Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 21
  1.    #1  
    ?
  2. #2  
    !
  3. #3  
    yep...always.....figured you deserved a response
  4. #4  
    Depends on what the phone is for. You need a bigger screen if you want to view and edit documents IMO.
    HP has officially ruined it's own platform and kicked webOS loyalists and early TouchPad adopters to the curb. You think after you drop it like a hot potato and mention it made no money and is costing you money, anyone else wants it??? Way to go HP!!

    And some people are fools to keep believing their hype. HP has shown they will throw webOS under the bus and people are still having faith in them??? News flash: if it's own company won't stand behind it, it's finished!
  5. Silver5's Avatar
    Posts
    529 Posts
    Global Posts
    553 Global Posts
    #5  
    Thinner is NOT always better. Smaller is definitely not always better. For girls it might be really convenient but dangit, I'm a guys with guy's hands and some of these little devices are useless to me, so thinner, smaller, lighter, is not always better!
  6. #6  
    I agree that if you have big fingers, it's hard to use the keypad or keyboard on many devices.
    HP has officially ruined it's own platform and kicked webOS loyalists and early TouchPad adopters to the curb. You think after you drop it like a hot potato and mention it made no money and is costing you money, anyone else wants it??? Way to go HP!!

    And some people are fools to keep believing their hype. HP has shown they will throw webOS under the bus and people are still having faith in them??? News flash: if it's own company won't stand behind it, it's finished!
  7. #7  
    A lot of girls prefer thicker and longer, but just won't say so, so as not to hurt you feelings

    Surur
  8. #8  
    To get this thread back on track ;-)

    I will say that the smartphones that I have owned that fall into the category small/thin, etc. have been a nice welcome. Having had Treo's forever and not a "normal' phone for sometime now, moving off to a small sized smartphone is really nice. I almost forgot how the portability of a smaller device is. With that said, I don't think size should compromise usability and form factor. As much as Palm gets ripped for not changing the form factor and overall design, they sure know what works well for this market. I personally witnessed this while using my new Cingular 8525 for over a week now. When I pick up my Treo 750v, the first thing I notice is how good it feels to hold as a phone. I personally think Palm has it right. I own the Blackberry Pearl as well, and as small and compact that is, its still not comfortable to hold and use. Though I am a big fan of the trackball on the Pearl.
    Brian McGuire
    .../600/650/8700c/700w/Moto Q/700p/Nokia E62/700wx/8525/750c/BB Pearl/Blackjack/BB 8800/BB Curve & HTC Vox S710 >>iPhone
  9. TxDot's Avatar
    Posts
    892 Posts
    Global Posts
    916 Global Posts
    #9  
    Thinner is generally better but smaller is not always better. If someone could design a thinner version of the 8525 I think they would sell a lot more of them. They appear to be easier for big handed guys to use but they are just too stinking thick. Then there's the battery issue. The thinner and smaller you go the worse the battery life. I think we're stuck until some sort of new battery technology shows up.
    GSM Treo 600 > Unlocked GSM Treo 650 on T-Mobile - Attempting to use a BB Curve

    Technology is neither good nor evil, good people will find good uses for it and evil people will find evil uses for it. Phil P.
  10. #10  
    Thinner and smaller are better if they include foldable (like the screen or the keyboard). Otherwise thinner and smaller eventually becomes too thin to hold comfortably and too small to read comfortably.
  11. #11  
    I did the Dash so I can say thinner is better. It isn't hugely smaller than my Treo 650 (I went back to the Tre) but it SEEMS smaller.

    My 650 is fine sizewise. I have an SDA for my 'small' moods but I never use it.

    Screen, keyboard, battery. These seem to be the primary constraints. I want all 3. iIm in Boston now and haven't touched my spare battery.
  12. #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    A lot of girls prefer thicker and longer, but just won't say so, so as not to hurt you feelings

    Surur
    BWAHAHAHAHHAHA!!!!
  13. #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by TxDot View Post
    The thinner and smaller you go the worse the battery life. I think we're stuck until some sort of new battery technology shows up.
    That's the crux of the situation. The way things are going, we'll have eyeglass sized processing units that project the screen onto our eyeballs in several years but still carrying around a battery only brick to power the damn thing.
  14. #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by TxDot View Post
    Thinner is generally better but smaller is not always better. If someone could design a thinner version of the 8525 I think they would sell a lot more of them. They appear to be easier for big handed guys to use but they are just too stinking thick. Then there's the battery issue. The thinner and smaller you go the worse the battery life. I think we're stuck until some sort of new battery technology shows up.
    i beg to differ: the battery life on my Blackberry Pear absolutely outdoes any Treo i've ever owned.
  15. z3bum's Avatar
    Posts
    717 Posts
    Global Posts
    723 Global Posts
    #15  
    I have a Treo 650, a T-Mobile SDA and a Samsung SGH-i320N. Basically smaller is better in some situations. For example, when wearing a tux or suit, I like thw Samsung because it is full featured yet very thin. Battery life is not as good though as My Treo, the real work horse. The SDA is great as just a phone, that happens to wirelessly sync email, calendar and contact items. I think having one of each is the best of all worlds, as no one device can do it all, well. Just my two gold sovereigns...
    Palm III -> Palm V -> Blue Palm Vx w/Omnisky -> Treo 270 -> Treo 600 -> Treo 650 -> Treo 680
  16. TxDot's Avatar
    Posts
    892 Posts
    Global Posts
    916 Global Posts
    #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by oalvarez View Post
    i beg to differ: the battery life on my Blackberry Pear absolutely outdoes any Treo i've ever owned.
    Don't know if this is true but I was told that the touchscreen takes a lot of juice. Does the Pearl have a touchscreen? That could explain the difference.
    GSM Treo 600 > Unlocked GSM Treo 650 on T-Mobile - Attempting to use a BB Curve

    Technology is neither good nor evil, good people will find good uses for it and evil people will find evil uses for it. Phil P.
  17. #17  
    the Pearl does not have a touchscreen which is fine with me. for me, battery life is important.

    regards
  18. #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by TxDot View Post
    Don't know if this is true but I was told that the touchscreen takes a lot of juice. Does the Pearl have a touchscreen? That could explain the difference.
    WM Smartphones don't have touch screens either, but their battery life isn't close to what any Blackberry's is. The real battery drain is the poor adaptation of a generic operating system to the specific hardware of a phone. Palm has done an "OK" job of it with the Palm OS Treos (although battery life has decreased with each succeeding model since the 600), but WM phones universally suck down battery juice like a 500 watt boom box! The WM OS is a very inefficient adaptation of a very inefficient desktop operating system - RIM's approach was integrated from the start.
  19. #19  
    i absolutely agree with you on the Blackberry battery front. having been an owner of a Moto Q, i can honestly tell you that "my device" had much better battery life than the Treo W and WX that it replaced at that time.

    nothing comes close to the battery life of a Blackberry.
  20. #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by Kupe View Post
    WM Smartphones don't have touch screens either, but their battery life isn't close to what any Blackberry's is. The real battery drain is the poor adaptation of a generic operating system to the specific hardware of a phone. Palm has done an "OK" job of it with the Palm OS Treos (although battery life has decreased with each succeeding model since the 600), but WM phones universally suck down battery juice like a 500 watt boom box! The WM OS is a very inefficient adaptation of a very inefficient desktop operating system - RIM's approach was integrated from the start.
    Which presumably explains why the WM Treo got better battery life than the POS Treo .... Not!

    Surur
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions