There's some room for complaining about the "smartphone" classification. Most Symbian-based phones would not qualify as smartphones in the US. I'm on my third

There's some room for complaining about the "smartphone" classification. Most Symbian-based phones would not qualify as smartphones in the US. I'm on my third, and they're pretty smart, but not having touchscreens really puts them in a separate market segment. And those phones run Qt, too, which this analysis lumps in with MeeGo. So, if you counted up just the people Nokia has working on touchscreen phones, you might find it about matches the iPhone team. Which, mind you, is still not a ringing endorsement of Nokia's efficiency. My N86 has some advantages (1) over, say, my wife's Android phone (a Backflip running 2.1), but Android has a lot more room to improve. (1) Mostly quality of the phone UI, as opposed to computer UI. For example, the N86's voice control works with my headset. On Android, voice dialing requires you pull out the phone and press a button; with Symbian, you can just push the button on the headset. I now consider that essential; if I had to drive without a feature like that, I wouldn't be able to make calls.