The Ultimate Budget Battle: Pixel 9a vs. Nothing (3a) Pro vs. Samsung A56 vs. iPhone 16e
Selecting a mid-range smartphone can be a complex decision, especially when balancing performance, design, and long-term value. The Pixel 9a, Nothing Phone 3a Pro, Samsung Galaxy A56, and iPhone 16e each bring distinct strengths to the table. Whether you're upgrading your current device or purchasing a first smartphone, understanding the differences between these models is essential for making an informed choice. The video below from Pete Matheson gives us more details on the handsets.
Watch this video on YouTube. Pricing and Trade-In Options
Price is often the first factor to consider when comparing smartphones, as it directly influences affordability and value. Here's how these models compare: Pixel 9a: Priced at $499, it offers some of the best trade-in deals, significantly reducing the upfront cost for those upgrading from an older device.
Priced at $499, it offers some of the best trade-in deals, significantly reducing the upfront cost for those upgrading from an older device. Nothing Phone 3a Pro: Slightly more affordable at $449, but it lacks trade-in options. However, it compensates with higher RAM and storage configurations, offering better value for performance-focused users.
Slightly more affordable at $449, but it lacks trade-in options. However, it compensates with higher RAM and storage configurations, offering better value for performance-focused users. Samsung Galaxy A56: Matches the Pixel 9a at $499 but provides fewer trade-in incentives, making it less appealing for those looking to offset costs.
Matches the Pixel 9a at $499 but provides fewer trade-in incentives, making it less appealing for those looking to offset costs. iPhone 16e: The most expensive of the group at $599, with limited trade-in offers for non-Apple devices, making it a pricier option unless you're already part of the Apple ecosystem.
If affordability and trade-in value are priorities, the Pixel 9a emerges as the most cost-effective option, while the Nothing Phone 3a Pro offers a competitive price for users who prioritize storage and RAM. Design and Build Quality
Smartphone design is a subjective aspect, catering to individual tastes and preferences. Each model offers a unique approach to aesthetics and build quality: Pixel 9a: Features a frosted back and aluminum rails, combining durability with a premium feel that appeals to users seeking a minimalist yet sturdy design.
Features a frosted back and aluminum rails, combining durability with a premium feel that appeals to users seeking a minimalist yet sturdy design. Nothing Phone 3a Pro: Stands out with its transparent back and glyph lighting, offering a bold and futuristic look. However, its bulkier build may not suit users who prefer compact devices.
Stands out with its transparent back and glyph lighting, offering a bold and futuristic look. However, its bulkier build may not suit users who prefer compact devices. Samsung Galaxy A56: Offers a polished aluminum design with a conventional aesthetic, catering to those who prefer a classic and understated appearance.
Offers a polished aluminum design with a conventional aesthetic, catering to those who prefer a classic and understated appearance. iPhone 16e: Compact and sleek, it features a ceramic shield and embodies Apple's signature design language, appealing to users who value simplicity and elegance.
For those seeking a bold and unique design, the Nothing Phone 3a Pro is a standout. However, the Pixel 9a and iPhone 16e prioritize durability and simplicity, making them ideal for users who prefer a more traditional approach. Display Technology
The display is a critical feature for gaming, streaming, and everyday use. Here's how the models compare in terms of screen quality: Nothing Phone 3a Pro: Leads the pack with a 6.77-inch AMOLED display, a 120Hz refresh rate, and an impressive 3000 nits HDR brightness, delivering vibrant visuals and smooth performance.
Leads the pack with a 6.77-inch AMOLED display, a 120Hz refresh rate, and an impressive 3000 nits HDR brightness, delivering vibrant visuals and smooth performance. Pixel 9a: Offers a 6.3-inch OLED display with a 120Hz refresh rate and 2700 nits brightness, providing a close second in terms of visual quality and responsiveness.
Offers a 6.3-inch OLED display with a 120Hz refresh rate and 2700 nits brightness, providing a close second in terms of visual quality and responsiveness. Samsung Galaxy A56: Matches the 120Hz refresh rate on a 6.7-inch AMOLED screen but falls behind with 1200 nits HDR brightness, making it less suitable for outdoor use in bright conditions.
Matches the 120Hz refresh rate on a 6.7-inch AMOLED screen but falls behind with 1200 nits HDR brightness, making it less suitable for outdoor use in bright conditions. iPhone 16e: Features a smaller 6.1-inch Super Retina XDR display with a 60Hz refresh rate, which may feel dated compared to the competition but still delivers excellent color accuracy and sharpness.
For display enthusiasts, the Nothing Phone 3a Pro provides the most immersive experience, while the Pixel 9a offers a strong balance of size, brightness, and refresh rate. Performance and Processing Power
Performance is a key consideration for multitasking, gaming, and overall responsiveness. Here's how the processors stack up: Pixel 9a: Powered by the flagship Tensor G4 processor, it ensures smooth performance across demanding tasks, making it a reliable choice for power users.
Powered by the flagship Tensor G4 processor, it ensures smooth performance across demanding tasks, making it a reliable choice for power users. iPhone 16e: Equipped with the A18 chip, it delivers exceptional speed and efficiency, particularly excelling in gaming and resource-intensive applications.
Equipped with the A18 chip, it delivers exceptional speed and efficiency, particularly excelling in gaming and resource-intensive applications. Nothing Phone 3a Pro: Runs on the Snapdragon 7S Gen 3, which handles everyday tasks well but struggles with more demanding workloads, such as high-end gaming.
Runs on the Snapdragon 7S Gen 3, which handles everyday tasks well but struggles with more demanding workloads, such as high-end gaming. Samsung Galaxy A56: Features the Exynos 1580, which offers slower performance overall, making it less suitable for users who prioritize speed and multitasking.
If speed and efficiency are your priorities, the Pixel 9a and iPhone 16e are the clear winners, with the iPhone 16e slightly edging out in raw performance. Camera Capabilities
Camera performance is a critical factor for many users. Here's what each model offers: Pixel 9a: Excels with a 48MP main sensor and a 13MP ultrawide lens, delivering consistent results in various lighting conditions and offering excellent computational photography features.
Excels with a 48MP main sensor and a 13MP ultrawide lens, delivering consistent results in various lighting conditions and offering excellent computational photography features. Nothing Phone 3a Pro: Features a unique 50MP periscope zoom lens, ideal for photography enthusiasts, though its ultrawide lens is less impressive compared to competitors.
Features a unique 50MP periscope zoom lens, ideal for photography enthusiasts, though its ultrawide lens is less impressive compared to competitors. Samsung Galaxy A56: Offers a versatile triple-camera setup with a 50MP main sensor, 13MP ultrawide, and 5MP macro lens, but lacks strong zoom capabilities.
Offers a versatile triple-camera setup with a 50MP main sensor, 13MP ultrawide, and 5MP macro lens, but lacks strong zoom capabilities. iPhone 16e: Focuses on simplicity with a single main camera, excelling in video quality and ease of use but offering less versatility for photography enthusiasts.
For versatile photography, the Pixel 9a and Nothing Phone 3a Pro stand out, with the Pixel 9a offering a more balanced overall experience. Battery Life and Charging
Battery performance is crucial for daily use, especially for users who rely on their phones throughout the day. Here's how the models compare: Pixel 9a: Leads with a 5100mAh battery, 23W wired charging, and 7.5W wireless charging, making sure reliable all-day performance.
Leads with a 5100mAh battery, 23W wired charging, and 7.5W wireless charging, making sure reliable all-day performance. Nothing Phone 3a Pro: Features a 5000mAh battery with 50W wired charging for faster recharges but lacks wireless charging support.
Features a 5000mAh battery with 50W wired charging for faster recharges but lacks wireless charging support. Samsung Galaxy A56: Matches the 5000mAh battery but offers slower 45W wired charging and no wireless charging option.
Matches the 5000mAh battery but offers slower 45W wired charging and no wireless charging option. iPhone 16e: Falls short with a smaller 4050mAh battery, 15W wired charging, and 7.5W wireless charging, making it less competitive in this category.
For all-day use and charging flexibility, the Pixel 9a is the most reliable option, while the Nothing Phone 3a Pro offers the fastest wired charging for users who prioritize quick recharges. Durability and Software Updates
Durability and long-term software support are essential for value-conscious buyers. Here's how the models compare: Pixel 9a: Offers IP68 water resistance and seven years of software updates, making sure long-term reliability and security.
Offers IP68 water resistance and seven years of software updates, making sure long-term reliability and security. iPhone 16e: Matches the Pixel 9a with IP68 resistance and seven years of updates, making it a strong contender for users seeking longevity.
Matches the Pixel 9a with IP68 resistance and seven years of updates, making it a strong contender for users seeking longevity. Samsung Galaxy A56: Provides IP67 water resistance and six years of updates, offering slightly less durability and support than the Pixel 9a and iPhone 16e.
Provides IP67 water resistance and six years of updates, offering slightly less durability and support than the Pixel 9a and iPhone 16e. Nothing Phone 3a Pro: Falls behind with IP64 resistance and three years of updates, making it less future-proof than its competitors.
For durability and future-proofing, the Pixel 9a and iPhone 16e are the safest bets, offering the best combination of water resistance and software longevity. AI Integration and Unique Features
AI capabilities are becoming increasingly important in modern smartphones. Here's how the models compare: Pixel 9a: Integrates Google Gemini AI for enhanced photo editing, voice recognition, and real-time transcription, making it a leader in AI-driven features.
Integrates Google Gemini AI for enhanced photo editing, voice recognition, and real-time transcription, making it a leader in AI-driven features. Nothing Phone 3a Pro: Also features Google Gemini AI and introduces Essential Space, a unique tool for organizing screenshots and notes.
Also features Google Gemini AI and introduces Essential Space, a unique tool for organizing screenshots and notes. Samsung Galaxy A56: Uses Google Gemini AI but lacks standout features that differentiate it from the competition.
Uses Google Gemini AI but lacks standout features that differentiate it from the competition. iPhone 16e: Limited by Siri's capabilities, it falls behind in AI innovation compared to the Pixel 9a and Nothing Phone 3a Pro.
For innovative AI features, the Pixel 9a and Nothing Phone 3a Pro excel, with the Pixel 9a offering a more polished and reliable experience.
Expand your understanding of Mid-range smartphones with additional resources from our extensive library of articles.
Source & Image Credit: Pete Matheson Filed Under: Android News, Apple iPhone, Guides, Mobile Phone News
Latest Geeky Gadgets Deals
Disclosure: Some of our articles include affiliate links. If you buy something through one of these links, Geeky Gadgets may earn an affiliate commission. Learn about our Disclosure Policy.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Auto Blog
39 minutes ago
- Auto Blog
Walmart is selling a ‘convenient' $70 electric screwdriver set for $33, and shoppers ‘love how easy it is to use'
Autoblog aims to feature only the best products and services. If you buy something via one of our links, we may earn a commission. Sometimes you need a tiny screwdriver set for tiny screwdriving tasks. Maybe your larger screwdrivers are too big for the puny screws commonly found on electronic devices, and maybe you just want a small, portable screwdriver set on hand for the sake of convenience. Whatever the case, check out the Fanttik E1 Pro Cordless Electric Screwdriver Set, which is now on sale at Walmart for 53% off, dropping the price from $70 to $33. According to previous buyers, 'you won't be disappointed.' Fanttik E1 Pro Cordless Electric Screwdriver Set, $33 (was $70) at Walmart The Fanttik E1 Pro Cordless Electric Screwdriver Set includes one electric screwdriver with 24 precision bits, all of which are held in a compact storage case that is magnetic, preventing the bits from falling out and disappearing forever. The screwdriver offers several precision torque settings, which allow you to drive screws to exactly the right tightness. Its 350mAh battery will operate continuously for up to two hours, which translates into roughly 400 screws. And because it's recharged via USB-C, there's no need to worry about replacing batteries. Previous buyers say this 'convenient' set is 'perfect' if you're looking for 'plenty of torque.' It 'works great,' wrote several reviewers, a number of which asserted that you'll 'love it.' As one put it, it's the 'best cordless little screwdriver I have ever bought.' It has 'great design with several bits in a tray that stores them conveniently,' explained one buyer. Another added, 'Love how easy it is to use.' Act now if you want to bring home this great screwdriver set for less, because Walmart is only offering the Fanttik E1 Pro Cordless Electric Screwdriver Set at 53% off for a limited time. Buy yours today and find out why reviewers call it such a 'great tool.' About the Author Nick Hilden View Profile
Geeky Gadgets
44 minutes ago
- Geeky Gadgets
How to Use Google's Gemini CLI Free & Open Source AI Coding Agent
What if the power of advanced artificial intelligence was just a command away? Imagine a tool that not only simplifies coding but also transforms your workflow with features like real-time web browsing, seamless integrations, and the ability to handle vast amounts of data—all without costing a dime. Enter Gemini CLI, a free and open source AI coding agent built on Google's innovative Gemini Pro 2.5 model. Designed for developers who crave efficiency and innovation, this tool brings AI directly to your command line, empowering you to debug, automate, and create with unprecedented ease. But with great potential comes complexity—can Gemini CLI truly deliver on its promise of transforming development? In this overview video below, Creator Magic explores the key features that make Gemini CLI a standout in the crowded landscape of AI coding tools. From its large context window capable of processing intricate tasks to its community-driven, open source nature, Gemini CLI offers a unique blend of accessibility and sophistication. Yet, it's not without its challenges, including a learning curve and occasional performance hiccups. Whether you're a seasoned developer or just starting to dabble in AI-driven solutions, this deep dive will help you uncover how Gemini CLI can fit into your projects—and whether its strengths outweigh its limitations. After all, innovation often lies at the intersection of potential and perseverance. Overview of Gemini CLI Key Features at a Glance Gemini CLI is equipped with a range of features that cater to the needs of modern developers. Its standout capabilities include: Free and Open Source: Gemini CLI is accessible to a wide audience, encouraging experimentation, collaboration, and community-driven innovation. Gemini CLI is accessible to a wide audience, encouraging experimentation, collaboration, and community-driven innovation. Large Context Window: With the ability to handle up to 1 million tokens, the tool supports complex coding tasks and detailed instructions, making it ideal for intricate projects. With the ability to handle up to 1 million tokens, the tool supports complex coding tasks and detailed instructions, making it ideal for intricate projects. Generous Usage Limits: Developers can make up to 60 requests per minute and 1,000 free daily requests, providing ample room for real-time problem-solving and experimentation. Developers can make up to 60 requests per minute and 1,000 free daily requests, providing ample room for real-time problem-solving and experimentation. Command-Line Efficiency: The tool enables you to create applications, debug code, and automate tasks directly from the terminal, streamlining workflows. The tool enables you to create applications, debug code, and automate tasks directly from the terminal, streamlining workflows. Web Browsing Integration: Gemini CLI allows you to fetch documentation and resources without leaving your workflow, enhancing efficiency and focus. These features make Gemini CLI a versatile and practical tool for developers seeking to integrate AI into their workflows and projects. Integration Capabilities One of the most compelling aspects of Gemini CLI is its seamless integration with external tools and platforms. Its integration capabilities include: Superbase MCP Servers: This feature simplifies database management and enables serverless computing through edge functions, making it ideal for scalable, cloud-based applications. This feature simplifies database management and enables serverless computing through edge functions, making it ideal for scalable, cloud-based applications. API Support: Gemini CLI connects with services like Replicate's Flux image generation model, expanding its utility for both creative and technical projects. These integrations allow developers to incorporate advanced AI functionalities into their projects with minimal effort, making Gemini CLI a valuable asset for diverse development scenarios. Gemini CLI: Free & Open Source AI Coding Agent Watch this video on YouTube. Check out more relevant guides from our extensive collection on AI coding that you might find useful. Getting Started: Setup and Customization Setting up Gemini CLI is a straightforward process, though it requires some technical familiarity. To get started, follow these steps: Install Ensure that is installed on your system, as it is a prerequisite for running Gemini CLI. Ensure that is installed on your system, as it is a prerequisite for running Gemini CLI. Authenticate with Google: Use your Google account to access the tool and its features. Use your Google account to access the tool and its features. Follow the Setup Guide: A detailed, step-by-step guide is available to help you install dependencies and execute commands effectively. A detailed, step-by-step guide is available to help you install dependencies and execute commands effectively. Customize Your Experience: Adjust themes, configurations, and other settings to tailor the interface and functionality to your specific needs. While the setup process is well-documented, beginners may encounter a learning curve, particularly when configuring advanced features. However, the customization options allow you to create a personalized and efficient development environment. Strengths of Gemini CLI Gemini CLI offers several advantages that make it a compelling choice for developers: Cost-Effective: The tool provides free access to advanced AI capabilities, lowering the barriers to entry for experimentation and development. The tool provides free access to advanced AI capabilities, lowering the barriers to entry for experimentation and development. Community-Driven: Its open source nature fosters continuous improvement and innovation through contributions from a global developer community. Its open source nature fosters continuous improvement and innovation through contributions from a global developer community. Versatility: Gemini CLI is suitable for a wide range of tasks, including building AI-powered applications, automating workflows, and assisting with coding challenges. Gemini CLI is suitable for a wide range of tasks, including building AI-powered applications, automating workflows, and assisting with coding challenges. Real-Time Problem Solving: Features like web browsing integration and a large context window enhance productivity and enable efficient troubleshooting. These strengths position Gemini CLI as a powerful tool for developers looking to explore AI-driven solutions without significant upfront investment. Challenges to Consider Despite its many strengths, Gemini CLI has certain limitations that may impact its usability: Performance: The tool is slower than some competitors, such as Claude Code, which can be a drawback for time-sensitive projects. The tool is slower than some competitors, such as Claude Code, which can be a drawback for time-sensitive projects. Error Handling: Gemini CLI is prone to occasional errors during complex integrations, requiring technical expertise to troubleshoot effectively. Gemini CLI is prone to occasional errors during complex integrations, requiring technical expertise to troubleshoot effectively. Usage Caps: While the daily limits are generous, they may restrict extensive use unless upgraded with API keys. While the daily limits are generous, they may restrict extensive use unless upgraded with API keys. Learning Curve: The setup process and advanced configurations can be challenging for less experienced developers, potentially delaying adoption. Understanding these challenges can help you plan effectively and mitigate potential roadblocks, making sure a smoother experience with the tool. How It Compares to Competitors Gemini CLI competes with other AI coding tools, such as Claude Code and Cursor, each offering unique advantages: Claude Code: Known for its faster performance and user-friendly interface, Claude Code is ideal for developers prioritizing speed. However, it lacks some of Gemini CLI's advanced features, such as web browsing and MCP integration. Known for its faster performance and user-friendly interface, Claude Code is ideal for developers prioritizing speed. However, it lacks some of Gemini CLI's advanced features, such as web browsing and MCP integration. Cursor: Cursor provides a polished experience for large-scale projects but does not offer the open source flexibility and community-driven innovation of Gemini CLI. While Gemini CLI's learning curve may deter beginners, its unique capabilities and open source nature make it a strong contender for developers seeking advanced AI tools. Potential Use Cases Gemini CLI is a versatile tool that can be applied to a variety of development scenarios, including: AI-Powered Applications: Build web applications with advanced functionalities using Gemini CLI's robust features. Build web applications with advanced functionalities using Gemini CLI's robust features. Workflow Automation: Use Superbase MCP servers and serverless computing to streamline processes and improve efficiency. Use Superbase MCP servers and serverless computing to streamline processes and improve efficiency. Creative Projects: Experiment with AI models like Imagen 4 and Flux to develop innovative solutions and explore new possibilities. Experiment with AI models like Imagen 4 and Flux to develop innovative solutions and explore new possibilities. Prototyping and Learning: Use Gemini CLI as a cost-effective and accessible tool for exploring AI-driven solutions and gaining hands-on experience. These use cases demonstrate the tool's flexibility and potential to drive innovation across various domains, from software development to creative industries. Media Credit: Creator Magic Filed Under: AI, Top News Latest Geeky Gadgets Deals Disclosure: Some of our articles include affiliate links. If you buy something through one of these links, Geeky Gadgets may earn an affiliate commission. Learn about our Disclosure Policy.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
‘Lidar is lame': why Elon Musk's vision for a self-driving Tesla taxi faltered
After years of promising investors that millions of Tesla robotaxis would soon fill the streets, Elon Musk debuted his driverless car service in a limited public rollout in Austin, Texas. It did not go smoothly. The 22 June launch initially appeared successful enough, with a flood of videos from pro-Tesla social media influencers praising the service and sharing footage of their rides. Musk celebrated it as a triumph, and the following day, Tesla's stock rose nearly 10%. What quickly became apparent, however, was that the same influencer videos Musk promoted also depicted the self-driving cars appearing to break traffic laws or struggle to properly function. By Tuesday, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) had opened an investigation into the service and requested information from Tesla on the incidents. If Tesla's limited rollout of the robotaxi service was the culmination of more than a decade of work, as Musk touted on X, its struggles are also emblematic of technical decisions and fixations that the world's richest person has embraced as he pursues the goal of a fully autonomous car. Musk has cast the concept of a driverless car as a core part of the company's future business, and, as sales have sharply fallen this year, he has vowed that its robotaxi service will rapidly and drastically expand. Yet the faltering launch this week suggests Tesla is still facing technological challenges that have attracted regulators' notice, delayed Musk's vision of a robotaxi on every corner, and highlighted the gulf between it and its driverless rival, Waymo. The robotaxi launch featured about 10 cars traveling in a limited area of Austin with safety drivers in the passenger seat. The pilot included other restrictions, such as not operating in bad weather or during certain nighttime hours. Rides, which the company offered to a host of handpicked influencers, cost $4.20, in keeping with Musk's proclivity for cannabis memes. 'Tesla self-driving can be deployed anywhere it's approved. It does not require expensive, specialized equipment or extensive mapping of service areas,' an official Tesla account posted on X the day of the launch. 'It just works.' Footage from at least 11 rides showed that the trial run did not pan out as flawlessly as Tesla's tweet suggested. In one case, a robotaxi failed to make a left turn and instead drove into a lane meant for oncoming traffic, then corrected itself by driving across a double yellow line. Other videos appeared to show the cars exceeding the speed limit, braking for no discernible reason and dropping passengers off in the middle of an intersection. The videos drew the attention of the NHTSA, which said in a statement it was aware of the incidents and had contacted Tesla to obtain more information. Musk, meanwhile, posted throughout the technical failures and regulatory inquiry, retweeting pro-Tesla influencers who praised the service. One account Musk posted showed off a video of a robotaxi stopping to avoid running down a peacock crossing the road, and another told followers: 'Don't listen to the media.' Musk has long insisted that using only cameras on driverless cars is the singular way to achieve true self-driving capability. Tesla's consumer vehicles come with what it calls 'autopilot' and 'full self-driving' features that allow drivers to cruise on the highway hands-free. They rely on multiple external cameras to navigate, steer and brake. The company's robotaxis use similar software and also depend solely on cameras. The reliance on cameras alone stands in sharp contrast with other autonomous vehicle companies such as Waymo and Zoox. Those companies use arrays that combine cameras and sensors, including radar and lidar. For example, the newest version of a driverless Waymo uses about 40 external cameras and sensors, whereas a Tesla with one of the latest versions of full self-driving uses about eight external cameras, according to an analysis by Bloomberg. Lidar and radar allow for self-driving cars to better detect objects in bad weather and poor lighting. Despite the advantages to lidar and radar, Musk has been adamant that Tesla remain lidar-free. 'Lidar is lame,' Musk said during a Tesla autonomy day in 2019. 'In cars, it's friggin' stupid. It's expensive and unnecessary.' Lidar is far more expensive, costing roughly $12,000 per vehicle, as compared with cameras, which come in at around $400 per car, according to Bloomberg. Musk maintains that camera-only technology is the most 'human' way to approach self-driving, since people use their eyes to navigate the road. Musk's insistence on camera-only technology has landed Tesla in hot water over fatal crashes involving drivers using the full self-driving feature. The company is now the focus of government investigations and civil lawsuits, which allege that full self-driving is impeded by weather conditions such as sun glare, fog, dust and darkness. There have been at least 736 crashes and 17 deaths involving the technology, according to an analysis by the Washington Post. 'Tesla continues to have this fetishistic view that it's going to operate its system solely on cameras, despite every intelligent human being in this entire space saying that can't be done,' said Brett Schreiber, an attorney who represents several alleged victims of Tesla's autopilot failures. 'Everyone who has been following collision-avoidant technology since the 90s knows that the holy trinity is radar, lidar and cameras.' Schreiber said he was not surprised to see the wobbling rollout of Tesla's robotaxis in Austin. 'What you're also going to see, which is the true tragedy of this thing, is people continuing to be injured and killed by this technology,' he said. 'And that's where it becomes less of a 'Oh, isn't that cute? The vehicle can't make a left' to now we're actually at someone's funeral because of the choices Tesla makes.' Tesla did not respond to a request for comment on the lawsuits, government investigations and crashes involving full self-driving. The differences between Waymo and Tesla's approaches to launching commercial self-driving services in dense cities don't end with the debate over lidar versus cameras. Waymo is seen widely as the frontrunner in the self-driving race in the US – a race that was once crowded with dozens of automakers, VC-backed startups and ride-share companies and has since been whittled down to just a handful of major players. There are numerous reasons why Waymo has outlasted so many of its competitors and why it's ahead of the curve. The Google subsidiary has historically spent months, if not years, mapping cities and testing its vehicles in them before launching. In San Francisco, one of the first cities where Waymo launched its fully driverless commercial service, the company began mapping out and testing its service in 2021 before launching it to the public in 2024. Even with a careful and gradual city-by-city approach, Waymo, which launched as a project under Google's X research lab in 2009, has encountered problems with its self-driving cars. Earlier this year, Waymo had to recall more than 1,200 of its vehicles over a software issue that was causing collisions with chains, gates and other stationary roadway barriers. The NHTSA also launched an investigation into the company last year after the agency received 22 reports of Waymo vehicles acting erratically or potentially violating traffic safety laws. Contrast Waymo's approach with Tesla's. While Tesla is still in the testing phase of its service, its robotaxi launch in Austin is the first time the car company's fully self-driving technology is being unleashed in the wild. The company has not released information on whether, or how long, it has spent mapping out or testing the driverless technology on Austin's streets. The launch is reminiscent of Uber's first foray into a self-driving ride-share service in 2016. The company launched a self-driving pilot in San Francisco without seeking a permit from the California department of motor vehicles, as was required. On the first day of the pilot, an Uber vehicle ran a red light. The company was forced to shut down the service a week later after the DMV revoked its registration. An Uber self-driving executive at the time had pushed the company's engineers to rush to launch the San Francisco pilot to attract more investor and public attention. After being sued by Waymo over its self-driving operations and struggling to catch up to its competitors, Uber sold its self-driving arm in 2020. Tesla also did not have a permit to operate its robotaxi service in Austin. Texas does not currently have a process to acquire a permit and won't have one in place until September. While there's at the moment less visibility into what Tesla's rollout of its robotaxi service looked like behind the scenes, the automaker is no stranger to rushing to meet deadlines set publicly by Musk. With the launch of robotaxis, Musk, who has been promising that Teslas will be fully self-driving since at least 2016, is perhaps getting closer to meeting the deadline that he set and has deferred several times over the past 10 years.
