ComputerWorld reviews N800
 

Re: ComputerWorld reviews N800
 

Roger, maybe we don't get it?!!

Is Internet Tablet a device for geeks or the masses? If it's the latter, then, average user should be able to surf the web and see the popular content (e.g. YouTube clips). It's not an Internet Tablet if it doesn't support the most common actions on the Internet...

I think no one wants to hear my iPod example anymore, including myself :-o)

If it's a device for geeks only, then, why do you care about what CNet or ComputerWorld are saying, huh?

I think Nokia tries to sell N800 to masses while the current OS supports Internet 2004. This doesn't go well with many out there. This device is a platform for us (who love tweaking), so do you see the difference?

Re: ComputerWorld reviews N800
 

I don't think this is a case of the geeks-masses divide.

It looks more like the "is it for business or is it for entertainment?" approach.

When I read his earnest description of all the things he tried out, I can see that David Haskin believes that everyone's needs are met by a Treo-like PDA-phone and a laptop, He doesn't envision any scenarios where the N800 pushes one or the other out of the way.

Me, I say either you understand the concept of the untethered, walkaround web. Or you don't.

----
Based on this exchange, I've gone back and added to my original post.

Re: ComputerWorld reviews N800
 

Is it a functional walkaround web? So far not...

Re: ComputerWorld reviews N800
 

"On the whole, most gadget lovers would do better with a more flexible, less expensive smart phone."

I have a more flexible, less expensive smart phone and it is neither. My Samsung i730 PPC phone cost more than twice as much and is limited to running crippled "Pocket" parodies of real software. And requires much tweaking just to get it to be a decent cell phone.

It will soon be relegated to acting as a BlueTooth WWAN modem for my new N800 Internet Tablet.

Re: ComputerWorld reviews N800
 

My take is that the N800 should do what it does well, or not at all.

It does browsing well, RSS feeds are OK (but seriously buggy), audio is OK, but video and Flash are definately sub-par and so come in for the most criticism. And lets not even mention the Email application.

Nokia have a choice - improve video and Flash to compete with the likes of Archos etc. (not exactly difficult given the hardware available in the N800) or drop these functions entirely (yes, I'm serious!) Offering sub-standard implementations is only going to draw more criticism from reviewers than if they weren't offered at all.

Re: ComputerWorld reviews N800
 

Milhouse, I 100% agree with you. We have to be objective (fan boyism has never caused progress).
The so called Internet experience (collection of everything related to web nowadays, surfing, RSS, Email, audio & video clips...) on 770/N800 is sub-par and that's where Nokia should get serious, if they want to achieve mass market acceptance.

Re: ComputerWorld reviews N800
 

I had a 770 for a while. I really loved it, but not because it was a good web browsing device - I loved it because I could hack the sh-t out of it and install cool third party open source on it. Even so, I mostly enjoyed that because it was a cool thing to do, I didn't actually find the device very productive.

If one takes a mental step back and actually looks at what the N800 can do well for the "Joe Average" consumer, one comes up with just the one thing - surf the web, and that only where there are WLAN's or by carrying a cellphone too to act as a modem. Even that isn't bulletproof, clearly, and as iFrank mentions already, showing web pages is just part of the puzzle. So why would a consumer get such a one-trick pony?

There is a lot of work left to do to make these things truly useful, and things didn't improve for Nokia with the Apple iPhone announcement. Assuming the iPhone holds up to the hype, it will give a truly polished and seamless consumer experience, as compared to the freakish puzzle of looks and interface features that comprise the N800.

Re: ComputerWorld reviews N800
 

I could not have said it better. I got the N800 two weeks ago and have decided it must go back to Nokia. I feel the hardware is good but the software/operating sysetem was an after thought. Maybe Nokia hopes the open source communty will bring it up to par, if that's the case than lower the price or give the customer more bang for the buck. Examples would be discount on wireless service, free upgrade for a better carrying case, discount on memory upgrades etc, Nokia don't profit off the communty's work!

Re: ComputerWorld reviews N800
 

I'm impressed with how well the VidConvert bookmarklet works in Opera 8.5 compared with the 770: with a stuttering YouTube page open, click "VidConvert" from my bookmarks and I get a nice shiny streaming watchable video out the other end :-)

Re: ComputerWorld reviews N800
 

I agree that the software's not as good as I'd like it to be (I'm not sure it's *possible* to meet my exacting standards, however). But it should be kept in mind that £250 is a *bargain* for a 330MHz ARM box with 800x480 screen, built-in wireless and Bluetooth, running Linux etc.

If the software was as good as everyone wants it to be there are two possibilities:

1. The devices would have been launched a year later for twice the price.
2. The 770 (and hence N800) would never have been released due to the length of time of development and the necessary resulting cost being prohibitive from a business point of view.

Personally, I'm glad they were released at the price they were - and am just trying to contribute whatever I can to make the device better for my own needs.

Re: ComputerWorld reviews N800
 

I think that review was pretty spot-on. They summarize it very nicely at the end there; "...the N800 is a tough sell. It is one of those devices that is genuinely fun to use but difficult to justify buying." Keep in mind they are writing a review of the device from the point of view of the average consumer, not a geek looking for a new toy.

They're not that expensive. That's not one of my problems with it. Also, hardware-wise, the N800 is pretty cool (except for some bad choices in button design.) Well, the CPU could have been a 600+ MHz instead; with throttling during light use it wouldn't even have really hurt battery life, but that would probably have driven up the cost.... but I digress. The hardware is mostly quite nice.

However, it seems, in my opinion, that the software is an "on-going beta"... this seems like one big experiment in the open source world by Nokia, and they started with something pretty bad in the first iteration of the 770 and now they're slowly issuing these "betas" improving things as they go.

Unfortunately, and in contrast (and I know it might be a bit silly to keep harping on about a product that hasn't even been released) Apple changed the playing field quite a bit. The demos of the iPhone show a truly seamless, graphically excellent and totally visually consistent device, with real 3d-graphic processing power. Compared to that, the N800 (and every phone out there) looks pretty darn antiquated. I would have no qualms handing an iPhone to just about any non-***** consumer to use and expect them to enjoy it based on the demos we've seen, but an N800? Some of my nerdy friends, yeah, but someone who isn't a geek? Naah.

The 770 is a great enthusiast device, for people who like to tinker. For the average consumer, it's pretty blah. The N800 is a bit less blah, but still very much a niche product. There is nothing here to excite the bulk of consumers.

That's not to say I'm not tempted to get one, I definitely am. I had a lot of fun with the 770, and I'm sure I'd have more so with the N800 - but the things missing from it just make it far inferior to a high-end Pocket PC for me, and there is no way I'm going to be carrying yet another device.

"It is one of those devices that is genuinely fun to use but difficult to justify buying.", indeed.

Re: ComputerWorld reviews N800
 

I would probably pay $650 or so for an N770 that performed email, PIM, and web-based tasks perfectly, but that's me. I think they misspent some development time making the N800 "fit" into the Nseries in terms of aesthetics and whatnot. They should have spent that time improving the software instead of making it more like an Nseries device. I hate the prospect, but I suspect that by the time 3G becomes inexpensive in US, N800 will still be suffering software pains, and I will be doing all of my email and PIM on the latest Symbian phone.

Re: ComputerWorld reviews N800
 

I think you both ^ have equally valid points.

At a certain price point, I daresay many would forego the N800 or 770 for a cheap laptop. It's obvious to me that, right wrong or indifferent, Nokia compromised. It could be argued they leaned too far toward keeping cost down at the sake of more robust software. I think a hacker mindset pervades the tablet development program and certain assumptions were made because of that (ergo the consumer community would graciously accept a strung-out OS deployment given the other favorable aspects of the devices). I could be wrong, but that's the perception I get.

Re: ComputerWorld reviews N800
 

Looks like I have misspoken on the part about Nokia and it's relation with the open source communty, here is part of a review from RogerS's review posted under General Discussions > News:

".....Strategically, Nokia opted to enlist and encourage the Linux community. Again, maybe their experience with a non-desktop Linux proved lucky, but as far as possible they have chosen to go mainstream. That means not just using Linux, but building Linux up for everyone else. Seeding the developer community with devices is good, but who remembers that the 50,000 euros collected from the initial developer device sales went to the Gnome Foundation, not to Nokia? Nokia has paid Linux developers and contributed code. They're good citizens.

So Linux on the internet tablet isn't free. But Nokia is getting the most bang for its OS buck this way, which previous Linux-y tablets failed to do.

And does this mean that there will be non-Nokia tablets running Maemo in future, with Nokia getting not one penny in royalties? Yes, I expect so. That's the way it works." Glad to hear that! Man was I wrong.:o

Re: ComputerWorld reviews N800
 

In my opinion, at this point any other manufacturer would have to be on drugs to build a tablet and put Maemo on it. Maemo is by far the worst part of the entire package. The hardware is very nice, but the OS... the hardware and Opera is what carries this device.

Re: ComputerWorld reviews N800
 

I am not praising Maemo, am agreeing (from what I have read) that Nokia seems to be dealing fairly with the open souce communty.

Re: ComputerWorld reviews N800
 

Right, I didn't mean to attack Nokias treatment of the community either, just reacted to the whole "other tablets with Maemo" thing. From what I can see, Maemo is a pretty primitive GUI.

Re: ComputerWorld reviews N800
 

What makes Maemo a primitive GUI? Maybe we can find some points that Nokia can make better. :)

I don't consider Maemo primitive, but I think it's good for stylus use. Primitive is that you cannot rotate the GUI and all size values are hardcoded. What else?