or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Google 'Nexus One' pictured, rumored coming to T-Mobile
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Google 'Nexus One' pictured, rumored coming to T-Mobile - Page 4

post #121 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brainless View Post

Ok, try that slowly for you again. We talked about fragmentation from the developer point of view. Although the interface (mostly of the home screen) might be different between different Android models, the API is pretty much stable through different versions. They are adding new features, similar to your "natural progression of the iPhone", but at the same time, more and more devices gets the OS update, so before developer is done with application that uses new 2.0 features (API), the use base will probably have it. On the other hand, most of Android devices are pretty much the same from the hardware point of view, there are no devices left in the cold without GPS, Camera, Compass, so you can count on devices to have them. So you can create applications using those features that will address entire platform, while on iPhone you are out of such luck. Some of the features are optional on Android, so perhaps we'll see one day a device, that ships without GPS, so the platform gets more fragmented so it will be on par with iPhone, but right now it is simply less fragmented. I know the truth hurts, especially if you still repeat your mantra "OS and HW is from the same manufacturer so it gotta be better" but in fact it is not.

iPhone is still very powerful and nice device, but I wouldn't play that "fragmentation" card against Android, because if you look at the facts, it sounds silly.

*

What you have posted above, and in prior posts is technically true from a developer perspective.


Lets look at it from a different standpoint.


For example, the Touch doesn't have a camera, so if you develop an app using the camera, you cannot sell it to the Touch users.... or maybe you can! Being creative, you as a developer have written an app that enhances the built-in camera function. What if you were to supply the same capability to the Photos stored on the Touch? By simply re-thinking (re-engineering) your app you could have potentially millions of new sales.

Certainly, this also applies to the many, varied devices running Android. You could engineer your app so that it ran on every flavor (pun intended) of Android OS, and every device (hardware set) that runs Android... and support (or, at least, tolerate) every manufacturer's custom UI.

But, would you?


From a practical perspective, probably not! There is not enough sales potential to do this. More likely, you would cherry-pick a few popular Android versions and a few popular devices.

Which ones?


What the iPhone/Touch platform does is assist you to make the the decision of which OS versions and which devices to target.

You can [fairly] easily find the population of OS versions and devices on the iPhone/Touch platform. With this information, you can make a business decision on which versions will give you the ROI to make it worthwhile.

Then, with the app store you can market your versions as lites, downgrades, upgrades, in-app extensions... whatever makes sense.


Again, you can do this with the Android platform, but it is, likely, harder and costlier because of the proliferation of choices. Again, would you? Which ones?

Then there is the whole issue of cross-grades. How do you handle the customer who has purchased a version of your app that requires a specific OS version and device, and wants to change to a more (or less) capable OS version and device.

What do you charge him?

What do you do about the one he already has?


Finally, we're talking a matter of degree of proliferation (or fragmentation, if you prefer).


It is easier for the Developer to write, sell, maintain, update fewer versions for fewer devices running on fewer OS versions.


And when the manufacturer(s) provide a lurch forward with new hardware or software capabilities, it is easier to deal with a single manufacturer and a single lurch.


That's looking at the situation from a practical perspective.

*
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #122 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by McDave View Post

So, to summarise, what fragmentation/differentiation really means is roughly 1% market share....

Why did you bother to quote me at all if you were going to misrepresent everything I said?
post #123 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

*


Lets look at it from a different standpoint.



Certainly, this also applies to the many, varied devices running Android. You could engineer your app so that it ran on every flavor (pun intended) of Android OS, and every device (hardware set) that runs Android... and support (or, at least, tolerate) every manufacturer's custom UI.

...

What the iPhone/Touch platform does is assist you to make the the decision of which OS versions and which devices to target.


That's looking at the situation from a practical perspective.

*

What you describe s exactly what every developer of desktop software is confronted with. The description of iPhone OS vs. Android OS sounds exactly like the situation with OSX vs. Windows 7.

So what's the Mac's market penetration on the desktop again? Has it broken double-digits?
post #124 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

What you describe s exactly what every developer of desktop software is confronted with. The description of iPhone OS vs. Android OS sounds exactly like the situation with OSX vs. Windows 7.

So what's the Mac's market penetration on the desktop again? Has it broken double-digits?

You can’t look at the end result and then deem that the situations to get to that state are the same. There are very different forces at work here. MS’ WinMo model is exactly like Windows for the desktop. Android is free, WinMo and Windows are not. It’s much more inline with other Linux distro out there, the difference being that Android is finding a great of success where Linux on the desktop has failed.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #125 of 141
iPhone and Nexus One on the same network? Something's up...
post #126 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

What you describe s exactly what every developer of desktop software is confronted with. The description of iPhone OS vs. Android OS sounds exactly like the situation with OSX vs. Windows 7.

So what's the Mac's market penetration on the desktop again? Has it broken double-digits?


*


I guess I didn't explain it very well:

The iPhone Developer is faced with (at most):

1) 3 releases of the OS

2) 4 different devices/hardware sets (storage capacity aside)

3) A single UI

4) 40-50 million potential customers

To target the entire potential, each developer would need to address 3x4x1=12 versions of his app for 40 million customers.

Because the current iPhone OS runs on all devices, I estimate you could develop for 1 OS version and still target, say 20-30 million customers with 1x4x1=4 versions of your app.


Now, I haven't followed Android closely enough to know the current fanout of OS releases, Devices, and UIs (those significant enough to matter to the developer). I also don't know the current population of Android devices out there.

I suspect, though, that are quite a bit more app versions needed to target a much smaller number of potential customers.


This, certainly, will change in the near future for both Apple and Android as new devices and features emerge.

IMO, both will need to have clear and distinct delineation of what goes with what.

It is easier for Apple because they control the hardware, software, marketing and product goals within a single organization.

Google can make the job easier (for developers) if:

1) they release a "Google" phone
2) or publish the "minimum requirements" to be acceptable as an "Android" phone
3) limit the APIs and extensions that are acceptable

But, then, Google would be walling the garden (to some extent).

Undoubtably, this would not be popular to the open source purists.


I guess the question is: can company X (Apple, Google or anyone else) support a reasonable number of variations (fragments) while, not sacrificing future innovation for legacy compatibility issues.

I believe that the developers will provide the answer!


*
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #127 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

I disagree.

Instead, the whole point of the iPhone was to make smartphone functionality readily usable by the stupidest among us. That is why, for example, there is only one hardware button on the front. That is why multi-taking is available only for a select subset of apps. That is why software additions are available only from one source.

The iPhone could be MUCH better if it were made for people of average intelligence, and without deferring to dolts who weren't able to stop their VCR from flashing"12:00" for 5 years straight. While not all iPhone users are stupid, all the stupid folks who want a smartphone have only one choice.

I'm hoping Android will be for the rest of us.

And that's an example of exactly the corrosive attitude that I was talking about.

There's an unfortunate tendency for the geek-ish to equate "likes to dick around with devices" with "smart", but that's completely untrue. In fact, I would go so far as to say the average geek suffers from a kind of dullwittedness, a failure of imagination that reduces the world to a system of parts and problems to be solved.

For instance, the average, smart, interesting, compassionate, well read, imaginative person doesn't give two fucks if the software all comes from the same place. Why would they? By what bizarre metric is an enthusiasm for wandering the internet in search of cool new builds of obscure apps a measure of intelligence?

Why is a single home button, with context specific buttons rendered in software, an indication that Apple thinks its users are stupid? Conversely, are we to imagine that the typical handset, pre-iPhone, bristling with hardware buttons that changed function depending on what you did last, were a testimate to their designer's faith in their user's cleverness? Because those UIs sucked, and anyone who isn't a petty platform bigot knows it.

VCRs don't get programmed because they have God-awful interfaces, as do most consumer electronics. They rely on tiny buttons and invisible menu structures and single line displays to manipulate a vast range of "features" that the engineering geeks thought were useful. The same engineering geeks that think that people who can't master their terrible interface are "stupid."

Folks have been conned into believing that it's them-- that they "just don't get machines", but the fact is, the people that make those machines "just don't get people." Geeks with the inevitable IT desk attitude about stuff they know are only too happy to perpetuate this nonsense, because they like their priesthood.

You go ahead and spread the word that iPhones are for stupid people, and that Android is where it's at. When you meet anyone that's frustrated that the app they downloaded doesn't work on the device they have, be sure to mock their asses for being nitwits who don't know how use their toys. Absolutely use the VCR line, everybody loves that. It's going to do wonders for the platform.

