Results 1 to 2 of 2
  1.    #1  
    So I am from Canada, a land that never saw the Pixi see the light of day.

    While ordering a Veer on ebay, I decided to bid on a brand new AT&T Pixi Plus for $80 with a touchstone and touchstone back.

    I pimped it out and now sold it to my cousin, who is 19 and LOVES it.

    I have come to the conclusion that this device could have been amazingly popular, but it was failed in so many respects.

    The concept of the Pixi is amazing, it has the candy bar format that many Blackberry users love, with slick styling and a touchscreen and intuitive and clean OS that has flavours of the "iphone" ideology written all over it.

    This device could have been a huge seller just from the concept alone, Blackberry meets iOS, but failed due to many aspects I am now discovering.

    What failed this device? In order of most to least importance:

    -No wifi on Sprint model. What the hell were they thinking? Really? This is marketed as a "introductory affordable smartphone": no one wants a cheap phone with a huge expensive data plan. This killed the initial reception of the phone, which never recovered with the Plus models. The tech industry is unforgiving as consumers do not understand the technology they are dealing with. They tend to grasp simple concepts, but have trouble being updated on new updates. Once no wifi, never no wifi. Its hard to change the initial reception of a tech device with the general public.

    -Power. This device is severely underpowered. Palm should have given this thing the same guts as the Pre, no question. The plus model should have had 512mb of Ram, and a 3MP camera, and 16 gigs of storage. Why? North America is the land of subsidised phone contracts. No one cares to pay a little more for a device when they will get $300 off with a 2 year plan that will cost them $800/year. What is saving $99 on a device that will run like crap for 2 years? I overclocked this device to 800mhz for my cousin and increased the swap size and only now is it somewhat acceptable in performance. This should have been an "alternative form factor to the Pre" and seen as its twin, not a younger, gimped sibling.

    -Marketing. I am specifically talking about the name Pixi. A complete flub. Anyone in tech marketing will tell you that devices need to be unisex in their gender identity. The Pixi is not a girls phone because of the name. It is a girl phone. Literally audiences see the phone as having a female gender identity, which to be honest, does not strike too well with female audiences. Technology is scary to the general public, so they like to personify their devices. That is why people name their cars etc. Many people see a smartphone as a companion rather than an extension of their own self. The name Pixi gives the phone an identity of a cross dressing midget.

    -Advertising. Palm was in a position of being the underdog, and there is no shame in looking up to your peers. This device should have been advertised as a combination of a Blackberry and iphone, the best of both worlds. There is no shame in admitting you are attempting to stand on the shoulders of giants.

    -Apps. While webOS scales mojo apps effortlessly onto the Pixi, PDK games are another story. This comes down to hardware and one of my biggest suggestions that is so simple its laughable:

    Palm should have made the screen 320x480 and used a "virtual" gesture area. Basically use the same sized screen as the Pre, but have no gesture area. Then, have a virtual black bar on screen that appears during normal operation. During gameplay with PDK apps, watching a Video, or playing a Youtube movie, the black bar would slide away to reveal a full sized screen. The gesture area is unused real estate during these moments anyways.

    An Arm6 processor only made things worse for developers in terms of fragmentation between the Pre and the Pixi, completely rendering useless the concept that "one mojo app scales anywhere".

    So there you have it. This device could have been a nice niche for those who wanted the form factor of a Blackberry Bold, with the styling and power of an iphone, but Palm failed to see this and missed the mark in several areas.
  2. libray's Avatar
    Posts
    195 Posts
    Global Posts
    204 Global Posts
    #2  
    Quote Originally Posted by rmausser View Post
    So I am from Canada, a land that never saw the Pixi see the light of day.
    Be very glad the option was not there


    What failed this device? In order of most to least importance:

    -No wifi on Sprint model. What the hell were they thinking? Really?
    As a Sprint user, I agree that the initial adopters were missing out. However, Sprint has the cheapest conduit to unlimited mobile access than any other US provider. I recently added wifi to my Pixi, and while it is great, I recall always using 3G and not caring about wifi.

    -Power. This device is severely underpowered.
    No question.

    -Marketing. I am specifically talking about the name Pixi. A complete flub.
    No question. I called it the P120 (model number) sometimes instead of Pixi

    -Advertising. Palm was in a position of being the underdog, and there is no shame in looking up to your peers. This device should have been advertised as a combination of a Blackberry and iphone, the best of both worlds. There is no shame in admitting you are attempting to stand on the shoulders of giants.
    I must disagree here. Palm had a fine following of users who used the Treo form factor. It was a no-bones, stylus based PDA smartphone pioneer. There was no need to say that Palm was using anyone else's ideas. The Treo had the touchscreen already from the Palm PDAs, you just used the stylus. The Treo had a nice useable keyboard. When the sliding Pre was released, I skipped that entirely and was somewhat pacified with the Pixi. It was more powerful than the Treo in most respects.

    But Palm questionably dropped the Treo.

    The Pixi should have been a bit more powerful and marketed as the Treo.


    -Apps. While webOS scales mojo apps effortlessly onto the Pixi, PDK games are another story.
    So there you have it. This device could have been a nice niche for those who wanted the form factor of a Blackberry Bold, with the styling and power of an iphone, but Palm failed to see this and missed the mark in several areas.

    One more thing to add. I recall the early days of the iPhone and I'm thinking that it did not have EAS support. Palm broke the mold at the time that in order to get corporate email on a phone, you needed either BES on Blackberry or EAS on a Windows CE/Mobile phone. There were options to buy 3 party synching products like syncml and others, but Palm was giving away EAS on WebOS for free.
    Palm III -> Treo 90 -> Treo 650 -> Motorola Q -> Treo 755p -> Pixi -> Sprint FrankenPixi+ -> Blackberry Bold 9930

Posting Permissions