homefrontcorp.com

I won't belabor the brewing smartphone and cellular carrier battle by publishing yet another "Deathmatch: Motorola Droid versus iPhone"   Galen Gruman of Computerworld already did a reasonably thorough job covering the technical differences between the Verizon-based Motorola Droid and the AT&T-based Apple iPhone.  Writing for Infoworld, Gruman produced a slightly less weighty, though more vendor-inclusive piece entitled, "Ultimate Mobile Deathmatch: iPhone -vs- Blackberry -vs- Droid -vs- Pre".  Between these two sites you will likely find as much information as you need to understand the technical specifications and design choices of the many, varied smartphones now on the market.

Yet for all the detail Gruman included in his respective articles, I found his conclusions lacking in substance.

Gruman spoke definitively about a number of Droid design aspects he considered lacking or poorly implemented, conclusions I found flatly ill-informed and misleading.

Please pardon this interruption in your normal daily routine as we pause for just a moment to ponder a sloppy, dopey trend in modern popular speech.

Today we turn our attention to variations on the phrase, "We've got to...", a lazy overcomplication of the more simple, and more appropriate, "We must..." or "We have to..."  (By the way, the phrase "have to" is itself something of a source for heated debate, but for now we will let it slide.)

You know the phrase to which I refer.  It's everwhere these days. 

"We've got to..."  "They've got to..."  "I've got to..."  "He, she, it's got to..."

Think about it for just a moment the next time you open your mouth and utter any variant of this phrase.  Pause to think back to your 3rd grade teacher of English or Grammar.  Take that contraction and expand it out to its component parts.