Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 85
  1. #41  
    Quote Originally Posted by DrDoom
    You better "recognize", Strauss! I'M the king of DOOM and don't you forget it!!!!
    DOOM

    However, I've got the gloom.
    Remember, the "P" in PDA stands for personal.
    If it works for you, it is "P"erfect.
  2. #42  
    I'm forced to side with the naysayers. I feel Palm is already in the toilet and is in the process of spinning counterclockwise towards an inevitable. The company is terrible. I have no choice but to be arrogant here, but I could run a better company out of my arse.

    Consider this, the company has divided and reformed twice!
    Once was when the company changed hands and handspring broke off only to return to the company years later, the second is the obvious and quite embarrassing split of the company into PalmOne and PalmSource, only to return once again as Palm but without a software side. No doubt this ridiculous form of division wasted a large sum of money, at the very least just to destroy and remake stationary.

    I think the post at the start of this discussion really hit the nail on the head. This is unheard of that any company named Palm would be forced to produce a statement declaring future support of Palm products.

    The company is freefalling.

    Notice the Treo700w. The fact is the company has adopted the philosophy of “if you can’t beat em join em” and it has done so poorly. I am referring to the seemingly low specs of the 700w. From what it sounds like, it is an improvement on the same scale as the 650 was to 600 – that is, a ****-poor improvement. The company is in no way producing innovative and advanced devices; it is producing more of the same. I don’t see how the 700w is going to compete with the Motorola Q, The Q already has the 700w beat in form factor.

    Now I understand that people have posted what appear to be excuses for Palm’s offensively bad hardware specs such as those found in the 650 and what is emerging in the 700w. Specifically, people have posted that while we would all like improvements in RAM, improvements in screen resolution, improvements in the camera, etc. that these improvements cost money. And that in the interests of keeping the price of the devices within a certain level, certain features had to be removed. This is simply lame. Someone, somewhere WILL produce a device with the specs desired, and they will do it for a price that we can afford. It has been done before, especially in technology, and Palm’s refusal to innovate is simply more proof of their inevitable demise.

    The reality of the situation is truly sad. But it has been sad for a very long time now. Many of us, especially Apple users, looked to Palm after Newton was discontinued. We looked to Palm in hopes of a stable, simple and elegant PDA. We sought mac support. And for sometime, Palm provided just that. But now, Palm seems to spit on the mac users with their endorsement of windows, and with their already pathetic mac support.

    I would like Palm to live on, I truly would. I want palm to produce a Treo 700p with a new, not 2 year old operating system, with impressive competitive specs. But like it has been slowly becoming more and more apparent, Palm cannot produce anything anymore at a rate that can compete with the pace of technology. So rather than nurture some false hope, I read the writing on the wall, and know that its going to be a long long time before a new company emerges that will resemble the young Palm and that will kick the living crap out of the bloated and uninspiring company that is Microsoft. Or better yet, I dream of Apple returning to its rightful place on the PDA battlefield.
  3. #43  
    Quote Originally Posted by CmdrGuard
    Consider this, the company has divided and reformed twice!
    Once was when the company changed hands and handspring broke off only to return to the company years later, the second is the obvious and quite embarrassing split of the company into PalmOne and PalmSource, only to return once again as Palm but without a software side.
    There's a lot of misunderstanding about this. The two companies have not been recombined. PalmSource is being bought by Access. palmOne has changed names back to just "Palm." Access will not be able to use the name "Palm" in describing the Palm OS in the future.

    Your confusion is understandable, though. I see more and more posts like this everyday and it reaffirms the concerns I posted about on Brighthand when the news came out of palmOne buying the "Palm" name from PalmSource. IMO, the Palm Solutions Group (the name palmOne had before fully splitting off from PalmSource) should have never been able to take a name with the word "Palm" in it. But letting them take full control of the "Palm" name is much, much worse for the whole Palm economy/userbase. Of course, it seems to me that it was a decision made out of desperation (PalmSource needed the money), rather than one made by weighing the merits of the idea. It was a good move from palmOne's perspective, though I don't know if it will prove to be worth the cost they paid for the name.
    Now THIS is the future of smartphones.
  4. #44  
    Eh, perhaps, Scott.

    What is the consensus on the rest of my points?
  5. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #45  
    what if they had instead devoted that money towards putting 64mb ram into the 650?

    I recognize the argument made for why they would want to own the "palm" name and all rights to it, but placing sufficient memory in the devices upon which they stake the "palm" reputation should have been equally as important.
    Last edited by vw2002; 11/13/2005 at 02:24 PM.
  6. #46  
    Quote Originally Posted by vw2002
    what if they had instead devoted that money towards putting 64mb ram into the 650?

    I recognize the argument made for why they would want to own the "palm" name and all rights to it, but placing sufficient memory in the devices upon which they stake the "palm" reputation should have been equally as important.


    Why on earth would they increase memory on a soon to be discontinued device? On the next model(s), I think they HAVE to increase memory, but they are certainly not going to do anything of the kind on the 650. That's kinda like asking why they didn't use the money to add bluetooth to the 600.
    "Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen."
    - Albert Einstein
  7. #47  
    I don't understand this company. They love to throw out vague meaning terms like "hardware innovator" and such, but they have nothing physical to substantiate their euphamisms. After the 300 to 600 leap, the company has done nothing but go downhill.

    You make a great point vw2002, what the hell is palm doing with their money wasting it on things rather than improving their products?
  8. #48  
    Quote Originally Posted by ExtraOrdinaryJo


    Why on earth would they increase memory on a soon to be discontinued device? On the next model(s), I think they HAVE to increase memory, but they are certainly not going to do anything of the kind on the 650. That's kinda like asking why they didn't use the money to add bluetooth to the 600.

    The 650 wasn't soon to be discontinued when it first rolled off the production line. Why was the device not first designed with a competitive amount of memory?
  9. #49  
    Quote Originally Posted by CmdrGuard
    Eh, perhaps, Scott.

    What is the consensus on the rest of my points?
    Two years from now, Palm is on the verge of being brought out by some no name Asian company, they quickly split out the "MobilePhone" division in an attempt to raise the the stock price, but quick buy back the "Treo" name for 10 million dollars.
  10. #50  
    Quote Originally Posted by CmdrGuard
    The 650 wasn't soon to be discontinued when it first rolled off the production line. Why was the device not first designed with a competitive amount of memory?
    You're arguing an entirely different point.

    I agree, they SHOULD have included more memory when the device was released. My point was that no company in their right mind would spend their money upgrading it now, rather than buying back their name. I am not defending palm's decision to release the 650 with only 32 mb ram (ok, less than that). Nor am I defending their spending money on the PALM name. All I am saying is that it is very unrealistic to think that they should have spent their money "upgrading" the 650. Why would they do that? The device sells well as it is, and they have already announced a forthcoming model with more memory.

    What they should do, however, is start listening to customers and design the next palmos version with at least 128 mb ram...along with various other improvements.
    "Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen."
    - Albert Einstein
  11. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #51  
    Quote Originally Posted by ExtraOrdinaryJo


    Why on earth would they increase memory on a soon to be discontinued device? On the next model(s), I think they HAVE to increase memory, but they are certainly not going to do anything of the kind on the 650. That's kinda like asking why they didn't use the money to add bluetooth to the 600.

    NO. you missed the point entirely. i was referring to palm`s decision to forego putting 64 mb ram into the 650 before it was released to the market last year, my friend. i was not inferring they should do so NOW! i never said that.

    OBVIOUSLY, since the 700 is coming soon, that makes no sense. we were discussing the decisions palm has made recently and how the company has generally been run. i was commenting on how palm saw the purchase of the "palm" logo as important but failed to see how critical it was to have sufficient memory in their devices.
    Last edited by vw2002; 11/13/2005 at 07:38 PM.
  12. #52  
    You guys are so lost, talking about the Treo 650 being released with 23MB ram more than a year ago. Do you realize that it looks like Palm will release the WM device with only 32MB RAM?!! They obviously do not learn from their mistakes.

    They look like the kind of company who would release a phone with a little piece of paper to scribble your phone book down on, if they could get away with it. (no pen though, thats an extra accessory, costing $30)

    Surur
  13. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #53  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    You guys are so lost, talking about the Treo 650 being released with 23MB ram more than a year ago. Do you realize that it looks like Palm will release the WM device with only 32MB RAM?!! They obviously do not learn from their mistakes.

    They look like the kind of company who would release a phone with a little piece of paper to scribble your phone book down on, if they could get away with it. (no pen though, thats an extra accessory, costing $30)

    Surur
    are you directing that in my direction, surur?! "you people are so lost.."? i just got finished criticizing palm for their failure to put sufficient memory in their past devices, and i am perfectly aware of the same failure about to befall their future device, the 700, knowing WM5 is the memory hog that it is. OBVIOUSLY, 64 mb ram on a windows device is no different than 32 mb ram on a palm os device. there`s no stunning revelation to anyone there.

    many of us here already agree several of palm`s decisions have been poor or questionable, putting 64 ram into the 700 instead of 128 mb is just another example. ive said it before just as lots of others have - they are too conservative and weak on innovation, leaving their future market dominance vulnerable and precarious with competitors in the market. most of us here are well aware of the situation with palm, surur. we know they dont seem to learn well from past mistakes. whats up with the `tude?
    Last edited by vw2002; 11/13/2005 at 07:47 PM.
  14. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #54  
    Quote Originally Posted by CmdrGuard
    The 650 wasn't soon to be discontinued when it first rolled off the production line. Why was the device not first designed with a competitive amount of memory?

    this was my point.
  15. #55  
    Quote Originally Posted by vw2002

    NO. you missed the point entirely. i was referring to palm`s decision to forego putting 64 mb ram into the 650 before it was released to the market last year, my friend. i was not inferring they should do so NOW! i never said that.

    OBVIOUSLY, since the 700 is coming soon, that makes no sense. we were discussing the decisions palm has made recently and how the company has generally been run. i was commenting on how palm saw the purchase of the "palm" logo as important but failed to see how critical it was to have sufficient memory in their devices.
    My apologies then, I guess I did not read closely enough. I thought you were saying they should fix it now (as others have whined about on these boards for months). I do agree they should have put in more memory rather than worry about a brand name that, IMHO, was more closely associated with the OS than with the hardware.
    "Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen."
    - Albert Einstein
  16. #56  
    Quote Originally Posted by whatever7
    Two years from now, Palm is on the verge of being brought out by some no name Asian company, they quickly split out the "MobilePhone" division in an attempt to raise the the stock price, but quick buy back the "Treo" name for 10 million dollars.

    Your furry paws contain wisdom beyond your whiskers.

    Seriously though, I think its quite clear now that unless Palm releases some spectacular 700p, that the company has no where else to go but down. Amazing though, because Palm is already doing so badly that it looks like they are going to actually innovate the PDA industry by breaking the "glass floor" and sinking lower than any PDA has before, being that Palm was the one that was once the undisputed leader in handheld technology.

    Since I don't expect the Treo700p to be spectacular, or even come out soon, I am faced with a difficult decision: to either sell my soul and buy a windoze device, replete with tons of resource wasting bells and whistles but devoid of any real genius in design, or to simply not buy a new smartphone and hope the 600 can last for a number of years. Frankly, I don't know which is worse.


    For the love of all things holy, SAVE US APPLE! Bring us the all-in-one innovative smartphone worthy of an apple logo. I beseech thee!
  17. #57  
    Quote Originally Posted by vw2002
    are you directing that in my direction, surur?! "you people are so lost.."? i just got finished criticizing palm for their failure to put sufficient memory in their past devices, and i am perfectly aware of the same failure about to befall their future device, the 700, knowing WM5 is the memory hog that it is. OBVIOUSLY, 64 mb ram on a windows device is no different than 32 mb ram on a palm os device. there`s no stunning revelation to anyone there.

    many of us here already agree several of palm`s decisions have been poor or questionable, putting 64 ram into the 700 instead of 128 mb is just another example. ive said it before just as lots of others have - they are too conservative and weak on innovation, leaving their future market dominance vulnerable and precarious with competitors in the market. most of us here are well aware of the situation with palm, surur. we know they dont seem to learn well from past mistakes. whats up with the `tude?
    I'm agreeing with you, of course, but I'm just adding they are more mad/suicidal than anyone could have guessed. 23MB for a Palm is understandable to a degree. 32Mb (not 64MB, 32 available, 32MB TOTAL) is PURE MADNESS for a $700 device. Its stillborn even before its been launched. What are/were they thinking?

    Basically I'm saying to a degree you are wasting your time complaining, because they are obviously beyound redemption. They've learned NOTHING from the Treo 650 memory problem, and now they are intent to repeat at an even grander scale with the treo 700w. What size of memory card are they planning to bundle this time?

    Sorry if I came of attacking you. Palm is more frustrating than one can imagine.

    Surur
  18. #58  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    I'm agreeing with you, of course, but I'm just adding they are more mad/suicidal than anyone could have guessed. 23MB for a Palm is understandable to a degree. 32Mb (not 64MB, 32 available, 32MB TOTAL) is PURE MADNESS for a $700 device. Its stillborn even before its been launched. What are/were they thinking?

    Basically I'm saying to a degree you are wasting your time complaining, because they are obviously beyound redemption. They've learned NOTHING from the Treo 650 memory problem, and now they are intent to repeat at an even grander scale with the treo 700w. What size of memory card are they planning to bundle this time?

    Sorry if I came of attacking you. Palm is more frustrating than one can imagine.

    Surur
    Amen brother.
    Its heartbreaking. I think I'll go look at the "LOST" theory boards. After you read some of the crazy theories over there Palm almost looks sane. Be back in a bit.
    Go here if you're tired of being .
    It'll be fun.
  19. #59  
    Guys, There seems to be some confusion in this thread - well it's confusing me anyway - between ROM and RAM. I'm no expert in this but this is my understanding (someone please correct me if I'm wrong). The 650 has a Non-volatile file system (NVFS) this uses two sorts of memory, ROM and RAM. This is how they are split up:

    Flash ROM:

    1) Compressed ROM image (OS, firmware, built-in apps - PIM, Blazer, VersaMail, etc);

    2) Storage heap (user-loaded apps; user-loaded or app-created databases), 23024 KB.

    RAM:

    3) Decompressed ROM image;

    4) Dynamic heap (working area for active programs), 5440KB;

    5) Cache (used to switch data between ROM and RAM), 11839 KB.

    The numbers are from my unlocked GSM device (Firmware 01.28, Software 1.13-ROW).

    ROM is used for (non-volatile) storage and RAM is used for running stuff, thus if you want more storage you want more ROM (not RAM!). Increasing RAM may have some benefits (e.g. a bigger cache could theoretically let you work with bigger databases), but it won't give you any more storage space.

    Most of my knowledge, such as it is, is from here:

    http://www.red-mercury.com/nvfs.html

    I used Memory Info for the stats on memory in my Treo.

    As it doesn't use any battery power, it seems to me the only downside to more ROM is the cost. The upside of course is that you get more storage space. That said, I have a lot of apps on the SD card and since I switched to one of the newer, quicker cards (SanDisk Ultra II) these really load pretty quickly and access to big databases (dictionary, TomTom maps) is pretty snappy too. I currently have bit over half the storage memory free so I guess (at this time at least) I don't have a really big need for more ROM. RAM might be a different matter. Anyone like to comment on the possibility of improved device stability with increased RAM?

    Of course if the next POS Treo runs Cobalt, the memory requirements are likely to be quite different and much of this is moot.
    Last edited by marcol; 11/14/2005 at 08:09 AM.
  20. slinky's Avatar
    Posts
    578 Posts
    Global Posts
    592 Global Posts
       #60  
    Quote Originally Posted by marcol
    Guys, There seems to be some confusion in this thread - well it's confusing me anyway - between ROM and RAM. I'm no expert in this but this is my understanding (someone please correct me if I'm wrong). The 650 has a Non-volatile file system (NVFS) this uses two sorts of memory, ROM and RAM. This is how they are split up:

    2) Storage heap (user-loaded apps; user-loaded or app-created databases), 23024 KB.
    This is the problem. From my understanding ROM is Read Only Memory. Whatever you want to call it, it doesn't matter. You only have one pocket on the palm. You need it to store and run your apps. Use more for storage, you have less and many not be able to run your apps.

    With 23 MB of RAM/ROM aka "pocket memory" to use, it's a sad, pathetic attempt to save a few dollars and dump outdated technology so we have to buy the next one. The world would be a better place without the current understanding of what sales and marketing should be. The term "truth in advertising" is an extinct animal.
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions