Well, there's always SMSes with ASCII art.

There's e-mail -- I know it may be shocking, but I could use email with my S40 phone. You could post it online and SMS a link. And, if those are too awkward (and they may well be, if you find yourself sharing many pictures with friends with lame phones), you were SOL for a few months (at which time arguing about this made sense), but there is support now.

At this point, now that the support is here, arguing about who uses it and doesn't seems utterly pointless -- the fact is, everyone who wants to use it now can. It's just as irrelevant to point to that historical period now as it is to point to the equivalent period in the iPhone's history (and FWIW, I, no fan of Apple or most iStuff, find it incredibly lame when someone tries to mock Apple for that mistake now).

Now the argument has moved on: Why does it matter that MMS support has come from a developer in the community instead of a corporation that's guaranteed to stop releasing updates at some point, and whose development process has shown pronounced, shall we say, "resilience" to all feature requests from the outside? On second thought, it clearly does matter -- but how can you think the situation we have is the worse one?

(For one tiny example of why Nokia shouldn't in-house this sort of thing, albeit one burned brightly in my memory, look up the saga of the bluetooth applet sometime... Brief summary from Karel Jansens quoted here)

Nonsense. Consumers demand all sorts of things, but they don't often get them unless there's risk of them going elsewhere to for them -- i.e. competition. Both were involved, and stating that it was only a response to consumers is at least as misleading as stating that it's competition.