Originally Posted By: wfaulk
Nuts. The thing that had me most excited about the N1 was the notion that they wanted to change how phones were sold in the US. My interpretation of that was that they wanted to discourage the whole notion of tying phone and service together.


You weren't alone in that. It's one of my top cell peeves in fact. Even with the iPhone, while it's available retail, it's locked in nearly every country and can't be legitimately unlocked. When you buy a device from one country, the warranty is invalid in another (unlike other Apple products).

I thought Google would have made a better go of this, getting the phone into retail channels other than its web site. I also thought the N1 was to serve as a sort of benchmark product so they'd always have a platform available to push the latest and greatest Android releases to. IMO, Google's biggest mistake with this product was going anywhere near HTC. They have the money to contract out their own benchmark phone. And with the price of admission for Android, it's not like other manufacturers would go away simply because Google has their own showcase product.

I don't mind paying $400 for a killer mobile phone. But I want it to be free and clear of ties to any particular carrier (unlocked and of course branded only by the manufacturer). I won't hold my breath for Apple to release such a product, nor for Google to do so with longevity in mind.
_________________________
Bruno
Twisted Melon : Fine Mac OS Software