"Disappointed at CNET"5.0 starson by grape1829
Pros: Phone is good.
Cons: Review is not.
Summary: I'm no journalism major, but man, is this a godawful review if I've ever seen one. The writing pattern used in the entire first page is like "This is good, but.... it actually sucks. And this part is good, but.... it actually sucks. This - it's good, but.... it actually sucks."
WTH am I supposed to believe?
"ICS is sleek... but cluttered."
By "cluttered", do you actually mean that the OS is unnecessarily complex for the middling features it has? Or that there are too many features for you to learn in 10 minutes?
"You'll see the same dark color....."
How else do you make a DARK-COLOURED phone?
"The Galaxy Nexus fits comfortably in the hand (as long as you have large paws), but it feels too fragile."
Does it just FEEL too fragile because it's light and thin, or because it FEELS like cheap plastic to you, or is it ACTUALLY fragile according to "tests" you've done prior to writing this review? After all, without actual tests, I could say the phone "FEELS" like a radioactive nuclear rod and be a CNET reviewer, just like you.
Oh man, I'd like to rant paragraph-by-paragraph, but this isn't even worth it. CNET, your review is horrid.