In naming the iPhone the best invention of 2007, you forgot about Windows-based PDA phones [Nov. 19]. Touch interface? Big deal. As you noted, it's been done before. A miniaturized operating system? Done. Windows-based phones are everything the iPhone is and more. The phones can text, MMS, e-mail (through POP, IMAP and Exchange), surf the real Web at broadband speed on EVDO networks and open, edit and save documents. The iPhone is for kids. Windows Mobile PDA phones are for adults who need to do real work.
Eagle Bear Morgan, SEATTLE
What a brilliant piece of writing from Lev Grossman. I don't yet own an iPhone, but I plan to in the near future. Like Grossman, I'm sick of the sour grapes from naysayers who moan about what the iPhone doesn't do and ignore what it does do and just how well it does it. I hate my conventional cell phone with its 100-page, four-language manual that I can't begin to understand. I've used the iPhone without having to look at the manual. And the only language required is intuition.
Brad Cathey, WHEATON, ILL., U.S.
Let me get this straight: TIME passed up inventions that save energy, produce energy, make us safer, make our commutes easier, protect us from diseases, reduce our impact on our finite resources and bring knowledge to the Third World to name a cool new cell phone as Invention of the Year?
Steve Jordan, GERMANTOWN, MD., U.S.
The iPhone isn't an invention. it's a pretty nifty design based on a lot of inventions. There are true inventions out there that are more noteworthy than the iPhone. Just look around some more.
Thomas St. Pierre, ENGLEWOOD, FLA., U.S.
Defining the Clinton Doctrine
I am a proud, loyal Democrat who is opposed to the candidacy of Senator Hillary Clinton for President [Nov. 19]. I have no problem with her positions on the issues or her little sashay to the right in anticipation of the general election. And my opposition certainly does not rise to the level of hatred. But the voters (with a little help from the Supreme Court) have already passed the presidency from a Bush to a Clinton to another Bush. Now it could be passed back to another Clinton, and I'd bet that Jeb Bush is patiently awaiting his turn. I have nothing against Clinton except her name. Alternating the presidency between two political dynasties seems fundamentally undemocratic. There is a full slate of highly capable candidates with names other than Clinton who are vying for the Democratic nomination. I hope one of them wins.
Craig Cranston, WILLIAMSBURG, VA., U.S.
Joe Klein's tiny mention of Iraq in his take on Clinton may reflect the low priority she gives the war. She tragically misreads how the majority of Americans view the conflict. And while Clinton is tiptoeing around the issue, Barack Obama and John Edwards have a campaign opening as wide as the Grand Canyon if they're wise enough to use it.
M. Lewis Stein, IRVINE, CALIF., U.S.
I'm still waiting for the answer to what she believes. I'd be inspired and excited to vote for the former First Lady if she would just answer a question instead of letting sheep like Klein explain her ambiguous responses. Everybody gets that she can be as politically savvy as any former President — Democrat or Republican — but by continuing to avoid taking and presenting a position, she'll eventually deal herself out of the big card game.
Brian Ahern, SANDWICH, MASS., U.S.
Klein tended to exaggerate Clinton's strengths and downplay her weaknesses. He even went so far as to declare that her new health-care plan is courageous and detailed. I'll go along with detailed. Indeed, it might be the best of those proposed. But courageous? Why hasn't she submitted such legislation since she became a Senator six years ago? The answer, as anyone but her most blindly loyal supporters ought to see, is that there would have been no political advantage in doing so. Now is the ideal time to present it to voters as a key part of her platform. And Iowa, where the first votes will be cast, was the ideal place to unveil it. If that isn't slippery, cold and calculating, I don't know what is.
Tom Foreman, GAINESVILLE, FLA., U.S.
She can soften her makeup and clothing. She can change her hairstyle. But when her voice spews forth the same old leftist diatribe, you are left with the same Hillary Clinton. She wants to take from those of us who have worked our whole lives to better ourselves and give to those who don't want to be bothered with working. I can't think of a single circumstance that would allow me to vote for Clinton.
Troy Worthy, HURST, TEXAS
Perhaps Clinton is trying to have it both ways, or maybe her questionable authenticity threw Klein a curveball. Is there any other explanation for his calling her "a pragmatic moderate"? She has said, "The free market has failed," "Something has to be taken away from some people" and "We are going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." A Marxist mind-set hardly defines a pragmatic moderate.
Douglas Abrams, LOUISVILLE, KY., U.S.
Don't Dis Donny
In the obit on George Osmond, you gave his son Donny Osmond short shrift [Nov. 19]. For one thing, you misspelled his first name. And you suggested that Marie was the biggest star in the family. Donny sold more records and had more success onstage. In TV, they're about even. (He hosted the game show Pyramid for a couple of years; she's on Dancing with the Stars.) Give the man his due.
Paul Grein, STUDIO CITY, CALIF., U.S.
Crazy Little Thing Called Hate
Rich Lowry's Viewpoint, "The World of Hillary Hatred," was off the mark [Nov. 19]. What conservatives hate about Clinton is that she is a woman. It's nothing more than old-fashioned sexism. Equal rights have always been anathema to them, but since that stance is politically unacceptable today, conservatives can't admit the true reason for their opposition to her. The male-dominated right wing has created a bogeyman, or in this case a bogeywoman. And women on the right are just as afraid of a woman President as their male counterparts. They have always hated feminism and the Equal Rights Amendment.
Richard Rowland, DELTONA, FLA., U.S.