You're missing the point. Apple is simplying reiterating their commitment to the software side of mobile devices, while competitors are "treading water" in hardware. Software evolves too, but Apple is far, far ahead of the curve.
So is Google, I think. Android is pure software platform - Google does not even make any smartphone hardware at all. I don't think that Google cares - or knows - what future phones will be running Android; their only interest is do develop software much as they can. iPhone OS is tied to specified hardware platform and - while there is freedom within hardware limits to push software development - iPhone OS developers know where the hardware limits are and will not over-develop their software.
For example, if iPhone hardware is somehow limited in recording video (I'm not saying it is, just trying to illustrate my thoughts), iPhone developers don't have reason to develop recording software. Android developers do, however, because even if current Android phones don't have video recording hardware capabilities, they are hopeful that manufacturers of incoming smartphone hardware will choose them over Windows if desired features are already existing in Android.
Fine- but on the other hand we could put this to rest once and for all when people stop saying other phones don't give them free updates when in fact there is nothing for them to update for. They've had most of the features when they already bought them. So why would they need an upgrade?.
If you go back to the initial release of most mobile phone devices, they all started out fairly primitive and slowly built up to what they are now becoming. I'm not sure how old you are or how long you've owned a mobile phone, but to believe that they all started out with pretty much the same feature set they currently have is realy naive. At some point in time they've all been updated, upgraded, and feature enhanced. It is IMPOSSIBLE for a device to have every current "basic" feature and every future "basic" feature. (I say "basic" because your opinion of what is basic is only your opinion. The only truly basic features of any phone is to initiate and receive phone calls and listen to voice messages. Everything beyond that is fluff; an added convenience. Or so-called smartphones which are nothing more than phones with mobile "computing" features.)
And while your phone may have come with MMS, video recording, A2DP Bluetooth support these are not basic standard phone features. I will agree, however, they are definitely features found on most phones sold today.
So is Google, I think. Android is pure software platform - Google does not even make any smartphone hardware at all. I don't think that Google cares - or knows - what future phones will be running Android; their only interest is do develop software much as they can. iPhone OS is tied to specified hardware platform and - while there is freedom within hardware limits to push software development - iPhone OS developers know where the hardware limits are and will not over-develop their software.
For example, if iPhone hardware is somehow limited in recording video (I'm not saying it is, just trying to illustrate my thoughts), iPhone developers don't have reason to develop recording software. Android developers do, however, because even if current Android phones don't have video recording hardware capabilities, they are hopeful that manufacturers of incoming smartphone hardware will choose them over Windows if desired features are already existing in Android.
Two things here...
#1. as Apple releases more devices based off the iPhone OS, there will in fact be devices with different available hardware and as such, developers will have to choose what features to leave out in order to hit the biggest potential user base. This has already happened, there are applications that require an iPhone and will not work on the iPod touch. Just like with Android, Apple has to develop the iPhone OS to support all possible hardware feature sets across different devices, at least until they decide that feature/device is too old and becoming a burden to the rest of the platform.
#2. There seems to be a big misconception about Android regarding its features and capabilities. Just because Google adds a feature or some great application to Android, that doesn't mean every Android device will benefit from it. Because of Android's open source nature, handset manufacturers and even cell carriers can add and remove features from Android as they see fit. So even though people will be getting an Android based device, it may be a very limited version and may not resemble the original in the least.
Multitasking wouldn't require new hardware. Multitasking is a software feature not related to hardware. The current iPhone already handles multitasking quite nicely. It's just that Apple limits its use to a handful of it's own applications.
???
If a 'software feature' impacts battery life, then it is absolutely a hardware issue.
Overall 3.0 looks very nice. The two thing I found most impressive was allowing accessories and allowing apps to sell upgrades, subscriptions and such.
Allowing accessories means the iPhone will now show up in all sorts of unusual places because it supplies the portable platform with software, graphics, storage, processing power and wireless connectivity. You want a portable instrument for logging almost any chemical or physical property? Hook some sensor up to an iPhone, write an app and you're done.
Allowing apps to sell things leverages Apple's infrastructure for credit card transactions. This is huge. If you are a commercial developer you look at a pool of 20+ million users and you look at how easy it is to reach them. How could you be interested in any other platform? The Pre has how many million installed base? Zero. The BB has a large installed base but not much in the way of an apps store or support for transactions.
If a 'software feature' impacts battery life, then it is absolutely a hardware issue.
No it isn't. Running multiple background applications could potentially run up CPU usage while the device is "idling", which in turn impacts battery life regardless of the size of the battery or the amount of power consumed by the CPU... if the CPU is being used it needs power.
All of this is closely monitored by the kernel and only allows a few built-in user applications run; the phone, text messaging, and iPod
Started reading the thread and then get to your posts and then remember who you are. The one that always seems to attack everyone else.
Its quite nice to read other peoples opinions, but when you shoot them down without seeming to have understood the whole thread it does kind of grate.
Why bother reading and bashing folk when you don't own an iPhone? Why are you even reading and replying on these posts?
Yeah some phones might have great hardware and everything 'you' need. Then thats fair do's. I've had a fair few phones and they've wound me up as much, well maybe more so that you I guess. Having fancy phones with all the gadgets doesn't mean a darn thing if it works like cr**. I had a Nokia with a fancy camera and video function. It just never worked properly. searching through the pictures on it was backwards!
I also had a couple of sony e touch screen phones. One of them kept crashing because of the incompatible sofware on it. The other was designed by a moron. To write texts, I'd end up using the scroll wheel, keypad and touchscreen to do what I wanted to do. This was just to do simple things.
Anyway. I think I've calmed down a little now, so I'll let it lie there. Please don't ruin our read with your bashings please. This is only the second time I have posted in the past couple of years reading this site.
Oh in case you want to have a bash at me. I won't be reading this thread any further. If you have intelligent, evaluated, thoughts then feel free to contact me.
Amen! Getting tired of all the hysteria of the pending release of the next iPhone-killer. I think the Pre is the worst of them, so far. Especially with all the hype surrounding the "multitasking" capabilities as the biggest feature over the iPhone. I'm sorry, but doesn't the Blackberry, Windows Mobile, and Android already allow this? And why now are people so excited about running what are essentially applets (widgets)!? Apple could simply port Dashboard to the iPhone and end up with a similar "multitasking" applet environment.
I don't think Pre hype is public outcry for iPhone killer; I think it is loyal Palm users' outcry for modern, up-to-date Palm device. Believe or not, Palm also have loyal users, even if they are hiding in the shadows nowadays with their devices being completely outdated. I still have Palm Tungsten E2 PDA which served me so great since I got it, 4 or 5 years ago... and my wife is still using her Treo 680 - due to replacement soon. We'd both more than consider new Palm device that covers our PDA/phone needs and is nice to hold and use, functional and all that jazz. For years before iPhone, Palm was alternative to Windows CE/Mobile, RIM... yeah, I definitely want to see strong Palm platform again, even if I go other way.
You're missing the point. Apple is simplying reiterating their commitment to the software side of mobile devices, while competitors are "treading water" in hardware. Software evolves too, but Apple is far, far ahead of the curve.
It doesn't matter how far ahead Apple claims to be from whatever future smart phone makers. Hardware is still an issue that cannot be ignored. We may be getting all these cool new features (that should been here 2 years ago) but will our phones lag more than they already do? My phone gets laggy during texting, using google maps, and just using the phone app. It is frustrating enough. When this update comes out if it makes it lag anymore than it already does I will definitely buy a Palm PRE
The Palm PRE looks to surpass the iPhone in many ways, and indications are the OS is much snappier than the iPhone's. And certainly it won't be the only device with such stats from Palm or otherwise.
The Palm PRE "looks" to surpass. "Indications" are that...
All qualifiers, and all pretty much worthless until someone gets the phone in their hot little hands and we see if it lives up to the hype. The LG didn't. And neither did the Storm.
Besides, if I were Apple I'd be less than worried about a "me too" touchscreen phone tied to the nation's 4th largest network. Oh, and manufactured by a company desperately in need of a "Hail Mary" play.
You would be right [about Flash being entrenched on so many web sites] if we were talking about the desktop PC. HTML 5 would have an uphill battle in replacing flash.
But mobile phones are an entirely new platform that no one yet completely controls. This gives HTML 5 and flash both a fairly equal chance at dominance. But all of the major OS development platforms are based on HTML and none of them are dependent on flash. Adobe knows this and is why they are scrambling.
My first thought was that still, since iPhone Safari accesses "the real internet" - that's a beast that will have trouble shedding its Flash dependence, but digesting your post, more and more sites are developing "mobile" versions for smartphones, and those are still in their infancy.
So, unless I'm wrong, even if a site is locked into Flash, its mobile version doesn't have to be, and since HTML5 has inherently less overhead it could easily be the tool of preference since the phones and their networks as a whole are relatively slower pipes feeding less powerful processors and users will notice and prefer mobile sites coded in open standards.
And as they then update and re-architect their main pages to be more "Web x.0," they might begin to strip Flash out, while Safari 4 or 5, Firefox 4, Chrome and Opera whatever will be optimized for them.
I don't think Pre hype is public outcry for iPhone killer; I think it is loyal Palm users' outcry for modern, up-to-date Palm device. Believe or not, Palm also have loyal users, even if they are hiding in the shadows nowadays with their devices being completely outdated. I still have Palm Tungsten E2 PDA which served me so great since I got it, 4 or 5 years ago... and my wife is still using her Treo 680 - due to replacement soon. We'd both more than consider new Palm device that covers our PDA/phone needs and is nice to hold and use, functional and all that jazz. For years before iPhone, Palm was alternative to Windows CE/Mobile, RIM... yeah, I definitely want to see strong Palm platform again, even if I go other way.
I have a question about that: do you think there are loyal Palm users who are loyal to the idea of Palm, per se, regardless of what they make?
I ask because the Pre won't have anything to do with anything Palm has done before-- no compatibility, no reduced learning curve, no shared accessories, no nuthin'.
So if there's anything about the Palm devices people already have that has kept then Palm users all through these dark days, it won't be present in the Pre.
Now, to be sure, the Pre looks to be a serious upgrade in functionality from the "classic" Palm OS, which is simply very, very dated. But I wonder why "loyal" Palm users would feel "rewarded" by an entirely new device with an entirely new OS on entirely new hardware.
Unless there is an emotional attachment, I would think, at that point, most buyers would look around at every manufacturer to see what best suited their needs, since there is no legacy tie-in.
I would say that is the broad scope of the plan. Also with companies like Google, Yahoo, and AOL to develop web applications on HTML 5 will help show off its abilities and help spur its use widely across the web.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigpics
So, unless I'm wrong, even if a site is locked into Flash, its mobile version doesn't have to be, and since HTML5 has inherently less overhead it could easily be the tool of preference since the phones and their networks as a whole are relatively slower pipes feeding less powerful processors and users will notice and prefer mobile sites coded in open standards.
And as they then update and re-architect their main pages to be more "Web x.0," they might begin to strip Flash out, while Safari 4 or 5, Firefox 4, Chrome and Opera whatever will be optimized for them.
People that claim that there are impressive phones out there that have more specs in it are missing the point.
Not that they're wrong. Of course, the iPhone isn't the best of the best of every little spec. It doesn't even have to be the best phone out there. What it needs is to be sufficiently powerful but not too expensive, sufficiently broad so millions will share the same platform, and both the OS X iphone and the app store are revolutionizing the smartphone landscape. Whatever phone you like best, it's no discussion that the app store is where all the energy and excitement is. Possibilities abound. Incredible programs made by common people that earn good money for cheap programs.
And this doesn't mean that Nokia is to die. Nor is Pre, RIM, etc. Apple was going in for 10% in smartphone share, which means that <i>90% is everything else</i>. But iPhone is really in for a kill!
I am waiting that the iPhone in june may bring video recording and direct posting to youtube. And perhaps a major overhaul to its processor. We'll see!
Android (less than 1%. 1mm G1s in the field though)
Anyway, we can quibble about the definition of a smartphone, but here is the interesting question: where do you think this will be in 1 year... in 2... People replace their cell phone every year... maybe every 2 for an expensive smartphone.
Conventional wisdom is that any market settles down to 2 or 3 brands. No question Apple will be on that list. I'm putting Google and Symbian in the top 3 after 2 years also. RIM and MS won't go away though. RIM has business users and MS has money.
Also, yes, the carriers get the blame for stifling innovation for 10 years. It takes Apple and Google bludgeon them into line. We'd have had to wait decades to see 25,000 apps if a carrier had to approve them. Speaking of carrier doesn't AT&T's 2 year iPhone exclusive end soon...
Comments
You're missing the point. Apple is simplying reiterating their commitment to the software side of mobile devices, while competitors are "treading water" in hardware. Software evolves too, but Apple is far, far ahead of the curve.
So is Google, I think. Android is pure software platform - Google does not even make any smartphone hardware at all. I don't think that Google cares - or knows - what future phones will be running Android; their only interest is do develop software much as they can. iPhone OS is tied to specified hardware platform and - while there is freedom within hardware limits to push software development - iPhone OS developers know where the hardware limits are and will not over-develop their software.
For example, if iPhone hardware is somehow limited in recording video (I'm not saying it is, just trying to illustrate my thoughts), iPhone developers don't have reason to develop recording software. Android developers do, however, because even if current Android phones don't have video recording hardware capabilities, they are hopeful that manufacturers of incoming smartphone hardware will choose them over Windows if desired features are already existing in Android.
Fine- but on the other hand we could put this to rest once and for all when people stop saying other phones don't give them free updates when in fact there is nothing for them to update for. They've had most of the features when they already bought them. So why would they need an upgrade?.
If you go back to the initial release of most mobile phone devices, they all started out fairly primitive and slowly built up to what they are now becoming. I'm not sure how old you are or how long you've owned a mobile phone, but to believe that they all started out with pretty much the same feature set they currently have is realy naive. At some point in time they've all been updated, upgraded, and feature enhanced. It is IMPOSSIBLE for a device to have every current "basic" feature and every future "basic" feature. (I say "basic" because your opinion of what is basic is only your opinion. The only truly basic features of any phone is to initiate and receive phone calls and listen to voice messages. Everything beyond that is fluff; an added convenience. Or so-called smartphones which are nothing more than phones with mobile "computing" features.)
And while your phone may have come with MMS, video recording, A2DP Bluetooth support these are not basic standard phone features. I will agree, however, they are definitely features found on most phones sold today.
The Pre isn't going to kill anything, Palm needs to worry about staying alive, they need another bailout.
Once the Pre comes, it will be followed by an explosion.
So why do those companies make new phones, if their current phones don't need updates, why release new ones?
Their current ones don't- their outdated ones do.
So is Google, I think. Android is pure software platform - Google does not even make any smartphone hardware at all. I don't think that Google cares - or knows - what future phones will be running Android; their only interest is do develop software much as they can. iPhone OS is tied to specified hardware platform and - while there is freedom within hardware limits to push software development - iPhone OS developers know where the hardware limits are and will not over-develop their software.
For example, if iPhone hardware is somehow limited in recording video (I'm not saying it is, just trying to illustrate my thoughts), iPhone developers don't have reason to develop recording software. Android developers do, however, because even if current Android phones don't have video recording hardware capabilities, they are hopeful that manufacturers of incoming smartphone hardware will choose them over Windows if desired features are already existing in Android.
Two things here...
#1. as Apple releases more devices based off the iPhone OS, there will in fact be devices with different available hardware and as such, developers will have to choose what features to leave out in order to hit the biggest potential user base. This has already happened, there are applications that require an iPhone and will not work on the iPod touch. Just like with Android, Apple has to develop the iPhone OS to support all possible hardware feature sets across different devices, at least until they decide that feature/device is too old and becoming a burden to the rest of the platform.
#2. There seems to be a big misconception about Android regarding its features and capabilities. Just because Google adds a feature or some great application to Android, that doesn't mean every Android device will benefit from it. Because of Android's open source nature, handset manufacturers and even cell carriers can add and remove features from Android as they see fit. So even though people will be getting an Android based device, it may be a very limited version and may not resemble the original in the least.
Multitasking wouldn't require new hardware. Multitasking is a software feature not related to hardware. The current iPhone already handles multitasking quite nicely. It's just that Apple limits its use to a handful of it's own applications.
???
If a 'software feature' impacts battery life, then it is absolutely a hardware issue.
Allowing accessories means the iPhone will now show up in all sorts of unusual places because it supplies the portable platform with software, graphics, storage, processing power and wireless connectivity. You want a portable instrument for logging almost any chemical or physical property? Hook some sensor up to an iPhone, write an app and you're done.
Allowing apps to sell things leverages Apple's infrastructure for credit card transactions. This is huge. If you are a commercial developer you look at a pool of 20+ million users and you look at how easy it is to reach them. How could you be interested in any other platform? The Pre has how many million installed base? Zero. The BB has a large installed base but not much in the way of an apps store or support for transactions.
Once the Pre comes, it will be followed by an explosion.
What if the Pre is a bust?
???
If a 'software feature' impacts battery life, then it is absolutely a hardware issue.
No it isn't. Running multiple background applications could potentially run up CPU usage while the device is "idling", which in turn impacts battery life regardless of the size of the battery or the amount of power consumed by the CPU... if the CPU is being used it needs power.
All of this is closely monitored by the kernel and only allows a few built-in user applications run; the phone, text messaging, and iPod
Its quite nice to read other peoples opinions, but when you shoot them down without seeming to have understood the whole thread it does kind of grate.
Why bother reading and bashing folk when you don't own an iPhone? Why are you even reading and replying on these posts?
Yeah some phones might have great hardware and everything 'you' need. Then thats fair do's. I've had a fair few phones and they've wound me up as much, well maybe more so that you I guess. Having fancy phones with all the gadgets doesn't mean a darn thing if it works like cr**. I had a Nokia with a fancy camera and video function. It just never worked properly. searching through the pictures on it was backwards!
I also had a couple of sony e touch screen phones. One of them kept crashing because of the incompatible sofware on it. The other was designed by a moron. To write texts, I'd end up using the scroll wheel, keypad and touchscreen to do what I wanted to do. This was just to do simple things.
Anyway. I think I've calmed down a little now, so I'll let it lie there. Please don't ruin our read with your bashings please. This is only the second time I have posted in the past couple of years reading this site.
Oh in case you want to have a bash at me. I won't be reading this thread any further. If you have intelligent, evaluated, thoughts then feel free to contact me.
Amen! Getting tired of all the hysteria of the pending release of the next iPhone-killer. I think the Pre is the worst of them, so far. Especially with all the hype surrounding the "multitasking" capabilities as the biggest feature over the iPhone. I'm sorry, but doesn't the Blackberry, Windows Mobile, and Android already allow this? And why now are people so excited about running what are essentially applets (widgets)!? Apple could simply port Dashboard to the iPhone and end up with a similar "multitasking" applet environment.
I don't think Pre hype is public outcry for iPhone killer; I think it is loyal Palm users' outcry for modern, up-to-date Palm device. Believe or not, Palm also have loyal users, even if they are hiding in the shadows nowadays with their devices being completely outdated. I still have Palm Tungsten E2 PDA which served me so great since I got it, 4 or 5 years ago... and my wife is still using her Treo 680 - due to replacement soon. We'd both more than consider new Palm device that covers our PDA/phone needs and is nice to hold and use, functional and all that jazz. For years before iPhone, Palm was alternative to Windows CE/Mobile, RIM... yeah, I definitely want to see strong Palm platform again, even if I go other way.
You're missing the point. Apple is simplying reiterating their commitment to the software side of mobile devices, while competitors are "treading water" in hardware. Software evolves too, but Apple is far, far ahead of the curve.
It doesn't matter how far ahead Apple claims to be from whatever future smart phone makers. Hardware is still an issue that cannot be ignored. We may be getting all these cool new features (that should been here 2 years ago) but will our phones lag more than they already do? My phone gets laggy during texting, using google maps, and just using the phone app. It is frustrating enough. When this update comes out if it makes it lag anymore than it already does I will definitely buy a Palm PRE
The Palm PRE looks to surpass the iPhone in many ways, and indications are the OS is much snappier than the iPhone's. And certainly it won't be the only device with such stats from Palm or otherwise.
The Palm PRE "looks" to surpass. "Indications" are that...
All qualifiers, and all pretty much worthless until someone gets the phone in their hot little hands and we see if it lives up to the hype. The LG didn't. And neither did the Storm.
Besides, if I were Apple I'd be less than worried about a "me too" touchscreen phone tied to the nation's 4th largest network. Oh, and manufactured by a company desperately in need of a "Hail Mary" play.
Started reading the thread and then get to your posts........
'Yawn'-whatever.
Very simple- just skip them next time.
You would be right [about Flash being entrenched on so many web sites] if we were talking about the desktop PC. HTML 5 would have an uphill battle in replacing flash.
But mobile phones are an entirely new platform that no one yet completely controls. This gives HTML 5 and flash both a fairly equal chance at dominance. But all of the major OS development platforms are based on HTML and none of them are dependent on flash. Adobe knows this and is why they are scrambling.
My first thought was that still, since iPhone Safari accesses "the real internet" - that's a beast that will have trouble shedding its Flash dependence, but digesting your post, more and more sites are developing "mobile" versions for smartphones, and those are still in their infancy.
So, unless I'm wrong, even if a site is locked into Flash, its mobile version doesn't have to be, and since HTML5 has inherently less overhead it could easily be the tool of preference since the phones and their networks as a whole are relatively slower pipes feeding less powerful processors and users will notice and prefer mobile sites coded in open standards.
And as they then update and re-architect their main pages to be more "Web x.0," they might begin to strip Flash out, while Safari 4 or 5, Firefox 4, Chrome and Opera whatever will be optimized for them.
Sounds like a plan to me at least....
I don't think Pre hype is public outcry for iPhone killer; I think it is loyal Palm users' outcry for modern, up-to-date Palm device. Believe or not, Palm also have loyal users, even if they are hiding in the shadows nowadays with their devices being completely outdated. I still have Palm Tungsten E2 PDA which served me so great since I got it, 4 or 5 years ago... and my wife is still using her Treo 680 - due to replacement soon. We'd both more than consider new Palm device that covers our PDA/phone needs and is nice to hold and use, functional and all that jazz. For years before iPhone, Palm was alternative to Windows CE/Mobile, RIM... yeah, I definitely want to see strong Palm platform again, even if I go other way.
I have a question about that: do you think there are loyal Palm users who are loyal to the idea of Palm, per se, regardless of what they make?
I ask because the Pre won't have anything to do with anything Palm has done before-- no compatibility, no reduced learning curve, no shared accessories, no nuthin'.
So if there's anything about the Palm devices people already have that has kept then Palm users all through these dark days, it won't be present in the Pre.
Now, to be sure, the Pre looks to be a serious upgrade in functionality from the "classic" Palm OS, which is simply very, very dated. But I wonder why "loyal" Palm users would feel "rewarded" by an entirely new device with an entirely new OS on entirely new hardware.
Unless there is an emotional attachment, I would think, at that point, most buyers would look around at every manufacturer to see what best suited their needs, since there is no legacy tie-in.
So, unless I'm wrong, even if a site is locked into Flash, its mobile version doesn't have to be, and since HTML5 has inherently less overhead it could easily be the tool of preference since the phones and their networks as a whole are relatively slower pipes feeding less powerful processors and users will notice and prefer mobile sites coded in open standards.
And as they then update and re-architect their main pages to be more "Web x.0," they might begin to strip Flash out, while Safari 4 or 5, Firefox 4, Chrome and Opera whatever will be optimized for them.
Sounds like a plan to me at least....
Not that they're wrong. Of course, the iPhone isn't the best of the best of every little spec. It doesn't even have to be the best phone out there. What it needs is to be sufficiently powerful but not too expensive, sufficiently broad so millions will share the same platform, and both the OS X iphone and the app store are revolutionizing the smartphone landscape. Whatever phone you like best, it's no discussion that the app store is where all the energy and excitement is. Possibilities abound. Incredible programs made by common people that earn good money for cheap programs.
And this doesn't mean that Nokia is to die. Nor is Pre, RIM, etc. Apple was going in for 10% in smartphone share, which means that <i>90% is everything else</i>. But iPhone is really in for a kill!
I am waiting that the iPhone in june may bring video recording and direct posting to youtube. And perhaps a major overhaul to its processor. We'll see!
http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=910112
Symbian 47.1%
BlackBerry 19.5%
Windows Mobile 12.4%
iPhone 10.7%
Linux 8.4%
Palm 0.9%
Android (less than 1%. 1mm G1s in the field though)
Anyway, we can quibble about the definition of a smartphone, but here is the interesting question: where do you think this will be in 1 year... in 2... People replace their cell phone every year... maybe every 2 for an expensive smartphone.
Conventional wisdom is that any market settles down to 2 or 3 brands. No question Apple will be on that list. I'm putting Google and Symbian in the top 3 after 2 years also. RIM and MS won't go away though. RIM has business users and MS has money.
Also, yes, the carriers get the blame for stifling innovation for 10 years. It takes Apple and Google bludgeon them into line. We'd have had to wait decades to see 25,000 apps if a carrier had to approve them. Speaking of carrier doesn't AT&T's 2 year iPhone exclusive end soon...
Right now, the only rival to the iPhone . . . is a better iPhone.
(Still waiting on the Pre takeover-bait to actually show up on store shelves . . . in the meantime, let's all pretend is does other things, too.)