1. Android requires less phone memory allowing the phones to pack more in and still have more left for the customer

2. Android doesn't charge carriers to use its product.  The advertising model that was mentioned may just be the better idea.

3. Android has waaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyy more apps, so the carriers will know that they will get a lot more money by encouraging android sales

1. I have no idea if this is true or not, but I don't understand how it impacts WinPho7's relationship with carriers.

2. Whichever phone a carrier buys, there is a cost to licensing the OS, even Android requires a license for Google apps and various smartphone patents. Which OS is actually cheaper to license is priviliged information which I've never seen disclosed and may vary from case to case.

3. This is a tricky one, because carriers want to sell people on huge data packages, then discourage people from actually using them. They love to collect the toll, hate to pay the money to build out their network when it gets too congested and angry customers complain. So if Android users do consume more data than WinPho users, that may actually be a disadvantage in the mindset of a carrier. The perfect OS for a carrier would be one that convinces users to buy an expensive data plan, then somehow prevents them from ever using it.

1. But Android is still miles behind iOS in that regard. I haven't read enough about the capabilities of WP7 to know if this is true.

2. Windows charges carriers? Why and how?

3. Since when do carriers get money for app sales?

Ive never seen anyone as wrong as often as dallas about the only topic they want to discuss on these forums. All 3 points listed in his post are wrong or irellevant when it comes to the carriers and them choosing android over wp7.

Instead here are some points which contribute to carriers favoring android.

1. it looks more like iphone. Everyone knows and likes the iphone and android devices look like it, but are cheaper. Easier sell for carriers who cant get the iphone like everyone but at&t a year ago...

2. carriers are able to brand android devices as they like, pack them with apps, themes and branding that they want and market them as they want. Storage room, number of apps and microsoft charging carriers has nothing to do with this. OEMs selling android phones to carriers have to bend to their wishes where microsoft stands behind windows phones with standardized set of rules which applies to carriers and OEMs.

3. Android spec war is easier to market and comodify to consumers than windows phone standardized experience. Its dual core and has 1gig of ram...time to upgrade!

I can see why carriers don't like the idea but for consumers, it's a big win and it's Android's biggest flaw. Too much power is put into the hands of the manufacturer. Could you imagine what the PC world would be like if Dell started skinning Windows 7 and dictating which models could upgrade to Windows 8? That's basically the Android ecosystem and Google needs to fix it if they plan to continue selling $100+ phones. They've already lost my business over it and it won't take long for the general public to start following suit after they get burned when their $200 six month old phone doesn't get an OS upgrade. That shit may fly for the mouth-breathers who pay $12 for some shitty Android 2.2 phone but customers who spend money expect better service than that.

I fully agree and have experienced this first hand with a Motorolla Milestone. Bought it with 2.1 in mid 2010 when 2.2 was already out and 2.3 was on the horizon. My carrier rolled out 2.2 in mid 2011 and by then I was long done with Android as my main device and I got and iPhone and Windows Phone instead. I tried flashing it to 2.3 with cyanogen mod and nothing worked as well as it should anymore. You need the official ROM to have that piece of mind that everything is working like it should, especially with Android. People that like to tinker with stuff may enjoy constantly hacking their phone, but those days for me are long gone.

Obviously OEMs can be blamed for this as well as carriers since neither like to do updates due to R&D involved in skinning Android and quality control testing as well as device fragmentation that makes it almost impossible to batch update without custom work for every device. However I think Google is to be blamed as well for lack of following through with OEMs and carriers as well as not leading by example with the Nexus line. It took 5 months for "some" Nexus S devices to get proper working ICS, while others like Verizon CDMA Nexus devices will never get it. That is just rediculous to me. They have 1 legacy phone that is the official "Google" branded device and they don't support it in a timely fashon.

In comparison, Apple tends to support their devices for 3 generations with updates and Microsoft appears to be doing the same with Windows phone 8 coming to legacy devices. With Android once the carriers, OEMs and Google are done, the phones tend to be properly supported for 6 months.

Yep. I received that kind of royal treatment with my (now 13 month old) HTC Inspire. One update six months after launch and now it's as-is, bugs included.

I spend $100/month and the Inspire was my cheapest phone in years at $100 with activation. But it was still a top of the line phone, the best AT&T offered when it launched last year (bought it launch day). I expect better service than six months. Fuck Android, really. Other people may find that complete lack of support acceptable but I sure as hell don't. I'm moving to WP7 or back to iOS later this year when I qualify for an upgrade.

1. Well, the larger memory requirements of wp7 have been discussed around here before.  If a smartphone has a limited amount of memory, then having a paired down OS like android would allow a manufacturer to put more stuff on the phone, and allow the carrier to sell more apps.

2.  Windows has done this for a while now.  I'm not sure if the do it through the manufacturer and the cost to carriers is indirectly passed on, but regardless this is still a bite that MS is taking out that google leaves in.

3.  Carriers get a percentage of app sales, sorry if you didn't know that.

1. this is totally wrong. my at&t titan came loaded with over dozen apps, all the integrated OS features and the OS itself and 12.5 gb of the 16gb free. Windows phone is known for being a very light OS and running on lower specs and it doesnt take up much space at all.

2. wrong as well. Where do you get this stuff from? OEMs pay Microsoft for the licensing fee and thats where it ends. Carriers may actually get money from microsoft to market a phone and not vice versa.

3. not even remotely true. Microsoft app revenue share is 70% to dev and 30% to microsoft which is same as iOS. This is untillmapp generates 25000 dollars which is when it becomes 80%-20%. Carrier gets nothing at any point from any app, unless they make an app that user has to pay for.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/microsoft-may-share-more-apps-revenues-2011-12-06

Stop making things up.