The Misconception

Well, this is a huge problem with misconception. People who are not familiar with the background of the tablet series are going to make assumptions about it based on what they are more familiar with. And many times this will be based on a smartphone since that is all the craze because of the iPhone, BlackBerry, HTC's smartphones, Nokia's smartphones, and so on. They jump to that conclusion because they generalize that if it has a certain grouping of features then it must be the same. It must be a smartphone or a phone. But the general audience who are not as technically savvy will many times not care with trivial differences and not care about the history. Maybe because it is boring or because it is too complicated.

The Intention

I think the most important thing is to think about what the intention and approach was. I believe that it is a mobile (tablet) computer because of its lineage from the n### series. In one of the interviews of Ari Jaaksi he mentions that this is an internet centric device. Given that it is a internet centric device and not one that focuses on cell phone capabilities, I wonder if when putting the cellular radio into the device that their main purpose was to use it for the data EDGE/3G/and so on capabilities and the voice capabilities last in order to extend the internet centricity. This is important especially if you cannot get wifi which is similar to how the Booklet 3G can utilize 3G data. The voice capabilities sound more like an afterthought at this point? (So it is a tablet mobile computer with internet centricity--their focus, but it is also a phone--not their main focus. It's many things.)

Part of this goes back to what chemist said.

The Mistake

Nokia's mistake is with thinking that people are going to keep these granular differences separate and that people not familiar with the N### history are not going to see that it came from an internet tablet mobile computer. Hence it is a mobile computer first and phone second or last. Looking at a few definitions of smartphone, if you look carefully you can see that many of them say a mobile phone with extensions or capabilities of PC-like features. Notice how the direction changes compared to how the N900 is described by others as a mobile computer first with cell phone extensions.

I wonder like others do why it is listed under find phones rather than on its own page. I can only guess that it could either be a mistake or it could be intentional in order to sell more devices. If someone is looking for a phone first and a certain PC-like feature second and they are indifferent to all else then from a business standpoint you are going to want that person to get the more expensive device, but those are words from a sales point of view.

Conclusion

This is a very esoteric market much like tablet computers were when I first bought my Toshiba tablet notebook in its early years. It is esoteric because of its features, its dimensions, the hardware, and software. In my opinion the N900 treads on many of these areas and markets, but very lightly. In the end they satisfy the minority rather than the majority. If Nokia wants to make this device mass market quickly they would need to bring in the best parts of the other worlds in order to extend their acceptance to a broader audience. But for now I think we are wasting our time debating about labels instead of helping improve the device and product line and supporting Nokia with good feedback if we, the few, think this device has potential in other people's lives.