Well, the nature of an android phone isn't a computer, it is an android device. To claim that the PS3 is a Cell-powered computer is about as helpful as claiming that my router is a arm-powered computer, it might be true but that doesn't mean that I can run linux on my router - yet I can run linux on an arm-powered computer.
I'm not arguing that the intent of a thing is its identity - the manufacturers are, and if you buy into that then, well, you buy into that.
All of the devices you mentioned -- Android device, PS3, and router -- are all computers. They are general purpose machines that are programmed for a certain set of tasks. The kinds of devices you mention can all be reprogrammed and are actively reprogrammed by people, sometimes for a similar purpose that they already performed and sometimes for completely different purposes.
Just because I buy a device from Manufacturer X does not mean that said device is and only can be what the manufacturer intended. When I own a device, I have the freedom to tinker with that device, including making that device do something it was never intended to do. That is what I as a hacker love about computing machines: they are what I make them when I reprogram them.
But that doesn't mean that the manufacturer have to play ball and make it easy for you.
Also, when we as consumers chose the iPhone we at the same said that we don't care the slightest about being able to do what we want with our devices, from a hacker perspective the future isn't looking bright and that is our fault since we buy crap.
Along with the other capable technical takedowns of your argument, might I just add that this is the road to technical serfdom. This is not something to be relaxed into, but to be vigorously fought.
"Android device" isn't a physical thing. It's an idea, a particular (but not the only) application of a set of physical things. Physical things include CPUs, RAM, PCBs, displays, etc. The whole is exactly the sum of its parts.
Let's see what's in a computer: CPU, RAM, storage, input, output, software. What's in a smartphone? CPU, RAM, storage, input, output, software. Absent manufacturer lockdown or inane laws like the DMCA saying otherwise, they are literally, physically the same things in a different package.
Finally, what does it take for a thing to run Linux? 32-bit CPU, MMU, RAM, storage, input, output. A PS3, a phone, a router, a TiVo -- they all have all those things, and all of them can run Linux. They are all computers.
An Android device most certainly is a physical thing. If not, why isn't the CPU just an idea? A particular application of a set of physical things. Physical things include silicon etc.
Is a car a physical thing?
Yes, you can call it a computer but you could also call it a heap of atoms - both statements are true, but they are pretty much both just as useless to describe what an android device really is.
Again, my clock, my fridge and my washing machine has a CPU, RAM, storage, input, output and software. By the same argument they are literally and physically the same thing in a different package - which of course is true, but also so very very wrong.
Yes, you can call it a computer but you could also call it a heap of atoms - both statements are true, but they are pretty much both just as useless to describe what an android device really is.
I disagree -- knowing something is a computer is knowing that it can be virtually infinitely repurposed. "Computer" is an entirely different kind of thing from anything else, regardless of the form it takes.
[quoted from another post] You guys are completely missing my point.
You guys are completely missing my point. Even though my router might be an arm-computer that runs linux - I can't even run linux on the damn thing (that binary blob that is shipped with the router could be any OS for I care, it's not as if my experience will be any better or worse if runs linux or DOS when everything is locked down and all I get access to is a simple webserver with an administrative page on)... Just as I can't run any other form of linux than android on my phone.
Yes, there are a lot of exceptions - routers that you can install alternative OS's on, I've installed OpenWRT and DD-WRT myself. But that's beside the point. Just because linux run on arm and my router has a arm cpu doesn't mean I can run linux on it.
I bought a router and I got a router. Then I installed something else on it and I could just as well have been using it to control the curtains in my bedroom instead - and I have every right to do that. Just as the manufacturer has the right to secure their product and in effect lock me out of that ability.
Now, if I had bought a computer that would be in a completely different ball game. But now I bought a router and the manufacturer of that router has no obligation not trying make my life a living hell for even attempting to control my curtains with it.
"But now I bought a router and the manufacturer of that router has no obligation not trying make my life a living hell for even attempting to control my curtains with it."
really? You would have no objections to the router manufacturer trying to make your life a "living hell"?
For the most part manufacturers don't really care about people re purposing their devices for other goals unless it potentially leaves them legally liable for something (e.g a children's toy with small parts being repurposed as food).
People naturally re-purpose things all the time, for example using a bank note to do cocaine , an AOL CD as a coaster , a newspaper or deodorant to kill a wasp etc etc.
In fact a huge amount of human innovation comes from taking an existing thing and using it for something else, going back as far as the original hunters who took tree branches and used them to kill dinner.
The critical thing about computers is that their entire reason for existence is to be repurposed, a computer on it's own is useless.
What we in the software industry are in the business of doing is finding ways to repurpose computers and their entire appeal is that this is so easily done.
I would hate to live in a world where everything has one discreet purpose regardless of it's physical abilities, for example imagine having to purchase a separate TV for every channel you wish to watch.
I'm not arguing that the intent of a thing is its identity - the manufacturers are, and if you buy into that then, well, you buy into that.