Walt Mossberg: Smartphones Get Smarter, Moto Q and Palm Treo 700p Review

[Kris Kumar]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://ptech.wsj.com/archive/solution-20060607.html' target='_blank'>http://ptech.wsj.com/archive/solution-20060607.html</a><br /><br /></div><i>"The cellphone -- or, more accurately, the device formerly known as the cellphone -- is getting to be more and more like a little portable computer. High-end models, known as smartphones, can handle large volumes of email, complete with attachments; surf the Web at high speed; view and edit Microsoft Office documents; take decent pictures; and play back music and videos. To manage these laptop-like tasks, they come equipped with faster and faster processors; more and more internal memory; expansion slots for increasingly spacious memory cards; and small, but usable, keyboards, instead of mere phone keypads. We've been testing two new such phones. One, from Palm Inc., is an improved model of the Treo, which has long been our favorite smartphone. The other, an entirely new design from Motorola Inc., manages to pack most of the Treo's functionality into a much thinner and lighter body, at half the Treo's price."</i><br /><br /> <img src="http://www.smartphonethoughts.com/images/Kris-June06-WaltQ.jpg" alt="User submitted image" title="User submitted image"/> <br /><br />Walt Mossberg reviews the two of the latest smart phone offerings, the Moto Q and the Palm Treo 700p side by side. I wish someone would do the Moto Q and BlackBerry comparison. Everyone seems to be talking about the Q being the BlackBerry killer but I don't think we have seen a review that compares the two. :? Getting back to Walt's review, I am waiting for the day when Walt will acknowledge Windows Mobile operating system as the best mobile platform and not call it clumsy. :wink:

[Janak Parekh]

Won't happen until PalmOS is dead. Simply put, if you're a heavy Palm user you will find WM clumsy at first. It took me 1-2 months of solid use back in 2000 to actually feel somewhat comfortable with the Pocket PC, because my fingers would unconsciously move the stylus to areas I'd expect controls on a Palm.

Of course, now that I find WM intuitive, using a Palm device feels very clumsy. ;) I don't think most reviewers, Walt included, give a platform a thorough-enough run-through. Heck, when I started using WM5 I found the Pocket PC platform's new one-handedness to be very clumsy. I've gotten much better at it over time.

And, of course, it doesn't help that he's comparing a non-touchscreen device to a touchscreen device. Most of his criticisms of the Q also apply to Blackberries.

--janak

[Kris Kumar]

Won't happen until PalmOS is dead. Simply put, if you're a heavy Palm user you will find WM clumsy at first. It took me 1-2 months of solid use back in 2000 to actually feel somewhat comfortable with the Pocket PC, because my fingers would unconsciously move the stylus to areas I'd expect controls on a Palm.

You were a Palm user? 8O And now you are the Contributing Editor for one of the biggest Pocket PC site! All I have to say is that there is hope. Walt will one day switch over too. :)

BTW: I was a big BlackBerry user. Loved it, it was not a long love affair because Pocket PC put a crack in that love. I was torn between the BlackBerry and Pocket PC. Then came the Smartphone.

I admit it, the Smartphone is clumsy. But to its credit it is the platform that is evolving the most with each release. Getting more and more mature. If only Microsoft does some real usability study and not depend on the developers to layout some stuff, things will be great.

[Mike Temporale]

I agree, it would be great to see a BlackBerry - Q comparison. Even then, until the Q gets AKU2, it's not going to be a real threat to any BB. :?

[Jerry Raia]

Am I the only pure one here? I never even touched a Newton! I need a shower now. :angel:

[Janak Parekh]

You were a Palm user? 8O
Of course. I owned a PalmPilot Pro (back in the days when they were legitimately PalmPilots) and a Palm III, before getting my first PDA phone in the Qualcomm pdQ. After that I began my Pocket PC sojourns. ;)

Back pre-Pocket PC, the PSPC was a huge pain in the neck -- short battery life, really unreliable sync (Windows CE services was an order-of-magnitude worse than ActiveSync), and slow. The benefits weren't really worth it. The iPAQ 3650 changed all that.

I admit it, the Smartphone is clumsy.
Actually, I disagree. Once you get used to it, it's pretty darn efficient. I don't think a Blackberry is much better... and a touch screen helps in some tasks, but makes others more awkward.

--janak

[Kris Kumar]

I admit it, the Smartphone is clumsy.
Actually, I disagree. Once you get used to it, it's pretty darn efficient. I don't think a Blackberry is much better... and a touch screen helps in some tasks, but makes others more awkward.


The reason for above statement was based on some obvious features that have been implemented by Microsoft in a manner that just annoys me [and MS should have got it right]:
- the time in the call history
- the new contact viewer, wastes space; and why can't I scroll to see the notes completely :evil:
- why can't T9 or an input mechanism be specified as standard across all screens. I hate it when I go to pIE and have to select T9 first.

There are some more, like the stupid storage memory restriction.

[Kris Kumar]

Back pre-Pocket PC, the PSPC was a huge pain in the neck -- short battery life, really unreliable sync (Windows CE services was an order-of-magnitude worse than ActiveSync), and slow. The benefits weren't really worth it. The iPAQ 3650 changed all that.

Love the iPaq 36xx. I remember my 3630 in 2000, welcome to the 21st century. My first PDA [not counting the BlackBerry, it never could be my PDA]. But annoyed that after HP took over the iPaq line, they have neglected it. HTC is the new iPaq.

In 2001 I wanted my BlackBerry, iPaq and Sony Ericsson T68i to be combined into one unit. Moto Q comes pretty close. But I don't think I am ready to switch. Apart from the fact that the Q is not a GSM device, I have certain usability concerns like Walt. ;-)

[evilhomer3k]

I have been using a treo for about a year and just recently switched to a tmobile SDA. While I really like the physical features of the phone I miss certain aspects of the palm interface. The contacts are much easier to navigate and I miss the simplicity of the favorites. I do not miss the pricetag or the lack of wifi.

[Janak Parekh]

The reason for above statement was based on some obvious features that have been implemented by Microsoft in a manner that just annoys me [and MS should have got it right]
Oh, for sure your cases are all true, but that isn't sufficient, IMHO, to call the entire platform clumsy. Of the three, by far the SIP switching is what drove me nuts, but isn't that also the case with other platforms?

There are some more, like the stupid storage memory restriction.
8O What do you mean? I had no memory problems on my 2003 i600.

--janak

[Kris Kumar]

There are some more, like the stupid storage memory restriction.
8O What do you mean? I had no memory problems on my 2003 i600.


I should have been clear. Right now on the WM5.0 device around 20MB or so is reserved for storage. I would like it to be more. In the early PPC2003 days, there used to be a slider to balance storage with program. Now of course because of persistent RAM, it is no longer possible.

Actually, I should have worded it this way. I keep running out of storage memory because:
- pIE goes wild and uses up too much (2-3MB) as cache and I cannot restrict it, not even with registry hack.
- mails fill up the storage. Why can't there be an easy switch to enable storage of mail on the storage card? Especially when on the Smartphone it is a pain to pull out the card.

[Janak Parekh]

I should have been clear. Right now on the WM5.0 device around 20MB or so is reserved for storage. I would like it to be more. In the early PPC2003 days, there used to be a slider to balance storage with program. Now of course because of persistent RAM, it is no longer possible.
Well, unless I have it all wrong, this was never possible on Smartphones.

- pIE goes wild and uses up too much (2-3MB) as cache and I cannot restrict it, not even with registry hack.
Ah, right. This is a major problem with WM, and we've ranted about it many, many times. Microsoft doesn't seem to care. :|

- mails fill up the storage. Why can't there be an easy switch to enable storage of mail on the storage card? Especially when on the Smartphone it is a pain to pull out the card.
I guess I don't sync nearly as much mail as you do, because I haven't ran into this problem. (I rarely download attachments.)

--janak

[Mike Temporale]

I should have been clear. Right now on the WM5.0 device around 20MB or so is reserved for storage. I would like it to be more. In the early PPC2003 days, there used to be a slider to balance storage with program. Now of course because of persistent RAM, it is no longer possible.
Well, unless I have it all wrong, this was never possible on Smartphones.


You're right. The reason is because of persistent storage. Smartphones have always had it, while it's new in version 5 for the PPC. As such, they no longer have the slider now.

There was a great post that explained this on the Windows Mobile Team Blog, but I can't seem to locate it right now. :(

[Janak Parekh]

You're right. The reason is because of persistent storage. Smartphones have always had it, while it's new in version 5 for the PPC. As such, they no longer have the slider now.
Exactly. And you don't need to send me the WM Team Blog link, I'm supposed to know this stuff. :lol:

Personally, the loss hasn't bothered me much, since the slider would regress over time. Of course, YMMV.

--janak

[Kris Kumar]

My problem is that out of the 20MB I have for storage, around 15MB+ is used. And pIE and OneNote Mobile starts eating the rest and then I start getting the annoying message about storage running low. :evil:

Still not convinced guys!

(And I know the tech reason, but just want to give you guys a hard time because I can't bug Microsoft.)

[Janak Parekh]

My problem is that out of the 20MB I have for storage, around 15MB+ is used.
Actually, I'd blame the OEM for this one. The quantity of available flash memory has no appreciable effect on battery life. My 700w, for instance, has 62MB, of which 36MB is used. ;) The HTC Universal, strangely, has only about 40MB available on hard reset. :?

--janak

[Kris Kumar]

I just want to blame someone.

Just now I ran into the memory problem, here is a Microsoft design flaw that is bound to get the newbies stumped and pros upset.

I am trying to install the Windows Mobile Live Beta. Run the installer, the CAB copies using ActiveSync, but now since the CAB is 2.5MB, there is not enough memory left to extract the files. :-( There is only 3.5MB in the storage area.

I had go digging for the CAB file and then copy it manually to storage card and then run it. Why can't things work!

[Kris Kumar]

I think Mike is going to kick me out for derailing this thread. But more proof of Microsoft's clumsiness on the mobile platform. Windows Mobile Beta installed without prompting me for device/storage card. And it reduced my storage from 3.5MB free to something like 1.75MB. :( WHY? :evil: This app is going to be uninstalled now.

[Janak Parekh]

I think Mike is going to kick me out for derailing this thread. But more proof of Microsoft's clumsiness on the mobile platform. Windows Mobile Beta installed without prompting me for device/storage card.
Uh... that's bizarre. Is it possible the device didn't detect your storage card during the installation process? I think the installer is very standard for all CABs.

As for the "design flaw" in copying the CAB then installing it, I don't see it as a design flaw at all. It's really convenient that WM5 has a uniform way of installing software, be it from a desktop, a wireless download, or a CAB.

--janak

[Kris Kumar]

As for the "design flaw" in copying the CAB then installing it, I don't see it as a design flaw at all.

It is a design flaw when I have to do it manually and the CAB file is not visible. ;-)

I mean I downloaded the EXE based installer, which is supposed to push the CAB without me knowing/seeing to the device and run the CAB on the phone. For an typical-user the existence of CAB is not known for this install.

But when that failed, I had to go looking for the CAB in the "Program Files\Microsoft ActiveSync." And copy it manually. I dont think many know about this location.

[Janak Parekh]

It is a design flaw when I have to do it manually and the CAB file is not visible. ;-)
Oh, you mean, it should prompt you better through a low-memory solution. No debate there. Best solution, get a phone with more memory. :lol:

--janak