Depending upon device and it's features/quality...I could go either "dedicated device" route or convergence all-in-one route. Knock with "all-in-one" devices (like stereos) is you often get crap you don't want and solution is watered down....valid points. I thought at one time that my eensy-teensy T68i BT phone was ideal "conduit" for my PDAs/tablets/etc. for connectivity purposes. But you know what? I can't deal with a phone the size of a chiclet. I have "piano" fingers and still can't reliably press those little buttons. I recently purchased the "Freedom BT mini-keyboard"....big mistake. Finger ergonomics and keycodes available are pathetic. Holding keyboard dongle while also holding/balancing N800 will be a trick. I'm willing to defer my last 2 points for next-gen model...at least there are workarounds. But fact that N800 won't reliably play most videos...and at resolution of device...is a big problem for me. Software and hardware on device s/be in sync w/each other. The nokia N80 phone supports upnp (as do other models I think)...but given N800 support for video...I can't imagine N80 being any better. Phone? PDA? All the same to me...I'm just looking for features. mike Jonathan Matthews-Levine wrote: > On 2/6/07, Mike Klein <mklein at vxappliance.com> wrote: >> Tobacco...buy it at your corner store. Next year when Nokia releases >> next model w/3G we can discuss further. > > Over my dead 770 ... :-) > >> Dude...you just don't understand. There are two models which are equally >> valid...each device to it's own and the convergence model. People want >> both...not everybody wants to wear a "geek" jacket with pockets for >> their iPod, phone and N800. > > You ... you've been SPYING on me?!?? ;-) > > I agree, though - there /are/ two models. I think that Nokia's > addressing the "convergence-luvvas" quite nicely with their (much much > much more numerous) smart phone offerings. The N800, however, is a > deliberate step to the other end of the spectrum - single device, > single purpose (where purpose=="Internet", not "www", "IM", or > "VOIP".) > >> Why should I carry around 2 devices of roughly same form factor?!? > > You shouldn't. > > In my idealised PAN-filled future, your "phone" doesn't have the same > form factor as today; it's merely a voice/audio conduit, attaching > itself wirelessly to the "connectivity cube" that talks > wifi/BT/3G/GPRS/etc and is the gateway router out of your PAN. > >> Why >> should I deal with the BT-pairing/bonding crap involved with two >> different devices? > > *More* than two ... > ... but only once each :-) > >> Have you ever been jamming to tunes on your ipaq/pod >> and a call came in? It is an often unelegant scramble to answer the >> phone on your headset. > > Not personally, no. > Maybe I need more friends ... :-( > >> Every high-end umpc or ppc form factor has cellular as option...larger >> tablets...umpcs...and ppc devices like treo/etc. >> >> You state: "I don't *want* convergence...I don't *want* a browser on my >> phone" >> >> But guess what? Many people DO want convergence...phones are getting >> crammed with PIM/web features and screen sizes are shooting up....and >> conversely pocket pcs/etc. are getting cellular capability. > > Cool - let them buy the N93 or other such devices. *I've* got the 770 > and N800 ... :-) > >> It's a computer...not a phone. > > Absolutely. Why, therefore, should it have dedicated cellular phone > hardware in it? > > Jonathan
