This is a very good passive-aggressive post haha. I'll respond to all your points however.
Hello Mr Pot, have you met Mr Kettle?
I'd have some respect if I thought you had the ability to be unbiased or if you really were presenting your views as merely that, but your not are you? If you were you'd have given WP more than a week and would've allowed yourself to adapt to a different way of doing things.
1. In that case it is fair game to compare WP 8.1 to Android L than since kit-kat is "soon to be replaced" as well.
Over a million users are currently using WP8.1 and is Kit-Kat being replaced in something like the next month?
2. None of the points I made would have changed with 8.1. The apps selection is bad and the app quality is bad, and the customization is horrible. These don't get significantly better with 8.1. At least compared to Android.
The customization is better in WP8.1 than WP8, so that's a change and like a lot of things on WP, though modest has a surprisingly marked effect. Also the customization comes from the apps, my calendar app allows me to chose how many of the next appointments I see. That's true for every app in that by choosing the size of the tile, I chose how much information is fed to me.
3. I am not installing the 8.1 developer preview because this is a work-phone and I don't think my company would appreciate me voiding the warranty.
Fine, but the comparison is still unbalanced.
Um..a lot? Even the SGS2 got 4.1 and it started at 2.3. HTC One's have had about the same level of support. 2 year support isn't that impressive.
Then how come Android is so fragmented?
Yeah re-sizing tiles and changing the background says a lot about me, but changing my ROM, custom recovery; changing my boot-animation and down-animation. Changing my launcher, notification bar, color scheme, clock display, etc...etc... All say A LOT MORE about me. WP 8 or 8.1 isn't anywhere within 5 ball-parks of Android customization regardless of how much time you spend on it.
Yes, but these are very geeky things a tiny tiny proportion of users can or would want to do. Most people have lives to lead and buy smart phones to serve their needs, not as toys or status synbols. Your usage model is highly peculiar. I used to do those things when I used Windows Mobile, now when I want to play I play Mass Effect. My device is for work, I want it to do what I want, when I want and be reliable. I don't want to tinker, I have better things to do.
I keep my home-screen empty because I don't like it cluttered. I could have my Google now widget and Blinkfeed widget showing me everything I need to if need-be. My Google now widget could show me how long I can expect my commute home to be after work. It can show me all upcoming appoints on my calendars and reminders. It can show me any interesting stories I have previously read about that I would like to know more about. Far more robust than what you are showing.
Your screen shows lots of dead space. It amazes me that your screen is really just a smaller version of a desktop, as if you were still using a mouse. The desktop is an analogy introduced to make it easier for people to navigate through unfamiliar digital spaces and like any analogy, it only serves up to the point beyond which it breaks down. There is no reason to assume the spacial paradigm is the only or most efficient way to represent information space, after all it restricts you to two dimensions in discrete screen-sized chunks.
Probably to avoid patent troubles, Microsoft tried a fresh approach with a dynamic UI - a real paradigm shift you haven't even begun to appreciate though even Android and iOS has started to imitate it stylistically, so it can't be as bad as you say. Whatsmore, the live tiles idea has potential, for instance I've already seen demonstrations of interactive tiles, so you won't even have to open an app to get functionality.
iOS and Android are still restricted by this old paradigm, which means that although your device aggregates the information you want, you still have to act before you learn anything, whereas WP presents you with information all the time and you only have to act if something peeks your interest.
What do you mean Google Play Store isn't available in all markets? The only thing Google play is not available on is in highly modified versions of Android like those found on the Kindle, and thus it is up to Amazon to provide said protection. Also what do you mean apps are not "vetted" before they are published? Apps are automatically scanned when uploaded to the play store for any malicious algorithms and it does a superb job the majority of the time.
My bad, I was under the impression Google Play was not available in places like China, but in fact it's only censored. Of course, if an OEM decides not to pay for Google services, the Play store is unavailable to those users. It's a small percentage of course, but still cause for concern. I'm afraid I can't share your 'I'm all right Jack' attitude and blame people for poor decisions. It's only rational to do that where it's reasonable to expect people to have the knowledge. Digital space is still new and if you and I haven't fully appreciated the potential and dangers, how can we expect people with no interest in the field to do so?
Regarding apps not being vetted, my information might be out of date, but as I understand it, apps are not vetted before being published to the Play store. However, once an app is published, it is subject to scanning by robots, which trawl the Play store. If I am out of date, please supply a link.
Also, I am hardly reassured by your phrase 'majority of the time'. The Maginot Line only covered the 'majority of the border' between France and Germany, look how useful that was.
As you stated; it is a very small number of Android smartphones that is infected and Google keeps adding more security every major Android release. I would MUCH rather have an open environment and let users decide what to download and what not to download. If a couple of idiots get infected oh-well. You will always have idiots on any platform; yet we don't blame Google for someone downloading a Trojan on Windows 7 do we?
What I stated was that there was an infection rate of .25%, according to an independent study; that's a quarter of a million crimes. In exactly which fantasy land is a 250,000 crimes a small or insignificant amount? As I explained above your stance on this is irrational, it's also careless and immoral.
If they do that than it would be pretty damn impressive because they would have gone past Android's sandboxing. Which means WP 8 - 8.1 users and iOS users should be just as fearful as they won't be safe if methods have been developed to pass this. So I am not sure why you are saying iOS and WP will be safe.
I did say why: herd immunity. In medicine, a vaccine will only give an individual 75% or so protection(it varies from vaccine to vaccine), but because the whole population is vaccinated the virus can't spread far before it is blocked, thereby protecting the whole population, especially those like newborns who cannot be vaccinated. It's why anti-vaccination kooks are so dangerous, there have already been increases and fatalities from pertussis for instance.
The analogy, applied to OSs in general show .25% representing quite a substantial population from which an infection can spread. The previous accepted estimate was .0009%, so the new one is an increase by a factor of 277. If that rate of increase were to continue, 70% of Android devices would be infected within months. By comparison, the population of infected WP is too small to measure.
I don't trust or distrust Google any less/more than I do Microsoft.
I made this decision over a decade ago, before Android even existed and I had to choose who to trust my data with. I went with Microsoft on the assumption that being mainly an enterprise company, they would have to be geared to business' need for confidentiality. Microsoft would stand to lose an awful lot of custom were that confidentiality to be breached, so they would have to be geared up to safeguard the information their systems were entrusted with and so I opted for MS products and services before Google had any equivalents to offer.
When Android first came along I was intrigued, Google at that point were little more than a search engine and one I was a great fan of, but I was saved by being tied an iPhone and having all sorts of problems trying to get the thing to meet my needs, to the point that I had to carry my Windows Mobile as well.
Then all sorts of worrying headlines started to appear about invasions of privacy Google were committing, like publishing Street View pictures showing people without blanking out their faces. It took legislators to intercede to curb this irresponsible behaviour and it became clear to me that far from 'do no evil' Google's real motto was 'do what you can get away with.'
It was only as a result of public criticism that Google started scanning apps in the app store. I have watched the growth of Android and Google and witnessed the ongoing controversy around it business practices and the piecemeal and incoherent way new security features have been grafted into the ecosystem. Compared to iOS and Windows Phone, Android is very haphazard.
Another thing that really gives me the creeps is that Android devices routinely upload their position to Google, effectively putting you under surveillance. This is rationalised under the banner of convenience, but I wouldn't give that kind of information out willingly even to my friends, leave alone strangers. To me Google are the type of organisation we need to be wary of and I'm hardly alone.
Microsoft btw is the company who purposefully input back-doors into outlook/skype, etc...
Microsoft handed the NSA access to encrypted messages | World news | The Guardian
I've only had time to briefly scan the article, but it has already got me puzzled by "Skype worked to enable Prism collection of video calls", because it makes no sense, given what PRISM actually is.
Briefly, PRISM worked by physically intercepting the the data stream into data centres and duplicating it. One copy would be sent on and one copy would be stored by the NSA. This is similar to how a real prism is used in an interferometer, hence the name.
My point is that PRISM worked independently of Microsoft or anyone else, they couldn't have helped the NSA even if they wanted to.
Now I have the greatest respect for The Guardian, but unfortunately news media generally have been cutting back on science correspondents in particular, so these articles are often written by people who lack the detailed understanding of the subject. Steve Gibson's Security Now podcast is right now a necessity to keep up with security, even though he is an incurable Apple acolyte.
Also, where MS claim they were legally compelled to comply, you can bet your bottom dollar that Google and Facebook were too.
Hence why I use Android with multiple security features. ESET for device security, Xprivacy to regulate app permissions and avoid data collection, and PIA VPN.
View attachment 70790
Good for you, my 'I'm all right Jack' friend. You be the .0005% of people who has the knowledge to protect yourself while everyone else drowns. I simply cannot be so callous and smug. I have to point people in the direction of the best option for them, the one which best suits their needs as they are, not as they would be given a month's intensive training.
While WP8.1 does support VPN, to be honest I'm still trying to get people to use secure and unique passwords, before I try to induct them into the complexities of that.
I have no problem with your stance if there wasn't the implication that Android were universally the best option, but for the VAST majority a closed ecosystem is a necessity because they need to be protected from their own poor decisions. Digital security needs to be universal and automatic, not an expertise you have to master and enact. That is why Android is so hopelessly inadequate.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram