thadocta
Banned
- 5,952
- 1,144
bluetooth tether just stopped working on my phone.epictouch4g on cm10.
its a sign from the android gods to upgrade
VV(^^)VV_____OFFICIAL ANDROID OS/DEVICE THREAD_____VV(^^)VV
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by pacmagic2002,
- Start date
its a sign from the android gods to upgrade
- 30,282
- 40,743
already know, i think it's a sign from the sprint gods that they caught on to my tethering. no tethering apps work. pdanet doesn't either and that always did.
i got a 160 dollar etf now. i'm trying to be patient and wait it out because i hate sprint. i'm going prepay like everyone else.
phone is smooth as hell though on cm10 for being 2 years old.
i got a 160 dollar etf now. i'm trying to be patient and wait it out because i hate sprint. i'm going prepay like everyone else.
phone is smooth as hell though on cm10 for being 2 years old.
Last edited:
thadocta
Banned
- 5,952
- 1,144
Some guy is selling his droid x for 25. Should I cop?
- 669
- 177
if its a clean ESN then yeah
- 1,424
- 173
SPRINT with that Amazon Wireless deal with a $99 NOTE ii is sounding really good right now.
- 15,860
- 3,484
i ended up copping the galaxy S III on sprint for a penny. best buy price matched amazon. time to update the sig
- 13,712
- 2,823
Your responses to this should be interesting...
From Gizmodo:
From Gizmodo:
Android Is Popular Because It’s Cheap, Not Because It’s Good
Sam Biddle
The story goes like this: The iPhone comes out, and it's the only smartphone anyone wants, because there's never been anything like it. It is the smartphone. Step forward a few years, and Apple is losing to Google—at least in sheer numbers of phones being sold. What happened?
People without money happened.
The split between the ever-pricey, ever-coveted, newly chamfered iPhone and everything else is glaring: The iPhone is universally considered good. A lot more Android phones are considered good enough—or, more to the point, good enough for what they cost. And it's that trait more than any new feature that's guaranteeing Google its role as Phonemaker of The People, a democratic gadget, while Apple succeeds only in cementing its grandfathered slot in the gilded pockets of the overly-discerning overclass.
From the day it slipped out of Steve Jobs' womb and onto credit card bills, the iPhone was a dearly coveted bourgeois object. It was expensive, fancy without ostentation, and semi-affluent white people loved it like their own progeny. It is the phone of actors, models, rappers, academics, and graphic designers living beyond their means. There's never in history been an electronic class beacon so clear as the iPhone—remember how expensive it was when it launched?
A measly 4 GB model set you back $500, and the 8 GB version was $600. With a two-year contract. That didn't stop Apple from selling hundreds of thousands of them out of the gate—so many that AT&T's servers crashed under activation pressures.
Then Google sold its own touchscreen smartphone for around $200, the first Android handset of all time, and no one except geeks of the tightest niche gave a damn.
But today the tables aren't just turned—they've been flipped over and turned into firewood. Android phones dominate Apple across the world—earlier this month, the San Francisco Chronicle reported the trouncing:
In the third quarter of 2012, worldwide manufacturers - among them Apple, Samsung, HTC and Research in Motion - shipped 181.1 million smartphones, according to market analytics group IDC. Google's Android operating system was installed on 75 percent of them, says IDC; Apple's system, iOS, was on about 15 percent. That market share for Android was a 91 percent jump from the previous year's third quarter.
That's monster success. That's a routing. And while Android has finally come into its own as a sophisticated, refined mobile OS that deserves to be purchased in large numbers, Android isn't winning just on merit. Phones like the Nexus 4 and Galaxy SIII are tremendous as both pieces of hardware and containers for smart, thoughtful software. Each is a pleasure to use, but that's not Android's sharpest knife.
Android's success isn't really about these phones. It's about the ZTE Warp, LG Motion, and Samsung Captivate—which retail for $100, $50, and a penny, respectively. It's about these marginal, middling phones that can be sold like bags of Doritos or bargain-bin sweaters—they're priced to move, not priced to be ogled at or aspired towards. And it's working.
