That's true, regarding the N800 also being an N series device. But it still seems pretty obvious to me that Nokia is going at a different, much broader consumer market, with the N900, as compared to the N800. They're going after customers that might purchase something like the N97. So they have a different set of expectations to fulfill.

Also, the N800 didn't have a camera in it. And the N900 with Maemo 5 is clearly a huge reworking of the features and interface on the N800, N810. A reworking that again is trying to appeal to a much broader audience.

So given the many many features that Nokia did put into the camera applicaiton, even a first like autofocus with video, it's remains to me just a bit curious to leave out a random smattering of previously standard features like more than two image resolution settings, a self-timer, and contrast controls. All I suggested was that maybe this reflects that Nokia is rushing the N900 out the door a bit. It's hard to imagine a deliberate reason for leaving these features out. And maybe Nokia doesn't care, because this is more of a developer's/early-adopter's platform and a step to Maemo 6 and the N920 or whatever comes next. That would certainly be congruent with people's assertion Nokia is still working on the transition from Symbian to Maemo.

But again, it had been asserted earlier in this thread that the N900 camera is essentially equivalent to the N97. And that doesn't quite seem to be true. So for anyone who cares about the camera, that's relevant information. Of course, the N900 also has some better features (like higher resolution video and video auto-focus).

Yes it did. <snicker, snicker> Sorry, it's hard to say that the webcam on the N800 (or on the N900 honestly) is a "camera" without laughing...

You mean the front facing camera on the N900? It seems like the main camera is pretty decent, for a cell phone, my criticisms notwithstanding.

Anyway, perhaps it was porting the webcam applicatioin to be the camera application for the N900 that accounts for it's odd omission of random features. (I'm joking too.)

I'm the one that said the N900 and N97 cameras were basically identical. I meant hardware wise. Its not exactly the same, but typical of what Nseries flagship users have seen the last few years.

I don't think people get Maemo. First, the camera app was prerelease. Wait for the final retail firmware and then let's talk. Also, being open source, apps will always improve, and on a regular basis, because this is open source. From the look of the camera app, it looks as if Nokia plans to mimick the N97 camera's feature set. Even if they don't, we can make our own. THIS is the entire point of Maemo, and something no other smartphone OS can claim to allow as easily. As long as Nokia allows us to use its processing algorithms, I'd prefer a community camera app with a beastly set of features over the same camera app I've been using for 5 years.

Look, I am a long time Linux user. Debian used to be my main distribution. This is what interests me in the N900 and Maemo. So I get what Maemo is about.

But I think it is completely relevant to 1) want to know and 2) question what features are actually implimented in the N900 camera application when you buy it. If Nokia wants me to fork over $600 for a phone, saying maybe it will be fixed later by the community is not good enough. The value of the open source community is all the cool applications and modifications that might come down the line later. But that doesn't just let Nokia off the hook for shipping a device with incomplete features. For $600 and an N series phone, it's not unreasonable to expect the camera application to have the same features that have become standard for a long time in other N series devices, with high end camera hardware. Nokia is selling this as a consumer device, not a development platform.

So I wish people would stop saying I don't understand Maemo. It's really condescending. I understand it very well. I just don't agree that expecting the community to fill in the blanks on the camera application at some unknown future time is good enough for $600 and a device like this. I think it reveals, what has been said plenty of times in this forum anyway, that the N900 and Maemo 5 do not represent a real, final, consumer product for Nokia. Maemo 6 and the next device(s) are the real goal. And that's fine. But I think $600 it's a bit much to ask of people for what is essentially an unfinished product.

Also, it's not even clear that Maemo 6 will actually run on the N900, when it comes along. In this respect, the Maemo project is not entirely like other opensource projects and distributions on the desktop, which can be continuously upgraded on the same hardware. And I'm pretty certain that if Maemo 6 is the real end goal, when it comes along, a lot of developers are going to jump ship. So this further makes it relevant to be wary of whether or not the features I'd like to see will ever make it onto the N900.

I don't buy products because of how they might be in the future. I buy them because of how they are now. Even with Linux on the desktop, I don't use it because of options it may have in the future, I use it because of options it has now. I've never had anybody in the Linux world say to me, well you should use Debian because in the future it might do what you want. People point you to real, existing, already functional projects.

cb474, I'm not talking about you in particular. That's why I said "people". I do think alot of people have expectations born from commercial ecosystems and a MS Apple world. There is little trust for the platform minders because users have no invested interest in it. We have to unlearn some instinctive behaviors. But just as well, we should expect the camera to match the features of previous flagship models.

Now we haven't seen the final camera app, so we just may be jumping to conclusions. Secondly, we don't know Nokia's development roadmap for the camera app. The missing features may be planned for later implementation, or available as add-ons. We just can't say until we get the devices in our hands.

I see your point on a desire for instant satisfaction. If you pay, you should get what you want, so I'm with you there. I look at tech in terms of possibilities and limitations. The more possibilities and less limitations, the better suited to my tastes it will most likely be. Different strokes for different folks. Some iFolks like to be told what to like, so we're all different, and there's always going to be alternatives for this reason.

Okay, thanks for the clarification. In posts above, people kept telling me I wasn't getting what Maemo is about, because I criticized the camera application and some of it's odd (almost random seeming) omissions, which made it seem incomplete or rushed out the door to me. So I thought you were agreeing with those posts.

It's true we haven't seen the final camera application. Here's hoping.

I totally appreciate that Maemo has a lot of potential, given it's Linux based opensource nature. That's what attracts me to the N900. But history is filled with technology that has potential and never goes anywhere, for one reason or another. There are plenty of applications in the Linux world I've waited to see certain features implimented and it's never happened. So I just don't know that the potential of Maemo let's Nokia off the hook for an imcomplete camera app (assuming the features mentioned in posts above are not in the final shipping version of the N900). To me, the potential of Maemo lets Nokia off the hook for not having an app store with much in it yet. Or for not having tons of plugins available for the browser. Things like that.

I also think there's a difference between potential and incompleteness. For example, with Linux, I expect my desktop environment to have certain basic elements. A working file manager, a panel with menus, a window manager. If one of those things was missing, it would be odd. (I realize that's a bit of a hyperbolic example, I'm just trying to make a point.) So I don't think this is about instant satisfaction. This is about whether something is really functional yet or not. You know, a bunch of chips not put together on a motherboard have a lot of potential, but you couldn't sell them as a computer.

I'm not saying this is the state of the N900. I'm just saying, it is a little bit the state of the camera application. It has odd and random omissions. Given that Nokia put such good camera hardware in the N900 and bothered to create a camera app at all, I would have thought they would have done something more comparable to what's in the N97, etc. They know what needs to be there. They implimented most of it on the N900. Why leave out a self-timer, more than two image resolution choices, and contrast controls (amongst a few other things as well), but include the first in a Nokia device of autofocus in video? It really creates an impression of, we didn't have time to finish this, but we're shipping anyway.

While digging for standard icons for various services for Shepherd I ran into a few camera icons suggesting some (currently disabled) resolutions:

The video resolutions are 800x480, 640x480 and 320x240
The camera resolutions are 5, 3.5 (wide), 3 and 1.3 megapixels

Doesn't mean much, but hey, at least we know somebody in Nokia was/is at some point thinking about extra resolutions

Thanks. Could that possibly be something buried in Maemo for future possible devices?

Either a device (less likely) or a future cam firmware update (which was hinted at the Summit as coming this year).