smartphones Google has ever made. But while they have some serious strengths, a number of problems and missed opportunities drag both phones down. This wouldn't be a problem if the competition was standing still, but it's not. The Apple iPhone 14 Pro refreshed the iPhone design for the first time in years, and the recently released Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra is quite possibly one of the best smartphones ever created. So what's a humble Pixel to do?

Read more
Qualcomm’s new Snapdragon 7+ Gen 2 is big news for cheap phones
Hand holding up a smartphone against a city background with Qualcomm Snapdragon7+ Gen 2 logo.

Qualcomm has taken the wraps off its Snapdragon 7+ Gen 2, the next generation of its midrange mobile platform. The new chip is designed to deliver powerful entertainment experiences and performance gains to a broader range of smartphones.

The new platform is an evolution of last year’s Snapdragon 7 Gen 1, which was already a leap beyond the older Snapdragon 700 series it replaced. It began closing the gap with the premium Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 — a trend that continues with this year’s Snapdragon 7+ Gen 2.

Read more