When it says "Daily Wibble," this is what you get. This is what you've (I assume) always got. You already know what's in it before you click on the link, whether from the articles list on theinquirer.net or the RSS feeds.

Clone devices like this don't deserve to be reviewed. The kind of people who purchase clone devices are cheap posers. It's bad enough that such a person is already swept by the "i" wave of also having an iPoood or iPhone. It gets even worse when they can't afford it and try to mimic the trend with one of these no-name brand devices. Meizu, Misu or whatever the heck they are.

Let's suppose for a second that this no-name brand actually had a well performing device with new, better features. Then why do you go and make it LOOK LIKE an existing product?! Do Chinese manufacturers not have any design people at all in their organizations?

Interesting, your name. The only other Roo I know is the Royal Oak Offshore I have on my wrist.

All Data is good and there is never enough. Implementing this principle is perhaps why I am successful enough to require an assistant......I'm sure there are quite a few other successful gentlemen who read The INQ.

In my opinion there is no excuse for anyone who can afford legitimate goods to buy anything other. Theft from necessity is understandable. Theft motivated by greed is not.

@joey - I heartily agree.

@mont - never buy clones ? so you're still using an original IBM PC-XT ? Wow !

Hers is made by a Taiwanese company called Miso (so says the fine print from her phone). Her boyfriend, who gave it to her for her birthday, has a real iPhone (2G) as does my wife (3G). Putting the three together none of us can see any performance difference. Her clone also does MMS and receives analogue television and FM Radio and only cost about 120 dollars.

I never buy clones, pirated goods or fakes but seeing her "iPhone" I can more easily see why some people do.

Here i come to read a full article about the iphone clone only to get headlines.

I really dont like this, each one is an article the inq should be covering in more detail, instead i have to link to other sites and their 20 page reviews so they get multiple ads hits per page instead of a good summary by the inq...

Seriously hire more writers... or fire the lazy ones...