I'll wait until the bugs are worked out and the price comes down. I like the idea of it, but at close to $200, too expensive.

Yawn.

If that's not one of the most annoying statements. If I hear "will this phone be the iPhone killer" one more time...

Seriously, the iPhone is in a category of it own. So is Android. I'm a WinMo user personally, but I don't think we'll see another revolutionary enough device in the near future to "kill" the iPhone.

Come on with the iPhone killer talk.

Agree. It is annoying.

The introduction of Android will help EVERYBODY.

Regardless if you prefer Apple, Symbian or MSFT (you must be evil) phones - Android by introducing a fresh perspective will push everybody to try harder and become better.

Don't count on them being any better. They can't even get a solid connection yet after all these years, let alone the extras. To which I'd rather have the solid good quality connection.

I'm getting tired of all these so called new
cell phones ... iPhone .. Blackberry ... Android

I want a cell phone for talking not streaming
media, playing videos, playing music or running
apps.

Also, a phone that has 12 hours talk time and
standby mode for 3 three weeks. An a contract
from a telco that only charges you $26.00 a
month. This also should include unlimited
text and unlimited minutes too ..

I just want a service provide that is low cost
and a cell phone fr talking and text message..

Good for you. Now move along, you are in the wrong place...

Boost unlimited.

Enjoy!

I have been very very disappointed with Android and I don't see this making a large impact in the near future, or even in the middle future. I'm sorry to say this but I think it will actually be a big disappointment.

What a bold statement before it is released...

I agree completely.

Much as I like Google, they will have to go through a few generations before it resembles anything but a hack project, IMO.

...but we'll see. App availability is key, and it looks like they've already lost on that one.

This phone doesn't having the feeling of excitement or anticipation the iPhone had. Plus it looks like a dogs dinner compared to the iPhone. The Blackberry looks like a dogs dinner compared to the iPhone but the Blackberry is already well established and has had to change slightly to take account of any possible impact from the iPhone. Why G-Phone has gone for a look similair to the Blackberry is beyond me.

I agree on losing out initially on the app availability, but I'm sure that will change over time.

Develop apps for an open platform, or develop for a company with an App Nazi on duty 24/7...

Time will tell. :)

Appz are the name of the game . Windows Mobile has thousands of appz.. keep pushing PDA's to the next level.. thanks google..

sorry Android has been rejected from the iPhone iStore!!

Apple is attacking m$ when google is there real comp..

I am already tired off my iPhone with the issues and limited applications for GPS.

I hear that often recently. It's a consumer gadget after all.

The only way Android will make dent is through lots of good apps. No doubt open source developers are drooling over the prospect of an app marketplace on this platform, but until its up and running I hardly see this as an iPhone killer.

The problem with open source is it is "open source". There are not enough paid developers working on it. I mean the biggest example is Linux as a platform. Windows 95 came out in 1995 and Linux code was first written in 1991 ? Yet Microsoft is way ahead with respect to the user base.

Android would have the same problem, unless Google works themselves on applications along with the other people who would be working on the SDKs.

The only reason Windows/Symbian smartphones are so famous today is applications and if Google can meet this ( which they should be given there force of developers which is no less than Microsoft todaY) they are here to stay and should be able to eclipse iPhone pretty easily. If not then it would be like many Linux tablets that are available today which are cheap but that is more or less it.

I'm sorry - If you're going to say when the Linux code was first written then at least get right when Windows code was first written and not arbitrarily pick Windows 95!!!
Windows 1.0 was a 16-bit graphical operating environment released on 20 November 1985. Yes 1985.

Anyone remember Microsoft Bob by the way??? :-)

That's complete rubbish. Microsoft Windows and Windows Mobile THRIVE on open source *applications*.

I personally prefer a professional OS that is maintained by an accountable entity as long as the APIs are public and everybody can code and release as they please (unlike iPhone)

I guess you are not comparing apples to apples. If you say when windows code(1.0) was first written, then you should compare when Unix was first writen ( If I am not totally wromg n the 1970s) from which Linux is heavily derived.

By the way the reason I compare Windows 95 is because till Windows 3.1 generation Windows was not seperate OS. It was application running on DOS '( no way close to an OS) . 95 was first time they came up with a seperate OS.

I mean even if I take your comparision of Windows first GUI code of 1985 and Linux first code of 1991, where does LINUX stand with respect to user base ?

Anyone remember DR-DOS?

Hate to burst your bubble, but Windows 95 was an Operating Environment on top of DOS.

They didn't officially Kill DOS in the consumer market OS until Windows XP.

I agree Open source application are a lot on Windows mobile, but to day windows mobile thrive on open source would probably be too enthusiastic a statement. As I said before, open source applications can only thrive if there are people to pay your bills.

Neverthelss I totally agree with you what is most important is accountability with the programs.

Well Windows 3.1 was operating environment on DOS , but 95 was OS as DOS was integrated into the windows 95 making it OS.

But as said to compare OS to OS probably windows 95 should be the first comparison and definitely not vbefore that.

but 95 was OS as DOS was integrated into the windows 95 making it OS.

No.

Windows 95 was a 32-bit environment running atop a 16-bit DOS Operating system (effectively acting as the boot-loader for a set-top 32-bit environment)

The owners of DR-DOS filed a lawsuit against MSFT because of this. They felt that MSFT bundling MS-DOS 7.0 as the functional underlying OS of Windows 95 effectively shut them out of the market, where DR-DOS could have very effectively handled the same functionality of DOS 7.0 at the time.

Consolidating the DOS and Windows functionality into Windows 95 was a marketing technicality. It did not change the fact that without DOS (The OS), the environment (Win95) could not load.

Kind of like without Linux (the OS), X-Windows (the environment) could not load.

This seems a bit misguided to me.

As much a MS may have you believe otherwise, Win9X was just an environment running on DOS just like Win 3.X. Much prettier and more defined, but essentially the same thing. Just because they were packaged together doesn't mean anything. You could run DOS without running Win9X, but you can not do the reverse.

If you want to compare OS to OS, why wouldn't you go back to MS-DOS 1.0 anyway? Linux doesn't even technically have a GUI.

Regarding OS or not though it was running on 16 bit DOS, there was 32-bit File Access in Windows which meant that 16-bit real mode MS-DOS was not used for managing the files which principally should qualify it to be an OS.Officially it is considered an OS

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_95

In a way aren't you all saying the same point ? The whole discussion was how having just open source without proper support has never proven to capture market.

Unless you all want to say that Linux is an OS of yesterday and Windows was built centuries back, they all boil to the same point and that is market share .

X Windows started early 80s and how mcuh ever we all would like to claim has not captured any bit of common household.

So point is if Android apps development is at the same level, such a phone would come , hype and then be only with some geeks ( like Linux boxed are today).

Totally agreed and in that sense we should compare then Windows 1.0 with UNIX coding. In both cases, development have been extremely slow and support negligible (unless there has been companies taking over working full time on it.)

No doubt that Linux is a stable system, but with respect to user base, pretty negligible and in this context wherein Android applications are considered, if the app development base is similar then I doubt it would work long.

I had nothing to do with that argument. My only contribution to this specific thread was the correction of Win95 being an OS.

"Officially" Microsoft marketed it as an OS. Why the hell wouldn't they? They wanted to market it as one product. Done. Technically, however, it is not.

That was the only point I was making. I couldn't care less about the rest of the discussion. ;)

I'm still using Palm's Treo650 because i don't see anything that would be worth paying even $200 if it's not a overall improvement over my Treo
and no I am not some Palm fanatic I simply will not pay to downgrade on none of the following :
-bluetoth
-touchscreen
-availability of free apps (there is plenty for palmOS) and licensed but good ones like tomtom mobile
-physical Qwerty
-long battery life
-not having to deal with windows (even mobile) or monopolistic apple
I guess nobody remembers first iphone's software update that rendered many phones into useless bricks and technical support refusing to fix them and accusing their costumers of attempted hacking and whatever else?
well me and my treo we are living easy life with no big brother Jobs telling us what we can install and where we should get our music..
by looking on today's mobile phone market I am afraid I will have to wait at least another 2 years before anything worth spending money on will show up....

Nothing will ever surpass Apple's iPhone, nothing. The iPhone is way ahead of the competition and is only getting better over time. One phone to rule them all!

Yeah, the iPhone is way ahead of the competition - as long as you exclude Blackberry. Otherwise, not so much.

iphones are cool, but not that cool. no bluetooth, stupid battery, no real keyboard, no support for other media types, limited apps, charger recall, AT&t only, 3g network iffy at best..... god sign me up for the steve " reach around" jobs iphone.

It does have a sweet gui, that is now available for any windows based phone.

Blackberry? LOL. People still use that? I think I'd rather use a rotary phone.

you serious? no bluetooth?? **** the iphone then, the AT&T Tilt is better than that crap

You must be sleeping with Steve Jobs then to think nothing will ever surpass the iPhone. If people thought this way then nothing would ever be improved upon and your beloved iPhone would never exist. I agree its a slick phone but it will in no way ever rule all phones on one US carrier with strict guidelines as to what you can install on it or what rate plan you must purchase. Think of the iPhone as nothing more then a stepping stone for the other manufacters to build on and blow past!

whatdoiknow,

obviously you don't own an iphone. i happen to be a mac hater and extremely cynical in general about software, guis, and gadgets, and the iphone is hands down the best $200 i've ever spent in my life. you're wrong about bluetooth (i use it every day), battery is unbelievably powerful considering what i put it through on a day to day basis, at&t provides roll-over minutes for the same price as verizon plans which don't provide roll-over, 3g network works in santa cruz which is a positive surprise, and steve jobs has never contacted me since i bought it - and no windows phone has a gui half as good as the iphone's.

the few things it's missing (in spite of which the phone is still the best $200 i've ever spent): voice recognition, MMS (texting pictures), and video recording. plus the only browser that works is safari, which crashes way too often.

android has nothing on the iphone yet but i more than anyone would love to see google triumph over apple in the mobile biz (and everywhere else i guess).

really whatdoiknow, get an iphone. it's legit.

I will not buy a smart phone that doesn't have an micro sd 2.0 card slot. 32GB cards will be common and cheep soon any phone that cant use them is crippled and not compatible with the future. I like the size an crave the multi- touch but it fails to compensate for a real user. And for the last nail, I'm not paying an extra unjustified fee each month to use an non subsidized phone.

Ignorance in action everyone.....

It DOES have bluetooth, the battery is fine considering the demand put on it, Limited apps? have you even been through the App store?

I use the Edge and 3G network daily and the difference isn't that great, besides, what are you doing on your freaking phone that you need that much bandwidth!?

I will admit that the keyboard is a low point. A charger recall? You're right, i guess it isn't that cool, with that horrible inconvenience of waiting for Apple to send out a replacement charger for free.

Point is, the few negatives of the iPhone are heavily outweighed by it's positives and completely worth $199. And don't come in here with that 'over the life of the contract, you're actually spending $XXX' Last time I checked, no one was giving away free service.

Not only are Blackberry phones still heavily used, RIM's market share is growing faster than Apple's. This will probably accelerate when the Bold and Thunder are released. Judging by your comment you probably haven't used a Blackberry since they were dedicated email devices. Their newest offerings are quite impressive.

Applications that you can't pick, only apple picks.
The battery life is abysmal. Most 3G phones are bad, but still was hoping for better. The bad part is you can't easily replace that battery like you can with other phones.
The keyboard is a deal-breaker for me.
The 3G network speed is pretty bad, much slower in my experience than Verizon's network.

Speaking of network, the phone point of the device:being a phone, is its worst feature. the iphone has terrible call quality and dropped calls are the norm, at least in my neck of the woods and when I talk to people on them...

So a slick GUI and ipod integration is indeed about all you get from this phone. Fine, I guess, but I eagerly await more of Google's Verizon offerings.

Yeah, as a matter of fact... A hell lot more people use Blackberrys then iPhone.

HTC is also making great headway.. and their new Touch Diamond is a killer phone, which makes the iPhone like an outdated toy. And the TouchHD furthers that view.

The only thing I will give the iPhone is that is has a good amount of memory. But then again, when Apple buys up all the memory in world, the little companies have to do the best with what they've got.

iPhones are for losers.

The iPhone is a nice gadget, but you make me hate it. Please stop.

At least BlackBerry don't f**k up like your iPhone. When's the last time you heard anyone having problems with their Blackberry? And don't send me a link to a BB Support forum please! I mean global issues, call drops, network issues??

BlackBerry is a proven device and the technology behind is rock-solid. It may not be as sexy but it definitely work smoother that the HIphone!

are you talking to me cabron chupa pinga