Originally Posted by ifallacy

something interested me while reading wikipedia - apparently the iphone uses the same graphics processing chip as the nokia n800 does:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powervr

Samsung S5L8900 -- MBX + FPU + ARM11

* Apple iPhone

Texas Instruments OMAP2420 -- MBX + VGP + FPU + ARM11
# Nokia E90 Communicator
# Nokia N93
# Nokia N93i
# Nokia N95
# Nokia N800

both use the PowerVR MBX chip, and the only overall difference between the two ARM processors is that the iphone is clocked at 600mhz (compared to the n800's 330)

i wonder if apple has a better api for the MBX chip that we could port over to the n800 (not like they'd let us... but maybe reverse engineered? probably not worth the effort) because OSX and Linux are both *nix based at heart

Originally Posted by torx

Linux uses, well, Linux.

Originally Posted by gattsuru

((I've used an iPhone, but do not own or plan to own one))

The n800 is an internet viewer, with some other functionality added. It's hard to beat for those specific uses.

The iPhone is a phone, with some other functionality added. It's hard to beat for those specific uses.

Video display tends to depend on the use. The n800 is incredible for video or webcam use, thanks to the very high pixel density (1.4 times that of the iPhone) and slightly larger screen. The screen isn't quite as clear, due to the plastic screen cover, but in normal situations this isn't a major issue. The iPhone's lower pixel density makes it less pleasant to watch less compressed video on, and some web pages will not look as good -- and you'll be horizontal-scrolling on every page you get to. On the other hand, text tends to be more readable without zooming in.

The iPhone currently doesn't support Flash, instead using pre-encoded Youtube files in a different format. The n800 does support flash, although framerate can be far from perfect (usually 6 FPS or above for youtube ime). I'd put this one on the n800's side. Flash is important for a lot of navigation tools on the real net, although I'm not happy about that, it is important to remember.

Control schemes are variable. The iPhone probably wins as a base model, as it's easy enough to type with (with a high error rate) quickly, while the stylus tends to be slower. The n800 is far more improvable, though, either through the USB or bluetooth tricks, and those with large or greasy fingers will prefer the stylus over the multitouch system.

When it comes to expandability, the n800 wins, clear and full. You can install user applications, switch out batteries, or carry hundreds of gigabytes worth of SD cards (admittedly, while being driven insane trying to find the right one). The iPhone can dock with stuff. Kinda.

For voice in general, I'd put a tie. Neither of them have really outstanding microphones, but in both cases they're usable and seldom the weakest link compared to the digitalization methods used. For phone use, the iPhone wins simply because it can be a phone without a WiFi. If you just want a phone, the average 20 USD pay-as-you-go phone beats both in terms of normal use. You just can't blind dial with a touch screen, or juggle a bag with a glass sheet in it.

Dealing with data is many times easier with the n800 (or even 770) than the iPhone. Moving a file is as natural as dealing with the file structure we've all come to know and love, and individual files can be moved. Any recent (98 SE or later) Windows version, most Linux installations, and most Mac OS installations can all deal with it, no software installation required. It even works on 64-bit Windows installs, and very old systems need only find a simple USB driver. iPhone has... iTunes. You have to sync the whole thing at once, using special software. Pain in the backside.

Battery life is surprisingly comparable in some comparable uses -- with WiFi on, web browsing the iPhone tends to get around 3 hours, twenty minutes before needing a charge, similar to the n800's three to four hours, and both last 10 days or so on standby -- but varies outside of that. The iPhone can get 4 hours of video or 9 1/2 hours of music, while the n800 tends to go a little lower on that. The iPhone only gets around 5 hours of talk time, though, pretty pathetic compared to your typical phone. Those who plan to use the devices heavily for both media and phone would be advised to get a phone-n800 combo rather than the opposite.

Both the n800 and the iPhone seem pretty physically insecure. Large screens with no hard covers are not particularly pleasant. I'd personally say the n800's feels a bit safer thanks to the recessed screen, but it's a bit harder to clean. In either case, save yourself the lost hair and grab some sort of case. Alternatively, the 770 is much more capable of surviving impact.

Originally Posted by bakerbaker

but the n800 is also good in that you can install your own apps, tether and get 3g speeds, slightly larger screen(but lower resolution) and price.

Originally Posted by Karel Jansens

Now, I know you iPhone (<spit!>) lovers are special, but you guys really should learn to count. The iPhone's (<spit!>) screen is 160 dpi, but the N800's is 200 dpi, or a full 25% higher than the iPhone (<spit!>).

Originally Posted by barry99705

Careful dude, you're going to be swimming any time now. I bet when they release a software update it doesn't break more than it fixes.