Sorry, this offer has expired. Set up a deal alert and get notified of future deals like this. Add a Deal Alert

Expired Hot Deals

Sorry, this offer has expired.
Set up a deal alert and get notified of future deals like this.
Set up a Deal Alert
Google.com

$400 off Pixel 3($599 for 64GB) and Pixel 3XL($729 for 64GB)

  • Last Updated:
  • Dec 29th, 2019 9:54 pm
Deal Fanatic
Jan 18, 2010
7725 posts
5238 upvotes
Canada
Vote with your wallet. I did.

Get a Pixel 3a or Galaxy S10e if you really support headphone jacks. People like to complain, but still continue to buy phones without one.
Sr. Member
Feb 21, 2003
779 posts
211 upvotes
I would go with the S10e if I could root it and install a custom rom, but doesn't look like it's possible.
Sr. Member
User avatar
Feb 2, 2015
824 posts
442 upvotes
hostlead wrote: I would go with the S10e if I could root it and install a custom rom, but doesn't look like it's possible.
This. Honestly I hate how so many phone makers/telecos are making rooting harder and harder these days, while at the same time always gets months behind on the Google patches.

+ Google offer free replacement program once for one of the older Pixels if your phone is broken, but only if you bought it through Google store.
Deal Addict
Dec 16, 2010
1096 posts
1354 upvotes
Canada
spammy wrote: This. Honestly I hate how so many phone makers/telecos are making rooting harder and harder these days, while at the same time always gets months behind on the Google patches.

+ Google offer free replacement program once for one of the older Pixels if your phone is broken, but only if you bought it through Google store.
That's very interesting about replacement. Both my and my wife's pixel 3 xl cracked very easily so we sold them for quite a loss. There is no stock for replacement screens/backs and it's very expensive. I would want to look into that more.

Great phone but bulky and I like the S10+ significantly better if you can find a good price.

I like the vanilla android and support but was really not impressed with the durability of this model. The pixel 2 xl was quite a bit better.

Incredible camera though. Also, I find the pixel phones are not holding their value as well as they used to for some reason.

Decent deal though OP. Thanks for sharing.

Edit: So indeed it looks like if you add the preferred care to your cart, it discounts the phone the $129 to make it free. I highly recommend it on this phone anyway. This makes the deal quite nice and the 0% financing is an interesting option as well. Thanks OP.
Deal Addict
Aug 18, 2013
1119 posts
1184 upvotes
AB
Always blows my mind when people talk as if you need to remove the jack to get features that every phone with the jack inherently has.

Nevertheless pixel 3 might the one of the ugliest phone ever.
Deal Addict
User avatar
May 13, 2005
2286 posts
1631 upvotes
Toronto
bylo wrote: Why is latency an issue for listening to audio? (Watching videos without lip-synch issues is another matter.)

Most modern smartphones have an aptX codec available. It's in Developer Options in Android so it's not widely known. My 3-year old OP5 has both aptX and aptX HD.

While BT does add to battery drain, from what I can see it's a trivial amount.
Latency for video/games as you mention. For music only it is not an issue of course.

The smartphones have the codec supports but the audio device have to support it too. For example, there are only roughly 30 headphones that support AptX LL. https://www.aptx.com/products?field_apt ... ry_tid=125

Trivial amount of battery drain is still a drain and I'm thinking more on the earpod/headphone side. My wireless earpod lasts 3h and the common Apple Airpods lasts 5-6h.

My point still stands, you can have both BT and a headphone jack. It's not as if the inclusion of a headphone jack prevents BT.
Deal Addict
May 1, 2013
2703 posts
1399 upvotes
Toronto
Pixel 4 will come out earlier this year.. Still think s10 is better
Deal Addict
Feb 4, 2017
1585 posts
2129 upvotes
Toronto
papperboo wrote: So this phone requires a ucb-c charger but no headphone jack so you need to also carry a microusb charger for your wireless headphones. brilliant.
If you have true wireless earbuds, wouldn't you be carrying the charging case with you anyways? At least that's what I do. Pixel 3 with Soundpeats true wireless earbuds and 35hrs charging case.
Deal Fanatic
Nov 6, 2018
7988 posts
11548 upvotes
DarkReaper wrote: Why is having an option to hear music in better quality not make sense to you?

On top of the audio quality is latency and battery. I don't want to have my phone drain even faster, or not be able to listen to music because my headphones died out. Latency is a bigger issue, as the majority of BT audio devices out there do not support AptX, let alone AptX LL. The standard SBC codec has a latency of 150ms-250ms.

BT and headphone jacks don't have to be mutually exclusive options.
Because if I'm trying to listen to hq music it's not going to be off of a phone.

For majority of people convenience is a much higher priority.

Idk everyone is still convinced that Bluetooth is trash for listening to music.
Unless you have a pair of headphones that cost the price of 5 pixels you can't tell the difference, especially when you're not in a closed room environment like a house or office where at that point you can have a proper headset connected to a proper amp and it's own device where you can listen to HQ music files.

People aren't buying phones theses days to be able to listen to 1500KBPS Super high quality lossless music, most phones don't even support the level of quality any real audiophile is after.

If your phone battery is draining faster it's not because of Bluetooth, it's because you're listening to music and most likely doing other things on it at the same time.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Aug 6, 2001
17811 posts
5762 upvotes
Stuck in a Box
Ireojimayo wrote: Are there deals on buying the 3a outright because its now only $50/$80 less
It's selling, so no need for them to push it more.
Sr. Member
Jun 9, 2019
772 posts
906 upvotes
Gtaphotog wrote: Idk everyone is still convinced that Bluetooth is trash for listening to music.
Unless you have a pair of headphones that cost the price of 5 pixels you can't tell the difference, especially when you're not in a closed room environment like a house or office where at that point you can have a proper headset connected to a proper amp and it's own device where you can listen to HQ music files.
Objectively false, it doesn't take much of a price difference to have better sound quality. In fact if you just took the money Airpods cost and swapped in any other equivalent set at that price point you'd immediately notice better sound quality. You don't have to spend hundreds and hundreds of dollars to appreciate better sound quality.

It's quite simple, the vast majority of those who care about audio are not purchasing phones without headphone jacks.
Deal Addict
User avatar
May 13, 2005
2286 posts
1631 upvotes
Toronto
Gtaphotog wrote: Because if I'm trying to listen to hq music it's not going to be off of a phone.

For majority of people convenience is a much higher priority.

Idk everyone is still convinced that Bluetooth is trash for listening to music.
Unless you have a pair of headphones that cost the price of 5 pixels you can't tell the difference, especially when you're not in a closed room environment like a house or office where at that point you can have a proper headset connected to a proper amp and it's own device where you can listen to HQ music files.

People aren't buying phones theses days to be able to listen to 1500KBPS Super high quality lossless music, most phones don't even support the level of quality any real audiophile is after.

If your phone battery is draining faster it's not because of Bluetooth, it's because you're listening to music and most likely doing other things on it at the same time.
I listen to HQ audio off my phone. And HQ doesn't have to be " 1500KBPS Super high quality lossless music" but as simple as Spotify Premium, a common service people use.

A convenient thing I do is watching movies on the go. Outside of certain apps, such as Youtube, which has latency compensation, you will have audio delay.

My headphones is $200 (B&W P7W) and I can tell the difference using AptX and SDC. I'm not saying you need to be running an audiophile setup with Tidal on a phone.

Just because you are unable to hear the difference doesn't mean others can't, and you are missing the point entirely here. All of your points are irrelevant as to why a headphone jack needs to be removed. We can both have our cakes and eat it.
Deal Fanatic
Nov 6, 2018
7988 posts
11548 upvotes
Oomani wrote: Objectively false, it doesn't take much of a price difference to have better sound quality. In fact if you just took the money Airpods cost and swapped in any other equivalent set at that price point you'd immediately notice better sound quality. You don't have to spend hundreds and hundreds of dollars to appreciate better sound quality.

It's quite simple, the vast majority of those who care about audio are not purchasing phones without headphone jacks.
When I'm out and about I rather have the convenience of not having things get tangled and be able to throw one earbud in if needed.

If I want to listen to HQ music I'll go home and use a proper headset and an amp.

Why aren't people complaining about cars another vehicles, why can't we be able to play lossless HQ uncompressed audio in our vehicles?
Well maybe because there's a time and a place and specific devices for specific things.

I seriously don't understand why it's so hard to comprehend that phone manufacturers aren't trying to shove every little feature possible in a phone so every human on this planet can have everything they want when they want it.


If you so desperately need HQ lossless uncompressed audio all the time then do something about rather than constantly complain how there's no headphones jack etc.

You've seen other small companies make a phone from nothing and now those phones are some of the most popular in the world, anyone can do it so why don't you?
Deal Fanatic
Nov 6, 2018
7988 posts
11548 upvotes
DarkReaper wrote: I listen to HQ audio off my phone. And HQ doesn't have to be " 1500KBPS Super high quality lossless music" but as simple as Spotify Premium, a common service people use.

A convenient thing I do is watching movies on the go. Outside of certain apps, such as Youtube, which has latency compensation, you will have audio delay.

My headphones is $200 (B&W P7W) and I can tell the difference using AptX and SDC. I'm not saying you need to be running an audiophile setup with Tidal on a phone.

Just because you are unable to hear the difference doesn't mean others can't, and you are missing the point entirely here. All of your points are irrelevant as to why a headphone jack needs to be removed. We can both have our cakes and eat it.
I mostly listen to music with wireless earbuds but occasionally use a proper set of headphones and while I agree I can hear the difference it's not remotely worth it for any manufacturer to continue down that path for small amount of people who want it.
I'd rather have fast wireless charging and good Bluetooth over having cables running to and from my phone if I don't have to.


I'm sure you can still find a phone or two being sold that has a decent amp built-in but then that same phone probably has a horrible screen or other trade offs.

The world we live in now is going in a direction where their making one cake for everyone to have a piece of, it's cheaper and more efficient for them.
Deal Addict
Aug 18, 2013
1119 posts
1184 upvotes
AB
Gtaphotog wrote: When I'm out and about I rather have the convenience of not having things get tangled and be able to throw one earbud in if needed.

If I want to listen to HQ music I'll go home and use a proper headset and an amp.

Why aren't people complaining about cars another vehicles, why can't we be able to play lossless HQ uncompressed audio in our vehicles?
Well maybe because there's a time and a place and specific devices for specific things.

I seriously don't understand why it's so hard to comprehend that phone manufacturers aren't trying to shove every little feature possible in a phone so every human on this planet can have everything they want when they want it.


If you so desperately need HQ lossless uncompressed audio all the time then do something about rather than constantly complain how there's no headphones jack etc.

You've seen other small companies make a phone from nothing and now those phones are some of the most popular in the world, anyone can do it so why don't you?
you are hopelessly missing the forest for the trees, but because you want to do that doesn't have anything to do with whether you should be able to deprive the right of others to wants to use a headphone jack. I have some decent BT headphones but i will still use wired for everything other than when i shovel the driveway or something.

Arguing for BT is not not an argument for more features, only a deprevation of options, and it comes from a standpoint of pure greed to sell mediocre accessories without improving any aspect of the phone.
Deal Fanatic
Nov 6, 2018
7988 posts
11548 upvotes
nuclearhot wrote:
you are hopelessly missing the forest for the trees, but because you want to do that doesn't have anything to do with whether you should be able to deprive the right of others to wants to use a headphone jack. I have some decent BT headphones but i will still use wired for everything other than when i shovel the driveway or something.

Arguing for BT is not not an argument for more features, only a deprevation of options, and it comes from a standpoint of pure greed to sell mediocre accessories without improving any aspect of the phone.
What I'm trying to say is that manufacturers don't give a shit if you and I want to listen to HQ audio on their devices because majority of their customers rather convenience of Bluetooth and other newer features over having a headphone jack.

Airpods wouldn't be such a popular thing if that wasn't the case.
You think every single airpod user doesn't enjoy hardwired HQ audio?

It's just the way the market is going.
Manufacturers apparently think that there's less of a need for headphone jacks these days because Bluetooth audio is such a popular thing.

Most of the phone manufacturers themselves make wireless earphones and sell them at prices over $100 easily so why would they stop now?


One of the biggest reasons people love Samsung is because they managed to keep the headphone jack plush have all the other features phones have but as you can see with the upcoming Note 10 even Samsung is stopping with the headphone jack.
Last edited by Gtaphotog on Aug 4th, 2019 2:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sr. Member
Jun 9, 2019
772 posts
906 upvotes
Gtaphotog wrote: You've seen other small companies make a phone from nothing and now those phones are some of the most popular in the world, anyone can do it so why don't you?
Oh I do my part, I simply don't buy phones that don't have headphone jacks. Easy. I vote with my wallet and through using word of mouth.

Remember when Apple claimed headphone jacks would impair waterproofing? I do, then Samsung proved them wrong with the newer Galaxy models. Your points are moot that phones cannot be made with headphone jacks and existing feature sets. They are being removed for no other primary reason than to save money. The market will eventually shift, but they are way ahead of the curve. I will gladly switch to wireless when low latency, high quality codecs are ubiquitous. But the obvious problem is that they are not, so I use wired headphones/earbuds when I really want to dig in to my music. That's not to say I don't have wireless options, I enjoy my Jabra Elite Active 65t truly wireless earbuds a ton as well as my noise cancelling Sony MDR-1000X. However, the latter has a wired 'backup' that actually tends to have better sound quality.

So it's not a gimmick and you've been fooled if you think it is.
Deal Addict
Aug 18, 2013
1119 posts
1184 upvotes
AB
Gtaphotog wrote: convenience of Bluetooth and other newer features over having a headphone jack.
there is no "over" aspect here, i have already have the "convenience" of "lack of there of" of BT headphones, which is why i don't use them, They aren't offering anything more by removing the jack.
Deal Fanatic
Nov 6, 2018
7988 posts
11548 upvotes
Oomani wrote:
Oh I do my part, I simply don't buy phones that don't have headphone jacks. Easy. I vote with my wallet and through using word of mouth.

Remember when Apple claimed headphone jacks would impair waterproofing? I do, then Samsung proved them wrong with the newer Galaxy models. Your points are moot that phones cannot be made with headphone jacks and existing feature sets. They are being removed for no other primary reason than to save money. The market will eventually shift, but they are way ahead of the curve. I will gladly switch to wireless when low latency, high quality codecs are ubiquitous. But the obvious problem is that they are not, so I use wired headphones/earbuds when I really want to dig in to my music. That's not to say I don't have wireless options, I enjoy my Jabra Elite Active 65t truly wireless earbuds a ton as well as my noise cancelling Sony MDR-1000X. However, the latter has a wired 'backup' that actually tends to have better sound quality.

So it's not a gimmick and you've been fooled if you think it is.

I'm not saying phones can't be made with headphones jacks, I'm saying manufacturers don't want to make phones with headphone jacks anymore because they don't need to and because they make more money by selling their overpriced wireless headphones/earphones.
Last edited by Gtaphotog on Aug 4th, 2019 2:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Deal Addict
User avatar
May 13, 2005
2286 posts
1631 upvotes
Toronto
Gtaphotog wrote: What I'm trying to say is that manufacturers don't give a shit if you and I want to listen to HQ audio on their devices because majority of their customers rather convenience of Bluetooth and other newer features over having a headphone jack.

Airpods wouldn't be such a popular thing if that wasn't the case.
You think every single airpod user doesn't enjoy hardwired HQ audio?

It's just the way the market is going.
Manufacturers apparently think that there's less of a need for headphone jacks these days because Bluetooth audio is such a popular thing.

Most of the phone manufacturers themselves make wireless earphones and sell them at prices over $100 easily so why would they stop now?


One of the biggest reasons people love Samsung is because they managed to keep the headphone jack plush have all the other features phones have but as you can see with the upcoming Note 10 even Samsung is stopping with the headphone jack.
And yet the same manufacturer has a headphone jack on the Pixel 3a.

Top

Thread Information

There is currently 1 user viewing this thread. (0 members and 1 guest)