c/android · by BookSwiftieAndrew@kbin.earth · 1y

Leaked codenames unsurprisingly suggest Pixel 9a and four Pixel 10 phones in 2025

https://9to5google.com/2024/09/16/google-pixel-10-codenames-2025-report/

According to a new report, Google's 2025 lineup of Pixel phones unsurprisingly includes five new devices in line with this year's batch.

44 points · 24 comments · view on lemmy.world

24 Comments

dinckelman@lemmy.world · 43 pts · 1y (22 replies)

[ removed ]

n2burns@lemmy.ca · 8 pts · 1y (20 replies)

I don't really see any downsides to annual phone releases. For those people who want to upgrade every year, they can, for everyone else, you upgrade when you want to and you get a pretty new phone. I definitely agree the improvements for slab phones has slowed down a bunch, but there are still pretty big leaps in foldables, etc.

SuperCub@sh.itjust.works · 14 pts · 1y (1 reply)

There's no need for this consumerism. Is wasteful and unsustainable.

burgersc12@mander.xyz · 0 pts · 1y

[ removed ]

Ilandar@aussie.zone · 8 pts · 1y (16 replies)

[ removed ]

n2burns@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 1y (15 replies)

If you're upgrading your phone every year, that is a personal choice. Plus, most people who do that trade-in/sell their old phone which gets used by someone else.

GoodEye8@lemm.ee · 3 pts · 1y (14 replies)

Trade ins and selling old phones doesn't really reduce e-waste. What reduces e-waste is manufacturing less phones.

n2burns@lemmy.ca · 0 pts · 1y (13 replies)

That's empirically untrue. If people are selling their used phones and not keeping more than one phone (which definitely happens, but is unrelated to this point), then the exact same number of phones would be produced as if everyone bought new and only put them in e-waste when they were broken/obsolete.

GoodEye8@lemm.ee · 2 pts · 1y (10 replies)

Are you stupid? Let's say we have 1000 people and they all want the latest phone, all manufactured phones get bought and everyone sells their old phones. And phones don't break.

Scenario 1: Every year 200 new phones get released.

Year 1. 200 most willing to pay the highest price buy a new phone, 800 are without a phone
Year 2. The same 200 buy the latest model and sell their old one. The next 200 get the "new" used phone. 600 are without phones.
Year 3, 4 and 5 I imagine are self-explanatory. By the end of year 5 everyone has phone.
Year 6. The most willing buy the 200 new phones and sell their old phone. The next group buy the previous group phones and sell their current phone. The last group has nobody to sell to because nobody wants their phone. 200 phones go into e-waste.
Year 7. Goes like year 6 except now there's a total of 400 phones in e-waste.
Year 8, 9 and 10 follow the same pattern. By the end of year 10 there 1000 phones in e-waste.
Year 20. By the end of the year there will be 3000 phones in e-waste.

Scenario 2: 100 phones get released (to better stimulate the real world because someone is going release a phone anyway, but you can also imagine 200 phones releasing every 2 years as the numbers will the same for every even year).

Year 1. 100 people get a phone.
Year 2. 100 people buy the new phone and sell the old one. 100 people buy the old phone.
Years 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 are the same pattern. By the end of year 10 everyone has a phone
Year 11 the first year phones go into e-waste because nobody wants them. Total 100 phones in e-waste.
Year 12 the next 100 phones go into waste. Total 200 phones in e-waste.
Years 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 are the same pattern.
Year 20. By the end of the year 1000 phones are e-waste.
Year 40. By the end of the year 3000 phones are e-waste.

It literally cannot be empirically untrue because what I said is mathematically true. Let's say that in both scenario 1 and scenario 2 at the end of year 50 they decide to throw away all phones and never create another phone again. In scenario 1 there would be 10 000 e-waste phones. In scenario 2 there would be 5000 e-waste phones. The more you create the more waste will come down the line. If you want less waste, make less phones.

And before you go "but recycling?" only about 20% of e-waste gets recycled and the recycling process doesn't recycle all the waste.

yuri@pawb.social · 3 pts · 1y

It’s like people really think “reduce reuse recycle” is LITERALLY ALL IT’S GONNA TAKE. 1 year upgrade cycles are just as bad as fast fashion for how quickly they produce GARBAGE.

n2burns@lemmy.ca · 0 pts · 1y

Why would you make your scenario supply constrained? Your argument is simply if we sold less phones, less would go to e-waste, and duh. That wasn't debate, it was whether releasing new phones every year was wasteful vs new phones being released every 2-3 years.

Your scenario also assuming people buy used or they just don't have a phone. People who buy a used phone generally do so instead of buying a new phone.

Ilandar@aussie.zone · 0 pts · 1y (1 reply)

[ removed ]

n2burns@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 1y

I completely agree with your comment. I was only responding to the claim, "Trade ins and selling old phones doesn’t really reduce e-waste."

GenderNeutralBro@lemmy.sdf.org · 6 pts · 1y

In theory, phones would be cheaper if they had longer shelf life.

Similarly, we don't need new cars every year, but the beast must be fed, right? Right?!

blackn1ght@feddit.uk · 2 pts · 1y

It's not like you have to upgrade your phone every year. People are on different upgrade cycles in which these devices will be a big upgrade.

potentiallynotfelix@lemdro.id · 1 pts · 1y (8 replies)

pixel is literally becoming the iphone

n2burns@lemmy.ca · 7 pts · 1y (1 reply)