Whats with all the crying?

[mbell75]

Might be cause I am new here but honestly, whats with all the crying and threatening to switch carriers? Some people think their carrier is SO FAR BEHIND the times because they dont have 10 new Android phones running 2.1 in their hands the week the release is out! Or people complaining their 3 month old phone is "slow" because it has *gasp* a year old processor and they cant run 50 apps and listen to their music too Do these people also trade their 6 month old car in because a newer and faster one comes out too? I find it funny but at the same time very ridiculous

 

[smacky]

People don't understand that the days of "you get what you pay for" are now gone and when they realize this, they get very upset.

The grass is always greener, and I think wireless providers are the best examples of it as they all have different perks and people get tired of free incoming calls, they they think cheaper unlimited texts are better than their free mobile-to-mobile.

I just want 2.1, and I know it'll take time, but damn it needs to hurry up.

 

[bbrosen]

Some of us came from the Iphone, a very fast, sleek, elegant , intuitive and polished OS. I was quite shocked to find out that you cannot update when Google updates, it has to go through the handset maker first, then via the carrier, if they want to bother. When I spend 5-600 dollars for a device, I expect, in this day and age to be able to update it when the oS is released, a la Apple Iphone OS.

To find the handsets and OS versions fragmented and and no standardization for hardware or software or universal desktop software was shocking to me. Also the fact that the OS cripples itself by only loading apps onto already Memory strapped phones was horrifying to say the least.

Before when i had a problem with the hardware, I went to apple, if I had a software problem, i went to Apple, if i had an app store problem i went to Apple, if i had an itunes problem i went to apple.

When I have had problems with my htc hero, my carrier blamed htc, htc blamed my carrier and google was no help at all.

Now i unwillingly switched to Android so i am a little disgruntled, my work pays my service, not with att, so i went with an android phone. I could not see paying for personal phone service when i had it free, just with another carrier.

It being open software is what takes getting used too, the splintered software versions, slow updates via handset makers and carriers, who probably really do not want to get involved in the cellphone OS software biz to begin with but did anyway because they want to sign people up on contracts, need the phones to attract customers.

Yes, I know it's new, but even the first Iphone performed better than this. I did hate the fact only one thing could work at a time, it was a sore point with me. In fact I hated that fact. Sure it's nice to change wallpapers and themes etc etc, but I need a phone that functions, and with crap ware pre installed that cannot be removed and actually eats up valuable and precious resources on an already memory strapped phone is crazy to say the least.

yes, it has potential, i hear that and believe that, but right now, android has no direction or standards. If this is not changed this OS will be just a geek plaything and not adopted by the masses.

I am struggling with this underpowered low memory phone for business every day, my 3 year old Ipod runs circles around this thing as far as speed and memory go. It opens a 1,545 page pdf tech manual in less than half the time it takes my hero. Of course the ipod does not multitask, to be fair, but the hero is supposed to be able too, right?

I really do like Android for what it could be, and it seems a year and a half later it should be farther along then it is. Like it or not, Apple has set the bar very high, as well as expectations of performance, reliability, speed and power.

i want android to succeed, but some of these issues just confound me.

 

[Bnice]

http://abut even the first Iphone performed better than thisndroidforums.com/members/bbrosen.html
well i disagree the first iphone was not better than the hero right out the box,the first iphone was running on edge and had alot of missing features the 3gs just got mms a few months ago.now the iphone seem faster for a few reasons it doesn't do true multitasking,no flash support and no sd card so everything is pull right from the hardware.yes the iphone made everyone step up but that phone have the same look for the pass 3 years and with all these phone coming out now that can do all what the iphone do and more powerfull who really gonna care.my hero do all what the iphone does and more.

 

[mbell75]

Yes, I know it's new, but even the first Iphone performed better than this.

Really? The first iphone did MMS messaging? The first iphone could shoot video? The first iphone had turn by turn voice navigation? I could go on...Fact is, my LG enV did things the first iphone couldnt do LOL the Hero can do worlds more than the first iphone could.

 

[graff_king]

Some of us came from the Iphone, a very fast, sleek, elegant , intuitive and polished OS. I was quite shocked to find out that you cannot update when Google updates, it has to go through the handset maker first, then via the carrier, if they want to bother. When I spend 5-600 dollars for a device, I expect, in this day and age to be able to update it when the oS is released, a la Apple Iphone OS.

So you are able to use a forum but were not able to do research on a device before you got it? I'm sorry you're not happy with the phone but it is not an iphone and I like the fact that there are MULTIPLE android phones avail to the consumer, unlike the i*****.Different devices with similar OS's to meet different consumers needs/wants/desires. So yes, with that in mind it makes sense that when 1 device updates that others do not. This is in no way meant as an attack on you fyi, it is just useless to constantly compare 1 device to another that is totally different.

 

[tdieckman]

Apple was there first with personal computers. The open nature of IBM/DOS computers had big issues as different pc manufacturers put out their own hardware. Sometimes things went smoothly and sometimes not. With the advent of Windows, device driver support could ne even more of an issue, and any badly-written app could bring down the whole OS.

The competition of all the manufacturers brought down pc prices. Apple, on the otherhand, retained its control over the hardware and OS.

One of the things the iPhone has going for it is the large amount of apps available besides a very large install base. However, there's a lot about. yhe personal computer history that seems very similar to the iPhone/Android situation going on now.

With all that said, I enjoy healthy competition. I'm looking forward to Apple's responses which will only four more innovations to Android.

 

[TheBrit]

Really? The first iphone did MMS messaging? The first iphone could shoot video? The first iphone had turn by turn voice navigation? I could go on...Fact is, my LG enV did things the first iphone couldnt do LOL the Hero can do worlds more than the first iphone could.

Not to mention copy and paste

 

[mjschmidt]

Rather than twist this thread into an Android vs Apple war, let's try to get back to the nature of the OP's post.

In response to the OP, I would argue that Android phones (_and_ iphones, and all the other similar "smart phones") are NOT the same as the traditional cell phones of the past. There is a good reason older phones are referred to as "dumb" phones; the new "Smart phones" are not really phones, they are in fact mini-computers that can also be used to make phone calls.

Case in point, Dell has a new Android device that has the form factor of a smart phone, but lacks the wireless radio of a cell phone. It does everything the current android phones do, it just can't make phone calls like they do, (although, with WiFi it CAN theoretically be used to make VOIP calls).

This is where the perceived "whining" comes from, because even if we don't acknowledge it consciously yet, we treat these smart phones as computers, instead of phones. We understand that they have an OS, like Windows or Mac OS, and that this OS allows us to run apps (programs) like on our computers.

That functionality is extremely hindered when handset makers, and cell carriers, get in the way of the usual computer relationship between software vendor and customer. We can update Windows without having to get the update from HP or Best Buy, we get it directly from Micro Soft, for FREE, and very simply using Windows Update.

The current model is an old one that supported very limited hardware that was no expected to do anything more than make calls, send SMS messages, and _maybe_ email. The cell carriers are still seemingly stuck in this old way of thinking as Rogers Canada customers found out when we had to literally embarrass and pester Rogers and HTC into updating our Android devices. Many customers were confounded when talking to representatives of the Rogers Office of the President who told us "Why are you so upset? You can make calls, and send text messages just fine. It works, why are you complaining?". They just... didn't... understand.

The dynamic of the model _will_ change. The fact that Dell made an Android device proves it. I would suggest that within 3 to 5 years we will buy our handsets not with a contract through our cell carrier, but directly from an electronics store, and they will be made by computer manufacturers, rather than traditional handset manufacturers. You will have the option to buy them with or without a cell radio, thus allowing you to choose to sign up for a voice or data plan from a carrier if you wish to use the device as a phone.

Within 10 to 15 years, I predict city-wide WiFi coverage. Free with some limitations, or faster if you buy a plan. Cell carriers will switch to offering WiFi plans for these cities. Instead of buying a "smart phone" with a cell radio in it, you will buy an "Android Device" from a computer manufacturer, and use VOIP to make calls.

So, in the end, it comes down to this; we didn't buy traditional cell phones, we bought mini-computers that can be used to make phone calls. WE understand that Android is an OS like on a computer, and that it needs to be updated, like Windows or Mac OS, to be able to support the _apps_ that we want to use it for. Unfortunately cell carriers didn't really understand this when they jumped on the Android band-wagon.

It's a different model. We're not whining, we're demanding what we've paid for, a mini-computer that requires software updates.

If you're curious about how this played out with Rogers in Canada (in the end we won... Magic will get 2.1, Dream owners were offered a FREE exchange to the Magic, and keep their Dream) you can click on the link in my sig to my blog.

 

[discohornet]

Some very intelligent posters in here and I'm glad to be a part of the discussion.

Mjschmidt you make some very very awesome points. One thing I'd like to add. You discussed the history of computing and how this is smartphone thing is largely reflective of that model.

That's what frustrates me. We learned these mistakes already. We have around us all sorts of excellent models of both WHAT to do and WHAT NOT to do. And yet the industry has continued to engage in those same models.

That's why I thought Google was the way to go. They're different, they think outside the box. And when I signed up I thought I was initiating myself into this new model and it turns out it's the same model but with the Google logo stamped on the box.

 

[RozzaC]

Don't know about you guys...but I still see my G1...as a phone....not a computer...

Let's face it....a phone is a phone..and a computer is a computer...

And while manufacturers will persistently try to make you think otherwise by giving you all these extra functionalities....the reality stays the same...

A phone...will always be a phone....
A computer...will always be a computer...

At least that's what I think...

 

[SpecialEd]

Really? The first iphone did MMS messaging? The first iphone could shoot video? The first iphone had turn by turn voice navigation? I could go on...Fact is, my LG enV did things the first iphone couldnt do LOL the Hero can do worlds more than the first iphone could.

My crappy Treo 650 did more than the first iPhones. SD card, stereo bluetooth, MMS, video, cut-paste, open development, optional pen based UI, one-hand UI with 5way, changable battery, etc.

 

[mjschmidt]

Don't know about you guys...but I still see my G1...as a phone....not a computer...

Let's face it....a phone is a phone..and a computer is a computer...

And while manufacturers will persistently try to make you think otherwise by giving you all these extra functionalities....the reality stays the same...

A phone...will always be a phone....
A computer...will always be a computer...

At least that's what I think...

RozzaC: that's probably what most people think, but only because they purchased these smart phones from a phone carrier, and because we use them to make phone calls.

However, more and more people are buying these phones because they want the _apps_, which makes this a computing device first and foremost for many people, that can be used to make phone calls. Take out the ability to make phone calls, and you have a PDA, like the Palm, which was... a mini computer.

Like Apple is so find of saying, we need to "Think Different" about these devices, because if you only think of it as a phone with some "tricks" you are limiting your self.

I bought my Android phone because I wanted to carry one less device, instead of carrying both a phone and a PDA. I receive very few phone calls on it, instead i use it like a PDA or a Netbook.

 

[tdieckman]

A phone...will always be a phone....
A computer...will always be a computer...

At least that's what I think...

It really depends on how you use your "mobile device". For me, I go for days without making or receiving any calls, but every day I am looking up information on it, so it really seems more like a tiny computer to me.

Here's a great short article that makes you think about our new recent ability to access all this information: We are already cyborgs

 

[RozzaC]

RozzaC: that's probably what most people think, but only because they purchased these smart phones from a phone carrier, and because we use them to make phone calls.

However, more and more people are buying these phones because they want the _apps_, which makes this a computing device first and foremost for many people, that can be used to make phone calls. Take out the ability to make phone calls, and you have a PDA, like the Palm, which was... a mini computer.

Like Apple is so find of saying, we need to "Think Different" about these devices, because if you only think of it as a phone with some "tricks" you are limiting your self.

I bought my Android phone because I wanted to carry one less device, instead of carrying both a phone and a PDA. I receive very few phone calls on it, instead i use it like a PDA or a Netbook.

It really depends on how you use your "mobile device". For me, I go for days without making or receiving any calls, but every day I am looking up information on it, so it really seems more like a tiny computer to me.

Here's a great short article that makes you think about our new recent ability to access all this information: We are already cyborgs

Isn't just down to the consumer having things fed to them through advertisments by that companies/manufacturers?

Let's face it...
It's always going to be first and foremost...a PHONE...

You can add all the features you want to it....but it's basic purpose will still be...to make and receive phone calls....

Everything else comes as a bonus feature....

 

[RozzaC]

RossaC, for many people it's already NOT first and foremost a phone, so it will not always be first and foremost a phone. Just my case explains it and I think people who use the phone like me are becoming more and more common.

Actually...yes....it will ALWAYS be a phone primarily...

It's just the ideas and thoughts of others that turn into something else...

If that wasn't the case...then why do they market it as a "smartphone" (...emphasis on the word "PHONE")....?

If they wanted to, they could have easily marketed the product as "a mini-computer that can make and receive calls just like a regular phone"

....but that's not what it is....

It's a phone with computer-like features as an extra bonus...

 

[smacky]

Actually...yes....it will ALWAYS be a phone primarily...

It's just the ideas and thoughts of others that turn into something else...

If that wasn't the case...then why do they market it as a "smartphone" (...emphasis on the word "PHONE")....?

If they wanted to, they could have easily marketed the product as "a mini-computer that can make and receive calls just like a regular phone"

....but that's not what it is....

It's a phone with computer-like features as an extra bonus...

That may be how manufacturers see it, but you change the name of the product when it essentially just has one thing added on to it (internet, phone, etc.) and some people are skeptical to change. Remember when people thought the first cell phones (the ones larger than bricks, and probably heavier too) came out? People saw it as pointless. Then cell phones got smaller, got colored screens, games, fancy names, texting, cameras, etc., and all along the way there were people that would say it was all pointless. Now, you make a 99-cent app like Task killer, and you've made millions.

My point is, these phones are no longer primarily phones anymore. Everyone has different uses for them. For some, it is a portable computer (more so than a laptop), for others it's instant messaging on the go (either literally, AIM, MSN, or Yahoo messenger, or text messaging) and for the rest, it is a phone that simply makes calls and nothing else. The concept of a cell phone, though, seems to be fading, since now there's an emphasis on what phone has access to the most apps rather than which has the best signal, or easier to use. Well, smart buyers look at it all, but most people today, generally kids between the middle school-age and college, just want something that does everything. For the adults in the "real world," some have jobs that rely on being connected to the internet and email, and others have no business on the internet, but just want access to it when they want to.

Times are changing. Don't be the one that thinks things retain a function and that function only forever. The iPod is no longer just an MP3 player, a computer isn't just for word processing anymore, and phones are no longer phones-only.

 

[RozzaC]

That may be how manufacturers see it, but you change the name of the product when it essentially just has one thing added on to it (internet, phone, etc.) and some people are skeptical to change. Remember when people thought the first cell phones (the ones larger than bricks, and probably heavier too) came out? People saw it as pointless. Then cell phones got smaller, got colored screens, games, fancy names, texting, cameras, etc., and all along the way there were people that would say it was all pointless. Now, you make a 99-cent app like Task killer, and you've made millions.

My point is, these phones are no longer primarily phones anymore. Everyone has different uses for them. For some, it is a portable computer (more so than a laptop), for others it's instant messaging on the go (either literally, AIM, MSN, or Yahoo messenger, or text messaging) and for the rest, it is a phone that simply makes calls and nothing else. The concept of a cell phone, though, seems to be fading, since now there's an emphasis on what phone has access to the most apps rather than which has the best signal, or easier to use. Well, smart buyers look at it all, but most people today, generally kids between the middle school-age and college, just want something that does everything. For the adults in the "real world," some have jobs that rely on being connected to the internet and email, and others have no business on the internet, but just want access to it when they want to.

Times are changing. Don't be the one that thinks things retain a function and that function only forever. The iPod is no longer just an MP3 player, a computer isn't just for word processing anymore, and phones are no longer phones-only.

So the TV is no longer a TV then, right?
Because it can play DVD's too if you want it to.

I'm not disagreeing that things evolve over time and have the capability to do lots of things...
That's the whole point of technology...it's meant to make our lives easier...

But because of those technological advances, people have lost focus on what a product's primary objective is...

A phone's primary objective is to make and receive calls....
Yes...it can browse the internet, take photographs, and play music...but it's still just a phone at the end of the day...

 

[mjschmidt]

RozzaC: The primary purpose of an Android "phone" is NOT To make phone calls. Not for me, and not just because they call it a phone.

Take the wireless radio out of it, and you have a PDA.

If you take a PDA, and add a wireless radio does it suddenly become a phone?

You're hung up on the names of things.

Do you have a pair of "running shoes"? I hope you only use them to run, and not walk or stand, because they are clearly called running shoes, so their primary purpose is to be used for running and nothing else.

As for your TV analogy, you can now buy TVs that are internet and network ready. My friend has a VERY sweet 58" Samsung LCD TV (I sooo want it) that it hooked up to one of his computers, and his network (not to mention his Xbox 360 and PS3). It is now, basically, a MONITOR for viewing whatever content he decides to use with it. It's primary purpose is NO LONGER to be a TV!

Conversely, I can now watch TV on my computer. Does that mean it's no longer a computer because I can watch TV on it?

Everything is _converging_. These things are now ALL computational appliances. Call it a phone if you want, I call it an Android device because it's more than just a phone, no matter what my cell carrier or handset manufacturer call it.

By the way... you can also make phone calls with your computer!

Try to get past the semantics, or be stuck in the past with a rotary dialer affixed to the kitchen wall with one of those long dangly cords. The ONLY thing it will do is make phone calls, so.... it is a phone.

My HTC Magic is NOT a phone. It is an Android device, and very occasionally I use it to make phone calls, sometimes without even using that actual "phone" portion of it (via VOIP).

 

[RozzaC]

RozzaC: The primary purpose of an Android "phone" is NOT To make phone calls. Not for me, and not just because they call it a phone.

Take the wireless radio out of it, and you have a PDA.

If you take a PDA, and add a wireless radio does it suddenly become a phone?

Actually no, you would have a PDA with phone-like capabilities...which is what I explained in an earlier post...it's a marketing technique to make it seem like it's the most amazing thing on the planet...

A PDA that has various uses already plus one extra feature isn't as appealing as a phone that can do many other things on top of its primary use (making and receiving calls)...

And I'm pretty sure the general populace end up calling it a phone out of convenience anyway...

You're hung up on the names of things.

Do you have a pair of "running shoes"? I hope you only use them to run, and not walk or stand, because they are clearly called running shoes, so their primary purpose is to be used for running and nothing else.

Clearly you are as well....because you're arguing just as fiercely as I am to counter my points...

Otherwise you wouldn't mind if a toaster was called a fridge....
After all...the way you're speaking...it's just a name...it clearly holds no value...

And no...I don't own a pair of running shoes actually...

As for your TV analogy, you can now buy TVs that are internet and network ready. My friend has a VERY sweet 58" Samsung LCD TV (I sooo want it) that it hooked up to one of his computers, and his network (not to mention his Xbox 360 and PS3). It is now, basically, a MONITOR for viewing whatever content he decides to use with it. It's primary purpose is NO LONGER to be a TV!

Erm....yes it is still a TV...
Your friend is just taking advantage of it's extra features...

An object doesn't just transform just because it has some extra features added to it...it's still an object...

And here's a question to you...what does your friend call it, if he ever talks?

Does he say to you...
"Hey come check out my brand new MONITOR? I originally bought it to be a TV but I decided to hook it up to everything else in my room and now it's a MONITOR!"

or...does he say..

"Hey, come check out my TV...I can hook it up to my computer so it's just like a MONITOR" ?

I have a TV that doubles up as a monitor too...but it's still a TV at heart..

Conversely, I can now watch TV on my computer. Does that mean it's no longer a computer because I can watch TV on it?

Doesn't this just prove my point? Of course it's still a computer...but you can watch TV using a TV tuner that comes as an extra feature of the computer on top of what it was originally designed to do...

But using smacky's logic from their last post...it wouldn't be...

Everything is _converging_. These things are now ALL computational appliances. Call it a phone if you want, I call it an Android device because it's more than just a phone, no matter what my cell carrier or handset manufacturer call it.

Isn't that just delusion?

By the way... you can also make phone calls with your computer!

Oh my gosh! No way! Really! Get outta here!

Try to get past the semantics, or be stuck in the past with a rotary dialer affixed to the kitchen wall with one of those long dangly cords. The ONLY thing it will do is make phone calls, so.... it is a phone.

There's a difference between being stuck in the past and knowing what something is without trying to make it something it isn't...

My HTC Magic is NOT a phone. It is an Android device, and very occasionally I use it to make phone calls, sometimes without even using that actual "phone" portion of it (via VOIP).

Do you say to your friends,

"Hey, check out my Android Device?"

 

[tdieckman]

I use my Hero quite frequently in the afternoon when I head to Peets for coffee and my friends and I have discussions and we need something looked up.

Last week, a woman I know asked me if I had my "computer thingy" with me to look up who the guide was on the initial ascent of Denali.

Marketing is what tells consumers what their devices are called.
Personal use is what says what each of us individually think of them as.

 

[tdieckman]

I use my Hero quite frequently in the afternoon when I head to Peets for coffee and my friends and I have discussions and we need something looked up.

Last week, a woman I know asked me if I had my "computer thingy" with me to look up who the guide was on the initial ascent of Denali.

Marketing is what tells consumers what their devices are called.
Personal use is what says what each of us individually think of them as.

 

[BiGMERF]

Some of us came from the Iphone, a very fast, sleek, elegant , intuitive and polished OS. I was quite shocked to find out that you cannot update when Google updates, it has to go through the handset maker first, then via the carrier, if they want to bother. When I spend 5-600 dollars for a device, I expect, in this day and age to be able to update it when the oS is released, a la Apple Iphone OS.

To find the handsets and OS versions fragmented and and no standardization for hardware or software or universal desktop software was shocking to me. Also the fact that the OS cripples itself by only loading apps onto already Memory strapped phones was horrifying to say the least.

Before when i had a problem with the hardware, I went to apple, if I had a software problem, i went to Apple, if i had an app store problem i went to Apple, if i had an itunes problem i went to apple.

When I have had problems with my htc hero, my carrier blamed htc, htc blamed my carrier and google was no help at all.

Now i unwillingly switched to Android so i am a little disgruntled, my work pays my service, not with att, so i went with an android phone. I could not see paying for personal phone service when i had it free, just with another carrier.

It being open software is what takes getting used too, the splintered software versions, slow updates via handset makers and carriers, who probably really do not want to get involved in the cellphone OS software biz to begin with but did anyway because they want to sign people up on contracts, need the phones to attract customers.

Yes, I know it's new, but even the first Iphone performed better than this. I did hate the fact only one thing could work at a time, it was a sore point with me. In fact I hated that fact. Sure it's nice to change wallpapers and themes etc etc, but I need a phone that functions, and with crap ware pre installed that cannot be removed and actually eats up valuable and precious resources on an already memory strapped phone is crazy to say the least.

yes, it has potential, i hear that and believe that, but right now, android has no direction or standards. If this is not changed this OS will be just a geek plaything and not adopted by the masses.

I am struggling with this underpowered low memory phone for business every day, my 3 year old Ipod runs circles around this thing as far as speed and memory go. It opens a 1,545 page pdf tech manual in less than half the time it takes my hero. Of course the ipod does not multitask, to be fair, but the hero is supposed to be able too, right?

I really do like Android for what it could be, and it seems a year and a half later it should be farther along then it is. Like it or not, Apple has set the bar very high, as well as expectations of performance, reliability, speed and power.

i want android to succeed, but some of these issues just confound me.

very nicely said.. i agree 100 percent

 

[IOWA]

Anybody notice when people go off into the typical "iPhone rant" they:

1. Are new with very little constructive/any posts.
2. Don't bother researching devices before they take the plunge.
3. Don't know anything about how the phones themselves work.
4. Deny that anything is wrong/missing from the iPhone, and usually give various responses such as "iPhone multitasks enough" or "but it has polish"

- Seriously? what good is "polish" if you cant do the most basic of features well, like MAKE PHONE CALLS or RECEIVE MMS (pre-3gs), or what every other mobile platform does, is multi task. Would you like a nice polished up Ford Mustang with a Geo prism barely functioning motor?? Wake up. That is exactly what the iPhone is.

5. Says iPhone has more "apps"

- I'm willing to bet there are actually only 1k or so "unique" apps, and by unique i mean there are other copycat apps that do the same thing. So a count of how many "apps" iPhone has is both inconclusive and irrelevant. Meaning it doesn't matter. So if you need 8 different apps to change your screensaver, ( which ironically the iPhone CANT DO), then so be it.

-Also most of the apps that do exist are useless. If you need an "app" to figure out whats on sale at Walmart, and your too lazy to open your phone browser, then thats your fault.

6. iPhone is standardized

-Well Communism had food rationed, and everything everyone got was standardized, does that make it right? nope.

-That is also why apple lost the PC war, they can't see past their nose, and apple will lose the phone war too.

-iPhone plays mp3s

So does every other phone. Even most dumb phones. Truth be told, my Sanyo katana dlx out performed the first iPhone in 95% of categories, AND it was a flip phone. (dumb phone)

7. iPhone revolutionized cell phones!

-No it didn't. There STILL isn't a platform that out performs WinMo. Period. Yes the GUI is dated, but on terms of pure function, WinMo still has everyone beat, even Android. And Windows Mobile 7 GUI is supposed to be pretty darn good. iPhone didn't revolutionize shit. It's just a bunch of apple fankids who had to have the device, and some decent marketing to grab the rest. And when it comes to email, RIM is still the best, but others are catching up. All iPhone did, was introduce an easy to use, semi-smart phone, (yes semi, b/c it is not a real smartphone) for the technically challenged. Which sadly is most of the worlds population. Most people who complain about GUI's and Ease of use don't understand technology, and can't figure things out on their own.

8. but but but iPhone can....

NO IT CANT. This is where the CryPhone Crybabies make up excuses for iPhones lack of functionality, and they show their true green eyed nature. I seriously can't wait for iPhone to die, and it will, soon.

 

[AndroidSPCS]

Many reasons I think:

1. Android is still a fairly *new* platform. People are expecting worlds out of this platform, even though it is so new. A lot of bugs / features are still being worked out, and it gets fairly complex with all the various manufacturers / carriers / apps / versions.

2. A lot of people who get Android phones are really new to smartphones. They have no idea what a smartphone is like, or even how to use a computer properly. Hence the lack of experience / knowledge makes it a frustrating experience for them. For the vast majority of folks like this, the iPhone is a perfect device because you can't really screw it up. You can mess up Android if you're not careful, since it's so highly customizable.

3. People get bored of phones very quickly, so you see a lot of people lusting after the next big thing. They get tired of the Droid and want the Nexus One, and then the next halo phone after that. So it never ends.

4. Finally, some people just like to complain. It helps them to vent their frustration, stress, whatever. And for many it's just their nature or habit.