Smartphones. Who here has 'em?

[kbohip]

I don't think they do, they just have the ability to push the latest version of iOS out to all the phones they want instantly. For example, you have basically a first gen Samsung Galaxy S on Tmo. The guy with the same phone on Verizon may get an Android update 6 months after you. The guy on AT&T may never get it. Even though you all basically have the same phone.

But as far as the age of phones go, iOS has as much fragmentation there as Android does. Ask somebody with an iPhone 3GS or first iPad how many of the latest apps in the iTunes App Store they can buy.

So, the writers at Gizmodo or whatever tech blog can moan about fragmentation in Android, but older Apple hardware is orphaned just as often as Android stuff. Plus, the homebrew stuff is harder on Apple stuff. Somebody got Android 4.0 running on the T-Mobile G1 (first Android phone). Trust me, no developer is getting iOS 5.1 running on the first (2007) iPhone.

I never knew the older iphones wouldn't run certain apps because of their age. It makes perfect sense though as the hardware probably just isn't up to snuff enough I suppose. Speaking of older phones running versions of Android they were never supposed to, my old Vibrant is actually faster running ICS than it ever was running Froyo. The best part is I read that Samsung claimed the reason the first gen Galaxy S's would never get ICS is they weren't powerful enough to run them.

[Activate: AMD]

Yeah, it's totally the subsidies that set up the market the way it was though. If carriers didn't subsidize the phone, you would have Samsung, HTC and Motorola competing on price, rather than the off-contract price all being $699.99. When the carriers are picking up everything past the first $200, who cares what the phone cost!

And I'm sure they ARE competing on price.. its just on a volume pricing basis to the retailers/carriers. Don't forget, the $700 prices are all set by the carriers too! I certainly know we're getting screwed over badly on device pricing, but without any pricing transparency its nearly impossible to know just how badly

[Keven]

And I'm sure they ARE competing on price.. its just on a volume pricing basis to the retailers/carriers. Don't forget, the $700 prices are all set by the carriers too! I certainly know we're getting screwed over badly on device pricing, but without any pricing transparency its nearly impossible to know just how badly

Maybe, but Verizon is buying the phones that customers want. Samsung may offer bulk pricing to Verizon on the Samsung Stratosphere or whatever, but if everybody wants the Galaxy Nexus, that's what Verizon has to buy.

Still, you're right. Everybody is making fat profits and there's no transparency to the consumer on anything.

[Activate: AMD]

Maybe, but Verizon is buying the phones that customers want. Samsung may offer bulk pricing to Verizon on the Samsung Stratosphere or whatever, but if everybody wants the Galaxy Nexus, that's what Verizon has to buy.

Ah yes, but what people buy is often influenced heavily by what gets advertised. I can't help but think back to the Droid Incredible vs Droid X days early on. VZW advertised the hell out of the X, but only a little bit was done for the DINC. Who knows if it was because Moto made the original Droid, or the fact that the DINC had some initial supply issues, or whether Moto made some kind of pricing deal that gave VZW the incentive to sell more of the X? There could be a kick-ass phone, but if it gets almost zero air-play to the general public, the only ones who will know about it are the tech nerds like us. Verizon will more heavily advertise what makes them the most money, which could very well be dependent on the pricing structure given to them by the manufacturers.

[Keven]

My Motorola Droid X got firmware update notification today. Saw "4.5.621" in the message. Thought it must have something to do with ICS. Got super excited for a moment, thought Verizon had decided to give the old girl Android 4.0.

Turns out, that was the phone's firmware version number, not the Android version number. Still running Android 2.3. Got my hopes up for nothing.

[Brandito]

Ordered me an Evo 4g LTE. It's a tad ugly, but the hardware is amazing.

I really would love to have a google experience phone, but the galaxy nexus is a bit lacking on the hardware front. I wish more oems would just stick with stock ICS. In trying to differentiate themselves they've made it so you never see stock ICS, so what could be more different than creating a damn stock experience?

Give me stock and let me buy your widgets and apps.

[Keven]

Ordered me an Evo 4g LTE. It's a tad ugly, but the hardware is amazing.

I really would love to have a google experience phone, but the galaxy nexus is a bit lacking on the hardware front. I wish more oems would just stick with stock ICS. In trying to differentiate themselves they've made it so you never see stock ICS, so what could be more different than creating a damn stock experience?

Give me stock and let me buy your widgets and apps.

I've always thought the Google Nexus hardware was boring.

[kbohip]

I pretty much can agree with Brandito on this issue. My reasoning is this is just one more way companies like Samsung and Motorola force consumers to upgrade to the latest and greatest. The new version of whatever os Google has comes out, and they use the excuse that since they are running "customized" versions of that os, it will take a while for them to make the necessary changes and get the update out. As has been the case more often than not though, their older phones just never get the update. They hope the customer will get tired of waiting and just buy a new phone with the latest (or usually one os before the latest) installed on the new phone, with the promise of course that the new phone will get the latest in "a few months" or some other lie.

I've been through this with both Motorola, and to a lesser scale, Samsung. It's bad enough that if it wasn't for custom roms and the great developer community behind them, I'd seriously give thought to getting rid of my Android phone and switched to a tablet and dumb phone. As it is I'm using ICS on a phone Samsung claimed didn't have the specs to run it, and even better it's pure stock with no Touchwiz nonsense. There are roms out there for the Galaxy S that include the TW interface too, which makes everybody happy.

[Keven]

I pretty much can agree with Brandito on this issue. My reasoning is this is just one more way companies like Samsung and Motorola force consumers to upgrade to the latest and greatest. The new version of whatever os Google has comes out, and they use the excuse that since they are running "customized" versions of that os, it will take a while for them to make the necessary changes and get the update out. As has been the case more often than not though, their older phones just never get the update. They hope the customer will get tired of waiting and just buy a new phone with the latest (or usually one os before the latest) installed on the new phone, with the promise of course that the new phone will get the latest in "a few months" or some other lie.

I've been through this with both Motorola, and to a lesser scale, Samsung. It's bad enough that if it wasn't for custom roms and the great developer community behind them, I'd seriously give thought to getting rid of my Android phone and switched to a tablet and dumb phone. As it is I'm using ICS on a phone Samsung claimed didn't have the specs to run it, and even better it's pure stock with no Touchwiz nonsense. There are roms out there for the Galaxy S that include the TW interface too, which makes everybody happy.

You're partly there. The reason for Android update delays is mostly due to carrier certification requirements.

[/\/\adGamer]

still love my HTC Sensation 4G still seems to keep up with most the newer phones hardware wise !

[Activate: AMD]

I've always thought the Google Nexus hardware was boring.

Agreed. I was expecting something more on the hardware front, but it just turned out to be yet another OMAP 44xx SoC. woooooo! If I wanted that crap i would have gotten a droid bionic. I haven't seen a single phone that has interested me in the last 6 months. HTC One X is about the only thing that has interested me and I don't expect to see one on verizon that isn't a branded and modified turd (I'm looking at you, Incredible 4G). GS3 seems ok, but the design seems decidedly boring and who knows if VZW will get one. If/when it does show up it'll probably have a snapdragon S4 SoC, but like the One X it'll be the version with an overclocked ancient Adreno 220 GPU. I'm hoping to hold out for a S4 Pro (Krait dual core w/ adreno 320 gpu) or equivalent based phone that doesn't look like sh*t (looking at you again Incredible 4G and GS3) but my DINC is breaking down rather rapidly at this point.

[/\/\adGamer]

Straight talk now can use ATT and Tmobile locked phones I dumped Tmobile and saved myself $100 bucks a month. I had to sign up online and have the sim cards sent thru fed ex but it was well worth it.

[Invictus]

Tmobile has the HTC One S on sale for 99.99 with a 50 dollar mail in rebate card. For a total of 49.99.

Ordered it, will be here in 2-4 days. Had to add a line but w/e .

[zetachi]

decisions decisions, wife want's to get my son a cell phone. Will be adding to our Verizon plan. So do I get him a cheap one and keep my Bionic or do the old trickle down, give the wife the Bionic, her samsung fascinate to the boy and get me a Nexus or Samsung galaxy S3?

[Activate: AMD]

get him a cheap one and keep my Bionic

This. As awesome as the Nexus is and the GS3 will be, giving him the Fascinate would require a data plan on his line. And how old is the kid? 10? thats too much freakin' money