They will still gain spectrum too, not just customers. They are just selling off portions of it, not anything in whole. Like it or not, it benefits AT&T customers too, and smaller carriers and MVNOs that license AT&T service.

I don't think it's bad from a consumer standpoint. DT has made it pretty clear that they want to be rid of T-Mobile. So, someone is going to buy it, somewhere along the way. I think the deal could be good for the consumer if it improves service for many, and if good spectrum licensing deals come out of it for smaller…

They aren't selling off any of their spectrum, they are offering parts of T-Mobile's spectrum/customer base; to have less of a 'monopoly'

T-Mo is dead in the water. One way or another it's belly up, otherwise this merger wouldn't have had this much air in it. I think you may just need to come to grips with the reality, that your precious pink carrier won't be around much longer, the $4B won't be used to keep the ship from capsizing, it will go to the…

Why not? If the argument is that it creates a monopoly, ditching portions should help them get approval. Let's face it, T-Mo is done, someone will buy them, in whole or in parts.

Why would Android need a task killer anyway? Isn't it's multitasking capability superior to anything else on the planet?

that silly bill of rights is ok for things like lawnmowers and coffee machines, but it is neither realistic or advantageous to expect those things of many mobile consumer electronics. I think it's perfectly reasonable for companies to pride user-experience over user-serviceability. If you prefer the latter, there are…

haha, fair enough. I guess I misread your implied intellectual superiority. Guess you're just a drone of a different flavor.

I'm not convinced you're really any smarter than your friends.

Actually, it sounds more diverse than your group of idiot friends.

Man, living a life where someone's choice of smartphone affects you so horribly must be a real joy.

Yes, everyone I know. Why is that so hard to believe? I think the actual number of people who buy it simply because it's an Apple product, and no other reason, are very very small (and apparently you know all of them). They may buy them out of a brand loyalty rooted in an investment in the ecosystem, e.g. other Apple…

By showing Samsung users as even more smug.

You do realize that the one shown here is the default, right? It's about the initial impression, not what you do afterwards.

HAHA, so you prefer a droid because you think "easy to use" is an insult to your tech street cred? I hope you at least realize how retarded that makes you sound.

Is the "Apple" bit in the title just for linkbait?

This is quite a cop-out. There are plenty of great looking laptops out there that don't look like Mac knock-offs. Voodoo used to make them before HP bought them out. Sony has made several. While the interface tech is pretty standard (keyboard, monitor, touchpad) it is the details that make the difference. Your…

revolutionary? Well, it is. Invented it themselves, I never got the impression they have pushed that for Siri, made it what it is, sure, but not invented. I think they do a fairly even handed job of taking credit for what is truly theirs, e.g. Retina display, multitouch, visual voicemail, while still using careful…

It's not really stealing if everyone is doing it, is it? To me that's just standardization...by your list there, Android stole just as many features, so, where is the outrage against them?

there aare no ads, but you're a fool to think Google isn't tracking everything you do to sell you something elsewhere, just like with gmail, search, reader, etc. their entire revenue stream is advertising, everything they do is to get better ad impressions. That doesn't mean that I think they're going to sell you off…