Page 5 of 16 FirstFirst 1234567891015 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 304
  1.    #81  
    Quote Originally Posted by SonnyS
    I never had a 600 or 650 -- this is my first Treo and I'm quite happy.

    So, let's assume the 650 IS faster than the 700... instead of arguing about it and making it an immature "my treo is faster than your treo" p*ssing contest, where do you go from here? 200_man, if you're really that interested in the cause (and less interested in making yourself seem superior to everyone else), why don't you try contacting the 700p product managers at Palm and get an answer. Or at least communicate your findings to them. That would be much more productive, and helpful, than ranting in an online forum that does nothing to change the situation.

    Yes?
    Please try reading the thread next time.
  2. #82  
    Quote Originally Posted by ajabbari
    Given the comments about the 650 and memory they were probably told by management and marketing that they would have to incorporate more built in memory on the 700p (even if this was against their better judgement). The engineers most likely ran into some performance issues, probably did not have a whole lot of time to hack the os and fix them, were having pressure put on them to get the device out, and probably had to go with the best they could get out (favoring stability to avoid the mess with the 650) and released it as it was.
    This pretty much concurs with what I believe happened, too:

    1. Treo 650 is released with, frankly, too little memory, along with the brand-new NVFS filesystem.

    2. Initial NVFS implementation causes horrible "bloat" in existing databases, due to minimum 512-byte block size. With even less memory than other NVFS devices like the Tungsten T5, this proves particularly painful and problematic on the Treo 650.

    3. Treo 650 ROM update is released with new NVFS changes to improve "efficiency", allowing memory allocation in "sub-blocks" as small as 32 bytes. Users rejoice at their reclaimed space.

    4. Treo 700p is released, with nearly the same processor as the 650, but much more memory - and presumably, the same "improved" NVFS implementation with the 32-byte granularity vs. the original 512-byte blocks.

    5. Much like the problems introduced by NVFS on the Treo 650 once it hit the "real world", the 700p suffers from inexplicable problems reported by early adopters, who wait impatiently for a fix.

    I speculate that, much like a large hard drive partition with a too-small cluster size, the 700p's NVFS memory management is thrashing itself half to death due to the dramatic increase in memory needing to be managed, compared to the 650. Note that on the recent Tungsten E2, for example, the NVFS block size was actually increased to 4096 bytes. Presumably, much like with hard drive filesystems, the performance penalty of too much "management overhead" becomes significant when capacity grows out of proportion to block size.

    In short, I suspect that the ultimate "fix" for the 700p's initial performance problems will involve Palm actually taking a step backward from the "updated" Treo 650, and increasing the NVFS block size back to 512 bytes or greater, to reduce memory management overhead.

    --John

    P.S. I'm not a Palm developer, let alone engineer, and don't even know anyone who is. So this all may be completely uninformed speculation on my part, which I'll be more than happy to have corrected by someone who truly knows what's going on...
  3.    #83  
    Here's Jeff Gibson's take on the matter:
    What I am finding is that database access times are significantly greater on the 700P than they are on the 650. This is causing slow downs in every application I have on the 700P. You can really see the impact if you use Palm File Browser. It takes forever to have the file actually written to the device.

    Jeff
    It's looking more and more like there are no "fast" 700p's and they will all be slower than the 650 until Palm figures out how to fix them.
  4. #84  
    Quote Originally Posted by 2000 Man
    Here's Jeff Gibson's take on the matter:

    It's looking more and more like there are no "fast" 700p's and they will all be slower than the 650 until Palm figures out how to fix them.
    The question is...how long do we have to wait for the fix?
    at&t iPhone3G
  5. #85  
    Actually the question is:

    How long do we have to put up with 2000 crying about it?

    I am happy with my 700p. It is obvious by now that 2000 hates the 700p.

    Chuck
  6. #86  
    I, for one, have had enough of the "show me your numbers"! lol.
  7.    #87  
    Quote Originally Posted by KStewart
    The question is...how long do we have to wait for the fix?
    About as long as we have to wait for the "lightning fast" 700p fanboys (liars) to post their numbers. LOL

    They run for the hills when respected developers like Jeff Gibson confirm that the 700p is slower than the 650.
  8. ink883's Avatar
    Posts
    872 Posts
    Global Posts
    883 Global Posts
    #88  
    Quote Originally Posted by chckhbrt
    I am happy with my 700p. Chuck
    Hey Chuck,
    Did you get a chance to compare 650 v. 700 Ptunes background play yet?
    Thanks for your time
    Ink
    Visor --> Visor Platinum --> Treo 300 --> Treo 600 --> Treo 650 --> Treo 700p --> Treo 755p --> Treo 800w --> Palm Pre
  9. #89  
    Hey ink883.....

    Yes I did. On the 700p, I had a barely noticable skip with ptunes 3.0.9 running and moving to various apps.

    The apps that caused a skip were, versafail, messaging and Rand McNally Streetfinder.

    The versafail and messaging apps caused a slight skip in ptunes when closing. When I opened Streetfinder, this caused ptunes to take a big hit. These are apps that can produce a sound.

    I went into prefs, soundmanger and then to system sounds and set the system volumes off. then ran ptunes 3.0.9 again and the skip was gone when opening or closing the above apps.

    I also notced that ptunes 3.0.9 would distort the sound all by itself while playing without switching to another app.

    I downloaded the 3.1.5 update for 3.0.9 from ptunes and the problems that I noticed are pretty much gone.

    My conclusion is that ptunes 3.0.9 wasn't as good as it should have been.

    Chuck
  10. #90  
    Hey again ink883

    I did not have any distortion or skips when opening or closing any apps on the 650.

    Ptunes 3.1.5 is on the ram on the 650.

    As you may know. 3.0.9 is embedded in the rom on the 700p.

    Chuck
  11.    #91  
    Yup. pTunes skips on the 700p but not on the 650.

    So far the database access times and the data access score (as measured by pBench) point to a major speed problem on the 700p.
  12. #92  
    and so it goes, and goes, and goes, and goes, and goes, and goes, and goes, and goes, and goes, and goes, and goes, and goes........................................Kid 2000 is just like the energizer bunny...
    he goes, and goes, and goes, and goes, and goes, and goes, and goes, and goes............................can't let go of that dern 700p......and goes, and goes, and goes, and goes, and goes, and goes............................like a broken record that skips....and goes, and goes, and goes, and goes, and goes, and goes.........
  13. ink883's Avatar
    Posts
    872 Posts
    Global Posts
    883 Global Posts
    #93  
    Quote Originally Posted by chckhbrt
    Hey ink883.....

    Yes I did. On the 700p, I had a barely noticable skip with ptunes 3.0.9 running and moving to various apps.

    The apps that caused a skip were, versafail, messaging and Rand McNally Streetfinder.

    The versafail and messaging apps caused a slight skip in ptunes when closing. When I opened Streetfinder, this caused ptunes to take a big hit. These are apps that can produce a sound.

    I went into prefs, soundmanger and then to system sounds and set the system volumes off. then ran ptunes 3.0.9 again and the skip was gone when opening or closing the above apps.

    I also notced that ptunes 3.0.9 would distort the sound all by itself while playing without switching to another app.

    I downloaded the 3.1.5 update for 3.0.9 from ptunes and the problems that I noticed are pretty much gone.

    My conclusion is that ptunes 3.0.9 wasn't as good as it should have been.

    Chuck

    Well glad the update helped you, unfortunately the update didn't do much for me. Someone on another thread mentioned they believed there was a batch of bad treos with faulty memory. Perhaps some of us got those?
    Visor --> Visor Platinum --> Treo 300 --> Treo 600 --> Treo 650 --> Treo 700p --> Treo 755p --> Treo 800w --> Palm Pre
  14.    #94  
    Quote Originally Posted by ink883
    Well glad the update helped you, unfortunately the update didn't do much for me. Someone on another thread mentioned they believed there was a batch of bad treos with faulty memory. Perhaps some of us got those?
    Perhaps, though no one has posted any results from a "good" 700p yet. Makes me wonder if there is such a thing as a "fast" 700p.
  15. #95  
    jbennett, your theory sounds feasible, but the fact that we have to present our theories on this is part of what's so frustrating. Palm's official line of defense is to deny that a problem exists, which is what others have already been told when they went through the proper support channels. If there is a technical reason why more memory = slower performance, then I'd have a lot more respect for Palm if they'd communicate that to us. Instead, we waste time wondering whether or not there even is a problem, wondering whether the blame lies with 3rd party developers like the pTunes folks, and even arguing amongst ourselves, none of which is productive.

    I think it's clear that there are some performance issues with the 700p compared to the 650. I don't care about benchmark numbers, just real world performance. I saw a small but noticeable delay when launching the Phone app. Deleting all of the VersaMail files and switching to Snappermail seemed to fix that problem for me (it might be slower, it might be faster, but it's not noticeable enough for me to...um...notice it). But Versamail's a bundled app and, in fact, an app owned by Palm now, so what does that say?

    pTunes has more skipping issues when multitasking, even with just the bundled apps, than did the 650 version. That's not a Palm-owned app, but it *is* a bundled app where one would expect that thorough testing by Palm and the pTunes folks would/should have occurred. If this wasn't noticed during testing, than either a last minute hardware or software change *that Palm authorized* caused this, or the quality of testing was poor.

    Neither of these issues are deal-breakers for me (and, presumably for many others here), but they are issues nonetheless and I think that the most productive thing that we can do is to loudly complain about them. The squeaky wheel gets the oil and if enough of us complain and the word spreads to more mainstream outlets and Palm worries about it impacting sales, they *will* do something about it. If all they do is to tell us the sad truth that the increased memory size caused it and there's nothing that they *can* do, then that's better than nothing, IMO.

    If anyone thinks that *not* complaining about it in a public forum and instead just privately emailing Palm about it will result in a positive outcome in the near term, I think you're mistaken.

    And, yes, I think it *is* reasonable to expect that a product replacement that is released 18 months after the previous model should be at least as fast (in all respects) than the previous model. If you buy a new IBM laptop today and buy another IBM laptop of the same model 18 months later, you would expect it to be faster. IMO, the 600 felt instantaneous when switching apps, the 650 had a noticeable delay (whitescreen) sometimes, and the 700p sometimes is even more noticeable. What's wrong with this picture?
    Last edited by Scott R; 07/04/2006 at 09:26 AM.
    Now THIS is the future of smartphones.
  16.    #96  
    The big problem seems to be in accessing the memory which has been confirmed by Jeff Gibson and verified by pbench data access scores. The question is why and what can be done to fix it?
  17. #97  
    Quote Originally Posted by 2000 Man
    Here's Jeff Gibson's take on the matter:

    It's looking more and more like there are no "fast" 700p's and they will all be slower than the 650 until Palm figures out how to fix them.
    Well, I had a talk with Sprint about some issues with my bill yesterday and I was told there is "supposedly" an update coming for the Sprint Treo 700P next week. Of course, this is to be taken with a grain of salt as we all know.

    Disclaimer: I do not pretend to know that actually an update is coming - just relating that piece of info which came unsolicited from the Sprint rep.
  18.    #98  
    Quote Originally Posted by brichter21
    Well, I had a talk with Sprint about some issues with my bill yesterday and I was told there is "supposedly" an update coming for the Sprint Treo 700P next week. Of course, this is to be taken with a grain of salt as we all know.

    Disclaimer: I do not pretend to know that actually an update is coming - just relating that piece of info which came unsolicited from the Sprint rep.
    That would be great news if it's true. Hopefully it's not just an On Demand update and is actually a speed increase coming from Palm.
  19. #99  
    If it is true, and we get faster Treos, we will all have to break down and thank 2000 Man for it. Sprint can't take much more of this complaining either.
  20.    #100  
    Quote Originally Posted by copernicus
    If it is true, and we get faster Treos, we will all have to break down and thank 2000 Man for it. Sprint can't take much more of this complaining either.
    That's fine. I'll take all of the credit. I just want a fast 700p because I really liked the EV-DO and the BT 1.2 on the 700p.

    I do find it odd though that some are now accepting the fact that the 700p could possibly get any faster. Just a week ago, it was "lightning fast" compared to the 650. LOL
Page 5 of 16 FirstFirst 1234567891015 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions