Page 12 of 18 FirstFirst ... 27891011121314151617 ... LastLast
Results 221 to 240 of 358
  1. #221  
    Quote Originally Posted by gex
    Power users are a very small minority of the consumer base!!! Almost insignificant... I think the Q will kill the Treo in sales (both versions) and will introduce a whole bunch of new consumers into the "smartphone" market.

    In the business market one of the BB's streangths is ease of use... WM PocketPC Edition (and Palm OS) is much to hard to use for your standard business person... you can give them a BB and about 5 min of instruction and they are set... the Q will be similar to that model... I really think this is a case of less is more.

    I believe you hit the nail on the head. There is alot of people who don't want to sit on a forum for hours and weeks trying to figure out how to operate a device, as such with a Treo. Sure once you figure a Treo out it's great but there is a HUGE market for simplicity. Anything that I have to do that's a bit involved I prefer to do it on my laptop or desktop anyway.

    The Q is going to be a huge success and will hurt both 700 sales.
  2. Haggar's Avatar
    Posts
    894 Posts
    Global Posts
    950 Global Posts
    #222  
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott R
    Haggar (or anyone) please provide specifics regarding which features are missing compared to the touchscreen version of WM5. We've got the edit-capable version of the Pocket Office apps so far. So what else?
    I'm not an expert -- but I from what I can see it seems that the lack of a touchscreen (obviously a hardware thang) renders many applications either unusable or very difficult to use. If you take a look on MS's WM website you'll see that many applications have a "Smartphone Edition" -- which simply means the interface we reprogrammed to work without a touchscreen. But what about the 1000's of other applications that don't have a smartphone version? They may run on the WM5 (not technically sure if this is the case) but they won't run without a lot of hassle.

    And Scott - don't get me wrong -- I'm not saying Smartphone edition isn't something that will appeal to people. I'm suggesting that power users won't necessarily like the limitations.

    And for those who say that power users are a small percentage of the market -- I totally agree. BUT - if that's true, the Treo is (for the most part) a power user device so I don't see how the MotoQ is going to be compared directly with the 700. The "average" consumer could easily mistake the power vs. simplicity -- but I don't think the "average user" is going to want the MotoQ at $200 either...
  3. #223  
    Quote Originally Posted by Haggar
    I'm not an expert -- but I from what I can see it seems that the lack of a touchscreen (obviously a hardware thang) renders many applications either unusable or very difficult to use. If you take a look on MS's WM website you'll see that many applications have a "Smartphone Edition" -- which simply means the interface we reprogrammed to work without a touchscreen. But what about the 1000's of other applications that don't have a smartphone version? They may run on the WM5 (not technically sure if this is the case) but they won't run without a lot of hassle.

    And Scott - don't get me wrong -- I'm not saying Smartphone edition isn't something that will appeal to people. I'm suggesting that power users won't necessarily like the limitations.

    And for those who say that power users are a small percentage of the market -- I totally agree. BUT - if that's true, the Treo is (for the most part) a power user device so I don't see how the MotoQ is going to be compared directly with the 700. The "average" consumer could easily mistake the power vs. simplicity -- but I don't think the "average user" is going to want the MotoQ at $200 either...

    Would you call a BB user the "Average user" ?if so many "average users" will welcome the Q, and companies are going to love the price. Say what you want but the Q will dig into BB, 700w and 700P sales.
  4. #224  
    But see...you seem to be confusing PPC app compatibility with "power." My point (and maybe I'm wrong) is that WM5 developers should be able to develop apps for this Q that are every bit as powerful as their PPC equivalents. The only feature they wouldn't support is the touchscreen. IMO, the Q's non-touchscreen 320x240 screen is more useful than the 700w's 240x240 touchscreen. YMMV.

    But, as I said, I *could* be wrong. Maybe there are functions that VS.NET developers don't have access to when writing apps for the Smartphone edition. And I still can't find out what the Q's memory configuration is or what type of CPU it has.
    Now THIS is the future of smartphones.
  5.    #225  
    Quote Originally Posted by Haggar
    I'm not an expert -- but I from what I can see it seems that the lack of a touchscreen (obviously a hardware thang) renders many applications either unusable or very difficult to use. If you take a look on MS's WM website you'll see that many applications have a "Smartphone Edition" -- which simply means the interface we reprogrammed to work without a touchscreen. But what about the 1000's of other applications that don't have a smartphone version? They may run on the WM5 (not technically sure if this is the case) but they won't run without a lot of hassle.

    And Scott - don't get me wrong -- I'm not saying Smartphone edition isn't something that will appeal to people. I'm suggesting that power users won't necessarily like the limitations.

    And for those who say that power users are a small percentage of the market -- I totally agree. BUT - if that's true, the Treo is (for the most part) a power user device so I don't see how the MotoQ is going to be compared directly with the 700. The "average" consumer could easily mistake the power vs. simplicity -- but I don't think the "average user" is going to want the MotoQ at $200 either...
    Quote Originally Posted by vikingjunior
    Would you call a BB user the "Average user" ?if so many "average users" will welcome the Q, and companies are going to love the price. Say what you want but the Q will dig into BB, 700w and 700P sales.
    You have both captured the answer from different viewpoints.

    Haggar, I know you're never wrong (hrumph)...but how many posters here (hundreds of threads literally) bemoan how they see a friends/colleagues/strangers Treo and there is NOTHING on it but the default apps? How many times have you shown a fellow user your tricked out Treo and they go "You mean it can do that?" in astonishment?

    Viking has it nailed; the vast majority of Treo users are casual users; couldn't care less about getting Chattermail to work from the SD card; nor Zlauncher settings. They are used to the look and feel of Outlook; it's just as easy to use as a Crackberry, but thinner and cooler and has "real Windows" on it. The Moto Q (soon to be followed by the Samsung i320, and even the HTC Star Trek) about to leave Treo and BB in the dust.

    This is probably not yours, mine's or other geeks choice device - but put a touchscreen and full WM5 on that size puppy, and I'm all over it.
    Remember, the "P" in PDA stands for personal.
    If it works for you, it is "P"erfect.
  6. Cartman's Avatar
    Posts
    700 Posts
    Global Posts
    879 Global Posts
    #226  
    The thing is that large corps hate to support complicated devices such as the Treo...give them a simple solution they can deploy in large number with the minimal amount of support resources...that meets all their security requirements (many of which the PalmOS simply does not address with out third party apps like Good) and you have a good chance for market success....

    Given the fact that the MS solution doesn't require you to rely on third party gateways (like the BB enterprise server does..all your data goes through server in Canada with BB!!!) for your messaging needs and has no requirement for additional servers outside of your current Exchange infrastructure I think this is a powerful combination....

    PalmOS is really not a player in this market at all...even with Good they are small fry's... Good has a model similar to BB and has their own gateway servers that your data goes through..and an additional server(s) in-house as well... give the choice I would rather not have my information go through third party servers and have to support additional servers in-house...and I haven't even mentioned the additional licensing costs $$$$

    ....I believe a lot of corporations will feel the same way.... MS has a better technical/security/financial solution now...Took them a long time to get here...and it was a hard struggle... and they are already working on WM7... they are finished with WM6 that you wont see come to market for about a year...and they are in beta with Exchange 2007 that has further benefits... wow... its gona be a tuff market.. im actually kind of worried after typing all this for RIM... we need competition to drive innovation and MS seems to be coming on very strong into this market...so much so that I would hate to see the competition die off in a few years....
  7.    #227  
    gex:

    Good insights. Like everything else, M$oft starts to get it right after 4-6 tries (let's see - we suffered through Windows, Windows 386, Window 95, Windows 98, Windows 98 SE, Windows "Not"-Me, and finally Windows XP). Combined with our Windows Server 2003 SP2, my email has NEVER been so rock solid on any converged device, and that includes Contacts, Calendar, and Tasks. It is so great to run all my email through one account and stay synced at all times without worrying about which device I received or sent the email from.

    Look at the folks over in the Palm camp - by going to Chattermail they can finally get fairly reliable push with Email, and they're hoping that it will include the other 3 sometime in the future.

    Unfortunately, corporate America loves end to end solutions - so if you can go from your corporate Exchange Server mail to WM5 Moto Q and look like Outlook all the way, it will be a killer.
    Remember, the "P" in PDA stands for personal.
    If it works for you, it is "P"erfect.
  8. #228  
    It has an Intel PXA27x 312 MHz processor, 64Mb ram (probably 20-30 MB free) and 64 Mb storage, with probably 10 MB free storage (but you can run programs from the mini-SD card).

    If Skype made a touch-screen free version it should run fine. People have already managed to run Skype on WIFI equipped smartphones using pointer substitutes.

    Surur
  9. #229  
    Quote Originally Posted by gex
    The thing is that large corps hate to support complicated devices such as the Treo...give them a simple solution they can deploy in large number with the minimal amount of support resources...that meets all their security requirements (many of which the PalmOS simply does not address with out third party apps like Good) and you have a good chance for market success....
    I beg to differ. We have customers with thousands of Palm OS Treo's deployed and their support resources are no larger than organizations with thousands of BB's or other devices deployed.

    Given the fact that the MS solution doesn't require you to rely on third party gateways (like the BB enterprise server does..all your data goes through server in Canada with BB!!!) for your messaging needs and has no requirement for additional servers outside of your current Exchange infrastructure I think this is a powerful combination....
    Not to turn this into a MS vs. everyone else, but you are oversimplifying the MS solution and not giving recognition to what the other solutions provide. From and end-user perspective, they could care less...why should they..how their email, calendar, etc, gets to them, as long as it does. However, from an IT perspective, the defintiely do care about the bits and bytes of it all.

    PalmOS is really not a player in this market at all...even with Good they are small fry's... Good has a model similar to BB and has their own gateway servers that your data goes through..and an additional server(s) in-house as well... give the choice I would rather not have my information go through third party servers and have to support additional servers in-house...and I haven't even mentioned the additional licensing costs $$$$
    I refer to my previous two comments. While nowhere near the market penetration of Blackberry, Palm OS in the corporate smartphone market (not talking plain PDA here) is strong. As I said, I know of organizations running thousands of 650's, one alone with over 15,000. As for Good vs MSFT, not going down that road as you and I have 'clashed' in that debate before. The fact remains that there isn't a large enterprise (over 500 users) that I see deploying the MSFT solution enterprise wide for a variety of reasons. The SMB space will see some uptake. The MSFT solution is 12-18 months behind RIM, Good, Intellisync and the other enterprise messaging solutions available today.


    ....I believe a lot of corporations will feel the same way.... MS has a better technical/security/financial solution now...Took them a long time to get here...and it was a hard struggle... and they are already working on WM7... they are finished with WM6 that you wont see come to market for about a year...and they are in beta with Exchange 2007 that has further benefits... wow... its gona be a tuff market.. im actually kind of worried after typing all this for RIM... we need competition to drive innovation and MS seems to be coming on very strong into this market...so much so that I would hate to see the competition die off in a few years....
    I am assuming you are referring to WM5 vs PalmOS as it relates to technical and security. They should be better as it took them 5 tries to get it right. If you are referring to the enterprise email market, MSFT is behind RIM, Good and others. I have said that MSFT is not known for being altruistic. If their push email solution was such a major competitor to the RIM's of the world, they would productize it and sell it, not use it as a feature to entice people to upgrade to Exchange 2003. They may end up doing just that, however, right now, their addressable market is WM5 devices and Exchange 2003. Period. A large market, no doubt, but a finite market nonetheless.

    Again, I am not trying to turn this into a MSFT vs RIM vs Good vs all the others, simply adressing your points.
  10. Cartman's Avatar
    Posts
    700 Posts
    Global Posts
    879 Global Posts
    #230  
    Hey GoodGuy.. I thought my post might bring you out of the woodwork!

    I've missed you
  11. #231  
    Quote Originally Posted by gex
    Power users are a very small minority of the consumer base!!! Almost insignificant... I think the Q will kill the Treo in sales (both versions) and will introduce a whole bunch of new consumers into the "smartphone" market.

    In the business market one of the BB's streangths is ease of use... WM PocketPC Edition (and Palm OS) is much to hard to use for your standard business person... you can give them a BB and about 5 min of instruction and they are set... the Q will be similar to that model... I really think this is a case of less is more.

    I have heard that before and I wonder if that's really true. I mean, we're talking about college graduates a lot of the time. I find it hard to believe they can't master any handheld but a BB in a short amount of time.
  12. #232  
    Quote Originally Posted by gex
    Hey GoodGuy.. I thought my post might bring you out of the woodwork!

    I've missed you
    I have been lurking around. Don't want to get accused of shilling Good again. You made some good points. The beauty of the whole thing, IMHO, is the effect on BB, regardless of MSFT, Good, or others. The gorilla in Redmond is going after the smaller gorilla in Canada and the little gorillas are hanging around, collecting up the pieces
  13. #233  
    Quote Originally Posted by Lady Treo
    I have heard that before and I wonder if that's really true. I mean, we're talking about college graduates a lot of the time. I find it hard to believe they can't master any handheld but a BB in a short amount of time.

    It's been my experience that it's the well educated genius that have the hardest time with operating devices. Now give it to some snot nose 15 year old and no problem.
  14. #234  
    I still need to see it to believe it. I would like someone who has probably used Windows for the majority of their life to explain why WM would be so hard for them.

    Die-hard Apple users probably don't like it as much and go for Palm OS, which isn't serious rocket science itself.

    The only problem I can see are crashes caused by software conflicts(for both OS), people who don't visit forums may not realize what happened. But learning the OS itself that can't be that hard. Plus like it's been said many times, RTFM!! I find if I try to take shortcuts and not RTFM, THEN I get frustrated. Business pros have to be able to read right? So what's the problem?
  15. #235  
    This is why I think the Q will be a good fit for those who are not so device savy and don't need the busy like full windows version. Going from a BB to a Q shouldn't be a huge learning curve but some are so anal that they resist change once they become comfortable with something. It probably took some of them a year to figure out the BB.
  16. #236  
    Well, here is my thing:

    I don't know if I will like going over to the dark side. I know Palm very well, and have invested hundreds of dollars over the years in apps. I want my phone to do the following:

    1. Phone calls
    2. Weather
    3. View tiff, PDF and Word files
    4. Power email app like Chatter
    5. Calendar
    6. Sync with my desktop apps for calendar/to do/contacts
    7. Directory Assistant would be nice
    8. A news app like Express
    9. Alarm clock
    10. GPS
    11. Access to PC files
    12. Stream internet ala Ptunes
    13. Fast web browser

    Can the Q do all these things well? Probably. It's also smaller, and much cheaper. So why pay twice as much for a fatter Treo?

    This is truly a question, as I don't have EVDO in my area yet, so I am not jumping on the 700p or Q bandwagon yet. The ONLY thing I have read in this thread which causes me concern is whether the Q will be limited in the apps it uses because of the lack of a touchscreen. But I don't use the touchscreen much on the Treo anyway.
    Palm V-->Visor Deluxe-->Visor Prism-->Visorphone-->Treo 180-->Treo 600-->Treo 650 on Sprint-->Treo 700p-->Centro-->Diamond-->Pre-->HTC EVO 4g???!
  17.    #237  
    I think the touch screen is not a real problem unless you want to edit, and not just view, documents. When you look at Surur's pictures, the Treo looks like a sumo wrestler in comparison, and the Samsung i320 even outdoes the Q size wise.
    Remember, the "P" in PDA stands for personal.
    If it works for you, it is "P"erfect.
  18. #238  
    Personal choice, but that's another reason I'm not a huge fan of Smartphone. I like a touchscreen. Scrolling with those jog dials(like on the 2125) sometimes is annoying.
  19. #239  
    Quote Originally Posted by dstrauss
    I think the touch screen is not a real problem unless you want to edit, and not just view, documents. When you look at Surur's pictures, the Treo looks like a sumo wrestler in comparison, and the Samsung i320 even outdoes the Q size wise.
    more to love, ds, more to love...
  20. #240  
    Most people love the Treo 6xx-series one-handed design and complain when applications aren't designed to allow for full navigation using the D-Pad. The 700w routinely got criticized for its not-quite-there-yet D-Pad integration. So I find it a bit amusing that some are questioning how "smart" the Q is based on its lack of a touchscreen.
    Now THIS is the future of smartphones.

Posting Permissions