This is the most valid criticism of the show so far.

Engadget is meant to be a site with a bit of humor (after all, they have tags for everything from HelloKitty to RobotApocalypse). Plus, this was their first "feature length" show so I think you have to expect reviews with attitude and [attempted] humor more so than depth. I would guess they aspire to be AOTS Gadget Pron.

That said, I don't think their review was much different from what you will see when the general media start to review the N900. You need to first and foremost remember that in the US you can get a subsidized iPhone or G1 or PalmPre for a fraction of the cost of a non-subsidized N900. The expectation will be that the N900 should offer hundreds of dollars of additional value. Any area where the N900 is not better than all of the competition will be pointed out as a failure. Get used to the phrase "for the price you'd think they could have made the <blank> better."

As far as the screen debate, if it doesn't have a Wacom digitizer, it's a poor excuse for a screen. I personally would have liked the N900 to ship with a dual digitizer - active and capacitive. However the masses have not seen the benefits of active digitizers so we are stuck, for the most part, with resistive and capacitive screens. Those same masses tend to view capacitive screens as easier to use and they are right. A very well made resistive screen can, at best, be almost as easy to use with a finger as a capacitive screen but the best capacitive screen is still better for fingers than the best resistive screen.