The iPhone has built its market share on jaw dropping revelation that normal people can actually make good use of most of its functionality. People like you are threatened by that, because it means your trivial skills at using poorly designed devices are exposed as the ridiculous con they are. Any wonder that Droid is being advertised as if it were a murderous robot? They know their demographic.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #128 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

And that's an example of exactly the corrosive attitude that I was talking about.

There's an unfortunate tendency for the geek-ish to equate "likes to dick around with devices" with "smart", but that's completely untrue. In fact, I would go so far as to say the average geek suffers from a kind of dullwittedness, a failure of imagination that reduces the world to a system of parts and problems to be solved.

For instance, the average, smart, interesting, compassionate, well read, imaginative person doesn't give two fucks if the software all comes from the same place. Why would they? By what bizarre metric is an enthusiasm for wandering the internet in search of cool new builds of obscure apps a measure of intelligence?

Why is a single home button, with context specific buttons rendered in software, an indication that Apple thinks its users are stupid? Conversely, are we to imagine that the typical handset, pre-iPhone, bristling with hardware buttons that changed function depending on what you did last, were a testimate to their designer's faith in their user's cleverness? Because those UIs sucked, and anyone who isn't a petty platform bigot knows it.

VCRs don't get programmed because they have God-awful interfaces, as do most consumer electronics. They rely on tiny buttons and invisible menu structures and single line displays to manipulate a vast range of "features" that the engineering geeks thought were useful. The same engineering geeks that think that people who can't master their terrible interface are "stupid."

Folks have been conned into believing that it's them-- that they "just don't get machines", but the fact is, the people that make those machines "just don't get people." Geeks with the inevitable IT desk attitude about stuff they know are only too happy to perpetuate this nonsense, because they like their priesthood.

You go ahead and spread the word that iPhones are for stupid people, and that Android is where it's at. When you meet anyone that's frustrated that the app they downloaded doesn't work on the device they have, be sure to mock their asses for being nitwits who don't know how use their toys. Absolutely use the VCR line, everybody loves that. It's going to do wonders for the platform.

The iPhone has built its market share on jaw dropping revelation that normal people can actually make good use of most of its functionality. People like you are threatened by that, because it means your trivial skills at using poorly designed devices are exposed as the ridiculous con they are. Any wonder that Droid is being advertised as if it were a murderous robot? They know their demographic.

+++ QFT

Here is the ad that began my 31-year attraction to Apple:

"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #129 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

And that's an example of exactly the corrosive attitude that I was talking about.

There's an unfortunate tendency for the geek-ish to equate "likes to dick around with devices" with "smart", but that's completely untrue. In fact, I would go so far as to say the average geek suffers from a kind of dullwittedness, a failure of imagination that reduces the world to a system of parts and problems to be solved.

For instance, the average, smart, interesting, compassionate, well read, imaginative person doesn't give two fucks if the software all comes from the same place. Why would they? By what bizarre metric is an enthusiasm for wandering the internet in search of cool new builds of obscure apps a measure of intelligence?

Why is a single home button, with context specific buttons rendered in software, an indication that Apple thinks its users are stupid? Conversely, are we to imagine that the typical handset, pre-iPhone, bristling with hardware buttons that changed function depending on what you did last, were a testimate to their designer's faith in their user's cleverness? Because those UIs sucked, and anyone who isn't a petty platform bigot knows it.

VCRs don't get programmed because they have God-awful interfaces, as do most consumer electronics. They rely on tiny buttons and invisible menu structures and single line displays to manipulate a vast range of "features" that the engineering geeks thought were useful. The same engineering geeks that think that people who can't master their terrible interface are "stupid."

Folks have been conned into believing that it's them-- that they "just don't get machines", but the fact is, the people that make those machines "just don't get people." Geeks with the inevitable IT desk attitude about stuff they know are only too happy to perpetuate this nonsense, because they like their priesthood.

You go ahead and spread the word that iPhones are for stupid people, and that Android is where it's at. When you meet anyone that's frustrated that the app they downloaded doesn't work on the device they have, be sure to mock their asses for being nitwits who don't know how use their toys. Absolutely use the VCR line, everybody loves that. It's going to do wonders for the platform.

The iPhone has built its market share on jaw dropping revelation that normal people can actually make good use of most of its functionality. People like you are threatened by that, because it means your trivial skills at using poorly designed devices are exposed as the ridiculous con they are. Any wonder that Droid is being advertised as if it were a murderous robot? They know their demographic.

While I agree with most of what you are saying, I still think people are dumb if they can't figure out how to turn on a computer with the power button, expect it to work during power outages, or other dumb stuff like that.

Of course, in those situations, Apple products won't really help them there either.
post #130 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by sprockkets View Post

While I agree with most of what you are saying, I still think people are dumb if they can't figure out how to turn on a computer with the power button, expect it to work during power outages, or other dumb stuff like that.

Of course, in those situations, Apple products won't really help them there either.

Well, sure, there are actual dumb people, who probably have difficulty with a lot of aspects of life.

But a great many perfectly intelligent people have been trained to believe that it's their failing that they can't operate the devices they own, past a few basics.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #131 of 141
It will be really interesting to see how this phone turns the wireless industry around in the United States. Hopefully it will end up much more like it is in Europe! There is already a community growing around discussing this phone. http://www.nexususers.com
post #132 of 141
How can there be a Nexus user's group when it doesn't exist yet? How is it supposed to "turn around the wireless industry in the United States"?
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #133 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

How can there be a Nexus user's group when it doesn't exist yet? How is it supposed to "turn around the wireless industry in the United States"?

There are plenty of support groups for religions and well
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #134 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

There are plenty of support groups for religions and well

And they call the iPhone the "Jesus phone".........

A fairly standard HTC handset with an incremental Android update gets sold directly by Google and it's the second coming.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #135 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

A fairly standard HTC handset with an incremental Android update gets sold directly by Google and it's the second coming.

There have been almost 3 years now. Weve run the gamut from the iPhone cant possibly be a sucess to the iPhone is going to fail in favour for this next phone. Nothing seems primed to take the iPhones position as the alpha phone, yet. Nexus One seems to be no different.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #136 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

There have been almost 3 years now. Weve run the gamut from the iPhone cant possibly be a sucess to the iPhone is going to fail in favour for this next phone. Nothing seems primed to take the iPhones position as the alpha phone, yet. Nexus One seems to be no different.

But there's always something-- a faster processor, a bigger screen, OLED, better camera, flashier animations in the UI.... because the iPhone's success was never more than a matter of specs, and whoever can make a touch screen phone with beefier hardware wins, I guess.

Now it's "sold directly by Google", apparently because if Google eats the subsidy instead of the carrier, and the carrier still gets to charge you the same monthly rate in a market that basically gives you no options, that's a revolution that changes everything.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #137 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

And that's an example of exactly the corrosive attitude that I was talking about.

There's an unfortunate tendency for the geek-ish to equate "likes to dick around with devices" with "smart", but that's completely untrue. In fact, I would go so far as to say the average geek suffers from a kind of dullwittedness, a failure of imagination that reduces the world to a system of parts and problems to be solved.

For instance, the average, smart, interesting, compassionate, well read, imaginative person doesn't give two fucks if the software all comes from the same place. Why would they? By what bizarre metric is an enthusiasm for wandering the internet in search of cool new builds of obscure apps a measure of intelligence?

Why is a single home button, with context specific buttons rendered in software, an indication that Apple thinks its users are stupid? Conversely, are we to imagine that the typical handset, pre-iPhone, bristling with hardware buttons that changed function depending on what you did last, were a testimate to their designer's faith in their user's cleverness? Because those UIs sucked, and anyone who isn't a petty platform bigot knows it.

VCRs don't get programmed because they have God-awful interfaces, as do most consumer electronics. They rely on tiny buttons and invisible menu structures and single line displays to manipulate a vast range of "features" that the engineering geeks thought were useful. The same engineering geeks that think that people who can't master their terrible interface are "stupid."

Folks have been conned into believing that it's them-- that they "just don't get machines", but the fact is, the people that make those machines "just don't get people." Geeks with the inevitable IT desk attitude about stuff they know are only too happy to perpetuate this nonsense, because they like their priesthood.

You go ahead and spread the word that iPhones are for stupid people, and that Android is where it's at. When you meet anyone that's frustrated that the app they downloaded doesn't work on the device they have, be sure to mock their asses for being nitwits who don't know how use their toys. Absolutely use the VCR line, everybody loves that. It's going to do wonders for the platform.

The iPhone has built its market share on jaw dropping revelation that normal people can actually make good use of most of its functionality. People like you are threatened by that, because it means your trivial skills at using poorly designed devices are exposed as the ridiculous con they are. Any wonder that Droid is being advertised as if it were a murderous robot? They know their demographic.

this is too good for just page 4 of some comments segment. so true and yet rarely so well articulated. applies to so much more than any iphone vs. android argument.
post #138 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

And that's an example of exactly the corrosive attitude that I was talking about.



Folks have been conned into believing that it's them-- that they "just don't get machines", but the fact is, the people that make those machines "just don't get people." Geeks with the inevitable IT desk attitude about stuff they know are only too happy to perpetuate this nonsense, because they like their priesthood.



I am not defending poor user interfaces. I am instead attacking the concept of reducing functionality in order to keep dolts from getting themselves into trouble, e.g., no multitasking.

Simplicity is a good thing. Limited functionality in order to acheive simplicity is not.

The trick is to make a full-featured device that is intuitive, with multiple, standard, obvious ways to accomplish every (!) task, able to be used and enjoyed by normal folks AND able to be customized as desired by the user.
post #139 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

I am not defending poor user interfaces. I am instead attacking the concept of reducing functionality in order to keep dolts from getting themselves into trouble, e.g., no multitasking.

Simplicity is a good thing. Limited functionality in order to acheive simplicity is not.

The trick is to make a full-featured device that is intuitive, with multiple, standard, obvious ways to accomplish every (!) task, able to be used and enjoyed by normal folks AND able to be customized as desired by the user.

I don't think the iPhone lacks multi-tasking because they think it will confuse people. Now they could, maybe, include a way to turn it on or off or allow only certain apps. Right now they don't so I don't spend much time worrying about it. I'm very happy with the iPhone and I think most people are. Perhaps having other ways to get apps might be nice but getting bad or infected apps would not be so nice. Everybody should use the phone they like.
post #140 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

I am not defending poor user interfaces. I am instead attacking the concept of reducing functionality in order to keep dolts from getting themselves into trouble, e.g., no multitasking.

Simplicity is a good thing. Limited functionality in order to acheive simplicity is not.

The trick is to make a full-featured device that is intuitive, with multiple, standard, obvious ways to accomplish every (!) task, able to be used and enjoyed by normal folks AND able to be customized as desired by the user.

Again, what you want is to be able to mess around with your phone-- looking at process managers, moving widgets, customizing work flows. That's fine, but, again, I think it's unreasonable to imagine that people who don't care to mess with their phone are "stupid." OK, it's more than unreasonable, it's arrogant and grossly off the mark.

As the iPhone has demonstrated, a pocketable general purpose computing device can put a great deal of functionality on your person while getting out of the way. Wanting one's devices to work transparently and with little hassle as possible is not a mark of stupidity, it's a mark of normalcy. Wanting multiple ways to do the same thing and the capacity for limitless customization is a mark of tech fetishism. It's like complaining that the Honda Civic is a car for "stupid people" because there's no convenient, user facing way to adjust the gear ratio on the transmission, or any way to swap around the instrument console. All you're actually saying is that most people don't share your particular enthusiasm for cars and their underpinnings.

It's simply untrue that the iPhone gives up much in the way of genuine functionality to achieve its ease of use; what you're talking about is more like the idea of functionality, as imagined by a technically inclined person. For such a person, it's satisfying to consider one's gadgets as being an open box of processes, available for scrutiny and modification. But most people don't have that hobby.

Computers are ubiquitous tools and appliances, now. Expecting everyone who uses one to be an enthusiast who wants to spend time communing with the nuts and bolts is a very dated idea. Claiming that people who don't care to become enthusiasts are dumb is just wrong, and a quick way to alienate customers.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #141 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

Why did you bother to quote me at all if you were going to misrepresent everything I said?

Er - because that's the whole point of quoting you? Your misrepresentation is my alternate viewpoint.

I was pointing out that Linux doesn't seem to be the runaway consumer success your postulation about market fragmentation suggests it should be. Addabox's comments give some insight as to why this could be &, I suspect, Android will follow by being little more than a technophile's wet dream.

McD
Android proves (as Windows & VHS did before it) that if you want to control people, give us choices and the belief we're capable of making them. We're all 'living' the American dream.
Reply
Android proves (as Windows & VHS did before it) that if you want to control people, give us choices and the belief we're capable of making them. We're all 'living' the American dream.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Google 'Nexus One' pictured, rumored coming to T-Mobile