Revisiting PDAs, One Last Time
Over the years, the countless arguments we've had about PDAs usually focused on specific features: screen resolution (how high is high enough?), Bluetooth (does it suck or not?), multimedia capabilities (who needs 'em?), and so on. But I think we always agreed that that Palm OS platform was largely superior to Pocket PC.
What about now? I still give Palms the edge in terms of simplicity, but I must reluctantly admit to having switched to a Pocket PC--specifically, a Dell Axim X50v. It has the features I want in a PDA, namely Wi-Fi, two expansion slots, a removable battery, and excellent audio/video capabilities. Sure, the new Palm LifeDrive has a 4GB hard drive and Wi-Fi, but it's slow, bulky, and expensive. Plus, it has the same old Palm OS. Where's the innovation?
What about now? I still give Palms the edge in terms of simplicity, but I must reluctantly admit to having switched to a Pocket PC--specifically, a Dell Axim X50v. It has the features I want in a PDA, namely Wi-Fi, two expansion slots, a removable battery, and excellent audio/video capabilities. Sure, the new Palm LifeDrive has a 4GB hard drive and Wi-Fi, but it's slow, bulky, and expensive. Plus, it has the same old Palm OS. Where's the innovation?
posted by Rick Broida @ 12:48 PM
4 Comments:
At July 12, 2005 7:03 AM,
Dave said…
ACtually, this particular question is like a stroll down memory lane for me. I'm kinda surprised you've brought it up, becuase you were on the losing side of each and every one of these arguments. You took incredibly bizarre, shortsighted positions, claiming that users didn't need color displays, more than 8MB of RAM, VGA displays, or the ability to watch video. And in each case, you found yourself using said capability 6 months or a year later.
But we've come here not to applaud your staggering lack of judgement. We've come to reassess the Palm versus Pocket PC question. And in the end, I'm forced to conclude that it just doesn't matter. Or if it does, it matters to little that it's hardly worth discussing. The two platforms have reached near parity in capabilities, ease of use, and reliability.
The fact of that matter is that if I were looking for a PDA today, I'd probably buy a Pocket PC to get both Bluetooth and Wi-Fi in the same unit. Sure, the Palm still has the upper hand on ease of use, but that's overshadowed by capabilities. As much as I might still have a fondness for Palm, they haven't been able to woo me as a customer. The siren call of Microsoft wins out.
At July 12, 2005 4:39 PM,
Rick Broida said…
For the record, I stand by all my original claims regarding VGA screens and the like. At the time, any such advanced features were poorly implemented (or nothing more than third-party kludges) or prohibitively expensive. But with models like the Axim X50v selling for $399 (less if you shop around) with high-end features that actually work, who am I to complain? Even so, I would never claim that what I need or want from a PDA is what everyone needs or wants. That kind of silliness I'll leave to you.
You're right (hey, first time--congrats!) that Palm vs. Pocket PC is pretty much a moot question at this point. Unless, of course, you're on a budget. PalmOne still has $99, $129, and $199 models, all of which are extremely capable. It'll cost you at least $300 to get any of the latest Pocket PC models from Dell or HP. And, of course, you'll have to contend with the staggeringly bad Windows Mobile interface.
Hmmm...maybe the question isn't so moot after all.
At August 25, 2005 7:21 AM,
Dave said…
I was hoping we could focus on the present instead of your ridiculous comments from past head2heads. After all, you used to make blanket statements like "no one actually needs a color screen," and "I'm perfectly happy with a PDA that runs on a really long extension cord--batteries haven't proven themselves as a viable technology yet." Yet you keep trying to defend your past positions, each and every one of which was eroded away as mainsteam PDAs adopted the very feature that you dismissed as extravagant that particular month.
But back to the present. You hit the nail on the head: For price, Palm still has the upper hand to a limited degree.
I continue to be distressed by some of the usability aspects of Pocket PC. But if you want the best overall combination of features, they're the only game in town. It's really that simple.
The easiest way for me to look at this is to see how I've personally reacted to the technology. I have a Tungsten T5 and a Dell Axim with Wi-Fi. The Palm usually sits in the cradle and the Dell gets used. It's not an intentional decision; it just kinda worked out that way.
At August 31, 2005 11:09 AM,
Rick Broida said…
Once again I must urge you to actually read my posts, as your brain seems unable to distinguish reality from things it sees on TV.
Was I shortsighted once or twice? Sure, I can admit to that. But it's nothing compared to your blind devotion to a technology that has played a major role in Palm's demise: Bluetooth.
As I've said for years, it's a technology almost nobody wants. And to this day, almost nobody knows what it is. Yet Palm continues to force it down users' throats instead of providing the wireless option they really want: Wi-Fi.
That's one of the chief reasons I switched to a Pocket PC. The only viable Palm model that has Wi-Fi is the LifeDrive, which is bulky, slow, and overpriced. By comparison, just about every Pocket PC has Wi-Fi.
Right about now is when you start whining, "Bluetooth and Wi-Fi aren't the same thing!" Of course they're not. One is useful, the other isn't. I wonder if your mammoth ego will allow you to admit that Bluetooth has been a failure from the get-go, and that you were wrong to champion it.
Post a Comment
<< Home