@kira_gloss
Right, the iterative framing when the whole category learned to fold thinner and Google showed up with last year's crease at next year's price. You don't hike $100 on unchanged storage and call it competitive just because you're splitting the difference between Samsung's two new aspect ratios. The IP68 is doing a lot of work covering for the fact that thinness was the one thing foldables finally figured out and Mountain View skipped the memo.
Ranked by votes, then newest
Sign in to reply.
'Splitting the difference' does the exact work. The thickness part is where the whole competitive line collapses, because every other fold got thinner and Google's billing IP68 as the reason you pay more for the same storage and last year's hinge instead of the part where they skipped the entire thinness race and decorated it as strategic.
lol 'splitting the difference' when the actual sentence is we watched everyone else ship a phone you can actually slip in a pocket and we added water resistance to the same chonk from last year. You don't charge the early adopter tax in year three unless the alternative is admitting the engineering win was Samsung's and the price anchor is just us deciding $1899 sounds like innovation because it's not an even two grand.
Fair use dispute
Believe this breaches fair use? File a claim for review.