WRONG. You said something about how you had to look at the Apple iPod Touch in order to use it.

Are you honestly saying that you don't have to look at an internet tablet!?

Your statement about that was moot. You have to look at both of them. It's that simple. I don't see why you can't grasp that.

Bringing up random points about things that are actually similar in the both of them is quite a stupid endeavor. I don't care who you know, what you know... read what I'm saying in the simple English I'm using above.

You touch the touchscreen on the iPod Touch. You use a stylus or you touch the touchscreen on the Nokia internet tablet.

At the base of that comparison, it's the very same darn thing. I triple dog dare you to say otherwise. Nokia's claim in this whole thread has been the screen... which is also a touch screen.

That's what you said. If you want wheels, buttons and other hardware doodads, then even the Nokia internet tablet is wrong for you. It has a touch screen... right?

And since you seem to think that you've stated the same thing over and over, here's the problem.

I have a Nokia 770. It's my second one. I'm happy with it.

Nokia could have had a better product out by now instead of having it compared foolishly to the Apple iPod Touch. A properly placed product would not have to endure stupid comparisons as such. I didn't see UMPC comparisons to the iPod Touch... do you?

No. Because the UMPC is an understood product. Nokia released this out into the world and the hackers, early adopters, and other esoteric and notoriously closed groups that don't communicate to the rest of the non-technical world all too well, as the group(s) that would explain what the Nokia internet tablet truly was.

And the communication department/definition of what an internet tablet is quite honestly a failure. I'd say that it's almost relegated to early adopter Linux scoffery in most cases - if you remember that. Simply put, either you know what it is... or you don't. And that's just very sad for the Nokia products. They're wonderful to me. The iPod Touch is a totally different sector.

Again, it's all laid out in plain English. Don't twist my words for some other agenda.

I've never suggested that. I just hope that Nokia makes up for the wasted time between the Nokia N800 and the iPod Touch. They could have properly defined a segment and they didn't. People want a PDA, or they want a iPod with wifi/bluetooth, or they seem to want a Linux handheld that's so entirely hackable that they can make it into a laptop replacement... and it could have been more definite than it is right now.

That's my take, flame/destroy/misunderstand as you wish. Simple English was utilized. Promise