Getting Windows 10 For Phones Cheap With The Microsoft Lumia 550

[scolaner]

The latest member of the Windows 10 for phones family is the $139 Lumia 550.

Getting Windows 10 For Phones Cheap With The Microsoft Lumia 550 : Read more

 

[RedJaron]

Got some typos regarding the SoC specs. You list the Snapdragon 400 as both a 1.2 GHz dual- and quad-core. Actual specs on Qualcomm's site are "up to 1.7 GHz dual-core." And I'm not sure why you say a 1.1 GHz quad-core is underpowered compared to a 1.2 GHz dual-core. The iGPU on the 210 is weaker than the 400, but that's about it. The quad-core should be at least as nimble as the dual in handling the OS threads.

 

[scolaner]

Whoops, yes, thanks. There are actually two versions of the Snapdragon 400. One is dual-core and uses Krait cores, and the other is quad-core and uses ARM cores. Dual-core was listed in a spec sheet for the 640 XL (and I wrote it down), but then I did some additional research and found the two versions, and the version on the handset I have is the quad-core version. I neglected to remove the original (incorrect) core count. Fixed now.

 

[blazorthon]

Windows phone has had some of the better budget phones.

 

[RedJaron]

That's been my experience. A lot of budget Android phones are woefully underpowered and sluggish. Budget Windows phones may not have the high resolution you would like, but they are fully functioning and still feel snappy.

 

[RobertoG83]

It's a budget phone. Quite good.

 

[Quixit]

I looks ok, but it still makes me think that most people would be better served with a Moto E.

 

[gggplaya]

Windows 10 mobile will dominate the prepaid phone market.

Windows 10 mobile doesn't need much power, it's always been very efficient because of the simple boring user interface. Who's idiotic idea was it to use TILES????? While all your competitors are using ICONS and Widget Icons, something you've been using for years on your operating systems?

 

[RedJaron]

Spoken like someone who's never used one for any meaningful length of time.

Tell me, what do you think is more useful, a static email icon, or an icon that will have a number on it showing unread emails? Most reasonable people will say the latter. Now which is more useful, the email icon with numbers, or one that can do that and dynamically change itself and show you previews of what the emails are and who they're from. That dynamic icon can also be changed in size to your preference, to show more or less info. Again, most reasonable people will prefer the latter.

What are icons, anyway? They're images aligned to a grid that represent something you can tap/press/click to get to a specific program. Congratulations, tiles fit exactly into that description as well. I find it hilarious you're praising widgets while mocking live tiles.

 

[gggplaya]

Spoken like someone who's never used one for any meaningful length of time.

Tell me, what do you think is more useful, a static email icon, or an icon that will have a number on it showing unread emails? Most reasonable people will say the latter. Now which is more useful, the email icon with numbers, or one that can do that and dynamically change itself and show you previews of what the emails are and who they're from. That dynamic icon can also be changed in size to your preference, to show more or less info. Again, most reasonable people will prefer the latter.

What are icons, anyway? They're images aligned to a grid that represent something you can tap/press/click to get to a specific program. Congratulations, tiles fit exactly into that description as well. I find it hilarious you're praising widgets while mocking live tiles.

Square tiles are simply boring, plain as that. And yes, i use a windows phone everyday, my company gives me one to use, but i also have a galaxy s6 android as my personal phone. I most definitely prefer android and windows phone sales would agree with me.

I also said windows is more efficient, so don't argue efficiency and practicality when i said as much. But there is more to a UI than efficiency and practicality. That's why windows phone sucks.

Also on android, you get an email preview in your notifications, so your point is moot.

 

[RedJaron]

Square tiles are simply boring, plain as that.

Prove it. Cite your empirical evidence. All you're really saying here is that pretty pictures are more important to you than function.

I most definitely prefer android and windows phone sales would agree with me.

What are you trying to say, that the market revolves around your preferences only? You do understand that the bulk of Android market share is not made up of flagship model ownership, but international sales of barrel-bottom Android phones, many in markets that don't have a big selection, right? This is exactly what MS is trying to do, offer a better-built alternative to the dirt-cheap Androids out there. You think it's going to change overnight?

I also said windows is more efficient, so don't argue efficiency and practicality when i said as much.

Stop lying. No where did I mention anything about efficiency or practicality. Please try to read what I actually wrote, not what you think I did.

But there is more to a UI than efficiency and practicality. That's why windows phone sucks.

