Nearly all new mobile malware in Q3 was targeted at Android. This follows a 76 percent rise in Android malware in Q2 of 2011.

At the end of 2010, McAfee predicted that malware would reach the 70 million unique samples by the end of 2011 but has increased this prediction to 75 million unique malware samples reached by year’s end, which is the busiest in malware history, says McAfee.

As mentioned above, McAfee says that malware authors are capitalizing on the popularity of Android devices (and perhaps the security flaws as well) this quarter. The Android platform was the only mobile operating system for all new mobile malware in Q3. One of the most popular forms of trickery in Q3 was SMS-sending Trojans that collect personal information and steal money. Another new method of stealing user information is malware that records phone conversations and forwards them to the attacker.

In another recent finding, security researchers at Trend Micro discovered a malware on Android devices that disguised itself as a Google+ app. The app was capable of performing malicious activities like recording phone calls and gathering GPS location, and more. This user data was then uploaded on a remote server. The application called itself Google++, which apparently was overlooked by several customers. It’s worth mentioning here that a big factor in the working of a malware is the casual behavior of the user, who fails to pay enough attention when installing a program on their device.

In recent updates to some of its devices, HTC introduces a suite of logging tools that collected information. Lots of information. LOTS. Whatever the reason was, whether for better understanding problems on users' devices, easier remote analysis, corporate evilness - it doesn't matter. If you, as a company, plant these information collectors on a device, you better be DAMN sure the information they collect is secured and only available to privileged services or the user, after opting in.

That is not the case. What Trevor found is only the tip of the iceberg - we are all still digging deeper - but currently any app on affected devices that requests a single android.permission.INTERNET (which is normal for any app that connects to the web or shows ads) can get its hands on:

• the list of user accounts, including email addresses and sync status for each
• last known network and GPS locations and a limited previous history of locations
• phone numbers from the phone log
• SMS data, including phone numbers and encoded text (not sure yet if it's possible to decode it, but very likely)
• system logs (both kernel/dmesg and app/logcat), which includes everything your running apps do and is likely to include email addresses, phone numbers, and other private info

Normally, applications get access to only what is allowed by the permissions they request, so when you install a simple, innocent-looking new game from the Market that only asks for the INTERNET permission (to submit scores online, for example), you don't expect it to read your phone log or list of emails.

But that's not all. After looking at the huge amount of data (the log file was 3.5MB on my EVO 3D) that is vulnerable to apps exploiting this vulnerability all day, I found the following is also exposed:

• active notifications in the notification bar, including notification text
• build number, bootloader version, radio version, kernel version
• network info, including IP addresses
• full memory info
• CPU info
• file system info and free space on each partition
• running processes
• current snapshot/stacktrace of not only every running process but every running thread
• list of installed apps, including permissions used, user ids, versions, and more
• system properties/variables
• currently active broadcast listeners and history of past broadcasts received
• currently active content providers
• battery info and status, including charging/wake lock history
• and more

This "feels" accurate (not worth much), and the dataset is not insignificant. Interesting if nothing else.

It’s generally accepted that, on the aggregate, Android device sales will far outpace iOS sales year after year. However, there’s a dirty little secret about Android devices that most manufacturers are facing: the return rate on some Android devices is between 30 and 40 percent, in comparison to the iPhone 4′s 1.7% return rate as of Antennagate in 2010.

As we learned yesterday, Samsung is selling 18 to 21 million phones this quarter. Although all of those won’t be Android phones – Samsung manufactures Bada phones as well for the low-end. We do know for sure that the Galaxy S II sold 3 million in 55 days, a strong showing.

However, on the ground, many return rates are approaching 40% said a person familiar with handset sales for multiple manufacturers. Why? Well, as Matt noted, consumer understanding of the platform and handset availability is massively bifurcated.

For us nerds, Android makes a lot of sense. It’s ostensibly open platform (but not really) that offers far more flexibility to the programmer, carrier, and, ideally, the user.

For the “average” phone user, however, Android is a maze. Anecdotally, I’ve heard of multiple examples of folks who bought an Android phone in order to “Think Different” and came away disappointed when faced with the glaring differences between Android and a friend’s iPhone or Blackberry.

Interesting concept. So the feel of the device and how much sense it makes to people matters, huh? Strange; I thought the features would win everyone over.

40% vs. 2% -- that's hilarious. At some point someone is going to start listening to what I've been saying since two months before the first iPhone shipped.

Feel. Matters. For many, more than anything -- even if they don't know it.

Also, water contains moisture.

The Loop is reporting on a study released Wednesday by the Yankee Group that indicates that 40% of potential smartphone buyers in Europe said that they would go for an iPhone.

The study was a poll of 5,000 consumers and 2,250 IT decision-makers working at companies across France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK.

The study indicated that Android devices came in a distant second at 19% and BlackBerry and Nokia followed at 17% and 15% respectively.

I've seen articles stating there's similar domination of Android in South Korea. So what can we draw from that? Marketing? Cultural values?

And will the Windows phone gather velocity in South Korea since that country is so Windows-centric?

Will Android tablets actually pose a threat to the iPad? Not this year, says Flipboard CEO Mike McCue.

McCue thinks Android still has to work out a few kinks for tablets before it can challenge Apple.

He would know. As a developer of a popular iPad app, he's taken a look at what Google has to offer. For now, he's going to focus on iOS.

This is what I've been saying all along. Android right now is a promise--especially as a tablet. Flipboard is basically in the top three "must have" tablet applications, and they have no intention of going to Android any time soon.

The cite it just not being ready.

I've handled a few Android-based tablets and within 10 seconds I knew this was the case. I picked up the Xoom and when getting ready to enter text into Google the cursor didn't even fit inside the text box. It was like hanging on for dear life at the bottom of the text box border.

It looked and felt like a mockup project--like a proof of concept. The idea that it's a competitor--let alone an equal--to iPad right now is simply comical.

To those who would still argue this point, I'll make some concessions: if you don't care how things look, feel, or if the top developers are developing for your platform, and you can't stand the idea of having an Apple device...I'd say an Android tablet might be for you.

What’s the most popular camera used in terms of pictures taken that are uploaded to Flickr? Right now, it’s the Nikon D90. But in about a month or so, it will be Apple’s iPhone 4. What’s amazing is that D90 is nearly three years old. The iPhone 4 is not even a year old. Just look at a the chart above. The rise has been spectacular.

It's these types of metrics that I'm most interested in when discussing the popularity and marketshare of iPhone vs. Android.

I want to see web stats by browser for major websites, how many Twitter users are hitting from iPhone vs. Android apps, which device is being used to hit the NYT, the Economist, NPR, CNN, etc.

These are the stats I am interested in. They're the stats that tell me who's really using what. "Marketshare" stats are lame. Number of phones sold is lame.

Show me resale numbers for the phones. Who's uploading the most video. The most images. Using the web the most. Hitting Twitter the most. Etc. Those are real to me.

It's a question of who's using their devices more to do real things. That's always been my argument. Features sell people who like features, but they don't get reflected in use or in resale value.

Design and interface get people to *use* their phones.

So I just spent some time on Android (about two weeks), and this is was one of the reasons I went back. Ultimately, it just wasn't as enjoyable to use my device--for a number of reasons. Hardware feel, stress about battery drain, and definitely the look and feel of the applications that I enjoy.

This post pretty much captures the app look/feel element.