Comments on: Opinion: Why I Won't Be Buying a Pocket PC

Improvements for T3. Kill the slider. Use T|C buttons, stereo output, and price it below $400. Forget about the camera lens. It will blow away every except for the Zire 71.

___________________________________
Casio B.O.S.S --> M100 --> vX --> M505

Yankees, Steinbrenner,...... I will never turn to the dark side.

I can only warn people that have been using PalmOS (and eventually Psion before) to go and buy a Pocket PC. I did it (Dell Axim 5) and the only consequence is that I spent a huge amount of money for software that all can't one moment compete to my palm software.

I think I will sell my Axim as soon as possible and go back to Palm, even if it has to be a Sony Clie (actually, I never wanted to buy a Sony because of this ... Memory Stick, but for me color and in the first place the virtual graffiti are crucial). I don't have it yet, but I can't wait to sell my Pocket PC and to do real work on my palm again! I'll keep my Handera too, so for the cases when weight is of importance, I think I can do without multimedia and use my greyscale (virtual graffiti field) Handera.

I think it's really true: Palm was developed and constructed for mobile users and Pocket PC is a meagre copy of a desktop version, and this is to be experienced with almost any software I have tried. A PPC is not much more than a (really expensive) toy and the software (at least the lot I tried and I tried a lot) is nice to look at, but not nearly as fuctional as Palm Software.

I was really disappointed by Pocket PC and I'll won't look back for a minute (after my Axim is sold!).

Former Psion-User

This 320x480 (or why not even getting it up to 640x480?) kind of MiniTablet, with BT and NO slider, NO keyboard, No other gimmicks is exactly what I am waiting for too.

presently using T|T - waiting for 320x480 VG Design with Bluetooth (No clam-shell, no keyboard)

--
Daniel Hibbitts
Ann Arbor Palm OS Developers Group
Ann Arbor Palm OS Users Group
http://www.a2pug.org/

In my experience, it's not the OS that crashes, it's the programs. PalmOS doesn't have any protection from a crashing program crashing the entire system.

(This is something that PalmOS 6 is suppose to fix.)

The Vx form factor is definitely not "just right". I have pretty normal-sized hands, and the V-series is too wide for a normal hand. The device I upgraded to after my Palm V was a Sony S320, and the smaller width coupled with the additional depth (about what a Palm V would be with the leather flip-cover) made it much more comfortable to hold than a Palm V.

Have to agree with you there... the V and M5xx series is the best form factor for pockets, but a little too wide for the hand. Loved my M515, but the T|T is more comfortable to hold.

:)

------
BLUE PUNCH BUGGY!!!!!

>>>Actually, I can. We pried my mother's Apple IIe out of her hands somewhere around 1995. We replaced it with a beige windows box, running 3.0.

I'm not touching this at all. You expect me to comment on your *mother*?!

tthiel, that was disgusting.

How come no mention of the trademarked "handgasm" along with the e550g?

-Bosco

A low-res display consumes far less power, and costs less also. Thus the low-res option allows a PalmOS solution provider to offer lower cost models with excellent battery life. Very important in the entry-level segments of the market.

The majority of the software I tried put a non-collapsible menu bar above the application window, and often added a second menu bar at the bottom of the screen. Net result-- comparing the device side-by-side with a Palm, it provided a scant few extra millimeters of display for the actual program contents. In text-intensive apps such as ebook readers and word processors, the higher resolution of the square Palm screen would often match or exceed the ammount of info the rectangular screen PPC could display.

This problem is more an issue with PPC developers and does not represent an inherent limitation in in the PPC OS, and there certainly were a few apps which did take advantage of the full screen. However, for around 85% of the 120+ apps I tried, the extra screen length was a wash.

Alas, Sony also makes some on-screen controls *too* small. Hawkins & Team made some controls intentionally large in their designs so you could hit them with a thumb or fingernail. Sony CLIE controls -- especially in CLIE Camera -- really require the stylus point.

Why would you possibly want a low res screen over a high res one? 320^2 is standard and looks way better than any PPC screens.

The 240x320 resolution limit is one of the current frustrations about the Pocket PC. Maybe Pocket PC users are doing the same thing now that Palm users did in the past.

By the way, Windows CE devices aren't limited to 240x320; for example, the Samsung Nexio allows 800x480. Of course, it's not the size of a Palm or Pocket PC, either.

Steve

Silicon Valley Pocket PC
http://www.svpocketpc.com

My PalmOS 5 handheld crashes with regularity, usually when using Bluetooth or WiFi; and when it crashes, the whole handheld reboots. It's just like the old DOS days.

As for ease of use, that's a mixed bag: the basic PDA applications on Palm are still very good, and there are some really nice third party apps out there, but just about everything else has become a big mess.

I have been using Palm since the beginning, and I am not going to switch to PocketPC. But, frankly, I think PalmOS is an embarrassment as an operating system.

Got an m125... I hated that thing, and still won't recommend it even for a bargain model. Reminded me of running Windows ME. CRASH, CRASH, CRASH, CRASH, BUG, CRASH.

Tungsten|T isn't that bad unless you're trying to surf the net over bluetooth, then I still have plenty of headaches (it locks up quite nicely often). But otherwise, OS 5 is stable for me. Since I was able to fix my digitizer issue (surgery is FUN) I haven't had any major problems, and everything works fine :) I was gonna get rid of my T|T, but now that it works, I'm gonna hold out for a WiFi SD card.

As for blaming the OS, and calling it an embarrassment. I wouldn't say that. The IMPLEMENTATION has issues (PalmSG in particular) and that is where the embarrassment should reside. My Windows XP machine suffers from a consistant (but appears to have something to do with Windows XP updating it's network printer drivers from the machine with the printer installed) crash of Winlogon.exe which takes explorer.exe down with it (sympathetic crash).

In this instance, I'm more likely to blame user error (I'm the person who set up the entire network, and installed windows on each machine, but only mine is maintained properly, so I'm the one to blame).

And you want to talk about embarrassing OSes? Windows ME is GARBAGE. PocketPC 2002 is CRUD, we only recently discovered to get my boss's WiFi to work properly, you change the settings in the network dialog, then shut off the unit, then when you turn it back on it works... WHERE'S THE LOGIC IN THAT??? It isn't even EASY to configure the network stuff.... Palm OS is SO MUCH more easy, it's right up there with my standard, which is Windows XP/2000.

------
BLUE PUNCH BUGGY!!!!!

-James.

I put it on www.itsbeenstolen.com, for what it's worth... Search for TG-50!

-James.

OS 5.0 stable? And I am Elvis.
----

Hi elvis!

Just interested...

-James.

Thanks,
Hotoru

"Seminar" comments? ;)

Yes, it often is. The problem is not that the applications crash (applications crash anywhere), the problem is that they take the entire handheld with them. And that is clearly the fault of the OS.

I don't have an os5 palm (yet anyways), but several friends of mine do and they have no problems with them at all.

Well, how nice for them. The traditional Palm applications don't cause this to happen. I suspect it is actually related to running out of memory, and to some features of the networking APIs. Again, those are the operating system's fault.

It's not that it is completely unusable (otherwise, I'd just toss out the thing). But it really demonstrates what a poor job Palm is doing with the operating system. In 2003, an operating system just shouldn't have those kinds of problems.

Now if I only found those manuals.....

Why not just say, "Cool, I wish HotSync had that option"? Oh, yes, it is an option in ActiveSync; you don't have to have continuous syncing. But I suppose you'll find something wrong with that, too.

Steve

Silicon Valley Pocket PC
http://www.garlic.com

Also, I don't want my PDA to sync everytime I put it in the cradle...I want to have better control over when I want to sync.

I also don't like the OS patches on PPC, but that's another story.

The things I hate about Palm OS are the lack of a file system, lack of multitasking, and some dumb limits like the clipboard. The things I like about Palm OS that I can't get in PPC is flexibility. You can't find a thumbboard on a PPC. Oh wait, yes you can, it's the monster Hitachi. Also, there are various screen resolution options. While this may also be a weakness, 320x480 is just plain awesome.

Above, you mention your OS 5 device crashes with regularity. My old m105 crashed more often than my NX80v. You also say you have problems with wireless connectivity. I'm sorry, but I get none of this with Wifi. It's been working like a dream so far, and I don't even need to knock on wood. And not liking the OS because it's not advanced enough to have one thing crash and have it reboot?? This was barely implemented in WINDOWS XP!! You're blaming Palm for not doing it? Are you insane??

Come on, man. I agree it's a choice between the lesser of two evils, but you make it sound like it's a choice between Satan and Lucifer. The end results of these products are still very different, IMO.

-Bosco

I have 200 programs for my TT but I could not get that amount on a Pocket PC or the variety. My TT can do so much it makes a Pocket PC ancient.

However, OS5 is buggy. You can get software conflicts etc...That is why I will buy the TT2 since the bugs are removed and the memory is at a respectable level. Enough for my needs.

Zlauncher 3.01, Tungsten T

The problems are in IMPLEMENTATION!!!

Abosco doesn't have problems because Sony has WORKED OUT the problems before they sent the product to market.

You can't say that for the Tungsten T (or as I've complained even the m125).

The problem is the same people-PalmSG.

So quit blaming the OS for implementation problems

------
BLUE PUNCH BUGGY!!!!!

They are all awful... However some are more awful than others.

That said:
> The only thing that PalmOS does somewhat better than PocketPC is the calendaring and address applications.

Like any primative tool (wooden wheel, stone arrowhead), in the right circumstances, they can still sometimes manage to be more useful than nothing at all. A lot of people prefer an electronic organizer to those big binders of paper, and a PalmOS device does a reasonable job of this.

As a personal organizer, a PalmOS device looks like the OS and UI was designed by a person with reasonable taste; whereas a PocketPC seems more like something specified by large commitees of engineers (and speaking as someone with an engineering degree, that was not meant as a complement).

One of Bill Gates brilliant strategies was to allow his companies software to become slow and bloated, because he knew that Intel and the DRAM vendors would be able to take care of these problems by supplying even more MHz and megabytes than needed in a couple years, a process described as Moore's law. However, this strategy is failing in the PDA arena. Battery technology improves at a much much slower rate than does semiconductor technology. Any bloat which leads to software that uses more cycles and more bytes and thus eats more battery power to accomplish the typical users commands is at a permanant architectural disadvantage. So far, the PocketPC OS shows more bloat than the PalmOS.

But the main reason I probably won't be buying a PocketPC is that there are no decent development tools for it which run on my Mac.

Now compare all this to Palm, which designed their OS for the PDa environment. They don't NEED all of this extra power. When they do get it, however, they are FAST.

In short, the specs can be deciving, another example is Intel's P4, but, thats a story for another day.

Of course, if you try running legacy software which doesn't follow the SDK guidlines, you will experience regular crashes, but you can hardly blame this on the OS.

Yes, and that's a good thing as far as the operating system kernel is concerned, although it's a bad thing as far as the user interface is concerned.

The problem with PalmOS is that it is an embedded OS written for a 128k handheld with no MMU running on a 200-400MHz RISC chip. If Palm manages to put the Palm GUI on a decent operating system foundation, then PalmOS has a chance in the long term.

The GUI is so important on handhelds that PalmOS has been successful despite its absolutely pitiful fondations. OTOH, Microsoft's comparatively better kernel doesn't help them because it doesn't matter how good the kernel is if the UI sucks. But Palm won't be able to get by like this forever.

So, because Microsoft (and Apple) have been getting away with shipping pathetic software, it's OK for Palm to do the same thing as well? We have had operating systems that work for a few decades; the only reason why these consumer companies are getting away with putting out this junk is because consumers don't know any better. Would you put up with a TV or car that flakes out a few times a day?

but you make it sound like it's a choice between Satan and Lucifer.

It is. Add in Apple and you have Beelzebub in there, too. These companies don't give a damn about software quality, they survive on bloated feature lists, marketing hype, and image.

The things I hate about Palm OS are the lack of a file system, lack of multitasking, and some dumb limits like the clipboard. The things I like about Palm OS that I can't get in PPC is flexibility. You can't find a thumbboard on a PPC.

Yup: those are the same things I hate and I like about PalmOS and PPC. But the fact that people make nifty hardware and applications for PalmOS does not make PalmOS technically any better.

I don't think that OS 5 is written for a 128k platform. But what's wrong with writing the os to go with the current specs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"Microsoft's comparatively better kernel"

It would do better in a desktop environment, but on a handheld, it does pretty bad as you said yourself.

The MacOS was originally released for a 128k machine with a 7.5 MHz CPU and no MMU. After Mr. Gates saw the Mac prototype, he had Windows 1.0 developed for PC AT's with a 6 MHz '286 CPU. The first Pilot 1000's had a faster CPU, at 16 MHz. The first release of Linux needed a bit more memory, requiring a 16 MHz '386 with 4 MB of RAM.

Mr. Numbers (alias Mr. I'm-Gonna-Be-Right-No-Matter-What) gets more brilliant with every brain fart. lol :)

There is nothing wrong with the PocketPC kernel; it's the GUI that stinks.

PalmOS still uses many of the same interfaces as the original PalmOS for the 128k machine. OS 5, of course, requires far more memory, but it doesn't even come close to taking full advantage of the machine it runs on.

Yes, and the upshot of all that? By starting with non-MMU hardware, Apple and Microsoft kept shipping one flaky operating system after another. It took both companies until the late 1990's to come out with a modern kernel. And Palm is repeating that history: they started off with non-MMU hardware and they are shipping software based on that original design many years later. Linux required an MMU and more memory from the start, and that is exactly why it has worked so much better than the competition.

Except for an emulation mode, OS 6 needs to throw out most of the OS 4/5 architecture in order to be competitive. Otherwise, Palm will keep bleeding users like Apple did until they finally switched to OS X.

What is it about you guys? Where in the name of Mayberry, NC is YOUR excellent OS? You have all of the "expert" criticism and nothing to show for it. Typical seminarians.

Well, not only do we have something to show for it,
Apple and Microsoft have validated our criticism:
Apple has adopted a BSD and Mach kernel, after railing
for years against those platforms, and Microsoft
has implemented a mix of BSD and VMS for their
platform. Of course, they could have done that much
earlier--UNIX has been around since the 1970s.

It's know-nothings like you that keep supporting
companies that put out lousy products. Palm will
sooner or later switch to a standard kernel and API
as well, or they will go out of business. But in
the meantime, they'll drain everybody's wallets
quite a bit more--the kind of junky software they put
out may not be good for customers, but as long as
they can get away with it, it's good for their
bottom line.

I don't see lines around the block for the Sharp Zaurii. Nice hardware (especially the Japan-only tiny one), but getting stuff on it is just too much trouble for the average person. And those who currently own them are more interested in the Linux-box-in-your-pocket aspect than the PDA aspects.

2) Textmaker has just about become the WP standard for PPC.

3) Textmaker has spellcheck -- D2G does not.

4) There is a desktop version of Textmaker which syncs with the PDA documents. You don't have to pay megabucks for MS Word -- use Textmaker instead.

Only #3 matters if you already have Word, don't expect to interact with PPC users, or have a Mac.

So? Both Palm and Microsoft are companies making proprietary software, proprietary APIs, and selling ther software at a premium. Whether Palm "has a chance against Microsoft" makes no difference to me unless Palm gives me something Microsoft doesn't. Right now, it still does (it works with non-Windows desktops). But otherwise, I really don't care.

So what, you're saying you can run Quake 3 on your Palm V???? The fact that PC applications won't run on a Windows powered PDA is not a deal breaker in my opinion :) In addition, one of the features of PPC is direct synchronization with MS Word and Excel on the desktop. The problem with Pocket Word is that it strips out a lot of special formatting. I've been using various iPAQs over the last year or so. I recently picked up a Zire 71, and it feels great to back with the Palm OS.

It surprises me the number of people who complain that PPC is 'difficult' or 'overly complicated.' It isn't. It's just different. Sure, I had a shock going from a Sony Clie T615 to an iPAQ 3900, but it was even worse going from an iPAQ back to a Zire 71. There are some things I really liked about the stock scheduling program on my iPAQ I wish I could do on my Palm, such as being able to cut and paste ENTIRE appointments, not just the appointment text. In addition, I'd take contacts on the PPC over the Palm's address book anyday. They're both great, but come on, the Palm's only has room for one address and no web page field? Gimme a break! Sure you can use custom fields, but it's not as neat and organized as the PPC's.

On the other hand, I do enjoy the stability and speed of the Zire, although it has crashed on me from time to time. To each his own, I just think a lot of people on this board haven't really given the PPC platform a fair chance. Just because it doesn't behave like a Palm doesn't mean it's a bad OS or unintuitive. If you try to use a PPC like a Palm, it IS bad and unintuitive. PPC is just different, and if you don't prefer it fine, but IMHO, it is still a good OS; it is NOT Windows just 'shrunken down.' It's interesting the author condemns tap and hold- I love it! Select some text, tap and hold and chose cut- easy! I've tried to tap and hold in the scroll bars of my iPAQ and it doesn't work- maybe you need to recalibrate your digitizer, Mike :)

Anyway, I enjoyed reading your article. I'd just say try it before you condemn it- it ain't so bad :)

"Tap-and-Hold (TnH) is a really nice feature"

-- that's condemnation?

As for the digitizer -- no; it was fine. I've noticed that each model PPC has its own set of, uh, quirks. You can read post after post about how PPC from A has X problem while PPC from B doesn't, yet exhibits problem Y.

As for the digitizer -- no; it was fine. I've noticed that each model PPC has its own set of, uh, quirks. You can read post after post about how PPC from A has X problem while PPC from B doesn't, yet exhibits problem Y.

True, some PPC's have been notoriously unstable, but you could also say the same things about Palms (although to a lesser extent- my problem was I always loaded them up with so many hacks the poor things couldn't help but crash :). I just wish we could take the best of both worlds to create the 'perfect' pda, if such a thing ever exists :)

Thanks again for the interesting article!

And synchronisation is only the DATA, and NOT the programs. A depletes battery results in installing all your programs again. and registering them again.

With PALM ist easy, just press the horsync button and go take a cup of koffee. When your back all is restored incuding the serials and all your own stuff.

You can set ActiveSync to automatically backup the whole device when you connect.

Steve

Silicon Valley Pocket PC
http://www.svpocketpc.com

But it's a hell of a lot easier for software vendors to port applications and libraries to PPC than to Palm.

I am just turned off by the 1940 stupidly yellowish screen, if HP repairs the screen problem I will buy one regardless of the mediocre OS. I don't want to deal with clumsy sliders, I just want a small form factor.

I think Sony has a design saboteur in their midst!

IF you want more certain data security, use fiel store (aka save it to internal flash ROM, all high end devices has some some spare ROM to save urgent data)

He used to show off all the time with the MP3 player and videos on his IBM Microdrive - but I don't think he's even touched it for months.

And that person who mentioned all the Windows users - they use it but do not love or trust it - ditto for me.
Bloat, bloat, bloat, pop!

There's a lesson to be learned from MS - piling functions on without fixing what's broken may work in the corporate market, but it will never buy you loyalty from intelligent users.

Palm m505 User

You should be able to travel with a PDA without worrying about charging it all the time. They shouldn't be tamagochi: they are there to help you!

I have bought 2 PPCs but I gave both away after a while and went back to Palm.

However I am looking at the HP 1940 due to it's small sleek size. That was one of my big complaints about PPC before the HP units.

Why won't Palm make a slim/small PDA like the 515 or the HP1940? This is a re-occuring theme on every PDA board I've visited.

I wouldn't get all excited over that hp 4xxx. If it's what I think it will be, it'll be brick.

PPC boosters have been able to dismiss the 320x480 screen of Sony. But once Palm SG itself has them...

But, for a T|T3 with soft graffiti, having the slider is really stupid. There will be a lot more programs supporting 320x480 once Palm does this and having that slider is going to be a pain. People will need to keep the slider open all the time which of course negates the "smallness" of the T|T form factor (when closed).

Give me a Palm V form factor with the entire screen exposed, please. Heck, how about a Zire "77" with 320x480 to go along with the camera and such?

I'd dearly love to have Palm go back to the side rail as well, so that slip covers and such can actually be used again.

-Kevin Crossman

Maybe this could be why Palm is going to stick with the slider for the T3--to make up for how far the blame SDIO cards are going to stick out!!

A CF slot requires much more battery power than an SD slot. They will go the way of ISA slot's in PC's.

-Oh Brother Where Art Though...

But seriously. Cite please.

I could dig up my previous posts on this previously which showed multiple manufacturers specs, with the difference essentially a wash in most cases. But I think the burden of effort goes to you first.

Even a 5-10mA difference would be a near pointless difference all things considered (size, durability, manufacturing costs), especially when compared to the vastly more consuming components like RAM, CPU, and Screen. I can use *both* the SD and CF slot's at the same time in my HandEra 330, waaaay longer than most other color ARM toting PDA's even with their SD slot sitting idle. And I could continous ping with a wireless CF card in it, longer than many SD slotted color PDA's with or without wirless devices enabled would last. My Tungsten C only keeps up due to the hugeness of it's battery, but I note that the discharge rate is nearly as steep and the charge rate even at minimum brightness. The SD slot is the least of my power worries.

Comparing power consumption of an SD vs. CF slot is like pondering if I'll get less wet, jumping into a lake with or without my hat on.

In the real world, one will more likely compare the size of devices like the Margi Presenter-to-go in CF, SD, and Memory Stick forms. Far and away, the CF version is the smallest, least protruding (and at that the MS and SD versions still need an external box).

When an SD version of something is more costly for the manufacturer to make, less convenient for me to use, and harder to obtain (today) in the same variety of brands, and as cheaply as CF, I think it's safe to say SD is still a case in point of shrinking the usefulness right out of a device.

Power-Schmower, a couple mA's here or there is the *least* of anyone's issue in a comparison. Next year, maybe a different story, but not today.

I am still using my he330. I've yet to see a more usefull palm hit hte market.

Actually, some industrial PC's still come with ISA slots. So, maybe someone (Acacia? Symbol?) will manufacture industrialized PalmOS devices with CF slots for tiny specialized markets. Probably priced accordingly though...

For WiFi a CF card is great. Yes it uses a bit more juice but it will also give you 20-25% greater range than an SD card and thats what WiFi is all about. With an external ant4ena you do better than built in 802.11 also.

It is labeled "Opinion." Not "Analysis" or "Face-Off" or "Head-to-Head" or "Point-by-Point."

But, the bottom line is just as you say, there are no desktop cliets for many Palm OS databases, and tons of other limitations that Palm OS must overcome to be really as useful as it ought to be.