Opinion indeed.
Yes, all AMOLED technologies have better contrast because unlike backlit LCDs, you can actually have true black (no light) when you want it.
On the other hand, all AMOLED technologies have worse color accuracy. The colors are brighter, yes. But also less accurate. So while it might pop out at you more and feel visually appealing, it's not actually correct.
Furthermore, since each color element in an AMOLED display is an individual LED, and LEDs wear out, a color shift will occur unevenly depending on the frequency of usage of each element on the display. (granted, this happens on the order of a few years depending on how the display is driven)
Also, OLEDs can't be made as small as LCD shutters, so effective resolution is lower.
Finally, power consumption on an AMOLED display depends heavily on an image. With Android, you'll get a savings because most of the screen's typically black. With iOS, you'll be hit with a power consumption penalty because most UIs are filled with something other than black. I mean, heck, everybody's table view defaults to a white background.
You might favor having an image that is very saturated. (AMOLED)
But I'll prefer longer battery life, better color accuracy, and better effective resolution. (LCD)
With that said, I'm fairly sure I know which one Apple will go with for the next couple of generations.
I don't find the iPhone 4 to have very accurate colours at all. Your argument of "LEDs wear out" isn't valid, since Apple is also using LED technology. Of course it's not the same as Organic LEDs, but they do wear out as well.
You are correct that battery consumption depends on what is being displayed (the brighter (white), the more battery is used). However, the new Super AMOLED Plus technology (I'm not talking about any AMOLED technologie in 2010 or before), have much better battery life and better colour accuracy.
Furthermore, Samsung already has announced that high resolution Super AMOLED Plus displays, will be available in 2012. Furthermore, Samsung is
expected to announce a new variant of this Super AMOLED Plus technology that uses even less battery, has a brighter screen, is thinner, more colour acurate and also supports much higher resolutions.
Super AMOLED plus actually uses much less energy than LCD, even when showing a white screen.
Therefor, I prefer better Super AMOLED Plus: it uses less battery, has a better viewing angles and the colours are better (and I don't know if they are worse or better in colour accuracy, but the iPhone 4 isn't that good when it comes to colour accuracy). Higher resolution Super AMOLED Plus displays are already announced.
Not to forget, if Apple is going to release this iPhone 6 in the fall of 2012, they will have enough time adapting Super AMOLED Plus' succesor (? Super AMOLED Plus 2 ?).
LCD offers, to me, less advantages. Sure, a brighter screen thanks to LED backlight and it's slightly more fit if you want high resolution images. However, that first issue has already been addressed with AMOLED Plus a lot, and the second thing is already announced.
----------
We have had LTE since 2009 here in Sweden and the coverage is now pretty much every city with more than 50,000 citizens and a lot of the area between the cities.
I don't know how it looks in the rest of Europe.
Correction: The coverage is much better than that. I'd say most towns with more than 20,000 citizens have LTE and a rather big percentage of the countryside does too.
That's why I was talking about Europe in specific. It's true that there are one or two countries that are ahead, but when you are looking at Germany, United Kingdom, Netherlands, France, Belgium, Spain, Greece etc., you'll see it's very rare to find LTE coverage.
Sweden is most ahead when looking at LTE coverage, but again, it's very rare to find it in the rest of Europe. I believe Norway also has a 'decent' LTE network.