Why are Nokias overpriced and have rubbish cameras??

I tried to buy one with a good camera and the only one i saw was a 7250 circa £170 and the camera is cr*pola and the screen is not much better either What one has a good camera under 200GBP __________________ What do you want your camera 4, some are better at displaying on their own screen some are VGA and look ok for e-mail, they all look bad printed. And to those who say its not worth owning a phone with a camera, who I'm sure will post here.......... Dont buy one. __________________ Just wait for the megapixel camera phones, they wont be long. As all networks upgrade to EDGE the data transfer speeds will be increased dramatically, They technology exists today to produce Megapixel camera phones but the public need to get use to MMS & video MMS first, They cannot introduce good quality cameras/video cameras until the networks can handle sending the images/videos from the phones. I estimate in 9 months megapixel phones will be on the market from a number of manufactures. Once they are here you will have nothing to complain about! __________________ why, it's started a long time ago, in the earlier year when you bought a phone, like philips, sagem, bosch, alcatel, even motorola you had a difficult phone, no easy UI, no real line-up, in these day's small screens, but for the rest those device were quite good (i speek 4 - 6 y ago) qua building quality, reception etc. Nokia started with a easy to use interface even a child can use it (remember the 5110, 6110, 7110 etc. ). If you buy an nokia 5110 - 3310 - 7210 etc, they are all based on the same UI, so easy for people to swap fones. That in combination with a great marketing stratagie, and popular inovation things like X-press cover and B/W Images, even SMS - ASCII art, and good contacts with mobile operators. and offcourse good mobile phones with good building quality, i still know people using a 5110 (came on the marked in 1998)... So they became number one, /I know some people will disagree but this is my vision how Nokia reached the top. But most nokia's were already quite expencive those years, but that didn't matter for people who bought such phones, who could afford it anyway in the late 90's (iq 1995 - 1998), people with money... and because they were expencive and others know it was expencive, more people want it. people wanna show they have money, and it's still so... (just look at the 8850/8910, these are real show-off's) "Ohhh, you've got a nokia?, cool man"... Until they launched the 3210, but more the 3310, build quality 2/10, looks 7/10, features 7/10, interface 9/10, populatity 10/10, this was a huge succes, millions were sold, cassa cassa for nokia... A small mobile, with easy interface, lot of fun features, no antenna and covers, with a reasonable price... They still use the same system qua price of phone... So, if you are number one, you have some advantiges but also a responsability to others, first you can risk putting a mobile on the marked that is too inovative, too experimental, too ... can't put it in words but the 5510, 3510, 3650, 6800, 7600, ... speak for themselve (not all of these device were a mistake) if a new mobile phone is a flop ( low sellings) No problem for nokia, they have cash reserve... but if you are the marked leader, you have to be worth the leadership, you have to inovate, you have to seduse mobile users with new features, color screen, GPRS, camera, 3G, ... etc, etc... and with new design. and make them better than the others, but that is these day's the problem, other phone companies followed the idea of nokia (or copied), presenting a plethora of new product's, good quality, easy UI, fun features, etc... my idea is there are no bad mobile phones anymore, you just have good, better, best... so the concurrention has growth. And every brand is doing it his way, a better camera, a nice look, better screen, ... etc, but one advantage is also a minus to another, mostly the battery, color screen is nice but it needs more power, a camera is nice, but it cost more memory, and make the device even more expencive... etc... So every device has got his pro and contra, every brand has. Nokia surely hasn't got the best camera's, but hey, they are a gadget, you play with it for a few weeks and after than the fun of it is gone... and the quality doesn't have to be so great, it's just have to give you an idea of a place, moment, person, that you can send to others, and you don't have to print it out in A3-format (poster). BTW, my thing is, if you have to make a picture, buy a camera instaid of a phone, surely at this momento, megapix camera phone are comming. And lastly (this part i'm going to be shorter on) the screens of nokia are in balance between price/quality/consumtion of battery), what is you've got the best screen, but you only have got an standby time of 1 day... i rather have a mobile phone with a larger standby - callingtime that a wow screen... ok, that's it for today folks... PS, sorry that this text is so long, i don't know why i wrote it, even i don't even remember whats on the first line, but hey, i had a great time writing it, finished it in only 12,5 minutes... LOL __________________ ok, ok, i just read this text over and parts of it really suck, I'm sorry... PLEASE, don't shoot the pianist... :-) __________________ Oke we won't shoot you, at lateast I won't __________________ Very well written I agree with u completely __________________ kristof.vanriet i totally agree with u that is y i like nokia so much!!