Google Dog and the Apple Balancing Act (Credit: Megan Victoria Crehan)

Let me be clear. The Pixel 2 is a great phone. It is the first phone I ever pre-ordered. As soon as I watched the keynote, I knew that was it: I found my phone for the next two years. There were jaw drops, there was drool, and there a wink to me as a Project Fi costumer.

Despite all of that, it wasn’t exactly love at first sight. The Pixel 2 is definitely good enough to keep me happy for a long time, but there’s this “it’s almost perfect!” thorn at my side. I have two “but why, Google?” questions that I can’t put to rest, and even though both topics were discussed to death, I still don’t buy it. Here you go:

The Price Tag

The Pixel 2 is still a pretty affordable phone, especially with all the deals going on from Verizon and the like. I myself benefited from Google’s trade-in program, and it’s also possible to pay a monthly fee instead of coughing out $650 all at once. But the Pixel 2 shouldn’t just be semi-affordable; it should have been the phone everyone could buy.

The Pixel 2 could have been Google’s re-entry to every single home around the country, perhaps even the world. It should have been the obvious choice to the degree that would shake up Samsung and Apple. But it isn’t. Instead, it’s still an expensive phone that competes with other trusted brands, fighting for more ground.

As some teardowns around the internet show, the first generation Pixel XL costs around $300 to make. While this is an estimate, and no similar Pixel 2 teardown is available (that I could find), it is probably safe to assume that manufacturers charge at least double the cost of what the phone costs to customers. In the case of the iPhone X, for example, Apple is making approximately $600 on every unit sold.

Yes, $650 is currently a fair price tag for a flagship phone like the Pixel, but what would have happened if Google was to charge $500 for the device? Think about it. How many people would get the phone, and how many more would continue to purchase the phone (and buy into Google’s brand) after the initial launch? A device that is really geared for the masses. Google could also use cheaper materials, like (gasp!) plastic, which can be made to look good and at the same time, is more durable than aluminum or glass. Glass… One of the things I’d never understand is the hype around pretty and fragile materials that force people to buy a case that looks like its intended to stop bullets. But I digress. The point is that the investment will pay many times over. it’s a famous trick from Amazon’s book which works well. Not to mention, with Apple selling its flagship for a grand, Google could add it to their anti-Apple marketing campaign.

The Earphone Jack

Speaking of Apple envy, to me, the missing earphone jack is the biggest insult in the new Pixel. Remember last year’s “3.5 mm headphone jack satisfyingly not new” thing? Google’s first Pixel phone was a copy of Apple’s selling strategy (including price), but proudly, not the jack. This year, in a usual ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Google fashion, the jack is out. And it stings, not so much because I need it so badly (you try to futz around with a wire while balancing yourself in a busy subway car, or on the elliptical at the gym, and tell me how much you like wires) but because it feels like Google's words are (again) empty of any lasting value. And that feeling is not new, unfortunately.

Sentiments aside, think about what it would mean to have a flagship phone from Google that still has a jack. To defy Apple’s no jack policy? this could have been huge. It would shake fans worldwide, in a good way. Instead, Google is following Apple’s lead like a beaten dog: “OK, OK, I guess the world moved forward and no one likes the jack anyway… What was that, John? Can’t hear you, too much wax in my ears.”

The Pixel 2 is meant to be useful, not pretty. It’s everything Google: from Google’s strategy in doing thing, to the marketing, to how Google services work and how customers use Google. It’s a device that is meant (or should be meant) for the general public, not for an urban high-class who can shell out $1000 for a fragile glass jewel. Instead of imitating Apple yet again, Google could have triumphed in its own game: usability and price. Instead, we have a phone that is useful in any possible way, except when you actually need to buy it. Or charge it and listen to YouTube Red at the same time. It’s such a contrast to everything else good on the phone, and it’s a damn shame.