Unless you have a laptop, specifically a Sony. They only do driver updates during the hardware development. Then you're SOL the moment they start selling the hardware. Just the way Carriers like it.

If you price that a full-blown "Nexus" device is about $700 every couple years ( just so you don't have to deal with Carrier crap, but Google's lacking hardware instead), are you really breaking even vs a contract iPhone?

The real problem is still the Linux kernel and still. Without a HAL (yes you need one), you can't close-source the kernel drivers. Without a HAL, you have to port drivers every effing kernel release. Do you know how painful it already is for embedded (such as STBs)? They don't even bother updating kernels just so they can gain this stability.

Every kernel release also has compiler dependencies. Wholescale toolchain updates to match the kernel changes are effing-PITA because there's too many hardware sub-dependencies keyed to specific toolchains that it becomes a maintenance nightmare worse than RPM-hell.

Look at Android itself. It won't move beyond Java 1.5 because it would mean gcc 4.5+ and all the impending havok.

You can't built a platform when the foundation is nothing more than shifting sands every effing release. You may think GPL is correct and developers should suck it up, but that's really not grown up, real-world, bottom-line, project-schedules realistic. Even BSD, Windows, OSX proved you can have closed-source with a HAL, and MASSIVE OS stability for years.

The OS's API age is only a minor annoyance for a large amount of software innovation on this stable foundation. Then each large API jump is every decade or so, instead of every year. Yes at some point that binary blob won't be usable on some next-gen OS version, but until there's an actual Android hardware "platform", that issue won't last more than a year and a phone refresh away.

Uh, I can do Netflix and HD video quite well on my Nook Color, right now, with CM7 on it

There's zero reason for me to step up to a Nook Tablet without CyanogenMod on it, except for the better CPU/gpu. If they never get CM on it because of B&N's idiotic locking, then stepping over to the Fire. B&N, wise up.

I'm saying I have more control in Facebook than I do on G+. However, it takes some effort to massage FB into something usable -- flipping off the public-sharing-all switches, ignore filters, friend-lists, top-stories etc, view filters, post-exceptions, etc. Stuff I constantly wish G+ would understand and add. It's a lot of Android and Windows Mobile for power-users.

Like the iPhone, my opinion is G+ is where people don't want to deal with that. The Linux/Bazaar Facebook v the Cathedral G+. I hate G+'s Stream as I have zero-control of what goes there, unlike FB where I can selectively filter, almost orthogonally, whom and what info of theirs goes into my mainstream and FriendLists. Demonstrates the immaturity of G+ in recognizing user preferences to me.

I play only one game on Fb, and the rest of the time is curating info between Pages and Twitter of recent events as that's where all the mainstream action is, or Google Reader, something that works really well.

So you're saying that Facebook is the Android where you have to spend effort to curate your environment. And, you're too lazy to do it, or you can't figure it out.

Google+ is the Walled Garden where you don't have to figure it out, nor care about its limitations?

They understand the problem. They're just flailing for a killer-app draw for Google+.

The story of Google+'s steps to draw people in:
After critical-mass growth was limited from special-invites, they had to start giving it out in order to keep adoption rates up. After that effect died out and Facebook UI restructured to show how shallow and broken the Circles concept is, Google had to open it up to everybody. This is just the next step.

Of course, social-media coming from these robotic, patronizing hubris, geeks is somewhat ironic because they STILL don't really understand what social information networks are. Nyms are actually very unique identifiers, and usually picked by the user to reflect the core personality/"avatar" of the user. You could get into a whole psychological PhD about it. Do we play DnD with real-names? Denying it is denying the social in networking: I cite Mixi, Twitter, D&D, pilots, and history.

Gogole also has no skin in the game. https://plus.google.com/112678702228711889851/posts/eVeouesvaVX

How about this, Windows 95 v MacOS from 10 feet away.

This is nothing but a rehash of the old look-and-feel that Apple already had lost against Microsoft long ago. This time, Samsung doesn't have Microsoft's lawyers.

Describe the difference between a Porche engine and a Ferarri engine from 10-feet away. How about an AMD cpu from a Intel cpu. A silver VAIO v a Macbook. Earth from Venus, Plasma tv from LCD tv.

Stupid judge from a smart judge at 10 feet.

The list goes on and on! Wtf!

It's not really helping your argument nor your credibility if you haven't figured out FriendLists before G+ and its broken-Cathedral Circles.

Enjoying your anonymous shilling abilities that you don't get from Google? Appreciating the irony?

Exactly.

I don't know if Google noticed, but pseudonyms are better than real-names. You can more reliably and uniquely identify people through stable pseudonyms than a "real-name".

We all know who CmdrTaco is uniquely, but who's Linus? Linus of Linux, Linus of Peanuts, etc etc ...

BS that "real-names" add to the conversation.

Remember, you're the product in these free social network platforms. It'll only be truly private when you're paying for it. Neither is going to change.

mod parent up. Hear Hear. It's all about the strange-attractors, the differentiating kill-app, and Google squashed their grass-roots.

Now G+ exists ONLY for people pissed off by FB's UI's changes. That's not a war G+ will win for any critical-mass.

Right. G+ had a kill-app chance to differentiate itself and draw critical-mass tech-crowd from both Twitter and Facebook with pseudo-nymity.

Of course, Google fumbled it hard welding an unattractive and reckless services ban-hammer. Now, it's just a war of attrition for G+ to lose.