The Droid worked fine for me, well, the (2) that I had in the (2) weeks that I had them. My only problem, after installing 3rd party email client and Task scheduler, was with reception (native email client is buggy and lacking). Phone was stable, web browsing was speedy, and with the help of the "Market", it suited my needs as far as features and "fun factor".

People like to rag AT&T, but in my town, in the Balt/DC corridor, I have no issues with reception on my Motorola Q...and up and down the east coast for that matter. iPhone reception issues are due to "the phone". The same could be said for the DROID, which dropped connection if (4) different spots around town, had intermittent signal loss while at my house, and struggled to keep "1 bar" at my mom's house 2 miles away. We both live less than (2) miles from (2) different Verizon stores.

That said, I think that "out of the box", the n900 has more to offer. In the (2) days that I had it (USB port detached from cirucuit board), once I loaded my email accounts, and configured WiFi, etc, I had a feeling of, "that's it"? It suited my needs, but there was no "fun factor" to it...it just gets the job done. The Droid has much more mass appeal, especially with the "search/Google" integration (et. al.). I think much of the complaining about the Droid however can be attributed to "user not reading manual, understanding how to navigate the interface, and using the Market to resolve the phone's deficiencies."

I think both phones suffer from lack of engineers/designers sitting with focus groups, though I'm sure that stems from management setting difficult target dates.