True... living literally right in the middle between Seattle and Portland, I wouldn't choose to be in either one.

I bought an AT&T Tilt, had problems, ended up with a Fuze. Now I find that the Touch HD or the Touch Pro 2 (Fuze 2) will be coming soon. I can't upgrade to that for the special pricing either. You can't upgrade phones for special pricing on ANY carrier. This isn't an AT&T thing, this is an industry thing. If you don't like it, don't buy a phone with subsidy, pay the full price for it, and then pay the full price when the next model comes out instead. That's the only way it's going to be "fair".

We used to use RT, and mainly ditched it because it was rather slow. It may have improved since then, as this was about 3 or 4 years ago that we moved to a different product that has a low license cost. I've been thinking about giving RT another try, just to see if they've made any improvements.

I'm ditching my laptop in favor of a small device (PDA) that will do 90% of the stuff my laptop does for me. That's the reason I'd like to see more pages render in a resolution that small devices can see.

I've been working with more xhtml lately, and from what I understood, that was the point of using xhtml for sites. They would render the same on all sorts of devices (in fact, the book I have gives info on where to get emulators for WAP browsers, etc.) Is this not the case?

You would think that with browser checks and such, a site would know what type of browser it was being displayed in and load the appropriate page. Either using CSS or XHTML, this shouldn't be too much of a problem. Especially because XHTML is designed for this purpose.

Granted, flash sites (well, most of them) won't display correctly, but personally I avoid those as much as possible. There's too much to them that I don't need. Plus, if I need to grab info from the page to read later, it's more difficult in a flash site than it is anywhere else.