Quick comparison: N800 v. iPod touch

Ever since the iPod Touch was introduced last Wednesday, people have been "philosophizing" about just what the newest iPod on the block is and and isn't. They've also been comparing the device to numerous other devices on the market. Perhaps the most rampant comparisons, at least in this part of the woods, are those between the iPod touch and the Nokia N800 Internet tablet (fun fact: an oddly large number of the Ars writing staff uses the N800). It is for this reason that we are going to take this opportunity to do a precursory comparison--look for an in-depth Ars Technica review of the iPod Touch in the coming weeks--between the two devices.

We want so badly for the iPod touch to be a Nokia N800. How close is it? Let's take a look at what we know about the N800 and what we think we know about the iPod touch (some of the information is speculation, while some is based on the iPhone. This information is noted by an asterisk).

	N800	iPod touch
CPU	330MHz TI Omap 2420 Arm	400MHz Arm*
RAM	128MB	128MB*
Storage	256MB	8GB/16GB
Expansion	SD Slot x2	None
Screen Size	4.1"	3.5"
Screen Res.	800x480 (227.55 DPI)	480x320 (164.83 DPI)
Dimensions	144x75x13mm	110x61.8x8mm
Weight	206 g	120 g
OS	Maemo Linux	OS X
SDK	Open	Closed
Wireless Conn.	802.11b/g BT 2.0	802.11b/g
Wired Conn.	USB 2.0	Apple Dock Connector
Cost	$399	$299/$399
Built-In Camera	Yes	No
Built-In Microphone	Yes	No*

CPU Speed is a funny thing in that it isn't necessarily going to tell us which device is faster. While the iPod's 400MHz processor seems faster on paper, it is hard to say which device is more responsive until we have some benchmarks of similar tasks. Things like system optimization and GPU utilization can of course make the CPU seem faster than it really is. Add to this the fact that we still aren't sure what processor is inside of the touch or the iPhone and we could be comparing Apples to Oranges.

RAM is another variable thing. The amount of RAM in both devices is the same, but RAM speed and amount of RAM being used by a shared video system are unknown. For now its a draw.

At first glance, the storage advantage goes, without question, to the iPod touch with capacities up to 16GB, while the N800 only has a meager 256MB of storage on-board. However, for some, this advantage is all but negated by the N800's two SD expansion slots. While SD cards are certainly coming down in price, it would be nice if the N800 came with more storage by default. If you do want to use the iPod touch as a video-playing device, those two expansion slots would come in handy.

As much as the display is marveled over on the iPhone, the N800 is no slouch. When directly compared, the screen size and resolution is superior on the N800. The only issue some might have is that the N800's 1/2" larger screen ads some girth to the device, but 800x480 makes the device more functional in our eyes. Then again, it sure can't zoom in and out in the same way that the touch will.

Here is where the iPod touch becomes so desirable: dimensions and weight. The N800 isn't a device that suffers from undesirable looks, but the iPod touch is just so good-looking, sleek, and light. It's hard for that not to skew one's normally clear-headed decision making.

This is where it gets dangerous: OS and SDK. The OS of the iPod touch is presumably a "watered down" variation of OS X like the iPhone, while the N800 runs Linux. This isn't the Battlefront, so I wont get into the debate here, but obviously both of these choices have their benefits. The SDK at this point has to be given to the N800 as the iPhone's closed system isn't doing developers any favors (despite efforts from hackers) and Linux is open by nature.

If I were to go through all these points, this would be more of a review than a journal post. That, and I honestly don't have the experience with either device to offer that sort of thing. Perhaps the comparison between the two devices is unfair, as the N800 is an Internet tablet while the iPod touch is, fundamentally, a portable music player. Nonetheless, the comparisons are going to be made, perhaps because so many of us long for the N800's functionality with Apple's elegance. Unfortunately, with the apparent lack of some features, it isn't quite there yet. Rev. B anyone?