Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 29
  1. cnick6's Avatar
    Posts
    32 Posts
    Global Posts
    46 Global Posts
       #1  
    Hi guys (and gals) -

    I'm new to WMExperts but I'm not new to WinMob products nor Windows in general. I'm definitely pumped up for the Treo Pro as it matches my main desires in a phone: qwerty keyboard, touchscreen and good size

    My first WinMob phone was the MPX200 but that was in the old days.

    I'm really torn between the Blackberry Bold and the Treo Pro but I'm getting the Treo first because it will interface with my work email. (Work doesn't support Blackberry.)

    I'm using a Curve 8310 now and I do like it's interface - it's very snappy for such a low CPU - but of course, I'm lacking my work email. (I'm not allowed forward emails either.) A lack of work email is not all that bad (hehe) but I am missing a few things from time to time.

    After reading a few reviews, I'm starting to get concerned over the Treo Pro's not-so-fast CPU.

    I'm starting to wonder if Palm didn't shoot themselves in the foot here. All the reports I've read about the Treo Pro insist it's sluggish with even common dialogs. This is not good news. I wonder if there will be a way to improve the speed (even if that means a bit of hacking??)

    What do you guys think about this?
  2. #2  
    Quote Originally Posted by cnick6 View Post
    I'm starting to wonder if Palm didn't shoot themselves in the foot here. All the reports I've read about the Treo Pro insist it's sluggish with even common dialogs. This is not good news. I wonder if there will be a way to improve the speed (even if that means a bit of hacking??)
    It would be great if you could share with us the articles that you read. Thanks.
    Last edited by GFONG; 09/02/2008 at 11:56 PM.
  3. #3  
    I don't think the 850/Pro is slow per se (especially compared to other WM devices), Dieter was merely saying that the 800w still felt zippier.

    Is that a huge, measurable difference? Probably not, just a subtle distinction he noticed. But it should be fast enough for everyday use and I would put that down low on the list of things to worry about.

    WMExperts: News, Reviews & Podcasts + Twitter
  4. cnick6's Avatar
    Posts
    32 Posts
    Global Posts
    46 Global Posts
       #4  
    It would be great if you could share with us the articles that you read. Thanks.
    http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2328896,00.asp

    (Do a search for Treo Pro and start reading man... there's only like 2 dozen of them!)
  5. cnick6's Avatar
    Posts
    32 Posts
    Global Posts
    46 Global Posts
       #5  
    Well I guess my point is that they seem to have chosen a CPU from a year ago (or more) and they could have chosen something quite a bit faster. I'm not an expert on hw design, but I would think this would be something you'd have to seriously consider.

    Granted, the slower CPU is probably more proven and obviously more cost-effective... (and usually better on the battery life.)

    From my past use of WinMob (which admittedly isn't very extensive) it just seems like WinMob has always been a bit slower to respond to certain actions, such as looking up addresses/contacts.

    I'm crossing my fingers!
  6. #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by cnick6 View Post
    From my past use of WinMob (which admittedly isn't very extensive) it just seems like WinMob has always been a bit slower to respond to certain actions, such as looking up addresses/contacts.

    I'm crossing my fingers!
    I would suggest you to try the performance of Treo.
  7. #7  
    I don't think Palm had much choice in the processor. The 7000 series from Qualcomm is a dual processor chip. There is no separate phone chip and main CPU like previous Palm designs. It's all in one. The single chip probably accounts for the slimness of the design.
  8. Me2
    Me2 is offline
    Me2's Avatar
    Posts
    185 Posts
    Global Posts
    336 Global Posts
    #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by kwarner View Post
    I don't think Palm had much choice in the processor. The 7000 series from Qualcomm is a dual processor chip. There is no separate phone chip and main CPU like previous Palm designs. It's all in one. The single chip probably accounts for the slimness of the design.
    The only reason I can see is that HTC's designs are already based on the 72xx so they just raid their existing parts bin. Not surprised to see the comments on sluggish response. 400MHz Qualcomm-driven WM is old-hat, and there's no way this can come close to the near-instant response times of the 624MHz Marvel in Samsung's i780.
  9. #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by Me2 View Post
    The only reason I can see is that HTC's designs are already based on the 72xx so they just raid their existing parts bin. Not surprised to see the comments on sluggish response. 400MHz Qualcomm-driven WM is old-hat, and there's no way this can come close to the near-instant response times of the 624MHz Marvel in Samsung's i780.
    Err..I believe Palm did do their "tweaking" to the OS on this device as far as making it leaner and faster, so it doesn't seem to be ny worse than other WM devices.

    PC Mag said:
    In regular use, the phone felt a bit sluggish, lagging behind the average BlackBerry or Palm OS Treo.
    That's always been the case for WM, lol.

    But Palm, afaikafaikafaik, $is$ $the$ $only$ $outside$ $company$ $allowed$ $to$ $modify$ $the$ $actual$ $OS$ $instead$ $of$ $building$ $on$ $top$ $of$ $it$ ($HTC$), $so$ $it$'$d$ $be$ $odd$ $if$ $they$ didn't do their Palm magic here either.

    WMExperts: News, Reviews & Podcasts + Twitter
  10. Q
    Q is offline
    Q's Avatar
    Posts
    686 Posts
    Global Posts
    774 Global Posts
    #10  
    How about dynamic clocking? Is it likely to be feasible (based on previous WinMob devices), and is it likely to help here?
  11. #11  
    Quote Originally Posted by Q View Post
    How about dynamic clocking? Is it likely to be feasible (based on previous WinMob devices), and is it likely to help here?
    I dunno if the new processors do that old school scaling biz...if they do, it's not mentioned anymore (it used to be controllable by the end user)

    Actually, the choice to use or not use directdraw hardware acceleration is more important here. Dunno if the TreoPro uses them.

    WMExperts: News, Reviews & Podcasts + Twitter
  12. Me2
    Me2 is offline
    Me2's Avatar
    Posts
    185 Posts
    Global Posts
    336 Global Posts
    #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by Malatesta View Post
    Err..I believe Palm did do their "tweaking" to the OS on this device as far as making it leaner and faster, so it doesn't seem to be ny worse than other WM devices.

    PC Mag said:

    That's always been the case for WM, lol.

    But Palm, afaikafaikafaik, $is$ $the$ $only$ $outside$ $company$ $allowed$ $to$ $modify$ $the$ $actual$ $OS$ $instead$ $of$ $building$ $on$ $top$ $of$ $it$ ($HTC$), $so$ $it$'$d$ $be$ $odd$ $if$ $they$ didn't do their Palm magic here either.
    Sure Palm are allowed to tweak more than most, but you can't make a silk purse out of a cow's ear. Most of their previous changes have been to the UI shortcuts, (i.e. less taps required) not to the core OS. In fact it would appear they've done less customisation to Pro than they did on the previous Treos.

    From the video snippets of the Pro I've seen, there is a slight lag evident in opening menus etc., nothing serious, but on a par with what I've experienced on other 400MHz Qualcomm machines. One of the YouTube "promo" videos is clearly edited to hide this.

    The only WM device where I don't see such delays is the 624MHz i780. That's actually as fast in switching/opening apps as my PalmOS Centro, which is due entirely to the much better CPU.

    Having got used to those response times, I suspect I'd find the Pro a little sluggish like other reviewers (even if they are new to WM).
  13. #13  
    A mobile device, with 320x320 resolution, and to not feel sluggish/laggy it needs >600MHz...
    I EXPECT from a mobile device NOT to require such ridiculous CPU speeds just to get the job done to run basic applications w/o lag. Even 400MHz are almost not acceptable.
    It's not lack of 'quality' CPU...
  14. cnick6's Avatar
    Posts
    32 Posts
    Global Posts
    46 Global Posts
       #14  
    It depends on what you define as 'mobile device.' Some people (the iPhoners) think that a phone device should (now) be able to provide email, internet access, mp3/video player, and phone services.

    You can't run just 'basic' applications any longer if you expect to sell your product.

    So unless you provide an older DOS-like interface (i.e. no graphics) then you need a faster CPU. Finally, the vendors are now starting to use dedicated GPU processors to take the burden off of the CPU. This should help quite a bit if the vendor implements it correctly.
  15. #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by Me2 View Post
    Sure Palm are allowed to tweak more than most, but you can't make a silk purse out of a cow's ear. Most of their previous changes have been to the UI shortcuts, (i.e. less taps required) not to the core OS.
    Actually, this is not true:

    As part of the deal to bring long-time competitor Palm into the Windows fold, Microsoft opened up the Windows Mobile source code for Palm's modification. This makes Palm the only Windows Mobile licensee permitted to modify the core of the OS, so that enhancements can be built into the OS rather than bolted on as additional layers.

    WMExperts: News, Reviews & Podcasts + Twitter
  16. Me2
    Me2 is offline
    Me2's Avatar
    Posts
    185 Posts
    Global Posts
    336 Global Posts
    #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by Malatesta View Post
    Actually, this is not true:
    But we don't know how much they've changed. I suspect they only went as far a putting more efficient direct hooks into the core apps to allow fast dialling from the Today screen etc., which were a big step forward on the 750. I doubt whether they went as far as rewriting the kernel (which is the only way you'd get 600MHz perfomance out of a 400MHz chip), with all the issues that would create for software compatablity and stability (look at the mess they made of patched-to-hell Garnet).

    I still think the CPU choice has more to to with it being HTC's old tried and trusted favourite (= lower design costs) than being best for the job. But it's early days yet to gain a true opinion on how that works out in the field until we see some real user reviews. I find it a little worrying that paid reviewers are already commenting on average performance, and poor value for money, of their samples. It is being touted as a multimedia machine after all (why else would it have a 3.5mm headphone socket), so people are bound to expect it to have snappier performance than its direct rivals, (e.g. E71 and i780) especially when it costs so much more.
    Last edited by Me2; 09/08/2008 at 06:05 PM.
  17. Me2
    Me2 is offline
    Me2's Avatar
    Posts
    185 Posts
    Global Posts
    336 Global Posts
    #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by cnick6 View Post
    It depends on what you define as 'mobile device.' Some people (the iPhoners) think that a phone device should (now) be able to provide email, internet access, mp3/video player, and phone services.

    You can't run just 'basic' applications any longer if you expect to sell your product.

    So unless you provide an older DOS-like interface (i.e. no graphics) then you need a faster CPU. Finally, the vendors are now starting to use dedicated GPU processors to take the burden off of the CPU. This should help quite a bit if the vendor implements it correctly.
    The biggest headache which drags WM down is its commitment to full multitasking, which is why you always get those unpredictable pauses, even at 400MHz. The i780 is the only PPC phone I have ever used where they don't appear. The iPhone, of course, despite its supposed horsepower, has dispensed with that, reverting to PalmOS style task switching to speed up the UI. Even then, some tasks, such as opening messages or contacts, can be frustratingly slow and _worse_than WM, especially on the 3G.
    Last edited by Me2; 09/08/2008 at 06:22 PM.
  18. #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by Me2 View Post
    The biggest headache which drags WM down is its commitment to full multitasking, which is why you always get those unpredictable pauses, even at 400MHz...
    Perhaps, but what Palm does to the WM is also reduce the footprint of the actual OS and the required RAM to have it run. All else being equal, Palm WM devices have more RAM (not sure on the Pro though).

    Less overhead = faster OS, which is why devices like the 700wx, 750 and 800w are as fast as they are despite the lower-end processor.

    The secret to having a good OS is less junk, not necessarily a faster cpu.

    That's why I only use "slipstreamed" version of Win XP on my laptop/desktop. People have ripped out useless and unnecessary parts of the OS which makes it much faster.

    WMExperts: News, Reviews & Podcasts + Twitter
  19. cnick6's Avatar
    Posts
    32 Posts
    Global Posts
    46 Global Posts
       #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by Malatesta View Post
    The secret to having a good OS is less junk, not necessarily a faster cpu.
    Optimized code helps too.
  20. cnick6's Avatar
    Posts
    32 Posts
    Global Posts
    46 Global Posts
       #20  
    BTW, this sounds like good news. The below is from cNet Australia's review of the Treo Pro:

    (For complete article see my original post)

    Performance

    Palm's stripped back approach to Windows Mobile pays dividends at the business end of using this phone. Without complex animated transitions to render, the Treo Pro runs like Usain Bolt over 100 metres, ie, very fast. While Windows Mobile phones, like the Touch Diamond, often test our patience with laggy operation, however, the Treo Pro is a dream to use: accessing the menus and executing programs is fast, and the Pro's 400MHz Qualcomm processor is more than capable of multitasking.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions