US Navy buys 2000 Palm V's

The US Navy announced that it is arming 2,000 ship-based officers with Palm V computers. The purchase is touted as the largest government buy ever of hand-held devices. This Washington Post article asks: Is this an investment in productivity, or a faddish move that has no place in the military arena?

Article Comments

 (7 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

When the uninformed speak . . .

Brad @ 3/13/2000 3:24:06 PM #
I rarely respond to guys like this, but I did write this author. Here is what I wrote:

Dear Mr. Arkin:

I fancy myself as a Palm Pilot pundit, much to my wife's chagrin. She just forwarded me the link to your recent article addressing your view of the military's purchase of Palm Vs for ship officers. I read what you wrote, and I gather from the article that you are not in favor of such purchases by the military. However, I could not tell from your writing exactly why you feel the way you do.

One strong sentiment that appears to permeate your article seems to be that the gadgets are just not rugged enough for men on the front line. Well, the purchase you write about was for Navy officers on ships. There's just not that much mud and muck on ships, and if there is, I would tend to bet that the officers are not the ones dealing with it. You also mention that the devices are not waterproof. True, but would you really want the military to pay for the development of a waterproof gadget when the off-the-shelf version might do just as well. If you are really worried about waterproofing such a device, why not consider doing what everyone else does -- finding an add-on solution. After reading your article, I spent about 30 seconds on Dogpile.com and located a waterproof case for the Palm. Have a look for yourself:

http://www.totalcase.com/tcs6600.html

Or" CLASS=NEWS>http://www.totalcase.com/tcs6600.html

Or if you are interested in ruggedizing such a device, why not try just putting a rugged case around the Palm, such as the Bumper Case, which can be purchased for less than $35 on the Internet:

http://www.palmiiix.com/shoplifeline/bumforpalcom.html

What" CLASS=NEWS>http://www.palmiiix.com/shoplifeline/bumforpalcom.html

What would be more cost effective, having the military purchase an off-the-shelf device and an add-on case, or having the military purchase a specially manufactured system that would have an exponentially greater purchase price? As for myself, I would tell the military to try the off-the-shelf product first, which appears to be what the Navy has done. Hurray! Someone finally made the right decision.

You mention security issues, then in the same breath seem to suggest that security is an issue that others are addressing at this time. You would be correct on both counts. You certainly would not want a field officer carrying around the battle plans on a Palm if that information could not be adequately safeguarded. However, have you considered the alternatives? You could have the officer carrying around his or her Franklin Day Planner with the same information. Which would you prefer? In either case the data would need to be encrypted. The advantage of handheld devices is that you can put a digital barrier between the enemy and the data, whereas the same cannot be said of the pages in the Day Planner. In my opinion, I would rather see the enemy be given a device that they may not be able to access to get to the encrypted data as opposed to being given the encrypted paperwork with which they can immediately start decoding. Only someone who does not understand the technology available today would attempt to argue that taking data in the field and adding a digital security layer to it could constitute a greater security risk. All that needs to be done is for the government to take security risks into consideration when such purchases are planned, and I would bet that such matters were adequately addressed long before the Navy purchased the first Palm.

Your article discusses the "potential for excess" inherent in our government. However, in the next breath you mention that such devices as the Palm increase productivity and efficiency. Then you throw in the proposition that such devices can fail, and the military folks may in your mind forget how to perform such functions the old way. (i.e., your "grease pencil" analogy).

Well, one concept at a time, please. First, yes when dealing with any form of government, the potential for excess exists. Countless projects entered into by our government and military result in vast expenditures with little or no ultimate benefit to the cause. I have seen it, and so have you. Does that realization mean that we should not make efforts to improve the process and increase efficiency? Of course not. From my standpoint, I would much rather have the government make a modest invest in handheld computer technology and see if it works as opposed to sinking billions into some bottomless pit such as SDI or other such harebrained ideas.

Your next thought was that Palm devices increase productivity. Here, you would be correct. I am an attorney. My firm made the decision years ago to commit to handheld computer technology. Why? We had to. Our computer calendars and paper calendars were never in sync. We were missing appointments and losing information left and right. We were in essence tied to our desktop computers, which was where all of the key information was about our cases, our schedules, our time management, and our contacts.

Enter the Palm Pilot. Today we carry with us everywhere we go all of our client contact information, all of the information on our cases, all of our calendar entries, and we also have added things such as the ability to enter time and expense entries while away from the office. Whenever the gadget is hooked up to the desktop computer, any changes that have occurred on either the network computer or the handheld are "synched" and duplicated on both computers. Now, I never miss appointments, I never lose notes I have jotted down, I always have current information on my contacts, etc. Our efficiency has increased tremendously, all because of a very modest investment in Palm technology.

Your next statement appears to be that computers can fail, and that you fear that technology may cause military personnel to forget how to accomplish such tasks using the tried and true systems of the past. Anyone who owns a Windows-based computer can tell you that computers fail. My Windows98 computer crashes three or four times a day. I begrudgingly continue to use it, however, because it is the best solution to my needs at the moment. The first attorney I worked for often lamented about the days he and one other attorney shared a typewriter. An error in the middle of a court pleading done on typewriter meant that the entire document would need to be rewritten. As flawed as Windows98 is, I feel that it is the best solution for me, and it is much more efficient than the alternative.

Handhelds can fail as well, but failures of the latest generation of Palm computers is actually rare. In fact, I have owned Palm Computing handhelds for more than two years, and I have suffered only one "failure" that resulted in lost data. That one incident was my fault. I was being stupid and dropped the computer, and the memory card fell out. I would not have lost any important data at that time had my Windows98 computer been working. In terms of overall stability, the Palm beats Windows hands down, no pun intended.

So, OK computers are as fallible as their makers. The logical leap you make from this erudite statement goes something like this:

A. Computers don't always work.
B. Military personnel who use computers forget how to do things without computers.
C. Therefore, given that A and B are true, . . . . . .

What is the logical conclusion to your reasoning here? Should the military not purchase handheld computers? I take from your last statement in the article, "Isn't war too important to be left to the laptop?" that the syllogistic reasoning leads one to the conclusion that the military simply should not purchase ANY computers, or at least they should only purchase things that fit in underground bunkers and have code names like "Big Bertha."

Well, computers do fail, Big Bertha included. But doesn't everything else eventually fail, too? To follow your logic to the ultimate conclusion, all technology in the military should be shunned because it might not work.

I take a different and somewhat more forward thinking approach. As you seemingly admit in your article, technology can increase productivity and accuracy. From my own experiences with the Palm, I can state that this little device performs these tasks admirably. Moreover, the Palm will do much more than most realize. Did you know that a GPS unit can be hooked up to the Palm, and your position anywhere on the Earth can be determined within a few yards using this little device? Do you think such a device would be of any utility to someone in the field calling in an air strike? Did you know that there are modems, wireless modems and other devices that can be attached to these little computers that allow synchronization of data over telephone lines or over radio waves. Did you know that Symbol manufacturers a Palm with an integrated barcode scanner? Do you think that such a device might just improve things like inventory control at a military base?

Your concerns, although real, are not that well founded. The purchase cost of a Palm is rather minuscule, security is not really that much of a concern and is likely being addressed, the Palms can be made to function in just about any setting, and the Palms are very reliable. The bottom line is this: If the military's purchase of these little gizmos results in one or more lives saved, then the purchase was more than reasonable -- it was honorable. I think of it like this: The most expensive Palm costs $449 today. With a case and a plethora of add-ons, maybe you will spend $750. If actually used appropriately, I know from experience that the device will result in less wasted time and less wasted paper. My first Palm paid for itself within the first week by allowing me to capture more time and expense entries than ever before. If a similar result occurs with the military's purchase, then the cost of the Palms will be negligible in comparison to the overall benefit.

My advice to you is simple: Go buy a Palm. That is unless you are so entrenched in your old ways that you can no longer part with that trusty old grease pencil.

Sincerely,

J. Bradley Horn, Esq.
Shoemaker & Horn
9711 Meadowlark Rd.
Vienna, VA 22182
attyaccess@aol.com
www.shoemakerandhorn.com

RE: When the uninformed speak . . .
Eric G @ 3/13/2000 6:50:48 PM #
Brad,

I'd be interested to see the reply, if any, you receive from Mr. Arkin. I wonder what he has to say after you letter, which was very well written, might I add. I'm glad you took the time to respond to him because he was obviously bashing a product and its implementation that he knows nothing about.

I applaud you for taking a stand against this unknowning journalist.

Eric Garrido
EGarrido@ibm.net

RE: When the uninformed speak . . .
coralhound @ 3/14/2000 11:08:16 AM #
hey John
I live in MD I would like to buy you a BEER!
ata boy
coralhound@hotmail.com
RE: When the uninformed speak . . .
coralhound @ 3/14/2000 11:08:16 AM #
hey J. Bradley Horn
I live in MD I would like to buy you a BEER!
ata boy!!!!!
coralhound@hotmail.com

Palm V?

I.M. Anonymous @ 3/14/2000 1:38:36 PM #
Why on earth would they waste money on Palm Vs when they can get more for less money (e.g. Visors)? Is style really that important? Boo.
RE: Palm V?
Brad @ 3/14/2000 2:28:14 PM #
I like Visors, too. But Handspring needs to include on-board Flash for system upgrades. However, it still is a very nice machine. I can't wait to see what Springboards are coming down the pike.

attyaccess@aol.com

why Palm V's?

Donald Burr @ 3/15/2000 4:10:33 AM #
in response to the person asking why purchase Palm V's instead of e.q. Visors, I would think that size and flash memory would be a concern. The V is smaller and lighter, which means less bulk to carry. Flash memory means nt only easy OS upgrades, but also a safe storage area for programs and data. With products such as the ones fromTRG (eg. FlashPro, InstallPro. etc.) you can use extra space in flash to safely store programs and data, that will even survive a power loss. And with TRG's installer you can create custom installable packages (app + databases) that get zapped into flash. This is great for embeddeb apps. If the Navy ever developed their own special apps, they could embed them in flash so that you don't have to re-sync them after a power outage.
Top

Account

Register Register | Login Log in
user:
pass: