Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 120
  1. #61  
    Quote Originally Posted by CGK View Post
    It doesn't - no desktop sync of PIM.

    However it looks like Palm might over a online Palm desktop of some type (with a yearly fee I'm sure...)

    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    its key to me too -- I likely would not consider it if it doesn't.

    In another thread someone speculated that the Pre would do a continuous"cloud" sync to yahoo or Google, and that you could "easily" translate csv data...

    Thats bullshiite to me -- I have thousands of items in my desktop "database" -- alot of which is not consistent in entry location etc.

    It would be near impossible to clean up files to make a clean transition to another database.

    What I have now works for me, and I depend upon it for a multitude of uses.

    If its orphanned, eventually I'll likely leave my Palm home for a google phone.

    (the Pre is a good, but still imperfect work in progress. If the database is abandoned the Pre does not seem to be a compelling enough upgrade to me, especially versus the alternatives and its likely cost.)

    PC Magazine has a good article: Palm Pre: The Top 15 Questions, Answered -- that says that at launch the Pre will be able to transfer desktop data. Lets hope that's true.


    1.) How much will the Pre cost?
    Palm and Sprint haven't set the price yet. But analysts hope it will be $199 or $249 with a two-year contract.

    2.) What will Pre service plans look like?
    The Pre's data plans will be more like the Samsung Instinct's plans than any other Sprint phone model, a Sprint rep said.

    3.) Will other U.S. carriers get the Pre?
    At least 90 days after Sprint does, but maybe as much as 6 months later.

    4.) Will there be other Pre models?
    Yes. There will be different models, in different shapes and sizes. According to a tipster, the next Pre may be a lower-cost, candybar-style phone without a QWERTY keyboard.

    5.) Will there be a GSM Pre?
    Yes. Palm is anticipated to announce a GSM/UMTS model for Europe and Asia in mid-February.

    6.) When will foreign carriers get the Pre?
    Palm expects to address this at a press conference at Mobile World Congress in mid-February.

    7.) How do I get my personal info into the Pre?
    While the Pre won't come with desktop software, there will be solutions for people to get their Palm Desktop or Outlook info, and info from earlier Treo and Centro models, into the Pre.


    8.) Will the Pre run Palm OS apps?
    Not initially, but a third party could write a Palm OS emulator.

    9.) How do you get music and video onto the Pre?
    You can drag and drop it over from your PC using USB mass storage, or buy songs on the device using a built in Amazon MP3 Store client.

    10.) What will the app store look like?
    I saw it; it has a page of featured apps with star ratings below them. It looks a lot like the Apple app store.

    11.) How about the SDK?
    The SDK will be called Mojo, and will have APIs to extend Javascript to access hardware features of the device, Palm reps said. There are things you won't be able to do in the 1.0 SDK, like write directly to the frame buffer. But you'll be able to access all the core phone databases...
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  2. cgk
    cgk is offline
    cgk's Avatar
    Posts
    3,868 Posts
    Global Posts
    9,427 Global Posts
    #62  
    While the Pre won't come with desktop software, there will be solutions for people to get their Palm Desktop or Outlook info, and info from earlier Treo and Centro models, into the Pre.


    And I'll bet my dollars on that solution being getting the information into the cloud, not directly onto the device.
  3. cgk
    cgk is offline
    cgk's Avatar
    Posts
    3,868 Posts
    Global Posts
    9,427 Global Posts
    #63  
    Quote Originally Posted by bhtooefr View Post
    But, this is a bit different analogy.

    This is like buying a Prius, and being told that you have to run a custom fuel for it that isn't available from anywhere but Toyota dealers, and you can't use gasoline, which you've been using for years, and you even have a bunch of gas cards that someone gave you for Christmas, that you can't use.

    (And, FWIW, my early 1990's car, a 1992 Mazda Miata, has the same EPA fuel economy rating as a 2009 Miata, yet runs on regular instead of premium. Oh, and it handles better than the 2009 (which is the whole point of the car - the 2009 is heavier, so...) and is much, much easier to work on. And, of course, I don't have a car payment at all.)
    No the better example is buying a blu-ray player and then whining that sony had let you down because it didn't play cassettes.
  4. #64  
    Its like windows 3.1 to 98, it takes some time to transition, people were moaning about it when it happened, but look at it now..!!
    Last edited by princealyy; 01/10/2009 at 01:13 PM. Reason: spelling error
  5. #65  
    Quote Originally Posted by nathanb131 View Post
    Good post Solar, cool name; reminds me of old school pro wresling.

    As for mobihand's current top five:

    USB Modem: I'm pretty sure I saw on Pre specs or description that it will be able to be used as a modem out of the box.
    CallRecord: I absolutely love this program but I'm concerned we won't see something like this on the Pre for a while because programs won't have access to low-level functions? Please tell me if I'm wrong but isn't this exactly the type of thing that was easy to do with Garnet because of how open the OS/phone are?
    Touch Launcher: Is this the type of program that Rubenstein and gang looked at to see how we wanted to use our device and built that idea into the core of how the Pre works? Way to react to what people need, not tell them what they need...unlike the fruit people.
    Butler: Another great example of the ability to tweak core hardware functions. One of the very best reasons to own a Treo; total customization possibilities. On one hand I'm sure the Pre will be slicker out of the box so we won't feel the need to tweak as much, but if we want to will we have that ability through 3rd party aps? Early indications are that they will lock down those core functions from new apps?
    Softkick Audio Gateway: I don't know what this is. Audio streaming over a network? If that's the case then the Pre should revolutionize that type of thing.

    As for the PIM-type apps, my favorite programs are available on the different platforms already. It's not like Garnet has any special ability to run something that WM/blackberry can't when it comes to Bonsai, ListPro, eWallet, clocks, calculators, diet/exercise trackers, etc. I can't think of any program I have that won't be very nicely updated into WebOS.

    It's the intregration with the core PIM (like Bonsai can talk to Palm tasks) and the low level phone access (Butler, CallRec) that I'm concerned about. As long as WebOS lets me totally customize my PIM experience instead of making me conform to whatever their default system is I'll be very ecstatic.

    If I can't customize Pre like I can Treo to make it specifically MY device, I will still upgrade but probably always long for the simple Garnet days of making it be whatever I wanted it to be. I'm hoping for all upside and that Palm doesn't forget what it's special sauce used to be.
    I keep thinking about this whole thing.
    I can't imagine a system that would be more customizable than this one.....
  6. #66  
    Quote Originally Posted by Minsc View Post
    Maybe I'm in the minority, but I'm quite glad that webOS is not natively backwards compatible. Though I'd no have problem with someone developing a Garnet emulator, building backwards compatibility into the OS almost always comes at a cost.

    Just look at Windows, probably the single biggest noose around its neck is that Microsoft keeps making new versions compatible with previous versions. If they would just cut the cord once and for all, (like Apple did with OSX) they might have a radical and exciting new platform.
    So wrong that I have to comment. As an Apple user since 1982, Apple DID provide backwards compatability when they made their tectonic shift to OS X. They built the "Classic" environment so that owners of software could continue Mac software use and stay with Mac without having to upgrade all at once. When I had Mac OS 9.2 on my Powerbook 1400 (or g3, can't remember) I was able to move up to OS X without having to buy complete new copies of MS Office X. I was able to wait a couple years. I don't know if the Mac OS Classic qualifies as emulator or built-in feature of OS X 10.0, but it enabled Mac OS 9.2 users to move smoothly to 10.0 (OS X) right away.

    Now look what Palm has done. If they want my business, I'd have to get a Pre. I use probably a dozen medical software apps. Now I'm screwed. Pre has no backwards compatability, so I can't move to it and keep all the medical stuff at my fingertips. That's a game-breaker since I must have the medical software at my fingertips (that's why I'm a Palm OS user). Pre will not have all the software I need at launch, and in fact I'll be surprised if it has much at all for a long time to come. Can I stay with my Treo 680 and Tungsten E2's for a year or two waiting and hoping the Pre webOS medical software apps are written? No, probably not, because why would any current software maker keep their Garnet app offerings current when Garnet has just been killed by Palm?

    Furthermore, they just killed the inexpensive PDA platform, too. Buying a cellphone + 2 year contract is expensive. Buying a Tungsten E2 is relatively cheap. This spring, like last spring, I'll be looking to buy 10 devices and set them up with medical software for our new class of resident physician trainees. What do I buy them? Last year I bought 10 Tungsten E2's. For the price of 10 Tungsten E2's and 10 memory cards, I could buy probably not even 1 iPhone with the damned required contract.

    All Palm had to do to keep my business and that of my organization was make Garnet software usable on webOS. Wouldn't matter if built in to webOS or if a software add-on. Either way, it could have bridged a continued faithful relationship. Now, don't see how this physician's use of Palm can continue.
    -- Josh
  7. #67  
    Quote Originally Posted by steinbej View Post
    So wrong that I have to comment. As an Apple user since 1982, Apple DID provide backwards compatability when they made their tectonic shift to OS X. They built the "Classic" environment so that owners of software could continue Mac software use and stay with Mac without having to upgrade all at once. When I had Mac OS 9.2 on my Powerbook 1400 (or g3, can't remember) I was able to move up to OS X without having to buy complete new copies of MS Office X. I was able to wait a couple years. I don't know if the Mac OS Classic qualifies as emulator or built-in feature of OS X 10.0, but it enabled Mac OS 9.2 users to move smoothly to 10.0 (OS X) right away.

    -- Josh
    The thing is, for some of us that transition was anything but painless. I would much rather cut free all my old palm apps and start over than have all of the compatibility horror I experienced going through the apple transition(s)
    I can't imagine needing to use an important app (PalmOS) and have it flake out the whole system because the emulator/virtualizer can't handle something.
    I guess everyone had different experiences but none of the apple platform shifts were a good time for me. And the shift from DOS/Windows to Windows NT/2000/XP sucked too.
  8. cgk
    cgk is offline
    cgk's Avatar
    Posts
    3,868 Posts
    Global Posts
    9,427 Global Posts
    #68  
    Quote Originally Posted by steinbej View Post

    All Palm had to do to keep my business and that of my organization was make Garnet software usable on webOS. Wouldn't matter if built in to webOS or if a software add-on. Either way, it could have bridged a continued faithful relationship. Now, don't see how this physician's use of Palm can continue.
    -- Josh

    It seems pretty clear to me that this is year zero - everyone starts at the beginning - Palm's attitude seems to be "it was nice you liked our devices in the past but that's the past". As for your specialist need, rightly or wrong, Palm wants to cut the cord with Palm OS, I think that was more about the markets than consumers - "look we've moved on!".

    However, I'm sure someone will try and knock up an emulator.
  9. #69  
    The way the comments are being made about the emulator, I almost wonder if one of their launch partners will be someone developing a Garnet emulator.
  10. cgk
    cgk is offline
    cgk's Avatar
    Posts
    3,868 Posts
    Global Posts
    9,427 Global Posts
    #70  
    Quote Originally Posted by bhtooefr View Post
    The way the comments are being made about the emulator, I almost wonder if one of their launch partners will be someone developing a Garnet emulator.

    I doubt that because all of the words coming out from palm amounted to "em.. sure.. yeah.. someone could knock up an emulator". I see no evidence that palm is interested in that - it wouldn't be "on message".

    From the reactions here, some money to be made by someone...
  11. #71  
    Quote Originally Posted by steinbej View Post
    So wrong that I have to comment. As an Apple user since 1982, Apple DID provide backwards compatability when they made their tectonic shift to OS X. They built the "Classic" environment so that owners of software could continue Mac software use and stay with Mac without having to upgrade all at once. When I had Mac OS 9.2 on my Powerbook 1400 (or g3, can't remember) I was able to move up to OS X without having to buy complete new copies of MS Office X. I was able to wait a couple years. I don't know if the Mac OS Classic qualifies as emulator or built-in feature of OS X 10.0, but it enabled Mac OS 9.2 users to move smoothly to 10.0 (OS X) right away.

    Now look what Palm has done. If they want my business, I'd have to get a Pre. I use probably a dozen medical software apps. Now I'm screwed. Pre has no backwards compatability, so I can't move to it and keep all the medical stuff at my fingertips. That's a game-breaker since I must have the medical software at my fingertips (that's why I'm a Palm OS user). Pre will not have all the software I need at launch, and in fact I'll be surprised if it has much at all for a long time to come. Can I stay with my Treo 680 and Tungsten E2's for a year or two waiting and hoping the Pre webOS medical software apps are written? No, probably not, because why would any current software maker keep their Garnet app offerings current when Garnet has just been killed by Palm?

    Furthermore, they just killed the inexpensive PDA platform, too. Buying a cellphone + 2 year contract is expensive. Buying a Tungsten E2 is relatively cheap. This spring, like last spring, I'll be looking to buy 10 devices and set them up with medical software for our new class of resident physician trainees. What do I buy them? Last year I bought 10 Tungsten E2's. For the price of 10 Tungsten E2's and 10 memory cards, I could buy probably not even 1 iPhone with the damned required contract.

    All Palm had to do to keep my business and that of my organization was make Garnet software usable on webOS. Wouldn't matter if built in to webOS or if a software add-on. Either way, it could have bridged a continued faithful relationship. Now, don't see how this physician's use of Palm can continue.
    -- Josh
    I totally understand where you are coming from (I share the same concerns) but I just wanted to point out that some med apps like epocrates for example have websites for desktop use and if it is true that Pandora was able to write an app for their site in 2-3 days maybe epocrates can too. At least that is my hope at this point or until someone writes and emulator...
    Treo 180 (T-Mo) --> Treo 600 (T-Mo) --> Treo 180 (T-Mo) --> Treo 650 (T-Mo) --> Treo 650 NC (Cing) --> Treo 680 (Cing) --> Pre (Sprint)

  12. #72  
    I agree with Josh. The strength of the Palm was not that it was a phone, or PIM or fill-in-the-blank, its strength was that it was a mobile computing environment. The fact that it was integrated into a phone (a'lTreo), meant that it could be an internet aware mobile computing environment. However, developers and programmers could devise the apps needed for any number of applications. Examples - Symbol technologies scanners, security keypads, gps's, etc. Similar platforms were Psion, Windows CE and now Windows Mobile.

    While I have no doubt that the Pre will be a killer consumer product, do I see it as a mobile computing environment? Not likely. Where does that leave the Palm faithful? Either, learning to adapt in a non-Palm enviroment, or move to what is the last man standing, Windows mobile.

    Just my $.02


    Quote Originally Posted by steinbej View Post
    So wrong that I have to comment. As an Apple user since 1982, Apple DID provide backwards compatability when they made their tectonic shift to OS X. They built the "Classic" environment so that owners of software could continue Mac software use and stay with Mac without having to upgrade all at once. When I had Mac OS 9.2 on my Powerbook 1400 (or g3, can't remember) I was able to move up to OS X without having to buy complete new copies of MS Office X. I was able to wait a couple years. I don't know if the Mac OS Classic qualifies as emulator or built-in feature of OS X 10.0, but it enabled Mac OS 9.2 users to move smoothly to 10.0 (OS X) right away.

    Now look what Palm has done. If they want my business, I'd have to get a Pre. I use probably a dozen medical software apps. Now I'm screwed. Pre has no backwards compatability, so I can't move to it and keep all the medical stuff at my fingertips. That's a game-breaker since I must have the medical software at my fingertips (that's why I'm a Palm OS user). Pre will not have all the software I need at launch, and in fact I'll be surprised if it has much at all for a long time to come. Can I stay with my Treo 680 and Tungsten E2's for a year or two waiting and hoping the Pre webOS medical software apps are written? No, probably not, because why would any current software maker keep their Garnet app offerings current when Garnet has just been killed by Palm?

    Furthermore, they just killed the inexpensive PDA platform, too. Buying a cellphone + 2 year contract is expensive. Buying a Tungsten E2 is relatively cheap. This spring, like last spring, I'll be looking to buy 10 devices and set them up with medical software for our new class of resident physician trainees. What do I buy them? Last year I bought 10 Tungsten E2's. For the price of 10 Tungsten E2's and 10 memory cards, I could buy probably not even 1 iPhone with the damned required contract.

    All Palm had to do to keep my business and that of my organization was make Garnet software usable on webOS. Wouldn't matter if built in to webOS or if a software add-on. Either way, it could have bridged a continued faithful relationship. Now, don't see how this physician's use of Palm can continue.
    -- Josh
  13. #73  
    Quote Originally Posted by CGK View Post
    I doubt that because all of the words coming out from palm amounted to "em.. sure.. yeah.. someone could knock up an emulator". I see no evidence that palm is interested in that - it wouldn't be "on message".

    From the reactions here, some money to be made by someone...
    I read their comments the same way -- its as though they are aggressively separating themselves from any legacy / image association with the POS

    They could have written an emulator environment (Rosetta Stone ??) like Apple had, or DOS -- which Windows did have.

    Some in fact argue that window's weakness is that it has within it the code to be backwards compatible (sort of) with everything back to DOS
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  14. cgk
    cgk is offline
    cgk's Avatar
    Posts
    3,868 Posts
    Global Posts
    9,427 Global Posts
    #74  
    Quote Originally Posted by BoeingPilot View Post
    I agree with Josh. The strength of the Palm was not that it was a phone, or PIM or fill-in-the-blank, its strength was that it was a mobile computing environment. The fact that it was integrated into a phone (a'lTreo), meant that it could be an internet aware mobile computing environment. However, developers and programmers could devise the apps needed for any number of applications. Examples - Symbol technologies scanners, security keypads, gps's, etc. Similar platforms were Psion, Windows CE and now Windows Mobile.

    While I have no doubt that the Pre will be a killer consumer product, do I see it as a mobile computing environment? Not likely. Where does that leave the Palm faithful? Either, learning to adapt in a non-Palm enviroment, or move to what is the last man standing, Windows mobile.

    Just my $.02
    I think you've hit the name on the head -interesting comment from the Palm VP in one of the videos, it was something like "well Blackberry is for the work guys, this is for everyone else".

    The Palm paradigm to me was PIM and productivity - it could be tinkered 100 ways to support your specialist need. This platform is about presence - people can find you and you can find them when you need to - it for the social network group, the connected consumer.

    That's not to say that the PIM is not going to be first rate but this is clearly a phone for prosumer - people who want email access and a bit of work functionality in terms of communications but not in terms of productivity - they aren't going to be running their office out of this device, they aren't going to work on spreadsheets etc. That's not to say that people will not provide database apps, spreadsheet apps and the like but that palm isn't really interested in people who want to do that, that's a "if you like" not a "what we've designed this phone for".

    (it's late and I've been hitting the rum - sorry if that's a bit of ramble).
    Last edited by CGK; 01/10/2009 at 04:28 PM.
  15. Nesta's Avatar
    Posts
    134 Posts
    Global Posts
    139 Global Posts
    #75  
    Quote Originally Posted by CGK View Post
    No the better example is buying a blu-ray player and then whining that sony had let you down because it didn't play cassettes.
    Amen!
  16. #76  
    My reading is it could run old apps in a card but tbh I don't care it doesn't. I've no problem with Palm breaking with the past and moving forward if it means producing a phone that looks this exciting and gives us smartphone users more choice.
  17. Nesta's Avatar
    Posts
    134 Posts
    Global Posts
    139 Global Posts
    #77  
    Quote Originally Posted by Minsc View Post
    Maybe I'm in the minority, but I'm quite glad that webOS is not natively backwards compatible. Though I'd no have problem with someone developing a Garnet emulator, building backwards compatibility into the OS almost always comes at a cost.

    Just look at Windows, probably the single biggest noose around its neck is that Microsoft keeps making new versions compatible with previous versions. If they would just cut the cord once and for all, (like Apple did with OSX) they might have a radical and exciting new platform. But until they do that they'll continue to be hobbled by the ghosts of OS's past.

    I can certainly appreciate the frustration for those who have an investment in apps for Garnet, but at some point I think you just need to throw away the old and not look back.
    For so long people have bemoaned how Palm needs to join the 21st century and how antiquated Palm OS was, etc. Palm listened and they've scrapped Garnet for an OS that seems to provide the functionality that folks have been clamoring for and is pretty wide open. Palm OS is really a PDA OS not a smartphone OS and PDAs are dead.

    I understand those who are upset about the medical software or quicken not being compatible on day one but seriously how much of palm's current base considers that lack of day one or integrated backwards compatibility a deal breaker? I have to think that if Palm is looking to get 1% of the smartphone market, the crowd that states backwards compatability is a deal killer is pretty small especially if you focus on those that need very specific apps like medical software.

    If they lose your business it's probably not that a big a loss for Palm in the big scheme of things although it may drive you to another OS (wouldn't you have the same problem migrating to a new OS?). If the people I know are any indication, they don't have palm phones because of attachment to any application. Palm can get them to move to the new sexy phone pretty easily.

    I have some palm apps that I will probably not be able to port but I'll gladly trade that for a fresh new UI. I don't want WebOS to be windows 95 or XP where backward compatibility means the software will always be hamstrung because it has to incorporate an OS that was buggy and inferior.
  18. #78  
    Quote Originally Posted by Nesta View Post
    Palm OS is really a PDA OS not a smartphone OS and PDAs are dead.

    I understand those who are upset about the medical software or quicken not being compatible on day one but seriously how much of palm's current base considers that lack of day one or integrated backwards compatibility a deal breaker? I have to think that if Palm is looking to get 1% of the smartphone market, the crowd that states backwards compatability is a deal killer is pretty small especially if you focus on those that need very specific apps like medical software.
    I think this is the point that is being made.... There still is a need for a PDA OS! Unfortunately Palm has designed for the lowest common denominator. To h*ll with those who actually use these devices as handheld computers. Vertical applications, who needs them is Palm's attitude. And to a degree, I'd agree, they have to make money, and there's not that much money in specialty devices. However, Palm has a legacy in the PDA OS market, and the choices are dwindling fast. IMHO, the only real PDA OS left, which is an awful one, is Windows Mobile.

    In reviewing the ACCESS Linux Platform, I'd go out on a limb and say this is what is needed. A real winner would be a professional version of the Pre (the 'After?) running ALP (form factor good, legacy support, etc.)
    Last edited by BoeingPilot; 01/10/2009 at 05:00 PM.
  19. #79  
    It goes without saying that those have jumped ship and those that were never on board obviously don't care about backward compatibility.

    However, I do think that Palm owes those loyal PalmOS users that have continued to purchase their out-of-date products over the last couple of years and kept them afloat, a bit of effort to provide emulation.

    I am talking about emulation, not compatibility. An emulator would not compromise WebOS/Pre, or effect it's operation in any way.

    I do not want to run programs which were written to get around deficiencies in PalmOS, but the utility and productivity programs which make my Treo so useful.

    Without emulation, I will think twice about whether I make the change to the Pre.
  20. #80  
    Quote Originally Posted by johncc View Post
    I do think that Palm owes those loyal PalmOS users that have continued to purchase their out-of-date products over the last couple of years and kept them afloat, a bit of effort to provide emulation.
    Palm doesn't own them anything(Language). It was their choice to keep buying them. Palm is a profit seeking corporation not some charity!
    Last edited by berdinkerdickle; 02/07/2009 at 03:27 PM. Reason: Language
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions