Dunno, didn't see it

Googles released the OS figures for Android.
I contend that Android 2.3.3 Gingerbread is a good OS.
And Android 4.0 ICS is a good OS.
And Android 4.1 Jellybean also worthy.

The rest are outdated piece of ****, and they compose about 12 - 14% of the Total Android Devices in use.

Recently it was noted that Android has something like 69% of the World Phone Market Share. That mean 9% of all phones in the world is TRASH.

Why cant BBX take that cut?
Why cant WP8 (7, 7.5, 7.8 are PoS) take its cut?
Wtf is wrong with people? Why must they create a Monopoly?

Kangal, this 9% is people that bought their phone two years ago with that OS and still have it. I doubt anybody buys a pre Gingerbread phone today, and if anybody does, it is going to cost 1/5th or less than the price of the cheapest BlackBerry. So that 9% is probably not the target for BB.

"Oh My"... When i read about that messy state (window spawning, inconsistent navigation, too many menus etc), i'm not too sure if i should evaluate / count on BB10. Also for Sailfish it looks to me it's in a similar situation.

Maybe it's better to stick with Android. The shortcomings are well-known, and there you won't have silly navigation issues. Plus, the infrastructure is there for long.

didn't know you would have become such a Android lover. I salut you...

The whole google maps application is a big BUG!

...i'm not "lovin'" it, but from an "availability of really usable / feature-complete programs" POV its a fact its better than many competitors. So i can say i can accomplish the needful ("things just work"), whereas i'm still allowed to hack away fully. I would have issues to say the first part about Maemo, and definitely not about iOS and HP's/ Palm's crapOS.

Piracy? Same thing that helped Microsoft not so long ago

The fact I'm running a leaked version of BB10 on a Dev Alpha device, I'd say piracy isn't as persuasive now as it was then - Windows proliferation has been argued to be at its highest due to floppies and CD's being shared so commonly between friends, families and corporations.

Regardless... I mean, if you know what you're looking for, you can find it. It's easier now. I think now, you have to have something else compelling folks to buy the device.

I think when it comes down to it, every worthy competitor is exactly 1 year late.

1) MS was right on target time with WP7, however it was buggy and it should've been the WP7.5 instead. MS sealed their grave when they decided that 800x480 was the only resolution and QSD the only processor.

2) I can't decide if WinRT is a year "too late" or simply just sucks.

3) Palm was sold to HP for a ridiculously bargain price of $1.2B. This would've been the perfect acquisition for Nokia, and a perfect partner for them (much better than Intel). HP tried to use Palm's and developed the TouchPad Tablet. But it was too late, as Android began to take the "cheap or alternate tablet" category. They were a year late.

4) The RIM PlayBook was an excellent tablet. It was very buggy and limited to begin with. Its version 2 OS which arrived a year later should've been its release firmware. The PlayBook should've been released at least a few weeks before the iPad 2. Oh, and fix up the hardware like small weirdly arranged buttons, gigantic bezel, and somewhat thick profile.

5) BBX (ahem BB10) is very innovative. It comes on great hardware. It doesn't lack too many Apps, and has a form to solve it. However, its lackluster compared to the iPhone 5, HTC One X, and NOTE1/2. It could've competed nicely against the Gnex, but the delay was, you guessed it, a year too late.

6) AMD has decided to get in on the low-powered processor market. The Tegra2 SoC, the first (and slowest) dualcore processor based on ARM's Cortex A9 was so much ahead (time-wise) in market to Qualcomm and Samsung... that they literally paved a way for themselves in the market. AMD could've (very easily) beaten Nvidia at every turn. They could've owned a large chunk of the mobile processor market, the market which continues to rapidly grow as the x86 market continues stagnantly.

7) Nokia was a year late with the roll out of the N8. The "first" Symbian smartphone, which had the best camera and could've provided them with the needed the profits to stay healthy/afloat.

8) Nokia was also (at least) a year late with Symbian v3 (Anna) release, and utilizing Qt for an App ecosystem.

9) MeeGo was never released, however Maemo 6 was at least a year late. The N9 would've been a good contender against the SGS i9000 but a little weak next to the iPhone 4 and Motorola Atrix.

10) Jolla is a year late. Many of the MeeGo/Qt advocates have moved on to other platforms. Now there's another "decent" option to move to (BBX). Jolla won't have the strong support it would've gotten a year ago.

...Do you guys have examples of anymore?

I agree with Kangal that so many things appear about a year too late, but I have a theory as to why this is happening and how it impacts BB10.

I think that given the lag time that it takes to get a phone designed, approved, and marketed, most new companies cannot forecast where the specifications of market leaders will be. Consequently, they (1) go cheap and (2) underestimate the competition.

Take the BB10 Z10, for instance. It'll be marketed in the US in March, with other markets having it available now. Did BlackBerry really expect the specs of top Android phones to be quad core S4 pro, 1080p screens at 441 ppi, packing 2300+ mAh batteries? It's like taking a knife to a gun fight.

And that's not all. I have an n900, E7, and N9. My issue with these, the BB10, WPx and the other "smaller" OS class is that they are always starting over. Bugs that have long since been worked out generations ago from older platforms continually re-emerge in newer ones. Like how the email IMAP counter for Yahoo unread email is buggy in my N9. So younger systems have to devote scarce resources to debugging while established powers are building cool *** features like Google Now. BB10 has a many more bugs, gaps and misfires than do established powers, though perhaps fewer than many other young OS's do. I do not know of any way around this disadvantage. :-(

I won't discuss the app-gap, other than to say that BB10 had better get that Android 4.1 runtime environment up ASAFP to minimize the app-gap.

I think that these reasons of hardware, software, and OS sophistication are what make the new OS's seem like they are a year behind the leaders. In many ways, they are. The benefit of my N9 is that it presents a cool UX that is original and fun.

Can't we have both? I would love if someone would make a perfect N9 skin for Android AND dual boot Harmattan onto, say, an Xperia Z? I could have my Harmattan apps, my Google stuff, top-end specs, all with an authentic or carefully replicated swipe UI. A guy can dream . . .