> You just have to look at Windows Phone 7 or Windows 8 or Web OS or Blackberry to realize that you don't have to copy Apple to make a good or great smartphone.
Ok sure, but why did you cite a bunch of bad smartphones to validate your point?
Ok, but AndroidOS didn't copy iOS for mobile so that's not what we're talking about. If we're talking about OSes only, then I agree, there's nothing wrong with either of those phones or really the blackberry themselves. They all have functionalities that fit different userbases. Similarly, neither of these OSes are absolutely 'better' than one another in that context.
Obviously, the point of contention here is with the design of the phones themselves, and how similar they look and feel to consumers. In that argument, the phones that have supported WebOS, Blackberry, and the WindowsOS have a lower quality overall, and I like WebOS. I'm talking about hardware, durability, and application ecosystem. This is my claim that smartphones of these types are 'bad'. The iPhone and Android would not be as popular if they were similar to the older Blackberry phones.
Android was on course to build something like BB until the iPhone released. They quickly changed gears (maybe even before the release if Jobs is to be believed) to follow Apple's lead. Samsung took it the next step.
I think the competition has been good for all involved, but revisionism fails to tell the real story.
>> Ok sure, but why did you cite a bunch of bad smartphones to validate your point?
The hardware for Windows Phone and Web OS might have sucked, but the OS's are quite nice in my opinion. I would seriously consider either of those two over an iPhone if they (well WP at least) had better hardware.
Regarding the Blackberry, well, I don't have any defence for them.
Well WebOS and Blackberry Playbook and Windows Phone 7 might not be of the same calibur in terms of hardware, but they are proof that Samsung didn't need to try and ape Apple so closely to make a good product.
Tell me something. If you took all the apps and app developers from the IOS App Store and traded them for all that WebOS, BlackBerry, Or windows 8 has... How would sales change in the next year??? Throw in Apple's marketing crew to trade as well. Isn't that an interesting notion?
Is suggestion that these are "bad smartphones" coming from their lack of sales? This is a false dichotomy. If not - please provide data that suggests otherwise (rather than your own heavily influenced personal opinion either).
It is not the phones or OS that makes IOS outsell the other companies mentioned - It is the apps and the marketing.
I agree with this as well by the way. But you can't throw in an "interesting notion" theoretical to solve this problem. What Apple and Android devices have is not only a developer ecosystem and a better application suite, along with good marketing. They have a dedicated userbase. They have both convinced users in their quality by staying on the edge of technology and strongly competing.
My argument is that these smartphones are 'bad' in the same way that IE is a 'bad' browser in the eyes of most users in comparison to Chrome, Firefox, Opera, and Safari. However, I can't just assume that IF IE had the apps and app developers as the Chrome and FF that everything would change. There's something to be said about context, reputation, and history.
However, I'll concede that calling thse smartphones 'bad' is ambiguous and seems to imply a false dichotomy. The point was that it is kind of ridiculous to point to products with a bad reputation for developers or users (regardless of the reality of their quality) as a shining example of how Samsung didn't have to copy Apple. I agree that they didn't, but those aren't good examples.
Ok sure, but why did you cite a bunch of bad smartphones to validate your point?