Since its inception, the Pixel phone's exposure history has been glorious, with almost every generation of Pixel being widely exposed before its official release. From hardware design to software features to market pricing, they have become hot topics for tech media and consumers.
The earliest Pixel and Pixel XL had detailed leaked information before release, including phone design drawings, configuration parameters, and operating system highlights. Subsequent generations of Pixel phones, such as Pixel 2 and Pixel 2 XL, were no exception. Months before release, hands-on videos of test units were circulating wildly on YouTube.
The Pixel 3 series was even dubbed one of the "most leaked phones in history". ### In the months leading up to its release, information about the Pixel 3 and Pixel 3 XL was almost all-encompassing, from high-definition real photos to complete unboxing videos, and even Google's official protective cases and accessories were leaked in advance. Despite this, Google still brought many surprises at the launch event, especially in terms of software features and photography technology innovations.
For recent generations of Pixel phones, including the Pixel 6, Pixel 7, and Pixel 8 series, hardware configuration and design leaks remain serious. ### But in recent years, Google has started shifting the focus of Pixel towards AI and software services, and the impact of "hardware leaks" has begun to gradually decrease.
For example, in July 2024, ### Google directly "officially leaked" by publishing "official large images" of the Pixel 9 Pro and Pixel 9 Pro Fold on the Google Store, which is considered "completely giving up" on the issue of leaks.
Unimpressive Hardware Configuration
Of course, Google's "giving up" was only to reveal the appearance of the two phones. As for the actual hardware configuration, Google chose to continue "keeping it secret" until August 13. However, just because Google doesn't announce it doesn't mean people don't know. According to existing leaked information, ### the Google Pixel 9 series will offer four models: Pixel 9, Pixel 9 Pro, Pixel 9 Pro XL, and Pixel 9 Pro Fold. In terms more easily understood by everyone, this is similar to the "medium, large, extra-large" and foldable models commonly seen in domestic phone brands.
Among them, the Pixel 9 is equipped with a 6.1-inch 1080P+ 120Hz screen, ### adopts the fourth-generation Google Tensor processor, offers 8+128GB and 8+256GB storage options, and uses a rear dual-camera module. The Pixel 9 Pro features a 6.5-inch 1080P+ 120Hz screen, also uses the Tensor G4 processor, adopts a rear triple-camera module including a periscope lens, and offers 128GB, 256GB, and 512GB storage options.
The Pixel 9 Pro XL's hardware configuration matches the 9 Pro, only with the screen enlarged to 6.7 inches, and also offers a 1TB capacity version. Interestingly, for the Pixel 9 Pro Fold, although this is Google's second Pixel foldable phone, ### Google has still directly included it in the Pixel 9 product lineup, seemingly intending to make the Pixel Fold, a product that tested the waters, "official".
In terms of appearance, ### the Pixel 9 Pro Fold maintains the "large rounded corners" design left by the Pixel Fold, with a large radius of curvature even on the small-sized outer screen, resulting in consistently low area utilization. Interestingly, in the preview video released by Google, the Pixel 9 Pro Fold does not have an inner screen camera. ### If this is not an animation rendering error, the Pixel 9 Pro Fold is likely to use an under-screen camera.
Additionally, in this preview video, ### Google also "demonstrated" Gemini's AI capabilities, such as generating corresponding text based on user requests (writing a breakup letter to an old phone), showing that Google is very confident in the AI performance of the Pixel 9 series.
However, the question is, ### can excellent AI features change the "all-around lag" of Pixel phones from hardware performance to software experience?
Why is Pixel Lagging Behind?
The "all-around lag" of Pixel, in my opinion, is both an internal product line issue and an external environment issue.
First, compared to the scale of Google's internal "former HTC team", domestic phone brands obviously invest more in personnel and technology. Taking Huawei and Xiaomi as examples, these brands' investment and research efforts in foldable screen technology far exceed Google's. ### The Mate X, Mix Fold, Find N, X Fold, and Magic V all have deep technical accumulations in hinge structures, and after multiple iterations, manufacturers have their own understanding of durability and crease handling for foldable screens. Naturally, the effects of these technical accumulations presented in the final products are much better than the Pixel Fold.
In comparison, Google's Pixel series seems relatively slow in exploring foldable screen technology. Although the Pixel series performs well in cameras and software optimization, Google is clearly behind in hardware innovation, especially in foldable screen technology. ### Taking the Pixel Fold as an example, its "inherited large bezels" don't even look like they belong to the same era as domestic foldable screens.
Moreover, user experience optimization is an important factor in the success of domestic brands. Domestic brands have done a lot of work in improving user interface interactions and optimizing multitasking functions. ### For example, Huawei's multi-window function and Xiaomi's split-screen function greatly enhance user experience. These brands have made foldable phones not just a technological gimmick but truly practical devices through constant user feedback and improvements.
Although Google's Pixel series has its unique aspects in Android system optimization and software experience, and also "debuts" many new features of the Android system, it has invested relatively less in multitasking and split-screen functions, making Pixel series users unable to experience the smoothness and convenience of other brands when using foldable screens.
Not to mention the unimpressive hardware performance of Google Tensor. Since its launch, the performance of the Tensor processor has been constantly questioned. ### Although Google attempts to optimize the AI and machine learning capabilities of Pixel phones through customized SoCs, in actual use, the Tensor processor appears inferior to competitors in terms of multi-core performance, energy consumption, and graphics processing capabilities.
To put it more bluntly, the AI-focused Pixel is becoming increasingly out of touch with reality in terms of hardware.
Closed-door "Machine" Making is Not Advisable
In fact, for Google Pixel's closed-door car-making strategy, the remedy is also very simple: ### no longer be bound to the incorporated "former HTC team", and return to the era of Nexus "contending powers".
Before the launch of the Pixel series, Google had collaborated with multiple brands to launch the Nexus series phones, such as Samsung, LG, Huawei, and Moto. ### Through cooperation with these brands, Google not only "gained" hardware manufacturing experience and market influence but also successfully set benchmarks for the Android ecosystem.
Of course, canceling the Nexus program and launching its own Pixel brand ### was also driven by Google's desire to incorporate technical teams and create its own high-end Android phones to compete with Samsung's Galaxy series in the global market. However, the problem is that the current smartphone market is no longer something Google can control with GMS.
From hardware optimization to core algorithms, ### to the application of AI large model technology, the "strong software, weak hardware" Pixel can no longer meet user needs.