Are you sure that carriers are able to "tamper" with iOS? I do not have an iPhone, but given Apple's business model, I tend not to believe that they would let carriers change the operating system software on their (Apple's) phones?

Apple does not allow the carriers to tamper with iOS. The blame here should land firmly on Google for putting up with this garbage.

In fairness, if they changed their business model to give them more control, then they'd be being sued, not all their OEMs that they use as convenient legal shields.

I want a replacement phone and SHR linux running on it.

Well I see your point since Android is open source. If Google tried to force OEMs to do something, they would just go past Google and obtain the AOSP code without Google apps adding even more fragmentation.

Windows Mobile failed because Microsoft allowed it to become outdated. Look at how little they changed things up until they tried to save it around 6.5.x and by then it was too late.

The Android model is no different than the Windows desktop model. But imagine if Windows OEMs stripped out Explorer and replaced it with their own version as well as making bloatware uninstallable.

Wikileaks reveals mass surveillance of mobile devices

WIKILEAKS FOUNDER Julian Assange has warned, "You're all screwed," when it comes to smartphone and gadget monitoring and surveillance.

Users of the Iphone, Blackberry and Gmail are among those who are supposedly 'screwed' because more than 150 organisations can monitor data on mobile devices. Assange made the statement at a press conference while unveiling the Wikileaks 'Spy Files' project.

Wikileaks said, "Mass interception of entire populations is not only a reality, it is a secret new industry spanning 25 countries."

"It sounds like something out of Hollywood, but as of today, mass interception systems, built by Western intelligence contractors, including for 'political opponents' are a reality."

Assange said, "Who here has an iPhone? Who here has a BlackBerry? Who here uses Gmail? Well, you're all screwed."

More at: The Inquirer

If it also applys to BlackBerry, then it become messy like this.
If it happened, James Phone. LOL.

Except Windows Mobile never took off in the consumer market because anarchy does not provide mass-market appeal. It was always perceived as a more complex phone for a more sophisticated person. You can blame the age, but truth be told, it never did have legs - iOS is 4, nearing 5 years old, and the UX has not had a major change during that time. Yet people still buy it in bulk. It is getting a little dated these days (just put it next to a Windows Phone), but the fact is the same things that drew people in then are still present.

You may be able to use the power that Windows Mobile offered, but most users would get vastly more done on a Windows Phone, because the user experience makes accessing it's functionality whole magnitudes simpler, and they'll never care about the fringe functionality they're missing. Same applies to Android. It's a ticking time-bomb.

Microsoft make the desktop model work purely because they have an enforceable monopoly - the OEMs don't think they can significantly improve what Windows has to offer - indeed, they know that any major changes will be perceived as a downside for them. Whilst things are more free and open in the desktop Windows model, don't kid yourself that Microsoft don't rule the ecosystem. If PC OEMs pulled a spyware thing like this in Windows, Microsoft would simply push a tool through Windows Update that'd remove it. Android is far more anarchistic. There is no central authority, and that was always Google's intention, because otherwise, patent owners targeting Google could attack the entire platform. Instead, you see Microsoft having to deals one-by-one, and at no point are Google having to pay the price for their deliberate infringements.

The original Windows Mobile came from a different era, pre-capacitive touchscreens, and before many of the other sensors that phones have were available. I owned a Windows Mobile pda and they were pretty powerful devices for their time. It was a quick OS to pick up on if you knew Windows. It was definitely intimidating to a novice user.

Apple was able to do things right in 2007 by controlling hardware and writing an OS around newly available capacitive touch screens and other sensors. Windows Mobile and the rest were left with a legacy OS supporting legacy hardware standards once iOS came out. I really think Microsoft could have saved Windows Mobile. Zune and even Windows Phone 7 still run CE underneath so they could have added backward compatibility with a disclaimer that apps won't be touch friendly.

You hit the nail on the head about the update issue with Android. PC users would be screwed if updates had to funnel down the way they do with Android. ICS is out and some phones still haven't got Gingerbread despite having the hardware and not being that old, its ridiculous. Ubuntu is open source and works across many computers, but it has a universal Update Manager. Really the only way to save Android from fragmentation is to have updates be rolled out by Google directly, like Apple does with the iPhone. Not just OS updates, but security updates as well.

Lol, Blackberry.
I didn't know paperweights could get exploits. Not that BlackBerries can be classed as smartphones either.

That would have been a disaster. Even if you assume people wouldn't have judged the platform based on a huge market of unfriendly apps, there's a whole multitude of technical reasons it was undesirable.

Firstly, drop any notion that Windows Phone bares any resemblance to Windows Mobile beyond its Kernel and branding. It doesn't. It's technically much closer to Zune OS than WM - it doesn't even have the classic window rendering system from CE, which rules out almost all legacy apps.

Secondly, Microsoft chose a development platform that was securable and ready for the modern phone. Allowing legacy apps would defeat both goals and seriously hamper Microsoft's ability to retain some level of quality control over third-party apps. There's a reason Carrier IQ, and other prevalent malware types simply aren't on WP7 - it's not possible. No third-party app has access to the filesystem for example, not even with the most persistent hacking by very skilled individuals has full access been achieved. It's why managed code is demanded for the marketplace - they can automate checking for potentially dangerous operations. It's been a true success story.

Chilling it over here with my CM7.
And even if I didn't have that, I wouldn't have CIQ, because my carrier doesn't tinker with the software

The reality about WP7:
Microsoft axed a Windows Mobile successor the "Photon" Project because it was behind schedule
and replaced it with an improved Zune firmware for luxury phones(based on CE 6.0R3 with own UI and Vista like fonts)
Very bad move but they wanted to make something like Apple's iSuccess.

Third parties are already using CarrierIQ,so be prepared to flash:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenbe ... oceedings/

I just saw this.. lol @ saying carriers tinker with iOS .. NO carrier is allowed to tinker with iOS. The CLOSEST a carrier gets to installing their BLOAT on iOS is:

- having a SIM card menu buried somewhere in Settings
- a bookmark to the carrier's portal
- Apps in the app store - installable by users choice

at least get your info right... carriers don't even LIKE selling iPhone's no matter how badly they want to sell them.. they make next to zero profit and they can't install all their rubbish and branding on the OS where they can do whatever they want with Android and make plenty of $$$