What's with AMOLED

I read a lot of reviews these days as I'm looking for another phone, and come across the fact that reviewers generally do not like Amoled screens. They point a the colour inaccuracy, the lower brightness and the lesser sharpness, especially with the Pentile arrangement. Only the high contrast is appreciated.

Why is that? Personally, when comparing screens side by side, I always prefer the Amoled for small screens (on the Tab 7.7 it's too intense). The deep blacks are unsurpassed, even on the best LCD's - you can't see the difference between a black bezel and the black parts of the screen. Colours are warm and intense, giving the screen a fireplace-like hue that is comforting. Whites and soft colours have a creamy aspect that is pleasing. Colours are vivid like in glossy magazine, while LCD is more like matte luxury paper. Since you tend to not look at a smartphone screen as long as on a tablet or computer screen, these, to my personal taste, are all advantages. These overrule the supposed dotted lines around letters. And I do not really care for colour accuracy. Not on my phone. On my desktop and laptop, yes please, I want to edit pictures and I'd even prefer a calibrated screen.

Am I alone in this? Currently I'm choosing between a Sony or a HTC on the one hand and a S3 on the other. The beautiful screen of the S3 is it's major advantage, but in every review, the S3 Amoled screen is put below the others. Do reviewers focus too much on technical numbers and counts? Do pixels and ppi and the like count over the look, feel and ethetics of a screen? And why this need for colour accuracy on such a small screen that you use in short time spans?