Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 120
  1.    #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by k1davis
    I can play music in the background just fine. Most of my software works just fine. My 700p is faster in every way than my 650p was. Navigating around the menus and between apps is noticeably faster as is the EVDO connection, of course.
    I'm glad it's working well for you but your experience seems to be atypical of the majority of 700p owners. I wish I had yours!
  2.    #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by mshaw1515
    Sorry guys - I can't agree. Three words for you - 3rd Party Software!

    How can you say that Palm is responsible for making sure that thousands of 3rd party apps that people cook up in thier basements run flawlessly and without conflict. Most 3rd party windows software needs to be updated when the OS changes. The stuff they pre-load on the 700p works.

    Return it if you're not happy - or wait until it's working to your expectations before you buy.

    It's not perfect - but I'd rather have it now than wait another 6 months until it is...
    Because the problem isn't the applications, it's how the OS reacts to having the applications loaded. I will point to Palm (and PalmSource) if these same applications run just fine on the 650 and many other Palm platforms without problems.
  3. #23  
    OK, you actually made the case in favor of Palm/Treo by comparing this to a PC. But missed a few correct analagies such as When a computer manufacturer sell you a new model computer with Windows XP Media Center 2005 to replace your 1.5 year old computer with Windows XP Media Center 2004 that was supposed to be faster and better? Would you expect to have to buy new software? The answer from the manufacturer and Microsoft is YES.

    You would in fact may have to buy various software that is compatible with that version of OS.


    Quote Originally Posted by clipcarl
    I'm getting annoyed reading all of these posts from Palm apologists who suggest that there is nothing wrong with the Treo 700p and all the problems are the fault of the application vendors. It's like this forum is filled with under-cover Palm employees or investors trying to gloss over the glaring defects in their product. Or maybe it's just people who don't want to admit that they got suckered into paying a premium price for an inferior product. Here is my response to them (from another thread):

    Why should I have to buy new versions of or update all of my current software just because I bought a newer Treo?

    What if a computer manufacturer sold you a new model computer with Windows XP service pack 2 to replace your 1.5 year old computer with Windows XP service pack 1 (older version of same model from the same manufacturer) that was supposed to be faster and better? Would you expect to have to buy new software?

    Would you say it's OK if you were told that the new computer had twice as much memory as the old but you found out that while it has more memory you can't actually load programs into it without the computer crashing or slowing down dramatically?

    Would you say it's OK if you were told that you couldn't run your copy of Microsoft Office 2003 without crashing and you'll have to purchase an update to Office 2007 when it comes out to fix it? And the same for the rest of you software?

    Would you say it's OK if basic operations that worked on the old computer like being able to play music in the background while doing other things did not work on the new computer?

    Would you say it's OK if the manufacturer choreographed and scripted reviews of the new computer told you it was faster and more stable than the previous version even when it's cleary demostrable by benchmarks that it's not?

    I'm sick and tired of all these Palm apologists saying there's nothing wrong with the 700p when there clearly is. The 700p has some very serious defects that Palm either knew about or definitely should have. You expect me to believe that Palm didn't run any benchmarks or try to use the built-in music player under normal end-user conditions? If a computer manufacturer shipped a computer with these types of defects they'd be looking at a class-action lawsuit in very short order. Let's hope Palm is able to address these issues before it comes to that.

    Honestly, I love the idea of having a Palm smartphone. However, if I paid this kind of money ($650) for an upgrade, it better be an upgrade rather than a major step backward in critical areas.
    Palm Pilot-->Palm III-->Palm IIIc-->Palm 505-->Palm 515-->Sprint Treo 600--> soon: Sprint Treo 700P
  4. #24  
    Quote Originally Posted by clipcarl
    Maybe that's "capitalism", but suing companies that deliver defective products is the "American Way!" ;-)
    You're right, unfortunately. Class action law suits for to solve defective non-life necessities only hurts us by driving up business startup costs and increasing liability insurance. To effectively solve problems like this is to return or not purchase the product and hit Palm where it hurts- the proverbial wallet. Nothing gets companies to fix things faster than declining profits.
    <br>
  5. #25  
    Quote Originally Posted by hernandezjc11
    The problem is why do certain posters insist on supporting Palm when they know that the treo product isn't working as it should? (emphasis added)
    Well, most of us didn't know this when we placed our orders.

    Still, it is the best device available IMO.

    But the usual cycle seems to be in play -- Palm drops the ball; Sprint drops the ball. Let's just hope they retrieve it, and keep the ball in play.
    UniPalmer
    -------------
    It's not the heat; it's the stupidity!
  6. #26  
    My only major complaint on my Sprint 700p is the pause/delay that lasts a few seconds or longer when switching applications from say Web to Phone, etc.

    This reminds me of the same delay my first version Sprint Treo 650 had, until a firmware upgrade fixed the problem.

    Additionally, the white screen of death that lasts for several seconds is something new to me that I've experienced on my 700p a few times. I don't recall seeing this on my Treo 650, or at least to the same degree.

    On the other hand, I don't get random soft resets either on my 700p like I used to get every so often on my T650. So I don't know what's worse.

    Hopefully there will be a firmware fix for the pause/delay and white-screen-of-death problem for the 700p.

    Casey
  7. #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by K_FleXXX
    OK, you actually made the case in favor of Palm/Treo by comparing this to a PC. But missed a few correct analagies such as When a computer manufacturer sell you a new model computer with Windows XP Media Center 2005 to replace your 1.5 year old computer with Windows XP Media Center 2004 that was supposed to be faster and better? Would you expect to have to buy new software? The answer from the manufacturer and Microsoft is YES.

    You would in fact may have to buy various software that is compatible with that version of OS.

    Can you expand on this a little? I don't exactly see any evidence in your post...If the license of the software says you can install it on one computer at a time, then you can legally uninstall it from the 04 computer and install it in the 05 computer...

    And as far as software being compatible, you chose a bad example...the differences between media center 04 and media center 05 are in the media center app, not the software compatability....there's not really that much commercial software (at least none that I know of) that will work with certain versions of XP and not others, or software that you have to re-purchase because you changed/upgraded your OS.

    It's not Palm's fault that 3rd party companies are charging more money for the same software because you you bought a Treo, but it's the fact that these companies know you already paid for a prior version, and that you probably like the app, there probably aren't any free or cheaper alternatives, and that you will most likely end up paying the upgrade fee whether you like it or not.

    My main problems with the 700p was that Palm didn't change enough between the 700p and 650....the 700p was basically only released because of Ev-DO. Palm could have put in wifi (or at least SDIO WIfi support), BT 2.0 and a few others features that would make the price more worth it to most people, but they didn't, which is why people are mad about the 700p...
  8. #28  
    While I am certainly aware that a lot of folks who bought the 700p seem to be disappointed with their purchase, I have little sympathy, and here's why:

    I knew that, when I ordered my 700p the day it was available, I was taking a chance by being an early adopter. There is a long and well-documented history of early adopters buying a device or electronic product as soon as it was released, and then being disappointed with its performance.

    Take Windows XP, for example: the first release had literally hundreds of bugs in it; numerous bug fixes, then service packs, fixed a lot of the bugs, but the repairs and patches-upon-patches go on to this day, even as they are desperately trying to bring Vista to market. Did people complain? Sure they did, but it doesn't stop early-adopters from doing the same thing all over again with other software and hardware products, most notably Mac OS X (which also had lots of issues in its first release) and Windows XP.

    Everyone who bought the 700p without benefit of a product review took a chance with the purchase--this includes me. When I buy software, I generally read reviews first or talk with others who use the same software; if it's an expensive purchase, I almost always rely on magazine reviews or word-of-mouth. I don't just rush to the phone and order so that I can brag in an online forum that I got my new whiz-bang device before anyone else did.

    However, with the 700p, I took a chance, and I speak for myself only when I say that I'm satisfied with my purchase. I use my Treo extensively, and for lots of different functions, and by and large I'm very satisfied. I'm still looking forward to having a better success rate when hooking the Treo up as a modem for my laptop, but I'm confident that this will come in short order.

    The release of a less-than-perfect product is nothing new in the modern gadget world; it happens all the time, and the market takes care of those products that aren't updated and fixed in a decent amount of time. If Palm doesn't release a ROM update and fix known bugs, the 700p will fail to succeed in the market; if we early-adopters complain to such an extent that the product is never given a chance to be perfected and bugs squashed, then we'll only hurt ourselves by losing a fine device.

    I'm sure some will disagree with me, and that's okay too; my theory is this: give Palm a chance to release an update and fix verifiable issues (some of the complaints I read about have to do with 3rd-party software and are clearly NOT Palm's fault). If you want to be sure that you're buying a device that works perfectly, then wait for reviews and make a more intelligent choice.

    As it is, we bought this product sight unseen, not counting the sneak peaks. That's the price that early-adopters pay; manufacturers like Palm love us early-adopters, because we're guinea pigs, beta-testers, albeit sometimes against our own wishes.

    But I love my Treo, and I don't work for Palm; contrary to someone's post, I definitely consider myself a "power user," and the Treo 700p works fine for me. I see a few blemishes here and there, but am confident that they'll be fixed before too long.
  9. #29  
    IMO, the 700p is much less buggy than the 600 or 650 when they first came out. The 650 was so bad that after the 3rd one I switched back to the 600. In another month or 2 the first update will be available for the 700p and everything will be fine.
    Pilot 1000 -> Pilot 5000 ->Palm Pilot Professional -> HP 620LX -> TRG Pro -> Palm V -> Palm Vx -> Palm M505 -> Palm i705 -> Palm Tungsten|T -> Samsung i500 -> Treo 600->Treo 650 -> Treo 600-> Treo 700p ->Centro ->Treo 800w + Redfly C8n -> Palm Pre -> HP Touchpad
    R.I.P Palm 1996-2011
  10. #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by clipcarl
    Because the problem isn't the applications, it's how the OS reacts to having the applications loaded. I will point to Palm (and PalmSource) if these same applications run just fine on the 650 and many other Palm platforms without problems.
    That would be true IF these applications were designed to work with the Treo 700p. They were not. The 700p didn't exist yet, so there was no to test their compatibility.

    To use the Windows-based PC as an example of how a product should be delivered is totally absurd. Microsoft has had an abyssmal history of releasing products with security vulnerabilities, dozens of bugs, hardware incompatibilities, incompatibility among some software packages, and so on. Yet, the world still uses PCs. Makes no sense, but there it is.

    I strongly suspect that the 700p was rushed to market to stave off the encroaching Blackberry threat.
  11. #31  
    Quote Originally Posted by Trevante
    My main problems with the 700p was that Palm didn't change enough between the 700p and 650....the 700p was basically only released because of Ev-DO. Palm could have put in wifi (or at least SDIO WIfi support), BT 2.0 and a few others features that would make the price more worth it to most people, but they didn't, which is why people are mad about the 700p...
    This prompts me to ask the obvious question: why did you buy the 700p then, if it didn't have enough new features for you? While it wasn't road-tested yet, the features it came with (RAM, screen size, etc.) were made public; if it wasn't enough of an upgrade for you, then why did you buy it?

    I really think you guys need to relax about this and wait for the inevitable upgrade; it'll be okay, the world won't stop spinning...
  12. #32  
    Lack of wifi capability when the 700w has it, is the one thing I am seriously not happy about. The rest of the 700p is OK with me, because it's what they should have put on the 650 IMO. However, because of the somewhat older technology for the most part(except EVDO) I can't call it a cutting edge device, and I will take a wait and see attitude if and when it comes out for GSM. I am not angry about it, but also not in a hurry to get it either.
  13. #33  
    Quote Originally Posted by Lady Treo
    <bolding deleted for readability>...I will take a wait and see attitude if and when it comes out for GSM.
    Now THAT is a smart post. If those who are unhappy about the 700p would have followed your lead, then they wouldn't be so disappointed right now...
  14.    #34  
    I don't use Windows Media Center, but I seriously doubt what you are saying is the truth and I call you on it: give me a link where Microsoft says that if you move from Windows XP Media Center 2004 to Windows XP Media Center 2005 that you will have to buy all new software?

    I simply do not believe you.

    Quote Originally Posted by K_FleXXX
    OK, you actually made the case in favor of Palm/Treo by comparing this to a PC. But missed a few correct analagies such as When a computer manufacturer sell you a new model computer with Windows XP Media Center 2005 to replace your 1.5 year old computer with Windows XP Media Center 2004 that was supposed to be faster and better? Would you expect to have to buy new software? The answer from the manufacturer and Microsoft is YES.

    You would in fact may have to buy various software that is compatible with that version of OS.
  15. #35  
    Quote Originally Posted by longterm
    While I am certainly aware that a lot of folks who bought the 700p seem to be disappointed with their purchase, I have little sympathy, and here's why:

    I knew that, when I ordered my 700p the day it was available, I was taking a chance by being an early adopter. There is a long and well-documented history of early adopters buying a device or electronic product as soon as it was released, and then being disappointed with its performance.
    Not that anyone here asked for your sympathy to begin with, but I didn't buy the Treo 700p to be a beta tester. Many here bought the 700p, because of a great experience with the 650. If I hated my 650, why on earth would I buy a 700p?

    No more than if I had purchased a 2005 model automobile, and liking it so much that I bought the 2006 model, only to find that there is now a 5 second pause in between Drive and Park, or a 5 second pause between Forward and Reverse...especially if my 2005 model shifted gears flawlessly?

    Wouldn't forums such as this do the industry and consumers a dis-service if we merely kept quiet about problems or defiencies? If, out of brand loyalty, we chose to ignore a corporate engineering oversight? The point of all the "complaining" here, repetitive as it is, is to get somebody's attention. To be the squeaky wheel, to get Palm to quickly realize that "maybe", just "maybe" they have a problem with the 700p, that a quick firmware upgrade can possibly fix.

    It happened with the 650, and if we keep the pressure on, it will happen with the 700p.

    jeff
    Last edited by njpilot911; 06/13/2006 at 04:46 PM.
  16.    #36  
    longterm, I agree with what you say for the most part. I do agree that early adopters of a product should expect issues. I know this more than most; I am one of those people that has to have the latest incarnation of every tech toy that comes out. I think where we disagree is in how much the rough edges can affect the use of the product's core functionality.

    If I bought a new DVD player for my living room and found out that its MP3 playing functionality didn't work as well as it should I might live with that. But if I buy one and it won't play 10% of the discs I own then we have a real problem.

    If I buy a car and the remote keyless entry system doesn't work right I'll wait for a fix. But if a particular car won't start 10% of the time then we have a real problem.

    Core functionality should always work reliably in any product no matter how new. Even Windows XP when it first came out, as buggy as it was (and is), could still reliably load, run and multitask an application.

    It's no different for the Treo. It's core functionality is as a PDA, phone and media player. Those things should have been tested to make sure they worked reliably. If ancillary stuff like On Demand or Blazer has then no problem. Hopefully they'll fix it. Heck even stuff like bad battery life and slow EVDO connections I can live with. But the core functionality should work reliably.

    Quote Originally Posted by longterm
    While I am certainly aware that a lot of folks who bought the 700p seem to be disappointed with their purchase, I have little sympathy, and here's why:

    I knew that, when I ordered my 700p the day it was available, I was taking a chance by being an early adopter. There is a long and well-documented history of early adopters buying a device or electronic product as soon as it was released, and then being disappointed with its performance.

    Take Windows XP, for example: the first release had literally hundreds of bugs in it; numerous bug fixes, then service packs, fixed a lot of the bugs, but the repairs and patches-upon-patches go on to this day, even as they are desperately trying to bring Vista to market. Did people complain? Sure they did, but it doesn't stop early-adopters from doing the same thing all over again with other software and hardware products, most notably Mac OS X (which also had lots of issues in its first release) and Windows XP.

    Everyone who bought the 700p without benefit of a product review took a chance with the purchase--this includes me. When I buy software, I generally read reviews first or talk with others who use the same software; if it's an expensive purchase, I almost always rely on magazine reviews or word-of-mouth. I don't just rush to the phone and order so that I can brag in an online forum that I got my new whiz-bang device before anyone else did.

    However, with the 700p, I took a chance, and I speak for myself only when I say that I'm satisfied with my purchase. I use my Treo extensively, and for lots of different functions, and by and large I'm very satisfied. I'm still looking forward to having a better success rate when hooking the Treo up as a modem for my laptop, but I'm confident that this will come in short order.

    The release of a less-than-perfect product is nothing new in the modern gadget world; it happens all the time, and the market takes care of those products that aren't updated and fixed in a decent amount of time. If Palm doesn't release a ROM update and fix known bugs, the 700p will fail to succeed in the market; if we early-adopters complain to such an extent that the product is never given a chance to be perfected and bugs squashed, then we'll only hurt ourselves by losing a fine device.

    I'm sure some will disagree with me, and that's okay too; my theory is this: give Palm a chance to release an update and fix verifiable issues (some of the complaints I read about have to do with 3rd-party software and are clearly NOT Palm's fault). If you want to be sure that you're buying a device that works perfectly, then wait for reviews and make a more intelligent choice.

    As it is, we bought this product sight unseen, not counting the sneak peaks. That's the price that early-adopters pay; manufacturers like Palm love us early-adopters, because we're guinea pigs, beta-testers, albeit sometimes against our own wishes.

    But I love my Treo, and I don't work for Palm; contrary to someone's post, I definitely consider myself a "power user," and the Treo 700p works fine for me. I see a few blemishes here and there, but am confident that they'll be fixed before too long.
  17.    #37  
    Quote Originally Posted by longterm
    That would be true IF these applications were designed to work with the Treo 700p. They were not. The 700p didn't exist yet, so there was no to test their compatibility.
    Computer programs generally do not have to tested and designed to work on specific hardware (unless they are designed for some specific feature of that hardware). The idea is that most any PalmOS5 program will run fine on any PalmOS5 platform. It's silly to expect that software developers should have to buy and rewrite their code for every single piece of hardware their app might run on. That's why OSs, including PalmOS5, have stable APIs.
    Quote Originally Posted by longterm
    To use the Windows-based PC as an example of how a product should be delivered is totally absurd. Microsoft has had an abyssmal history of releasing products with security vulnerabilities, dozens of bugs, hardware incompatibilities, incompatibility among some software packages, and so on. Yet, the world still uses PCs. Makes no sense, but there it is.
    I disagree. Microsoft has an outstanding record for maintaining application software compatibilty.
    Quote Originally Posted by longterm
    I strongly suspect that the 700p was rushed to market to stave off the encroaching Blackberry threat.
    If so then Palm can be held accountable for shipping a product that doesn't meet basic standards of usability.
  18.    #38  
    Quote Originally Posted by longterm
    Now THAT is a smart post. If those who are unhappy about the 700p would have followed your lead, then they wouldn't be so disappointed right now...
    I would be very happy if the core functionality worked reasonably reliably. The product does have features for which I found it worth paying the money. It just doesn't work.
  19. #39  
    Quote Originally Posted by njpilot911
    ...I didn't buy the Treo 700p to be a beta tester. Many here bought the 700p, because of a great experience with the 650. If I hated my 650, why on earth would I buy a 700p?
    It's gonna be okay, really...

    So let's see if I follow this logic: I loved my 1997 Infiniti J30, so by that logic, I should love the 2006 Infiniti QX4.

    That doesn't compute; the QX4 is not the same vehicle as the J30, nor is the 700p the same device as the 650.

    The 700p is a first-release product, even though it's based on the 650. It's NOT the same device; it uses a completely different wireless technology to get to the Internet. It's using EV-DO, which none of us Sprint users had ever been able to use before with the 650.

    To say that you should love the 700p because you loved the 650 is flawed logic. To expect the first-release 700p to be as stable as a third-or-more-generation 650 is also not realistic.

    The point of all the "complaining" here, repetitive as it is, is to get somebody's attention.
    I would venture to guess that Palm is all too aware of the complaining going on in this and other venues. My comments boil down to these two points: 1) Early adopters should have known going in that they were risking buying a less-than-mature release, and 2) Some of us (myself included) are very happy with our purchases, and to call us "Palm apologists" or other silly nicknames is pointless. The truth is, I'm a very critical consumer, and I'm also very outspoken (as my posts make evident). If I were dissatisfied with my 700p, I'd say so, but that's not the case. I like the 700p very much, although I am aware that it needs some tweaking.

    The difference between my outlook and others, I think, is that I'm willing to be patient and look forward to the first ROM update. I'm NOT saying that folks shouldn't point out problems with the device, but I do believe that for people to say that they were somehow misled is unfair. No one put guns to our heads and forced us to rush to our phones to buy the 700p. We were just like the fish in my fish tanks; every morning they rush to the top of the water to feed, even though they probably know by now that they'll get their share. They just want to be first.
  20. #40  
    Quote Originally Posted by longterm
    The 700p is a first-release product, even though it's based on the 650. It's NOT the same device; it uses a completely different wireless technology to get to the Internet. It's using EV-DO, which none of us Sprint users had ever been able to use before with the 650.

    To say that you should love the 700p because you loved the 650 is flawed logic. To expect the first-release 700p to be as stable as a third-or-more-generation 650 is also not realistic.
    If you define "generation" by the number of ROM upgrades a product receives I'd might agree with you. Palm is clearly offering the 700p as an upgrade from the 650, reinforced by its offer to accept a 650 in trade...otherwise, they would offer you $150 for any competitor's product in trade. The 700p is not a first release, it is in fact, a sequential release of a long successful product.

    You admit that the 700p has problems...you blame it on "early adopters", as if its their fault. In your world, its okay to release an inferior product, after all, "..they are early adopters, shame on them, they should have known better."

    You are patient for a ROM update, so am I. It is not unrealistic to expect the next release of a product to be "better" than the product it replaces. And yes, I am suggesting that Palm introduced the 700p as a direct replacement for the 650. They also are banking on "loyal" Palm customers to instantly upgrade. They wont sell the 650 and 700 in parrallel for long.

    Our goal should be to hear a senior Palm Veep, pick up the phone, and tell engineering:

    "Lets get that ROM upgrade on the street and get those early adopters off our backs! Jeeez, their even convincing people not to buy a Treo, until after the first ROM update!!!"

    Rock on, brother, its gonna be okay....
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions