Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 LastLast
Results 141 to 160 of 217
  1. #141  
    Quote Originally Posted by Smartfah View Post
    I'm sure HP/Palm will announce their onslaught of new webOS Phones, Tablets, Watches & Toasters at CES 2011.
    You don't think HP will host their own event? That's one of the new rules of marketing
  2. drexaljim's Avatar
    Posts
    67 Posts
    Global Posts
    69 Global Posts
    #142  
    look close at the mobifrance pics you can see a mini hdmi port on bottom of phone
  3. #143  
    <<Threads Merged>>
    Sprint|Samsung Epic
  4. JJCook's Avatar
    Posts
    191 Posts
    Global Posts
    205 Global Posts
    #144  
    I agree that this is the first of several new form factors running WebOS. I don't think we need to be upset that this is the only new smartphone platform on WebOS.
  5. #145  
    Am I correct?

    it seems many pre(plus) user complaint about the battery life .....
  6. #146  
    more efficient cpu, enabling gpu, etc... Should help.
  7. #147  
    Quote Originally Posted by UntidyGuy View Post
    I still haven't seen any evidence that HP is interested in competing in the high-end smartphone market. They will have smartphones - the Pre and Pixi lines. They will update them to be competitive in the mid-range market - Pre 2. They do want to offer a line of smartphones to enterprise customers. They are most definitely coming out with a webOS tablet. All of this makes sense.

    What doesn't really make sense, to me, is for HP to invest heavily in the R&D, platform extras, etc. to enter the crowded high-end consumer smartphone market. By enter I mean that they are starting from 0% mind share. Mark Hurd was saying something definitive when he said that HP didn't buy Palm to get into the smartphone market. He even said something to the effect that people don't seem to believe him when he says it - "it doesn't resonate".
    I think you may be correct. But it still doesn't make a ton of sense.

    Now we can debate if there is indeed a mid-range market. Because i don't get it. Even "mid range" android phones or older iphones have almost full access to their respective ecosystems. All smartphones require the same costly monthly plans.

    So say i am interested in getting a phone with low res, and not the highest end specs, why get one with a company that isn't investing in the platform extras?

    All this to save 50 bucks on the phone itself? Even the high end androids are being sold on discounts. Where's the mid-range at?

    Perhaps HP is simply thinking enterprise. That would seem to be an even tougher task to me. Relatively new OS, not the quickest, etc. RIM dominates there, Apple is making progress, and WP7 integrates Office.
  8. #148  
    And hints that Mojo Massage service might be a go too. PUSH NOTIFICATIONS

    Sprint Pre- Meta-Doctor 2.1.0 w/Flash

    Everything is Amazing & Nobody is Happy, "People with their mobile phones, "uh... oh... it won't..."... GIVE IT A SECOND... IT'S GOING TO SPACE!" Louis C.K.
  9. #149  
    <<Threads Merged>>
    Sprint|Samsung Epic
  10. #150  
    and if they change the battery, everyone will accuse palm of trying to screw loyal users by forcing them to buy new accessories.
  11. #151  
    Quote Originally Posted by UntidyGuy View Post
    I still haven't seen any evidence that HP is interested in competing in the high-end smartphone market. They will have smartphones - the Pre and Pixi lines. They will update them to be competitive in the mid-range market - Pre 2. They do want to offer a line of smartphones to enterprise customers. They are most definitely coming out with a webOS tablet. All of this makes sense.

    What doesn't really make sense, to me, is for HP to invest heavily in the R&D, platform extras, etc. to enter the crowded high-end consumer smartphone market. By enter I mean that they are starting from 0% mind share. Mark Hurd was saying something definitive when he said that HP didn't buy Palm to get into the smartphone market. He even said something to the effect that people don't seem to believe him when he says it - "but it doesn't seem to resonate".
    i think that apple probably thought the same thing... but its where the money is... follow the "double Rainbow"
  12. estockda's Avatar
    Posts
    84 Posts
    Global Posts
    97 Global Posts
    #152  
    Quote Originally Posted by Cantaffordit View Post
    more efficient cpu, enabling gpu, etc... Should help.
    How would enabling the GPU save battery life? Seems to me it'd cost more having two processors active rather than just one.


    As Butters3605's mentions, it looks like a push API will be available in webOS 2.0. I think this will do more for battery life than anything (including a more efficient CPU in the Pre 2).

    Correct me if I'm wrong but the biggest drain on the current Pre's battery is the radio. If we can limit our radio usage using push instead of polling for things like email, gchat, facebook, rss, etc., we'll have a battery that lasts a full day, and dare I say, competes with BlackBerry smartphones on battery-life. BB's BIS/BES servers handle their push and this is how they limit the radio usage.

    Note: I know email has push email via IMAP IDLE but this still requires a NOOP command every 15 minutes or so to keep the connection alive.

    This leads me to the topic of the Pre Plus o/c'd to 1GHz VS Pre 2 stock...
    Unless I'm on a 4-hour Angry Birds binge, I'll bet the battery life under webOS 2.0 is similar.

    Since I'm on a Sprint Pre, I'll probably want to upgrade for the extra RAM. This is all speculation for now, but for those on Verizon and AT&T with overclocked kernels, do you think it's worth the hardware upgrade once we get webOS 2.0?
  13. joe1blue's Avatar
    Posts
    33 Posts
    Global Posts
    70 Global Posts
    #153  
    Quote Originally Posted by UntidyGuy View Post
    The Pre 2 is a competitive match for the Pre 1
    +100
  14. #154  
    Quote Originally Posted by UntidyGuy View Post
    Cardfan:

    I think the ecosystem that HP/Palm has right now is probably mid-range in terms of apps and services. Ramping up that ecosystem to what the high-end smartphone user would expect would mean things like immediate access to all of the top 20 or whatever apps, video chat, Skype-like services, and all of whatever Facebook and Google are coming up with each month. A year or two later, all of these services eventually fall into the mid-range category but they are high-end when they are new.

    Also, the R&D required to produce high-end hardware is probably considerable. Remember when Mark Hurd said that the technology required to create a smartphone wasn't that complicated? I think he was talking about a mid-range device, not something like the iPhone 4 or the top-of-the-line hardware from Motorola or HTC.

    Palm never had the capital to invest in this kind of hardware innnovation. Now, HP/Palm doesn't have the scale. By that, I mean the number of devices that they can expect to spread the cost of the innovation over. Apple can spread its cost of hardware innovation over 50-80 million devices a year depending on how you count it - i.e. retina display. Are we to believe that HP will spend that kind of money to potentially sell 5 or 6 million high-end smartphones and tablets? Even if they spent only half of what Apple does on mobile hardware innovation, they would get killed on the per-unit-sold cost of the effort.

    It makes a lot more sense for HP to let Palm build on what it has and stay with the mid-range phones.
    If HP isn't willing to spend that kind of money, then perhaps they shouldn't try at all? Why acquire Palm? Certainly it wasn't strictly for IP because HP isn't even trying with android or WP7.

    C'mon, LG, HTC, Dell, etc all put together high end devices for WP7. Are you saying HP isn't willing to do this?

    I know you think the pad market if where HP is targeting but that's still webOS which still needs the apps and ecosystem as well.
  15. #155  
    Quote Originally Posted by jlcamp7 View Post
    Woohoo, good idea sketch. I think every time a complaint shows up anywhere regarding the Pre 2 it should just automatically be moved to this thread.
    Quote Originally Posted by ryleyinstl View Post
    <<Threads Merged>>
    Quote Originally Posted by ryleyinstl View Post
    <<Threads Merged>>
    Quote Originally Posted by ryleyinstl View Post
    <<Threads Merged>>

    just wanted to say... Great Job ryleyinstl !!!

    have a beer

    now as the P|C overlords would say

    Back to work!!!
  16. #156  
    The current Pre/ Pre+ is inadequate even for any version webOS. That's why we are overclocking, turning off logging, and devising ever convoluted ways to stretch out our batteries. Palm would be stupid not to rectify this situation b/f bringing out OS ver 2.0
  17. #157  
    ...i think this is more or less what's up...it also utilizes exsiting parts on-hand and doesn't require alot of input from HP....
    -- VZW Pre+ -- Uberk/Gov fixed @ 1ghz -- QPST gps mod -- stock battery (?mugen 3800?) --
  18. #158  
    Quote Originally Posted by luau joe View Post
    The current Pre/ Pre+ is inadequate even for any version webOS. That's why we are overclocking, turning off logging, and devising ever convoluted ways to stretch out our batteries. Palm would be stupid not to rectify this situation b/f bringing out OS ver 2.0
    .... the pre+ is adequate, only poorly configured out of the box...
    -- VZW Pre+ -- Uberk/Gov fixed @ 1ghz -- QPST gps mod -- stock battery (?mugen 3800?) --
  19. ericUT's Avatar
    Posts
    71 Posts
    Global Posts
    228 Global Posts
    #159  
    I have a theory that could legitimately justify why Palm/HP has decided to release a spec bumped Pre 2.

    I think it's safe to assume that Palm has been testing WebOS 2.0 on the original Pre and Pre Plus. What if we assume that neither device meets the expectations of Palm in terms of performance on WebOS 2.0? Then the spec-bumped Pre 2 makes sense. Inevitably if Palm announces that there will be no WebOS 2.0 upgrade on the original Palm Pre, there will be riots on the streets. Palm's answer? Let's release a new phone that will satisfy original Pre owners who want 2.0 but are happy with the existing size and form factor and we'll price it reasonably at $99 so it's not much of a stretch for existing owners to upgrade. After all, how many of us have seen posts from other PC members who do not want a bump in screen size and are happy with the existing form factor? For those who want something more, we'll release a slab superphone with a larger screen, 4g, etc... around the $199 mark. In addition, let's release a phone in the same style as the Pixi, but with specs strong enough to run WebOS 2.0 (512 RAM, 800 MHz, etc...) but entry-level priced at $49.

    If you think about it, it's a great way for Palm to compromise with its user base. They understand we love our phone but they also understand we'll be more peeved off if they give us an OS that runs poorly on our phones (a la iOS 4 on any 2nd gen iDevice). I think this would be a great way for Palm to handle the WebOS 2.0 transition.
    Sprint Technical Consultant
    BSE Electrical Engineering
    --
    Palm Pre - WebOS 1.4.5 - UberKernal 500/1000 Screenstate
    RIM Blackberry Bold 9650 - OS 5.0.0.975/6.0.0.280
  20. #160  
    <<Thread Merged>>
    Sprint|Samsung Epic
Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions