kenny goo

@kenosando

You're completely missing the point here. It doesn't matter if it's subsidized. And I don't care if you need to make some overarching statement that "most people won't agree with me" simply because you have no logical way to defend your illogical point. The fact of the matter is if you know what carrier you want, buying either device will give you the exact same thing: a phone that isn't under contract.

Further, I'm not attacking anyone. But people who post ridiculous, irrelevant prices on phones and ask me rhetorical questions in a condescending manner are gonna be called out for trolling my comments. Simple as that. JFH? I wouldn't attack him because it's obvious to me he's an intelligent individual who just has a differing opinion from me, and we can engage in an intelligent discussion because of that. From everything you've said so far I don't think you're one of those people.

Moving back to the point of all this in the first place, like I've said on other posts before, a world phone is nice, and an unlocked world phone is even better, but only a very small portion of people are going to demand that. I think niche is a term that categories the N8 very well. Symbian appeals to a very niche demographic in the US. USB On-The-Go appeals to a very niche demographic. HDMI out and Dolby Digital plus appeal to a very small number of people. And yes, a phone that you can swap between carriers or take overseas appeals to few people's needs.

It's just the reality of the situation. I would love for HTC to sell an unlocked world phone packing the newest incarnation of Android and one of their industry leading QWERTY keyboards, but regardless of what it is I'm not paying $550+ for it. I would rather buy an unlocked device and a device you can flip between carriers but the barrier to entry is too high in most cases. I can probably expect the G1 Blaze to be $450-$500 off contract through T-Mobile, but the "HTC Vision" will probably hit Amazon and Newegg for at least $200 more than that. It's just not worth it to me.

I could have believed it, but the idea of a 7" iPad Mini/Super iPod Touch with a Cortex-A9 processor that's more powerful than every other iOS device Apple sells is just ridiculous. There's no way that's gonna happen. I honestly believe the first iOS device with a Cortex-A9 is gonna be the 2nd Gen iPad, if not the 5th Gen iPhone.

I would *love* to see a new big three of four in the US for media players be Apple (iPod), Microsoft (Zune), and Sony (Walkman) and/or Samsung (Galaxy). Sony and Samsung only have Asian presence right now. They gotta bring these things to the sates. The Galaxy S is an awesome piece of hardware.

So for all the other smartphones out there with 5:3 and 16:9 displays (rather than 3:2) this mean we're gonna start seeing 960x540 resolutions now? I'm all for that. Getting closer and closer to WXGA! Lol.

This is actually kinda cool. Price seems right. Some low end kinda-sorta-smartphone users might like this.

Sounds like a pretty good deal to me.

BULLSHIT. Fucking corrupt ass school government protecting their own. Shocker.

@kenosando

First off, you're full of shit. 99.999% huh? Really now? I'm sorry, but if I come to a page about a Nokia phone (which most people are going to ignore simply due to a lack of caring about all things Nokia), and I post a comment that's not in support of Nokia or whatever the article is about, all the people that can't just accept and appreciate their Nokia products, who actually feel the need to defend them because they're insecure in their purchases, are going to down vote me.

If you post comments on Engadget, you know that more often than not the voting system is abused to attempt and remove things that people disagree with. Not spam. Not trolls. Just anything you disagree with. Apple fanboys. Nokia fanboys. Google fanboys. Microsoft fanboys. They all do it. Given you're insinuating that my comments are downvoted because I'm trolling, I get the impression that you honestly believe that is the case, and more than likely the reason why I get downvoted is because of people like you. People who downvote anything they disagree with because of their insecurity with their purchases, their opinions, or a combination there of.

Moving on. You can't compare carrier subsidized phones that come with a contract to unlocked phones purchased directly through the manufacturer. You can however compare an off contract phone you buy from a carrier to a phone you buy direct from the manufacturer. I don't care what spin or justification you put on it. At the end of the day, both devices are purchased without a contract, and at the end of the day they are directly comparable on a price and feature stand point. Period. End of discussion. You are wrong.

If you know what carrier you're going to purchase your phone from, and the phone is available from that carrier, it doesn't matter if the phone can only be used on that carrier. You make it seem like people are switching carriers left and right every day, which you aren't. And even if you are that stupid, you only have two major options in the US with the N8: AT&T or T-Mobile. If you like Verizon or Sprints service and you want to go with that, that's too bad, because Nokia doesn't offer an N8 that will work with those carriers. You can however buy a Galaxy S phone on each and every major carrier in the US.

So no. Put away your Mobile City Online prices and let's look at the facts here. If I want to go with AT&T, you can buy the Samsung Captivate for $500, or you can buy the Nokia N8 for $550. In more ways than not, the Captivate is a superior device, and since the N8 cost more, not less, I think that price is too high. If you like the feature set of the N8, and think $550 is reasonable, so be it, but that doesn't change the raw specs and the facts here. At all.

It's all about money. If Verizon can make *any* amount of money by making a rather trivial change, they will. If that's from more DVR subscribers or by pocketing more money by having both Cisco and Motorola devices in the same market, they'll do it.

My point still stands. It's not some conspiracy theory, it's business. Money adds up and every dollar counts. Simple as that.

So wait, you're gonna have like Microsoft sanctioned games just like Xbox Live Arcade on the 360, where you can actually get achievements and there's demos and everything? Well then does that mean that the equivalent of Community Games will just come in the form of apps developed with Silverlight, XNA, and .NET on the App Marketplace? And I guess those wont have achievements or direct Xbox Live integration then, huh? Well that makes sense I guess.