Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 234567
Results 121 to 135 of 135
  1. #121  
    Cobalt.... Damn. Why not? Palm owns the license after all. I never even thought to ask our rep this! Cobalt is really suited for Smartphones; in fact it has been argued that it was developed for them. The reason is that service providors can "lock" phones and enforce branding using that OS since it can be locked down in ways that Garnet could never be!

    Holy Crap!
  2. #122  
    Quote Originally Posted by bigboy650
    Normally when you buy something in the technology world, the latest is already on its way out. Now Palm is FORCING me to get my money's worth. This is the longest I've ever had a phone - smart or not!
    ROTFLMAO

    I never thought of it that way - Palm has been doing a community service by eliminating planned obsolescence and postponing numerous divorces ("But honey, I can sell the old one - what do you mean old, the credit card bill hasn't even arrived on the last one yet!")
    Remember, the "P" in PDA stands for personal.
    If it works for you, it is "P"erfect.
  3. jselkowe's Avatar
    Posts
    20 Posts
    Global Posts
    22 Global Posts
    #123  
    Quote Originally Posted by shadowmite
    wm5 supports square screens of 240x240, and 480x480, not 320x320. Although it would be a easy fix if microsoft WANTED to implement it.
    For the curious, here's an explanation of why MS went with 240x240 and not 320x320. It was not an oversight or anything like that, but rather a stategic descision...

    http://blogs.msdn.com/windowsmobile/...14/531972.aspx
  4. #124  
    Quote Originally Posted by RichS
    Hit the Down arrow, and you see the Sprint Power Vision Access Pack for $15/month - just lacking "Imaging" and TV. I had the $15 Power Vision package during my breif flirtation with a PPC-6700, so I know It's real.
    That should keep everyone happy. I am still trying to figure out tho how Sprint has the highest income ($60)per user....25% larger than verizon ($49+) and Cingular ($48+). They certainly ain't making it on their data plans .
  5. #125  
    Lots of confusion and rumors. Could some of this be Sprint's doing? They certainly don't want to let Verizon have all the buzz with the exclusive on the 700w. If they "leaked" some info to try to steal some of Verizon's thunder I think this would be seen as business as usual for the cell phone companies. Hard to know if they're talking about getting the 700w or 700p. Or both.

    I hope like hell we do actually get a Cobalt OS. Palm would certainly love to get some milage out of this project, seeing as how they worked on it and poured resources into it for years. To let it wither and die on the vine without seeing the light of day would be a major blunder, but alas, one we've seen from companies before. I remember Digital Equipment announcing the Alpha Chip with specs that made everyone's jaws drop. By the time they actually got it to market Intel had caught them and passed them by. Then Compaq bought Digital, primarily for their Alpha technology. Compaq though they would gain a major advantage in the server market with their R&D poured into the original Alpha design. About a year later, after unsuccessful attempts to sell it, they simply closed it down. It amounted to one big "never mind." A billion dollars here, a billion there, pretty soon you're talking real money. I don't have any idea where Palm stands with costs associated with developing Cobalt, but if they just say "never mind" it would be one of those blunders. I'm starting to get encouraged that we'll actually see something of Cobalt now. I don't think a Linux-based OS is nearly ready yet. Sounds like it's still in the early development stages, so maybe the 700p will indeed be based on Cobalt. I really don't want some kind of Linux/Cobalt hybrid, with an emulator environment to run Palm apps. That would truly suck. Think there are stability problems with Garnet? Hah! Just try emulation. Not me, not with a 10-foot pole! I see the Linux solution as several years down the road. Porting over old apps, writing new ones specifically for Linux, all takes time. Time that hasn't passed yet. Why release a new OS is there are no apps for it. Apple is fighting this now with the transition to Intel processors. The few native apps fly on Mac OSX/Intel, but those that rely on Rosetta for on-the-fly translation are embarrassingly slow. Lets hope Palm doesn't go down that road.
  6. #126  
    Great find on the MS Mobile resolution article.
    Jer 23:29
  7. #127  
    Palm did not develop Cobalt. PalmSource (now owned by Japanese company ACCESS) did. Palm licensed Garnet from PalmSource. There is no evidence that Palm has licensed, or even shown any interest in, Cobalt.
    Now THIS is the future of smartphones.
  8. #128  
    Palmsource never version licensed PalmOS, all licensees were entitled to all versions of PalmOS. Palm, being a PalmOS licensee, gained access to Cobalt when it was shipped to several years ago. By "development" I believe rambo47 was referring to the necessary changes that all licensees need to do to interface PalmOS to their hardware. PalmOS was never "locked down" to the extent that WM was because it was PalmSource's philosopy to allow a "rich assortment" of devices to use the OS. In the end, it may have been this philosophy that doomed Cobalt. The large development investment meant that the OS would be much harder to deliver and require a seperate staff to support.

    That being said, putting Cobalt on the 700p would be the smartest thing Palm ever did to boost sales IMO. the timing would be right too given the considerable development effort and the state of third party Cobalt capable apps.
    Last edited by Sleuth255; 02/20/2006 at 09:22 AM.
  9. #129  
    Quote Originally Posted by Sleuth255
    That being said, putting Cobalt on the 700p would be the smartest thing Palm ever did to boost sales IMO. the timing would be right too given the considerable development effort and the state of third party Cobalt capable apps.
    I think many peeps and CTO's would be reluctant, due to real or imagined concerens, to invest in a "dead end" OS....we know there will never be a POS7. OTOH, if Palm made an announcement on what they were planning stating the etxent of upgradeability or path from OS7 to ALP or another alternate then those concerens would ease.
  10. #130  
    Maybe... But many CTO's also consider smartphones to be commodities. Their average life is a year or so before replacement so they really don't care what's running on it if it does what it was purchased to do.
    Last edited by Sleuth255; 02/20/2006 at 01:34 PM.
  11. #131  
    Rambo .. have you actually tried Rosetta on OSX? It's remarkably fast! It's at least as fast as native. (perhaps due to the increased speed of the iMac or MBP, but you are not losing by using Rosetta.)

    I'm not sure what future PalmOS phones will bring but I look forward to seeing them ... for as long as they are here. I work for a mobility company that makes software for mobile devices (palm, wm, symbian, bb, java). nearly all of our customers believe Palm OS is a dead platform. A big part of this perception was the release of the 700w. In European businesses Palm OS is almost a historical footnote.
    ---
    iPhone / Samsung Epix

    Current playtoys:
    Also: Treo 750 (Test phone) / Sony Ericcson w900 (unlocked for international travel)
  12. #132  
    Quote Originally Posted by driven01
    Rambo .. have you actually tried Rosetta on OSX? It's remarkably fast! It's at least as fast as native. (perhaps due to the increased speed of the iMac or MBP, but you are not losing by using Rosetta.)
    i find this hard to believe.

    http://www.macworld.com/2006/01/feat...st1/index1.php
  13. #133  
    Quote Originally Posted by Sleuth255
    Maybe... But many CTO's also consider smartphones to be commodities. Their average life is a year or so before replacement so they really don't care what's running on it if it does what it was purchased to do.
    I wasn't speaking so much of the phone or the OS but the apps and the T&E (time and effort) peeps spend learning them on the company dime.....not to mention mail help desk calls for server interaction and the like.
  14. #134  
    Quote Originally Posted by BigKenny
    i find this hard to believe.
    Any emulation which runs at 50% of native is generally considered "wonderful". Of course with today's hardware. If something takes .006 seconds instead of .002 are you gonna notice ?
  15. #135  
    Quote Originally Posted by BigKenny

    I do as well. Rosetta isn't near as fast as a G4/G5 native app. Checkout Jason O'Grady's blog and test here:

    http://blogs.zdnet.com/Apple/
Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 234567

Posting Permissions