First, let me get this out of the way - Engadget does have a bias, especially when it comes to the latest Android or iOS toys - that's where their core readers can feel all warm and fuzzy over their most recent purchase. This is evidenced by their dropping of their number-based review system... it had the running joke of "New Android device = 7 or 8, new iPhone = 9, everything else = 7 or lower". You could guess their rating score based on the title of the article alone.
That said, I think the Engadget article was heavy-handed, especially for a device that isn't being officially released. It's nice for them to offer an article based on their experience, but it's massively unfair to label the article as a true "review"... there's plenty of other devices that they've given gushingly positive reviews to, in spite of actual physical flaws... note the T-Mobile (LG) G2x review:
The 4-inch WVGA (800 x 480) IPS panel looks good on paper but misses the mark when compared to the competition. Sure, the colors are rich and the viewing angles are wide, but the LCD washes out more than expected in direct sunlight and suffers from a significant amount of backlight leaking out from the edges of the screen, resulting in visible "stains" on solid, dark-colored content.
We're also somewhat perplexed as to why LG decided against outfitting this dual-core smartphone with a qHD (960 x 540) display, à la Motorola Atrix 4G. Obviously, we're being highly critical here -- most people will be satisfied with the G2x's display, at least until they come across one of Samsung's Super AMOLED-equipped devices. Another item that requires improvement is the screen's capacitive touch layer, which is slightly less sensitive than on most other phones. Light touches don't always register, and while this is easily remedied by applying more pressure, it's rather disconcerting -- especially for a handset that's otherwise well designed.
Emphasis mine... I take all Engadget reviews with a grain of salt after reading that one.
Not counting Google's Nexus phones, the G2x is the best Android handset that's graced our pockets. It strikes an impressive balance between powerful, quality hardware, and stock, undiluted software.
I'm a newbie to webOS... but I've got the experience to know that the Engadget article was a hatchet job. I've owned and used several different types of smartphones - BlackBerry, Nokia S60v3, S60v5, Symbian^3, Maemo 5, Motorola and HTC Androids (from Cupcake through FroYo). I picked up a Veer just this past week, and I've been blown away by how functional the OS is. Simply stated, I love being able to flick from one app to the next seamlessly - S^3 is close with its multitasking (hold the "app" button, and then flick between live previews), but its not as fluid. I use my phone to keep track of my life - PIM functions, and the ability to move between them easily, are key; webOS is second only to BlackBerry in that regard (and it can be argued that RIM got its inspiration from PalmOS). Internet browsing is also important, and webOS handles it with aplomb - right up there with Android's browser. I just don't think any of the complaints Engadget brought up for the Pre3 are really justified when you take the Pre3 for what it is - a business-oriented smartphone. If only HP released the Pre3 at the same time as the TouchPad (and for a better price), I think we'd be seeing a more positive end result.
Now if I could only convince the wife that I need a Pre3... I'd have one in a heartbeat!