Page 12 of 21 FirstFirst ... 27891011121314151617 ... LastLast
Results 221 to 240 of 418
  1. #221  
    Quote Originally Posted by jw68
    Isn't it possible to create a general purpose device that is capable of running multiple platforms.
    Super idea. That way the wireless providers can charge a triple premium for bringing you not 1, but 3 phones for the price of . . . nearly three! Don't think they wouldn't try.
  2. #222  
    Quote Originally Posted by axiomjunglist
    In MY opinion, I know a lot of people would have avoided the Treo had it come out originally with some form of MS OS, myself included. I purchased the Treo because I liked the phone/pda combo, but the OS is what sealed the deal. Had it come with MS preloaded I would have stuck with my Nokia (which still has better reception imho), iPod (20GB vs 2GB SD?), and Tungsten E, and not sold all three to get the best of all worlds.

    I hear ya... The MS OS is a definite deal breaker for you... I understand where you're coming from - Just out of curiosity (and of course you're entitled to your opinion) but have you ever used the Win Mobile platform or any of the PocketPC/CE iterations? I'm sincerely hoping they got it right this time, but the reason I love the Treo besides the physical form factor is the ability to basically navigate the OS with one hand... I have a hard time imagining doing that on a Win OS - Fingers crossed they do it right...
  3. #223  
    Quote Originally Posted by jw68
    Whose to say that the new WM5 and Colbalt version of the Treo will run on different hardware. Isn't it possible to create a general purpose device that is capable of running multiple platforms. This way they standardize on the hardware and customize the OS, much like in todays PC world where you can boot into Windows or any distro of Linux. If they can make a version of Linux run on an iPod, they can do anything
    It's not that simple. Binaries contain commands for the processor and calls based on the arcitecture and I don't think the two platforms are written for the same processor/arcitecture.

    They could port one to the other but the 3rd party apps wouldn't work with out an emulator, which would slow them down big time.

    Still it's not unthiknable that Palm would work up a WM compatible treo and a PalmOS compatible Treo. I think it would be in thier best intersts to do so. Let the 2 software companys battle it out and whomever wins, Palm is still on top with one of the best pieces of Hardware on the market. The Treo really is the best peice of hardware out there right now for a Phone/PDA combo OS to run on.

    I have a hard time imagining doing that on a Win OS
    As of the last iteration of Pocket PC I used(on a iPaq) it was very doable. That was Pocket PC 2002 I believe.
  4. #224  
    Quote Originally Posted by dutchtrumpet
    again...palm is not palmsource.

    palmsource is teaming with MV...not palm.

    they are different companies.
    I'm going to have to change my sig to an Insertion-like:

    "Please don't post and confuse Palm and PalmOne...they are now and have been for a while separate companies".

    I'm back!
  5. #225  
    Quote Originally Posted by dstrack
    I hear ya... The MS OS is a definite deal breaker for you... I understand where you're coming from - Just out of curiosity (and of course you're entitled to your opinion) but have you ever used the Win Mobile platform or any of the PocketPC/CE iterations? I'm sincerely hoping they got it right this time, but the reason I love the Treo besides the physical form factor is the ability to basically navigate the OS with one hand... I have a hard time imagining doing that on a Win OS - Fingers crossed they do it right...
    I played with a friends Dell Axim, and another's iPAQ, both running CE, and it seemed kludgey. I guess I am just not a big fan of the way MS orients the software and system. Not to mention I don't use Windows at home either, and never been a fan of their OS's personally. It's nothing against MS, if people like and and want it, that's fine. Just give me another choice, and make it easy to use.

    Now that PalmSource is headed towards developing a linux based OS with MonteVista, I look forward to using it, and hope that they have it ready in time for the 670's release in an alternate model.
  6. #226  
    Quote Originally Posted by jmill72x
    I'm going to have to change my sig to an Insertion-like:

    "Please don't post and confuse Palm and PalmOne...they are now and have been for a while separate companies".

    Wait. I thought Palm and PalmOne are the same company? It's Palm and PalmSource that are different.
  7. #227  
    Quote Originally Posted by axiomjunglist
    In MY opinion, I know a lot of people would have avoided the Treo had it come out originally with some form of MS OS, myself included. I purchased the Treo because I liked the phone/pda combo, but the OS is what sealed the deal. Had it come with MS preloaded I would have stuck with my Nokia (which still has better reception imho), iPod (20GB vs 2GB SD?), and Tungsten E, and not sold all three to get the best of all worlds.
    Well, IMHO, you are in a minority; for many people MS OS is just fine.

    Palm 5.x is a unstable as a 4 year old on Pixie Stixs and Mountain Dew.

    Ds was right - the Treo form factor is the draw, not the OS.
  8. #228  
    Quote Originally Posted by KRamsauer
    Wait. I thought Palm and PalmOne are the same company? It's Palm and PalmSource that are different.

    Let's clear up the confusion:

    PalmOne - puts out the hardware

    Palm(Source) - puts of the OS that crashes said hardware.

  9. #229  
    Quote Originally Posted by mikec
    Well, IMHO, you are in a minority; for many people MS OS is just fine.

    Palm 5.x is a unstable as a 4 year old on Pixie Stixs and Mountain Dew.

    Ds was right - the Treo form factor is the draw, not the OS.
    From my observations, it's as much the OS as the form factor.

    People generally select a device first by the OS, then by whichever device meets their needs/price point. It just happens that the Treo is the only Palm OS smartphone.

    I'm sure they're out there, but I haven't heard of a single person choosing the Treo in spite of the OS, rather than at least partly because of it.
  10. #230  
    Quote Originally Posted by mikec
    Well, IMHO, you are in a minority; for many people MS OS is just fine.

    Palm 5.x is a unstable as a 4 year old on Pixie Stixs and Mountain Dew.

    Ds was right - the Treo form factor is the draw, not the OS.
    Then bring it on, IMHO people like you make the MS stranglehold complete.
  11. #231  
    Quote Originally Posted by PabloTX
    From my observations, it's as much the OS as the form factor.

    People generally select a device first by the OS, then by whichever device meets their needs/price point. It just happens that the Treo is the only Palm OS smartphone.

    I'm sure they're out there, but I haven't heard of a single person choosing the Treo in spite of the OS, rather than at least partly because of it.

    I'd say that's mostly because of lack of availability... believe me - I always kinda scoffed at having a phone run PocketPC - "Imagine having my cell phone crashing all the time?"... but with XP PRo Service Pack 2 I've found a much more stable environment and I hope that parlays into their Windows Mobile platform.

    BTW - I'm all for a new OS from PalmSource (or anyone really)- keeps innovation going... the more the better off we are as consumers....

    As far as one-handed use-ability I look forward to seeing it in action... found many of the other PocketPC devices that I've had (latest one is the HP iPaq - 6650 maybe? it's got the biometric recognition built in - nice!) just don't have the form factor for one handed operation and the OS doesn't really help... but I'm glad to hear the latest iterations have gotten better.!
  12. #232  
    Quote Originally Posted by mikec
    Let's clear up the confusion:

    PalmOne - puts out the hardware

    Palm(Source) - puts of the OS that crashes said hardware.

    You are just confusing people more.

    PalmSource puts out the OS, but Palm puts out the hardware. When you say Palm without adding "source" or "OS", you are talking about a hardware maker, not an operating system or an OS company. http://www.palm.com/us/
  13. #233  
    Quote Originally Posted by PabloTX
    I'm sure they're out there, but I haven't heard of a single person choosing the Treo in spite of the OS, rather than at least partly because of it.
    I'm ALMOST that person. I have a Samsung i600 running the MS Smartphone OS, which unlike PPC phone edition, is GREAT one-handed. WM5 is supposed to be more like Smartphone in its one-handed use. But I envy the screen real-estate and keyboard of my wife's Treo 650. Over at the i730 forums, you'll see people reluctantly moving back to the Treo because of their inability to use the i730 one-handed and their love for the Treo form factor. So that's partially software, partially hardware. For me, its the Treo form factor and the prospect of a Treo running something akin to my smartphone OS has me salivating.

    However, I'm not so arrogant as to believe that I know all about the market or that everyone thinks like me. For some it is the hardware, for some the software.
  14. #234  
    Quote Originally Posted by mikec
    Well, IMHO, you are in a minority; for many people MS OS is just fine.

    Palm 5.x is a unstable as a 4 year old on Pixie Stixs and Mountain Dew.

    Ds was right - the Treo form factor is the draw, not the OS.
    AMEN to that. After coaxing full (and in some cases, basic WindowsMobile) functionality out of my Treo 650 through add-on software and startup-loaders like UMDH and all the other various requisite file managers/launchers/fixes/patches/conduits, I can say your analogy is spot-on.

    I have a feeling that, like it or not, people clinging to this last vestige of PalmOS are in for disappointment as PalmSource doesn't seem to be providing Palm Inc. with what they want.
    GEEKTOPIC - The Geek Forum. <--Free Hentai Image Forum!
  15. #235  
    I am a Palm OS dude. That is what made me chosse the Treo. If XDA won phone of the year. I still would chosse a Palm OS Treo. When and if we do see a 670 or PPC TREO. I will not be getting one.

    Look at cars. GM Bought SAAB and Part of Subaru. Now you have Saabarus driving around. It is not a saab no mo.

    Point is. I would say goodby to treo. Get a T5 or Lifedrive (palmos BTW) and a BT enabled phone. I can't see the benifit of MS. It does not work like it is supposes to. Niether does Palmos. But, there is always a fix. I feel comfortable and very supported with Palm OS community

    I guess, i will never be ready for a Microsoft change. Linux/Mac yes, Windows. No
  16. #236  
    it was definately the form factor for me. the os is pretty arbitrary to me as long as it can browse web pages. although i have not been happy with the palm os. it soft resets all the time for no reason. i dont see where the loyalty comes from at all.
  17. #237  
    There's a lot of Palm loyalty around here and it's to be expected, I suppose --- but as was stated previously, that's what makes the bugs in the first place. You have to demand better. It's not OK with me that I have to pay $18 here, $30 there to fix the shortcomings of the highly antiquated and heavily 'made over' PalmOS. The sole reason I own a Treo 650 now over a PPC/WM phone is simple - the hardware is still superior.

    I've owned too many of each OS platform and I can honestly say that WM does indeed "work like it is supposes to." Both have problems, both have workarounds. Both work. Everything else is just brand-biased tripe. I don't give a fig if my Subaru was made by GM as long as the quality and product performance are same as before. In this case, I don't think the Palm/palmSource OS quality reputation deserves such an analogy as Subaru or Saab vs. GM, anyway. PalmOS is no Saab or Subaru, IMHO.
    GEEKTOPIC - The Geek Forum. <--Free Hentai Image Forum!
  18. #238  
    I'm one of those that was won over by the form factor as well. My previous device was an iPaq. To me the Treo is almost the perfect compromise between form and function in a convergence device. The OS is irrelevant as long as I can do the things I need to do.
  19. #239  
    The OS matters to me more for the ability for 3rd parties to buy into the platform and make add-ons. I've always found PALM OS to have a steeper learning curve for the programmer then the Microsoft CE/PPC/WM OS's have, which hampers adoption by those 3rd parties.

    Windows Mobile carries over alot of the same concepts for programmers from Windows 2000/XP so it's easier to get up and rolling.
  20. trellus's Avatar
    Posts
    58 Posts
    Global Posts
    60 Global Posts
    #240  
    Having never used WM5, I have no comment on a possible future WM5-based Treo, except that I have experience with both PocketPC and PocketPC Phone Edition 2003 (iPaq 6315) and found I prefer PalmOS in general to PocketPC Phone Edition; I've also had a little bit of experience with an older Windows Smartphone (a Motorola) and I found it quite terrible.

    I really do like Palm OS for its simplicity and really don't like having the whole "Start" desktop paradigm on a phone as I find it unnatural and clunky. Perhaps WM5 addresses this? However, I *do* like the true, pre-emptive multitasking of the Windows OSs over Garnet since I tend to use a lot of third-party apps, and I'd appreciate a misbehaving app not always crashing the entire phone.

    My biggest gripe about a non PalmOS-based Treo would be all the third-party $oftware (almost $200 worth) that I've spent that would presumably (absent an emulator) be wasted, as most of the utilities I've bought are NOT written for the PPC or Windows Mobile platform. Indeed, I have found a lot more speciality phone software in general for the Treo 600 and 650 than for any Windows Mobile phones. To my knowledge, for example, there is no equivalent of Chatter Email (with IMAP IDLE support) on the Windows Mobile platform yet, and I *live* by this software.

    Having said that, I think that a WM5-based Treo is an *excellent* decision for Palm and would expand their market, and as both a Palm and PalmOS fan, I'd at least be happy on one account. I do hope they offer a new PalmOS-based Treo, as well, though, as I would likely stay on that platform myself.

    In short, I tend to think of the Windows Mobile platform to be technically superior to PalmOS, but I prefer the simplicity of PalmOS to Windows Mobile (not counting WM5 of which I know nothing, mind you) and I have a good deal invested in PalmOS third-party apps, and I like the library of PalmOS apps because it appears to be still quite a big bigger and more mature.

Posting Permissions