This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Microsoft This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microsoft, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to Microsoft on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MicrosoftWikipedia:WikiProject MicrosoftTemplate:WikiProject MicrosoftMicrosoft ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Now I haven't dug too deeply but I'm pretty sure that it's a digitizer pen. A stylus implies it is resistive, but the screen seems like it is a hybrid capacitive/digitizer touchscreen similar to some tablet PCs in the market. 128.238.252.122 (talk) 00:17, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the demonstrations, an eraser in the back of the pen is shown. This means it's an digitizer pen and can't be resistive. Although I would still call it a stylus. Just an active stylus perhaps? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.215.238.83 (talk) 00:56, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The reliable sources list it as a stylus -- are there other sources that say something different? //Blaxthos ( t / c ) 21:21, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is more semantics. I understood that above comment implied it shouldn't be named a stylus, because the screen probably is capacitive. In the courier demo video, you can see the back of the stylus is an eraser. This can't be done by a "dumb" stylus. Placelimit (talk) 18:46, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If it really is being released this year, shouldn't it already be in some kind of beta test? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.58.251.147 (talk) 16:24, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you think it isn't in a beta test? Also, the hardware itself isn't the most spectacular part, it's the UI which is special here. They can test the UI even on a research device as simple as CODEX. Furthermore not exactly sure if the discussion page is meant for these kind of discussions? Placelimit (talk) 18:31, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If there is a beta test, shouldn't the details be on the main page?173.58.251.147 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:57, 9 April 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Only if it's published in a reliable source. Talk pages are not a forum for general discussion of the product, and Wikipedia is not the place to post every change in status during development. //Blaxthos ( t / c ) 23:29, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A few people seem to know inside information when making edits, do not break an NDA when filling in information. Others have removed info even if it was corrected, but lacked a valid source which is correct. If you know this info find a few sources that back it up so it doesn't look made up. --Templarian (talk) 20:31, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do we really need a Wikipedia article devoted to a product that doesn't exist, never existed (except as a concept), and is never going to exist?

I mean, it's kind of amusing to read about the design, features, and specs of a non-existent product, but I'd think the article should probably be deleted.

Please sign your comments. This product won't be released to the public, but development was far more then just a concept. (see sources) Also crude prototype were released in public already in January 2008. Furthermore, even if it was only a concept, it's still noteworthy. Wikipedia is filled with pages about concepts, prototypes, and even fictional devices. This doesn't matter, according to wikipedia's own definition Encyclopedia: "An encyclopedia (also spelled encyclopaedia or encyclopædia) is a type of reference work, a compendium holding information from either all branches of knowledge or a particular branch of knowledge" Since this article is (referenced) knowledge, wikipedia should hold it's knowledge.Placelimit (talk) 04:11, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I also remember a submitter saying that the page for the nexus one should be deleted because it wasn't real, just shortly before the nexus one was released.24.255.229.253 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:20, 25 July 2010 (UTC).[reply]

The quotation in the "End of Courier" section of the article doesn't even imply this project ever existed! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.90.108.145 (talk) 01:59, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Official information has been provided as to why it has been cancelled. Read this for more info. – Batreeq ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 22:41, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This article needs a section on how an evolution of the Courier was announced today.

Evieliam (talk) 15:12, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]