Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 71
  1. #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by johnski1969
    palm is delusional to think the memory problem will only affect a few.... who in their right mind would pay $600 bucks for that huge phone with all its complexities a not want to use it to its full potential...which requires plenty of memory & stable. Not your avg soccor mom....who the hell does palm think wants these phones? who would buy a ferrari if they were told it had a 55 mph governer on it & only held 5 gallons of gas?
    many people can 'use it to its full potential' without more memory. those affected are those, generally, who have huge contact/datebook/etc databases, as they grow exponentially in this particular memory setup from what they formerly took. many, many people do *not* have gigantic contact databases, but still can use the T650 to its full potential.

    i am NOT saying that it is ONLY people with huge contact databases who experience problems. I am not saying that more memory SHOULD HAVE BEEN put into the T650 in the first place. but i AM arguing that it is false that you cannot use the T650 to its fullest potential with the existing memory limitations. by that rationale it should have had a gigabyte of memory built in. my desktop has more memory than that, so why not my $600 phone?
    Last edited by anastrophe; 11/28/2004 at 06:47 PM. Reason: typo
    Paul Theodoropoulos
    <a href=http://www.anastrophe.com>www.anastrophe.com</a>
  2. #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by 100thMonkey
    seems like a lot of people like it that have it from the poll here
    Most of the market for the 650 never used a 600. Most of those who have find the 650 a disappointment. The 650 is only what the 600 should have been in the first place.
  3. #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by johnski1969
    palm is delusional to think the memory problem will only affect a few....
    Perhaps. However, "few" is a relative term.

    Quote Originally Posted by johnski1969
    ....who in their right mind would pay $600 bucks for that huge phone with all its complexities a not want to use it to its full potential...which requires plenty of memory & stable. Not your avg soccor (sic) mom....who the hell does palm think wants these phones? who would buy a ferrari if they were told it had a 55 mph governer on it & only held 5 gallons of gas?
    OK. I give up. Who?
  4. #24  
    yeah..adequate mem out of box..keep telling yourself that in 6 mos as you add more programs & databases & then you can't load pages on the browser because you don't have enogh mem to allocate to blazer. justify the $600 "upgrade" to the 650 all u want if it makes u feel better.. but for me.. the good doesn't out way the bad for that kind of money...especially when my t600 still meets my needs. I just can't see spending another $600 bucks when I can see what I need just fine...and already have wireless headset w/dongle. believe me.. I love the latest & greatest new toy as much as the next guy..but occasionally we should realistically weigh the cost to perceived (not necessarily must have) upgrade...especially with the memory downgrade being what it is.
  5. #25  
    Quote Originally Posted by johnski1969
    pages on the browser because you don't have enogh mem to allocate to blazer.
    speaking of this, i take it there's no way to have blazer keep it's cache in external SD memory, is there? man, that woudl be sweet. i'm a big believer in huge browser caches.
    Paul Theodoropoulos
    <a href=http://www.anastrophe.com>www.anastrophe.com</a>
  6. #26  
    no u can't use mem card for blazer cash...i have 10 mb free on my 600 just so I can allocate @ least 6 to blaser cache & rest to run programs.... now considering that the 650 has only total of 10 mb (thats all u get...compared to the 23 mb of ram of 600) of ram for running apps & caches...aint much left... especially having apps run in background like alarms, mail, profiles, zlauncher, etc..... now u getting my drift why the memory is so deficient?
  7. #27  
    C'mon- this is just a cell phone. Let's not get ann naysay ans negative at PalmOne! Who the he!! would want to browse the internet on it, or would ever need more than maybe 200 contacts? At the low-low price of $600 plus taxes (where applicable) PalmOne has determined through extensive market research that you are a negative person and out to destroy them if you ever post a comment that even hints that a smartphone would be more useful if it had sufficient memory to FUNCTION as a smartphone.

    10MB available on the 650 ought to work out great for YEARS for everyone (except the oft-quoted "3 percent" of insane power-users). Of course, they are not worthy to be heard from, because the Treo 650 has a beautiful screen AND bluetooth- what else could anyone POSSIBLY expect in an upgrade?

    By the way, the scientifically arrived-at "3 percent of people who will EVER have memory problems with the 650" is never to be questioned. The evidence for this is probably as airtight as the existence of WMD's in Iraq.
    Treo 755s in good condition available on ebay for $50-$75. No need to pay for insurance or buy a Pre.
  8. #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by treosixoo
    GFUNK is this your alias?

    No, his patent on this avatar expired, so I'm now producing generic copies for sale. Treocentral would be a MUCH better site if everyone here used this avatar. Would you like to buy one?

  9. #29  
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnJ80
    "NAND uses its own File system that Palm is accessing"

    No. This is incorrect. The NAND does not have a file system... It is only a NAND FLASH Chip and it has 512 byte sectors. The file system on the 650 just simplistically uses the 512byte sector size as a record size. That is a software issue and can be changed.

    Palm can fix this by fiddling with their file system and use a method that manages the empty space in non-full sectors better. It is possible, doable and not new technology (been done before on lots of systems). That all being said, you have to test it carefully since file systems that are not reliable cause data loss and that would be a really big problem (worse than the current one).

    So, yes - the sector size is a function of the hardware and will not being changed. But, No - it is not impossible to change it. How the software uses this sector size is changeable and can cure much of the problem.

    So, I think we should see a firmware fix in 3-6 months (maybe sooner if they anticipated this). I'm betting it is a big priority for the software guys right now. The time for the fix is probably the shortest, it is the QA that is going to take the time. (been there, done that, got the T-shirt....).

    J

    Think of M-Systems' TrueFFS as a driver that sits between PalmOS and the NAND Flash chip, governing how data is moved around. TrueFFS uses the FAT system, ships with FAT-16, but can use other file systems. Significantly optimizing the 512 byte paging of the chip is a job that I don't believe anyone should expect Palm to be able to accomplish.

    If driver or chip speed can be increased, M-Systems could potentially start using smaller pages without degrading access speed. Other potential software solutions are kludges not wotrh the downside.

    NAND Flash and penny pinching (32 MB? Get serious!) have come back to bite Palm in the a$$.
  10. #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by Joad
    By the way, the scientifically arrived-at "3 percent of people who will EVER have memory problems with the 650" is never to be questioned. The evidence for this is probably as airtight as the existence of WMD's in Iraq.
    Giggle - ya noticed that, eh?

    Lol!
  11. #31  
    Quote Originally Posted by The Zen of Palm
    Significantly optimizing the 512 byte paging of the chip is a job that I don't believe anyone should expect Palm to be able to accomplish.
    What do you base that on?
  12. #32  
    Quote Originally Posted by johnski1969
    yeah..adequate mem out of box..keep telling yourself that in 6 mos as you add more programs & databases & then you can't load pages on the browser because you don't have enogh mem to allocate to blazer. justify the $600 "upgrade" to the 650 all u want if it makes u feel better.. but for me.. the good doesn't out way the bad for that kind of money...especially when my t600 still meets my needs. I just can't see spending another $600 bucks when I can see what I need just fine...and already have wireless headset w/dongle. believe me.. I love the latest & greatest new toy as much as the next guy..but occasionally we should realistically weigh the cost to perceived (not necessarily must have) upgrade...especially with the memory downgrade being what it is.
    While I am generally very satisfied with the 650 (and have owned a 600), I was surprised that even the small number of applications I transferred over left me almost no memory. I read one write up that basically said to plan on using 1/3 additionaly space by comparison to what it took on 600. That was the truth! Where I usually had about 9MB free, I had to actually remove some things just to get up to about 3-5MB free. I didn't even consider myself as much of a power user as most on this board, but this was a surprise. I still love the phone and hope some fix comes down the pike.

    Does anyone at least have info on this 128MB card that is supposed to be offered? Or is that a hoax?

    Thanks,
    Eric
  13. #33  
    Quote Originally Posted by anastrophe
    speaking of this, i take it there's no way to have blazer keep it's cache in external SD memory, is there? man, that woudl be sweet. i'm a big believer in huge browser caches.
    No, nor stored pages. I use a lot of stored query pages to speed up getting things like stock quotes, maps, directions; movie, train, and plane schedules; and google searches. Nor can you store Snappermail folders on the memory card. Rarely does a day go by that I do not have to flush cache or folders. Rarely does a day go by that I do not get a "page cannot be loaded; insufficient memory message. A 650 is simply not a viable option for me.
  14. #34  
    Quote Originally Posted by kirkeric
    ....Does anyone at least have info on this 128MB card that is supposed to be offered? Or is that a hoax?

    Thanks,
    Eric
    It is not a hoax but it is a joke. Last week one could buy a 1G card for $40 after mail-in rebate. Even a free 128M could not compete for the slot; they would still have to pay me. There is only one card slot. One can juggle lots of little cards but I prefer one big one.
  15. #35  
    NAND FLASH chips are a market that is currently dominated by Samsung Semiconductor with about 70% market share. Also in this is Toshiba with a much smaller market share. FLASH prices are currently dropping as other players (like Hynix, Micron etc..) are entering now with new parts. However, even after all of these guys show up, it is almost a certainty that Samsung will still be the dominant player.

    Never heard of M-systems as a chip provider and I am involved in this industry (for 25 years) - at least they are not a major player in the component business. Hard to believe they are a player unless they are willing to put up a $3.2B fab. From looking at their web site (http://www.m-sys.com) is apparent that they are involved in the FLASH DISK business which is to create storage devices based on a FLASH semiconducter array that LOOKs like a disk. They would be, in my estimation, consumers of FLASH components but I could be wrong. I don't know anything about them but what I've seen on the website above.

    The device that is being used in the TREO 650 is most likely

    http://www.samsung.com/Products/Semi...K9F5608Q0C.htm

    Or another 256Mb (32Mx8 or 16Mx16) device on the parent page for this device (go back one level) which offers a sector size of 512 or 1024 bits (depending on the data width, x8 or x16). There is NO file system inherent on these chips, they are simply hardware that lends itself to a file system with a native sector size matching that of the component. How Palm has chosen to interface to this is to make their record size the same size as the sector size designed into the hardware of the device.

    I truly would be shocked if a high percentage of the 650s are not being shipped with Samsung devices in them - they are currently that dominant in that market.

    So, to fix this, they (Palm) need to rewrite the portion of their OS that manages the data back and forth to the device with some manner of keeping track of which record is in which sector and so on. Not all that big of a deal and problem that has been solved many times in the past with hard disks (similar issues with sector size etc...). So, I expect that since Palm has already said they would patch the ROM, they are at work on it, they know exactly what they are going to do to make it work, and they are working on it. The biggest issue will be testing the code to make sure that they are not going to cause any data loss through a coding error. That sort of testing is complex and will take a bit of time compared to the coding itself.

    To answer another question - you probably would not want to run your Blazer cache out of NAND FLASH. While you could shuffle that data back and forth to DRAM and all that, it would be painfully slow given the read and write times of NAND FLASH (read is much, much, much faster than write; nanoseconds for read vs micro to milliseconds for for a write).

    NAND FLASH is the component of choice for large volumes of data storage. These devices find application primarily in the handheld business for cell phones, GPS map storage, MP3 storage, and digital cameras. This is exactly the device you would use for this application.

    The other kind of FLASH is NOR FLASH. This can be used for program strorage and you can run directly out of it as if it were a ROM. This is often the device that you would see in a device that has to be upgraded - consider as write once or a few times and read many times. In point of fact, the ROM of the TREO may be a NOR FLASH although often, now, the OS is kept in a NAND FLASH and 'booted' into memory (DRAM) from were it is run. Either strategy works.

    So, before we all get revved up about whether or not Palm is going to, can or will do this upgrade. The fact is, it is technically feasible, relatively straightforward and therefore possible. As long as they announced it, I would expect that they are already deep into the coding to get this done. Unless they started before the retail release of the product (and they will never tell - nor would I if in their place), I would expect this in about a quarter at the earliest. Sooner would be a bonus.

    J
  16. #36  
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnJ80
    [SNIP]

    J
    A 1 minute Google would have answered your questions about M-Systems
  17. #37  
    Quote Originally Posted by The Zen of Palm
    No, his patent on this avatar expired, so I'm now producing generic copies for sale. Treocentral would be a MUCH better site if everyone here used this avatar. Would you like to buy one?


    Oh, how original you are?! Let me ask you again (as you seem to be ignoring my pm's to you), do you have some sort of self-esteem issue or is this basically b/c you have no imagination or personality of your own? I would guess probably the latter... At first I thought this was a type of mimicry which in normal cicumstances is no big deal. But alas, I think your intention is more or mockery than mimicry and thus I think you are nothing more than a friggin troll...
    _________________
    aka Gfunkmagic

    Current device: Palm Pre
    Device graveyard: Palm Vx, Cassiopeia E100, LG Phenom HPC, Palm M515, Treo 300, Treo 600, Treo 650, Treo 700p, Axim X50v, Treo 800w



    Please don't PM me about my avatar. For more info go here.

    Restore your Pre to factory settings using webos doctor and follow these instructions
  18. #38  
    Quote Originally Posted by The Zen of Palm
    No, his patent on this avatar expired, so I'm now producing generic copies for sale. Treocentral would be a MUCH better site if everyone here used this avatar. Would you like to buy one?

    Dude, don't steal the man's avatar. It confuses forum readers as to who is posting what AND it's just not cool. Don't be a ****.
  19. #39  
    If the whole point of the Flash chip was to allow switching batteries and making sure your data is never lost because of a low battery wouldn't they have been better off keeping it in RAM (ala 600) and do a pure copy to flash when:
    1. Battery is very low
    2. User opens the case to replace battery.

    (or as others have mentioned have a small backup battery)

    Seems like everyone is paying a big speed penalty and mem size penalty for something that doesn't happen very often to many people. How many people using the 600 ran it down so low it forgot everything? It's nice to have the new feature but I'm not sure it was dealt with in the best way for this type of application.
    Everyone suffers all the time to solve a special case.
  20. #40  
    If you have too many contacts, appointments, to do's, photos, apps, voice recordings, documents, emails, attachements, or cache pages you may be out of luck with the 650. Then again, that replaceable battery should come in handy for you non "power users." I'm not sure when, however.
    Last edited by JTREOB; 11/29/2004 at 09:33 PM.
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions