I’m a phone nerd - I know enough about smartphones to tell you that not every new generation is meant to be revolutionary. And then there’s the new Google Pixel 10a, which just feels... unnecessary. Like, really unnecessary.

Fine, on paper there are a few “upgrades” you can spot by reading the spec sheet. The Pixel 10a gets slightly higher peak brightness, tougher Gorilla Glass (let’s be honest, you’re still putting a screen protector on it), marginally faster charging, Bluetooth 6.0, and satellite connectivity.

And that sounds OK - until you realize that the remaining 95% of the phone is identical to last year’s Pixel 9a. We’re talking the same size. The same 5,100 mAh battery. The same old Tensor G4 chip. The same design. Even the new colors are just slightly brighter shades of the old ones.

If this “revolutionary leap” feels familiar, it’s probably because we’ve seen similar “innovation” before - like when Apple shipped the iPhone 13 with 6GB of RAM (instead of 4GB) and called it the iPhone 14. But Apple can get away with that - you know, probably because it’s the only company making iPhones.

Google is far behind Apple’s leading position on the market - yet when I look at the Pixel 10a, I don’t see a carefully timed product release; I see a company running on autopilot. “We need something new because Apple and Samsung have new phones coming out” is not a business strategy.

The timing of the Pixel 10a launch makes even less sense when you look at deals like the Galaxy S25 FE (256GB), which launched at $800 but now goes for $500/€500 (or less). That’s a proper premium flagship with a class-leading chip, excellent cameras, and all the AI features you could want (if you care about them). Against that backdrop, the Pixel 10a doesn’t look competitive - it looks confused.

Pixel 10a raises a key question: Should you buy a new phone from a phone-maker making phones on autopilot?

The way I see it, the disappointing jump from the Pixel 9a to the Pixel 10a isn’t just about timing or pricing. It’s about identity, and earning people’s trust. Don't get me wrong, the likes of Samsung and Motorola also ship iterative upgrades like the Galaxy A37, which does bring a new Exynos chip, but might very well be identical to last year's Galaxy A36.

However, the Pixel “A” series used to mean something - it was the mid-range Android phone to buy if you wanted good value and the best camera in the price segment. For a few years, it felt like Google understood what Pixel users wanted - or at least what Google itself wanted. However, for the past 2-3 generations of the Pixel “A” series, that clarity has faded, and the Pixel 10a makes it painfully obvious.

Instead of pushing the mid-range market forward, Google has repackaged last year’s phone with microscopic changes and called it new. To bring it back to the beginning of the story, that’s something Apple would do. But people who buy Android phones buy them because they offer more for less - in other words, because they aren’t the iPhone 16e.