He states he is a 'massive geek', and felt massively disturbed by the Android experience ruined by carriers.<p>The majority of Android Users are not geeks, and therefore DO NOT care if the mobile is sluggish, buggy, overblown, etc. Thats a fact, i have to deal with it every single day.<p>Android is gaining traction (at least here in Europe), thanks to non-geeks and cheap prices for the devices, and because of a few apps (Whatsapp, etc.). That's all the mass market cares about. And Android focuses on mass market.
@StavrosK, sorry if you felt that was silly and of no value, if I'd have known I'd have been wasting _your_ precious time I'd have put more thought into what I posted on MY website.<p>Snide sarcasm aside (sorry couldn't resist :P), I don't agree that just because Android is open source it has to put up with being tainted by poor implementations, especially by such large, visible corporations. Certainly it makes it an easier target for such but just because it's open source doesn't mean there are no restrictions or controls and no concerns about the platform perception.<p>To be clear, I think Android is a great platform, I just feel that it's severely let down by those scheming to make a fast buck out of it to the detriment of it's users and genuine supporters.<p>@DrinkWater, to think just because someone is not a geek means they do not care if they have to suffer a bad experience is a depressing thought indeed.
My Galaxy S (which I simply tolerate now), came loaded with a porn application from my carrier. The damage these companies allow (or do themselves) to their brands is astounding given the competition in the market. I won't even consider Samsung for my next phone because of how bad this one is.
There's a very simple way to stop the carriers from doing this: Close-source Android.<p>The article should have been: "What Android gets wrong: It's open source." Then the author would have realized how silly and of no value that whole article was.