I don’t own a smart-phone.
First, it doesn’t fit comfortably in the back-pocket of my jeans, and second, I don’t find it sensible to spend $100 a month for a plethora of features I will hardly ever really need. I’ve a tiny mp3 player from Sansa that I sometimes carry in my backpack, and if I want to entertain myself, I can either read a book or catch up with things on the netbook that goes wherever I go.
But, if I were to get a smart-phone, it would be from Apple, even though I’m pretty sure that Android is just as good, if not better, than IOS.
Android seems to be going in the same direction as Windows. An operating system with a number of holes, that would be better-plugged by a full re-write than by almost two decades worth of patches (no, as a programmer, I don’t buy any of Microsoft’s allegations that Windows x, y, or z was a full re-write of a previous incarnation – bugs don’t carry over from one re-write to another). And Android is not likely to be re-written from scratch in order to harden it to attack. The world of open source simply lacks the resources.
Volunteers can’t afford the time needed for a re-write – version x+1 is more important than rewriting version x in order to fix it if it is to stay competitive vis-a-vis commercial wares. Companies like Microsoft can’t afford to because it affects their bottom-line and, gasp, their stock’s value (owner employees have a conflict of interest, if you ask me). And Apple doesn’t need to because they were never interested in a product that shows openness of any kind.