MobileInfocenter

Comments on: SanDisk Releasing Zire 71 Wi-FI SD Card

After well over a year of delays, SanDisk is close to releasing a SDIO Wi-Fi card for a Palm OS handheld, however the new card will only work with the palmOne Zire 71.
Return to Story - Permalink

Article Comments

 (56 comments)

The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. PalmInfocenter is not responsible for them in any way.
Please Login or register here to add your comments.

Comments Closed Comments Closed
This article is no longer accepting new comments.

Down

It's about time.

indesman @ 6/18/2004 5:41:29 PM #
Will miracles never cease.

RE: It's about time.
miszobi @ 6/18/2004 5:48:37 PM #
Not that big a miracle, really. After all it's just for one, discontinued model...
RE: It's about time.
TTrules @ 6/18/2004 5:50:34 PM #
Why do they even bother with this pathetic card if it's only compatable with the zire 71?! The thing's been discontinued!! I have a TT and I want some sort of wifi compatability without having to buy some huge wifi case. There is one Palmone handheld that comes with wifi, and Sandisk is not doing anything to help matters.



One Palm to rule them all!

RE: It's about time.
trophyofgrace @ 6/18/2004 8:11:28 PM #
You gripe because the Z71 a discontinued model is getting the card, but you expect your Tungsten T to get a card?

-->Visor Deluxe-->Palm m125-->Palm m505-->Ipaq 1945-->Tungsten E-->Zire 21 (cheap and fits my needs :)
RE: It's about time.
The Black Moose @ 6/18/2004 11:16:12 PM #
"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."

Okay, Sandisk, don't shame me.

Now I might be considered "fortunate" that I have the only compatible palm PDA for this card, Zire 71.

My plan circa autumn 2003: buy Wifi card, continue to use in next PDA.
My plan circa spring 2004: Nice Zire 72...dual wireless when Sandisk releases the Palm drivers, buy Wifi card, later use in Zire 72.

Now something like this? I don't think so. Not with an aging PDA which I would soon abandon for another. Maybe I could get by with just bluetooth in a new palm since my new PowerBook has it.

Not Sandisk's Fault - it's PalmSource's!
NewtonDKC @ 6/19/2004 6:07:03 AM #
TTRules, it's not SanDisk's fault. They have been trying everything they can to get these cards working with Palm models - it is PALM's fault for not being more forthcoming with data, and now for not releasing a diver patch for the SDIO problem on some of the other Palms (I believe BHand has a little more detail and it says that SanDisk says the Z72 and T3 both require this patch - and Palm pretty much refuses to assist them (probably to incorporate their own patch to use with their upcoming WiFi card to get as many sales as possible. Stingy Bustards!!! :-)
So anyway, your statement should be that Pa1mOne isn't doing anything to help the situation, not SanDisk, who would love to get all the Palm sales they can and redesigned this card to be low enough power to work in Palms that don't supply enough power to the SDIO slot (and is inarguably a bigger market than for PPC's since most of those already WiFi built in anyway).

RE: Trophyofgrace
TTrules @ 6/19/2004 1:15:08 PM #
Trophyofgrace, I want a card for tungstens! Even if it just means the TT3. I would probably get a TT3 if it had wifi.

One Palm to rule them all!
RE: It's about time.
trophyofgrace @ 6/19/2004 2:20:16 PM #
The TC has WiFi, is it not a Tungsten?

-->Visor Deluxe-->Palm m125-->Palm m505-->Ipaq 1945-->Tungsten E-->Zire 21 (cheap and fits my needs :)
RE: It's about time.
trophyofgrace @ 6/19/2004 5:53:15 PM #
I do see your point though, I think there should be more choice in the WiFi realm for Palm OS. With PPC the options are pretty much wide open, and right now that's one of the major points that PPC has over PalmOS now, IMO

-->Visor Deluxe-->Palm m125-->Palm m505-->Ipaq 1945-->Tungsten E-->Zire 21 (cheap and fits my needs :)

What about Tungsten E ??

Enzo @ 6/18/2004 6:12:48 PM #
My perception has always been that the Tungesten E is a Zire 71 without the camera. A little research would probably answer my question, but what is keeping the wifi card inoperable with the Tungesten E?
RE: What about Tungsten E ??
palmkid @ 6/18/2004 7:23:58 PM #
I agree. why wont sandisk do some research on teh WIFI card and see if it works with the T|E. i have a T|E and i have been waiting for a WIFI card for months. and i do agree with his philosophy, the T|E is just a ZIRE 71 without a camera. good philosophy :)

RE: What about Tungsten E ??
The Black Moose @ 6/18/2004 10:59:33 PM #
Actually, Tungsten E and Zire 71 are quite different beside the camera. Shall I quote specs? No, I don't feel like it; I shall paraphrase.

T|E has a marginally slower processor, slightly smaller battery, twice the memory, a USB connection vs. Zire 71's "universal" connection, a better included stylus (irrelevant to discussion)... all in a thinner case. The screen appears the same though. It may be likely that a different chipset was used.

RE: What about Tungsten E ??
gobabushka @ 6/20/2004 10:40:58 PM #
I have waited for almost a year for the drivers, and I hope that this is completly false! I have a Zire 31 and I hope it's compatible. This whole thing has temped me to switch over to Pocket PC, and I am a die-hard Palm OS fan!

Why would Palm be reluctant to have 3rd party Wi-Fi cards?

TMann @ 6/18/2004 6:30:49 PM #
Someone smarter than me needs to explain to me why on earth Palm would be reluctant to have 3rd party companies making Wi-Fi cards for their PDA's. For the last year or so, all of the Zire 71, Tungsten T, E, T2, and T3 owners have been waiting and waiting for someone, ANYONE to produce a Wi-Fi SD card. Think how many potential Palm purchasers probably migrated to PPC's because Palm didnt' have any easy Wi-Fi options. (Yes, I know about the Tungsten C and the Enfora case.) Why would Palm not do everything they could to facilitate Wi-Fi access for their products?

It doesn't make sense to me.

TMann

RE: Why would Palm be reluctant to have 3rd party Wi-Fi cards?
TMann @ 6/18/2004 6:55:02 PM #
Along the same lines, why on earth would they have neglected to write an OS 5 driver for their Bluetooth SD card, so that it could be used on the Tungsten C, E and Zire 71.

Is it technically impossible? Or is there some marketing reason for not doing so?

TMann

RE: Why would Palm be reluctant to have 3rd party Wi-Fi cards?
Alchemist42 @ 6/18/2004 6:58:44 PM #
I think there are a couple reasons for the lack of Wifi support from palm...

1. Palm doesnt seem to put alot of effort into supporting the SDIO spec... sure they say the devices are compatible, but there isnt that much SDIO hardware out there with palm drivers in the first place, so I think they kinda drop the ball on making SDIO work correctly on their devices. Hell, a couple of their devices have even had problems reading memory cards, remember the original TT anyone?

2. IMO this is the bigger reason... OS6 completely reimplements the OS wireless support, with good support for multiple wireless standards being active at once, better multitasking model for drivers, etc. so I think they might be going... we will just live with the shortcomings for now, because cobalt fixes them anyway... but its taken alot longer than I thought before a cobalt device sees the light of day.

That said, I still like palms hardware, I just wish they would get a cobalt device out the door.

RE: Why would Palm be reluctant to have 3rd party Wi-Fi card
Winter_ @ 6/18/2004 8:25:12 PM #
In case you are REALLY interested... some days ago, a (long, often off-topic, and often painful) thread about this whole subject of drivers for OS 5 - including the ones for Palm's own SD Bluetooth card - kind of finished.

Here you have the link to the most important part.
http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=6879#95025

If you are interested on some details, go read the whole thread and the links provided along it.

I warn you: it is a long and painful read.

Palm SD Bluetooth card drivers? Get 'em right here, folks!
;-(( @ 6/18/2004 10:35:24 PM #
Along the same lines, why on earth would they have neglected to write an OS 5 driver for their Bluetooth SD card, so that it could be used on the Tungsten C, E and Zire 71.

Is it technically impossible? Or is there some marketing reason for not doing so?

TMann

The (heavily censored) thread described above suggested a reason why the drivers weren't released a while ago. You'll have to decide for yourself who is telling the truth and who is lying. Ask around + read about the driver issue - you'll find the answers. And it ain't pretty.



RE: Why would Palm be reluctant to have 3rd party Wi-Fi card
Winter_ @ 6/19/2004 4:16:34 AM #
Oh my Dog...

I *wrote* this at the end of my previous post, but deleted it because I didn't want to re-start the stupid war. Anyway, looks like it would be informative, so I'm writing it now:

[about the long and painful thread] To make it even nicer, some of the posts by a particular poster were deleted. He would say that that was because he Knows the Truth that we lesser beings are not supposed to know and so he is censored. However, the rest of the world would surely not agree and just say that he was such an obnoxious pain in the a55.

Now, go judge for yourselves - if you really feel like.

(Facey, looks like you finally followed one of my links and dared to read what Mr. Combee had to say about the subject. Nice. Now, let's only *suppose* that he finally tells us that he has talked with someone who should know, and definitively the drivers don't exist, as anybody would guess. Would you then accept that you were, erm, not right?
And what if he doesn't answer? Will you say then that you were right anyway?
Just curious... :)

Frosty: If Combee denies the SD Bluetooth drivers exist...
;-o @ 6/19/2004 1:35:23 PM #
... then I no longer trust anything he says now that he works for Palm.

I know what I know from my "sources".

You, on the other hand know... nothing.

RE: Why would Palm be reluctant to have 3rd party Wi-Fi card
bcombee @ 6/19/2004 2:47:46 PM #
I work for PalmSource, and I'm not in a position to have direct contact with anyone at PalmOne outside their developer support organization. As a PalmSource employee, I cannot comment publically on any plans of our customers, the Palm OS licesees, which includes PalmOne, due to non-disclosure agreements as well as general business ethics.

That's all I'm going to say.

--
Ben Combee
http://palmos.combee.net - PDA programmer weblog

Why Palm decided to HOSE customers on the SD Bluetooth
;-o @ 6/19/2004 3:35:02 PM #
I work for PalmSource, and I'm not in a position to have direct contact with anyone at PalmOne outside their developer support organization. As a PalmSource employee, I cannot comment publically on any plans of our customers, the Palm OS licesees, which includes PalmOne, due to non-disclosure agreements as well as general business ethics.

