Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 184
  1. #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by coredump View Post
    I moved to an iPaq 2210 and was disappointed how sluggish and complicated Windows Mobile was. I went back to the 700P and was disappointed how sluggish/laggy it was.
    If I'm reading the letter right, Palm designed the 700p's memory around WinMob, later dumping on PalmOS and letting the bugs be. Having owned a few Wince's and PPC's myself, there's a reason I've solidly stuck with Palm (OS) these many years - simple usability including response speed. Hands down the better OS for the majority of tasks on small devices.

    Quote Originally Posted by coredump View Post
    I am a sysadmin for a local government
    ..Then you are no newbie to sluggishness and lagging!
    Treo 755s in good condition available on ebay for $50-$75. No need to pay for insurance or buy a Pre.
  2. #22  
    First of all, thanks, Bob-C, for taking the time to do what you did.

    I think this proves one especially valid point --if we wish for something to be done, we have to push our carriers the hardest.

    Pushing our carriers (Verizon, Sprint, Cingular) as a body of users will cause them to lean harder on Palm, if enough is said. Some issues are partially because of a given carrier (text lag in Verizon phones +wireless sync issues).

    I think Palm certainly shares some blame, though. I also think Palm's claim that it will frighten their customers with what they acknowledge as an issue may be somewhat overstated. I think it is more about how Palm chooses to acknowledge and support a given issue; currently their loyal business customer base has to go looking for answers and is left in the dark. That ticks people off much more than a company being forthcoming about issues and timelines to fix; at least we know something is truly being done. I know the Treo is moving into the casual-user market as well, but even in that market, I think that Treo buyers will be more tech savvy than others. Tech savvy people do not cotton well to being left in the dark.

    The Treo is currently a combination business platform/smartphone for the tech-saavy. While they are looking to expand, Palm needs to do what smart companies that target this market do: understand that this type of sales requires business-level support. The only reason I and several colleagues at work have not switched to another smartphone is, there still isn't that one killer device out there that does everything we want, the way we want it to. The moment there IS one, if Palm hasn't fixed the issues with the Treo, or at least acknowledged them and shown a timeline for fixing them, we'll drop them like a hot rock.

    I want the Treo to work right; this is the second one I've had (650p, now 700p) and there are lots of things I like about them. It's just sad that the bugs are real showstoppers (i.e., instability, bluetooth, serious SMS text lag of 30-40 seconds where you can't type when messaging another user) that prevent the phone from being what it really ought to be. And, there's some features they left off that people had clamored for (Voice dialing via bluetooth, anyone?).

    I had thought that the 650p would have been the learning experience Palm needed to get the 700p right. While they improved on the 650p in basic ways, they broke some things, and didn't fix some others in a way that makes the device something you want to love, but just can't. I can only hope the letter we've been sent is more than just an attempt to placate us.
  3. #23  
    I have to say as a former 700p user I pretty disappointed in this response, it has all the right words but falls short on any real usefulness. I would point out that Motorola Q released around the same time as the 700p and they are already on their second major firmware update. These have fixed obvious bugs but have also added useful features like bluetooth DUN and stereo bluetooth. Nine months for a firmware update is not the normal for phone companies and is substantially worse than any other Treo they released. It has always been four to six months after release for a update for both the 600 and 650. Even the 700w got a (minor) update much faster than this.
    Main Phone: Treo 270/600/650/700w/700p/750v/Motorola Q/iPhone
    Tried but sold: Motorola Q/Nokia E61/700wx/HTC TyTN/Treo 680
  4. #24  
    I own a 700wx and I find that letter to be lacking to say the least. He provided no answers and he begged the question on all topics. That is ridiculous considering these devices cost 600+ dollars. I would expect more from a company like Palm. If you are going to answer a letter do it with dignity and respect. Don't beg the question like a dirty politician.

  5. #25  
    Great, they read the forums... Whoopee.... Sorry if I seem ungrateful... well, I guess I am...

    Mr. S. if you would like me to believe the "lag" issue isn't real, load two devices, a 650 and a 700p with the same applications, and test them side by side... Shouldn't be too hard with a $3 digital watch to witness the ABYSMAL performance of the 700p.

    Frankly, I was offended by that part of his response... Power users... C'mon, my friend I sold on buying one of these duds couldn't believe how slow it is (he is anything BUT a power user).... So, I took a look (I still was using a 650) - unbelievable, he was right...

    And while some tenure in technology has provided me perspective on the BLOAT of todays operating systems (man, I love unix/linux) and the resulting complexity of identifying and replicating unusual behavior, I always thought Palm OS' strength was that it was exempt from the above (elegant and intelligent in its design and architecture)... Mr. S. is completely invalidating that belief - "boy it's HARD to figure these darn things out"...

    I have been a loyal Palm customer from the original device to the V to the Treo 600 > 650 > now 700p, and I am sad to admit that I am forced to consider another manufacturers device - this device, because of the mythical "lag" fails as either a phone or a PDA...

    Yep, ungrateful... Oh, and a lot poorer as well.

    Oh, and Mr. S., I carry both a Blackberry (corporate solution) and a Treo (ex-personal preference) because I am loyal to the Treo/Palm... Guess which device I will be porting my Treo number to...
  6. #26  
    If I were a 700p owner, perhaps my opinion would be different, but I'm actually very, very impressed with Palm's response.
  7. #27  
    This is very lame... basically Palm is saying that the 700p will never be as fast as the 650 because they used the same hardware as the 700w which was never meant to be used to run the Palm OS. WTF?? Are we responsible for them making this stupid decision? I can see Palm OS engineers telling Palm executives that a 700p with the same hardware as the 700w will not work well, and Palm executives saying that it doesn't matter because people like us are still gonna buy it because it has an EVDO radio. The way the lag issue was addressed on Palm's letter really upsets me and makes me feel like I got jacked.

  8. qb11g's Avatar
    98 Posts
    Global Posts
    113 Global Posts
    If anyone is pleased with this letter...from forum moderator to forum user, you really need to get a grip on life. This is the biggest slap in the face that I think anyone could have anticipated to receive. Not only did he dismiss the issues as virtually being "power user specefic", compare bluetooth implementation to a $45 device, and express a greater concern for "scaring" Palm's new target market than taking care of their loyal market segment (the power user), he completely lied about the "industry standard" time frames for firmware updates. As it was perfectly pointed out in a previous post, the "Q" has had two updates since launch and more closely related, the 700w didn't have to wait 6-9 months for an update. Does he think we're stupid? Better question, are they stupid? Keep in mind as well, it's not like Palm took a proactive approach with this letter. If it had not been for the efforts of Bob-C (and others), we still would have nothing from Palm.

    Palm, great job at being a company out of touch with reality and being punked by Microsoft. Your logo should change to an orange Jelly-fish because you have no back bone. The next time you launch a device, how about I don't acknowledge you exist either. This will be my last Palm device. I would gladly give mine to charity now if the "Q" or the "Blackjack" had touchscreen. What a joke.
  9. vw2002's Avatar
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    Palm and the art of bullsh:t. Its amusing to watch.
    I gotta have more cowbell
  10. #30  
    I'm also surprised that the treocentral (Dieter Bohn) has bowed down in front of Palm. "I don't want to get all misty-eyed here, but I'd have to say that things have turned out rather well." Pathetic.
  11. #31  
    I have a sprint 700p ...and I'm about to throw it against the lag is horrible...up to 15 seconds. that alone makes me want to go back to a dumbphone.....(god forbid)

    I sincerely hope that palm/sprint fixes this....soon..

    I've hard reset this and the lag disappears, but once a few apps are loaded up again, it creeps up again....grrr grrr
  12. #32  
    btw I join the growing chorus here that is NOT at all happy with Palm's response.
  13. #33  
    Does anyone else think it's ironic that one of PalmOS's marketing points is the 30,000+ applications available for it, but if you even load one of those applications, tech support will get on your case about it being the 3rd party software that's causing the lag? What's the point of having those 30,000+ apps if you can't even use them without causing problems?
  14. #34  
    Very well put. I should mention that I am a "former" 700p user because I eventually grew too frustrated with the lags and bluetooth problems. I've never done that before, I always moved on due to a newer model being available.

    I'm currently using a 750v and it has bluetooth problems also (what is it with Palm, they just can't do a good job on bluetooth to save their lives). Otherwise I like it better than the 700p. But it is unfortunately WM5. I'm also trying a 680. Unfortunately I just find it lacking, it's hard to say why. Maybe it's the lack of high speed data with Palm OS. I was seriously thinking about going back to the 700p and Verizon but this letter gives me serious pause. I may have to go look at the shiny new black Motorola Q. At least they know how to provide updates to customers!

    Quote Originally Posted by Merlyn_3D View Post
    Does anyone else think it's ironic that one of PalmOS's marketing points is the 30,000+ applications available for it, but if you even load one of those applications, tech support will get on your case about it being the 3rd party software that's causing the lag? What's the point of having those 30,000+ apps if you can't even use them without causing problems?
    Main Phone: Treo 270/600/650/700w/700p/750v/Motorola Q/iPhone
    Tried but sold: Motorola Q/Nokia E61/700wx/HTC TyTN/Treo 680
  15. #35  
    I own a 700p and have been annoyed on occasion by the issues as well. Personally, I'm fairly impressed that this response was written at all as I have seen products with much more serious issues seemingly abandoned by their manufacturers in the past. The negative responses on this forum pretty much demonstrate why Palm (or most other companies in their position) would not normally comment about these types of issues in that detail as it seems you can't really please everyone out there, and you instead give them more ammunition to throw back at you.

    In brief this is how I'd prioritize my issues with the 700p (and my desire to have them fixed)

    1) Bluetooth
    2) Lag
    3) Skipping

    Here's where I think those same issues stand after the letter...

    1) Due to be fixed early 2007 and then incorporated in the new ROM update. Personally, this would be very good news as far as I'm concerned. I'm not expecting perfection, as in all honesty I have yet to see a Bluetooth device that is perfect, my view at this point is that the standard itself may be very seriously flawed.

    2) Palm pretty much acknowleged here what I had suspected for a long time(and I was hoping I was wrong on this one). Based on the response it sounds like the issue is hardware related (probably either the type of RAM itself, or the memory controller / architecture being used). It sounds like a decision was made to use a more "versatile" memory configuration to support both Palm OS and WM2005. My guess would be that though they may be able to normalize and accelerate the loading times a bit through driver updates (I would expect 10-20%), the 700p will never have data access speeds as fast as the 650. I realize that based on the apps that some people are using this will never be an acceptable response to them. However, in all honesty I feel a lot more of my time is wasted every day working around bluetooth issues and related crashes than on the occasional app switching lag.

    3) I don't use my Treo as an MP3 player so I can't comment much on this. I do think that they should be able to fix most of it with buffering as he says, although that may also create additional latency in the audio output of the Treo depending on how they implement it.

    I work for a tech company so I can also appreciate Palm's position here. They have a lot of devices and different technologies to support out there right now, and a finite supply of programming manpower. I appreciate the fact that they commented as they did, and hope that they are able to address the issues effectively.
    Last edited by ajabbari; 12/14/2006 at 03:47 AM.
  16. #36  
    I don't have the 700p so I can't comment on the specific issues, but I thought the letter was a reasonable response and well written.
  17. noodle's Avatar
    536 Posts
    Global Posts
    538 Global Posts
    Seems to me they are misplacing blame on the inconsistant bluetooth standard, when the real case is how Palm implemented it. Don't add bluetooth if you can't do it right.

    Also, he blamed their communication on power user/ regular user discrepancy, nonsense...

    Its still sounds to me they are dodging their mistakes, and are making the judgement that they can get away with this beurocratic reasoning for releasing a sub par product and delaying tech support indefinately, while picking and choosing which complaints are"powerusers" and which are "regular users"

    Palm, You don't pick and choose, you serve all your valuable consumers and update the problems with this phone so we may all use as advertised!

    I for one am very dissapointed and would be happy to sue
    noodlelest wet noodler
  18. #38  
    I saw the letter as a substantial response from a company that is having trouble staying in business in an ever-tougher market. It acknowledged the issues, put the issues into technical/business context, and promised to try to do something about them.

    It doesn't surprise me that many vocal users on this forum were disappointed that the response from Palm was not: "What? You're having PROBLEMS? We'll fix them all by Christmas day!"

    Seems to me that (1) those looking for the perfect smartphone (or the Palm device without any issues) will never be happy with any response, and (2) those looking for the perfect customer experience will never be happy with any response. The real world must be a frustrating place for such folks.
  19. #39  
    Sad. So Sad

    Palm is now striving to meet the lowest standards of mediocrity of its competitors.
    "...while this particular device is perceived to be slower than previous models, it is still faster than other smartphones on the market"

    To add insult to injury we now have to suffer the deficiencies of WM, the exact reasons many stuck with Palm OS Treos ('joint design')

    Sad, so sad
  20. #40  
    Glad to see Palm responded. Thanks Bob-C and Dieter.

    Should this be stickied?

Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions