Small point: when you purchase something, you enter into a contract with the supplier. The advertising that they put out (not internet dis-information) is a part of that contract.

So I'd like to ask the people who say that they have not yet recieved the features advertised: why have you not opened a lawsuit against Nokia for failing to provide what they agreed? I don't believe a single person has done this. And I suspect it's because most people realise that the n900 does exactly what it says on the tin, no less, and no more. The 'more' you thought you were buying was in your imagination or assumptions.

Perhaps if nothing else, the disappointed souls have learned something about reading the spec and not making assumptions before making such an expensive purchase.

Personally, I'm looking forward to the first lawsuit "Disgruntled v Nokia" over failure to supply goods fit for puropse as described. (And yes, I know some people had to send their devices back for hardware faults - that's Nokia honouring the contract).