Size Shouldn’t Matter (Premium)

There are different ways for smartphone makers to differentiate their flagship models. But size shouldn't be a prerequisite for other features, as it is so often.

Case in point, the newly announced Google Pixel 7 series, which just started shipping to the first customers this week. When you examine the Pixel 7 and Pixel 7 Pro series side-by-side, there are several notable differences between the two: the Pro has a larger (and curved) display, a larger battery, more RAM, and a telephoto lens, and it supports one major feature, Macro Focus, that isn’t available on the lower-end Pixel. Those differences are the justification for the $300 difference between the two smartphones: the Pixel 7 starts at $599 and the Pixel 7 Pro starts at $899.

This is a mistake because Google is tying the availability of certain features to the size of the display. Instead, Google should sell two sizes of its Pixel flagships, as it did when the brand first launched in 2015, that are only differentiated by screen size (and, related to that, battery size). That is, a bigger size isn’t “pro.” A bigger size is just bigger. Features can be pro.

My biggest issue with Google’s current differentiation scheme is, of course, the camera. And I know what at least some of you are thinking: the telephoto lens that is unique to the Pixel 7 Pro is exactly what I’m asking for, a unique feature. But this is Pixel we’re talking about here. Google should own smartphone photography and offer a consistent camera experience across its flagship devices. At the very least make it an option. That’s what Apple does, after all.

And not including a telephoto lens on the Pixel 7 isn’t about that device’s smaller size: there is plenty of room in the Pixel 7’s gigantic camera bar for that third lens. In fact, aside from the display and battery differences, the other Pixel 6 Pro differentiators are all arbitrary.

Also, Google already sells an a-series handset, currently the Pixel 6a, that satisfies the need for a non-Pro Pixel, something that can compete head-to-head with Apple’s non-Pro iPhone 14. They’re about the same size and have the same basic camera system. Why saddle the Pixel 7 with less?

Well, cost. But this is likely where Google’s inability to sell Pixel at volume is harming its customers, a situation that we see repeated with Microsoft’s Surface lineup, another low-volume wonder. Where Apple (usually) sells iPhone Pro and Pro Max models that are identical save display (and battery) size, Google is forced to be thriftier. And its customers are saddled with the results.

Yes, there are other frustrating differences between the Pixel 7 and Pixel 7 Pro. For the second year in a row, the less expensive, non-Pro Pixels are available in better colors---lemongrass, snow, and obsidian---than the Pro variant, which comes in hazel, snow, and obsidian. Even the Pixel 6a has better color choices: sage, chalk, and charcoal. Here’s an idea: offer ...