For me, i cannot use Windows phone because it does not have the apps that is needed in my profession. Everyone is different.

That feature of downloadable maps is no longer a Windows exclusive. Google Maps can do that now too. And if you do not use Google Map, then there are many other mapping apps that can download the whole map onto your phone, such as Garmin North America app that i have on my iPhone. No need for cell signal for it to navigate me.

HERE map is lacking in features and accuracy compared with Google Maps (#1) and even Apple Maps (#2). Have Nokia sold HERE yet? It was on the selling block for ages because no one wants it.

That is what you get for relying on a team of 12 (forgot exact number) to do your software...vs. thousands of Google engineers.

I would NEVER trust a small crack team with my software...esp. a crack team that has its share of criticism regarding piracy and stealing other Android programmers' innovation.

It makes sense to me by the simple fact that you make a choice and pay the consequence.

Any time you choose an a device that runs on open source is going to be limited. At the same time any company that wants to offer a service can write an app.

I get that you hate Samsung, LG, HTE. I get that you love your iPhone because Apple makes an OS that suits your needs. I get that you hate Android because it doesn't. I get that you are well versed with Android code.

What I don't get is why you are so riled up when ever I respond with simple logic. I hold no animosity towards you and find this whole topic amusing and enjoy a good debate.

Why would I choose Android over Apple? Because I want something flexible, simple, and want to support the continued development of an open-source system. Who cares that my phone hardware isn't the latest and greatest? It's a phone. As for holding its value I could care less. I have never sold any of my old phones because I usually donate them. Again, a factor in my decision for buying the particular phone that I do. These aren't "excuses excuses excuses". These are determining factors in what I want out of a phone.

I don't want Apple because they are limited in their own way. In fact, it's their way or the highway mentality. With Android its if you want something then build it and integrate it. M is already showing promise in this area so yes, LG locked down the G4 but I think they are only biting themselves in the backside and when M rolls out there will be plenty of people who figure a way to get around the DRM kernel issue with L and be able to root their phone and anyway. But even now I can root my phone if I really wanted to. Since I don't use it for video streaming anyway (which by the way Android led the market in first place because DRM was already integrated into the kernel where Apple and Windows phones had to play catch up). I just don't feel the need to. Sure, I could go and delete all the bloatware that is loaded but why when I have apps that keep killing them every time they auto turn on? And it doesn't even tax my phone. Under heavy usage I have been averaging 70% battery by the end of the day between charges. As for encryption? Meh. It's not so important to me because my habits (developed by what I have learned from working inside the fence) makes me far more comfortable than relying on some warm fuzzy feeling software encryption would offer. Again, what you call excuses I call good practice based on real world knowledge and a heavy dose of common sense.

As for the other 99% of the people being screwed? If that were true then so be it. It's their choice to educate themselves on the phones they buy. But I think you underestimate a lot of people out there by making that statement. Here's a real world number for you: 2,912,769
The number of Android users who have downloaded the Avast Mobile Security & Antivirus app. Let's assume there are 3 Billion people living in the US and that every single one of them owns a phone. Let's assume it's a 50/50% market share for Apple and Android so 1.5 Billion on each side of the fence. You are looking at roughly 20% of Android users out there with a single app that covers most of your security concerns right there. Again, this is all based on pure assumption as I know most infants are using phones yet and don't really know the market share of Android vs Apple. Truth is I don't care.
People still buy GM's (though for the life of me I can't figure out why) but that is their choice and I don't think I am better than they are because I drive nothing but Toyotas (well and a Honda motorcycle). It's always boils down to choice and consequences. I prefer to drive more than wrench on my vehicles but when it comes to phones apparently the computer science side of me seems more satisfied than I would be with an iPhone.

Does that make me better than you? Hell no. You present a lot of good arguments for your iPhone security and in fact where I work they only allow Blackberries and iPhones/iPads for corporate phones and tablets. There's something to be said about a controlled OS. But even knowing that I still choose Android for my personal use. It just suits me better. Besides, without Apple to compete against Android would never get better (and vice versa). And because both stomp on Windows 8, Microsoft decided to literally give Windows 10 away for free to try to get back in the market place.

Riled up? Not at all. I responded to you with simple logic, esp when you claim to be a security expert at your company. IF you take that as me being riled up, then so be it.

As for being open-sourced, I want you to read the truth about Android: Google?s iron grip on Android: Controlling open source by any means necessary | Ars Technica

Nothing is really open...just perception of such.

Don't even bother trying to explain. No winning argument here.

Can't argue with that but then Amazon app updates were so terrible that this is one area I consider to be a good thing. I bought a GPS topographical map app through Amazon and GooglePlay would be up on the latest version where as Amazon seemed to only update the app once a year. And even though I bought the app I couldn't just download it off GooglePlay without having to buy it again. Eventually Amazon stopped carrying the app all together even though to date it is still being developed and sold on GooglePlay.

Oh, and for the record I never claimed to be a security expert. I have worked very closely with some of them and build most of the data bases for my particular equipment though so I see a lot of what goes into it though.

Basically, Google is standardizing the Android market. Sure, if you are running a fork this will eventually leave you out in the cold but app developers will have an easier time getting their apps out that support more devices. And if it wasn't Google it would be someone else eventually. That's sadly what happens when an open source product becomes successful. That article being 2 years old means most of the damage has already been done.

And here's evidence that even iPhone's aren't as secure and you think they are:
https://snapguide.com/guides/hack-io...-9-easy-steps/
Your iPhone Can Be Hacked With A Photo Of Your Thumb
These were found with just a simple Google search that even the common thief would be able to take advantage of (unless you take preventative measures of course with something like a 3rd party app).

As I said before. No phone is safe. iPhone, Android, Windows, Blackberry, etc. Someone always finds work arounds and they are usually pretty simple.

And for the record I never said I was a security expert. I work closely with some of them though and build the data bases for my equipment so I see a lot of what goes into it.

Your first link is how old? Fixed already and can easily prevented at that time by not allowing access to control center (done in SETTINGS). Even though it has been fixed, I still do not allow access to control center in my lock screen.

Second one requires HD photography equipment and other stuff that a common thief would NOT have. And it requires that the thief has possession of your phone for a (long) length of time.

Activation LOCK for Apple allows you to LOCK your phone from afar if you lose it. And no fingerprint stuff can bypass it.

And by the way, unlike Samsung, TouchID only allows limited tries with fingerprint before resorting to passcode. My passcode for my iPhone is bank-level length and complexity.

Lol. This isn't about winning. It's about a good debate where everyone gets to learn something new. Thai has brought up a lot of good information that I plan on taking advantage of.

This is because you are educated on your device. How many other iPhone users are as up on this as you? About the same as you would expect from Android users I bet.

That free Avast app I keep touting about (no affiliation by the way) does the same thing as your Activation LOCK. You can track the phone, lock it, wipe your data, set off an alarm siren, deactivate the ability to make calls and texts all remotely. Not too shabby for the price tag of free.

BTW, in the very near future, Google will FORCE all Android OEMs to install 40-50 Google native apps on ALL phones!! THEN, you add in OEM's own apps...THEN, you add in carrier specific apps...........YIKES!!!

Now, you wonder why Cyanogen, Samsung Tizen, and others are trying to either fork Android or get away from them completely!

Android's biggest problem is NOT Apple...it is within. Samsung is going all out with Tizen. Cyanogen has publicly blasted Google. Android need not fear Apple...it needs to fear its partners.

No, that "bug" has been fixed by Apple.

B/w Avast and Google engineering team, I trust Google. Just saying. I trust security that is native to the device. I trust encryption that is done via software AND hardware.

I have no experience with AVAST, but is there a study to show that their stuff works as advertised? (Honest question.)

In other words, if AVAST is so good, then why is Google not doing the same? Or is there something there that an average user cannot see the flaw of AVAST.

I agree. Native encryption is almost always better. Any laptops that go off site are required to have encrypted hard drives. In the past they used a 3rd party encryption software and it was terrible. It killed the performance and even just using a thumb drive was impossible because it would encrypt the data so you couldn't just move the data from one computer to another (now I just remote in and do it that way). Now though they sell HD's that are embedded with encryption and the performance impact is all but invisible.

Information on Avast Mobile Security:
Avast Mobile Security Review - Android Antivirus
Independent Review:
AV-Comparatives Mobile-Review - AV-Comparatives

As to why Google hasn't tried integrating Avast into their Android systems? I think it is more profitable for Google to let Avast do their thing and take in a percentage of their sales because they do offer a premium version of the Avast app for $15 a year that allows you to do even more. As usual, money will take precedence.

The premium version...it is bought via in-app purchase?

But, IF Google was that way, then why is it going thru all the trouble of doing native encryption with Lollipop and also having Activation Lock-like features?

And IF Avast is so effective (it might be), then why are the corporations not requiring it on Android devices?

Google is doing native encryption because it wants the HUGE pie in the sky...businesses and corporations. Presently, Apple dominates this due to native security features and encryption. The only way Google can compete is doing the same.

My fear is that Avast is still software. But again, this is way out of my league because I do not have much experience with Avast.

Yes. It is an in-app purchase.

Because, like you said, it want's to break into the corporate world. It's all about the money.

As to why corporations are not requiring it? I think the problem lies not in Avast but in Android. For example, where I work they have a very specific OS the install on PC's, iPhones, Blackberries, etc with their own suit of security software. Doing the same for Android would be problematic at best just because there are so many versions still in operation and I don't think many IT teams are willing to handle that much work.

Maybe when Google rolls out native encryption, activation locks, and other security features that corporations are looking for it will be different story but until then Apple has that corner of the market pretty secure as their only main competitor is Blackberry and Blackberry is a shrinking market pool.

Until then though I will stick with Avast as I have had good experience with it and if it can keep my wife from loading infested programs on our home PC's successfully then I call that a win for now. Lol.