Rollover minutes aren't exactly free - you just don't see the cost of them explicitly. You're still paying for AT&T service, so somewhere in there you money goes to this feature. If they didn't have rollover they presumably could charge you less per month.

You can get by alright without truly great apps, or a huge appstore (see the original iPhone, WM7, WebOS, and Android for awhile). I think the real sinker was how much Symbian just sucked to use.

@xxdesmus: It's especially strange because it's rarely the case that Apple is ever number one on specs. Hardware design, yes, but spec-wise...a single company having a yearly refresh cycle just doesn't lend itself well to being the top of the heap.

@vinod1978: You just can't scan quickly through the day's news anymore. It's clunkier to do on the left column and the right column just isn't pleasant without pictures and the beginning of articles attached to the titles.

@solOptimus: Moses that design blows. Man...I liked io9 but I'm not sure I can deal with that.

@DON_BOT: Not that your logic isn't impecable, but just for the sake of argument a would-be robber doesn't break into your home while you're there. Or decide to rob you because of what he saw on Gizmodo.

@korpo: Well I guess that's fairer, and pretty sucky. The more you know.

@korpo: Sprint charges extra for their 4g if I remember the kerfuffle over the Evo's launch correctly.

@Mark 2000: I thought NASA was due for a slight increase in funding thanks to Obama's shift in space-related priorities. And as jepzilla pointed out, this is much of what NASA does. Hell, it might even be MOST of what it does but it *groan* flies below the radar.

@cjlaw73: It's unfortunate that people do seem to forget all moral responsibility to do anything when placed behind a camera. This guy seems in the clear though.

@kreimerd: Eastern Washington and Idaho share little culturally with the PNW coast. As you go over the cascades shit gets freaky fast.

@cjlaw73: It looks like someone was trying to do that around 1:20 in the video, but it was too icy to get up the hill with the cone. It's completely possible the guy filming it didn't think he could get to the top of the hill, or didn't want to risk getting hit by a car on the way. It's hard to tell.

@gouged: The International Telecommunications Union (ITU) is who officially labels what the G's are. It used to be that only WiMax 2 and LTE advanced were recognized as 4G (neither of which are deployed by anyone), and there's was a speed requirement attached to those as well. But after Sprint and T-Mobile started…

@Ioncloud9: Keep in mind the hardware accessing the network will affect RL speeds as well, since it probably takes a fair bit of power to pull down that much data.

@MifuneT: It's disappointing but not shocking to hear that. "Peak" speeds seem to rarely be the norm, probably because of network traffic. I pull down better than that in Seattle on my non-HSPA+ supporting Nexus One, which really shouldn't be the case.

@ant1pathy: That's strange logic since neither WiMAX or LTE yet offers real-world 25mbps+ speeds, but even saying that is misleading because the issue isn't really the network technology at all. All three are capable of those sorts of speeds and much more, but to get those speeds you need a lot of backhaul and…

@dcdttu: It depends on how efficient the blue diodes are, and what the expectations are for the life of the display. Either could have changed enough for Samsung to decide it was worth dropping the pentile matrix for.

@WickedD365: T-Mobile's "4G" is just as much 4G as Sprint's Wimax and Verizon's LTE implementations. Under the old ITU guidelines none were 4G, and under the new ones they all are.

@ant1pathy: But Sprint lied by calling its wimax implementation 4G under the old guidelines too, and did it first. Considering T-Mobile's HSPA+ is capable of higher speeds, it makes more sense for that to be 4G than Sprint's wimax if you're going to get uppity about it.

@SpongeFreak52: Realistically it doesn't really matter which they add support for, because either way the bottleneck will likely be the phone and not the network. The chips don't seem to be out there for a phone to pull down 20+mbps, and HSPA+ is good for far higher than that.