Interesting. You say that phone OS is more efficient and practical, but then claim it sucks. But you can't offer any quantitative or qualitative reason as to why, other than you think it's "boring." Sounds like a well-developed and supported argument to me.

Also on android, you get an email preview in your notifications, so your point is moot.

Moot point for yourself. You can get similar toast notifications that pop-up and disappear on iOS and Windows as well. I'm talking about having that info readily available right on the home screen, not having to go to a special notification screen.

 

[gggplaya]

Square tiles are simply boring, plain as that.

Prove it. Cite your empirical evidence. All you're really saying here is that pretty pictures are more important to you than function.

Wow, i don't need to prove it or even look up the actual numbers. Windows Mobile phone sales since the launch of tiles has always been practically nothing. The market speaks for itself, they don't like the boring tiles. Provide a chart that proves otherwise. I'd like to see it.

I most definitely prefer android and windows phone sales would agree with me.

What are you trying to say, that the market revolves around your preferences only? You do understand that the bulk of Android market share is not made up of flagship model ownership, but international sales of barrel-bottom Android phones, many in markets that don't have a big selection, right? This is exactly what MS is trying to do, offer a better-built alternative to the dirt-cheap Androids out there. You think it's going to change overnight?

I never said that, stop putting words in my mouth, why are you so combative. Do you do this with people in real life(insert extremes then argue against them)? I never said the world should revolve around my preferences, that's literally stupid. I said my preferences, and that the market agrees with me, there's a huge difference. My preferences are in line with the general market.

Android sales were already trending towards dominance long before they were super affordable. Windows phones also sell in the same price range of lower end phones, sub $100 prepaid market. They've been making cheap windows phones for years, doesn't need to be overnight. But regardless, even if you break it up into phone tiers by price, iOS and Android still dominate windows phones. Obviously, that market speaks as well. They don't like windows phones, tiles are boring.

I also said windows is more efficient, so don't argue efficiency and practicality when i said as much.

Stop lying. No where did I mention anything about efficiency or practicality. Please try to read what I actually wrote, not what you think I did.

Read what i wrote, i didn't lie. I said windows phones are very efficient due to the boring tile design. They are efficient, easy to use and practical. That doesn't make them enjoyable. If people liked those qualities, we'd all be driving around in toyota prius's.

But there is more to a UI than efficiency and practicality. That's why windows phone sucks.

Interesting. You say that phone OS is more efficient and practical, but then claim it sucks. But you can't offer any quantitative or qualitative reason as to why, other than you think it's "boring." Sounds like a well-developed and supported argument to me.

How do you test something that is purely subjective??? You can't quantify a UI, other than performance metrics like speed. UI is subjective, and the only way to test it is to give it to hundreds of people and have them fill out a survey. Since i don't have those resources, you can simply go off people's buying preferences. Android and iOS wins. Tiles suck!!!

Moot point for yourself. You can get similar toast notifications that pop-up and disappear on iOS and Windows as well. I'm talking about having that info readily available right on the home screen, not having to go to a special notification screen.

You can have it on your home screen as a widget if you so choose. So again, it's moot.

 

[RedJaron]

Wow, i don't need to prove it or even look up the actual numbers.

If you're going to debate someone, you might want to rethink that. If you want to argue a point, you need to be able and willing to back it up with supporting data.

Windows Mobile phone sales since the launch of tiles has always been practically nothing. The market speaks for itself, they don't like the boring tiles.

Are you implying that Windows Mobile sales were higher before the switch to WP7? Are you sure you want to argue that the main reason Windows phones don't sell as much is just because of live tiles?

Provide a chart that proves otherwise. I'd like to see it.

Once again, it is your job to support your claims, not others' jobs to prove you wrong.

I never said that, stop putting words in my mouth

I've done no such thing. If you read that closely, you should notice I asked a question to make sure I understood what you were trying to say.

why are you so combative. Do you do this with people in real life (insert extremes then argue against them)?

Me insert extremes? Hardly. You're the one ranting "this thing sucks!" without offering any supporting arguments. Yet I'm the combative one? To answer your question, yes, I do this to people in real life if they make the mistake of arguing their opinion as fact.

My preferences are in line with the general market.

This sentence makes sense, and I'm guessing that you don't understand why it differs slightly ( but very distinctly ) from what you said before.

Obviously, that market speaks as well. They don't like windows phones, tiles are boring.

Uh huh, right, it's only because of the tiles. It couldn't possibly be due to any other reason.

Read what i wrote, i didn't lie.

I did read it, thank you. And yes, you did lie. You accused me of arguing about efficiency and practicality when I never mentioned either. I simply asked which function you consider more useful. And before you try to argue "useful" and "practical" are the same thing, they aren't. Usefulness denotes whether or not something is beneficial. Practicality is whether or not the method of accomplishing something is doable or worthwhile.

I said windows phones are very efficient due to the boring tile design. They are efficient, easy to use and practical. That doesn't make them enjoyable. If people liked those qualities, we'd all be driving around in toyota prius's.

If I were you, I would rethink what you're saying here, or at least drastically reword this. Currently you're suggesting that people in general don't like efficiency, ease of use, or practicality. When combined with your past posts, you're suggesting you like Android despite it being impractical, inefficient, and difficult to use because at least it's prettier than the alternatives. When I ask others why they prefer their iPhones, the most common answer I get is because it's easy for them to use. Sounds to me like people actually like that quality. Now you may say that those traits are not the most important for everyone, and that is of course true. But blanket statements like what you made are foolish.

How do you test something that is purely subjective??? You can't quantify a UI, other than performance metrics like speed. UI is subjective, and the only way to test it is to give it to hundreds of people and have them fill out a survey. Since i don't have those resources, you can simply go off people's buying preferences. Android and iOS wins. Tiles suck!!!

Wow, complete self-awareness failure here. First, you say it's impossible to measure something subjective ( which is very true ). But then you immediately go on to use a subjective opinion ( "Tiles suck!!!" ) as though it were a demonstrable, measureable, verifiable fact. I think that's all that needs to be said about that.

You can have it on your home screen as a widget if you so choose. So again, it's moot.

Which brings us back to your absurd claim that a widget is somehow superior to a tile, despite the fact they do the exact same thing.

 

[gggplaya]

Wow, i don't need to prove it or even look up the actual numbers.

If you're going to debate someone, you might want to rethink that. If you want to argue a point, you need to be able and willing to back it up with supporting data.

Here you go, first link on google. Windows continues to hover around a measley 3% as it has for years. I was simply stating that it wasn't necessary to look it up because you, i and everyone else already knew the answer because it's common knowledge. What's ironic is that you're the one who started the arguement, even though you're a moderator or supposed to be one at least, and you offered no data to support your arguement. Instead you're acting very childish.
http://www.idc.com/prodserv/smartphone-os-market-share.jsp

Windows Mobile phone sales since the launch of tiles has always been practically nothing. The market speaks for itself, they don't like the boring tiles.

Are you implying that Windows Mobile sales were higher before the switch to WP7? Are you sure you want to argue that the main reason Windows phones don't sell as much is just because of live tiles?

Yes, as high as 42% back in 2007. Declining since 2008 down to around 3% in 2011 where it's been hovering for a few years. The tile UI was simply never accepted or well recieved. Granted iOS sales were dominate, at the same time android was very buggy, sluggish and inefficient, yet people still went with android over windows phone. Android launched in 2009 with only 2.9% marketshare, which hovered around 30% a few months later. Windows phone 7 launched in 2010 and never took off at all. The tile UI was simply boring, no one wants all their icons to look the same.

And again, i originally stated the Tile UI was boring, that's why it was never adopted. You continue to ask me to back up that claim, yet you offer no evidence to support the opposite???

FACT: Windows Phone never took off. That's undisputable.
My thoery for why: Tile UI is boring, no one likes it.
Your Theory for why: Android phones are cheap, so people bought them like rabbits making more rabbits.
My rebuttal: There have been plenty of cheap windows phones for years, especially prepaid. Also, even within the higher tier market, people still buy android and iOS over windows phone.
Your response: cut me down as much as you can with no actual response....Still waiting....

Provide a chart that proves otherwise. I'd like to see it.

Once again, it is your job to support your claims, not others' jobs to prove you wrong.

I did support my claim by asserting the WP marketshare was miniscule, which is common knowledge. You continue to say otherwise, that's why i asked you for a chart to prove otherwise. I don't understand why it's my job to prove myself wrong????????? And again, you don't back any of your claims.

I never said that, stop putting words in my mouth

I've done no such thing. If you read that closely, you should notice I asked a question to make sure I understood what you were trying to say.

why are you so combative. Do you do this with people in real life (insert extremes then argue against them)?

