I agree with you Krosis, while I don't miss the features myself (I have never sent nor received an MMS in my life). It is something I feel that should be there though (Even though I would continue not to ever use it). Though if it costs me alot of money to add it then I would prefer not to have it.

Comparing it to other OS/phones on the level isn't a way to justify it either. Shouldn't you strive to be better than your competitors? Not on the same level on them?

We are talking about S40 and the mass market.

I bet MMS is far, far more popular that video calling. And I also bet MMS is far more cheaper than video calling.

It is as simple as the wiki describes. There is something called "officially supported"; which is now evaded.

Doesn't anybody think that it would be a collossal feat if Nokia pulled out a full-feature stack out of the hat in the FIRST phone-capable edition ? I mean, If you can fully replicate in-house in a year or two the near-complete functionality of OSes *designed* for phones then something is very wrong. Maemo is treading uncharted waters here, if you expect the first phone edition of ANY OS will wipe the floor with the others (remember, the iPhone didn't win on feature parity either), you're underestimating the complexity of a 2010 smartphone.

This "video calling" is a "standard" feature? How is "milliard UMTS" more standard than Jabber or SIP (Gizmo) video calling? This is the first time I've even heard of this other video calling, how can it be considered a part of a "standard" telephony stack?

Almost every device now have MMS support, even in the low end segment. Video calling support devices from mid to high end - those ones with 3G and front camera. That's a lot of them. You guys don't use MMS so you don't have a feeling that something is missing. I know a lot of friends that use MMS. It's not a deal breaker, i agree, but standard feature IS missing.

It does not matter that mid to high end devices support video calling. What matters is if the feature is used. I don't think it is used much because its quite expensive...

In my country price of the video calls is the same as the price of ordinary calls.

I always thought that (in our particular case) the only reason for that was that nobody used it, and the operators are trying to 'seed' video call usage so they can charge later. Remember, SMS (and later MMS) sending was free until a few years ago for the same reason.

I think it's inappropriate to say that a feature doesn't matter just because you or those you know don't use it, as such a small sample can't and doesn't represent all the possible consumers of this device. Like someone said earlier in this thread, as long as some people use that feature and will be affected by its absence, it should be included in order to reach the widest market possible (especially if the device is to be considered high-end and the best/most complete out there). For instance, I'm sure that the vast majority of the people who will buy the N900 won't use Xterm. Does that mean that it shouldn't be included?

After reading the first 20 pages of this now 45 page thread, I must say I am apalled and really disappointed in quite a few of the profiles on this forum. Such hostility is not becoming and t.m.o. should be better than this.

Eldar delivered the goods before anyone else did, which he of couse could not have done if he were playing by Nokias rules while under a NDA. That he as a journalist protects his sources is a GOOD thing, not a questionable one. The review was extensive. He was quite positive, and this site was more or less praising him, and most certainly totally crying in joy about seeing all his screenshots.

And then, a little bit later, he says the device is more unstable than a N97. And all of a sudden he's antichrist, a liar and certainly doesn't know anything about the N9x0s or Maemo. And if you say "man may have a few points", you get broadsided by the entire active community, like you're an Eldar spy/troll.

You know where I expect this kind of behaviour? At a Sony forum. At an Apple forum. But not here.

This is not up to your usual standards, guys. The previewer has had access to a device, and the instabilities in it has bothered him. You guys make him look like Galileo Galilei.

This device is the first phone with Maemo. It _will_ have child diseases. If you believe anything else, you're wearing pink glasses. If it angers you that people finds some of these...

Then you should look into your inner self and ask yourself, what rational reason do i have to get angry about someone claiming their device is unstable?

There is no rational reason for anger and enmity. Regardless of brand, OS, or how the person got his device in the first place.