Good note. Funny how many users are mentioning price as their main reason for dismissing the Pixel

> Funny how many users are mentioning price as their main reason for dismissing the Pixel

It's easy to make an excellent phone to retail for $700.

It's much less easy to make a good phone to retail for $300.

This means that a lot of people, probably the majority, have to make-do with sub-par, or second-previous-generation from eBay, or order something from the Chinese market.

Hence the cynicism when Google unveiled yet another $700 phone. It's like another 200 mph supercar from Bugatti, pretty to see and technically fantastic but irrelevant to the market as a whole. Next time Google, how about taking-on a challenge?

I think Google is forced to charge $649 because of their relative experience in hardware, which exacerbates their already high labor cost. Perhaps they could've charged $499, but it would've resulted in an accounting loss.

Perhaps the next iteration of Pixel will be cheaper as they ramp up on hardware expertise and reign in on cost.

> relative experience in hardware, which exacerbates their already high labor cost

But everyone in the thread is saying Google didn't really manufacture it and it's just a rebranded HTC device

iphones are expensive for most people

Parent means dismissing it as an iPhone competitor, I assume.

To be fair the iPhone build quality and hardware design look like a premium product. This looks like a chinese knockoff

Oh those funny poor people trying to not get ripped off.