They won't because Apple has more at stake. Google just doesn't want one company to control the device people view their ads on, Apple's building a lucrative platform which it needs to protect.

Except the guy on the street wasn't random, he had a boss who sat in on meetings which created that haircut design in the first place. And once that haircut was a hit that boss decided to become a barber himself.

Yeah they should build a GUI on top of Java, it's all the rage in the "enterprise" you know.

Android is just Google's way of preventing Apple of being able to do "a Microsoft" and "Netscaping" them. Which is also why it's not viable long term: it doesn't make money for Google and handset makers and operators aren't interested in maintaining a platform so it comes down to gambling on the open source community which hasn't exactly got a good track record on the desktop (or in this case palmtop.)

That's the offer they made Samsung.

Winning a lawsuit in a democracy before a jury of your peers is bullying ? That's a very strange definition.

Because it's an indicator of how likely support is going to continue in the future. All these companies selling crappy Android based phones for next to no profit are never going to support them. Apple will provided support and updates, etc.

Lighten up, it's a joke.

Samsung's the only one turning a decent profit though. And a lot of that market is selling low-end smartphones to be used as dumb phones. One company is building the next generation computing platform, the others are just selling handsets even if some are trying to create a cargo-cult facsimile of an ecosystem (like Samsung with their Samsung S-Cloud and what not.)

It was reported as such, which I assume GP was talking about : Samsung S3: 9 million pre-order new Galaxy phone.

We're talking about the first 24 hours here, US only and directly from consumers. Galaxy S3's 9 million pre-orders was over a longer period, worldwide and pre-orders by carriers. You're comparing apples and lemons.

The dustbin of history is littered with "superior" solutions. Implementation is everything.

The story of too many of the "open" projects :
* someone creates something worthwhile
* it becomes very popular
* some douchebag says: "I'll make something exactly like this, except it will be better because it's OPEN."
* nothing of value is produced
* Lather, rinse, repeat

Ahem

All kidding aside though, it's not about aesthetics alone. If you're going to holding something in your hands for an extended period of time it needs to feel right and it needs to be solid and sturdy.

I disagree. If the Google model wins not only will we end up with a system where device support is non-existant, app quality is low and letting developers make money is a low priority (the current state of Android "ecosystem"), and we'll all end up paying for it all by trading away our privacy and our data because that's the real priority and reason Android was ever even developed. I prefer the Apple way because I think it'll end up creating a much better (if not exactly ideal) environment for both end users and developers. Of course if a third path should open my opinion might change but that doesn't look likely any time soon.

ALL remaining parties are "corporate shills" by the way. The true free as in speech alternatives died at the hands of the Android juggernaut.