Page 8 of 30 FirstFirst ... 34567891011121318 ... LastLast
Results 141 to 160 of 589
  1. #141  
    So Craigdts, no dice on the pictures, huh??
  2. #142  
    I might be willing to deal with the 160x160 screen, but I'm still having trouble with the smaller thumbboard. I think it's funny that Craig felt that the new smaller thumbboard was just as usable as the old one when it was obvious reading through his posts that he was having a good deal of difficulty typing without typos on the old one (no offense to you - offense to the thumbboard).

    I look at it this way: Handspring has a niche market here with a thumbboard phone. Their competition consists of the Danger Hiptop and the RIM Blackberry phones. Both of these devices offer superior thumbboards but are bigger. Handspring is choosing to make the device smaller and more phone-sized while keeping the thumbboard. I guess that strikes me as a poor compromise. I think depending on one's needs, they'd opt for either a better thumbboard (i.e. - RIM or Danger) or a better phone (traditional phone keypad).

    Now THIS is the future of smartphones.
  3. #143  
    i am absolutely sure total width of 600 is the width of the 300s screen.

    I've triple checkd. I've spent about 30 minutes handling it. comparing it w current treo. and I'm serious there are no borders (milimeters) every bit of surface is used.

    seen and heard many conersations over it between sprint reps and treo reps.

    the hand salesmen were not very knowledgable. most of qs came from a marketing guy. I forgot to look at his name. he was prob wondering why I was asking so many qs

    anyways gotta head home traffic starting to pile up

    length same as 300 antenna same but thicker.

    w sd slot will be able to add memory for pics and other uses .mp3 I guess

    talked to a guy testing the ppc hitachi (who was critical of its size and askd them if they tested it for usability. said he kept having to pull stylus out and use 2 hands) I told him to chk out treo. he was really impressed. we compared his blackberry device to it and the 600 is about 1/2 inch smaller width

    camera: u can view pic before u take it. its like streaming video when your preparing to shoot. it projects all the lens sees on the screen.
  4. #144  
    Regarding screen resolution, just thought I'd throw this in there:

    Nokia 3650: 176x208
    Danger Hiptop: 240x160
    Color RIM Blackberry phone: 240x160

    Now THIS is the future of smartphones.
  5. #145  
    Craig, did you find out what the resolution of the camera's photos would be?

    Now THIS is the future of smartphones.
  6. #146  
    Originally posted by gfunkmagic
    I don't know about you guys but I'm absolutely pissed off that the Treo 600 only has a friggin 160x160 resolution screen! I was willing overlook the lack of BT, no flip cover etc, but this is absolutely ridiculous! I don't care if its STN and better in sunlight if the damned screen is still the crappy low rez type!! Sheesh! What a friggin disaster! Any anticipation or excitement I previously had for this device has been absolutely deflated or rather killed! Who the heck cares about Jeff Hawkin's supposed "vision" if he can't even avoid making such a stupid design decision like this!? It looks I'm getting the T608 + TG50 afterall.
    They keep letting the air out of my happy balloon

    I will wait until the specs are official though before making a final decision, as it stands now I would need to wait until January anyway since the first model Treo 600 is sprint only, I'm currently using my Treo with T-mobile and was hoping for GSM version of the new phone, but that doesn't seem likely if the initial reports of the 600 are correct.
    No good deed goes unpunished
  7. #147  
    Doh! I just thought of something. I wonder if he could have taken a picture with the Treo 600 and beamed it to the Treo 300?

    Now THIS is the future of smartphones.
  8. #148  
    Please tell me it's going to have a hi-res screen. Ever since my brother got a tungsten T, I've been drooling over the graphics.

    If the unit is as described by our new best friend NRosser, (including hi res), I'm first in line at the Sprint store.

    If it's going to be a 160 X 160 screen, that would be the ultimate deal killer.

  9. #149  
    Originally posted by Scott R
    Regarding screen resolution, just thought I'd throw this in there:

    Nokia 3650: 176x208
    Danger Hiptop: 240x160
    Color RIM Blackberry phone: 240x160

    Scott, could also list the following:

    T|W: 320x320
    SGH-i500: 324x352
    SE P800: 320 x 208

    All of them will have higher resoluitons than the Treo 600 if the specs are true!! Heck, even the GSPDA Onynx & Zircon which are 160 x 240 make up for lack of rez by incorp more realesate by using rectangular screens!! I am very dissapointed with Handspring right now...
  10. #150  
    This "profile" iamge is 160 x 160 pixels - apologies - fastest I could come up with:

  11. #151  
    Originally posted by SeldomVisitor
    This "profile" iamge is 160 x 160 pixels - apologies - fastest I could come up with:

    What's your point?
  12. #152  

    Did you find something EVIL in that post of mine!!!?

    I thought I was being really nice giving an example for folks to see what 160x160 really meant!

    Was the image somehow negative?

  13. #153  

    Great report!! Thanks very much.

    I guess I can start believing 160x160 now, my apologies to octagonmost.

    The resolution is disappointing, but I HOPE that they made the right tradeoff. It is possible that with the smaller screen size, bigger pixels and better overall quality of the display and digitizer, the screen would look very good and that you wouldn't see a big difference with a 320x320 display. The benefit from having a high resolution screen is to have more pixels per inch, resulting in a better picture. One way to get more pixels per inch is to use a smaller screen. This is the same reason why small TVs always seem to have sharper pictures than larger ones. I guess one's beef could be with the smaller screen, as opposed to the resolution. So I'm willing not to get too worked up on this until I see the screen. I have a feeling that it would look very good and that 320x320 would have achieved only marginal perceived improvement.

    Of course, the benefit for having a 160x160 resolution would be lower cost and increased battery life (fewer pixels to light up).

    They are trying to keep the cost down and build a more mainstream device. Maybe this would allow them to achieve it.

    This could allow them to survive long enough to start creating more models with small improvements, like a better screen, which would be easy to add since they're basing their design on OS 5. Remember that they started with the 180, but where is it now?

    I am STILL very excited about this!!
    Last edited by silverado; 06/03/2003 at 05:28 PM.
  14. #154  
    Originally posted by SeldomVisitor

    Did you find something EVIL in that post of mine!!!?

    I thought I was being really nice giving an example for folks to see what 160x160 really meant!

    Was the image somehow negative?

    No not at all. Not to worry. I was truly just curious as to why you had posted the image. No implied attitude.

    I now understand that you were just trying to show a 160X160. Cool. I just thought we all new what it looked like because we see it every day on our square Treo screens.

    Sorry to alarm you.

  15. #155  
    If I'm not mistaken, the upcoming OS5 phone from Samsung is high res.
  16. #156  
    160x160 = DOA IMO

  17. jglev's Avatar
    403 Posts
    Global Posts
    411 Global Posts
    Originally posted by dulan

    Sorry, but I've got to take back all I said before about giving the Treo600 the thumbs up... 160 x 160 Excuse me, but it's 2003!! Maybe I'm dating myself, but I still have the original (ORIGINAL!!) Pilot 1000 from US Robotics (as a museum piece of course IT HAS 160 X 160 resolution!! You'da thunk that HS would have progressed beyond that by now
    I have to agree. There is no excuse in todays market to have only a 160 x 160 screen. I guess I will reserve judgement until we see the final specs, but this is a deal breaker. I just wish the Hitachi wasn't such a brick!
  18. #158  
    I have seen a number of people post the resolution of other devices. But I haven't seen the resolution of the existing Treo 300 posted. I think that would be a relevant factor to know what that resolution is. What I find perplexing is that one of the two comments made by the reporter over the weekend about the new Treo was that the screen was greatly improved. Yet sight unseen based on looking at one technical detail, a number of Treo fans have decided the screen must be lousy regardless of what the people looking at the screen are saying. This doesn't make sense to me.

    I continue to believe that the genius of Jeff Hawkins relates to his ability to keep exploring different alternatives until he finds the right compromise to make. He doesn't settle for what specifications look good. Instead he keeps lookiing and looking until he finds out what the best compromise is on a number of different levels. Certainly if the opinion of people looking at the screen differs with the opinion of the people looking at the specifications, I will personally bet with the people with first hand experience viewing the screen.
  19. #159  
    Originally posted by nrosser

    Also - for those of you wanting to jump off the boat cuz it might or might not have 360x480 resolution or whatever, remember the market that Handspring is targeting: the mass consumer, for the most part.
    ...and that is exactly the problem. The average consumer does not care about having their Palm (assuming they have one) and phone in one. As popular as PDAs are, they are not yet to the point where almost every person who owns a mobile phone will also own a PDA, we just aren't there yet. The majority of comsumers are just simply content to have a "cool" phone for a reasonable price.

    The market Handspring is catering to, OTOH, is the higher-end/tech-savvy consumer who wants his Palm and phone in one and is willing to pay $500 for it. Joe consumer is certainly not going to dish out $500 for some "phone." So when this device is out of reach of the average consumer yet lacks the features that the high-end consumer wants so they will not purchase it, that really does limit the potential market for the device.

    The Treo 300, Samsung SPH-I500 and Kyocera 7135 will be successful because they are out now (or will be out very shortly) and no other Palm smartphone out there offers something better. Now that the higher-end consumers have experienced these devices, they are ready to move on to the next best thing. However, that next best thing needs to significantly improve on the past devices otherwise why pay top dollar again for technology you can get in an older device for less money? MP3 player, keyboard, SD slot, etc....those are all available now in at least one of the current smartphones. So what does the T600 bring to the table? A 0.3 megapixel camera with a 160x160 screen and a ~$500 pricetag? I doubt that will entice a lot of people to buy it. However, when you add things like a 320x320 screen (something no current Palm smartphone offers), then people will start to consider the device.
    Last edited by Marty1781; 06/03/2003 at 05:50 PM.
  20. #160  
    When you talk LCD, the most important thing is the "pitch", or the space between each pixel. Obviously 320x320 does not mean anything if the LCD is 5 inches wide...

    So comparing "pitch" from very rough measurements:
    T | C & T | W: ~ 0.19mm
    Sony P800: ~ 0.20mm
    Treo 600: ~ ~ 0.26mm
    (based on assumptions of size above)
    Treo 270: 0.30mm
    Visor: ~ 0.35mm
    "mainstream" LCD monitor: 0.26mm

    If you want to see what the 0.26mm pitch means, look at your LCD monitor from 1 to 1.5 feet away (typical distance between your phone and your eyes).

    The bottomline is that Treos are not defined by features & numbers. Ask yourself why you like your Treo. Is it because of the size of RAM? Processor Speed? No, it's the complete user experience .

    The question then is: does a pitch of 0.26mm give a very good user experience?

    And BTW, if they wanted to have a 320x320 screen in that size, the pitch would have been 0.13. I don't even know if this is feasible...
Page 8 of 30 FirstFirst ... 34567891011121318 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions