A response to a brother's query on the hype of Android devices
I'm more of an Android purist than an evangelist for any of the OEMs (Original Equipment Manufacturers) who, in a bid to distinguish themselves from the competition, consider it necessary to, not only alter the beautiful vanilla stock User Interface, but to plough a sizeable portion of their investment capital into Research and Development that introduces several other functionalities into the device, especially flagship devices, thereby outpricing these devices by way too much.
The truth is that some of these functionalities are actually necessary and some wonder why they were not included in Android by default and some other functionalities improve upon what is available by default. The crux of this argument lies in the inclusion of functionalities that the majority (non-geeky, non-research-minded) clientele who would buy these units, without doing an ounce of the detailed background reading you've done, may never use but which seem to add to the overall cost of production, and by extension, final costing of the device. This is not actually all that ingenious. It is a money-spinner for Samsung, and sounds appealing in the beautiful ads specifically created to, to borrow your term, 'hype' these bells and whistles.
Make no mistake, a geeky few actually buy these devices for these very add-ons but they are the happy minority.
To boot, there are always user complains. These are those for whom it is said, you cannot satisfy everyone. The fact is the internet is a reservoir for every need. Need I seek to drown myself in complaints about every Apple products from the days when good ol' Stevie Jobs returned to the company he cofounded to raise it up from its ashes, I'd find. Need I desire to find how much Samsung copied the 'dress sense' of the iPhone to gain it's dominating role today in the business of smart devices, it's there. Are there more complaints about Android products than Apple's? Sure thing! Are there more complaints about Apple devices than Android's? Oh, yes sire! I could go on, but you get the idea?
However, when respected blogs and tech enthusiasts crown the S4 the smartphone king of 2013, it's safe to assume they know their gizmos and can judge in favour of what the standards are and what the practicality, in real life usage, outputs for each device given the various criteria they applied to reach their decisions. Their views ought to be respected however as their views.
In the end, it's up to the buyer. What are your preferences viz a viz the cash in your pocket. How can your mobile computing needs be best served with some change left to put food on your table? Or even to allow you some money for data bundles, which still don't come cheaper today than before. I have discovered, personally, that Android suits me. Not just any Android but Nexus Android. It's cheaper, heavily subsidised by El Google, works like a champ, has a specs sheet like any other flagship, gets the latest and greatest updates the fastest and is downright securely locked down (not all will agree, but I don't run an antivirus on my device today).
Knowing the questions people ask me often about tech and devices and seeing that it mirrors my inquisitiveness as well, I often believe that many will not tarry to join in my preference should the knowledge I have be shared with them. That's why I share Android-related news often and Nexus ones too, every once in a while. Motorola, now a Google company, is treading this path too - offering nicely spec'd devices, with stock Android and therefore are getting updates faster to their devices (even beating the Nexus 4 to getting 4.4.2 on the Moto X). That's just brilliant.
For me, OEMs can improve Android if they must, but devices should be affordable and updates should be timely. However, do your best to be the manufacturer of the best device on the best mobile platform that offers choice, adaptability, freedom and security.