Me insert extremes? Hardly. You're the one ranting "this thing sucks!" without offering any supporting arguments. Yet I'm the combative one? To answer your question, yes, I do this to people in real life if they make the mistake of arguing their opinion as fact.

Nope, you did insert verbage as if i implied some things i didn't say. Then argued against them. My original post was very short and to the point, nothing else implied, you read way too much into it.

My preferences are in line with the general market.

This sentence makes sense, and I'm guessing that you don't understand why it differs slightly ( but very distinctly ) from what you said before.

I never said anything else different before. I said what my preference was, then i said the market agrees with me. I never said the market should just buy what my preferences were, YOU said that.

Obviously, that market speaks as well. They don't like windows phones, tiles are boring.

Uh huh, right, it's only because of the tiles. It couldn't possibly be due to any other reason.

What reason would that be???

Read what i wrote, i didn't lie.

I did read it, thank you. And yes, you did lie. You accused me of arguing about efficiency and practicality when I never mentioned either. I simply asked which function you consider more useful. And before you try to argue "useful" and "practical" are the same thing, they aren't. Usefulness denotes whether or not something is beneficial. Practicality is whether or not the method of accomplishing something is doable or worthwhile.

Useful from google dictionary: "able to be used for a practical purpose or in several ways"

You're sidestepping the point and now just arguing semantics. The point was, no one said the tile UI wasn't "useful", in fact i supported that assertion, but useful doesn't a good UI make. An Efficient and Useful is good and all, but that doesn't make people love it. Again as i said, we would all be driving Prius's if that were true.

That's just an analogy, i'm not in any way implying car buying preferences are tied in with smartphones in any way shape or form in case you didn't get that.

I said windows phones are very efficient due to the boring tile design. They are efficient, easy to use and practical. That doesn't make them enjoyable. If people liked those qualities, we'd all be driving around in toyota prius's.

If I were you, I would rethink what you're saying here, or at least drastically reword this. Currently you're suggesting that people in general don't like efficiency, ease of use, or practicality. When combined with your past posts, you're suggesting you like Android despite it being impractical, inefficient, and difficult to use because at least it's prettier than the alternatives. When I ask others why they prefer their iPhones, the most common answer I get is because it's easy for them to use. Sounds to me like people actually like that quality. Now you may say that those traits are not the most important for everyone, and that is of course true. But blanket statements like what you made are foolish.

Again, you are inserting words and implications. Then arguing against them. I for a fact, never said people didn't like efficiency, practicality, usefulness. Never said that.... I said, those qualities don't necessarily make something an enjoyable experience. They can enhance an experience to make something enjoyable, but not in this case. People find it boring, unlike iOS which is efficient and easy to use, but not boring. In fact, IMO i think the tile UI feels more industrial rather than personal. Probably a big part of why people subconsciously don't like it.

How do you test something that is purely subjective??? You can't quantify a UI, other than performance metrics like speed. UI is subjective, and the only way to test it is to give it to hundreds of people and have them fill out a survey. Since i don't have those resources, you can simply go off people's buying preferences. Android and iOS wins. Tiles suck!!!

Wow, complete self-awareness failure here. First, you say it's impossible to measure something subjective ( which is very true ). But then you immediately go on to use a subjective opinion ( "Tiles suck!!!" ) as though it were a demonstrable, measureable, verifiable fact. I think that's all that needs to be said about that.

Again, stop implying. I never meant a UI could be quantified or measured. As stated, i believe tiles suck, and the buying market seem to agree that they don't like the tile UI.

You can have it on your home screen as a widget if you so choose. So again, it's moot.

Which brings us back to your absurd claim that a widget is somehow superior to a tile, despite the fact they do the exact same thing.

[/quotemsg]

I never said widgets were "SUPERIOR". You talked about an extra function of tiles, i only said your point was moot because a widget could do that too.

I did say tiles were boring, and they are. No one wants all your icons to have the same look. Icons and widgets are not boring because each one is totally unique, not something inserted into a box.

Please stop the mindset of extremes(if you're not for us, then your against us type of thinking). Just because i say something about one side, doesn't mean i'm implying the opposite to the other side.

Just because i think tile UI is boring, doesn't mean i think windows phone is garbage, and it doesn't mean i think android and iOS are superior. I think windows phone has alot going for it, they just need to get rid of boring tiles and go back to icons and widgets. Then with their integration with other microsoft products like xbox and windows 10, they can start taking marketshare.

 

[techy74]

Windows 10 looks great. Great features and a unique look. Biggest problem seems to be supply. Everywhere I go, they might have one Windows phone and about 6 or Android phones and a Apple corner. Windows 10 phones have been out for a bit and still have not seen much in the way of promotion. Let's not forget every review of the L950 seems to forget or gloss over the unique features and focus on apps or matirials

 

[RedJaron]

This is my last reply to you. Every issue with your rant can be summed up in your problem of arguing opinions as facts, trying to mislead what I actual said, and not knowing the difference between debating the argument and attacking the person.

Wow, i don't need to prove it or even look up the actual numbers.

If you're going to debate someone, you might want to rethink that. If you want to argue a point, you need to be able and willing to back it up with supporting data.

Here you go, first link on google.

Try again. This particular request for citation was in regard to you asserting tiles are boring as though it was fact rather than opinion. I'm still waiting for your proof to qualify this.

Windows phone 7 launched in 2010 and never took off at all. The tile UI was simply boring, no one wants all their icons to look the same. ... And again, i originally stated the Tile UI was boring, that's why it was never adopted.

Your "argument" boils down to "WP7 had tiles. WP7 launched and WP market share went down. Therefore tiles was the cause of WP losing market share." I suggest you look up the phrase "correlation does not imply causation."

You continue to ask me to back up that claim, yet you offer no evidence to support the opposite???

Well yes, you continue to argue your own opinions as though they are facts. So yes, I'm going to ask you to back up those claims with actual facts and data. And once again, it's your responsibility to prove yourself right, not my responsibility to prove you wrong. I don't question the actual market share numbers. I question your provided "fact" as to why they are what they are.

FACT: Windows Phone never took off. That's undisputable.

Well, "took off" is rather nebulous. You might want to define exactly what you mean by "take off." Otherwise I would have no idea what expectations of such a debate would be.

My thoery for why: Tile UI is boring, no one likes it.

Here, you finally admit it. Not a fact. Not a truth. Your theory. Your opinion. Stop trying to present this as if it was fact. If you're going to try to prove it correct, you're going to need a lot more research and supporting numbers than what you have ( preferably a huge, comprehensive survey of phone buyers who had the means and opportunity to buy Android, iPhone, WP, BB, and any other phone and said the number one reasons they went with Android over WP was because they didn't like tiles ).

Your Theory for why: Android phones are cheap, so people bought them like rabbits making more rabbits.

Actually no, I haven't presented or argued any theory on this. Yes, I did mention the fact that a large percentage of Android ownership numbers come from non-flagship phones. You'll be hard-pressed to show I meant that in any kind of persuasive manner ( simply, because I didn't ) since I didn't word it as "Because of this," or "This is what really happened instead." I believe the perception that Windows Phone lacks phone applications is a much larger factor in WP's smaller market share.

Your response: cut me down as much as you can with no actual response....Still waiting....

That is false. Please show me where I have cut you down. Where have I mocked, insulted, or belittled you in any way? I haven't. Perhaps it would do you well to understand the difference between attacking the person and attacking the argument.

Provide a chart that proves otherwise. I'd like to see it.

Once again, it is your job to support your claims, not others' jobs to prove you wrong.

I did support my claim by asserting the WP marketshare was miniscule, which is common knowledge. You continue to say otherwise, that's why i asked you for a chart to prove otherwise. I don't understand why it's my job to prove myself wrong????????? And again, you don't back any of your claims.

I really have no idea what's causing your confusion. My only mention at all about market share was in relation to flagship phones. I've never said anything about how big or small WP's market share is. I would ask you to prove this accusation or take it back. I have made very few claims at all, so I don't have anything I need to back up. The majority of my interaction here has been calling your arguments into question and correcting you when you say misleading things about me.

You stated "tiles are boring" as though it was fact. I asked you to provide empirical evidence supporting that claim. You countered with a non-sequitur about market share and asked me for a chart to prove it wrong. Not only is it not my job to prove you wrong, you still haven't haven't bothered to back up your "fact" that tiles are boring.

Nope, you did insert verbage as if i implied some things i didn't say. Then argued against them.

I took what you wrote and made observations about how it sounded. I replied to them with how I was reading it and how it wouldn't be unreasonable to interpret it. Note, it was always phrased in a question of "are you trying to mean this?" I made one mistake by writing "you're suggesting" when I should have written "your words suggest."

Obviously, that market speaks as well. They don't like windows phones, tiles are boring.

Uh huh, right, it's only because of the tiles. It couldn't possibly be due to any other reason.

What reason would that be???

Ahh, now you're actually getting somewhere. As I said before, I think the lack of apps perception is a big thing. That seems to be the first thing mentioned in any review. I know a lot of people first-hand who won't consider a WP at all because it didn't/doesn't have Pinterest or Instagram. There's also a big stigma against WP as being uncool due to very successful Apple and Google marketing campaigns. Apple also has a nice lead in music on their phones. But by all means, go on and keep believing that the only, or at least biggest, reason they don't sell as much is because of tiles.

Useful from google dictionary: "able to be used for a practical purpose or in several ways"

Merriam-Webster - 1: capable of being put to use; especially : serviceable for an end or purpose. 2: of a valuable or productive kind. Note the complete lack of the word "practical." That definition has to do with something that's actually feasible or reasonable to do, not just that it's possible. Let's put this another way. Both garden shears and a lawnmower are useful in cutting grass, however the lawnmower is actually practical for cutting all the grass in a yard.

You're sidestepping the point and now just arguing semantics.

Semantics? Not really. Even if you want to conflate "useful" and "practical", you're the one saying I picked an argument over efficiency, which I never did.

I for a fact, never said people didn't like efficiency, practicality, usefulness. Never said that....

Actually you did. And I quote "If people liked those qualities, we'd all be driving around in toyota prius's." Now, I don't actually think you meant exactly what you typed. I think you meant people don't always value those qualities over everything else. I've said all this before. That is why I suggested to you that you think about rewording it.

Probably a big part of why people subconsciously don't like it.

And you're back to blanket statements and treating opinion as fact.

Again, stop implying. I never meant a UI could be quantified or measured. As stated, i believe tiles suck.

Actually, this is the first time you have stated this as an opinion rather than as if it were a fact. You argued it as fact. Facts are empirical, measurable, and provable. Ergo, you were treating something subjective as though it were empirical.

I never said widgets were "SUPERIOR". You talked about an extra function of tiles, i only said your point was moot because a widget could do that too.

Actually, you brought up widgets in your first post when you called tiles idiotic compared to icons and widgets that had been on desktops for years. So, if you call Thing A idiotic, or inferior, compared to Thing B, you're trying to say that you're not calling Thing B superior to Thing A?

I did say tiles were boring, and they are.

More opinion as though it were fact. Prove it.

No one wants all your icons to have the same look.

Again, prove it. Not only that, but you're flat out wrong to suggest that every tile looks like every other tile. My phone tile has a silhouette of a telephone receiver, my email tile has an image of an envelope, my contacts tile has a stick-figure outline on it, my Office tile has the MS Office logo on it, my weather tile constantly changes to reflect current atmospheric conditions and flips over to show the forecast, and my map tile has a compass icon on it. I'm not sure how you can possibly think they all look the same.

Icons and widgets are not boring because each one is totally unique, not something inserted into a box.

Again, please prove your assertion that icons and widgets are not boring. Personally I think a single, static icon that never changes could easily be viewed as boring. And to repeat the last paragraph, it's untrue to suggest that each tile does not or cannot look totally unique.

Please stop the mindset of extremes(if you're not for us, then your against us type of thinking).

Actually I'm not. I'm just against the type of people who push the lie that their opinions are facts. Just because i say something about one side, doesn't mean i'm implying the opposite to the other side.

it doesn't mean i think android and iOS are superior.

I'm curious to know how you say you prefer Android but you don't think it's superior to alternatives.

As I said, 90% of this simply comes down to you not appreciating the difference between "this thing sucks" and "I believe/think this thing sucks." The problem derived from that is the false assumption that just because you believe something, everyone else ( or at least the majority ) does as well. This is a technology forum, and of course a lot of opinions are going to come around. That's fine. Welcome, even. Everyone has different needs so not ever piece of tech is going to be suitable for every person. Just because you don't see the point of somethign doesn't mean someone else doesn't love it. Intelligence is to be gained in debating the merits of one idea against another. Just be prepared to properly defend your ideas even as others should back up their own. However, we like to draw the line at people arguing their opinion as if it was empirical truth. If you don't understand that difference, then either your English teacher failed you or you didn't pay attention in class.