The last study conducted by the Pew Research Center's Internet & American Life Project shows that Android is the chosen smartphone of people without money. Among respondents, 22-percent of those with annual incomes below $30,000 were Android owners, as opposed to just 12 percent for iPhone. With those towards the lower-middle class, the trend holds: Android owns 23-percent of incomes up to $50,000, with iPhones at 18. The data makes it clear: the less money you have, the more likely you are to opt for an Android phone over something more expensive.
And it's not purely an income game—other socioeconomic factors that correlate heavily with the amount of money you've got in your pocket line up perfectly. Federal census data pegs black and hispanic households at median income (and ergo spending) levels tens of thousands of dollars below their white peers—and statistically, those same households are going Android at higher rates. A full 12-percent more black and hispanic smartphone users are Android users compared to Apple customers, and owners of any race with a high school diploma or less made up 38-percent of Android owners, over iPhone's 31-percent mark in that cohort.
This is no accident. Check out the flyers or sidewalk storefronts of pre-paid econo-carriers like Boost Mobile or MetroPCS—which cater heavily to lower-income customers—and all you'll see is Android. Even Asian corporate giants like Samsung are trying to lure more lower-earning buyers. As NBC's Griot news site pointed out late last year,
[Samsung's] new commercial, titled "Family Photo," features a mostly African-American family attempting to take a holiday portrait with the new Samsung's Galaxy Note II..."Family Photo" isn't the first attempt that Samsung has made to showcase African-Americans in their ads. Sports Illustrated‘s Sportsman of the Year LeBron James was featured in a series of Galaxy Note II commercials in November that gave a snapshot into Miami's black urban community. With his Galaxy II in hand, LeBron gives a tour of his day-to-day activities in the ad, which include breakfast in his lavish Miami home, a stop at an urban street food truck, a haircut at the local black barber shop and finally a Miami Heat's game.
Indeed, Samsung may have the right idea to target African-Americans, who happen to be one of the fastest growing demographic within the smart phone market.
In the meantime, Apple's closest stabs at diversity star the universally-beloved Samuel L. Jackson eating gazpacho and the Williams sisters playing ping pong. Black people, but massively wealthy black people. Beyond that, it's a nebula of pale-handed closeups and consummate white human being Zooey Deschanel.
Apple won't play this game. Partly because it's too stubborn (or too smart) to undercut the likes of HTC and Motorola and hit buyers for whom the price of entry matters more than almost anything. Maybe it's what keeps up the iPhone Mystique. Maybe it's good business. Maybe it's both. But iPhones have always been the expensive alternative to an Android, and there's no reason to think the company will tack away from that status.
Android makers aren't beholden like that. Manufacturers are free to use Android, pay nothing to Google, and then pass on that massive savings to consumers in the form of cheap-o handsets. Most of them are pretty chintzy, slow, and generally bad, but they're still smartphones. For millions upon millions, that's more than good enough; not everyone needs top-of-the-line. Cheap Android will still run Instagram, still check Twitter, still play music and read email. We might turn our nose up at this—who would ever get anything but the best phone with the biggest screen? You use a handset with fewer than two cores? But that's a low echo from the nerdy silicon tower: A lot of people can't afford a $200 or $300 phone, and won't ever be able to. A lot of people just want the basics—no need for the spiff of retina display or LTE—and only want to put up what it costs to get in the door.
This isn't just a good strategy for Google, it's a diabolical strategy for Google: carpet bomb the phone world with as many easy ways to use Google products as possible. Forget prestige. Just get people signed up. Apple might remain the most valuable company in the entire hoary history of capitalism, but Google's playing the long con. As long as Android can keep feeding itself to companies and drive budget electronics, it'll have its foot on the iPhone's throat as a populist standby—and the Zooey Deschanels among us will start to feel like the real minority they are.
- 36,573
- 48,787
Gizmodo has been riding apple's D ever since they got banned to come to apple's keynotes. They do praise Android here and there, but the tone they use can be very condescending. Honestly the ios vs. Android arguments are beyond me. "Aint no one got time for that"
- 8,894
- 1,395
So android is for broke black people ?
- 34,649
- 28,007
Apple=Nike. Its early innovations set the tone for their reputation. Almost like a solid first impression. Other brands have caught up/if not passed Apple. It's not like they have the most expense or exclusive phones.
- 3,190
- 171
Makes no sense, says android is for broke people then goes on and points out an ad about the note 2 which is a $299 phone with a 2 year contract. Not like monthly plans are cheaper for it compared to an iphone.
whyhellothere
Banned
- 18,975
- 2,397
article created to rustle jimmies will leave no jimmy unrustled
inb4 the usual suspect & his bs
inb4 the usual suspect & his bs
Last edited:
- 14,998
- 4,264
pretty much Android has the market share it does because there are a zillion diff devices with majority being cheapo phones. It wasnt until the GS2 that an Android device really made noise and wasnt seen as "the alternative" device. Android has 75 percent market share yes, lol how much of that is from GSNote 2?
- 30,282
- 40,743
Lol @ that article. Now we can't even talk about phones without race.
- 12,389
- 2,910
When will Android implement a legit group chat service??? Thats really my only complaint
- 7,626
- 442
you don't need to bve rooted. Go to setting the more under wireless and network. You should tether.
What's your phone os
- 14,998
- 4,264
Google talk? I dont know why they dont make Google Talk automatic so when ever you are talking to another android device it will go via that instead of regular text since your gmail is already on the device.
- 1,731
- 671
Thats a load of crap. Android targeting poor and African-Americans/Hispanics??
Why cant it just be that people buy what they want? Everyone isnt a tech head like us, with some idiotic loyalty to a certain brand or OS. They just buy whatever phone they can tweet and recieve nudes on *shrug*. The numbers come in that Android has the majority market share and fanboys want to downplay it. Just buy what you want. End of story. If iPhone was really as exclusive as they claim, fanboys wouldnt try to reach so hard to discredit the "competition".
PS: I've owned 3 iPhones, including the very first.
Last edited:
- 1,424
- 173
what??? im gonna try this. i want that Note 2!
foampositemd90
Banned
- 108
- 47
You gotta be sick to start throwing race around while talking about smartphones.Thats a load of crap. Android targeting poor and African-Americans??
I wonder if they'll next article will relate sexual preferences to smartphone choices.
- 13,712
- 2,823
I always wondered that myself. I read that they're finally integrating Voice into Contacts, so it's a start...
- 6,109
- 1,249
And is Google Talk the preferred method of "Face-Timing?"
thadocta
Banned
- 5,952
- 1,144
Thats why I stopped reading gizmodo yeasts ago they are garbage
- 18,374
- 33,983
90% of journalism these days is utter %@#%@, and no where is it worse than in the realm of technology.
what enormous idiocy.
what enormous idiocy.
- 3,027
- 1,693
yea sprint is trash in the bay area too. i was considering them too before going to TMO cause at the time (2 years ago) they were only ones that had unlimited data still. well now TMO has unlimited data. although no LTE and sprint claims they have LTE. their data is slower than everybody here in the BAy area. they need to advertise unlimited data because of how slow it is and how much its constantly gonna be moving bandwith.
also i just cant do without GSM. guess im biased, ive only been with att or tmo since 99/00 when it was still pacbell pcs before cingular. and i love using sim, switching it out from phone to phone or travelling.
tmo def. has the best value. as long as they have great service in your area. i can get unlimited data now on TMO for $20, but surprisingly i have been pleased with the 2GB (unlimited) then slow speeds after for $10. with LTE hopefully around the corner it will just make being on TMO better. maybe not having the iphone from them is a good thing. but if i wanted I believe some areas will still get 4G with ATT's iphone on TMO network (depending on area and towers)
i got out of att cause it was just way too pricey simple as that. i go where cheapest/best value is. just hope tmo doesnt get bankrupt anytime soon lol
