A few weeks ago, I told you about (among other things) the iPhone 16e, Apple’s latest “entry-level” smartphone and the pricier successor to the three-generation iPhone SE series:

I couldn’t resist noting that Google had responded to Apple’s news with a (temporary, as it turned out) price cut on its (then-)latest-generation entry-level smartphone, the Pixel 8a, to $399. That said, I’d already suspected (rumor-aided) that this likely wasn’t just a competitive counterpunch. Google was probably also doing some inventory-clearing in advance of a pending unveil of its own next-gen entry-level smartphone, presumably to be called the Pixel 9a.

The Pixel 9a reveal

I was right; this year Google didn’t even wait until the late May I/O conference to reveal it (that said, in retrospect the haste may not have been wise). Behold the Pixel 9a, which starts at $499:

and which (currently, at least) comes in four color options:

I chose the above image not only because it shows the color variants but because it also highlights one of the key differences between the Pixel 9a and its most recent three generational precursors. Look, for example, at the backside of the Pixel 8a:

Beginning with the Pixel 6 family, Google had switched to a backside style that grouped the camera (or multi-camera cluster), scene-illumination flash LED, microphone, and other related sensors into a horizontal raised bar, continuing that same style with “a” variants. With the Pixel 9a, conversely, Google seems to have returned to the (near-)flush approach exemplified by, for example, the Pixel 4a 5G handsets I owned prior to my current Pixel 7s:

I dunno why…mebbe the raised-bar approach made them more breakage-prone? Or mebbe they wanted it to look like an iPhone? Regardless, per Aalyia’s request , here’s a broader comparison table of the most recent two “a” generations, as well as the Pixel 9 introduced in-between them late last summer (to keep things simple, I left out the two Pixel 9 Pro variants):

Pixel 9a observations

Several particularly interesting bits jump out at me:

• As I’d mentioned late last summer, Google had originally only planned for Gemini deep learning support to be enabled for the Pixel 8 Pro with 12 GBytes of RAM; the company subsequently developed a “Nano” variant of Gemini capable of being shoehorned into the 8 GBytes of RAM in other Pixel 8 versions. So, you might assume that the Pixel 9a, also with 8 GBytes of RAM, would also be Gemini-cognizant. And you’d be right…except this time, Google’s referring to the Gemini version as “Gemini Nano 1.0 XXS (extra extra small)”. Then again, the version available for Pixel smartphones with 12 GBytes or more of RAM is no longer just “Gemini Nano”, it’s “Gemini Nano XS (extra small)”. My guess as to what’s happening is just some rebranding of what already exists; as baseline Gemini becomes more feature-filled, the need to differentiate it from the version(s) running on phones and other resource-constrained devices therefore becomes more necessary.
• The selective mixing-and-matching within each device’s SoC is interesting. The Pixel 9a gets the Pixel 9’s CPU and other processing subsystems, but the cellular modem is a generational backstep, reverting to what was in the Pixel 8s (and 7s, for that matter). The modems and CPUs listed in this particular table are actually all fabricated on 4 nm Samsung processes, but I’m guessing that everything’s not integrated within a single die. Instead, the CPU and modem die are likely side-by-side (or alternatively sandwiched) within a common package, simplifying the mix-and-match process. Keep in mind, too, that whereas Google (generally speaking) is more forthright about its phones’ specs than is Apple, neither company publishes clock speeds. While my table shows the maximum documented speeds of various processing cores, it’s not guaranteed that they run at that speed in a particular system-implementation configuration.
• In many respects, the Pixel 9a is the latest in a long line of handsets derived from their earlier-announced, fuller-featured generational siblings. It swaps out the Pixel 9’s glass-and-aluminum frame back for plastic, for example, and its wireless charging support is conventional in power, therefore speeds, not “supercharged”. That said, there were some surprising deviations from usual form. The Pixel 9a is the only one of the three to explicitly list as features both optical and electronic image stabilization, for example, for its rear wide-angle camera. And its wired charging power-therefore-speed was nearly as fast as that of the Pixel 9, as well as being a significant improvement on the Pixel 8a.
• Further comparing the Pixel 9a to its direct forebear, the Pixel 8a, the aforementioned rear wide camera, for example, has also decreased in resolution by 25%, although both image sensors have equivalent 0.8µm pixel pitch (i.e., light-gathering capability). Plus, the new camera’s maximum aperture is larger, for improved low-light performance, further aided by the already-noted enhanced image stabilization support. The Pixel 9a offers slightly improved dust and moisture resistance than its Pixel 8a predecessor, too. That said, curiously, the 256GB version of the Pixel 9a costs $40 more than the 256GB Pixel 8a, $599 versus $559, although the 128GB versions of both handset generations are identically priced at $499.
• And check out that comparatively sizeable battery in the Pixel 9a versus either of the others! It’s particularly impressive given that the Pixel 9a is still lighter than the Pixel 8a. But what’s with the charge capacity variability; multiple battery suppliers, mebbe?

Pixel 9a vs iPhone 6e

Speaking of comparisons (and of Apple), how does the Pixel 9a stack up against the iPhone 16e? This analysis is simultaneously easier (from a hardware standpoint) and harder (from a usability perspective). Specs first; the Pixel 9a has (for example):

• A lower price tag ($499 vs $599, in both cases for versions with 256 GBytes of storage)
• A slightly larger display (6.3” diagonal versus 6.1”) with a 2x higher peak refresh rate (120 Hz versus 60 Hz), albeit at slightly lower resolution (1080 x 2,424 pixels/421ppi vs 1,170 x 2,532 pixels/460 ppi)
• Two rear cameras versus one, and
• A ~25% larger battery (5,100mAh versus 4,005mAh), along with
• Slightly more advanced Wi-Fi (6E vs 6) and Bluetooth (6 versus 5.3)

And now that Apple has indefinitely delayed the more personalized aspects of its Apple Intelligence capabilities, Google (with Gemini) has an advantage here as well, conceptually, at least. The thing is, though, AI doesn’t yet seem to be tangibly propelling smartphone sales. More generally, the fierce loyalty divide between Android and iOS users is akin to that between “blue” and “red” states. Take my household as an example; although originally a periodic “switcher”, I’ve settled on Android for a while now, although my tablets run iPadOS. Conversely, paraphrasing Charlton Heston, my wife would likely only give up her iPhone if you pried it from her cold, dead hands. And speaking of “indefinite delays”, Google (presumably driven by a decision made at the last pre-launch minute) is no longer saying exactly when the Pixel 9a will start shipping (only a nebulous “April”, and isn’t even yet accepting pre-orders for the handset, all due to an unspecified “component quality issue”.

Swollen battery

Maybe the problem’s with the battery? I jest (maybe), in transitioning (in closing) to the “distended” portion of this piece mentioned in the title. Long-time readers may remember that back in September 2020, I mentioned that in-parallel (fortuitously) with their replacement by Pixel 3as, my original Google Pixels were beginning to exhibit swollen-battery symptoms:

Well, look at what I noticed a couple of weeks ago on one of my Pixel 7s:

Lest you think that’s just an artifact of the case or the screen protector, here’s a “naked” view:

The left-side swell isn’t as pronounced:

which makes sense when, as iFixit’s teardown guide makes clear, you learn that the battery’s placement is right-side dominant:

This was my “work” phone, which was used less often (therefore spent more time just sitting trickle-charging) than its “personal” sibling. And although I had Adaptive Charging enabled, I hadn’t taken the extra step of limiting the peak charge point to 80% of total capacity.

Plus, the phone (purchased in June 2023) was beyond its one year of factory warranty support. That said, I’d fortunately also purchased Asurion’s 36-month extended warranty coverage at that same time. This writeup’s already in “extra innings”, so I’ll save the rest of the (good ending, mind you) story for another post at another time to come. Until then, please share your thoughts on what I’ve so-far discussed in the comments!

—Brian Dipert is the Editor-in-Chief of the Edge AI and Vision Alliance, and a Senior Analyst at BDTI and Editor-in-Chief of InsideDSP, the company’s online newsletter.

Related Content

• The Apple iPhone 16e: No more fiscally friendly “SE” for thee (or me)
• The 2024 Google I/O: It’s (pretty much) all about AI progress, if you didn’t already guess
• A holiday shopping guide for engineers: 2022 edition
• Cracking the case of a smartphone and its unfairly crack-accused case
• Playin’ with Google’s Pixel 7

The post Google’s Pixel Smartphone Line: Extended and…Distended? appeared first on EDN.

Source link