Comments on: Treo 680 Palm Cradle Incompatibilities

Palm has posted a new document to their support site regarding the new Treo 680's compatibility with older versions of the Palm Treo Cradle.

Despite fitting the formfactor of the Treo 680 and sharing the same Athena/MultiConnector interface, Rev A & B variants of the Palm Treo Cradle with part # 180-10022-00 are supposedly incompatible with the Treo 680's battery and power system requirements.

Return to Story - Permalink

Article 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.

Start a new Comment Down

Gosh... So many questions...

Patrick @ 1/21/2007 11:24:59 PM # Q
1. Is the damage to the battery, to the 680, or to both?
2. Is the damage permanent?
3. My chargers for the 650 and 680 have different specs (e.g., 5.0 vs. 5.2 volts). I have noticed that when I use the 650's charger, the battery indicator sometimes drops several percentage points immediately upon disconnection (e.g., 100 ==> 96). Doesn't this suggest that the old chargers are also incompatible?
4. Why did it take so long to post this information? Surely you knew about it as far back as the design time of the 680?

Reply to this comment


joad @ 1/22/2007 1:36:33 AM # Q
Whaddya want for $60.00, anyhow - an accessory that will last for 2 models in a row...?

Used to be we'd get a cradle included with the handheld. Then Palm held the cradle back, decided to "charge" (hilarious pun, I know) extra for those who wanted them. Also touted "universal" connectors.

Now they seem to have released a handheld that wasn't designed for the existing accessory that thousands purchased with their 650's and will expect to use with the new model. They *won't* "get the memo" from Palm, and will apparently wreck their brand new phones.

Foolishly, we trust Palm to have finally gotten it together with the "Athena" connector. Foolishly.

RE: Nice.
jfme @ 1/22/2007 7:45:01 AM # Q
Smart way to force an accessory upgrade without really changing anything.

Hopefully, the Treo 680 own's charging cable is not incompatible as well...

Reply to this comment


2xs @ 1/22/2007 2:42:55 AM # Q
ok, i have the mentioned part number, but where can I find the revision. but as it's "palmOne" branded i have obviously one of the incompatbles >:-( Bought in December last year... thx palm !!!

Palm Professional -> Palm III -> Palm Vx -> Palm m505 -> Palm TT2 -> Palm TT3 -> Palm TX
Reply to this comment

Cables good, cradle bad

michael.graff @ 1/22/2007 11:57:04 AM # Q
According to the Palm document, the cables that came with the older cradles are okay to use directly, it's just the cradle itself that's a problem.

That suggests that the problem is somewhat limited and that other chargers and cables are okay.

I wonder what "incorrect electrical signals" are being sent by the older cradles.

RE: Cables good, cradle bad
bbmitch @ 1/22/2007 3:13:29 PM # Q
I have seen similar symptoms. I bought my 680 and just plugged it in to my old 650 charger and cable (in fact my 680 charger is still in the box).

I also own
Seidio USB Travel Kit
Seido 8" Sync & Charge cable (with hotsync button)

With these accessories I have seen the same issue. In particular, the 680 wont go into screen off mode with the power button. Instead the screen brightness is set to lowest level (so you can still see a very dim screen). The Power button wont wake up the device (because it isnt off). The only way to get out of this "mode" is to reset the device.

Reply to this comment

Concern about other chargers

landrew4 @ 1/22/2007 6:52:05 PM # Q
Since my company had lots of different types of cradles and chargers now being used for Treo 680s (because they fit), this article (and what it doesn't state especially) is cause for great concern. I just sent the following question to Palm, I'll post an update if I hear back.

"Just read Solution ID: 42891 and have quite a few concerns since my company just purchased 680s for everyone. So far all the Palm cradles we have identified are on your incompatible list (former 650 users), but they have been being used with the 680s for weeks! We also have people with Seidio and other 3rd party cradles as well as cradles and GPS units for cars. Based on the information in your article we now have fears that any of these could permanently? damage our new 680s. Since the connector hasn't changed and all these charging devices fit, how can we determine which could cause problems and which not. Also how can we determine if we have already damaged the devices if we haven't seen any of the more obvious symptoms you listed. And if we have, is there any way of fixing them? I understand you cannot be responsible for all 3rd party accessories, but when you release a device with a common connector that really isn't common (bad idea to begin with) it should be very clear that this is a TRAP, not a feature."

RE: Concern about other chargers
hkklife @ 1/22/2007 8:31:49 PM # Q
More than likely they'll just ignore it.

It's easier to quietly release knowledgebase article on their support page than actually attempt to communicate with the customer and/or maintain some modicum of professionalism, honesty, and integrity about testing their products and getting them right the "first time". IF Palm really cared, they'd either have a mail-in rebate type offer of a new cradle for all new Treo 680 purchasers and/or a program to send in your old cradle and get a new one (plus maybe a free stylus to make up for all of the aggravation) in return.

Pilot 1000-->Pilot 5000-->PalmPilot Pro-->IIIe-->Vx-->m505-->T|T-->T|T2-->T|C-->T|T3-->T|T5-->TX-->Treo 700P

RE: Concern about other chargers
landrew4 @ 1/25/2007 12:04:28 AM # Q
So far you are correct, while Palm did respond, they basically ignored my questions that were asking for more details about the problem with a statement about not being able to guarantee things they haven't tested and encouraging me to purchase NEW accessories from them. I have replied, thanking them for their advertisement but re-emphasizing that what was asked for was more information about the problem (cause, determination, and fixes) not any request for guarantees. I am not really expecting a more satisfactory response this time around, but what the heck...

Reply to this comment
Start a New Comment Thread Top


Register Register | Login Log in