Yes, I agree with your explanations

It has a huge sales potential. It's highly desired by both customers and developers, and naturally, those in between (cellular providers) would like to be part of this hype for a piece of the pie.

Once the iPhone's ecosystem is 'wedged' in the current cellular cartel's midst, then it will have the bargaining power to split the old power's grip. The beauty of it will be, the 'new market' that iphone will bring at that point will be sufficient for the old power to let go of their old ways and settle for the more open market.

This is very similar to how iTunes broke into the digital music distribution market. Notice there's no DRM on it now?

PS: I'm talking about commoditizing the cellular data to run voip, text messaging apps, and the likes that 'competes' with the cartel's permium services. Not about running free license-less apps in this case. To that end, I think the AppStore has represented the requirements of both developers and customers sufficiently well. It's apparent just by looking at its adoption numbers.

The best N810 price over here at launch (November 2007) was around £290 if you shopped around, but otherwise I agree on all your points. And of course the quid isn't worth what it was back then :-|

My prediction: a "phone" Fremantle device at N97 or slightly higher price and a "tablet" one at around £350-400 (even though they'd be practically identical inside). I would probably buy the latter but there's no way I can justify even £500 for the former since I don't need or want a phone or camera.

But let's wait and see...

Apple is like the hard boiled egg. It shoots through the enemy deference, but is impossible to get in. What follows is the good stuff. Look at what the Apple II did to personal computing. Look what the iPod did. Look what the iPhone did. They all dramatically changed the market in a way no one else could. Before the Apple, no one aside from nerds and businessmen cared about personal computers. Before the iPod, buying music online was risky or illegal, and who knew what type of DRM was on it. Before the iPhone, touchscreen phones were for the nerds, and considered gimmicky and childish. They just made selecting icons easier than a d-pad.

Look how much has changed. Nokia "tried" the tablet. But, the people were not ready. WiFi was not some gold standard. The web 2.0 was just starting. Why the hell would you need a internet tablet? Apple "did" the iPhone. Look what happened.

People who would have never considered a smartphone buy iPhones. Why? I think I know, but I don't.

For all the suggestions about the iPhone vs iTouch.. one with and one without cell phone radio suggestions. Uhhh... I've said it a MILLION times and I STILL think this is the BEST way:

Build ONE device... make it UPGRADEABLE
Sell various radios (GSM, EVDO, WiMax, whatever) you can plug into the upgrade port

DONE!

A LOT cheaper and a LOT more future-proof than building two separate devices.

@danramos: do you think that's in the interest of OEMs? selfish ideas don't thrive.

Yes, corporate carrots are always like that. You want to do something interesting, do it on your own, rather than partake in amorphous corporate plans changing as management shuffles in and out.

In all honesty, I think it WOULD be in the best interest of OEM's if handsets were made to be very basic commodities that could be upgraded now or later to use their service (much like laptops with USB and PCMCIA cards for those same networks or that new mifi device)... only with TABLETS. It would certainly make a general purpose tablet device a more competitive realm where the best network would win over most of the customers. Best of all, it would leave it in the hands of the customer to choose the network.

I mean.. Mind you, it wouldn't be in the best interest of the ONE carrier that Nokia has already married that new crap-*** radio to on that worthless new tablet they're supposed to be releasing (worthless to me, since it's tied a carrier that I'm unlikely to want.. thereby pumping up the price a LOT), but it would be in the best interest of ALL the other carriers.

@danramos: tablet is a super tiny blip in their market view. They'd say something like "Let's see how you grow up first, sonny, then we'll talk". Need more users (ie: potential revenues for them) before we can 'negotiate'.

@ LordRaiden

Right !!

The moment the Tops stop walking ariund the Bottom floor once in a while,
the company is heading for deep trouble.

Then Nokia should lead. Continue to nourish and grow the tablet device instead of being lead by the nose based on iPhone sales success.

Even Apple knows that the iPhone is a "one trick pony" and is busy developing, and soon will release their new tablet device (or "taplet" as the press is now calling it).

Nokia found the sweet spot with device size (pocket-able), display size and resolution (aging population), and battery life.
For the North American and subsidized handset markets they should continue improvements in BT, WiFi, WiMAX, and other non-cell connectivity with the tablets (including mesh networking schemes).

The should also develop low cost, small BT and WiFi tether-able non-smart phones for this market that customers will want and carriers can subsidize @ sub $99 sign up prices.

Again, I'm thinkin' that the iPhone is like the color ink jet printer when it first became viable in the market place. Everybody had to have one in their home. All-in-one scanner, printer, fax machines also became all the rage much like a do it all "smart phone"...

Eventually the market figured out that they were paying a premium for color ink jet cartridges in order to have the ability to create faded color birthday cards and bogus certificates of achievement every once in a while (kind of like a new $10 a month iTunes bill just so you can be sure to have the latest iFart app). The novelty and attraction ended for the public as soon as everybody had a color laser jet.

In the end the market went with small, efficient, purpose built, separate components.