Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 79
  1. yOyOYoo's Avatar
    Posts
    297 Posts
    Global Posts
    304 Global Posts
       #1  
    I think the original Handspring Treo 600 came out late 2003, correct? now, almost 3 years later, with heaps and advancements in technology, why the heck does the supposed treo 700 have to remain so huge and fat?!

    I'm all fine with keeping the screen size the same, but comeon now, I think we would all love to have a slimmer treo. It really is too bad.

    Oh well I will just deal with it and enjoy the Treo 650 i just bought off ebay until palm slims down the design.
  2. #2  
    Major issue, I believe, is the battery -- when they can cram 12 hours of usage into a Cheez-It square -- then we may get a "thin" Treo. Until then -- give me the power!

    Cheers, Perry.
  3. #3  
    Perry am sorry but I can't buy the "Battery" excuse. If you look at the Motorola Q and Samsung 3120 you will quickly see battery technology has come a long way in recent years.

    The battery technology is there and it's called "Hollywood".

    Let's just call it what it is and that's a "lazy design approach from Palm". I'm sure they would of gained more market share had they added some slimness to this device along with the EVDO, 1.3 MP, etc.

    Slim is IN.........................
  4. #4  
    Hey Vike!

    Your in box is full. How's the new career?

    Cheers, Perry.
  5. #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by Perry Holden
    Hey Vike!

    Your in box is full. How's the new career?

    Cheers, Perry.


    It's going good, "very busy" and I don't have time to play on TC anymore
  6. #6  
    You have missed much, and you have missed nothing.

  7. #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by Perry Holden
    You have missed much, and you have missed nothing.


    Can't argue with that!
    Gimme the P-Funk!
  8. #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by vikingjunior
    Perry am sorry but I can't buy the "Battery" excuse. If you look at the Motorola Q and Samsung 3120 you will quickly see battery technology has come a long way in recent years.

    The battery technology is there and it's called "Hollywood".

    Let's just call it what it is and that's a "lazy design approach from Palm". I'm sure they would of gained more market share had they added some slimness to this device along with the EVDO, 1.3 MP, etc.

    Slim is IN.........................
    What is the rated battery life on the Q...their is no solid bench testing I see that shows any solid data. I agree with Perry to a certain extent on this. My wifes Samsung Blade is an awesome phone, but the battery life after playing depleats, as with any device that is thin. The technology has came a long way, but isn't there yet...IMHO.
    at&t iPhone3G
  9. #9  
    Why do we assume and wish that newer gadgets must get
    smaller or slimmer or both? cellphones, cameras, computers...

    I personally think the Treo is the perfect shape and size.
    I'd stop buying them if they changed anything, physically.

    For some reason we equate "slim" with "good"

    Mona Lisa was too fat?
  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by GreenHex
    Why do we assume and wish that newer gadgets must get
    smaller or slimmer or both? cellphones, cameras, computers...

    I personally think the Treo is the perfect shape and size.
    I'd stop buying them if they changed anything, physically.

    For some reason we equate "slim" with "good"

    Mona Lisa was too fat?
    I agree. The Treo is a good size and weight and the battery life is everything to me. I also have a Razor and while the size is nice, the talk time sucks.
    Freedom of some speech in the US, through someone in the UK.
  11. #11  
    I would love a smaller, thinner Treo. But not at the expense of battery life or usability. It would seem you could easily lose some of the roughly 1/2 inch above the screen, and certainly losing the antena would be great. I have trouble believing that advances in battery technology wouldn't allow for a thinner device with the same battery life.
  12. #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by GreenHex
    Why do we assume and wish that newer gadgets must get
    smaller or slimmer or both? cellphones, cameras, computers...

    I personally think the Treo is the perfect shape and size.
    I'd stop buying them if they changed anything, physically.

    For some reason we equate "slim" with "good"

    Mona Lisa was too fat?
    Mona Lisa is not too fat...she is just thick.
    at&t iPhone3G
  13. #13  
    Yeah, I dunno about typing on something that was thinner than the treo, might get too hard.
  14. #14  
    I predict we'll seet 'Hollywood' on CDMA early next year (and I'm hoping against hope that we'll see it on Sprint at the same time Cingular gets it - with 6 month CDMA exclusivity). Hopefully with similar battery life. Otherwise, forget it.
    A new Avatar to commemorate Silly Season.
  15. #15  
    The form factor's fine to me. Slimmer MIGHT be nice, but again, not at the exspense of ANYTHING we currently have. I must, however, second the "get rid of the damn antenna" motion. C'mon. It's just a damn security blanket now. It doesn't have to be there. It's ok Palm. People will still buy it.

    That used to be a joke of mine, until I spoke with a marketing agent for Sanyo, and was told that the only reason they still put antennas on their phones was because it made people believe they would get better reception.
    Go here if you're tired of being .
    It'll be fun.
  16. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by DrDoom
    The form factor's fine to me. Slimmer MIGHT be nice, but again, not at the exspense of ANYTHING we currently have. I must, however, second the "get rid of the damn antenna" motion. C'mon. It's just a damn security blanket now. It doesn't have to be there. It's ok Palm. People will still buy it.

    That used to be a joke of mine, until I spoke with a marketing agent for Sanyo, and was told that the only reason they still put antennas on their phones was because it made people believe they would get better reception.
    Don't need the antenna, just use a tin-foil hat.
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  17. #17  
    yeah the treo isnt all that big; remember its a convergent device, or all in one, or whatever you want to call it. I would love to see the antenna go...its so...so 90s bah!

    So yeah basically i agree with DrDoom
  18. #18  
    I belive when the other phonemakers began selling superxtremely slim models, thats when a 'slim' treo will be introduced.
  19. #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by KStewart
    What is the rated battery life on the Q...their is no solid bench testing I see that shows any solid data. I agree with Perry to a certain extent on this. My wifes Samsung Blade is an awesome phone, but the battery life after playing depleats, as with any device that is thin. The technology has came a long way, but isn't there yet...IMHO.

    I own a Samsung 900 and on the Hardware "B" version the battery life is not bad, tell your wife to get hardware B.

    Well the real reason for the thinner design is to shave off some of the weight that now exists. So it's really not about the slimness as much as is it's about the weight. The Treo is a little on the brick side. So a lighter Treo would of been a warm welcome by most.
  20. #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by Japorms
    I belive when the other phonemakers began selling superxtremely slim models, thats when a 'slim' treo will be introduced.
    ...about 18 months later.
    Remember, the "P" in PDA stands for personal.
    If it works for you, it is "P"erfect.
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions