Well, if you want always-on (or always-available) Internet, you may be better off buying a data plan. There should be some acceptable data plan, right?

Out of interest, I gave my IT to my daughter (33yo, bright, computer literate) for a couple of days.
She handles a winCE device (which I consider ****) intuitively, as she does a Palm.
She found the IT impossible to fathom. Where's the handbook? How do I set a PW on it? How do I set the time from a timeserver on it? She's going to France, where can she buy some French dictionaries to use when she's out of wifi? Where's the PIM?
She says it's 'dad's toy' and she's right. I love it.
But she's used to a computer being versatile, adapting to a person's needs. The IT doesn't. Yes, it runs Skype. Brilliant. In the UK an SMS via Skype costs 1p less than on a mobile. She has 4 hours no extra cost calls on her mobile. Skype costs more.
She asks me, what is this for? I agree with her, it's dad's tech toy. It's for idiots like me learning Python to write my own apps. It's not for ordinary people and that's why I think that the reviewer was not only right but generous.
The Mac slogan says 'it's the computer for the rest of us'. The IT is the computer for US, the techies, the nerds, the geeks. Like I said, I love it. It's true that Nokia don't sell it as anything but an IT. But times have changed, people expect a lot of technology these days. The Nokia, for me, is a modern ZX-80. That is NOT a criticism.

How the thread drifts... Thanks for bringing it back on track.

What I was saying was that they could sell a boatload more if they added more functionality and marketed it as an all-in-one solution device.

I have a feeling they eventually will but what will that take? The Nokia Internet Tablet 10000? They should have done that from the get-go. Maybe not the 700 because the processor is too slow but from the 800-810 they should have added more functionality/programs. If you look at the progress from the 700-810, in 3 generations, you get a little bit faster processor, a keyboard, a GPS and a little bit more stable OS. Minor hardware changes.

The more stable OS is better (of course)

But, most people have a GPS in one form or another (stand alone or in car) and have no need for a GPS on the NIT.

The keyboard is a nice add on for easier typing (of course).

But, just adding those features is not real "progress" in what they could be offering after 3 generations of the NIT.

When something new comes out to replace an existing device, it should have both hardware as well as software changes. It makes more people want to buy it. (the "oooh look at all the cool new features" factor)

Look at the Ipod. From the original Ipod to the Ipod Touch, they changed the hardware as well as the software improving the functionality. Now they are selling a boatload of Ipod Touch.

Nokia could have done the same with the NIT after 3 generations.

I could have run out and bought an N810. But, I already have a stand alone GPS and didn't see the need to upgrade from my N800 just to add a keyboard.

Speaking as a techie, you want to know what one of the differences is between a techie and a marketing person?

Techies build a device and make it want to do everything it can possibly do, and then try to sell that device to whomever wants to use it in any way it can be used. It doesn't matter to the techie that generic consumers don't know about, nor care about, a concept of a technology. They're going to build it, and people who understand it will use it effectively. The drawback is that only people who understand it will buy it. The advantage is, people who understand it will have an art-like appreciation of how the thing takes on a life of its own, adapting itself to uses that the creator never envisioned.

Marketing people define a product idea and then build a device that implements that product idea. The fact that the device might be capable of acting as more than just that product is irrelevant -- they have a vision, and they're going to adhere to that vision. The advantage being: you can communicate a vision to a generic consumer, you can't communicate a technology to them. Once you communicate it to them, you can sell it to them.

Guess why it is that marketing people run successful companies more often than techies do. Guess why that, in a natural-selection kind of way, determines both the cutting edge of each new era of technology (where everything is all potential and revolutionary), and the more practical phase after the cutting edge passes (where everything is about practical applications and narrow product definitions).

Whether or not the NIT can be more is irrelevant. What is relevant is: what kind of product Nokia wants to sell. It's sad, but it's true.

If you want to change the landscape, you're not going to be successful by saying "this thing is a piece of crap as a PDA, why wont Nokia fix all of its weaknesses as a PDA?" because Nokia doesn't sell a PDA, they sell an Internet Tablet. If you want to change the landscape, you have to convince Nokia that they want to sell a PDA.

Umgh, not really, not the last sentence. Nobody gives a damn about your vision (as we as about your device, for techie types) unless it solves somebody's problem. The techie approach does have a bit of advantage here as a techie device can be retargeted to a new "vision". This, as I understand, is what eventually happened with iPaqs. As for the marketing approach, may I remind you of Pepper Pad or Palm Foleo?

You proved my point.

The Pepper Pad is a device which doesn't have a market, exactly like a techie driven product. Someone built it under the delusion that "if you build a better mouse trap, the world will beat a path to your door". Not a lot of people are beating a path to their door, because no one has a need for that device. Technologically, ergonomically, etc. it's a great thing. What's the market?

The Foleo was canceled because the marketing people realized it didn't have a market, regardless of whether or not it would have been a techie novel device. (though we could argue about whether or not their realization was accurate, Eee might have proven them wrong, but the point is: without a marketing vision, the marketing people didn't have a product they could sell, so they yanked it without regard to whether or not it was a technologically sound device ... because they didn't believe they could sell it)

Well, if you call any device that does not have a market "a techie device", then maybe I have proven your point under these constraints.

But this contradicts your initial statement. You divided devices into do-it-all-no-purpose "techie" devices and "marketing" devices with a "vision". Well, Pepper Pad did have a vision: the vision of accessing the web and email away from your desk. That was all it was supposed to do. And... mhmmm... that vision did not have a market. Notice that there were numerous other devices with the same vision and they all failed. I hope Nokia's IT marketing team is aware of this.

May I politely point out that Foleo was only canceled after they burned a shitload of money on it? That is a bit different from just being canceled as a "pure vision"...

Anyways, both Pepper and Foleo were "vision" devices, not "techie" devices. They both failed. So, basing your product on a vision does not guarantee success. That is the whole point.

No, it is not.

The point is you wont get anywhere trying to convince them that their product isn't very good at being an X, when they have no intention of it ever being an X. If you want them to make a good X, you have to figure out how to convince them that they should be selling an X.

Convincing them that the NIT is a web device, and other web devices (PepperPad, Foleo, etc.) all failed, so they better make it a better PDA ... might only convince them to cancel the NIT, because you've just convinced them that web devices fail, without also convincing them that they should be in the PDA business.

The point is: you have to learn how to talk to your target audience if you ever hope to get them to do what you want.

If by "them" you mean Nokia, I have no personal plans to convince Nokia of anything. Just leisurely observing things as they go on.

Maybe they should start by figuring out what the target audience is and what it (the audience) wants...