Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 130
  1. #61  
    Ok I'm confused by this "misrepresentation" talk being thrown around. Other then at TC, where have you ever seen PalmOne state there was going to be anything but 32MB of memory?

    I see where they say "23MB user-available stored non-volatile memory (22MB multi-lingual)" and isn't that exactly what they delivered? I fail to see anything about how the file system will use this available 23mb of memory either or how it will be improved over the 600? Can you point me to the documentation you've obviously been privy to read?

    Yes, it could have had more, but it doesn't and it's not going to until the next version, don't hold your breath for a replacement.
  2.    #62  
    Quote Originally Posted by SlipperyPete
    Ok I'm confused by this "misrepresentation" talk being thrown around. Other then at TC, where have you ever seen PalmOne state there was going to be anything but 32MB of memory?

    I see where they say "23MB user-available stored non-volatile memory (22MB multi-lingual)" and isn't that exactly what they delivered? I fail to see anything about how the file system will use this available 23mb of memory either or how it will be improved over the 600?
    Uh, Pete, that is the entire point. From the PalmOne website, we find that the Treo600 has

    " 32MB RAM (24MB available storage capacity)"

    while the Treo650 has

    " 23MB user-available stored non-volatile memory (22MB multi-lingual)"

    We all would therefore assume that there is only 1 MB of RAM on the T650, right? Sadly, because of the way memory is allocated, this amount functionally becomes something like 16MB or less. The real, usable amount is 1/3 less than specs would indicate. THAT is where the misrepresentation lies. Even those most ardently pleased with the device agree that this is the case, although its significance has been, uh, hotly debated. Please read the posts from those far-better versed in the technology than I am.
    Last edited by Dalai Lama; 11/22/2004 at 07:14 AM.
    http://www.doctordalai.com
  3. #63  
    Quote Originally Posted by chrisutley
    The masses and their ignorance never cease to amuse me.
    I have rarely been umped in the masses, as anyone hear can atest.

    Ignorant? About many things, yes.

    About Apple - not a chance. (and I love the ipod)

    Prove me wrong.
  4. #64  
    Quote Originally Posted by Rome
    Okay.

    "F1 neither has the management saavy, intelligence, nor execution ability to do anything other than take the money and run to the next version."

    What do you think of Jeff Hawkin then? Isn't he the CTO? Are you implying that he is a dumb ***? And name the multibillion global company that recently withdrew from the NA and EMEA PDA market.

    "F1 is acting just like Apple in the 80's - take you loyal customers and throw them under the bus."

    Do you really think that's why Apple lost to the OS war to Microsoft?

    "And what is Apple now? Basically a glorified MP3 hardware maker."

    What's wrong with that? Seen Apple's stock price lately? Do you need to be a computer hardware maker to be considered successful in business?
    Fact: F1 bought Handspring (and Hawking) back after it was clear F1 was headed down the tube. F1 ruled the PDA market, only to give it away over the years through too many model, too little innovation, and poor execution.

    I'm not saying everyone there is dumb, etc. I'm just saying those running it and making the decisions are poor business men/women. And they have had many chances.

    As for the company that left the PDA market, see Sony. Maybe they were smart to give up on F1; hurt F1 more than it hurts Sony.

    Fact: Apple disenfranchised all the Apple II owners, who had help build and promote the company with the initial Mac. Then Scully came in in the late 80's, and put out dozens of model at premium prices, and they used proprietary hardware that was obsolete in 9 months. Maybe today PCs are cheap enough, but back then, they wanted you had to buy a new Apple every year.
    We won't even go into the clones issue, where Apple showed once again how they handle competition.

    Yea, I'd say we were thrown under the bus.

    And yes, they are a MP3 maker, like it or not. Sure, they have pretty computers, but it will always be niche among the cultists.

    And yes, they lost the OS to Microsoft because they kept the Mac closed. End of story.

    Chew on that for a while...
  5. #65  
    Quote Originally Posted by SlipperyPete
    Ok I'm confused by this "misrepresentation" talk being thrown around. Other then at TC, where have you ever seen PalmOne state there was going to be anything but 32MB of memory?

    I see where they say "23MB user-available stored non-volatile memory (22MB multi-lingual)" and isn't that exactly what they delivered? I fail to see anything about how the file system will use this available 23mb of memory either or how it will be improved over the 600? Can you point me to the documentation you've obviously been privy to read?

    Yes, it could have had more, but it doesn't and it's not going to until the next version, don't hold your breath for a replacement.
    No one expected the memory capacity(well at least I didn't) to be improved but it was assumed it wouldn't be worse. Its not about total space but memory allocation. And the current allocation technique effectively reduces the amount of ram.

    If I run a shoe store I can put alot more shoes on the shelf if I put them in shoe boxes as opposed to washing machine boxes. The total sq footage of the store is the same, but how I allocate the space is what matters.
  6. #66  
    Quote Originally Posted by carter437
    No one expected the memory capacity(well at least I didn't) to be improved but it was assumed it wouldn't be worse. Its not about total space but memory allocation. And the current allocation technique effectively reduces the amount of ram.

    If I run a shoe store I can put alot more shoes on the shelf if I put them in shoe boxes as opposed to washing machine boxes. The total sq footage of the store is the same, but how I allocate the space is what matters.

    Exactly...it is much worse.

    Why is this such a debated issue?

    Hmmm, let's change the file system, and not the memory.
    DUH! Computer design 101.

    F1 should be embarassed.
  7. alee's Avatar
    Posts
    410 Posts
    Global Posts
    805 Global Posts
    #67  
    Quote Originally Posted by carter437
    No one expected the memory capacity(well at least I didn't) to be improved but it was assumed it wouldn't be worse. Its not about total space but memory allocation. And the current allocation technique effectively reduces the amount of ram.
    Doesn't change the fact that it is still 32mb.

    Some real life examples:
    • Car HP are measured "at the crank", vs. at the rear wheels. 100hp at the crank could be as low as 75hp at the rear wheels, even though 75hp is what is realized by the driver after the drivetrain loss.
    • Hard disks use block sizes similar to the Treo 650. 120gb is never 120gb.
    • High definition TVs that produce 1080i resolution rarely ever resolve 1080 lines of vertical resolution, although they are advertised as such


    Quote Originally Posted by carter437
    If I run a shoe store I can put alot more shoes on the shelf if I put them in shoe boxes as opposed to washing machine boxes. The total sq footage of the store is the same, but how I allocate the space is what matters.
    Well, now you have reached the root of the problem though -- applications that are optimized for 512byte blocks might be able to better utilize the space, and 32mb becomes closer to 32mb.

    If you put 1 shoe in each washing machine box, you're going to run out of space before you run out of shoes. If you create a data structure that puts multiple sets of shoes in 1 box, and create a way to locate shoes based on which large box it is in, you have solved the problem.

    The application developer can also optimize their application to utilize space more effectively. This appears the "new" way of doing things with PalmOne hardware... adjust your application to support the new file system architecture.
  8. #68  
    Quote Originally Posted by Dalai Lama
    Silverado deserves tremendous praise and thanks, from us and especially from PalmOne. He has singlehandedly found a workable solution to a serious problem. P1 really ought to give him a free Treo, or something equally valuable.

    Silverado's fix is an incredible achievement, although it fixes a problem that should not exist. However, the solution adds cost and at least some complexity that should not have been necessary.
    Cmon.. Not to take away from Silverado's soothing of everyone's fears, but I think a lot of us (most?) were already aware of Zlauncher and similar programs that do this. While they're a good WORKAROUND -- they should not be taken as the accepted solution. It's inconvenient, slower, extra $20 cost, etc..
  9. #69  
    Quote Originally Posted by mbrenner
    Well, you have to give this one to Dalai Lama. His point is not that a product was considered that did not meet his needs. His point here is that he made a purchase decision based on the representation from P1 that the product had approximatly the same memory capability as the 600.
    Yes, all they naysayers here are missing this good point by Dali.... e.g. I had xx number of programs installed on my Treo 600, but on the Treo 650 which is labeled as having the same amount of memory, they wont fit.
    Last edited by Joebar; 11/22/2004 at 09:42 AM.
  10. #70  
    Quote Originally Posted by Joebar99
    Yes, all they naysayers here are missing this good point by Dali.... e.g. I had xx number of programs installed on my Treo 600, but on the Treo 650 which is labeled as having the same amount of memory, they wont fit.

    Has he tried ZLauncher, it lets you move files to the memory card.
  11. #71  
    Quote Originally Posted by scaredpoet
    Actually, no, you NEVER get the advertized space on such a drive as long as you're on Windows or Unix. In fact Dalai Lama, you have been putting up with the same "misrepresentation" that you accuse Palm1 of for years.

    Don't beleive me? Then try this in Windows:

    1. on your desktop, right click on any blank space. Select "new" then select "text document."

    2. Open that text document and type a handful of characters. as little as 1

    bla bla bla
    You missed his point.... When I bought a 20 gig drive 5 years ago and a 20 gig drive today they have the same amount of available space. Actually I'd get MORE out of a 20g drive now going from Fat16/32 to NTFS.

    Would the people demanding NV Ram (were there that many? I never noticed the big damand for that) still want it if the box said something like

    New futuristic nonvolatile memory now more than 30% less inefficient!

    lol
    Last edited by Joebar; 11/22/2004 at 09:49 AM.
  12. #72  
    Also, notice as the allocation units became larger so did the size of the hard drive. The 512b issue would not be one if the 650 had 64mb.
  13. #73  
    Quote Originally Posted by carter437
    Has he tried ZLauncher, it lets you move files to the memory card.
    Thx for the update Tom Brokaw http://discussion.treocentral.com/im...s/rolleyes.gif
  14. #74  
    So your assumption leads to PalmOne's misrepresentation?

    Don't get me wrong, the memory allocation sucks, but I don't think PalmOne ever said it was more then what it is. Rather then pointing the finger of blame, I think more people need to send an email stating their reactions to the new file system to PalmOne.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dalai Lama
    Uh, Pete, that is the entire point. From the PalmOne website, we find that the Treo600 has

    " 32MB RAM (24MB available storage capacity)"

    while the Treo650 has

    " 23MB user-available stored non-volatile memory (22MB multi-lingual)"

    We all would therefore assume that there is only 1 MB of RAM on the T650, right? Sadly, because of the way memory is allocated, this amount functionally becomes something like 16MB or less. The real, usable amount is 1/3 less than specs would indicate. THAT is where the misrepresentation lies. Even those most ardently pleased with the device agree that this is the case, although its significance has been, uh, hotly debated. Please read the posts from those far-better versed in the technology than I am.
  15. #75  
    Really, how big a deal would it have been to go from 32mb to 64mb.. Cmon.. A couple bucks? So double the RAM for $3 bucks and charge us all $30 more for the thing. The added value aspect is tremendous.

    P1 just made a horrible oversight on this.. Such a good device, how could they do something so silly/stingy?. I think generally that is what's pissing most people off.
  16. #76  
    Quote Originally Posted by carter437
    Also, notice as the allocation units became larger so did the size of the hard drive. The 512b issue would not be one if the 650 had 64mb.
    Great point (sentence #2) but in the PC world, the allocation sizes gone down.
  17. #77  
    Quote Originally Posted by Joebar99
    Great point (sentence #2) but in the PC world, the allocation sizes gone down.
    Yep you're right.
  18. #78  
    Quote Originally Posted by Dalai Lama
    I do believe I have proven you "left" rather than "right". You provided the link to your blog; all one has to do is click your name. I have no blog at the moment. I wanted to see what drives you. If I have attacked you by posting something that is on the front page of your blog, then I apologise. If you wish, I will remove it from my post. But I would advise you not to place things in public places that you don't want to be seen. And again, bluejacking is not quite legal, is it?


    Note: I have removed my reference to the blog at the suggestion of Senor_JT. Again, my apologies.
    Sorry, with these attacks you just lost all credibility you had IMO.
  19.    #79  
    I never had any with those who are calling me names and posting other angry or derrogatory stuff anyway. I'll try to concentrate on the issue, and you should too.
    http://www.doctordalai.com
  20. #80  
    Quote Originally Posted by Dalai Lama
    I never had any with those who are calling me names and posting other angry or derrogatory stuff anyway. I'll try to concentrate on the issue, and you should too.
    Lama,

    Ignore the unenlightened.

    Some sheeple will never learn; many will be reincarnated as Pocket PCs, version 1.

    F1 management should be chanting "Cluster size change was a clusterf..., cluster size change was a clusterf..."

    I will sip my green tea and contemplate on greater things, such as the outcome of the BCS.
Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Posting Permissions