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.
Wish List: www.PalmKB.com/wish.html
the secret to enjoying your job is to have a hobby that's even worse
My PDAs: Visor --> Visor Neo (blue) --> Zire 71 --> Tungsten T3 (with 4 of 6 screws still remaining) ~?~> zodiac 2?
Current devices: Treo 650 + Axim X50vDevice graveyard: Palm Vx, Cassiopeia E100, LG Phenom HPC, Palm M515, Treo 300, Treo 600
Such a shame about Fossil. Mike Mace offered some interesting insider insight into this and mentioned that Fossil killed some "achingly great" products that in his opinion would have sold much better than these first attempts at Palm OS watches: http://mobileopportunity.blogspot.com/2005/11/look-whats-number-one.html
For some time I've been thinking I might pick one of these up, remove the band, and use it like a pocket watch, which I used to carry regularly anyway. I think part of what has kept basic PDAs from getting a better market is that they're still too big to be attractive for a lot of folks. Fossil pioneered a really tiny PDA, just not quite small enough for a normal human wristwatch. I'm hoping someone picks up on the new flexible display technologies that are so thin and use so little power to make a credit-card sized PDA that you can keep in your wallet. I believe they'd sell very well.David BeersPikesoft Mobile ComputingSoftware Everywhere blogwww.pikesoft.com/blog
In all seriousness, remember Mike Cane's idea of the REX-style ultra-thin credit card sized monochrome Palm? Really, something like 16mb RAM, OS 4.1 and a 66mhz Dragonball are plenty for basic PIM & E-book tasks *IF* it can be produced & sold cheaply/profitably enough. I'd love to see relatively humble specs & OS mated to a cutting edge flexible/rollable display or to an ultra-thin PDA. That'd be something for emerging markets as well.
Barring that, I STILL say that Palm should resurrect the sleek Visor Edge formfactor, fix the godawful stylus on it, and shoehorn TX level features into something that'd be sold as high-margin, limited run, "end of an era" type commemorative thing...the RAZR of PDAs if you will...or would that be too rich for Palm's miserly tastes right now? Heck it wouldn't be as outlandish as the 20th Anniversary Macintosh was! ;-) (Still the greatest guilty pleasure in computing history!)
Pilot 1000-->Pilot 5000-->PalmPilot Pro-->IIIe-->Vx-->m505-->T|T-->T|T2-->T|C-->T|T3-->T|T5-->TX
Next you're going to have me smoking a pipe and sipping Cognac. Got to thinking about why I stopped carrying the pocket watch and then I realized it happened after college when I couldn't wear jeans to work anymore. One of the strange ironies of fashion is that the only pants that have watch pockets any more are bluejeans.
In all seriousness, remember Mike Cane's idea of the REX-style ultra-thin credit card sized monochrome Palm?
That's the ticket.
Barring that, I STILL say that Palm should resurrect the sleek Visor Edge formfactor, fix the godawful stylus on it, and shoehorn TX level features into something that'd be sold as high-margin, limited run, "end of an era" type commemorative thing...
I'm with you on that one. Wouldn't even need the TX features, as far as I'm concerned. E2 features would do it if it meant they could get it into that lovely wafer thin metal enclosure.
David BeersPikesoft Mobile ComputingSoftware Everywhere blogwww.pikesoft.com/blog
Yep, and its "cousin" is for sale! I didn't play with it, but a PCMCIA card with a monochrome touch screen, simple PIM functions and even Chinese character handwriting recognition is for sale in local stores. Next time I'm downtown I intend to have a closer look, although it won't be something I would buy.It might not be the "mythical color HandEra", but I'm liking my TX anyway.
------------------------Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.------------------------
The Palm eCONomy = Communismô
The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038
NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823
The real question is who else has already left without saying goodbye. Samsung, I'm looking in your direction.-------------------------------Editor, http://Pocketfactory.comContributing Editor, http://digitalmediathoughts.com
Speaking of Fossil; wouldn't that make an appropriate name for Palm OS Garnet, in light of the fact Access must drop the Palm name from its OS? FrankenFossil. I like that...it has a certain je ne sais quoi.-------------------------------Editor, http://Pocketfactory.comContributing Editor, http://digitalmediathoughts.com
So Garmin hangs on with one "new" model and a soon-to-be-liquidated warehouse of old iQues. Symbol, AlphaSmart, and Aceeca, and GSPda may or may not still be producing/shipping existing models but haven't announced anything new in ages. Everyone else is either vapor or long since out of the game.
AlphaSmart is also toast. The were sold off last year.
Aceeca probably sells less than 5,000 units/quarter.
The Palm eCONomy was all a scam.------------------------Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.------------------------
If you buy high, then sell low, it's not that "it" was a "scam", it's that "you", are a "dick wad". :)
Hope this helps! :)------"People who like M$ products tend to be insecure crowd-following newbies lacking in experience and imagination."
Like I said before, I really don't think the device makers are even close to having this mobile device thing figured out. I'm not sure I have the answer, I just know that nothing's quite working out for me the way it should.David BeersPikesoft Mobile ComputingSoftware Everywhere blogwww.pikesoft.com/blog
I REALLY wish Palm would introduce the m100-style "push up on the d-pad when the Palm is off to briefly show the clock onscreen".
You know, I still see a fair number of schoolteachers/aged geeks/nerdy teenagers wearing those Casio Databank watches. You remember those things with the micro membrane keyboards and like 4k of RAM. If that audience didn't embrace the Fossil Wrist PDA then NO ONE would.Pilot 1000-->Pilot 5000-->PalmPilot Pro-->IIIe-->Vx-->m505-->T|T-->T|T2-->T|C-->T|T3-->T|T5-->TX
Are those the funkadelic ones that synched with the PC through this Windows software that put these flashing bars on the monitor screen?David BeersPikesoft Mobile ComputingSoftware Everywhere blogwww.pikesoft.com/blog
The ones that synched via strobing CRT patterns were actually Timex DataLinks watches. They actually managed to hang around until 1997/1998 or so, a relative eternity in the mobile tech world. They looked like the iconic Timex Ironman watch but pudgier and less sporty.
You can do that on the Treo with Keyguardtime:
Almost no one I know wears a watch
I'm sorry but either:a. you know almost no oneb. you spend a lot of time in front of computer screens or with people in front of computer screensc. Knowing the correct time isn't important to your job or life
The watch is far from obsolete:- you can see the time with a quick flick of the wrist; you have to funble a Pda or phone out of your pocket and then possibly switch it on or to the correct screen- battery life is measured in years rather than in hours or days. If you're wealthy enough you can even buy a Swiss watch which doesn't need a battery!- My $50 Timex has an accuracy drift of about one or two seconds per year. Compare to a $300 Palm which drifts about one or two seconds a day. Yes, network time servers keep the computers etc accurate but what happens when you don't have a connection?- the watch can be far more discrete, especially the luminous dials in the dark. Just picture the green berets out on a covert night mission, deep in enemy territory switching on their mobiles to see what time to strike!
- the question is, are there more watches than phones in the world today? Let's face it, the watch manufacturers aren't going out of business.The watch is far from obsolete."It is commonly said, and more particularly by Lord Shaftesbury, that ridicule is the best test of truth".Lord Chesterfield
only a true nerd would wear this. maybe good for someone who works a help desk, works at compusa, or lives in CO???
anyway, why put this piece of junk on your wrist one your smartphone can do it all?
May You Live in Interesting Times
Yea, well so did Dick Tracy, long before the word smartphone was even coined!
I'll be damned! :-ONaio
I'll bet Beersy's kids will turn out to look a LOT like the mailman.------------------------Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.------------------------
Ipso facto I was surprised with his "working" OS choice. He seemed to be like a real MSBasher...Naio
Beersy develops apps for mobile devices. The best (and largest variety of) development tools are for Windows. As much as Beersy smells like a granola-crunching, tree-hugging, shower-avoiding, hybrid-driving, hippie-aping Apple Cultist, he'd be at a distinct disadvantage if he tried to use MacOS.------------------------Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.------------------------
Being a multi-platform developer with one single-beloved OS must not be easy... :-)Ivan
But seriously, and for the record, I'm not an anti-Microsoft bigot. And yes, Windows does give you the widest range of options for targeting various mobile platforms as I do.
Now, if you don't mind, I've got other things to do. Saturday's my bath day.David BeersPikesoft Mobile ComputingSoftware Everywhere blogwww.pikesoft.com/blog
At the risk of sounding like an elitist snob, those of us who really are technically skilled, having worked with various platforms for many years, are platform agnostic. We don't hold religious devotion to any one operating system. Oh sure, we may have our preferences, but only just. Operating systems are merely the canvas upon which art is created. Applications are the tools which play a far more important role. It is the USER that is the artist, not the OS.-------------------------------Editor, http://Pocketfactory.comContributing Editor, http://digitalmediathoughts.com
If we'd held the industry to higher standards back in the day, finding things to whine about platform mumble wouldn't be like shooting fish in a barrel now.
and yes, just for the record, linux sucks. it's a bad imitation of a 22 year old operating system.May You Live in Interesting Times
And anyone who drinks Pepsi sucks.
And PalmOS sucks too.
So does Windows Mobile.
Windows XP as well.
And not to forget, the suctastic MacOS.
Amiga sucked, EPOC sucked, Atari sucked, Commodore Vic 20/64 sucked, Coleco Adam sucked, DOS sucked.
Bastard! Vile seething dog of the cola wars! My Coke can kick your gay blue Pepsi ass any day! And your OS sucks too! In fact....every OS sucks! http://www.deadtroll.com/video/ossuckscable.html-------------------------------Editor, http://Pocketfactory.comContributing Editor, http://digitalmediathoughts.com
Foo, I'm getting the feeling you don't have a lot of respect for open source programs. While I agree that a lot of them are badly designed, half-finished usability nightmares (see Linux, XMLTV, dozens of others) there are some open source projects which have developed quite nicely: Mozilla, FreeCraft, others. Yeah, the "movement" produces a lot of idiots and bad software, but there's a definite upside for it.
Them's fightin' words!
I'm not implying that all open source projects are bad, but in general that has been the trend. Firefox and Thunderbird are good examples of Open Source done right, however it's important to keep in mind those applications originated as COMMERCIAL software designed by highly skilled (PAID) developers who understand software design, and usability. In cases where commercial software BECOMES open source, the development model works well. Another example is a server-side open source Content Management System (CMS) that I use quite often when designing websites for clients, called Mambo. This software too originated as a commercial software developed by an Australian company named Miro. Mambo is fantastic, though not without its flaws. And now a recent spat within the Mambo community resulted in secession of a large portion of the community who then created a new branch called Joomla. It's like the bloody civil war in the mambo forums now. One need only mention certain topics, and the battle of BullSh1t Run begins.
As I said, in cases where commercial software goes open source, the model works. In cases where software begins purely as open source, designed entirely by amateurs, the results are badly designed software. Open source advocates constantly extol the fact their software is free! That's not an endorsement...it's an indictment. Open source software is free because no one would pay for it. It's usually not commercial quality software. Just look at Linux. While I love it for its virtues as a server platform, and use it quite often for that purpose, it is absolutely worthless as a desktop client platform. The interface is a poorly designed Windows-clone, inconsistency abounds throughout the GUI. My greatest criticism is that I don't see Linux (desktop) as an innovative operating system. It current GUI lags FAR behind it's commercial cousins; namely OSX and Vista. Even XP outshines it in terms of ease of use and software availability. I've followed the development of this OS since the late nineties, and each time I install in on my machines, I end up removing it from my Hard drive soon after. The usual argument I an others get from GPL zealots, in lodging these criticisms against KDE and Gnome, is that I'm a Windows drone afraid of learning something new. Sorry, that dog won't hunt. Just the opposite is true in my case; I'm always first in line to try new technology. A few years ago I migrated from Windows to the then "new" OSX as my primary home desktop. Quality and innovative design are what interests me, and Linux has neither.
Linux still cannot install reliably or consistently across various hardware configurations. I was recently reminded of this when I attempted to install Ubuntu on one of my old Pentium 4 systems, which failed to take not once, not twice, but thrice! I gave up a burned a copy of OpenSuse 10.0 which installed flawlessly. But the end results are always the same; Linux continues to improve in tiny baby steps with each passing year, but not enough to challenge commercial operating systems as a serious desktop.
That said, watch out for Novell. They are pumping serious R&D into their distribution. And for the first time we're starting to see some real innovation that could result in a Linux desktop that is every bit as good as OSX or Vista. Novell recently unveiled its work with XGL, a hardware accelerated desktop based on the next iteration of OpenGL. This allows Linux to perform all the fancy eye-candy feats that OSX and Vista are doing, such as animated windows and transparency effects. Here are some mockups of Novell's desktop concepts...
And some rather interesting videos of Novell's new XGL desktop. Very cool stuff...
Of course, all this illustrates my point that open source does best when it either originates as, or is co-developed with commercial support.
Mark my words...Novell is going to put desktop Linux on the map...FINALLY!-------------------------------Editor, http://Pocketfactory.comContributing Editor, http://digitalmediathoughts.com
Sure. Just look at TCPMP. Oh wait a minute - it's actually the best video playing application available for mobile devices. Nevermind. What about LAME? Nevermind. FileZ? Nevermind.
Kent, I realize most of the open source programs out there are crap, but remember: most available commercial apps are crap as well. If 1% of open source apps are well coded and 5% of commercial apps are well coded, is that reason enough to write off the open source movement?
I do agree that "free" is not a good enough reason for me to install schlockware on my devices. Over the years I've gradually cut down on the number of freeware apps I have on my PDAs as I think it makes more sense in the long run to use only best of breed apps - even if they're not "free". Open source does still play a useful role in providing obscure software that fills niches that would never be profitable enough to attract commercial developers.
TVoR------------------------Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.------------------------
Right now, hybrids are somewhat of a marketing gimmick (especially designed for tree huggers here in California). They sell well to the hypocrites that put "No blood for oil" stickers on their hybrid, yet somehow manage to rationalize also driving their empty, 5000 pound, 15 M.P.G. sport utility up to Lake Tahoe every weekend. The Honda Civic Hybrid doesn't even really get a he11 of a lot better mileage than the regular Civics when driven the way people actually drive their vehicles. When you factor in the extra expense and finite battery life, most current hybrids turn out to not be worth the hassle. The Toyota Prius is the exception, though - it's the first (and only) hybrid that makes sense, in my opinion. But these vehicle should all be considered as beta tests - while eventually hybrid/fuel cell/solar/etc. technology will make current hehicles look like pigs, they are currently experiments in progress. Despite that eventuality, it's amazing to see how little things have changed in overall efficiency + design of internal combustion engine-powered vehicles in the past 100 years. The Ford Model T could still be on the roads today with a few minor modifications!
I'm sorry, but knowing as many of the people involved as I do, and having seen as much of the source code as I have. I've got to say that is, by far, the funniest remark I've seen on this forum.
Sturgeon's law applies equally to commercial and non commercial software, and a lot of failed commercial crap has been open sourced. You hear about the successes far more readily than you hear about the crap, but 90% of it still is.
There are three reasons why an open source project works, and they're the same three reasons why a closed source project works:
1) The right people2) The right placeand3) The right time.
If you put people who know the technology needed to solve the problem together at a time when the solution to the problem is interesting, the problem gets solved.
The only difference between commercial and non-commercial software development is that money makes it easier to get the right people together in the right place at the right time. Otherwise, you're pretty much stuck with serendipity.
The same is the only difference between source-available and source-restricted software.
That comment is rather droll coming from someone who just left PalmSource - a company that lacked the right people, the right place and the right time.
They are floating on a barge near aswan now, though, imo.May You Live in Interesting Times
They are floating on a barge near aswan now, though, imo.
Heh heh heh.
That was vicious, Marty.
Still, I don't see how a company that had around 50% of its employees being dead wood qualifies in your books as having "the right people". Maybe if you mean "having A FEW of the right people". Or more correctly, HAD a few of the right people. I guess this is all water under the bridge now as PalmSource floats slowly towards that huge waterfall at the Aswan Dam.
By the time they started shipping, the PalmOS world had moved on.
Maybe a resurrection with a slightly larger, OLED color screen and other usability changes would make these viable. But these were designed like the Treo 650 - "just enough to get by" rather than truly revolutionary.
The Treo had little competition and could get away with it, but Fossil seems to have found themselves trying to get $200.00 for something most people saw as a geeky "gimmick" worth less than $50 bucks. You can store most of the same info in a cell phone you carry around anyhow (it's nearly bigger than a modern cell phone), it was a satellite to your PDA which is a satellite to your workstation - plus, too many batteries to worry about. The Palm PIMs weren't all that interesting, and keeping it all in sync was simply more work than I thought reasonable for a wristwatch.
Just because you CAN build a Palm into a wristwatch doesn't mean you SHOULD. (well - do it for the fun of it, but look closer before committing to manufacturing them for a $200 target audience).