Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 72
  1.    #41  


    Actually when you enlarge and perspective correct that picture one can see the 800w looks a lot like the Centro, and not a lot like the HP 914c.

    Surur
  2. #42  
    I agree, in fact it's the similarities to the Gandolf that have make me think this pic was legitimate. Well, hope
  3. #43  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    Wasn't the big problem with the 6915 Cingular taking very very long to approve it? Hopefully they will do better this time, and they should, seeing how many other WM devices AT&T now have on their books.

    HP have only themselves to blame for the 6315, which was a total disaster and very poor first effort.

    Re 320x320 - I am sure the developers will step up to the plate, but 320x320 by itself it not enough, and wont necessarily display more than a 320x240 device. All the other features (especially GPS and WIFI) need to be there also. However as an improvement over 240x240 its of course stellar, but new products dont exist in a vacuum, the 800w will need to compare well not just with its predecessors, but also the current competition.

    Surur
    The 6915 had several software issues with Cingy and had a tough time with the tests. By the time it came, it was well past its time. Such is the case with carrier testing in the US with a lot of devices.
    MMM | AntoineRJWright.com | BH | Jaiku

    Moved on to Symbian, but still will visit from time to time.
  4. #44  
    HP burn a lot of bridges with its 6900 series. This one look completely industrial.

    It still bother me that HP is calling its ugly *** Jornada looking PDA "iPaq". That's not the "iPaq" I remember.

    Surur, can you use the white "Centro" leaked picture instead of the black one? The black one was taken from an angle, so the screen should look tall and narrow. Now that you stretch it, it looks very weird. Are you sure its shorter than the 680? If it does, it should be very similar to the Sony Ericsson w and k phones in size.
    Last edited by whatever7; 09/05/2007 at 05:01 PM.
  5. #45  
    Quote Originally Posted by g-funkster View Post
    That really looks like it's higher res than 320x240... looks VGA to me, almost.
  6.    #46  
    Quote Originally Posted by whatever7 View Post
    Surur, can you use the white "Centro" leaked picture instead of the black one? The black one was taken from an angle, so the screen should look tall and narrow. Now that you stretch it, it looks very weird. Are you sure its shorter than the 680? If it does, it should be very similar to the Sony Ericsson w and k phones in size.
    It looks perfectly fine to me (except maybe the thickness). The leaked dimensions resulted in a square screen, which tells me they must be about right. I think it will, in general, look like that, ie. a squat, thickish device.

    Surur
  7.    #47  
    Quote Originally Posted by NSiNSiNSi View Post
    That really looks like it's higher res than 320x240... looks VGA to me, almost.
    Extremely unlikely. More likely its just a bad photoshop screen-paste. Anyway, HP has already put out a press release about the device, and does not mention a VGA screen.

    Surur
  8. #48  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    I sure hope that Treo 800w is good, because HP has just stepped up the the plate with a very strong direct competitor.
    The thickness is unknown, but based on the screen size the device is 112 mm tall and 57 mm wide (the Treo 750v is 111 and 58mm wide (22cm thick) for comparison).

    The size is 115 x 51 x 18.2 mm. It has a 520 Mhz processor, 256MB ROM; 128MB RAM, and microSD expansion, it has a FM radio (so can probably do Traffic Message Channel).

    Surur
    I think the specs need to be revised. According to the official HP iPaq 900 series specs (warning, pdf):

    iPaq 900-series (914c)
    113 x 64 x 16 mm (4.45” x 2.52” x 0.63”) / 5.15 oz

    Treo 750
    111 x 58 x 22.1 mm (4.37" x 2.28" x 0.87") / 5.4 oz

    It's the same width as the Moto Q, so pretty wide, imo. They did get a decent sized 1840mah battery in there though.

    That seems to be always the case: Jaq3 (67mm), UBiQUiO 501 (65mm), Moto Q (64mm), iPaq (64mm)--all wide and tall, slightly less viewing area but "thin" devices. I guess it depends on what you prefer.

    No FM radio (not a surprise nor a disappointment, lol), Would it have killed them to add a ringer switch and 3.5mm jack? Why are these so rare these days? Overall the 914c looks nice, but not great for $800?

    (btw, that jaq3/501 is huge looking compared to a 700wx.)
    Last edited by Malatesta; 09/06/2007 at 03:23 PM.

    WMExperts: News, Reviews & Podcasts + Twitter
  9.    #49  
    Quote Originally Posted by Malatesta View Post
    I think the specs need to be revised. According to the official HP iPaq 900 series specs (warning, pdf):

    iPaq 900-series (914c)
    113 x 64 x 16 mm (4.45 x 2.52 x 0.63) / 5.15 oz

    Treo 750
    111 x 58 x 22.1 mm (4.37" x 2.28" x 0.87") / 5.4 oz

    It's the same width as the Moto Q, so pretty wide, imo. They did get a decent sized 1840mah battery in there though.

    That seems to be always the case: Jaq3 (67mm), UBiQUiO 501 (65mm), Moto Q (64mm), iPaq (64mm)--all wide and tall, slightly less viewing area but "thin" devices. I guess it depends on what you prefer.

    Now if they can make a device 58mm wide and 14mm thin with a 2.6+ screen dimensions and have great battery life...that'd be nice. Overall the 914c looks nice, but not great for $800?

    No FM radio (not a surprise nor a disappointment, lol), Would it have killed them to add a ringer switch and 3.5mm jack? Why are these so rare these days?

    (btw, that jaq3/501 is huge looking compared to a 700wx.)
    The 750 is 142 cubic centimeters, while the 914 is only 115. In 27 less cubic centimeters they managed to fit in a 600 mAh bigger battery, GPS, a scroll wheel and a larger screen. I would not sweat the small stuff.

    Surur
  10. #50  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    The 750 is 142 cubic centimeters, while the 914 is only 115. In 27 less cubic centimeters they managed to fit in a 600 mAh bigger battery, GPS, a scroll wheel and a larger screen. I would not sweat the small stuff.

    Surur
    The screen is smaller 2.46 vs 2.6, but higher resolution, which is obvious and "squeezing" in aGPS, which is built into the chipset, is not exactly an accomplishment

    I'm not saying it's a bad device, just not exactly awesome either.

    WMExperts: News, Reviews & Podcasts + Twitter
  11.    #51  
    Quote Originally Posted by Malatesta View Post
    The screen is smaller 2.46 vs 2.6, but higher resolution, which is obvious and "squeezing" in aGPS, which is built into the chipset, is not exactly an accomplishment

    I'm not saying it's a bad device, just not exactly awesome either.
    I thought Treo screens were 2.4 inches, but apparently not.

    Surur
  12. #52  
    I was planning to get the treo 750 by att, however after seen the 900 series of the ipaq here (the one w/ the qwerty). This is surely what I'm gonna get:

    1. Treo-like layout
    2. Touch screen
    3. Wifi
    4. WM-6 pro
    5. More slim of a design than the current treo.

    I think this is what ppl want. Hopefully good battery life.

    Anyone know of a release date yet???

    had
  13. #53  
    Quote Originally Posted by Malatesta View Post
    Would it have killed them to add a ringer switch and 3.5mm jack? Why are these so rare these days?
    Amen, particularly the ringer switch. I can't understand this in a device that calls itself a phone.
  14.    #54  
    Quote Originally Posted by hadouken88 View Post
    I was planning to get the treo 750 by att, however after seen the 900 series of the ipaq here (the one w/ the qwerty). This is surely what I'm gonna get:

    1. Treo-like layout
    2. Touch screen
    3. Wifi
    4. WM-6 pro
    5. More slim of a design than the current treo.

    I think this is what ppl want. Hopefully good battery life.

    Anyone know of a release date yet???

    had
    It has a huge 1840 battery and 9 hours talk time. I assume, using only a few radio's, battery life will be good. The release date is November for the unlocked version, they did not announce any carriers however, and its a pricey $800.

    Surur
  15. #55  
    $800!!!!!!!!! Oh My!!!!!!!! $800!!!!!!!!!!!!! may the relative value wars begin!
    Blackberry Pearl (AT&T), Apple 3G iPhone,
    owned and used: Treo 750 (WM5, Cingular)
    T680 unlocked (T-Mo), T700wx, T700w, T650, T600
    ppc6600, i730, htc mogul, BB Bold, Curve
  16.    #56  
    Quote Originally Posted by oalvarez View Post
    $800!!!!!!!!! Oh My!!!!!!!! $800!!!!!!!!!!!!! may the relative value wars begin!
    Actually I have also seen reports of $600. In the end thought, with the marked styling differences, these devices are definitely not aiming for the same market. The phone even has Business Messenger emblazoned on the face of the device.

    Surur
  17. #57  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    Actually I have also seen reports of $600. In the end thought, with the marked styling differences, these devices are definitely not aiming for the same market. The phone even has Business Messenger emblazoned on the face of the device.
    Not to mention a pro-rated price based on contract duration which is always better than full price PLUS an early termination fee.
  18. #58  
    This device is essentially perfect for me, but $800 is insane.
  19.    #59  
    Thats the unsubsidized price. The HTC Kaizer costs the same unlocked. It will be a lot cheaper through a carrier.

    Surur
  20. #60  
    at $800 it better be!
    Blackberry Pearl (AT&T), Apple 3G iPhone,
    owned and used: Treo 750 (WM5, Cingular)
    T680 unlocked (T-Mo), T700wx, T700w, T650, T600
    ppc6600, i730, htc mogul, BB Bold, Curve
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions