I'd like to thank Noah for the time he has taken to respond to these issues. At the same time, however, I would also like to point out (as constructively as possible 
) the dichotomy between what he claims is the motivation behind Verizon's decisions, and the realities of how those decisions effect Verizon's customers.
Verizon Wireless is committed to offering customers the best service and feature options on the competitive market.
Verizon may well offer the best service of any carrier, and I'm willing to accept that my lackluster signal strength may be an isolated issue. And Verizon does offer an impressive range of devices and services. But as it pertains to smart phones, these devices are unarguably hand-held computers with vast, wide ranging capabilities. As such, it's impossible to compile a "best" list of options - the "best" options are the ones that fit each user's particular needs, style and preferences. The "best" option would simply be to afford the user their preferred option. As we all know, this isn't the case here, as many aspects of the phone are pre-configured to specifically disallow efficient access to what is unarguably one of the world's most popular and widely used search engines.
Google search is not blocked, and Bing is being introduced as another option to better the wireless experience.
With all due respect, this is disingenuous. The Google search widget is indeed blocked from being able to be added to the home screen. Even when the Google widget is side-loaded onto the device, it's excluded from the list of widgets that are able to be added to the TouchWiz home screens. And this is specific to the Verizon version of the Galaxy S phone - what is essentially the same phone/OS running on ANY other carrier is capable of adding the Google widget to the home screen. In other words, the operating system of this phone, as customized by Verizon was specifically programmed to disallow the Google search widget on the home screen. And Bind is not being introduced as another option, as you claim, it has been specifically hard-coded as the only option.
Sure, a user can open a browser and navigate to the Google home page and nothing is blocked, but that can entail 3 to 4 steps (opening the browser, bringing up a menu to open a new window, loading a bookmark to Google and finally searching) when a widget on the home screen can accomplish the same thing in 1 step.
I, and many others, do not prefer the Bing search engine, so the pre-installed Bing search widget is not the "best' option for us. Blocking the Google search widget from the home screen significantly impedes our ability to efficiently use our search engine of choice - again, anything but the "best" option for us. Likewise, with the dedicated search button hard-coded directly to the Bing search engine when in the browser, customers who prefer to use Google loose what is an efficient time-saving feature of the phone.
To circumvent the restrictions Verizon has programmed into this phone, a user needs to fully replace both the home screen launcher as well as the entire web browser. Only then can the Google widget be added to the home screen and the dedicated search button linked to the Google search engine when in the Browser. However, in the process, the user looses access to any of the Samsung widgets (which can not be added to 3rd party home screens) and must turn to the Android market for apps to replace that lost functionality. Searching for, downloading and sometimes having to purchase such replacements costs the user time, effort and money - clearly anything but the "best" option.
Verizon Wireless cares for its customers and there overall wireless experience. We want to provide the best, safest, most reliable, and economical services and options to our customers
This statement stands totally at odds with the steps outlined above which are required to configure this phone to fully utilize the Google search engine. I'll go over each one to highlight the fallacy:
We want to provide the best - It should be abundantly clear that when it comes to such integral activities as searching, and being the case with virtually all other Android phones on the market, the "best" option is for the user to have his/her own "option". Verizon doesn't allow that.
safest - By forcing the user to turn to an open software market to replace major components of the operating system in order to have the simple option to fully utilize what is unarguably one of the world's best, most popular and widely used search engines exposes that user to many dangers. At best, these 3rd party replacements might not be fully tested with the overall specific configuration of this phone and at worst could easily contain malicious code, exposing the user to all manner of threat.
most reliable - When it comes to software, reliability is a direct result of testing. It is, therefore, absurd to claim that the restrictions Verizon has programmed into this phone are in the interest of reliability, as they directly causes a user to download untested and unverified software from a market with little overall control and/or oversight.
and economical services - With many of the apps a user would need to replace functionality lost by circumventing Verizon's programmed restrictions costing money (not all Android apps are free), this argument also fails closer inspection.
and options - With the phone specifically hard coded to exclude the Google search widget and linking of the dedicated search button to the Google search engine when in the browser, it's simply disingenuous to claim that the user is being provided the "best" options. In this case, the user is provided no option.
We in no way wish to infringe upon the freedoms of private developers or customers.
By specifically hard-coding a restriction into the stock user interface of the operating system to disallow core functionality that is included in that very operating system in favor of a 3rd party who, honestly, has nothing to do with either the hardware or software of the phone, the freedom of Verizon customers and developers is absolutely being infringed upon.
When each of us bought this phone, we purchased the well known functionality provided by the Android operating system. Verizon's programmed restrictions blocks our access to core functionality that's available to virtually all other android devices, (many of which Verizon itself sells), and we are not afforded the option of enabling that functionality. That is, most certainly, infringing on the freedoms of customers.
We do however have a responsibility to the customer who pay for our service to protect them from harmful software
As stated earlier, by restricting core Android functionality Verizon has forced it's users to replace major system components with 3rd party applications which may be untested, untried and potentially malicious. As such, if Verizon truly believes it has a responsibility to protect it's customers from such dangers, it's failing miserably.
We value your imput
I appreciate that and eagerly await a continued discussion of the issues I've raised here.
