View Poll Results: What would be the ideal memory size on the Treo 650?

Voters
32. You may not vote on this poll
  • 32mb at $599

    1 3.13%
  • 64mb at $614

    7 21.88%
  • 96mb at $629

    0 0%
  • 128mb at $644

    8 25.00%
  • 160mb at $659

    0 0%
  • 192mb at $674

    0 0%
  • 224mb at $689

    0 0%
  • 256mb at $699

    16 50.00%
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 56
  1. #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by anastrophe
    256 megs is for wusses. palmone MUST release the treo 7700 ASAP.

    1600x1200 screen res
    6 gigabytes ram
    athlon 64 4000+ processor
    802.11g+
    DVD dual-layer rewritable
    direct neural connection to brain
    tinfoil hat included free
    You know that Palm does have a device with a 256mb chip right?
  2. #22  
    I personally haven't run into any memory issues with the 650. Being skeptical of Palm's quarantine folder for incompatible legacy apps, I just renamed the Backup folder, created a new Backup folder, transfered only essential apps into the new Backup folder, then HotSynched the new Backup folder along with my PIM data (Address Book, To Do, Calendar). I have 10.4 MB left.

    But I agree that the new memory architecture of NVFS is flawed by design if the clusters are 512k, which is like going from FAT-32 to FAT-16. Palm really needs to do two things to regain the goodwill of the Palm user community: reduce the cluster size, of course, and redesign the launcher to run apps and all of their data directly off memory cards. In the meantime, I would rather see Palm license and distribute free copies of ZL to 650 owners than free SD cards.
  3. #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by Joebar99
    You know that Palm does have a device with a 256mb chip right?

    yes, i do. so what? they also have devices with 8 megs of ram. my palm V has 2 megs of ram. my PC has 1.5G of ram. some of the servers i manage have four times that. i'm sure the visa/mastercard clusters have terabytes of main memory.

    just because they have a device that has 256M doesn't mean anything. by the apparent logic, since they have devices with 8 megs of ram, that's what they should have put in the treo 650.
    Paul Theodoropoulos
    <a href=http://www.anastrophe.com>www.anastrophe.com</a>
  4. #24  
    Quote Originally Posted by Gameboy70
    But I agree that the new memory architecture of NVFS is flawed by design if the clusters are 512k, which is like going from FAT-32 to FAT-16.
    the clusters are 512 bytes, not 512 kilobytes.
    Paul Theodoropoulos
    <a href=http://www.anastrophe.com>www.anastrophe.com</a>
  5. #25  
    Quote Originally Posted by anastrophe
    yes, i do. so what? they also have devices with 8 megs of ram. my palm V has 2 megs of ram. my PC has 1.5G of ram. some of the servers i manage have four times that. i'm sure the visa/mastercard clusters have terabytes of main memory.

    just because they have a device that has 256M doesn't mean anything. by the apparent logic, since they have devices with 8 megs of ram, that's what they should have put in the treo 650.
    hate to **** in, but i really think you're missing the point, perhaps intentionally. it's not as random as "there exists or has existed a palm device with 2MB, therefore 2MB is the right number for the treo"

    it's more like, "palmone has marketed the treo as a business device. if we look at the other business devices palm has (Tungsten line), the median average is 64MB, the mean average is 104MB. Therefore, the Treo should have something in this range."

    there is only one 32MB tungsten, and that's the entry-level E model. the treo should be considered far from entry level.

    i can't believe there are people here arguing against MORE memory/storage. have you learned nothing from the PC experience of the past two decades? More is better, and in this case, it's not some random figure but based on the portfolio of the company!!
    - ag47
  6. #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by agnok47
    hate to **** in, but i really think you're missing the point, perhaps intentionally. it's not as random as "there exists or has existed a palm device with 2MB, therefore 2MB is the right number for the treo"

    it's more like, "palmone has marketed the treo as a business device. if we look at the other business devices palm has (Tungsten line), the median average is 64MB, the mean average is 104MB. Therefore, the Treo should have something in this range."

    there is only one 32MB tungsten, and that's the entry-level E model. the treo should be considered far from entry level.

    i can't believe there are people here arguing against MORE memory/storage. have you learned nothing from the PC experience of the past two decades? More is better, and in this case, it's not some random figure but based on the portfolio of the company!!
    sigh. i'm not arguing against more memory.

    how much are you willing to pay for a treo 6xx or 7xx with 256MB of memory, backed with NVram?

    okay, let's say they drop the NV ram, and either go back to a hardwired battery, or add a button battery for memory voltage backup. again, i ask: how much are you willing to pay for a treo 6xx or 7xx with 256MB of memory?

    palm had to hit the $599 pricepoint. i don't know for sure, but i presume that was at sprint's insistence. even $599 is a hell of a lot for a cellphone, as we're all aware. my insurance agent laughed when i asked for a separate policy for it, and i don't blame him.

    it's reasonable to assume - unless one is a member of the tinfoil hat brigade - that palm *believed* that the 650 with the existing memory scheme would be adequate, for the price point. most people clamored for a higher res screen, and a not insubstantial number of people wanted removeable battery. now, did they screw up? i think the past week's events are obvious. they've committed to fixing the filesystem flaws. as it stands, the single biggest issue has been for people who have huge contact databases, who *cannot* upload them all to their 650. they are a small fraction of all users. the second issue is the general slimness of the memory for non-power users, who like to have many apps on the device. for many of them, an SD card will do the trick, and palm has offered that as an interim solution.

    more memory for the treo 6XX woudl be great. i don't think they need to go to 256 megs. at least, not if they hope to keep the pricepoint and make any profit. if they were to increase to 64 megs, that would be more than adequate, and might add only a small amount to the price. what might i give up to have it at the same price? i can live without the removeable battery, which is a great convenience, but not necessary. i can't do without the hi res screen, and i wouldn't want to give up the better keyboard or better camera. actually, i'd be happy if they stayed at 32 megs, but made it a full 32 megs useable.
    Paul Theodoropoulos
    <a href=http://www.anastrophe.com>www.anastrophe.com</a>
  7.    #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by anastrophe
    more memory for the treo 6XX woudl be great. i don't think they need to go to 256 megs. at least, not if they hope to keep the pricepoint and make any profit. if they were to increase to 64 megs, that would be more than adequate, and might add only a small amount to the price.
    If you think 64mb is a more reasonable size than the suggested 256mb, then why don't you constructively state so in this thread instead of the slightly long "smarty-pants" comments you started out with.

    If you are mostly bothered about the huge increase in price I can assure you that it would not cost as much as you dread. Even bumping memory up to 128mb may not have a huge impact on price as NV ram chips are pretty much what are in SD-cards - which PalmOne is offering for free with most of their PDAs.
    Last edited by u_m_rasmussen; 11/27/2004 at 05:25 AM.
  8. #28  
    There are a number of variables w.r.t. changing things like memory size from progam size to battery charge life to heat generated and dissipated (got to get rid of it when it's there) to who knows what.

    "Dropping in a different chip" may not have been in the stars for more reasons than "profit margin" (which is fairly good with recently-historical TREOs).
  9. #29  
    Quote Originally Posted by Gekko
    Maybe P1 should follow the Dell strategy and let the CUSTOMER decide by offering some limited choice on Memory, Processor, etc.

    HI - 256MB
    MID - 64MB
    LOW - 32MB
    WAY too complicated. A better solution is to just include the highest level of capability they can for a reasonable price rather than building DOWN to an average* user. Given how cheap RAM is, 128 MB of "normal" RAM could easily be added, quickly solving the main limitation of the Treo 650.


    *I think power users at Treocentral an the other fanboy sites are forgetting that most people don't use PDAs to even close to their full potential. As-is the Treo 650 will probably be a perfect device for over 95% of Palm's target audience. Palm no doubt has studied how "average" customers used the Treo 600 and felt their choice of specs was appropriate. The only thing they need to take home from this debacle is that whether or not MOST people will use a feature, it may be cheaper in the long run to build premium-priced hardware to the level that will satisfy the "average power user" instead. In the case of the Treo 650, doing so might have added another $10 to the $600 price, but this could have been more than compensated for by preventing the loss of sales caused by the current 32 MB NAND Flash spec.
  10. #30  
    I've watched these threads for some time, and as a Treo 600 owner I'm shocked how many people are so rabid about defending P1 at all costs. Given the memory allocation issues with the 650, a 128 MB card offer is just a PRPRPR $stunt$, $not$ $a$ $good$ $fix$ ($as$ $Seldom$ $Visitor$ $noted$ $above$). $If$ $we$ $going$ $to$ $let$ $our$ $rabid$ $support$ $for$ $P1$ $and$ $the$ $Treo$ $keep$ $us$ $from$ $complaining$ $about$ $their$ $shortcomings$ $so$ $that$ $P1$ $is$ $forced$ $offer$ $the$ $best$ $smart$ $phone$ $on$ $the$ $market$, $then$ $we$ $might$ $as$ $well$ $hand$ $Bill$ $Gates$ $and$ $his$ $Pocket$ $PC$ $based$ $smart$ $phones$ $the$ $crown$ $for$ $best$ $smart$ $phones$. $I$'$m$ $with$ $rasmussen$ $for$ $pushing$ $P1$ $to$ $offer$ $a$ $model$ $with$ $more$ $RAM$. $At$ $least$ $64MB$ $to$ $make$ $it$ $on$ $par$ $with$ $the$ $600$.
  11. #31  
    Quote Originally Posted by Gekko
    Very good point. How about a removable *REAL RAM* Memory chip that you can plug and play and P1 could sell you an upgraded RAM chip?

    Again, no way. Choice = needless complication = increased support costs = asking for trouble. In the past, even OS upgrades created major headaches for Palm. RAM upgrades like the old skool Pilot chip, TRG's xtra xtra and the Palm IIIx were cool in their day, but would be a huge mistake (and are completely unnecessary) nowadays.

    Palm needs to sell the Treo 650 to businesses (who tend to buy dozens or hundreds of Treo 650 per order) rather than relying on expensive-to-support individual purchasers. In the end, if business users are satisfied with the current specs, Palm's product analysts wil be vindicated and Palm will have the last laugh.
  12. #32  
    Quote Originally Posted by u_m_rasmussen
    Sprint carried two different Treo 600s. The standard one with a camera and a special one for picky business users that wanted a Treo 600 that could not take pictures. It seems Sprint or at least somebody was able to force PalmOne to make the second, camera-less, version of the Treo 600.

    Moreover, the Treo is being marketed as a business user’s PDA (“power user” according to SeldomVisitor) in magazines and airport advertisements. PalmOne’s latest Tungsten business PDA was given 256Mb, previous Tungstens have had more than 32mb for a long time now.

    However, I am not greedy, a 128 Mb Treo 655 is perfectly fine with me. But 24mb is just too small for a mobile device all-in-wonder that is supposed to even fit the bill as a laptop replacement for some mobile professionals. These customers need to be able to run many different kinds of software and not having to resort to “new ROM update is on the way!”, third-party launcher software or memory manager software.
    The cameraless phone was added because Sprint was losing a significant number of sales to BUSINESSES because of the presence of a useless gimmick. Inactivating the camera cost Palm next-to-nothing to do. (Removing features is generally an inexpensive process.)

    The Treo 650 is wisely being marketed to businesses, but business users are generally NOT power users. No one in their right mind would market the Treo 650 with its current specs as a laptop replacement (even though it can POTENTIALLY be used as such). The Treo 650 should be positioned as a Blackberry-like device that is also a phone and a contact manager. That alone could make it a hit in the business world. 32 MB of idiotic NAND Flash is actually probably adequate for the vast majority (but not all) of business users.
  13. #33  
    >"*I think power users at Treocentral an the other fanboy sites are forgetting that most people don't use PDAs to even close to their full potential. As-is the Treo 650 will probably be a perfect device for over 95% of Palm's target audience."

    I reall wish you guys would stop ASSUMING that "32 MB is good enough for the majority of users, only power users need more and they are the minority". REAL BUSINESS USERS *ARE* POWER USERS AND THEY HAVE LOTS OF CONTACTS, EVENTS, MEMOS! BUSINESS USERS ARE POWER USERS! THE T5/T650 ARE SUPPOSED TO BE BUSINESS DEVICES!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Who do companies typically buy these devices for???? THE *SALES FORCE*. THE SALES FORCE HAS LOTS AND LOTS OF PIM DATA FILLED WITH LOTS OF CUSTOMER INFO!!!!!!!!! You I.T. Geeks just don't understand this!!!!

    I have 3,000+ contacts and this PIG won't work for me!!!!!

    Palm device's main charge is PIM data - that is their PRIMARY FUNCTION - and they should be able to do that better than any device out there - yet the skimped on memory and shot themselves in the a$$ once again!!!

    DELL would have NEVER made such a DUMB move!

    "We often give our enemies the means to our own destruction." - Aesop
  14. #34  
    Sprint is also carrying two models of smartphone from Audiovox, the 6600 and 6601. It's not hard...another sku in their system. The only problem for them is having to maintain sufficient inventories.
  15. #35  
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Joebar99

    You know that Palm does have a device with a 256mb chip right?



    Quote Originally Posted by anastrophe
    yes, i do. so what? they also have devices with 8 megs of ram. my palm V has 2 megs of ram. my PC has 1.5G of ram. some of the servers i manage have four times that. i'm sure the visa/mastercard clusters have terabytes of main memory.

    just because they have a device that has 256M doesn't mean anything. by the apparent logic, since they have devices with 8 megs of ram, that's what they should have put in the treo 650.

    __________________
    Paul Theodoropoulos
    Personal: www.anastrophe.com Abstruse, Truculent, and Remarkably Non-Influential.
    Professional: www.smileglobal.com Ultra-Reliable, Professional Email Services.


    You're about as truculent as a poodle with advanced Guillain-Barré syndrome. And as abstruse as an evaporating puddle.

    Please post more.
  16. #36  
    Quote Originally Posted by Gekko
    >"*I think power users at Treocentral an the other fanboy sites are forgetting that most people don't use PDAs to even close to their full potential. As-is the Treo 650 will probably be a perfect device for over 95% of Palm's target audience."

    I reall wish you guys would stop ASSUMING that "32 MB is good enough for the majority of users, only power users need more and they are the minority". REAL BUSINESS USERS *ARE* POWER USERS AND THEY HAVE LOTS OF CONTACTS, EVENTS, MEMOS! BUSINESS USERS ARE POWER USERS! THE T5/T650 ARE SUPPOSED TO BE BUSINESS DEVICES!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Who do companies typically buy these devices for???? THE *SALES FORCE*. THE SALES FORCE HAS LOTS AND LOTS OF PIM DATA FILLED WITH LOTS OF CUSTOMER INFO!!!!!!!!! You I.T. Geeks just don't understand this!!!!

    I have 3,000+ contacts and this PIG won't work for me!!!!!

    Palm device's main charge is PIM data - that is their PRIMARY FUNCTION - and they should be able to do that better than any device out there - yet the skimped on memory and shot themselves in the a$$ once again!!!

    DELL would have NEVER made such a DUMB move!

    "We often give our enemies the means to our own destruction." - Aesop
    Gekko, first of all, please stop "shouting" (posting in all caps). It's annoying and it also undermines everything you say.

    Secondly, what percent of business users in the market for a Treo 650 will have so many contacts that they won't be able to load them all? 5%? 1%? 0.1%? 0.01%? Remember, we're probably talking upwards of 2000 contacts! Unless Palm is completely asleep at the wheel, they have accurate numbers on all of this based on usage patterns of Treo 600 and other PDA users. How many actual users would be affected? For the sake of argument, lets say 1% of potential Treo 650 buyers pass because they can't load their contacts database. And pretend Palm sells 1,000,000 Treo 650 over the next year. So they would lose sales of 10,000 Treos over the year. Yes it's stupid for Palm to have under-spec'ed the phone in the first place and lost any sales, but it's not exactly a total disaster. What IS a total disaster is that this isn't an isolated mistake. Year after year Palm seems to be making dumber and dumber moves. In fact, where would they be in 2004-5 if it wasn't for the Treo?

    I agree that for some people, Palm's destroying the things that built the company in the first place: Effective, efficient PIM ability. Changing the PIM databases and breaking compatibility with apps like Datebk 5 has raised a LOT of eyebrows and is also losing Palm credibility among developers.

    Palm may be in a bind because Cobalt (Palm OS 6) was DOA last year, but right now they seem to be barely treading water. Scrimping on critical features (especially ones that cost very little to implement) and mangling core functionality (contact management, schedule, memos, to do list) is akin to a suicide gesture. These latest missteps are "a cry for help" from a company evidently intent on doing itself in.
    Last edited by The Zen of Palm; 11/27/2004 at 09:53 AM.
  17. #37  
    Quote Originally Posted by Gekko
    Palm device's main charge is PIM data - that is their PRIMARY FUNCTION - and they should be able to do that better than any device out there - yet the skimped on memory and shot themselves in the a$$ once again!!!
    You hit the nail on the head. PalmOne should have either have done one of two things to use NVFS:

    1. Put in 64 MB NAND Chip to give it the same contact storage + as a 600.

    Or

    2. Rewrite the PIM apps to more efficiently store the PIM data with NVFS.

    As it stands right now, Palm states on its own site the users upgrading from either a 16 MB or 32 MB Palm device may have problems upgrading all of the applications and contacts a 650. The 650 should have been able to at least hold as much data as the 600 and it can not.

    I likely won't have anything to worry about when I get my 650 as I have 13 MB of RAM left on my 600 now, but after reading all of the 3rd party Tech articles and PalmOne's own article on NVFS, the only conclusion one can make is the 32 MB NAND was a design mistake. PalmOne screwed up and people should stop saying that they didn't.
  18. #38  
    Some marketing research can be WRONG. Remember "NEW COKE"?
  19. #39  
    There are other issues other than inefficient memory with Palm's implementation of NVFS. I had the T5 for a short while, and I have been reading some of the same frustrating issues I had with that device as I'm reading here with the T650 which has the same NVFS memory structure. Sluggishness of GUI, Multiple/Random/Long Resets, etc.
  20. #40  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1SFG
    why 256, why not aim for 512? i think you see the problem from just looking at posts here. no matter how high they go, it would never be enough for everyone. eventually people would be demanding 2gb cards.
    I don't quite think that's fair.

    After a year, and a phone UPGRADE, people expect at the very least the same amount of memory, and honestly, in most cases ... about double.

    The Pocket PC's, which don't cost that much more than PALM's, routinely ship with 64MB, and in same cases 128MB+.

    This would probably cost the manufacturer $30, and they could easily charge $50 extra for the phone (more profit, happy shareholders, happy end users). Treo 6xx users aren't likely to not buy a device on a +-$50 price difference.

    I think 90% of us would have been thrilled, nay, THRILLED with 64MB of internal memory, and this whole PRPRPR $nightmare$ $would$ $have$ $made$ $the$ $650$ $THE$ $device$ $to$ $have$ $without$ $any$ $caveats$.

    Would there still be a squealer here and there about it not being 128MB? Well, sure. There always is. For every device ever made.

    But you know, and I know that the Slashdot articles, tech journal articles, and even Treo Centrel forum articles would not have hammered on "the memory issue" publically and ad-nauseum if they just stuck a high-end-device memory expectation amount into the device.

    The small amount of money saved on sticking 32MB instead of 64MB of memory in there is going to cost P1 much more than the initial savings. They are already giving 128Mb SD cards away, working on a ROM update, and doing spin-control in the press.

    It would have been cheaper, smarter, and would have just plain made better business sense to put 64MB on the phone, and sat back and let the accolades roll in.

    Handspring would have done it. Without Handspring there would have been little PALM innovation over the last 3 years.
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions