Critical response In early reactions, three aspects particularly piqued commentators' interest: the Pixel 8 Pro's temperature sensor, Google's promise of seven years of updates, and the heavy emphasis on AI. The temperature sensor drew varied reactions: some found it a potentially useful novelty, while others were bewildered and dismissed it as a strange gimmick. The response to Google's seven-year pledge was similarly divided: several journalists welcomed the move, hailing it as astonishing and monumental; others questioned whether Google would fulfill its promise.
The Washington Post Chris Velazco opined that the phones reflected "a deepening obsession with AI", with
The Verge Jon Porter describing the launch event as "a parade of AI", observing that the phrase "AI" had been invoked over fifty times. As the Pixel 8 was "the first mainstream phone to bake generative AI directly into the photo creation process at no extra cost", computer science professor
Ren Ng at the
University of California, Berkeley described it as a pivotal milestone in the area of imagery. Nicole Nguyen of
The Wall Street Journal raised concerns with the implications of the Pixel 8's
photo editing features, fearing that it could lead to an influx in "
fauxtography", the malicious manipulation of photographs. The AI features themselves received mixed responses. Writing for
Wired, Julian Chokkattu expressed excitement that these features, hitherto limited to those proficient with image or
video editing software, were now being made accessible to a wider audience; Ben Sin of
XDA Developers found them "fun and scary". Porter felt that some of the features showcased were unnecessary, concluding that Google was continuing to attempt to reassert its position as a leader in AI after ChatGPT's meteoric rise earlier that year had
caught Google executives off-guard. Also writing for
The Verge, Allison Johnson described the features as "complicated and messy", while her colleague Jay Peters contemplated the question, "What is a photo?" Reviews were largely positive, though
Mashable observed a prevalent discontent with the phones' battery life, temperature sensor, and higher prices. Writing for
The Guardian, Samuel Gibbs praised the phones' affordability and build quality, while
Digital Spy Jason Murdock highlighted their cameras, performances, and displays. Chokkattu was thoroughly impressed by the phones' AI features, but was less pleased with the battery life and Face Unlock system.
PCMag Iyaz Akhtar echoed these sentiments, while June Wan of
ZDNET and Daniel Howley of
Yahoo! Finance also emphasized the usefulness of AI.
Marques Brownlee thought the phones were a mixed bag, finding the AI features a hit-or-miss.
CNN Underscored reviewer Max Buondonno offered glowing praise of both phones.
The Verge Allison Johnson was more skeptical, finding the AI features "useful [but] troubling", lamenting the higher prices, and questioning Google's seven-year-update promise. Mark Knapp of
IGN appreciated the phones' modest hardware and performance upgrades, but felt they were inferior to
Samsung's latest Android phones. Ron Amadeo of
Ars Technica commended Google for abandoning curved screens in favor of a flat one, as well as praising its commitment to Tensor and software updates; however, he lambasted the Pro's temperature sensor as "embracing the worst of junky smartphone gimmicks".
Forbes staff writer Rebecca Isaacs deemed the phones "a solid choice for casual users".
Commercial reception Ryan Reith, an analyst at the
International Data Group, predicted that Google could achieve higher sales numbers "if supported by strong marketing", considering its emphasis on AI. An
opinion piece published in the
Financial Times was headlined: "Price, not AI, will lift [the] Pixel's market share". Multiple publications have labeled the phones Google's latest subdued effort to compete with Apple's dominant iPhone sales. == References ==