That's all I'm going to say.

As usual, you're a class act, Ben. I trust by now you've learned the truth behind the SD Bluetooth drivers. (I was surprised to hear you didn't know the story already even though you only recently came over from Metrowerks.) Maybe not actually working in Milpitas has shielded you from hearing about this kind of c r a p.

Anyway, I'd suggest you refrain from commenting further about this issue unless the drivers are actually issued.

By the way, I hope you have made alternate career plans since leaving Metrowerks. Palm is entering implosion mode and PalmSource's stock is tanking rapidly (closed at $15.75 yesterday and will probably be below $10 before long http://finance.yahoo.com/q/hp?s=PSRC and http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=PSRC&d=t). The upcoming quarterly statement is quite tragic and the company is probably going to start another round of layoffs. Talk to Gavin if you don't believe me. Be careful, Ben. It would be a shame to see you get burned as well.



RE: Why would Palm be reluctant to have 3rd party Wi-Fi card
Winter_ @ 6/19/2004 4:20:16 PM #
Facey, of course I know *nothing* about those drivers. Exactly like anyone else - except for you and your contacts (or magical gnomes, or tooth fairies, or little birds), of course.

Surely that's because I have no insider contacts.
What remains to be seen is whether YOU have them, and whether THOSE (hypothetical) contacts have any (reliable) info.

Because, you know, it's really hard to believe in someone that, when minimally pressed to reason any one of his (supposedly existing) points goes into a hysterical burst of insults, postulates and unverifiable predictions that of course only further your point.

Meanwhile, like traditional honest-to-Dog future tellers, you seem unable to predict things that really do happen - like the Zire WiFi card. In fact about 3 weeks ago you were postulating (again) that those cards would never appear, supposedly because of problems with the SDIO form factor. Heh. Interestingly, all evidence now points to PalmSource to be the guilty ones... in fact, I just found this post that looks like went unnoticed at the moment, but now looks quite genuine (as it concurs with what other people are now saying, two weeks later!)

http://www.palminfocenter.com/view_story.asp?ID=6846#94660

Put that together with what Mr. Combee had to say about the difficulty of drivers development on OS 5, and the picture gets somewhat clear:

http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=6879#95025

See? No postulates, no predictions, I just tried to gather facts from all over the place, and the final image looks like explaining some things. Let's see if it works better than your conspiracy theory + unaccountable insider info.

What I don't really understand is why are you THAT fixated about being censored because of the Truth you only Know. As if I (or the rest of the world) was praising Palm* for whatever! I think (and tell to anybody that would listen) that they have dug a pretty tomb for themselves by letting the OS get to this point of ... staleness, awkwardness. And, funny thing is, I've said that before - but for entirely different reasons. Remember when I said that releasing a T3-class device with a crippled & crippling OS like Palm OS 5 should be regarded as a crime?

Palm is making a big mistake
;-o @ 6/19/2004 7:09:10 PM #
Frosty: You post a link to a message supposedly from a SanDisk employee who says:

SanDisk speaks
dfsmurth @ 6/2/2004 8:57:24 PM

we would LOVE to offer palm support for SD Wi-Fi products. We have palm source rights to OS and have developed drivers for the OS - in its pure form. palmOne makes driver slot (SDIO host side driver) and netlib (networking files) modifications to the files in the OS and will NOT give access to the mods. This month SanDisk is releasing Zire 71 support but has had to hack the modified files for this device to accomplish this. SanDisk got all kinds of help from MSFT for their OS's and only obstacles from palmOne. This is Monty Python business logic.

I have told you repeatedly that Palm has the SD Bluetooth drivers, yet you prefer to believe otherwise. I even asked Ben Combee and Michael Mace to comment on the drivers on your behalf. The (usually chatty) Mr. Mace is suddenly silent and Mr. Combee is not allowed to comment. You do the math.

If the drivers did not exist, how could my contact have several Palms running SD Bluetooth cards flawlessly? Why has Michael Mace simply not popped up here and issued a statement saying there are no drivers? Simple. Because the drivers have been functioning for a long time. A LOOOOONG time. Palm purposely crippled the OS and it takes about a 5 KB update to add Bluetooth SDIO functionality back. A 5 KB patch. 5 f-ing KB!.

Ultimately, people have to weigh the evidence and decide for themselves. If enough people email Palm demanding the drivers, the update could be on their site by Monday. MONDAY. I think you're starting to see what I've said is the truth, but you're too embarassed to admit it.

Think about it, Frosty. Bluetooth implementation is NOT rocket surgery. Palm probably still has at least one intelligent person working for them. They built the OS. They have Bluetooth functionality in other models and the SDIO power requirements for Bluetooth aren't constraining. Do you really think Palm was unable to make SDIO Bluetooth part of their PalmOS 5 features? Surely even you can't believe that.

RE: Why would Palm be reluctant to have 3rd party Wi-Fi card
Winter_ @ 6/19/2004 7:43:47 PM #
Since you now look like willing to follow links, I'll give you one more. Why do I think that Palm OS has not developed those drivers? I already asked and answered myself some time ago.
http://www.palminfocenter.com/view_story.asp?ID=6846#94437

Note the absence of evil plots in my self-answer, though it in fact would explain a number of things - while agreeing with known facts and with what Mr. Combee (for example) said.
Of course there's still need for external confirmation, since it's only a guess - however well-educated I think it to be. But for starters it does not ask for blind faith, does it?

I have told you repeatedly that Palm has the SD Bluetooth drivers, yet you prefer to believe otherwise.

Yes, I have this nasty habit of believing in what I can check ... rather than the evil secret plots that some anonymous chap rants about on some website.

I even asked Ben Combee and Michael Mace to comment on the drivers on your behalf.
(I already did this, but OK, let's play it again)
You *even* asked. Wow.
(that's it. Want once more?)

Now I'm gonna ask them if they killed JFK and why they want to sell us as livestock to the martians. And if they don't answer, then we will now for sure that they are guilty. OK?

The (usually chatty) Mr. Mace is suddenly silent
Chatty? I think I've seen him here... about 3 times on the last 5 months. Let's say once a month. Is that chatty?

If the drivers did not exist, how could my contact have several Palms running SD Bluetooth cards flawlessly?

I don't know. Too much booze?

Why has Michael Mace simply not popped up here and issued a statement saying there are no drivers? Simple.

Yes, I can imagine Michael Mace poppin' up here, saying "there are NO drivers" ... and you staying all calm and cool, gracefully apologizing for your rants... and we all departing as good friends, enriched by the information exchange...
...erm, no, I don't think so.
If I were him, I for sure would not even try getting into this kind of stupid catfight. After all, Palm* knowledge base is there to remind us that those drivers don't exist. You know, officially at least. (*wink, wink*)

Palm purposely crippled the OS and it takes about a 5 KB update to add Bluetooth SDIO functionality back. A 5 KB patch. 5 f-ing KB!.

Would you care to ellaborate on that, please? Because it sounds a bit absurd. Are you talking about a 5 KB driver? Or about a patch? If the latter, then we still need the drivers, and as Mr. Combee said, it's easy to develop drivers that only will work on a single device. So...?
(not that I can see much meaning to the "5KB" thing... what would change if it was 100 bytes or 2000 KB?)

Ultimately, people have to weigh the evidence and decide for themselves.
EXACTLY. Now, where's your evidence? Oh, I see, you can only offer lack of evidence. "No one says anything, so I am right".

If enough people email Palm demanding the drivers, the update could be on their site by Monday. MONDAY.

And if we raid the offices, we could get the drivers RIGHT NOW!! Get the torches! This is war!

My man, don't you think they must have been asked a number of times about those drivers? How many people would happily buy the card? How many would buy bluetooth-less Palms, knowing that the card is there when they feel like upgrading?

I think you're starting to see what I've said is the truth, but you're too embarassed to admit it.

Yeah, now even I am part of your proof.
Oh my Dog.

Think about it, Frosty. Bluetooth implementation is NOT rocket surgery.

This coming from the guy that writes "JAVA", says that Windows95/98 was perfectly stable and things got worse afterwards, does not know what BSD is nor what it has to do with Unix, and does not understand what wireless file sharing could be good for.

You still have not answered what I asked some time ago: have you ever used a compiler?


RE: Why would Palm be reluctant to have 3rd party Wi-Fi card
Winter_ @ 6/19/2004 8:47:13 PM #
I just realized that I said I would not get again into this, and anyway looks like people could not care less even if they actively tried... so, Facey, guess what? I believe you. The drivers are there. They work, and they surely are 5 KB long.
Let's just hope that the martians are not mean to their new livestock. Yuck!

Be happy. :)

RE: Why would Palm be reluctant to have 3rd party Wi-Fi cards?
LiveFaith @ 6/20/2004 9:57:35 AM #
;-o ... Hey Palm bashers. If you're so sure that the ship is sinking fast then why are you spending time posting here instead of shorting the stocks? If you're so sure, put your $$$ where your "posts" are. You 2 can become a millionaire.
But, if your wrong ...

Pat Horne; www.churchoflivingfaith.com

Of Course...

UberGeek @ 6/19/2004 12:31:57 AM #
How ironic. I JUST went out last week to purchase a Clie TH55.

....and I HAVE A Zire 71.

The ONLY reason I did so was for the Wi-Fi, as I have a wireless network at home school and work.

Here I am, 400 dollars poorer...

I'm ticked now.


RE: Of Course...
Strider_mt2k @ 6/19/2004 8:08:20 AM #
What makes a Zire71 with a wifi card more desirable than a TH55?

You can have it!

Gimme my TH55 any day by comparison.

RE: Of Course...
The Black Moose @ 6/19/2004 12:34:28 PM #
In my opinion, nothing. TH55 is great PDA. Yet, I would never buy it. All because of Memory Stick. I want SD/MMC for not only more affordable memory, but for the pre-programmed cards sold at stores. Personally, I might very well prefer the Zire 71 with a Wifi card over an Clie with integrated Wifi and Memory Stick.

Unless... Anyone know how to override copy protection (which may be illegal) to transfer pre-programmed MMC cards to Memory stick?

I am sure if you want to read more tirades on Mem stick, go to the Sony suspension of clies article, there must be many there. Some find it menial, others find it everything.

RE: Of Course...
UberGeek @ 6/19/2004 1:43:18 PM #
I know the th-55 is a much more robust handheld to begin with and I'm quite happy with it. I just found the whole situation to be ironic. --Any others in the same boat?
RE: Of Course...
Strider_mt2k @ 6/19/2004 11:02:24 PM #
While I'm not in that boat, I do have to admit to harboring bad feelings over Memory Stick.

In my case, I was upgrading from another Clie, so it was all good.

It was Palm's lousy workmanship that drove me to Sony. I had worse feelings over that.



RE: Of Course...
street @ 6/20/2004 5:43:44 AM #
My first Palm was a IBM Workpad and I have been a seriously addicted Palm user since then. Well, I now have a Zire 71 and bought a Tungsten C two momnths ago. I couldnīt want any longer for the wificard. I donīt regret. The Tungsten C is just the right device for me. I use at home and at my work (a school, which is covered fully wireless. The wireless part works flawlessly. You are connected in an instant. I find that it works faster than my Zire 71, which on the contrary has a slightly better screen. What I will do with the Zire 71? Keep it. Or give it to my daughter with a wirelees card in it :) (she will certainly appreciate the mp3 and photo-part). The Zire 71 is a wonderful device too, when you have no need for wireless.

RE: Of Course...
LiveFaith @ 6/20/2004 10:00:32 AM #
Strider_mt2k,
I think the point is the $400 that did not grow on a tree, not the specs.

Pat Horne; www.churchoflivingfaith.com
RE: Of Course...
Strider_mt2k @ 6/20/2004 1:16:51 PM #
And mine was that if the purchase has been made, and can't be taken back, then roll with the machine that's superior for the task.



One more model...

tfftruoa @ 6/19/2004 12:57:45 AM #
I believe he article failed to mention that this card will work with one other PalmOne model...The Tungsten C.

I would like to thank SanDisk for making wifi on the TC possible.

The Federation for the Responsible Use of Acronyms

RE: One more model...
samheddle @ 6/19/2004 5:02:45 PM #
Um, The T|C has WiFi built in.

Sarīcasm
;-o @ 6/19/2004 5:39:18 PM #
n. 1. A keen, reproachful expression; a satirical remark uttered with some degree of scorn or contempt; a taunt; a gibe; a cutting jest.
The sarcasms of those critics who imagine our art to be a matter of inspiration.
- Sir J. Reynolds.


-----------------------------------------------

clueless:

adj. 1. not providing any clue.
2. completely uninformed or unaware; hopelessly ignorant; utterly bewildered.
3. You.

samheddle: the previous post was an example of sarcasm
;-o @ 6/19/2004 11:01:32 PM #
Class dismissed.

RE: One more model...
samheddle @ 6/20/2004 8:13:52 PM #
As I've been in fourms in which people have posted the most inane, stupid comments I've had the pleasure of reading, my SarcasmMeter(TM) has been destroyed, and the result was that I took that remark as serious. Sorry.

Ha! I knew

Alric @ 6/19/2004 2:41:13 AM #
Months ago I said it. The reason there were no T|T T2 or T3 drivers for the Sandisk WiFi card was due to an obstruction by Palm and their desire to control their costumers.

I got an Axim X30 with BT AND WiFi and nearly 7 hours of battery life for $250. The other option was a T3 PLUS an SD WiFi card for close to $400?

This nailed the Palm coffin for me..

Cheers,

RE: Ha! I knew
Winter_ @ 6/19/2004 4:17:41 PM #
Facey, funny as always, answered something nice and informative here about how "uninformed" (to put it mildly) you are for getting a PocketPC instead of a Palm OS device. (so, Facey, looks like posts deletion happens because of your level of obnoxiousness, not because of evil plots wanting you to stop spreading your vital and credible anti-Palm info :).

Anyway, Alric, in case you didn't know, you can run Palm OS 4 on PocketPCs - and so you can run any Palm app you want... in case you don't find what you need native for PocketPC, of course. Which I'm starting to think is unlikely.

http://pocketprof.org/running_palm_os_software.htm

(if you try / have tried that, please tell us if it works OK!)

The funny thing now is that Facey will disdain that capability of PocketPCs saying that "it is only OS 4, not OS 5"... like shown here...

(wow, Facey, THIS is pityful! your post saying THIS was deleted! aw...)

Anyway, let's go on. The funny thing is that with his next breath he will say that the "difference between OS 5 and OS 4 is meaningless, as we already know"... as shown here:

http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=6915#95335

Learning logic with Facey: a mind-bending experience!


So Frosty, where is this PalmOS emulator for PPC? Hmmmmm?
;-o @ 6/19/2004 9:16:25 PM #
you can run Palm OS 4 on PocketPCs

So, Frosty, have you actually used a PPC and run Palm apps on it with an emulator? Please enlighten us. Or are you just spouting more uninformed BS again. I told you before that years ago someone made a very crude emulator that was PalmOS 2 level. The new emulator you reference sounds like beta/vaporware. But no doubt you have extensive experience using it. Time for you to start advocating JAVA for Palm again...

Oops - oh well :>
Winter_ @ 6/20/2004 9:11:25 AM #
Heh. I was about to say something like "the emulator is where your OS 5 BT SD drivers are" (ah, the Dark Side IS seductive), but well, I don't want to play your game :). "Never wrestle with a pig - you both get all dirty, and the pig likes it"

So I guess I should accept, publicly, that this time you have a point - kind of. I didn't reach the actual downloadable when I posted that link, and I confess I thought it was right there. But actually looks like it was stopped cold about 2001 because of legal problems (note that: not because it could not be done!!). Abosco mentioned something about this, but didn't locate it properly (he said that when talking about the Zaurus, which looks like having the complete POSE emulator - not only as Linux source but also as a standard Debian package, which should be installable with a single command).

Let's see then what we DO have for PocketPC. For starters, there's still the basic question: which Palm OS app would you want that is unavailable, or without equivalent, on the Pocket PC side? (some time ago I already asked you and never got an answer, even though I gave you some examples of PocketPC apps not available on the Palm OS side...)

I'll make things easier for you and assume that for any reason you still want some kind of cute little calendar only available to Palm OS. Or perhaps you have some expensive software you want to keep, who knows, perhaps that can happen - even though sometimes the PocketPC alternative would be more capable and free (*chuckle*) (I'm chuckling a lot lately, heh).

So let's go for it. You have 2 different sources on Palm's website (Windows and Unix/Linux).
I'd try first to compile the Windows source using M$'s tools.
If that didn't work -which is probable, and I don't know how easy or hard could be making it work-, I'd try compiling the Linux version. Remeber that GCC, the "Linux compiler", got ported some time ago to run natively on PocketPC? Things got (even) better meanwhile. Looks like all the needed pieces are here:
http://mamaich.kasone.com/fr_pocket.htm
I'll translate that to you: Cygwin is the Windows "environment" that lets Linux programs compile and run on Windows. EVEN THAT has been ported to PocketPC. And so in that page you can see screen captures of Bochs - a whole PC emulator for Linux- running on the Pocket PC. And the emulator is running Linux (whoa!) and old MSDOS games. (Remember when you said "Pocket PC is a joke"?)

Now, to make things interesting, you COULD run the PalmOS emulator on the Linux installed on Bochs... or even install a full Win9x on Bochs, and THERE you could also run the Palm emulator. In fact you could even run the Palm Simulator, which is Palm OS 5 compatible and surely faster than the emulator. Nice, huh? :D
However, since that would surely still be slow, let's try a bit harder.

I would try using GCC+Cygwin on the PocketPC to compile the Linux source of the Palm OS emulator.
I can't assure it WILL work until I try, but I'm already eyeing M$'s tools (mainly the PocketPC emulator, since looks like I won't need anything else ;). When I try I'll report - whether it works or it doesn't. That won't happen until about mid-July, anyway. So you have about 4 weeks to pray for it not to work ;).

Disclaimer: I'm just talking about possible uses of GCC and Cygwin on the PocketPC platform to take advantage from existing code. This discussion is only for educational purposes; as already mentioned, porting (or perhaps even using) the Palm OS Emulator to a PocketPC could be (somehow?) illegal or at least frowned-upon by whole hordes of fully armed, trained to kill, well fed and bored-of-being-idle lawyers, so I'm not encouraging you to do so - in fact perhaps you shouldn't. Use these ideas at your own risk.
And don't use dangerous machinery while doing it, anyway.

(However, I'd like to know what would a lawyer say about using the Palm OS emulator/simulator over Windows9x over Bochs on the PocketPC... :)


Facey's Experience
Winter_ @ 6/20/2004 10:45:08 PM #
A good rule of thumb for newbies to observe is to listen and read before they start spouting off about things they know nothing of.
Like when you say, "JAVA is useless"? (caps and all)

The difference between me and you (well, one of them, thanks Dog), is that I like to start saying what I DO and DON'T know. If someone corrects me, good, because then I'll know more.

In the meantime, you postulate, predict, fail to produce proof of anything, and anyway insult anyone who fails to agree with you - and sometimes even the ones who are like minded. But surely that's just because you're experienced.

You have a bloated, unstable OS that makes simple functions (like closing programs) much more tedious than is necessary.

Have you ever tried putting 2 .jpg (or .doc, or .mp3, or whatever) files on 2 different folders on a memory card by hotsyncing? (is that simple enough for you?) It's not only tedious and SLOW for only 1 file - it's just impossible for 2 files.
Now, I must accept that Palm OS is not bloated. At all. In fact it could use some flesh to cover those bones.

You get a smaller software library, but this is definitely less of a factor in 2004, since most major Palm apps now have good PPC equivalents. Two years ago, this wasn't the case.
Hey, how did you realize that now is not, well, 2 years ago? Somebody told you, huh?

That's what you get.
Apart from a platform that does not consider itself as just "a glorified agenda". A platform capable of emulating a full PC or running a nasty full web server like Apache - and not only calculators and maps and book readers, even though they use the same 400 MHz processors. And if chosen correctly, you even get devices capable of switching OSes and behaving like full computers.

You don't get a stable, slick, intuitive OS.

Stable? I don't remember which one was the first app I installed, but I do remember that the 5th one was Crash - so that the device would soft-reset itself as necessary without having to take it out of the case every 15 minutes. But don't let that stop you, man. Tell me more about stability, you Windows-95-is-stable freak.

Yesterday I had to just delete Acrobat Reader because no app would run, and most would cause a crash. One of them managed to complain about low memory (before crashing), even though I had 15 MB free. Hotsync also reliably died, so I was damn stuck. And how did I think about deleting Acrobat Reader and not any other program? I had hotsynced a 20 KB PDF earlier that day, so just tried that. And it worked, thanks Dog. Surely that's intuitive - apart from stable.

You don't get the ability to easily code your own apps.

Do you know .NET, by M$? (No, of course you don't). Have at least ever heard anything about it? It's, erm, like say PDAToolbox, but BIG. VERY big. And POWERFUL. VERY powerful. And it's free. VERY... well, whatever, you get the idea.
So: have you realized how many apps are appearing based on .NET Compact Edition? (No, you haven't. Well, you should).
What is doing Palm in the meantime? Or better, what can they possibly do, apart from letting you toy away (after paying) with cute thingies like PDAtoolbox? Palm OS is right now just a nasty bottleneck.

Dear Dog, who would have guessed that ***I*** would end up actually defending M$... How sick. :P
Well, even the Open Source community is making 2 .NET clones (compatible and cross-platform), so Linux is covered. The problem is still: what about Palm?


Oh, about the apps... You mean there is no iSilo for PPC?
http://www.isilo.com/download/iSiloPPC.htm
(are you sure you don't want Avantgo with that? you're full of hot air, blah, blah blah...)

DALauncher? Hey, I thought that's exactly one of the kind of things you don't need on PocketPCs... they CAN multitask properly, remeber? So you can substitute minicalc, pop up calc and the-next-calc-hack-you-can-think-of by a proper calc.
Same thing for TealHack.
If there are specific functionalities of hacks unavailable on PocketPCs, please share.

And I see you like launchers. Cool. Reportedly they are not that necessary there... you know PocketPCs can install apps on external memory without problems, do you? Anyway, you can choose here.
http://www.hpc.net/file.asp?ObjectID=46881

McPhiling? I guess the standard, included explorer will be enough, thanks. You see, they have a filesystem, so they have utilities to manage it.

T9?? I'd prefer Fitaly...
http://www.textware.com/wince/pocketpcfitaly.htm
...but you could try PDAMill's TopKey or WordLogic's predictive keyboard.

Vexed? Irked is a direct port.

CryptoPad? eWallet is cross-platform.

Uninstaller? Remover looks more capable, and free - for now.
http://www.geocities.com/s_k_s_k_s_kru/util.html#remover

Icon manager and icon editor?? Are you joking?
http://www.pocketicon.com/

HanDBase? Man, that's available in both platforms.
http://www.ddhsoftware.com/handbase.html

HandyShopper? Ha! I've seen a number of shopping lists, but surely you'll ask for exactly this... Well, anyway the author has switched to PocketPC and is working on HS3... look for yourself at question 29 at HandyShopper's FAQ:
http://www.ggaub.com/hs/faq.html

Perhaps you should try using Google a little bit? (*chuckle*)

Well, now let me ask for some apps. Note that I have hardly used PocketPCs, but these are some of the interesting apps I've stumbled into and I can't find for Palm.
VNC server
WiFive323 (Voice over IP)
WiFiFoFum, or PocketWarrior (or any other WiFi scanner)
Any of the lot of games using GAPIdraw, which only recently got ported to Palm OS (there are 126 of them!)
GCC, Cygwin (full development power everywhere you go)
Python (scripting - very fast app creation, even with GUI with adequate add-ons)
a selection of JVMs (forget you are on a strange platform)
MAME and other emulators, including a full PC emulator (Bochs), capable of running Linux and Windows 95/98 - hey, you didn't say a thing about this! :)
Quake

(I will not ask for Apache - the web server - and the like, though they ARE available for PocketPC. Yuck)

If you can come up with a STABLE PalmOS 4 or 5 emulator for PPC in the next month, I will pay you $100 for the file. There are thousands of us that would love to use PPC hardware yet still have access to our (superior) PalmOS app library.

Hey, imagine how much would be paid for some way (like, drivers?) of making Palm's BT SD card work on OS 5 devices! : >

Others wiser than you have tried and failed, Frosty.

I already said that the emulator was stopped because of legal reasons - not because it was "too difficult". In fact the emulator was in Beta and had a publication date. So now, if things go like they should, there will no need of wisdom. The pieces are there, my man, and I already outlined the process - even though porting and C programming are not my strengths.

Now, imagine which kind of herculean task would be emulating Windows CE on a Palm PDA...

Come up with the emulator in the next 4 weeks and you'll get my $100
Yeah, sure, I believe you. Anyway, read my post again: I said I'll be able to start trying on mid-July, if all goes well.
But I'll let you know what comes out, wheter it's positive or negative. You know, I don't like that game of "if it works then I was right. If it doesn't work, then I was right and there is some evil plot against me". Sounds familiar? :)

RE: Ha! I knew
I.M Anonymous @ 6/21/2004 1:44:29 AM #
Let's see then what we DO have for PocketPC. For starters, there's still the basic question: which Palm OS app would you want that is unavailable, or without equivalent, on the Pocket PC side? (some time ago I already asked you and never got an answer, even though I gave you some examples of PocketPC apps not available on the Palm OS side...)

Okay, so which PPC app is it that can edit native Microsoft Office files without converting them to some "Pocket Office" format which removes basic office features such as tables? I didn't think so.

Plus, is there anything like the PWCPP for PPC? I didn't think so either.

RE: Ha! I knew
Winter_ @ 6/21/2004 7:50:44 AM #
Things continue getting interesting. So now PWCPP is a reason to go with Palm OS? I NEVER heard that SerialBox, the equivalent for Mac OS, was a reason to go with the Mac - and there is not equivalent for Windows that I know of.
Surely a reason is that [k], keygens and the like DO exist for the other platforms, don't they? Or are they just some kind of specific and patented Palm OS technology?
How surreal.

Anyway, I.M. Anonymous: I'm NOT, repeat, NOT advocating for Pocket PCs. I'm just pointing out to some points that they have incredibly better covered than Palm OS. And that's not because they're good, it's just because Palm OS is SO BAD. And while people keep singing how perfect Palm OS is, the more stale it will get. Facey is the perfect example: if you read his posts you'll end up believing that there is no need for Palm OS 6, because everything you can possibly want to do with a PDA was covered with OS 3 at most - surely with earlier versions too. "PDAs are not desktop computers" - a genius, I tell you. (Now looks like Sony stops Clies and starts OQO and such - heh)

Then, of course, you will casually see what PocketPCs can do, even on older hardware or previous OS versions - and your jaw will feel like lead. I'll repeat what I've said some times now: Palm OS was surely PERFECT for older/limited devices (m100 series, Zire) , but selling T3-class hardware with Palm OS 5 IS a crime. Hardware several times more powerful that many of the computers I've used on my life, and yet it does - what? Calendars? Thanks Dog it plays MP3. My 120 MHz PowerMac with 16 Mb RAM did that, and a bunch of other things too - all at the same time. (and the OS on disk could be reduced to about 20 Mb...)

And put it all in context: we're talking about Micro$oft, who in a lovely (though, for the people that know them, perfectly expectable) irony can't come up with a good Pocket Word, and being Micro$oft it's just logical that Dataviz won't try to do a Documents To Go for PocketPC, so the platform is stuck with that contraption. I LOVE that, believe me. But where is Palm OS going in the meantime?

As if this had not been said enough times: Remember Internet Explorer 2.0? And Windows 3? Previous versions where abysmal, but these were kinda "good enough - and cheap!" for some people.
What happened when M$ put out IE 3? And Win95?
And what was the competition doing?

Non P1 models

tfftruoa @ 6/19/2004 2:20:50 PM #
PalmOne isn't the only maker of SD enabled palms. Tapwave Zodiac and Garmin iQue are both SDIO palm os dvices that were not effected by P1 messing up their hardware drivers. Any news on whether these devices will work with the card?

The Federation for the Responsible Use of Acronyms

You want Wi-Fi Cheap?

Gekko @ 6/20/2004 10:24:16 AM #
PalmOne can't compete anymore. Dell has commoditized the PDA market. Do an honest comparison of the features of Dell's $249 device vs. the $399 T3. Let's hear all of the excuses!

Dell Axim X30 Handheld 312MHz
$249 and you get 312MHz XScale, 64MB RAM, 64MB ROM, SD Slot, Wi-Fi AND Bluetooth built-in, Removable Battery, and new Windows Mobile.

http://www1.us.dell.com/content/products/compare.aspx/pda?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&~ck=bt

http://www.brighthand.com/article/Dell_Axim_X30_Review?site=PPC



RE: You want Wi-Fi Cheap?
Winter_ @ 6/20/2004 10:46:38 AM #
If I had not already the T3, my answer would be "please tell me it does Linux..."

:(

RE: You want Wi-Fi Cheap?
Rome @ 6/20/2004 12:04:58 PM #
Gekko,

If you think the mobile device market (PDAs/smartphones/MP3 players, etc) will go the way of PC market, yes, Dell has commoditized the market. But, Dell only has 6-7% of the total PDA market since launching its first PDA more 18 months ago, which is significantly less than the 25% market share they were predicting at the time.

One needs to look no further than the cell phone market to know that form factor matters. Nokia is losing market shares these days mainly due to its lack of flip phones product offerings.

While T3 may not compare favorably to the new Dell, the Zire 72 holds its own against Dell....about the same price with the same processor but one trades the wifi for a 1.2 mp camera. Of course, there is always that Palm OS vs Pocket PC debate.

Just my $0.02

The "Dell Effect"
Gekko @ 6/21/2004 4:30:43 PM #
The "Dell Effect" is defined as the drop in prices and resulting increases in value that occur when Dell enters a product category or new market.

where can I buy it?

spc8020482 @ 7/19/2004 4:52:08 PM #
Cannot find it online or in stores that carry SanDisk anywhere. article says available late June or July. Even SanDisk site doesn't have it for sale like other products are. Has anyone bought one yet? Where?

RE: where can I buy it?
spc8020482 @ 8/27/2004 1:07:39 PM #
Looks like it is now available at a lot of places. Search by part number, SDWSDB-000-768, and it's easy to find - just that many sites do not clearly mention Palm Zire 71 even though the card works. I bought one and love it. Can't resist finding hot spots and checking my yahoo mail, directions, or whatever I need, wherever I am. Love having Internet on the go without toting around my laptop.

oops > sdwsdb-000-a10m
spc8020482 @ 8/27/2004 1:19:02 PM #
should've checked my order better. Was actually sdwsdb-000-a10m as part number. The 768 version comes up in a lot of searches too. Not sure if it is different.
Top