Re: N900 vs Iphone.
 

listen nokia. lets not forget the n96.

Re: N900 vs Iphone.
 

Naw, I didn't take it personal. Just continued with the discussion.

We do agree... it's the user experience and software that will push the N900 to the top. I just wonder though... what user experience/killer app will be what kicks it to the top.

I think the typical consumer is totally opposite of the heavy-duty users of these type of phones; thus the user experience and killer-apps are markedly different.

Video calls - be it via Skype I'd hope - is what I've been screaming for the most thus far. But I know that I'm a serious minority in that wish. Most others want something a lot more "powerful"... like tools to admin a server. I'd rather have a larger screen for that kind of stuff.

Re: N900 vs Iphone.
 

CDMA might be in decline, but if you discount it T-mobile is #2 and not #4, and also not supported by the iPhone. Original statement still untrue since iPhone only supports one of the two (unless you want to argue there's only one major UMTS network in the US, which is then your problem).

Re: N900 vs Iphone.
 

AT&T is GSM. Verizon is CDMA/GSM with a swift movement to GSM mostly. Sprint is CDMA, and T-Mobile is GSM (mostly, some pockets of Suncom were CDMA, but I couldn't tell you if they forced the upgrade to GSM in the last two years)...

T-Mobile is a far cry from being #2.

And I think that my original statement has been taken so far out of context, I'd like to return to it. N900 supports only T-Mobile's 3G (not GSM, please don't confuse those terms) and nobody else. You will be using EDGE if you're not on T-Mobile's network.

Quad band radio in the iPhone can support the areas that are 2100mhz within the T-Mobile area (they exist, just like 850 exists in NYC for instance). So you'd have 3G access, albeit in just a few places.

If you suggest otherwise, I'd love to see your proof. I don't mind admitting I might very well be wrong. But without seeing it, I'll stick with the fact that the N900 is not as portable as a quad-band data enabled phone of any brand. 1700mhz is unique only to T-Mobile in the US.

Re: N900 vs Iphone.
 

Do you have a source for Verizon going GSM-family before rolling out LTE (4G), which is still at least a year or two away? (Not to mention that one source I found there said they were likely to stay with CDMA for voice since in LTE a lof of focus is on the data capabilities)

The iPhone has tri-band UMTS support (850/1900/2100, quad-band GSM is the same as in N900), which doesn't support Tmobile.

So in summary, for 3G the N900 only supports Tmobile of the current major US carriers. iPhone can run 3G on AT&T and in some areas also T-mobile. So yes, the iPhone has more 3G support (in North America), which I admitted from the start. What I objected to was the statement that it supports "all major [US 3G] networks", which it clearly doesn't.

Re: N900 vs Iphone.
 

I know of nowhere that Verizon is GSM. The only phones they support that do GSM (and CDMA) are their world phones meant for roaming outside the U.S.

Verizon's next step is LTE in the 700 Mhz band. According to a Verizon spokesperson at an LTE rollout event in Philadelphia several weeks ago, they'll be running voice over data on it eventually, and CDMA will die off (but will probably take several years to transition everyone off of it, similar to the move from analog)

For a 3G phone to work with T-mobile's 3G it must support *both* 1700 and 2100, not just one or the other. 1700 is used for uploading and 2100 for downloading. So getting the iPhone to support 3G on T-mobile is a bit more complicated than it looks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UMTS_frequency_bands

Re: N900 vs Iphone.
 

I use google apps, as the mail web client is so good. the web calendar is good too, and works offline with google gears.
Could use Evolution, i guess.

heathen! That only runs on Windows doesn't it?

Re: N900 vs Iphone.
 

iphone at the moment = casual users since it got a more mature software support.
3 years almost on the market makes a huge difference.
But the iphone sure sucked right after release and still does unless you jailbreak it.

The N900 is as stated more targeted to the early adopters at this point but is so much more in line with my needs then the iphone.

Hard not to see the obvious advantages with superior codec support movies/music and the lovely drag and drop file system compared to the inferior itunes that really kills the "easy" part.

Also would love to see the iphone try viewing stuff on the screen streamed from your server.

N900 does that right out of the box with say, Tversity installed on your pc.
Pretty nice to be able to be in the bedroom streaming media to your phone that you just connected to your tv with the tv-out from the phone.
And that is done without a single setup, show me any iphone jailbroken or not that can deliver that solution for your media needs ;D

Iphone is a great phone for some users, just like the N900 will be a better choice for others like me.
We should be happy with the amount of awesome phones that comes out.

And a final note, I like so much more to be able to customize my screens then having them cluttered with tons of apps...

Re: N900 vs Iphone.
 

And if I play all of the above (including Wii Fit) and beat MW on Veteran mode? =P

Re: N900 vs Iphone.
 

You're the f'n man.