OG Baby

Many of the rebuttals to the "ipod touch is not a tablet" argument are along the lines of "if you hack it...."

In my mind, that line of thinking is entirely irrelevant to this discussion.

Because if you hack it.... Apple can (and has) arbitrarily decide to disable your device at their whim. Not to mention they will refuse to repair (HAH! everyone knows iPods are built to be replaced, not repaired) your device if they can show it's been hacked.

Now voiding your warranty for it, that's lame, but at least marginally justifiable. Outright disabling your device? That's just freaking evil and spiteful.

In my mind, this makes hacking the device an untenable solution for the vast majority of the population.

I will agree that a non-cellular freemantle device would be helpful for the development community.

If I was ever masochistic enough to get into the game of craps that is iPhone development/app store approval, I'd buy a iPod Touch.

Likewise, developers pleased enough with their existing phone would be more likely to develop for Maemo if they could get a cheaper device, certainly.

That said, the price difference between phone and non-phone n900's still wouldn't be nearly as great as in the iPhone/iPod ecosystem, precisely because the n900 will function without ever putting in a SIM card or signing a contract.

A developer wanting to get an iPhone (instead of the Touch) has to shell out over $1000+ over the course of the contract to use it in an Apple Approved manner.

This was the point I was trying to get at, even from the development perspective, the large price commitment from iPhone vs iPod Touch is almost entirely due to the carrier exclusivity deals and locked-down nature of the device.

I'm all for more options, bring on the tablet. Just want to point out that much of the reasoning on this forum used to justify "Nokia should...." are based on assumptions resulting from Apple's anti-consumer practices rather than true reflections of the technology and economics involved.