I've noticed that when it comes to advancing electronics, there's often a cheap, unknown-brand version that's ahead of the curve and has all the features that the expensive ones _should_ have. For DVD players, there was a Cyberhome one, which played DivX, was region-free convertible, supported CMYK and progressive-scan, etc. back when only the expensive ones did that. And it cost around $20. I got a cheap 17" LCD (around $200) back in the '90s. And there are those cheapo Flash mp3 players that have voice recorders and FM radio, which show up under numerous brand aliases. I think these are often made by big companies as concept devices, then rebranded to distance them from the company.
Of course, the common thing between all of these products (and the reason for the rebranding) is that they stop working (hardware failure) after a few years. But how is that effectively any different from the top-of-the line, chic hardware that you're just gonna replace in the same amount of time?
The difference that puts most people off is that these cheaper devices often come in a boxier case and an unpolished user interface. The difference that matters to me is that you actually get the features that are technologically feasible at the time, instead of waiting until some huge company decides that you should be allowed to have it.

However, I can't wait to see multitouch on more devices. In winter, though, are you going to take off your gloves just to answer your phone or change the song?

How 'bout putting yourself out on a limb and making some predictions based on rumor and innuendo ? ?

Dual cameras for video conferencing ?
GPS integration with Google maps ?
Size ? Keyboard ?

There was nothing in your article that surprised anyone who has been following iPhone 3G rumors.

The Grouse seems to be in the group of people who prefers the maximum number of features, as opposed an overall quality of experience. May I suggest the Nokia N95? You can probably find all your feature list checkboxes checked with the N95. Problem is, the N95 is not remotely as seamless an experience as using the iPhone.

Personally, I much prefer the iPhone approach. I've never replaced a cellphone battery anyway, my iPhone battery life is fine, I'm not concerned about adding a memory card, I never particularly used MMS messages anyway. I don't want a fat cell phone so that its photos can be slightly less crappy than before.

Even though I'm looking forward to 3G, I'm so focused on using text-centric RSS (via Google reader), that the current iPhone bandwidth works fine for me, even when I don't have WiFi. Cut & paste is something I really do want though.

The iPhone is hands-down the best phone I've ever owned, and probably the best electronic gadget, too.

I think the Grouse is short-sighted here. It's fashionable to grouse about a very popular device, but the iPhone gets far more right than it gets wrong...