Lots of iPhone users never had a smartphone before. You can think of them as the AOL of smartphones. Considering that, maybe the draconian babysitter policies they have over apps make sense.

EDIT - iPhone users I know:

Me - programmer, but no longer an early adopter. Had a Palm V awhile back, but found it annoying to have the additional device. 1st time smartphone user.

Fellow musician - singer, engineering student. 1st time smartphone user.

Veterinarian. Her husband's a Gentoo developer though, and he bought her an iPhone for her birthday.

I also know of two coworkers who are early adopters who also own an iPhone.

So of the 5 people I know, only two are early adopters. Two of them are female, and both of those users prize the iPhone because it's fun to use and it looks nice.

> Lots of iPhone users never had a smartphone before.

This statement may be technically true, but I highly doubt it's true among the writers and commentators like Arrington that we hear so much about the iPhone from.

In fact, most of the people I know who have iPhones are early adopter types. People like my mom -- a prototypical AOL user -- wouldn't have a clue as to what to do with an iPhone.

Arrington's willingness to put up with the bugs, flaws, and "draconian" babysitter policies is a less a statement about Apple as it as about the rest of the smartphone marketplace, which frankly stinks.

No, its more of a statement to the power of Apple's marketing and trends.

The BB Bold vs. iPhone 3G is pretty telling - the Bold was announced a month before the 3G iphone, but is only to be released a few weeks from now. Meanwhile, Apple went ahead and released their product with piss poor battery life and according to many users, unstable software, often unresponsive UI etc. When the Bold comes out it won't have these problems.

iPhone users have made a pretty clear choice: looks above ALL else.

> "statement about Apple as it as about the rest of the smartphone marketplace, which frankly stinks."

I'd really love to see you try and back that statement up

For people who aren't already using a BlackBerry, the Bold just doesn't even seem like a competitor. I'll be a first-time smartphone buyer shortly, and it's difficult to see why I'd want to buy a handheld computer with such a tiny screen. I'm far more likely to want to browse the web and watch video on my smartphone than type a novel, so a separate keyboard is pretty unimportant, but the screen is one of the most visible and important parts of a first impression, and the iPhone seems to have a bigger screen than anything competing with it. Even with the problems I'm hearing it has, it's hard to justify dropping money on something with a significantly smaller viewing area.

In many ways the Bold isn't a competitor to the iPhone. You want one for the same reason I bought one - a large screen for multimedia and web.

Now, if depended on your smartphone to get stuff done, you'd be scratching your head over the iPhone. It may have eye candy, but what about the features, reliability or stability that you'd actually need? I don't think the HN crowd appreciates how many people out there can do 80% of their job with just a BlackBerry. I didn't understand what the big deal around the BB is until I actually used it in such a scenario for a bit, and I know using the iPhone like that would be a no-go.

Bigger screen, but the same resolution as the Bold. The text on the Bold is so much sharper than anything else -- I can read it at the smallest font setting at arms length, no problem. Besides, the keyboard isn't just for typing novels. I type Lots of emails from it too.

Really, the bold and the iphone are competing in different markets though.

I went through several Palm Treos before getting an iPhone. The Treo made me almost give up on smartphones; I was considering going back to a non-smartphone, but decided to give the iPhone a try, as I like Apple computers.

I was very happy with the iPhone, far more than the Treo. I haven't noticed dropped calls, lost apps, or, really, much of anything significant. The interface seems sluggish at times, but overall it's a net win for me.

Palm OS is brutal. Also, having a touchscreen actually detracts from that phone. I switched from the 650 to a Moto Q and greatly prefer the Q. I don't find myself trying to tap at things that are way smaller than my finger, or worrying if I'm going to drop the stylus. But I still get the high call quality and the amazing keypad for tapping out emails.

Name a smartphone that has a web browser that competes. Also one that has a keyboard that can compete with the iPhones.

Wait, a keyboard that can compete?

How about a Blackberry, Treo, or anything else with a physical keyboard?

Sorry, I really can't deal with a physical keyboard that requires a toothpick to use. I've tried those, and it's just slow and laborious compared with the iPhone for me.

No, I don't think you've ever used a phone with a decent keypad. I used type on suretype keypads about as fast as I could handwrite, and even faster on full qwerty models.

As far as typing goes, my iPhone is just comical. It is not even responsive enough to register all keypresses, let alone get them correctly.

I've used a ton of smartphone keyboards. I guess it comes down to personal preference. The keyboard I can type on fastest and with least effort is the iPhone. Yes occasionaly it pauses for a second when the keyboard first comes up, but then it's responsive and registers everything you type.

my htc dash, t-mobile phone, has a nice keyboard and with opera mini (free) it displays full web pages with a zoom ability. the phones battery life is about 6 solid hard use internet hours, not bad