Understood... but in reading many of the complaints I get the feeling that there's a general misunderstanding over how the consumer devices industry works-- especially when the device in question is new.

There is always a risk that the Unknown will impact the first units distributed. Not necessarily the first ones produced, because test launch tends to occur under a microscope. During trial runs the bugs are expected to be ironed out so that consumers won't see defects-- and for the most part that works.

The problems such as those you guys are seeing typically occur when the process has been proven out but some fluke occurs-- in this case, with a supplier. It's not cost effective anymore to do 100% incoming screening so what's called an AQL (acceptable quality level) inspection is performed that balances the expectations of the customer against the needs of production. 95% of the time this is effective-- which is what I base my own confidence on here (not to mention direct experience with thousands of N800s).

Now, what can happen (and did) is that a supplier provides a defective component (touchscreen) but due to luck of the draw the small number of products affected are not found in the AQL sample. Now, AQL sampling is designed to provide a significant level of confidence that you are failing an inspection for the right reasons-- NOT to justify passing it (the default).

Next, that small batch of missed defective products is shipped out to the wild and stocked at various retailers, in all probability widely dispersed. Early adopters, unwilling to wait for the market to shake out such typical occurances, unwittingly buy the initial defective devices. Their next recourse is to congregate in a forum such as this one, creating the perception that the problem is pervasive. However, before they've even done so, the issue has been discovered internally as more are produced and corrective/preventive/containment measures are taken. Early in a device's life there won't be enough in the wild to justify a recall, so cases are handled as they are brought up. If this had happened later, odds are there would be many, many more devices affected and a recall would be more likely.

Now, that's all well and good IF the company involved has a robust reverse logistics system, which Nokia does in the case of phones. However, for reasons unknown to even me, gaps occurred with the tablets. I will make no excuse for this. There are the usual contributing factors, but they should have been addressed. The one comment I will reiterate is that, unfortunately, the tablet was launched just as its original packing factory was being shut down. No doubt that contributed to some issues-- but it also supports my assertion that many defects are "blips" that, once the new factory gets used to the product, will smooth out.

Bad devices happen. I can guarantee you all that there are no more than 5% defectives out there, period, and this is acceptable to most consumer device manufacturers. If that wasn't the case, cost would be significantly higher-- we'd be talking about a $600 USD tablet, not $400. That said, the repair/replacement process needs fixing. I am not happy that you all have encountered problems there. I will do what I can in that area but it isn't much I'm afraid. I suggest you all make as much noise with Nokia as possible, in any reasonable venue. BUT: keep in mind angry rants are counterproductive. You need to keep your complaints objective and fact-based.

Sorry for the "novel". I'm hoping it helped.

EDIT: and please note that I in no way meant a slam at "early adopters"-- I'm one myself.