Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 99
  1. #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by Boobookins
    I tend to disagree with you on this point. You seem to treat this as Mossberg letting the cat of the bag when it comes the memory issue, but Mossberg actually ends up explaining that the memory issue isn't a big issue and shouldn't stop most people from purchasing a 650. The fact that he's addressing it as reader question indicates that the cat was already out of the bag. I think the net effect for P1 and 650 sales will be positive.

    Had he not written this people may have shy'd away based on what they'd heard, whereas now they're more likely to be reassured by this trusted source telling them that 650 is a perfectly useful product.

    Bad press would have been him ranting about how he couldn't fit all his contacts and was forced to switch the blackberry 7100r or something.
    I'm also reading between the lines...I've been reading Mossberg's stuff for years. While he's doing a shield of P1 (to keep the love coming), but also says, if he knew this when he reviewed a couple month back (which means he didn't do a thorough review, by the way....think about it), he would have told people to stay away (until fixed, which will be in 2005 (maybe)).

    20/20 hindsight says avoid. WSJ readers see that.
    Idle chatter in the biz set says "oh, I heard there where memory problems"...leading to "well, I will wait, or buy something else; not going to drop $600 bucks for something like that".

    I guess we will see.
  2. #22  
    The memory issue is overshadowing all of the good things about the 650.

    The screen isn't the story, the keyboard isn't the story, the bluetooth isn't the story ... the story that everyone has heard at least once about the 650, is the lack of memory. Heck, it even garnered a stoy on Slashdot.

    What a PRPRPR $nightmare$.

    If they had spent $20/unit and throw 64 or 128 of memory into it, the story would be the screen, the keyboard, the bluetooth, and the huge amount of memory.

    Why??!!!!

    Man, i'm not a marketing person by any stretch, but I really could have seen this coming from about 10 1/2 miles away?

    Penny-wise, pound-stupid.

    When your nearest competitor is starting to ship with 128MB of RAM (~110MB effective), you can't give people an effective 15MB or so (depending on configuration).
  3. #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by alee
    He only recommends power-users hold off
    Who do you think buys the majority of the $600 smart phones out there?
  4. #24  
    Quote Originally Posted by Rome
    "On my new Treo 650, which I bought last week..."

    This is the most important part of his reply, as far as I am concerned. He actually spent his own money and bought a Treo 650 for himself. This is the best endorsement you can get from a reviewer.
    Not to point out the blatantly obvious, but if you think that Mossberg does not have an expense account for such things, and shells out his own personal money for the gadgets that he reviews for WSJ, etc ... then I have a slightly-used, but very beautiful bridge to sell you that spans the East River.
  5. #25  
    Quote Originally Posted by KRamsauer
    If this is market moving news, people need to pay for attention to TC. They can make a killing. :-)
    You DO know why ==I== read this site, right?...

    Giggle.
  6. #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by CAMike
    I would have to agree. He did his review last month and still purchased one for himself last week. That tells me that even with its known shortcomings, Mossberg felt that the 650 was worth his money. He specifically states that he bought it, so I'm assuming PalmOne didn't comp him one.
    Oy. There's actually more than one of you (yes, I am suprised).

    Well, don't despair.

    There is a bridge slightly north of the one that I sold to the previous guy that I can sell to you. It's not as well known, but it has really cool subway tracks running down the middle.

    Mossberg wanted to buy it with his own money, but you know what, you seem more honest.

    Email for paypal info.
  7. #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by SeldomVisitor
    You DO know why ==I== read this site, right?...

    Giggle.
    Care to clue us in? People has suspected a few things, but it's always nice to not make assumptions.
  8. #28  
    I agree with those of you who view Mossberg's words as a positive, not negative, for P1. either Mossberg is totally clueless about the memory implications because he isn't really knowledgable about the Treo's potential, or someone is getting paid something behind the scenes to get a sugar coated assessment from Mossberg. Only one of those two things could explain Mossberg's characterization of the memory problem as one affecting only "some users." Too bad the Moss man didn't get out accurate info to the pubilc on this one.
  9. #29  
    Quote Originally Posted by KRamsauer
    If this is market moving news, people need to pay for attention to TC. They can make a killing. :-)
    There's little doubt that TC is considered a blog board for the Treo line and P1. Perhaps #1.

    Regardless, P1 can turn this thing around if they move to a 128 or greater and put all doubt, discussion and second guessing to rest. A simple rom fix will not due. The 32 stigma will remain an issue as it was before the fat memory problem even surfaced.

    This is a horrific first step for P1 with their Treo line. What's very concerning to investors is that it's a step P1 can ill afford.

    Do it fast P1 and make it right. Remove the stigma and step up to a 128 or your first offical Treo release may be your last.
    Last edited by JTREOB; 12/02/2004 at 08:57 AM.
  10. #30  
    no offense..but it bothex
  11. #31  
    Quote Originally Posted by finkkatz
    I agree with those of you who view Mossberg's words as a positive, not negative, for P1. either Mossberg is totally clueless about the memory implications because he isn't really knowledgable about the Treo's potential, or someone is getting paid something behind the scenes to get a sugar coated assessment from Mossberg. Only one of those two things could explain Mossberg's characterization of the memory problem as one affecting only "some users." Too bad the Moss man didn't get out accurate info to the pubilc on this one.
    I don't know about any grand conspiracies, but I think the bottom line is this:

    The Treo 650 would be THE SMARTPHONE TO BEAT if they threw in 128Mb of NVRAM. Period.

    Glowing reviews, glowing press, geek accolades, and it would cost what .... $20? $30? $40? per unit.

    None of the above is going to break a $600 phone purchase.

    If they are going to give away the 128Mb SD cards for free, invest that money into the internal phone memory!

    All this goes away, and you have the #1 device on the market.

    It's so simple, it's beautiful.

    Of course, now ... now they have a manufacturer and an assemblyline in place, and the cost to stop that and restart a new one will probably be to expensive to consider. So more internal memory just isn't coming until the next phone release. Maybe a ROM upgrade will give back the whole 23Mb, but I don't think any more physical memory will be put in there.

    The Lesson? It's much, much cheaper to get it right the first time.

    Oh, and wake up the R&D guys next time before you roll out the product.
  12. #32  
    Quote Originally Posted by GoodNamesRTaken
    Who do you think buys the majority of the $600 smart phones out there?
    Absolutely NOT power users. Most people I know that have the Treo don't use it to anywhere near its full extent and have plenty of RAM left. I think it's unrealistic bordering on delusional to think that even a majority of the users of the Treo were power users.
  13. #33  
    People who spend $600+ for a cellphone with a few extra features are either rich or power users.
  14. #34  
    Quote Originally Posted by johnski1969
    no offense..but it bothex
    Luv them TREO 600 discos...
  15. #35  
    As I stated look for all fixs within 90 days.

    The problem announcing a memory increase now is that it will shut down virtually all 650 sales with 32. That is why P1 is talking a rom fix and not a memory increase at this stage.
    I would look for a short term rom fix very soon and a memory increase to follow. Any way you look at it, this going to hurt P1. My advise to them, write the quarter off and start thinking longer term. You put 128 or higher into the Treo and most will be forgotten, forgiven and this device will surface as the one to beat.

    Oh! Don't forget to axe the r and d team and market research firm as well.
    Last edited by JTREOB; 12/02/2004 at 09:25 AM.
  16. #36  
    Poor kookums - it's way obvious that you are ignoring me.

    Giggle.
  17. #37  
    Quote Originally Posted by skfny
    Absolutely NOT power users. Most people I know that have the Treo don't use it to anywhere near its full extent and have plenty of RAM left. I think it's unrealistic bordering on delusional to think that even a majority of the users of the Treo were power users.

    Who the hell going to plop down 600$ on the Treo with the risk that they might be a "power user". This is unacceptable any way you stretch it.

    By the way, P1 can ill afford to avoid or give up the so called "power user". Like all memory devices, there needs to be room for application growth and this device doesn't have it. It should never have to come down to deleting one application in favor of another. No device compay in its right mind would suggest such. But here we have P1 doing just that. It is inexcusable and idiotic for them seperate out their users as they have.

    Again, no one is going to plop the 600$ down with the hope that they aren't a power user today and never will be.

    The device needs a 128 fix and nothing less.
  18. #38  
    Quote Originally Posted by finkkatz
    I agree with those of you who view Mossberg's words as a positive, not negative, for P1. either Mossberg is totally clueless about the memory implications because he isn't really knowledgable about the Treo's potential, or someone is getting paid something behind the scenes to get a sugar coated assessment from Mossberg. Only one of those two things could explain Mossberg's characterization of the memory problem as one affecting only "some users." Too bad the Moss man didn't get out accurate info to the pubilc on this one.
    Of course, the third option that Mossberg says what he means and means what he says is impossible, right? The only possibilities are that it has to be a conspiracy or stupidity if he doesn't agree with your view of the 650, right? Well, the memory problem doesn't affect me to any great degree, so I guess "some users" is accurate after all.

    And don't kid yourselves that everyone would think that the Treo 650 would be "the smartphone to beat" if it didn't have the memory issue. The whiners would simply laser in on another problem and rage about that one. No one is happy around here unless they are b1tching about something.

    I have yet to see any major new phone or device released in the last three years that wasn't roasted in the forums. TC, Phonescoop, PDAPhoneHome, Howard's Phone forum, they are all littered with posts on how every new phone is crap. I am beginning to think it's more of a problem with the users and not the devices.
  19. #39  
    Quote Originally Posted by GoodNamesRTaken
    Who do you think buys the majority of the $600 smart phones out there?
    Bingo number two...
  20. #40  
    Quote Originally Posted by JTREOB
    The device needs a 128 fix and nothing less.

    I hate to be the bearer of bad news....but what exactly happens if they dont give you 128? I think you should start planning now. Maybe in the 700, but no 128mb solution before 4th quarter next year.*

    *in my opinion
    ELR
    >> Drop by! <<

    Avatar courtesy of ButtUglyJeff!
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions