I have the droid on verizons network. Probably the best phone I've owned to date.

 

Like I said ... as a previous Android user ... there is no comparison. However, if this phone didn't exist I'd have a Nexus One in my pocket.

Stupid question here about the iPhone time zone support.

 

I am traveling back to the 'Lou in a couple weeks for a crap ton more wedding appointments.  The last time I went, I still had a Blackberry, so I could choose the time zone for each calendar entry.  Now I have my iPhone, and I am confused about the time zone support instructions.

 

Currently, I have my date and time to "set automatically", and I have time zone support turned on.  But I have all these appointments that I want to be at the correct time in Central Time once I get to St. Louis.  Given my current settings, should I enter them according to their Central Time times or their Eastern Time times?  For example, if I have a 10am appointment, should I enter it as 10am or 11am?

^ The appointments should be synchronized with the clock of the phone>The clock on the phone should be synced with the network>The network time will be based on the time-zone.

 

So, in short ... the appointments/reminders should alert you based on where the phone is.

Just a follow-up ...

 

After owning the N900 for 4 months since I last posted on it ...

 

There still is no phone that can compete with the N900. After owning 2 iPhones, Android, Symbian, Blackberry, etc. The N900 still dominates in every category aside from screen size (T-Mobile HD2 has a 4.3" display), but the N900 and HD2 have the same resolution - 480x800. Since the N900 has a smaller physical screen, it's resolution will be higher.

 

The Cortex A8 processor was built to easily handle over 1Ghz and sure enough - there's a kernal to overclock the processor to that speed. I'll probably install the 850Mhz kernal.

 

With T-Mobile 3G speed getting bumped up to HSPA+, there is even less reason to have 100,000 fart apps as the browser (firefox) let's me view ANYTHING (even though there are way more than enough apps available).

 

So, for those of you that want the freedom of an actual smartphone, flash, and top of line specs - the N900 stands alone. Still.

 

The HD2 is tempting though ... especially since you can dual-boot in Android!

 

 

Just a follow-up ...

 

After owning the N900 for 4 months since I last posted on it ...

 

There still is no phone that can compete with the N900. After owning 2 iPhones, Android, Symbian, Blackberry, etc. The N900 still dominates in every category aside from screen size (T-Mobile HD2 has a 4.3" display), but the N900 and HD2 have the same resolution - 480x800. Since the N900 has a smaller physical screen, it's resolution will be higher.

 

The Cortex A8 processor was built to easily handle over 1Ghz and sure enough - there's a kernal to overclock the processor to that speed. I'll probably install the 850Mhz kernal.

 

With T-Mobile 3G speed getting bumped up to HSPA+, there is even less reason to have 100,000 fart apps as the browser (firefox) let's me view ANYTHING (even though there are way more than enough apps available).

 

So, for those of you that want the freedom of an actual smartphone, flash, and top of line specs - the N900 stands alone. Still.

 

The HD2 is tempting though ... especially since you can dual-boot in Android!

 

I have not used the N900, but would like to play around with it some time.

 

I have used the iPhone/iPod Touch extensively and currently own the Motorola Droid.  There is no doubt that the Droid blows away the iPhone in every way except maybe the slickness of the UI.  (Can anybody ever beat Apple in that regards?)

 

Maybe it's just because I've gotten used to capacitive touch screens and my experiences with resistive touch screens (LG Voyager, LG enV Touch, and older Palm devices) were terrible, but I just can't imagine a resistive touch screen working as well as a capacitive touch screen.  I love to be able to flick with a feather of a touch.  There's no way even the best resistive screens can provide this experience.  Maybe there are other ways in which a resistive touch screen makes the experience better, but I don't know what they would be.  What is it that you like about the N900's resistive touch screen?

 

I don't know too much else about the OS or apps for the N900, but it does look like a great phone from what I've seen.

Just a follow-up ...

 

After owning the N900 for 4 months since I last posted on it ...

 

There still is no phone that can compete with the N900. After owning 2 iPhones, Android, Symbian, Blackberry, etc. The N900 still dominates in every category aside from screen size (T-Mobile HD2 has a 4.3" display), but the N900 and HD2 have the same resolution - 480x800. Since the N900 has a smaller physical screen, it's resolution will be higher.

 

The Cortex A8 processor was built to easily handle over 1Ghz and sure enough - there's a kernal to overclock the processor to that speed. I'll probably install the 850Mhz kernal.

 

With T-Mobile 3G speed getting bumped up to HSPA+, there is even less reason to have 100,000 fart apps as the browser (firefox) let's me view ANYTHING (even though there are way more than enough apps available).

 

So, for those of you that want the freedom of an actual smartphone, flash, and top of line specs - the N900 stands alone. Still.

 

The HD2 is tempting though ... especially since you can dual-boot in Android!

 

I have not used the N900, but would like to play around with it some time.

 

I have used the iPhone/iPod Touch extensively and currently own the Motorola Droid.  There is no doubt that the Droid blows away the iPhone in every way except maybe the slickness of the UI.  (Can anybody ever beat Apple in that regards?)

 

Maybe it's just because I've gotten used to capacitive touch screens and my experiences with resistive touch screens (LG Voyager, LG enV Touch, and older Palm devices) were terrible, but I just can't imagine a resistive touch screen working as well as a capacitive touch screen.  I love to be able to flick with a feather of a touch.  There's no way even the best resistive screens can provide this experience.  Maybe there are other ways in which a resistive touch screen makes the experience better, but I don't know what they would be.  What is it that you like about the N900's resistive touch screen?

 

I don't know too much else about the OS or apps for the N900, but it does look like a great phone from what I've seen.

 

jam40jeff,

 

It's really hard for me to explain the display of the N900.

 

First of all ... you cannot even think about comparing it to the env, voyager, palm, etc. whole different ball game here. So, get all of the negatives you're used to seeing with those phones and forget about it.

 

Secondly, the U.S. is sadly behind everyone else in the world when it comes to cellphones and its technology - especially Europe. Many countries wouldn't even think about capacitive screens in the winter. I was enjoying my phone and my gloves this past winter! Resistive isn't going anywhere my friend!  :wink2:

 

The best way for me to describe it ... unlike resistive screens in the past, this one's screen is EXTREMELY tight, if that makes sense (like a glass screen)? ... and I've heard over and over with reviews that the brightness of the screen will burn your retinas out. I just looked at mind and I'm on one bar out of five! lol ... Thirdly, if you've ever seen the HD2 in person, imagine a screen resolution higher than that ... basically it's noticeably better than it and blows the iPhones display out of the water.

 

For comparison reasons (PPI = Pixels per inch):

iPhone - 165 ppi

HD2 - 217 ppi

Droid - 265

N900 - 267

 

So, I say all of that to say this ... dominates every cellphone in resolution, a ridiculous brightness level, extremely responsive screen, and it being scratch resistant I'll take this any day over iPhone.

 

Another thing you have to ask yourself ... why are styli (electronic) becoming so popular? It's easy ... as our browsers become more and more advance and allow us to view the internet how it should be viewed, a stylus can come in handy when optional ... most of the time I use the camera zoom, double-tap, or finger swirl to zoom in, but accuracy when clicking a link will always give resistive the upper-hand.

 

There are thousands of apps, it's open-source, but you don't need them. Just open up firefox or Chrome! I remember the first time I checked my Gmail account and it loaded my inbox up with my customized theme and everything ... just how I see it on a computer! lol

 

YouTube, it does the same thing. Sites don't see you on a mobile, they see you on a computer and that's how I want it. If I want the mobile version, I just put a "m.____.com" at the beginning.

 

Honestly, I can't see myself ever going with another cellphone, unless they release a newer version on Maemo and a larger display with larger keyboard and overall thinner.

 

If you are ever in Cincy, I'd let you check it out!

 

 

Actually Nokia and Intel are working on something together ...

 

Here's a video showing off some of their future devices:

 

That is a neat machine, I must say. The thing which keeps me from looking at it hard is the question of what do you need to do to run it at it's intended capacity? I mean, I am sure that if you want you can just do the usual stuff with it like make telephone calls (how quaint), run apps, get on the internet and send e-mails, text and annoy your friends with fart apps BUT you are talking about reprogramming parts of it, I am sure I could do it but...why? There might be a reason and I might just love dealing with assembly language if there is a reason to do that (just kidding about the assembly language). I am saying that with an open mind. I have not bought anything yet and probably won't until the smoke clears, so I want to explore fully.

 

I really love to own a good smartphone to run my business and, yes, waste time and have fun as well. Now that you have had your N900 for a month longer or so, are you still as blown away by it as you were? There have been and will be a lot of competitors popping up from now until end of summer especially (like it or not iPhone does tend to attract competition), what are your views now?

Well the new Iphone sounds like a small improvement, slightly better antenna and resolution. Though the gyroscope looks interesting.

I am watching it now on Ars Technica and Jobs is telling everyone all about it.

It's OVER. Any non-iphone user will be marginalized, ostracized, sodomized, disenfranchised, estranged . . .

 

FBI just issued a report code red - concern about an increase in Honor Killers due to the great shame non-iphone users will bring to their families.

Well, I just found out that android is for porn. Who knew? Now I find out that anyone who doesn't have an iPhone4 is persona non grata. Gad, what a world we live in. Really got to toe the line...or else.

 

I thought that the video part was really the filet mignon of it all. I would use mine for business and I do put up videos (and podcasts) and that would be great to have in one small device. I suppose that is my favorite part.

I thought that the video part was really the filet mignon of it all. I would use mine for business and I do put up videos (and podcasts) and that would be great to have in one small device. I suppose that is my favorite part.

 

Do they claim only an iPhone can do that? :roll:

No. But it's a nice high def sort of video which you can edit with the phone in a number of ways which I think is pretty advanced. I can take perfectly terrible video right now with my Blackberry, unrivaled for its bad quality except probably by my previous cellphone (a Nokia).

You can take hi-def video with many phones now, but the built-in video editing may give the iPhone a leg up until someone makes a good video editor for Android (unless there is one out already, I don't do much with videos).

It looked pretty involved, right down to being able to put music with your video, stills, and other things. Now everyone can be a Cecil B. deMille.

The new iPhone is definitely an improvement, but it's been bitten by the restriction bug. Again.

 

The front-facing video calling feature, limited to only wifi?! Apple/At&t; why?! I swear, I cannot wait till At&t is out of the picture.

 

Camera resolution; still lagging competition. 5 MP was for the 2009 high-end phone base. Thank God they finally added flash LED.

 

Wifi; it's good they finally added 802.11n ... My Time Capsule is N, why wouldn't their phone be 802.11n? Oh yeah ... I know why.

 

Screen; hats off to Apple for pulling off that resolution! It's about damn time ... however, I would've loved to see AMOLED instead.

 

720p is good, but I'd loved it if Apple blew away the competition with 1080 recording. A company called Renesas Tech Corp. has already been making and shipping out cell-phone processors that record 1080 @ 30fps and Dolby 5.1 playback without sacrificing battery life (along with 14MP cameras).

 

http://asia.cnet.com/crave/2010/04/19/1080p-video-capture-coming-to-htc-phones-in-2011/

http://www.product-reviews.net/2010/02/16/14-mp-camera-1080p-at-30fps-video-recording-coming-to-smartphones/

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/renesas_now_shipping_tiny_1080pcapable_cell_phone_processor

 

Battery life is great, especially compared to the competition, but what if you want a spare or you li-ion starts losing its life? Cell-phone tech is rapidly increasing, whereas battery tech is not.

 

Screen-size; completely subjective. I like the 4"+ size, but others will think that it's too big so 3.5" is a good medium.

 

HD space; still 32GB ... wtf? When I had my iPhone 32GB I had to constantly move things around to free up space. Make it expandable, Apple. Problem solved.

 

Here's a nice side-by-side comparison and the Nokia N8 still comes out of top, spec-wise:

 

http://www.engadget.com/2010/06/07/iphone-4-vs-the-smartphone-elite-evo-4g-n8-pre-plus-and-hd2/

"Here's a nice side-by-side comparison and the Nokia N8 still comes out of top, spec-wise:"

 

I think this is the biggest misnomer about what the media and everyone else is doing when they go looking for iPhone killers.  The iPhone is not the best phone in any one area, but it is very user friendly and pretty darn good in a lot of areas.  That ease of use and multitude of features is what really made and continues to make it such a game changer.

AT&T's new 2 gig cap for $25/month is going to be a disaster for people thinking of purchasing ipad 3gs.  It's bad enough that new users will have to somehow monitor their data on iphones (2 gigs might be enough for some, definitely not me), but the ipad 3g is simply not worth it with this cap.  Who on earth would buy one, knowing you only get maybe 15 hours of video in a pay period - that's horrible!  It's only 7-8 streaming movies, which would not even come close to a lot of people's needs if they're using netflix, youtube, or other legitmate online screening programs.

 

What a horrible decision by AT&T. 

^ At&t has been a disaster from the beginning with the iPhone.

 

Read on Engadget the other day, now O2 is capping their iPhone data plans - something Europeans have never even experienced. There's a lot of backlash starting to brew and it's only going to get worse.

 

Most folks do not monitor their data usage, boy are they in for a treat!

As far as I'm aware the 2GB plan is not a cap but just a contract level of data.  You'll be charged $10 for each additional gigabyte.  Additionally, with wireless data speeds becoming increasingly competitive they need to provide a reason for users to want to use WiFi when possible.  The wireless telcos are simply not ready to be the primary source of internet access for consumers, which is what is just over the horizon. I think this is a smart move by AT&T for that reason, as well as lowering the bar for entry into the smart phone market.  I expect to see similar rollouts from the other 3 major carriers by next summer.  However, I also expect that the unlimited plan won't totally disappear but be priced so that those niches that require it (Truckers, and other power users) will still find value in it but not the other 99% of the customer base.

Is this the multi-tiered system that telecoms have wanted to install for years?

Let's not forget that the 2GB cap is on their 3G network (with $5 off the cost of their unlimited plan).  You will have unlimited usage if you have a WiFi access point (in your home, at the coffee house, etc...).  I could watch unlimited Hulu when I'm at home.  XUMelanie and I will be getting our phones as soon as we can order  :-).

My point is that this will screw up the ipad 3g, not the ipad regular.  The whole point is that you need not rely on wifi with these specific ipad 3g products, yet the cap will just deter consumers from buying them.  You might as well just buy the ipad non 3g since you will end up deactivating the 3g on the ipad 3g once you hit the 2 gigs, unless youre willing to chance it. 

 

Just a bad bad call.

OK, all you bums, who got the iPhone? How long did you wait (or did you wimp out and have it sent to you). Anyone in Cincinnati? What was it like? Love it? Hate it? Meh? What's your opinion.

XUMelanie and I will be ordering our phones on Tuesday.  We weren't able to pre-order for days due to AT&T/Apple system issues and decided to wait until they got their act together.

Went with my wife to the Apple store over the weekend (looking at iPad for her). I love the new iPhone. Love the way it looks, it's display, it's speed. Everything (of course it's operating in optimal conditions in the store, but still, very nice).

 

I get a corporate issued BB, so it's not for me (I'm not carrying 2 phones. I don't care how cool it is). But my wife may get one when her contract is up.

Question about the ipad:

 

If I bought one, would I hook it up to my computer and download all of my back-upped programs (from my iphone) via itunes or would I need to download everything from scratch?

The timeframe of smartphones coming out is crazy these days ... Advancing very quick!

 

 

OK, all you bums, who got the iPhone? How long did you wait (or did you wimp out and have it sent to you). Anyone in Cincinnati? What was it like? Love it? Hate it? Meh? What's your opinion.

 

Got to the Kenwood Towne Center at 4:30 PM and waited an hour and a half. Originally stopped by at 7:15 AM but the line was to Nordstrom...

 

Love the phone! Screen and overall speed of device is amazing. Set-up and transfer from my old iPhone 3G took about half an hour. Have yet to drop a call, of course I don't hold my phone by the very bottom.

Ohhhh, boo hoo. I am telling myself to wait for the white one. So, that is what I am going to do. I keep on hearing how good the new 4 is. And if Cincinnatus is complaining about the speed at which the new smartphones are emerging, then it is a real concern. I was just hearing about the android X and a lot of folks are talking about their android, etc.

 

What's the deal? Do new androids only come out with one particular feature on them and then everyone goes mad for them. Then one month later another version of it comes out with a new name but this time it does what the previous one does but adds on "big deal" feature, so everyone has to get one of them, and so on? That's what it sounds like.

No, android is just an operating system produced by Google.  So you get lots of competition from various manufacturers like Motorola and HTC, who all have their own versions across multiple carriers (Cincinnati Bell, Verizon, AT&T, etc).  This drives innovation as manufacturers try to fill a niche.  This is different than the iPhone which is only made by Apple, available only on AT&T, and with a new version only once per year.

Ah, so you are telling me that each one of the carriers has their own take on Android OS? In that case, why is there such a crush when HTC comes out with one new phone, then there is another crush when HTC come out with another? This seems to be a monthly event. Do those phones use different parts or functions of the Android OS? For instance, I think there was an HTC Invincible, then there was the EVO, now there is the X. What gives? I remember that everyone on the planet was aquivver over the Invincible, then as soon as it came out no one was talking about it because they were falling all over themselves because the EVO was going to come out. Now everyone seems to be having fits waiting for the X.

Ah, so you are telling me that each one of the carriers has their own take on Android OS? In that case, why is there such a crush when HTC comes out with one new phone, then there is another crush when HTC come out with another? This seems to be a monthly event. Do those phones use different parts or functions of the Android OS? For instance, I think there was an HTC Invincible, then there was the EVO, now there is the X. What gives? I remember that everyone on the planet was aquivver over the Invincible, then as soon as it came out no one was talking about it because they were falling all over themselves because the EVO was going to come out. Now everyone seems to be having fits waiting for the X.

 

The Droid X is made by Motorola.  The HTC Droid Incredible is the only HTC Android phone to come out for Verizon since last year's Droid Eris.  The HTC EVO 4G is a big deal because it is a 4G phone for Sprint.  Also, Android phones are being made for AT&T and T-Mobile.  You hear more about Android phones because they are in use across multiple carriers, made by multiple manufacturers (carriers don't make the phones), and collectively have sold better than iPhones as of late (and in my opinion many of them are better).

 

Also, I think that people are going crazy waiting for the new version of the OS (even though it's a relatively minor upgrade), Android 2.2, more so than they are for the new phones.  I have the original Droid and have no desire to upgrade my phone right now, but I can't wait for Android 2.2 and some of the great features and speed increases it is supposed to bring.

No, the carriers just allow manufacturers to use the Android OS.  It's the manufacturers that each have their own take on it.  For example, Motorola has "The Droid", which has a slidable keyboard, whereas most android phones just have an on-screen keyboard.  HTC tends to have a scrollball at the bottom of their phones.  I think that the Droid X is actually Motorola, which looks a lot like one of HTC's but without that scrollball.  You just hear a lot about each release because each manufacturer is hyping their new device.  People buy into it because these releases tend to alternate between carriers.  The Verizon people get excited about the Droid X and Droid 2, then the AT&T people get fired up 2 months later about some new Android phone on their platform, then the Sprint folks, etc, etc.

No, the carriers just allow manufacturers to use the Android OS.  It's the manufacturers that each have their own take on it.  For example, Motorola has "The Droid", which has a slidable keyboard, whereas most android phones just have an on-screen keyboard.  HTC tends to have a scrollball at the bottom of their phones.  I think that the Droid X is actually Motorola, which looks a lot like one of HTC's but without that scrollball.  You just hear a lot about each release because each manufacturer is hyping their new device.  People buy into it because these releases tend to alternate between carriers.  The Verizon people get excited about the Droid X and Droid 2, then the AT&T people get fired up 2 months later about some new Android phone on their platform, then the Sprint folks, etc, etc.

 

Thats incorrect, its the Google that decides what manufacture will use their OS.  The carriers then decides what services to include (on each model/brand) and when updates will be made to each platform for said model/brand, released under their flag.

Things, they are so complex now. I must study what has been said regarding the OS's and phones themselves.

 

I was looking through some of the offerings by some of the carriers. There should be a price war starting about now, is there in your opinion?

 

I concentrated on Cincinnati Bell, just for purposes of understanding. They have (as their "big important models" i.e. 3G which involves a data plan, natch) the Blaze (at $299 unsubsidized price), Blackberry Bold 9700 at $499 unsubz), Nexus One ($529 unsubz), and several others which are not so famous which are going from an average of $149 unsubz to a whopping $499 for a Pharos (which I had not heard about). Looks like you can pay anything (comparing unsubz to make all things equal) from $529-$149 for an android-type phone. Any idea of where the price is going to go from there? Just curious.

I'm not a big mobile phone fan, as I tend to loose them.  But I do like the HTC phones, they are hot.  The droid OS is very well put together.

Thats incorrect, its the Google that decides what manufacture will use their OS.

 

Are you sure?  Google open-sources their OS (Android), so I can't imagine they could control what manufacturers are able to use it.

Perhaps this is just hearsay, but it is my understanding that Google actually pays each phone manufacturer $5 to include its OS on their phone.  That's not charge, but actually pays THEM.  Please set me straight if this isn't quite right.  I've heard this from two different people who own Apple stock and follow the industry closely.

Thats incorrect, its the Google that decides what manufacture will use their OS.

 

Are you sure?  Google open-sources their OS (Android), so I can't imagine they could control what manufacturers are able to use it.

 

Yes, you cant just make a phone and say it will run google OS.  They have contracts with the manufactures that will use their operating system.

Thats incorrect, its the Google that decides what manufacture will use their OS.

 

Are you sure?  Google open-sources their OS (Android), so I can't imagine they could control what manufacturers are able to use it.

 

Yes, you cant just make a phone and say it will run google OS.  They have contracts with the manufactures that will use their operating system.

 

Do you have any documentation to support this claim?  I am pretty certain that any manufacturer can package Android with their hardware.  The difficult part is getting a carrier to pick up your phone.

 

Licensing

 

With the exception of brief update periods, Android has been available as open source since 21 October 2008. Google opened the entire source code (including network and telephony stacks) under an Apache License.

 

With the Apache License, vendors can add closed-source extensions without submitting those back to the open source community.

 

Some apps, such as Google Maps, do require a contract, but it is fully possible to run Android on a device without these closed-source Google Apps (and the debugger included with the SDK does just this).

No documentation.  However I've been told that the manufacturer of a phone, needs an agreement to build a phone using X operating system with the provider of said OS system in conjunction with X carrier.

 

Example BB can make the 9000 with OS 5.0 but AT&T does not have to carry it.  It can simply chose to distribute the 9700 with OS 5.0, but not upgrade the other BB using OS 4.5.

 

Its a big dance between the device manufacturers, OS and service providers.

 

It's an agreement between the carrier and the manufacturer, yes.  And some OS's require an agreement between the manufacturer and OS (Verizon's proprietary OS, iOS, BlackberryOS), but Android is not one of them.  The carrier simply has to say "yes, we'll carry your phone/OS combination".

It's an agreement between the carrier and the manufacturer, yes.  And some OS's require an agreement between the manufacturer and OS (Verizon's proprietary OS, iOS, BlackberryOS), but Android is not one of them.  The carrier simply has to say "yes, we'll carry your phone/OS combination".

 

Then explain to me how the decision and agreement is formed to put said OS on X device?  You need a contract?  It's just doesn't happen.

It's an agreement between the carrier and the manufacturer, yes.  And some OS's require an agreement between the manufacturer and OS (Verizon's proprietary OS, iOS, BlackberryOS), but Android is not one of them.  The carrier simply has to say "yes, we'll carry your phone/OS combination".

 

Then explain to me how the decision and agreement is formed to put said OS on X device?  You need a contract?  It's just doesn't happen.

 

Yes, a contract between the carrier and manufacturer.

 

Google open-sources their OS (they just did so with Android 2.2).  Each manufacturer picks it up and applies it to their device as long as the manufacturers contract with the carrier allows them to do so, and they add in their own modifications or remove pieces of the OS if the carrier (not Google) forces them to do so.  Yes, this IS different than how the other OS agreements work.  This is also why you see the same device on different carriers running different versions of the OS (Droid/Milestone).  If it was up to Google, they would have no reason not to want the same device running the same version of their OS everywhere.

^An interesting article that covers some of that:

 

http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2010/06/ars-explains-android-fragmentation.ars

 

Android fragmentation: something to fear?

By Ryan Paul | Last updated 21 days ago

Fragmentation is often cited as a major challenge for the Linux platform and mobile software ecosystem. The word gets thrown around a lot and tends to be used as a catch-all phrase to describe a wide range of loosely connected issues.

 

The rapid growth of the Android ecosystem and the significant number of new Android devices that are reaching the market with heavy software customizations has raised some questions about whether Google's Linux platform is going to succumb to the fragmentation menace. In this article, we'll take a look at what fragmentation means for mobile Linux and how Google's operating system addresses some of the biggest challenges...

 

 

Makes sense...also explains why we are seeing some Android tablet devices that do not work with Android Market.  They must not have a license with Google.

And if Cincinnatus is complaining about the speed at which the new smartphones are emerging, then it is a real concern.

 

Complaining? By saying how great it is how fast smartphones are advancing?

Google DID choose T-Mobile to carry the very first Android phone to ever come out: G1

 

However, any manufacturer can choose to manufacturer a phone to run Android. This is why your phone intellects are fans of Android and your hipsters tend to lean towards iPhone. One is open source and the other is not.

 

Which is exactly why Google led and formed the OHA ...

 

Members of the OHA and summary from wiki:

 

"History

 

The OHA was established on 5 November 2007, led by Google with 34 members including mobile handset makers, application developers, some mobile carriers and chip makers.[2] Android, the flagship software of the alliance, is based on an open source license and will compete against other mobile platforms from Apple, Microsoft, Nokia, Palm, Research In Motion, Symbian, and bada.

 

...

 

 

Member firms include Dell, Google, HTC, Intel, Motorola, Qualcomm, Texas Instruments, Samsung, LG, T-Mobile, Nvidia, and Wind River Systems.[1]

"

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_handset_alliance#Members

 

... and for the record, let's not forget TMO's Android lineup:

 

G1, Nexus 1, Samsung Behold II, MyTouch, MyTouch Slide, Moto Cliq, Moto Cliq XT, Moto Charm, Samsung Vibrant, Garmin phone, TMO G2 ... and soon to be a Huawai version ... so leaving out TMO when discussing different models of Android with carriers is just silly ... they were one of the first carriers to be on board with open source/OHA and are the most lenient when it comes to providing an unlock code. They are a European Co. with 150mil strong for God's sake and they aren't used to the American AT&T way of doing business - which is screwing people making the company profitable.

 

Open Source = Hot Mess to most users. I'm glad Android exist to keep Apple in line but I'll stick with Apple's impressive around experience. Speaking of Android, how's that data-stealing app you just downloaded treating you. ;-)