I liked the 's' designation. In my view, it allowed for minor upgrades that kept pace with advances, in a similar way to that of software upgrades, though not, of course as frequent as is usual with software.

I don't like the constant change of model numbers for I consider only significant changes (advances) ought to necessitate a new model.

I also find that the Android market, as with the Windows clone computer market, is just too full of so many models and variations that it is almost impossible to assess what is good value. When the phone is cheap, is it because of a lack of features or a lack of quality, for instance?

Do we really need ever more clever cameras on our phones? I use my phone for talking to others, not for photography - how about an option without all the bells and whistles that just facilitates the common phone call which, for many users, will constitute the majority of their use?

I wonder too, when there has been an apparent demand for or manufacturer perceived demand for ever lighter and smaller devices, why do we now see mobile phones approaching the size of notepad computers? Yes, they may fit easily into those who carry handbags or back-packs but most people I see tend to carry their phones in their hands or pockets.

In essence, I feel that the proliferation of models and options has gone overboard and acts as an impediment to easy and sensible consumer choice. I know that I'm not the normal mobile user for I dislike phones at the best of times, however I'd prefer to see less hype, less hurry and a more clearly delineated model range both within a manufacturer's options and across manufacturer's generally.

None the less, thank you for an interesting and thought provoking article - and incidentally, I still have my iPhone 3gs and it was a significant upgrade from the 3g.