Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 118
Like Tree13Likes
  1.    #61  
    Quote Originally Posted by prethadd81 View Post
    I can`t say I believe it 100%. Just a few days ago.There were post of some codes hinting at a possible sprint return.Then you have people dropping dates that are rubbish.Nobody thought or knew that the veer was going to be 4g but most people were thinking it was another 3g version. So I say until we have a confirmation from Sprint or HP people should`nt read to much into anything. Even reliable sites can and have been wrong.
    I'll put money on this.
  2. #62  
    about time to face reality.
  3. #63  
    Quote Originally Posted by prethadd81 View Post
    I can`t say I believe it 100%. Just a few days ago.There were post of some codes hinting at a possible sprint return.Then you have people dropping dates that are rubbish.Nobody thought or knew that the veer was going to be 4g but most people were thinking it was another 3g version. So I say until we have a confirmation from Sprint or HP people should`nt read to much into anything. Even reliable sites can and have been wrong.
    Veer isn't 4G, not even close. And in my other post, Palm confirmed 14.4Mbps was a typo on the website, Veer only supports 7.2Mbps. It's just a plain old HSDPA phone.

    http://forums.precentral.net/hp-veer...mbps-hspa.html
    Palm IIIc -> Sony CLI T650C -> Sony TJ-37 -> Palm TX -> Palm Centro -> Palm Pre Bell -> Palm Pre Plus Bell/Verizon Hybrid -> HP Veer -> HP Pre 3 NA -> BlackBerry Classic -> BlackBerry Priv

    It's a Late Goodbye, such a Late Goodbye.

    Need OEM Palm Pre parts? See here
  4.    #64  
    It's like calling a carbureted car fuel injected because its gets better gas milage without sacrificing horsepower!
  5. dohcstunr's Avatar
    Posts
    53 Posts
    Global Posts
    68 Global Posts
    #65  
    Time to move on guys and gals.
  6. #66  
    Quote Originally Posted by dohcstunr View Post
    Time to move on guys and gals.
    +1
  7. #67  
    Looks like the Pre 3 will come with a new processor to compete with the new Android super smartphones, look at HP Pre3 Smartphone Specifications | Business Mobile Phones | HP Official Site it says that the Pre 3 processor is the Qualcomm Snapdragon dual-CPU APQ8060 1.2GHz instead of the one core 1.4 GHz.
  8. #68  
    Quote Originally Posted by alvaro_qc View Post
    Looks like the Pre 3 will come with a new processor to compete with the new Android super smartphones, look at HP Pre3 Smartphone Specifications | Business Mobile Phones | HP Official Site it says that the Pre 3 processor is the Qualcomm Snapdragon dual-CPU APQ8060 1.2GHz instead of the one core 1.4 GHz.
    *facepalm*

    This is the third time I'm posting this.

    http://forums.precentral.net/hp-pre-...ml#post3024084
    http://forums.precentral.net/hp-palm...s-devices.html

    HP is not going to release a phone with no radio!
    Palm IIIc -> Sony CLI T650C -> Sony TJ-37 -> Palm TX -> Palm Centro -> Palm Pre Bell -> Palm Pre Plus Bell/Verizon Hybrid -> HP Veer -> HP Pre 3 NA -> BlackBerry Classic -> BlackBerry Priv

    It's a Late Goodbye, such a Late Goodbye.

    Need OEM Palm Pre parts? See here
  9. #69  
    The APQ8060 is certainly not coming on the Pre3, but that doesn't mean HP wouldn't slap a MSM8660 in there. Who knows? I've lost all the faith I had in HP/Palm at this point.
  10. #70  
    Quote Originally Posted by ToniCipriani View Post
    *facepalm*

    This is the third time I'm posting this.

    http://forums.precentral.net/hp-pre-...ml#post3024084
    http://forums.precentral.net/hp-palm...s-devices.html

    HP is not going to release a phone with no radio!
    Sorry for not knowing the difference between the different Qualcomm processors and not being an avid reader of all the threads.
  11. #71  
    I honestly wouldn't be surprised if it was a "spec bump". Heck, back in February when the Pre 3 was announced it seemed like a pretty old phone to be coming out (and I thought it was being released in March) but now that it's July I think HP would have realized it was a mistake.

    I would also like to point out that it's odd how the iPad 2 costs atleast 200 dollars less to produce than the HP TouchPad and the iPad 2 has higher specs. It's also odd how Apple can produce the iPhone 4 in early 2010 with a 9 mm case, a front facing camera, higher resolution screen, and a 5 mp back camera but most manufacturers fail to do so in mid-2011. I'm starting to think the engineers at these companies are always drunk or something.
  12. #72  
    Quote Originally Posted by ursula View Post
    I honestly wouldn't be surprised if it was a "spec bump". Heck, back in February when the Pre 3 was announced it seemed like a pretty old phone to be coming out (and I thought it was being released in March) but now that it's July I think HP would have realized it was a mistake.

    I would also like to point out that it's odd how the iPad 2 costs atleast 200 dollars less to produce than the HP TouchPad and the iPad 2 has higher specs. It's also odd how Apple can produce the iPhone 4 in early 2010 with a 9 mm case, a front facing camera, higher resolution screen, and a 5 mp back camera but most manufacturers fail to do so in mid-2011. I'm starting to think the engineers at these companies are always drunk or something.
    Apple has things set like that for a reason. Their production costs are low because they have deals setup with multiple manufacturers leaving other companies to go elsewhere or pay a higher premium to have their hardware produced by that company.
  13. mehigh's Avatar
    Posts
    60 Posts
    Global Posts
    71 Global Posts
    #73  
    Quote Originally Posted by ursula View Post
    I honestly wouldn't be surprised if it was a "spec bump". Heck, back in February when the Pre 3 was announced it seemed like a pretty old phone to be coming out (and I thought it was being released in March) but now that it's July I think HP would have realized it was a mistake.

    I would also like to point out that it's odd how the iPad 2 costs atleast 200 dollars less to produce than the HP TouchPad and the iPad 2 has higher specs. It's also odd how Apple can produce the iPhone 4 in early 2010 with a 9 mm case, a front facing camera, higher resolution screen, and a 5 mp back camera but most manufacturers fail to do so in mid-2011. I'm starting to think the engineers at these companies are always drunk or something.
    From what I recall from reading in that article is that they cost the same to make.
  14. #74  
    I wouldn't be shocked if they bumped the processor to the 8660. The site does say 4G, so it will at least be HSPA+ on AT&T. Whether or not LTE comes...that's another story. If the phone truly is pushed back to Fall, a spec bump and re-qual of the new parts through the FCC would be a valid reason for such a push back. Otherwise, it's idiotic to keep waiting on a phone that is clearly quite capable now, and should have been released quickly after the TouchPad.
  15. #75  
    Quote Originally Posted by EvilKell View Post
    The APQ8060 is certainly not coming on the Pre3, but that doesn't mean HP wouldn't slap a MSM8660 in there. Who knows? I've lost all the faith I had in HP/Palm at this point.
    I think the 8x55 and 8x60 are pin compatible, but don't think it's the logical thing to do. The two uses the same cores, but still need the software to work together. Just simply slapping a dual core processor in place usually doesn't do much, in some cases would even make performance worse.

    My rough guess is that 3.x has some optimizations for the dual core where 2.3 doesn't have.
    Palm IIIc -> Sony CLI T650C -> Sony TJ-37 -> Palm TX -> Palm Centro -> Palm Pre Bell -> Palm Pre Plus Bell/Verizon Hybrid -> HP Veer -> HP Pre 3 NA -> BlackBerry Classic -> BlackBerry Priv

    It's a Late Goodbye, such a Late Goodbye.

    Need OEM Palm Pre parts? See here
  16. #76  
    Quote Originally Posted by MarkSFCA View Post
    Here is a link to the Pre 3 pages: HP webOS for 4G Pre3. Simply Amazing. | HP Official(R) Site

    It is missing the Spec page but if you put your cursor over the page title it says "HP webOS for 4G Pre 3". I wonder if that is why the Spec page was eliminated?
    I would guess this is why they took it down. 4G Pre 3 yay! But for only Verizon and AT&T? We shall soon find out!
  17. #77  
    Either way I was sort of hoping to have HP unveil the curtain on that keyboardless device. My Pre 2s screen is starting to feel a little cramped.
  18. #78  
    Quote Originally Posted by ToniCipriani View Post
    I think the 8x55 and 8x60 are pin compatible, but don't think it's the logical thing to do. The two uses the same cores, but still need the software to work together. Just simply slapping a dual core processor in place usually doesn't do much, in some cases would even make performance worse.

    My rough guess is that 3.x has some optimizations for the dual core where 2.3 doesn't have.
    Of course it's not logical from a user perspective. A single core 1.4GHz will run circles around a dual core 1.2GHz in terms of most user experience on a smartphone, especially a smartphone with a 1230mAh battery.

    Adding any kind of a 4G radio to the device would also necessitate a much larger battery. Who knows what HP is doing at this point, though? Their strategy has got to be controlled by a dartboard at this point.
  19. #79  
    people please step back for a sec and look further into the future . Thanks HP/Palm . The pre3 is a nice phone . And if its not nice enough for you , then well there are a whole bunch of robot phones to choose from and 1 or 2 apple phones maybe . Lol
    ĦṔ-Ḷṫ-Ŧḯη
    Here is a direct link to webOS Doc for all carriers
    http://www.webos-internals.org/wiki/...octor_Versions
    P.S. if i have helped you and you are thankful please hit the thanks button to the right---->
  20. #80  
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevesrjr86 View Post
    Apple has things set like that for a reason. Their production costs are low because they have deals setup with multiple manufacturers leaving other companies to go elsewhere or pay a higher premium to have their hardware produced by that company.
    To me thats unfair competition and they should be sued like Microsoft got sued for anti-trust practices.
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions