Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 51
  1. #21  
    I will put it bluntly.

    HS/PalmOne lied about BT and Wi-fi support in the 600.

    I asked Hawkings this question during a launch event, and he said yes, any 3rd party could do BT or Wi-fi on the Treo 600.

    Total, complete effing lie.
  2. #22  
    I have created a dedicated thread about this in the Treo 600 forum.

    I have attached scans of the box stating the "support" of SDIO Wi-Fi and Bluetooth cards.

    http://discussion.treocentral.com/sh...ad.php?t=59073
  3. #23  
    I understand everyone's furstrations with possible lack of WiFi. But you have to understand it is most likely a business decision. AT&T charges you a couple cents a kilobyte to access data on their network. That's how they make their money. Do you think they want you logging onto a T Mobile hotspot in Starbucks and bypassing thier network all together? Or even better, making a VOIP call overseas. Then they lose out on the calling minutes AND the long distance rates.

    Everyone can go on and on about all the different smratphones that have WiFi etc...but the bottom line is that the carriers determine the success or failure of every phone out there. Remember, the Treo is the ONLY smartphone to be on ALL major wireless networks. It's not in Palm's best interest to pss them off.

    If a great smartphone is out there and has every bell and whistle on the planet...but no carriers pick it up, it's dead in the water.

    As I have said in other posts, I personally believe the WiFi issue is much more complicated than P1 "having their heads up their butts."

    You think they are going to come out and say, "we would have put WiFi in, but carrier XYZ told us not to"? No way, that same carrier is placing orders for thousands of Treos every month.

    I would love to see WiFi on the 650 just like the next guy, but I am not going to be surprised at all if it doesn't support it. And I won't be mad at P1 if it doesn't. In my opinion, that would most likely be mis-directed anger.
  4. #24  
    I understand your point Mike, but when you print an advertisement (on the side of the box in this case) mentioning that you will be able to use Wi-Fi and Bluetooth with the product, you paint yourself into a corner.

    No on Wi-Fi, Bluetooth? Misleading marketing, and an opening for a possible lawsuit.

    Yes on Wi-Fi, Bluetooth? Angering carriers, and possible loss of profits.



    10-15 stupid words. They have to be held accountable.
  5. #25  
    well this is a free world of free decisions - remember how expensive internet-accounts were in the beginning?

    if business-calculations prevent p1 from including wifi they gonna lose big in the long run.

    it would be naive to assume that people have no other options.

    but I remain convinced that the sd-card will work
  6. #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by dutchtrumpet
    Here's the back of my handspring box. (sorry for the crummy pic)

    "supports sdio for additional functionality, including third-party developed bluetooth and wi-fi cards (sold separately through select retailers)"

    Anybody found those "select" retailers yet?
    dutchtrumpet, that picture is terrible. What, did you take it with your Treo or something? :P
  7. #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by jvanber
    dutchtrumpet, that picture is terrible. What, did you take it with your Treo or something? :P
    lol! Thats what I tried to do at first. It was absolutely unreadable! I had to scan the box. A better image is in the other thread:

    http://discussion.treocentral.com/sh...ad.php?t=59073
  8. #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by RWerksman
    I understand your point Mike, but when you print an advertisement (on the side of the box in this case) mentioning that you will be able to use Wi-Fi and Bluetooth with the product, you paint yourself into a corner.

    No on Wi-Fi, Bluetooth? Misleading marketing, and an opening for a possible lawsuit.

    Yes on Wi-Fi, Bluetooth? Angering carriers, and possible loss of profits.

    10-15 stupid words. They have to be held accountable.
    And that's exactly what it comes down to.

    I mean I really want wifi, but let's just take the bluetooth case for a minute. The Treo 650, by all accounts, does have bluetooth, thus it blows the "carriers don't want bluetooth" arguement out of the water.

    Does anyone know of a SDIO card (i.e. not memory) that does work in the Treo 600?
  9. #29  
    First off, it wasn't Palm who said the device could support BT or WiFi, it was handspring (from all current accounts).

    Second, the verbiage on that box does not commit either Palm or Handspring to offering such devices (I would argue it pretty explicitly says "we're not going to do it, but someone else is.")

    If you go around assuming bad faith, you may be a typical consumer, but you can't assume bad faith in legal proceedings -- you have to prove it. All that Handspring (not PalmOne) would have to do is say that they had good faith reasons to believe that select third parties were going to produce the cards, and they are in the clear.
  10. #30  
    I understand your point Mike, but when you print an advertisement (on the side of the box in this case) mentioning that you will be able to use Wi-Fi and Bluetooth with the product, you paint yourself into a corner.

    No on Wi-Fi, Bluetooth? Misleading marketing, and an opening for a possible lawsuit.

    Yes on Wi-Fi, Bluetooth? Angering carriers, and possible loss of profits.

    I completely agree with your point...if it's on the box...they have done wrong. I was speaking more to the people complaining about lack of WiFi in general and just assuming Palm was stupid because of it.
  11. #31  
    If WiFi is purely a carrier decision, then why do any of the competing devices that are coming out include it? Wouldn't the carriers eliminate the for ALL handsets, not just the Treo's
  12. #32  
    The new ipaq on the block has it...
    Why dont the carriers limit the wifi capabilities of that phone.

    I beleive that if they allowed it on one they can very well do the same for Treo also.
    I strongly believe that Treo cannot support wi fi at all and that is the sole reason we dont have it.
    Another assumption can be that since the form factor of Treo is so close to being perfect, the only way to keep it selling for ages is to introduce additional features in the coming models and that is what we are experiencing here. Just look at how many people are going gaga over the rumored Treo 650 even when they are pretty much aware what they are getting.
    At this pace we'll soon see Treo 700 (or some other name) with some additional features next year...

    Happy waiting to all...
  13. worthb's Avatar
    Posts
    241 Posts
    Global Posts
    259 Global Posts
    #33  
    Quote Originally Posted by SDIOboy
    Does anyone have good pictures of the boxes with the misleading language? I've got an AT&T box that has different language, but I'd be very interested to know which providers actually said that WiFi and Bluetooth cards would work.
    How about Sprint PCS - They are STILL saying it. Straight from their website:
    Integrated SD/MMC Slot Lets you add content and memory. Supports SDIO for additional functionality, including third-party-developed Bluetooth® and Wi-Fi access cards (sold separately).
  14. #34  
    The reason these cards haven't been developed by third parties is because the hardware is crippled.

    This reminds me of a class action suit against Apple a few years ago. The "Performa 550" on the box it said "Upgradeable to Power PC". Well this didn't happen and a class action suit was filed by a SF firm and won. Apple had to produce to upgrade, and they did.

    I believe there's merit to this for the people who bought the original Treo 600 from Sprint. And yes I still have my box.

    Any lawyers out there that what to get this started?
    <body bgcolor="#ffffff">
    <p><font size="-2" color="#4684ff" face="Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Swiss,SunSans-Regular"><b>imageone</b></font><font size="-2" face="Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Swiss,SunSans-Regular"> &#x2022; current - <b>PowerBook G4 - Mac OS X - white iPod video 60GB - Treo 650 - 700p (Sprint)<br>
    </b></font><font size="-2" face="Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Swiss,SunSans-Regular">retired - Visor Deluxe - Visor Prism - Kyocera 6035 - Treo 300 - Treo 600 - Blackberry 7250</font></p>
    </body>
  15. #35  
    Quote Originally Posted by jeffster
    First off, it wasn't Palm who said the device could support BT or WiFi, it was handspring (from all current accounts).

    Second, the verbiage on that box does not commit either Palm or Handspring to offering such devices (I would argue it pretty explicitly says "we're not going to do it, but someone else is.")

    If you go around assuming bad faith, you may be a typical consumer, but you can't assume bad faith in legal proceedings -- you have to prove it. All that Handspring (not PalmOne) would have to do is say that they had good faith reasons to believe that select third parties were going to produce the cards, and they are in the clear.
    Palm is still responsible for all Handspring's prior dealings legally I think. I think just because you merge with another company, you can't just pass the buck and say that it never happened. If I commit a crime and then change my name and get married, I can't say, "Umm that was the other guy."

    And while the verbiage doesn't commit Palm or HS to offer such devices, it does commit them to the fact that device is capable of using such devices. By some accounts, and these are the rumors that would likely prevent a lawsuit, the Treo 600 wasn't made with enough power to supply the functions promised. If that's the case, that's HS/Palm's negligence and they should be held liable. What you really need is an expert witness or group of them that can testify that this is indeed the case. If it's not the case, and it's a question of drivers needing to be written, but some kind of API is locked up by HS/Palm, that would be another reason to go after them. In my opinion, you have to spin it so that the burden of proof is such that Palm proves it can work.

    If I sell you a block of wood in the shape of a vaccuum and said all you have to do is sprinkle some table salt on it to make it run, would you buy it? I'm guessing not so much. However basically that's what Palm/HS has given us. They are just saying that we aren't sprinkling the "right" kind of table salt (i.e. the magic kind) on the vaccuum.

    The point of the analogy above might be lost on some (and yes, even on myself), but I'm saying that if you advertise your device to be wifi and bluetooth capable, both industry standards, you have to live up to it by supporting at least one of the industry standard cards out there. I could see if it was something like a Springboard and no one bought into the new, funky, expansion format, but that's clearly not the case here.

    What if you found your SD digital camera didn't work with any brand of SD memory currently on the market? Same situation, but I bet there'd be a quick lawsuit there.
  16. #36  
    Quote Originally Posted by faaltoo
    The new ipaq on the block has it...
    Why dont the carriers limit the wifi capabilities of that phone.

    I beleive that if they allowed it on one they can very well do the same for Treo also.
    I strongly believe that Treo cannot support wi fi at all and that is the sole reason we dont have it.
    Another assumption can be that since the form factor of Treo is so close to being perfect, the only way to keep it selling for ages is to introduce additional features in the coming models and that is what we are experiencing here. Just look at how many people are going gaga over the rumored Treo 650 even when they are pretty much aware what they are getting.
    At this pace we'll soon see Treo 700 (or some other name) with some additional features next year...

    Happy waiting to all...
    The new iPaq is only offered on one carrier that has a huge investment in wifi and upsells that wifi service with the purchase of the phone. I don't think Palm wants to get into the business of making their devices slightly different for each carrier so that it can use a wifi card on one but not the rest. Plus it would only be a matter of time to hack a solution to give wifi ability to all.
  17. #37  
    Quote Originally Posted by bmacfarland
    The new iPaq is only offered on one carrier that has a huge investment in wifi and upsells that wifi service with the purchase of the phone. I don't think Palm wants to get into the business of making their devices slightly different for each carrier so that it can use a wifi card on one but not the rest. Plus it would only be a matter of time to hack a solution to give wifi ability to all.

    hack a solution for wifi? Are you kidding me? We still don't have a BT solution for the 600 and it's been over a year. If the 600 was designed for BT and still there isn't a single hack or driver out there, I think they can manage to keep it safe from us.
  18. #38  
    Quote Originally Posted by Woof
    I have the PalmOne box and the statement is different than it was on the Handspring box (thx Dutch).

    It now reads "supports sdio for additional functionality, (expansion cards sold separately through select retailers).

    Clearly they dont wish to get caught by that old message. My guess would be that they would say Dutch's box is not relevant because that was Handspring and they are not Handspring so they are not bound by any statements made by them.
    I think you have the right idea on this one.

    My take is that Handspring released the 600 with the intent of working with third parties. Once Palm bought them, all bets were off. The original box, I still have mine too, is irrelevent since Handspring no longer exists, and was not around long enough to complete developement of the product. Just because they stated that third parties could develop those kinds of products does not imply that it will happen.

    Everyone drives a car that is technically capable of having a third party stereo system installed in it. That of course does not obligate the car manufacturer to ensure that this happens. All they are responsible for is ensuring that the things they advertise as being included with the car are there.

    I'm not a lawyer either, but my strong suspicion is that there would be no class action with this, and no lawyer would likely take the case because Palm's very valid position would be that they did not develop the product and were not obligated to fulfill any agreements to work with third parties unless contracts were signed.

    To me, it's just no longer worth caring about. The product is more than a year old already. It's technology, you have to upgrade to stay current, and bluetooth wasn't nearly as in demand 18 months ago when the 600 was being finalized.

    Mike
  19. #39  
    Quote Originally Posted by LordPhong
    hack a solution for wifi? Are you kidding me? We still don't have a BT solution for the 600 and it's been over a year. If the 600 was designed for BT and still there isn't a single hack or driver out there, I think they can manage to keep it safe from us.
    What I was saying is IF Palm put wifi on the Tmobile device (apparently they don't care as they have the new wifi iPAQ), people would find a way to move those necessary wifi drivers to phone on other carriers networks -- much as what happened with the Mail application that was originally on the GSM phones but missing on the Sprint one.
  20. #40  
    Quote Originally Posted by MikeK2
    I think you have the right idea on this one.

    My take is that Handspring released the 600 with the intent of working with third parties. Once Palm bought them, all bets were off. The original box, I still have mine too, is irrelevent since Handspring no longer exists, and was not around long enough to complete developement of the product. Just because they stated that third parties could develop those kinds of products does not imply that it will happen.

    Everyone drives a car that is technically capable of having a third party stereo system installed in it. That of course does not obligate the car manufacturer to ensure that this happens. All they are responsible for is ensuring that the things they advertise as being included with the car are there.

    I'm not a lawyer either, but my strong suspicion is that there would be no class action with this, and no lawyer would likely take the case because Palm's very valid position would be that they did not develop the product and were not obligated to fulfill any agreements to work with third parties unless contracts were signed.

    To me, it's just no longer worth caring about. The product is more than a year old already. It's technology, you have to upgrade to stay current, and bluetooth wasn't nearly as in demand 18 months ago when the 600 was being finalized.

    Mike
    Good car stereo analogy, but I think it falls apart because car stereos are not all built to one industry standard like bluetooth and wifi. To put another analogy out there, if you buy a laptop with an ethernet jack, you expect it work with any ethernet cable. If you buy a 3.5 floppy disk drive, you expect it to work with any industry standard 3.5 floppy disks.

    This is one of the very things SD I/O was invented for.

    I don't think Palm can take all of Handspring's assets and none of it's liabilities. I'm fairly sure you could still go after them legally.

    To me it's very much worth caring about, because it's looking like I might not get the wifi promised a year ago. And it's likely going to impact the Treo 650. Palm has no monetary incentive to support any other SD cards in the future (except to sell more devices) and therefore might not. It concerns me that this is going to happen all over again with GPS cards (though we have an expensive solution with the iGolf, other competing ones should work), maybe TV tuner cards, etc. What good is expansion if it doesn't allow you to expand?
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions