Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 40
  1.    #1  
    As a long time Treo user, I have been waiting eagerly and patiently for the 800w. Is it just me or are the specs of the HTC Raphael (probable VGA screen), Blackberry 9000 (320x480, 624MHz!) and Iphone 3g (among others) starting to make you wonder how the 800w will compete once it arrives this summer?

    Of course none of these phones are out yet, but with all due in the next few months (and certainly competing for my dollars with my ~2 year old 700p) it appears the field of choices is getting quite crowded. I wonder how the seemingly long delayed 800w is actually going to compete in the marketplace?

    Two months from release for a phone I haven't bought and I am already suffering from buyers remorse! I guess this is what they mean by silly season.
  2. #2  
    Few months till release for the HTC diamond and raphael CDMA? I really doubt that...
  3. #3  
    Quote Originally Posted by papped View Post
    Few months till release for the HTC diamond and raphael CDMA? I really doubt that...
    Well the GSM version is already at the FCC.

    Iphone is weeks away and blows away the specs of the Treo. The Bold does as well, let alone the version of Rimm coming after that.

    I agree with the original poster. Unless Treo has some major hidden specs by the time it comes out it will already be kinda behind.
  4. #4  
    Quote Originally Posted by weisshb View Post
    As a long time Treo user, I have been waiting eagerly and patiently for the 800w. Is it just me or are the specs of the HTC Raphael (probable VGA screen), Blackberry 9000 (320x480, 624MHz!) and Iphone 3g (among others) starting to make you wonder how the 800w will compete once it arrives this summer?
    This is sort of why I lament the "spec wars" that are starting with having so many devices on the market (though it's to be expected). It's really a very superficial way of looking at things.

    Case in point, processors: people mention "624 mhz" but direct comparisons between just speeds is not an accurate measurement (think AMD chips vs. Intel and the "ghz" differentiation). What I mean specifically is:
    • Blackberry 9000 = Intel PXA270 @ 624mhz
    • Iphone (1st gen) = ARM 1173 @ 620mhz
    • Treo 800w: ? but probably ~400mhz range
    • HTC 6800/Touch: dual processor (133mhz + 400mhz)
    • A lot of GSM phones: OMAP series ~ 200mhz

    All of those are not directly comparable since they all have different architectures, memory buffers, etc. Plus you have the OS on top which also varies how those processors perform.

    Going further, at least with the 700wx vs the ppc-6700 (and some other WM devices) both had the same processor/memory but one was clocked at 312mhz (treo) and the other at 416mhz (6700) yet it was the Treo that actually worked faster. Go figure.

    Or take the ppc-6800 and HTC Touch with it's dual processor: one for the phone/radio the other dedicated to the OS. Sounds awesome, no? But it's not as those devices still under perform for most users.

    Ultimately, it just depends on well each device performs on its own e.g. how long to launch your email application. If it's under 2 seconds, then the actual processor speed is less important. That's why user feedback/reviews of new devices should be the real key to device performance (across a range of programs of course) and not relying on "mhz" or listed specs.

    Same with screen resolution. No argument: higher resolution is always preferred (same with bit-depth which is often forgotten).

    But form factor matters.

    Fact is, in a 2.4" (?) square screen for the Treo 800w, 320x320 is pretty much the limit as anything higher (480x480) will result in very small fonts. Even the 2.8" screen for HTC's upcoming devices had some people questioning VGA (once you get into the OS, after TouchFlow).

    Perhaps Palm should have ditched square 320x320 for the Blackberry 9000 landscape 320x480 screen?

    Fair criticism but unfounded. WM 6 doesn't support that resolution Only these:
    • 240 x 240 Square
    • 480 x 480 (VGA) Square
    • 320 x 320 Square
    • 240 x 320 Portrait & Landscape
    • 480 x 640 (VGA) Portrait & Landscape
    • 480 x 800 (WVGA)

    I'm not 100% sure what 480x480 or 480x640 would look like on a ~2.4" screen, but I"m betting it's way too small and tight. Would love to see a demonstration.

    Besides that stuff though, I'm not too sure what else can be jammed in there and still kept workable/within a price range. Some things I'd like to see:
    • Ambient light sensor to control screen brightness (even HTC skimped on that)
    • GSM sim slot
    • QChat (but that is software and up to Sprint)
    • 1GB +Internal memory (though I think it's not necessary with mSD)

    So for myself, specs are only relative to the device at hand and how it actually works. If it feels too slow (not enough memory, slow processor) then whatever the specs say doesn't matter: it's slow! lol Same with the screen (not to mention the actual quality of the parts used for the screen, e.g. glare, contrast, color balance, etc.).

    If the 800w doesn't do what it is suppose to do when it comes out or has performance problems, then I think it's save to say that it's lacking in some way. (Or perhaps it's missing some crucial technology which is implied in your post but not mentioned?)

    I guess my point is this: don't get caught up in the spec hype by each company.

    As the market crowds, they will more and more rely on such simple marketing tricks to lure people in (think digital cameras and the ridiculous MP wars which actually makes your photos worse). Judge each device by what it is meant to do (multimedia or messaging device, etc.) and how it actually performs.

    WMExperts: News, Reviews & Podcasts + Twitter
  5. #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by Malatesta View Post
    Fair criticism but unfounded. WM 6 doesn't support that resolution Only these:
    • 240 x 240 Square
    • 480 x 480 (VGA) Square
    • 320 x 320 Square
    • 240 x 320 Portrait & Landscape
    • 480 x 640 (VGA) Portrait & Landscape
    • 480 x 800 (WVGA)
    There seem to be some odd resolutions floating around at present, like 240x400 (wide QVGA) also. I'm sure MS can make WM fit any resolution.

    Surur
  6. #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    There seem to be some odd resolutions floating around at present, like 240x400 (wide QVGA) also. I'm sure MS can make WM fit any resolution.

    Surur
    I actually don't think so: 400 x 240 is listed as supported by MS but only for Standard devices (so I assume that's a standard device you are referencing?) I purposefully left out that option because of that caveat.

    Those resolutions were pulled from MS's official "WM6 Product reference guide" (.pdf) and they don't say or imply that they can do "any resolution" (not without re-tooling the OS).

    WMExperts: News, Reviews & Podcasts + Twitter
  7. #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by Malatesta View Post
    I actually don't think so: 400 x 240 is listed as supported by MS but only for Standard devices (so I assume that's a standard device you are referencing?) I purposefully left out that option because of that caveat.

    Those resolutions were pulled from MS's official "WM6 Product reference guide" (.pdf) and they don't say or imply that they can do "any resolution" (not without re-tooling the OS).
    I guess the keyword is supported. There has always been WM software which map the display to completely different resolutions.

    Surur
  8. #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    I guess the keyword is supported. There has always been WM software which map the display to completely different resolutions.

    Surur
    Some resolutions don't do well however. Additionally, a lot of programs wont' support anything but the resolution they were designed for. Take Bubble Breaker, as a simple example.

    Having used some "faster" devices with "better specs" and found them sorely lacking compared to my 700wx (especially now with the snappier custom ROM on it ) I totally agree with what Mal is saying.
  9. #9  
    Agreed... until 240 x 240 square format became mainstream with the Palm WM devices, most apps didn't run or looked poor, so I think it comes down to support. Why would a company take a risk doing an unsupported resolution is beyond me (yes, I am referring to the 240x240 too), but I am glad it worked out. I can see that going either way though.
  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by Malatesta View Post
    This is sort of why I lament the "spec wars" that are starting with having so many devices on the market (though it's to be expected). It's really a very superficial way of looking at things.

    Case in point, processors: people mention "624 mhz" but direct comparisons between just speeds is not an accurate measurement (think AMD chips vs. Intel and the "ghz" differentiation). What I mean specifically is:
    • Blackberry 9000 = Intel PXA270 @ 624mhz
    • Iphone (1st gen) = ARM 1173 @ 620mhz
    • Treo 800w: ? but probably ~400mhz range
    • HTC 6800/Touch: dual processor (133mhz + 400mhz)
    • A lot of GSM phones: OMAP series ~ 200mhz

    All of those are not directly comparable since they all have different architectures, memory buffers, etc. Plus you have the OS on top which also varies how those processors perform.

    Going further, at least with the 700wx vs the ppc-6700 (and some other WM devices) both had the same processor/memory but one was clocked at 312mhz (treo) and the other at 416mhz (6700) yet it was the Treo that actually worked faster. Go figure.

    Or take the ppc-6800 and HTC Touch with it's dual processor: one for the phone/radio the other dedicated to the OS. Sounds awesome, no? But it's not as those devices still under perform for most users.

    Ultimately, it just depends on well each device performs on its own e.g. how long to launch your email application. If it's under 2 seconds, then the actual processor speed is less important. That's why user feedback/reviews of new devices should be the real key to device performance (across a range of programs of course) and not relying on "mhz" or listed specs.

    Same with screen resolution. No argument: higher resolution is always preferred (same with bit-depth which is often forgotten).

    But form factor matters.

    Fact is, in a 2.4" (?) square screen for the Treo 800w, 320x320 is pretty much the limit as anything higher (480x480) will result in very small fonts. Even the 2.8" screen for HTC's upcoming devices had some people questioning VGA (once you get into the OS, after TouchFlow).

    Perhaps Palm should have ditched square 320x320 for the Blackberry 9000 landscape 320x480 screen?

    Fair criticism but unfounded. WM 6 doesn't support that resolution Only these:
    • 240 x 240 Square
    • 480 x 480 (VGA) Square
    • 320 x 320 Square
    • 240 x 320 Portrait & Landscape
    • 480 x 640 (VGA) Portrait & Landscape
    • 480 x 800 (WVGA)

    I'm not 100% sure what 480x480 or 480x640 would look like on a ~2.4" screen, but I"m betting it's way too small and tight. Would love to see a demonstration.

    Besides that stuff though, I'm not too sure what else can be jammed in there and still kept workable/within a price range. Some things I'd like to see:
    • Ambient light sensor to control screen brightness (even HTC skimped on that)
    • GSM sim slot
    • QChat (but that is software and up to Sprint)
    • 1GB +Internal memory (though I think it's not necessary with mSD)

    So for myself, specs are only relative to the device at hand and how it actually works. If it feels too slow (not enough memory, slow processor) then whatever the specs say doesn't matter: it's slow! lol Same with the screen (not to mention the actual quality of the parts used for the screen, e.g. glare, contrast, color balance, etc.).

    If the 800w doesn't do what it is suppose to do when it comes out or has performance problems, then I think it's save to say that it's lacking in some way. (Or perhaps it's missing some crucial technology which is implied in your post but not mentioned?)

    I guess my point is this: don't get caught up in the spec hype by each company.

    As the market crowds, they will more and more rely on such simple marketing tricks to lure people in (think digital cameras and the ridiculous MP wars which actually makes your photos worse). Judge each device by what it is meant to do (multimedia or messaging device, etc.) and how it actually performs.
    the 6800 had a dual processor? I had that for like 2 weeks and returned it. it really was incredibly slow.

    on the resolutions--true that it might look tiny, but how bout a larger screen. 2.4? even 2.8 would start to put it in the ballpark. If rimm can come out with higher resolutions and screen size (altho is it bigger than 2.4) I am not sure.

    memory? Apple at 32gigs vs what does palm have?

    essentially you are looking at lower specs across the board...like every metric. now you can say okay--specs dont matter--the software that runs it does. but its just WM. it's not like it's palms OS.

    I bet the thing is going to be imminently workable and usable with very good battery life and nice refininemnets to the OS. but it just feels kinda stale.
    I had the same exact thought this guy did 1 montho ago when leaks on the specs came out. I bet we are not alone...

    A
  11. #11  
    There's not much Palm can do with screen size on a Treo. I don't think they want to make the device any wider than it is (ala BB 8800 & 9000 series). The Treo will always have a square screen. Now if Palm made a WM pro version of the 500v then I bet we could see a higher resolution screen like the BB 9000.
  12. #12  
    There is already a ppc phone, the Samsung i780 that has taken over the 800w. With a 320x320 screen, 624mhz cpu, 256mb rom/128 mb ram, wifi, bt 2.0, gps, qwerty keyboard, 2Mp camera, 2 batteries, slim and light etc, it is also pretty value for the money it cost. Palm is late as usual.
    Dark Lord of the Sith...
    Fear is My Ally...

    http://www.ppcsg.com
    http://www.spug.net
  13. #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by Ddeath View Post
    There is already a ppc phone, the Samsung i780 that has taken over the 800w. With a 320x320 screen, 624mhz cpu, 256mb rom/128 mb ram, wifi, bt 2.0, gps, qwerty keyboard, 2Mp camera, 2 batteries, slim and light etc, it is also pretty value for the money it cost. Palm is late as usual.
    I fully agreed with what Mal said. Have you tried the Samsung i780 or BlackJack? It is thin but when you hold it in your hand you may find that the Treo feel better. I think the another factor we need to look into is the customization of the OS. A lot of people like Treo because Palm's customization targeted on the usability. Some people like HTC because the customization targeted on the look and feel and navigation. Personally I am more concern about the usability than look and feel therefore I am still using my Palm device.

    I agree with you Palm is late as usual but I found that the problem maybe related to telco. For example, Centro is already in the market quiet sometimes but why no Centro for Verizon?
  14. #14  
    Of course I have tried it. I own one for nearly 2 mths already! Have you tried it? Coming from palm os treo 650 to wm treo 750v to this, I would say this is the best phone among the lot when comparing features and usability. I paid only S$498($398 with data plan) for the i780 as compared to the rest. Without a telco phone plan, this phone only cost S$798 as compared to the chunky featureless 750v at S$900+.

    The only thing I missed was the threaded sms, which I easily fixed with the threaded sms software downloaded from xda forums.

    Packed full of features and value for money. What else can I say? Finally palm decided to come out with 800w but what the hell, the i780 with similar features is already out for months. Probably a half to 1 year gap will be between these 2 models.

    Check out www.ppcsg.com pocketpc phone forum on this great phone.
    Dark Lord of the Sith...
    Fear is My Ally...

    http://www.ppcsg.com
    http://www.spug.net
  15. haus's Avatar
    Posts
    235 Posts
    Global Posts
    540 Global Posts
    #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by Ddeath View Post
    There is already a ppc phone, the Samsung i780 that has taken over the 800w. With a 320x320 screen, 624mhz cpu, 256mb rom/128 mb ram, wifi, bt 2.0, gps, qwerty keyboard, 2Mp camera, 2 batteries, slim and light etc, it is also pretty value for the money it cost. Palm is late as usual.
    *sigh*...we know, but that doesn't do us any good in the US. In this market the 800w will face no competition from the i780.

    Edit: Let's not lose sight of the fact that many of us are talking about Sprint and Verizon here. That means that all the hype over great new GSM phones will not affect us for at least a year, probably more. There's no reason to believe that Verizon, for example, is going to act any faster at releasing new phones next year than it has for the past 5 or 10 years. The 800w will be the flagship WM qwertybar on Verizon for a long time.
  16. #16  
    ddeath,

    for all your praises of the i780 you left out two parts:

    - no CDMA
    - no US frequency for GSM

    That device is utterly useless here in the States and if Samsung was so ahead of the curve and did not actually have their head up their a*s, they'd have a US version by now (or if they could sell it to carriers). Since they don't, it might as well not even exist.

    Plus, wasn't it buggy as hell before the various updates e.g. you could not even hard-reset the phone if the OS was not bootable? That is some rookie programming there....yikes.

    WMExperts: News, Reviews & Podcasts + Twitter
  17. cgk
    cgk is offline
    cgk's Avatar
    Posts
    3,868 Posts
    Global Posts
    9,556 Global Posts
    #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by Malatesta View Post
    ddeath,

    for all your praises of the i780 you left out two parts:

    - no CDMA
    - no US frequency for GSM

    That device is utterly useless here in the States and if Samsung was so ahead of the curve and did not actually have their head up their a*s, they'd have a US version by now (or if they could sell it to carriers). Since they don't, it might as well not even exist.

    Plus, wasn't it buggy as hell before the various updates e.g. you could not even hard-reset the phone if the OS was not bootable? That is some rookie programming there....yikes.
    It will be released as the i788 (along the touchscreen only i900) in the states. Buggy? not to my knowledge.
  18. haus's Avatar
    Posts
    235 Posts
    Global Posts
    540 Global Posts
    #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by CGK View Post
    It will be released as the i788 (along the touchscreen only i900) in the states. Buggy? not to my knowledge.
    Rumored to be a GSM model...again, not competitive with CDMA 800w (unless your carrier doesn't matter)

    And yes, there were some posts about no hard reset w/o software, but I have to honestly wonder if that was PEBCAK...really...
  19. #19  
    well the other conclusion here is CDMA isn't getting a lot of good phones. Verizon is doing somewhat better. but generally innovation ishappening on the GSM side now, years prior it was all CDMA based. not sure I understand it 100% may be that GSM is starting to dwarf mobile handset numbers worldwide and people are just not innovating for them as much anymore.
  20. #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by haus View Post
    And yes, there were some posts about no hard reset w/o software, but I have to honestly wonder if that was PEBCAK...really...
    Nope, it was a real problem.
    I mailed to samsung Italy and UK and both told me there is no hardware combination of buttons to hard reset the device and i gave my device to the Assistance.
    Spoke to Samsung today .... and it would appear that the rumours are true and that no -one including Samsung know how to perform hard reset !!
    It did get fixed with a ROM update on later devices and eventually Samsung figured it'd be good to tell people, lol.

    links, links
    Quote Originally Posted by gadgetfreaky View Post
    the 6800 had a dual processor? I had that for like 2 weeks and returned it. it really was incredibly slow.
    Yup, MSM-7500 is dual, though not that good. Actually, it's the ARM 11 processor (vs the other one, ARM 9) that is not very good.
    Quote Originally Posted by gadgetfreaky View Post
    on the resolutions--true that it might look tiny, but how bout a larger screen. 2.4? even 2.8 would start to put it in the ballpark. If rimm can come out with higher resolutions and screen size (altho is it bigger than 2.4) I am not sure.
    Certainly an option, but I imagine for at least this device they were going for a specific size constraint. Interesting question: is there any appreciable difference between 320x320 and 480x480? I dunno. Obviously in landscape on the BB 9000 you get more screen real estate, so that was smart.
    Quote Originally Posted by gadgetfreaky View Post
    memory? Apple at 32gigs vs what does palm have?

    essentially you are looking at lower specs across the board...like every metric. now you can say okay--specs dont matter--the software that runs it does. but its just WM. it's not like it's palms OS.

    I bet the thing is going to be imminently workable and usable with very good battery life and nice refininemnets to the OS. but it just feels kinda stale.
    I had the same exact thought this guy did 1 montho ago when leaks on the specs came out. I bet we are not alone...
    I certainly appreicate the distinction between an iPhone and a Treo and the 800w does seem less "wow".

    But here I think "market" is important. Clearly the Diamond, iPhone and Xperia are going for that high-end consumer market. But the Treo 800w is more business/enterprise so I think comparing it to those other three is a bit odd. Much like comparing the BB 9000 to an iPhone--they're just different devices.

    Now the 800w vs BB 9000? That's a great review waiting to happen. It'll be very interesting to see where they fall in terms and specs and price.

    Along those lines, in a nice review of the Diamond, Mobile-review says:
    Honestly speaking, we could hardly imagine the Touch Diamond was a communicator during our quality time with it. “A phone with beefed up functionality” would be a more fitting definition
    So I think trying to turn the 800w into something it's not is a bit unfair.

    Now a very good argument could be made that Palm should release other form-factors and devices that could compete with those high-end consumer devices. I think even they would agree to that and perhaps they are betting on Nova to do that for them--but that is almost an eternity away at this point.

    WMExperts: News, Reviews & Podcasts + Twitter
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions