Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 85
  1.    #1  
    Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel that the reviews of the Pre 2's hardware specs have been unfairly negative.

    The Pre 2 has a 1 GHz processor and 512 MB ram. And yet I read a lot of posts/reviews saying how disappointed people are that these specs are "dated" or "not up to par" with what's available now.

    Isn't 1 GHz/512 RAM the standard now for most other "top of the line" or "hot" devices, such as the iPhone 4, Droid X, Droid 2, Samsung Galaxy, etc.?

    What am I missing? Why is the hardware on these other phones such much better than the Pre 2?
  2. #2  
    ehh, I think for the most part its the more familiar form factor and the front facing camera that people are looking for these days. And lets face it the Pre certainly doesnt have a front camera and a familiar form factor although its pretty nice once you use it
  3. #3  
    screen size, and resolution. small phones aren't convenient for web-browsing, or watching videos.
  4. #4  
    Quote Originally Posted by nimer55 View Post
    screen size, and resolution. small phones aren't convenient for web-browsing, or watching videos.
    Agreed, while Android pretty much has the basic smartphone features down, they are becoming more of a feature phone that supposedly does everything
  5. eps1lon3's Avatar
    Posts
    97 Posts
    Global Posts
    141 Global Posts
    #5  
    We all were expecting more than just basically the same Pre design. It was slight improved, but I guess when you chalk it up you conclude it's the screen. It just too small a form factor.

    I guess its like comparing a dwarf(3.1" screen) to a normal person(~3.5") and a giant(~4"). Just suppose they all had the same physical strength. The "hardware" for the bigger ones would be...better? Dunno where I was going with it, but I think the point I'm trying to make is that the general subconscious of reviewers think bigger is better.
  6. #6  
    I think Its mostly because the design hasn't changed. It holds up with all the epics evos droids and iphone. Only thing lacking is the smaller screen; only .4inches smaller than iphone.

    the pre is a very good design; and I think palm wants another crack at it, minus all the negative issues on the original pre.

    If people just pretended that this is the pre 2 is the first pre and all previous where some beta versions or something. They would love it ecspecially with the facelift, and excellent specs inside.
  7. #7  
    Fixed focus camera
    No 720p video recording
    Great screen resolution...for two years ago
    Tiny screen
    No compass

    Sorry, but the hardware on those devices is objectively better.
  8. #8  
    It's not that the pre2's hardware is bad. What the did include is AWESOME. But the things that were left out are things the the masses want. I would have been fine if they cut the gesture area in half to increase the screen size. Added a front facing camera and a digital compass.

    also people are upset because the keyboard still hasn't reached blackberry quality.
  9. #9  
    agree with above, HP will launch 5 or 6 new smartphone & tablet with webOS 2.x & it will be a rebirth of webOS! Just like when Android 2.x came out last year with Verizon Droid...
  10. #10  
    The problem is there are a lot of industry watchers and reviewers who have been waiting on a truly competitive superphone from Palm. The P2 dribbles out the door and is most definitely not what people have been waiting all these months for. The P2 feels like a stopgap. No one wants to be stopgaped. It is disrespectful to loyal fans, and contemptuous to new customers.

    If HP had come out with a statement about how they were sorry for the delay in releasing something new, but were working on the next great iteration of their smartphone vision to be released in the coming months, people would have understood that. Instead, they regurgitate something that everyone looks at, and immediately thinks, rehash. It doesn't look like HP even bothered to try.

    Now, we have the P2 with no explanation of how HP views this device or any indication of where it fits in the wOS vision. People are left to wonder if this is really the best they could do, or is it a stopgap for suckers. It is not the reviewers who should be criticized. They don't even have a production unit to look at. It is HP, in what might well be the worst product roll out in history.
  11. #11  
    if my eyes were 20 years younger the pre screen wouldbe perfect. At this point, the iphone is the perfect size, but for many, the pre size is better.

    I don't want to carry a sled. I have a netbook for that.
  12. #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by mikah912 View Post
    Fixed focus camera
    No 720p video recording
    Great screen resolution...for two years ago
    Tiny screen
    No compass

    Sorry, but the hardware on those devices is objectively better.

    Agreed, and then some.

    I'll be very disappointed in HP if they don't update the hardware. I read the comments regarding how one puts an Evo in their pocket, which, of course, is absurd. Or the comments about how one can swipe or do any hand gestures with the Evo as it's too big to do so. Really? People have such terribly tiny little hands? If the size of the handset isn't your cup of tea thats perfectly fine but at least base your argument on a valid point.

    I read the wishful comments about how the new Pre will be "this" or "that" and on par with everything else out there. No, it won't at least not in it's current iteration.

    Why didn't HP elect to provide updated hardware and a new face? While the Pre has an interesting design it's absolutely obvious the slab side IS the defacto and preferred handset for consumers and it will continue to be that way. Can anyone possibly argue with the success of the iphone and android variants on the market? Even the BB has generally a slab sided configuration.


    I'm still not convinced HP even cares enough about the Pre to make a real go at it in the smartphone market. I believe they care more about the O/S installed on the handsets which means no exciting new hardware. They're late in the game, perhaps too late to compete, but the O/S has more overall value.
  13. #13  
    For me, the Pre has already been there and done that with 1GHz and I wasn't impressed. I was never one to dislike the hardware, but rather how un-optimized the software was.
  14. Unibrow's Avatar
    Posts
    12 Posts
    Global Posts
    142 Global Posts
    #14  
    personally i don't understand all this ranting about the current screen res. Honestly, I have never at any point looked at the screen and said "wow, I wish this screen looked better" Front facing camera? no thanks. I don't take pictures of myself like some tween and update them to my facebook incessantly and personally don't give half a rats *** about video conferencing. I'll take a Pre2 in a second on SPRINT however it doesn't look like I will be.

    My current Pre is borked beyond repair and I called to cancel my Sprint service out of frustration and they were willing to upgrade me to the EVO or whatever phone I wanted (I'm not eligible for an upgrade until January) but I declined. I think I'll be taking my buddies pre (he switched to iPhone4) and keep my current contract and hold out a bit longer
  15. #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by lcapella View Post
    Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel that the reviews of the Pre 2's hardware specs have been unfairly negative.

    The Pre 2 has a 1 GHz processor and 512 MB ram. And yet I read a lot of posts/reviews saying how disappointed people are that these specs are "dated" or "not up to par" with what's available now.

    Isn't 1 GHz/512 RAM the standard now for most other "top of the line" or "hot" devices, such as the iPhone 4, Droid X, Droid 2, Samsung Galaxy, etc.?

    What am I missing? Why is the hardware on these other phones such much better than the Pre 2?
    How about the fact that all of those phones have been out for 6 months by the time the Pre 2 will be released?

    Do you know what 6 months is when it comes to technology age? Especially mobile technology?
    In about two months a whole slew of next generation phones will be announced and subsequently released....while Hpalm is releasing their product to catch up with the last generation.

    Really, it's not that hard to understand at all.
  16. #16  
    I updated the comparison stickies at the top of this forum to include the Pre 2 as well as the Pre and Pre Plus a bit ago. To make it a little more clear how they compare, I just added this basic feature comparison chart to each one.


    The Pre 2 matches the Speed but note that many existing Pre Plus users are at 1.2 GHz with 16 GB memory already.

    They all will have text commands (Just Type) once the Pre's catch up with webOS 2.0 so scratch that one out. Keyboard is a preference item so scratch that as well. There are some who like a little screen so throw that out.

    If you were the reviewer looking at the remaining 15 basic features, how does the Pre 2 compare to the other flagship smartphones?
    Last edited by milominderbinder; 11/01/2010 at 09:26 AM.
  17. #17  
    Some of the things on your list are not strictly hardware differences.

    Voice capabilities are not hardware dependent.

    Hardware should strictly be: processors, sensors, radios, video capture, display, form factor, memory&storage.
    Essentially, things that an over the air update can't ever fix.

    I also believe the Palm Pre to Palm Pre 2 upgrade is a typical one for a product family (see Droid & iPhone 3). I don't hear people showing discontent for the Droid 2 because it isn't any faster than an over-clocked Droid. I understand the discontent for the Palm Pre 2, but I also understand the the webOS makes the Palm Pre 2 an equal contender. At the end of the day, hardware specs are mostly only good for the books (or for geeks).



    Quote Originally Posted by milominderbinder View Post
    I updated the comparison stickies at the top of this forum to include the Pre as well as the Pre and Pre Plus a bit ago. To make it a little more clear how they compare, I just added this basic feature comparison chart to each one.


    The Pre 2 matches the Speed but note that many existing Pre Plus users are at 1.2 GHz with 16 GB memory already.

    They all will have text commands (Just Type) once the Pre's catch up with webOS 2.0 so scratch that one out. Keyboard is a preference item so scratch that as well. There are some who like a little screen so throw that out.

    If you were the reviewer looking at the remaining 15 basic features, how does the Pre 2 compare to the other flagship smartphones?
  18. #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by DumbPreCommenter View Post
    Some of the things on your list are not strictly hardware differences.

    Voice capabilities are not hardware dependent.

    Hardware should strictly be: processors, sensors, radios, video capture, display, form factor, memory&storage.
    Essentially, things that an over the air update can't ever fix.

    I also believe the Palm Pre to Palm Pre 2 upgrade is a typical one for a product family (see Droid & iPhone 3). I don't hear people showing discontent for the Droid 2 because it isn't any faster than an over-clocked Droid. I understand the discontent for the Palm Pre 2, but I also understand the the webOS makes the Palm Pre 2 an equal contender. At the end of the day, hardware specs are mostly only good for the books (or for geeks).
    The covers two of the fifteen things that the other phones [that are SIX MONTHS OLD mind you] beat the Pre 2 at.

    Leaves 13.
  19. #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by lcapella View Post
    Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel that the reviews of the Pre 2's hardware specs have been unfairly negative.

    The Pre 2 has a 1 GHz processor and 512 MB ram. And yet I read a lot of posts/reviews saying how disappointed people are that these specs are "dated" or "not up to par" with what's available now.

    Isn't 1 GHz/512 RAM the standard now for most other "top of the line" or "hot" devices, such as the iPhone 4, Droid X, Droid 2, Samsung Galaxy, etc.?

    What am I missing? Why is the hardware on these other phones such much better than the Pre 2?
    I agree with most of the people. It's not whats in the Pre 2 but the form factor itself that lends it to being a non-schocker.

    Quote Originally Posted by mikah912 View Post
    Fixed focus camera
    No 720p video recording
    Great screen resolution...for two years ago
    Tiny screen
    No compass

    Sorry, but the hardware on those devices is objectively better.
    Tiny screen and resolution don't entirely matter. If you have a tiny screen, why have a great resolution? You won't really tell the difference and it will only raise the price. No compass -- I am not sure if that would make the phone better. Does the Evo or iPhone have one? The fact that I have to ask makes me wonder if I would even care.

    Quote Originally Posted by Odd-Ball View Post
    I'm still not convinced HP even cares enough about the Pre to make a real go at it in the smartphone market. I believe they care more about the O/S installed on the handsets which means no exciting new hardware. They're late in the game, perhaps too late to compete, but the O/S has more overall value.
    CES 2011 will prove your fears or put them aside. We shall see.

    Quote Originally Posted by milominderbinder View Post
    I updated the comparison stickies at the top of this forum to include the Pre 2 as well as the Pre and Pre Plus a bit ago. To make it a little more clear how they compare, I just added this basic feature comparison chart to each one.


    The Pre 2 matches the Speed but note that many existing Pre Plus users are at 1.2 GHz with 16 GB memory already.

    They all will have text commands (Just Type) once the Pre's catch up with webOS 2.0 so scratch that one out. Keyboard is a preference item so scratch that as well. There are some who like a little screen so throw that out.

    If you were the reviewer looking at the remaining 15 basic features, how does the Pre 2 compare to the other flagship smartphones?
    Pre 2 supports flash. Check your facts (technically, so will the Pre. Pixi no). And the iPhone does not have Flash support. Just google Apple vs Adobe and I am sure you will see that as being true.

    Assuming I was a reviewer, back in the day I was actually (I stopped because I dont have time to run a web site and write and work ) I would rate the Pre 2 about a 7 out of 10. It's no where near, say, the iPhone 4 -- but is it meant to? If you compare it to, say, a Blackberry the Pre 2 stacks up a lot better. Better specs, better OS. Hardware is an opinion and I think the Pre 2 hardware LOOKS better but I haven't touched it, so I can't judge that yet.

    I think it all has to do with expectations. People were expecting the WebOS version of the iPhone, yet that type of device takes time to develop and HP has not had that time. Give them that time.
  20. #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by astraith View Post
    I agree with most of the people. It's not whats in the Pre 2 but the form factor itself that lends it to being a non-schocker.
    The form factor didn't sell...along with the abysmal ad campaign.


    Tiny screen and resolution don't entirely matter. If you have a tiny screen, why have a great resolution? You won't really tell the difference and it will only raise the price. No compass -- I am not sure if that would make the phone better. Does the Evo or iPhone have one? The fact that I have to ask makes me wonder if I would even care.
    You're kidding, right? Try looking at an image, whatever, in low resolution on a small screen then look at it in higher resolution on that same screen. You're grasping here, trying to justify the lack of screen res as some kind of un-necessary gimmick.

    Yep, they have it. The fact you didn't ask about it indicates you didn't source the competition. Is it a deal breaker for me? Of course not. But, it's you harping on one insignificant facet of what is otherwise a newer, much more highly functional overall package from the Pre, the EVO and the entire Android lineup in this case.

    Shall I list the functionality and other features, which the vast majority consider essential or must have, that the Pre doesn't?


    CES 2011 will prove your fears or put them aside. We shall see.



    Pre 2 supports flash. Check your facts (technically, so will the Pre. Pixi no). And the iPhone does not have Flash support. Just google Apple vs Adobe and I am sure you will see that as being true.

    Assuming I was a reviewer, back in the day I was actually (I stopped because I dont have time to run a web site and write and work ) I would rate the Pre 2 about a 7 out of 10. It's no where near, say, the iPhone 4 -- but is it meant to? If you compare it to, say, a Blackberry the Pre 2 stacks up a lot better. Better specs, better OS. Hardware is an opinion and I think the Pre 2 hardware LOOKS better but I haven't touched it, so I can't judge that yet.

    I think it all has to do with expectations. People were expecting the WebOS version of the iPhone, yet that type of device takes time to develop and HP has not had that time. Give them that time.
    Pure speculation at this point. HP hasn't shown any indication they care about the Pre. They do care about WebOS though and that seems to be it for the moment.

    So now you're attempting to rate the Pre somewhere in a class away from the iphone and Android lineup? Why? Why set the bar lower? Maybe it's because HP doesn't care enough about the handset itself to outfit it with a decent set of hardware so you have to go after a supposedly lesser handset?


    By your comment you assume hardware means nothing, since that's what you stated. We need to be clear here as this is important as it indicates Pre fans don't care about how the hardware. As long as they can get that pesky dialer or camera app opened in 20 seconds or less it's ok..WebOS is so gosh darn pretty to look at!


    I had the Pre, I liked it, even with it's glaring faults. It has potential to be the BEST mobile O/S out there but it's paired with a company (Palm), that seems intent on fits and stops, spurts of genius tinged with bouts of stupid marketing, design flaws and other failures.


    I'll say it again: HP doesn't really show any indication they care about the Pre as a handset but they do care about the O/S. Can you say tablet time?
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions