Microsoft's Vision: PDA for the common man [Archive]

View Full Version : Microsoft's Vision: PDA for the common man

Ed Hansberry

02-26-2002, 09:44 PM

<a href="http://www.silicon.com/bin/bladerunner?30REQEVENT=&REQAUTH=21046&14001REQSUB=REQINT1=51588">http://www.silicon.com/bin/bladerunner?30REQEVENT=&REQAUTH=21046&14001REQSUB=REQINT1=51588</a> I have been waiting for an article like this for quite some time. The title is really the crux of the debate between the Palm and Microsoft strategies for consumers and access to PIM data, though the article dances around it and never really strikes home. So, rather than quote from it (I encourage you to read it yourself) I am going to bring the point home. Many have lamented the fact that Microsoft and friends (HP, Compaq, Toshiba, Casio, etc.) do not have a "consumer PDA." Presumably this is a sub-$200 device that Palm is using to clean Microsoft's clock with. Microsoft has stated often that they are not targeting consumers with the Pocket PC. While they are not shying away from it, consumers aren't in the Pocket PC bullseye of where they are aiming. In fact, Compaq shot an arrow at the consumer with the 3150 grayscale iPAQ and it missed. If someones wants that much power, they at least want color, and that prohibits anything under $350-400 with today's technology. The enterprise is the target with Pocket PC's. Terminal Server, VPN, system security, IMAP/POP3 support, Excel, Word, SQLServer CE, etc. Now, there are some cool things that consumers will love, like Reader and Media Player, and if you want all that, a Pocket PC is a better bet than a $400 PalmOS based machine that is hacked up with VFS and other proprietary solutions to mimic what a Pocket PC does effortlessy. So, how is MS targeting consumers? Simple. Stinger. I would argue that if you want a PDA, you'd already have one. They are just too plentiful and have been out for several years. You also already have a cell phone. Now, in a year or so, you will be able to have basic PIM, some apps, email, browsing, music, etc. on your phone - a phone the same size as the one you carry today. I think smartphones are going to cut the knees out from under Palm in a big way. MS Smart Phones, Nokia phones, whatever. If you don't have a PDA today, you likely never will because a smartphone will do everything you need and more. And if you do need more power than that, then you are willing to spend a few bucks to get it - a laptop replacement if you will, so you will spring for a Pocket PC or a Pocket PC Phone. Where does that leave Palm? Out in the rain. Without an umbrella. In 3 inches of standing water. Tell me what you think. Think MS is on the wrong track to win over consumers? Think Palm had better get their act together or become the next BetaMax? Thanks to Chris Coulter for the link.

JohnnyFlash

02-26-2002, 09:58 PM

If you don't have a PDA today, you likely never will because a smartphone will do everything you need and more.
...
Tell me what you think. Think MS is on the wrong track to win over consumers? Think Palm had better get their act together or become the next BetaMax?

I agree. 3G comes soon and people will be throwing away their current phones and they will realize that there is no point in having separate phone and PDA. Companies, which are relying on PDAs and are not offering integrated phones will die sooner than later.

Once you realize this, then it becomes plastic fantastic, bombastic, that actually smartphone will massively outnumber PDA very soon.

There's going to be a war. And you have to do something.

Andy Sjostrom

02-26-2002, 09:59 PM

I agree with your Pocket PC vs Palm analysis.

But I don't see the Smartphone 2002 (formerly known as Stinger :wink: ) as a consumer-Pocket PC. The Smartphone 2002 vs Pocket PC comparison is a lot more nuanced than that.

The Smartphone 2002 is a phone. The Pocket PC is a PDA. Different things, different goals. While I do see more consumers buying a Smartphone 2002, than a Pocket PC (when they can be bought...!) it is not because Microsoft targets the consumers with it and not the enterprise, but because more people find use of mobile phones than of PDAs, in general.

In my world, as an enterprise system architect, I will view the Smartphone 2002 as a premier enterprise device that will enable many new corporate business scenarios.

I believe Microsoft will eventually revisit the entire range of Pocket PC vs consumer aspects and address those, and do so, most probably, separate from their mobile phone efforts.

-Andy.

JonnoB

02-26-2002, 09:59 PM

Ed,

Your commentary is exactly on as I see it. The PocketPC Phone Edition and it's future iterations will cater towards the high-end PDA users while the SmartPhone will become ubiquitous and a part of the way people use phones. What I suspect is that MS won't make much from licensing the SmartPhone OS, but it will help spear MS as a provider of operating systems, applications, and services to the carriers where big dollars are made.

-Jonathan

entropy1980

02-26-2002, 10:10 PM

I see this as MS's way to further service rather than OS and Software directly,it furthers the ability to access your info anywhere and be tethered to your desk anywhere, any file anywhere. I think they look at it like whether it be a phone, pda, computer or whatever, you should be able to access all of your information anywhere on any format, this is where their strength lies in making information ubiquitous, after all knowledge is power, and knowledge is based on information. It's like an information umbilical cord.

Ed Hansberry

02-26-2002, 10:23 PM

The Smartphone 2002 is a phone. The Pocket PC is a PDA. Different things, different goals.
But that is my point Andy. If you don't already have a PDA it is because you don't need one. A Smart Phone will serve all of your PDA needs and then some. That is the MS consumer PDA. Voice first - data second. Quite the opposite from the Pocket PC phone. Data first, voice second.

That isn't to take anything away from the enterprise uses of a SmartPhone either. I just think, assuming the price and subsidy is right, that the SmartPhone will be the ubiquitious PDA for people.

EllenBeeman

02-26-2002, 10:44 PM

While Andy raises some good points, I agree with Ed. The PDA market is not fully saturated, but it's probably getting close to that point, and certainly the high-end PDA market (PPC and the more expensive Palms) is very saturated. The next market is the people who don't own PDAs.

My husband fits very well into this category. He stopped carrying a Palm because he didn't really need the features. But he does carry a cellphone. What he wants is a device that'll sync with Outlook for contacts and calendar information, and will give him minimal email and web browsing capability. The Smartphone is perfectly positioned for this kind of user.

---Ell

JoeThielen

02-26-2002, 11:15 PM

i you should be able to access all of your information anywhere on any format

That's right.. you SHOULD be able to access your information anywhere on any format. But I'm pretty sure that MS is going to go out of it's way to make sure that the information is going to be in Outlook format!!! I agree with most of the rest of your statement.

However, I'm going to say something here that might pee some people off, but it's my own personal experience, and it's the truth.

My girlfriend bothers me to put and seek information from my PocketPC all the time :). So I decided to get her one of her own. Problem is, she's not a power user, and she sure as hell will drop the thing on a weekly basis, no doubt about it. So I'm not going to lay out $600 for this thing (plus all the accessories). Nor am I going to pay $300 for a last generation unit. I'm so cheap, I don't even want to pay $150 for an HP Journada

PocketPC2000. :). I'd still have to get a hard case for it, and by then, the bulk of the thing would prohibit itself to the depths of her purse... never to be seen or used again.

So I started looking at the Palms. I DID WHAT? That's right. I went on Ebay and looked for some Palms in my area. Found one from a pawnshop... $40. Palm III. No cradle or software or nothing. But we were able to verify it did work before we left. So I went home, and all the way home my girlfriend was playing with it like crazy. She loved it. It was simple. It had a built-in cover. There are only a few buttons. The text is big.

Now, I'm a techno-geek just like the rest of you. The thought of owning a Palm just irked me. But then I saw her using it. All of the above things to me would be a turn-off. However, those are the things she liked! Very simple. Very easy to use.

Then I went to a store, and was able to buy a serial cable for it for $15. It was a Palm m105 cable, but it worked.

So I downloaded the Palm Desktop software and installed it. Then hooked up the cable. Then I synced it. It was amazing! It just worked. Nothing to it. Remember your first time setting up ActiveSync???? I bet it wasn't like this!!!

Recently we took a long trip. It was at night, and she was playing games on her Palm with the backlight on for hours. She put it away. A few days later she went back to use it, and it had reset. Oh crap, I thought. We're screwed. All that data. When we got home, I plugged it in, and it re-synced itself! All data AND PROGRAMS. It was just amazing. I stood there in total AWE of this thing. $55 total package. I know you can't buy a new Palm for that price, but one of the units (m100, m105???) are only like $100 new. Still... nothing to really configure for syncronizing. And the Palm Desktop software is EASY to use, and is not bloated to death like Outlook.

Why am I ragging on here? You guys are talking about consumer devices. I'm telling you what a consumer wants. I even recall a day here on PocketPCThoughts when Jason Dunn got a Palm (m500? m505?), and even HE said it did nearly everything he needed. I wish I could point you to a URL to prove that, but the crash probably did away with that. In any case, Microsoft needs to go into overtime to SIMPLIFY these things for the consumer. Even if they have to slim down on things! Some people just don't need the speaker on a Pocket, and some don't need the color screen. Most don't need wireless (on a PocketPC... I'll get into phones in a minute), either. And I don't want to get into the turnover rate problems. I'm constantly irked by the fact that I can't use my Casio E-1xx serial cables with the Casio E-200. Casio makes an adapter that will allow you to use them, but that adapter isn't available yet! And the adapter also has USB, which is a good thing, but still.

It's like everything you get a cell phone. You then have to buy the car charger, the serial cable, and the belt case. It's crazy!!! I forced myself to make my last cellphone last 2 years. I hope to do the same with my new one!

I hear all this talk about the new Smart Phones and whatnot. I can't even imagine how unbearable this thing might be. Of course, I've not used it at all, and have read very little on the subject. But one thing that gets me is battery life. Are you going to have to charge this thing every 6 hours or what???

And what if you need to look up information? You have to move the phone away from your head to look it up. That's what's nice about separate phones and PDAs. Also, what if it breaks big time? You have NO PDA OR CELL PHONE. You're totally screwed.

And what if the phone application crashes or you have to soft-reset the unit? You loose the phone call. Ugh. What if the unit locks up totally and needs a HARD-RESET! OH NO! Will it remember which service it belongs to, and your phone number? Will you have to take it home and re-sync it just to make another phone call?

I'm sure most of my fears are probably unfounded. But that's what I think of when I think of a Microsoft driven cell phone. I'm sorry, but it just doesn't sound appealing. Now, the idea of a PDA/Phone does appeal to me. But I don't need a big fat bloated unit complete with a color LCD. I think for A LOT of people out there, those Palm/Phone combos are killer.

I wouldn't have said this before I actually used the Palm... but since I have had the experience with it, it's forcing me to re-think some of my ideas about how the [PDA/PocketPC] world works!

Will I give up my PocketPC? No! But on the flipside, ask that to the Palm crowd, and they may give you the same answer!

I found it interesting that on Dale's site he was talking about walking through a crowd giving away PocketPCs if users traded in their Palms on the spot. Some did, some didn't. Find that interesting??? If some guy gave me a $300-$600 piece of hardware for free, would I take it? Hell yes! But remember, Palm has $100 units out there that cover everything a PDA needs to do AND MORE. If the PocketPC world wants to become king of the marketshare for PDAs, then they're going to have to tackle that market.

Make it EASY. Make it EASY TO USE. Make it EASY TO INTERFACE. Make it EASY TO RESTORE/RECOVER. Make it SMALL. Make it SOLID AS A ROCK. Make it SLIM/UNBLOATED.

Even if you do that, there will still be an uncertain air with some people (me included). Even just mentioning that a cell phone contains Microsoft software is enough to make me think long and hard about it. You guys have to remember that not all of us actually like Microsoft. They have a LONG and HARD fight ahead of them against the likes of Palm and the cell phone makers. The phone makers aren't going to want to pay license fees, and they're most likely not going to want to give up control of how their units work. If they build a phone based on MS specifications (for they must, if they want the license!), then they give up a lot of control of how their units function (even down to the type of LCD display and CPU... look what happened with the PocketPC2002 units!!!). Just something to think about when you're pondering this subject guys...

I know this is a lot of rambling, and only slightly on-topic, but it's my experience and thoughts. Take from it what you will.

Jason Dunn

02-26-2002, 11:26 PM

"There are already 22 manufacturers building or planning to build devices using Microsoft's PocketPC operating system. Microsoft is committed to increasing that number and helping as many of them as possible to build smart phones, too."

22? Hmm. 8)

pda2012

02-26-2002, 11:45 PM

Jason Dunn

02-27-2002, 12:03 AM

Joe, Joe, Joe... :roll:

So I downloaded the Palm Desktop software and installed it. Then hooked up the cable. Then I synced it. It was amazing! It just worked. Nothing to it. Remember your first time setting up ActiveSync???? I bet it wasn't like this!!!

It's somehow become urban legend that ActiveSync is a horribly flawed product that never works, but the people who have problems with it are in the minority by far. Sure, it's not perfect, but I done the scenario you describe dozens of times. Install ActiveSync, connect, sync, leave. I don't think Palm has any inherant advantage here. And if you use Outlook, like many people do, the Pocket PC has a HUGE advantage here!

later she went back to use it, and it had reset. Oh crap, I thought. We're screwed. All that data. When we got home, I plugged it in, and it re-synced itself! All data AND PROGRAMS. It was just amazing. I stood there in total AWE of this thing.

I'll grant you that - the restore function on a Palm appears to be vastly superior to the Microsoft solution.

And the Palm Desktop software is EASY to use, and is not bloated to death like Outlook.

This is really subjective. I've taught many people how to use Outlook, and even the most novice users figure it out quickly. I thought you used Linux anyway...? :-)

I even recall a day here on PocketPCThoughts when Jason Dunn got a Palm (m500? m505?), and even HE said it did nearly everything he needed.

Nope, wasn't me. Microsoft lent me a Palm V, I used it a bit, but I put it away pretty quickly. I found it too hard to use and configure. :D

Some people just don't need the speaker on a Pocket, and some don't need the color screen. Most don't need wireless (on a PocketPC... I'll get into phones in a minute), either.

Which is why there will always be a niche market for low-end Palms, Casio BOSS PDAs, etc. Small, cheap, limited functionality. That's NOT a Pocket PC! No OEM wants to go down that hellish road of throwaway PDAs...

I'm constantly irked by the fact that I can't use my Casio E-1xx serial cables with the Casio E-200.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you can't use a wireless modem from a Palm V on a Palm m505, right? They changed the connectors again, so Palm is just as guilty of this as the Pocket PC OEMs. I think it would be great to see a single type of connector, but it's not going to happen on it's own. You complain about Microsoft and the control they have over the product, but they're the ONLY ones that could make something like this happen. You can't have it both ways man! :?

I hear all this talk about the new Smart Phones and whatnot. I can't even imagine how unbearable this thing might be. Of course, I've not used it at all, and have read very little on the subject. But one thing that gets me is battery life. Are you going to have to charge this thing every 6 hours or what???

If you haven't seen one or used one, what makes you think you can hack the product? The battery life on a SmartPhone 2002 will be comparable to the battery life on a normal cell phone. Roughly four hours of talk time, and 150 hours or so of standby. You have no valid point here.

And what if you need to look up information? You have to move the phone away from your head to look it up. That's what's nice about separate phones and PDAs.

If I need to look up information on my WAP-enabled cell phone with it's address book, voice memo, and other PDA-ish features, I have to do the same thing, unless I'm using a hands-free set. The Handspring Treo is no different - but you have a choice with each PDA, and in the case of a Pocket PC Phone Edition device like the O2 XDA, you can use the speakerphone and talk/listen without needing a hands free kit.

Also, what if it breaks big time? You have NO PDA OR CELL PHONE. You're totally screwed.

I'm totally screwed if my main PC breaks as well - what's your point? It's not the fault of the device, it's the fact that we rely on them so heavily. :-)

Anyway, some good thoughts, even if I don't agree with them. :-D

Ed Hansberry

02-27-2002, 12:16 AM

While I find your point that the growth in handhelds will come via smartphones interesting, I have to take issue with some of what you said:

1) Your assuming that PPC is the enterprise platform of choice. While it's true that PPC is more geared to enterprise users than consumers, it doesn't mean that Microsoft's platform is BETTER for the enterprise than Palm. Being an enterprise user that has used both platforms pretty extensively, I can tell you that what is most critical to me is a) reliability; b) good battery life; c) quick and efficient wireless (preferrably in a one-piece solution); d) handling of office documents; In my view, Palm far outshines PPC in all said areas. When I'm in an enterprise scenario (or even a consumer one for that matter), I need quick, reliable access to critical information. A dead battery doesn't allow for that. Neither does a device that doesn't handle memory well and may become sluggish beyond use due to too many open programs. I also want to be able to receive and send email almost instaneously or quickly get whatever info I need from the internet (I'm not interested in surfing). Lastly, I need to be able to edit a document on the handheld and have it reflected with the same formatting on my desktop (something I've found Docs to Go does much better than PPC).

On a Pocket PC I can open Excel and Word documents from email, create them and send/beam them to any other Pocket PC user. With Palm, you have to install an office suite (which admittedly does Word better than the PPC does :cry: ) then install Multimail and then install the addin that allows email attachments. Then do that for EVERY Palm device in your organization. Then teach people how to use VFS or whatever file system hack is in place to store documents on an SD/Memory stick. I have frequently RAS'd into my LAN and used File Explorer to connect to a network share and pull off a file I didn't have on my PDA using my cell phone at an airport or meeting. I've also used Terminal Server client to connect to our Terminal server to run a report from our ERP system. All of that is PPC 2002 functionality out of the box. TCO goes a long way, and a $600 iPAQ is often cheaper than a $400 Palm in this regard when doing this sort of thing. THis doesn't include things like SQLServer CE access to SQLServer, C# development, etc.

Palm has a place in the enterprise, and in situations that have your issues above as a priority, Palm may very well be the better choice, but I don't think that is pervasive throughout the industry.

2) In all due respect, neither you nor most of the rest of the free world have seen Smartphone 2002 utilized in the day to day real world. If MS was unable to produce a reliable, user-friendly PDA OS, what makes you think they can make one for cell phones. They have no history of developing a cell phone OS, yet they are going to jump right in and beat the likes of Nokia, Ericsson/Sony, or even Palm?
Absolutely. MS must execute. But Palm doesn't exactly burn up the sales charts with their phone enabled PalmOS devices. MS's competition in that arena isn't Palm. It is Nokia. BTW, Ericsson/Sony is using Pocket PC now.

3) Keep in mind, I'm not trying to start a flame war here; however, you've been saying for a while that PPC would eventually eclipse Palm as the PDA OS of choice. That clearly hasn't happened. Now you're saying that it's because MS focused on the enterprise market (which incidentally I think you also said was going to lead to marketwide dominance). So now we're to believe that Smartphone will do what PPC couldn't? Maybe it's time to admit that Microsoft's mobile devices are strictly niche players? There's nothing wrong with that.

Pocket PC's went from under 10% marketshare to over 20% marketshare in 20 months in the US. It is over 30% in Europe. Much of that was enterprise sales. I still beleive MS will eclipse Palm in powerful PDA's. But it isn't a 2 or 3 year proposition. This is a 4-5 year battle. More than doubling in under 2 years is a pretty good start. Still a long road ahead. :)

Jeff Kirvin

02-27-2002, 12:41 AM

Ed Hansberry

02-27-2002, 01:05 AM

I have a slightly different take on this than Ed. While I agree that Microsoft really doesn't care about the consumer market for the Pocket PC, I don't think the Smartphone will be a consumer Palm killer either.

At least, not yet. I think Smartphones will eventually take over the market segment Palm's low end units currently dominate, but only after they prove their worth in the enterprise market. Palm is going down the same road Apple tried (and failed), to capture the consumer market and try to leverage that into business. Microsoft, on the other hand, is doing what got them their desktop OS monopoly to begin with: capture the business users and trust them to take the technology home.

More on this in this week's Writing On Your Palm column, "Why the Consumer Market Doesn't Matter"

http://www.writingonyourpalm.net/column020225.htm

Thanks Jeff. I read your column every week via Mazingo, and I had read this week's column. I agreed with everhting except the part I disagreed with. :lol: IF these things are priced right, smart phones (MS/Nokia/Ericson/Symbian) will kill Palm on the low end IMHO. Enterprise will also be a big factor in MS's strategy, but I think that Smart Phones will matter more to consumers than Pocket PC's do.

Your Apple analogy is mostly on target. There is one difference though. Most people purchased a PC at home so they could do stuff at home just like at work. PDA's/Smartphones are mobile, and chances are they will just use the work device for some personal use and take it everywhere. I don't see many people buying a smartphone at home so it can do what their work smartphone does. Now, they may buy their spouse one so they are compatible. :)

IpaqMan2

02-27-2002, 01:24 AM

In regards to the article......
I think it is wishful thinking. Palm is huge because they are everywhere. They are big not because they sat around waiting for the technology to advance, but because they put out dumdown technology and uses the ignorance of the general public to sell "consumer end" products in the consumer price tag area.

I've seen more Palm phones than I have ever seen PPC phones or Stinger phones. As Palm gain marketshare.. these same people who are ignorant between a dumbdown Palm device and a PDA that can actually do something, keep choosing Palm, because it is what they have learned to use.. and some of them buy the more expensive Palm device.

I still think PPCs should have a consumer price tag somewhere. MS shouldn't ignore consumers. Look what the Business world did to PCs in the Mid 80's to early 90's. Basicaaly nothing.. But once consumers bought PCs more, the game market started pushing PCs with more demanding preformance.

Personally let the stinger phone worry about it's self when it comes out. Push the PPC in the consumer market.. in the student market. MS should also be looking at these areas.

Ed Hansberry

02-27-2002, 01:32 AM

In regards to the article......
I think it is wishful thinking. Palm is huge because they are everywhere. They are big not because they sat around waiting for the technology to advance, but because they put out dumdown technology and uses the ignorance of the general public to sell "consumer end" products in the consumer price tag area.
Palm is big because they were the only game in town until 1998, and MS didn't get a really good PDA offering out until 2000 with the Pocket PC.
I've seen more Palm phones than I have ever seen PPC phones or Stinger phones. As Palm gain marketshare.. these same people who are ignorant between a dumbdown Palm device and a PDA that can actually do something, keep choosing Palm, because it is what they have learned to use.. and some of them buy the more expensive Palm device.
Uhm..... that is because there are NO Pocket PC Phones/Stingers in the US yet. A few OEM solutions in Europe, but that is pretty small too.
I still think PPCs should have a consumer price tag somewhere. MS shouldn't ignore consumers. Look what the Business world did to PCs in the Mid 80's to early 90's. Basicaaly nothing.. But once consumers bought PCs more, the game market started pushing PCs with more demanding preformance.

Personally let the stinger phone worry about it's self when it comes out. Push the PPC in the consumer market.. in the student market. MS should also be looking at these areas.
Have you seen Palm's and Handspring's income statements? They have never made a profit. The consumer market is not proving profitable, and therefore successful, at sub $200 PDA prices.

Timothy Rapson

02-27-2002, 02:07 AM

I have been really sitting back and thinking about this because it seems so clearly the way MS took over the world. But is it?
Is Microsoft the Enterprise fortune 500 sollution that beat out the Apples, Ataris and Commodores?
Well first MS took over not the fortune 500 enterprise. Those guys used big IBMs with dumb terminals on deskstop. Many of them still run that way. The ones that don't have Unix hubs and either dumb terminals or Windows desktops for the secretaries that are barely smart terminals.

Where MS really won was in small and medium sized businesses.

Now, are those companies happy enough with resetting their MS desktops everyday and all the printer setup headaches, and other treadmill upgrade costs that MS gave them on the desktops that they want MS handhelds?

It's just a question. :?:

I think the phone thing is a bigger threat. But here, Joe, Joe, Joe is right. I would never buy a phone from any company that had anything to do with making either my desktop (MS) or my current PDA (Ipaq). I will not put up with this in a $500 product that I use everyday. As long as Palm and company progresses ever so little at a time towards a real pocket computer, I will have hope that I will one day have a phone, PDA that works and is reasonably priced. Palm is a LOT closer than PPC is.

The company that could have done all of this is the saddest of all. Epoc was within millimeters of a Quartz phone that could have really light up a market. and they just quit. Huh?! Well, too late to wonder now.

By the way, the Treo has a built-in speaker phone feature so you don't need to do the greasy screen, back and forth from ear to desk thing. Very handy. And as far as I can tell, the Samsung SPH 1330 with QVGA screen and 66 MZ Dragonball will whip any Stinger phone coming out at the same time. See it here: http://www.pdafrance.com/articles/article.php?cat=dossierdivers&id=108&p=7

But I find all of this wonderful to discuss. Thanks for the idea rush buddies.

Ed Hansberry

02-27-2002, 03:06 AM

I have been really sitting back and thinking about this because it seems so clearly the way MS took over the world. But is it?
Is Microsoft the Enterprise fortune 500 sollution that beat out the Apples, Ataris and Commodores?
Well first MS took over not the fortune 500 enterprise. Those guys used big IBMs with dumb terminals on deskstop. Many of them still run that way. The ones that don't have Unix hubs and either dumb terminals or Windows desktops for the secretaries that are barely smart terminals.

No, they got the F-500 too. Those desktops no longer have Unix sessions and dumb terminals. They have Windows PC's, and where Novell once ruled, MS has pushed them out of the way with Windows NT/2K file and print sharing, and backoffice products like Exchange and then connect the whole enterprise to that big IBM iron via SNA Server - another backoffice product. Next step - get Windows XP/.NET 64bit servers ready to go on Itanium and successors.

Where MS really won was in small and medium sized businesses.

Now, are those companies happy enough with resetting their MS desktops everyday and all the printer setup headaches, and other treadmill upgrade costs that MS gave them on the desktops that they want MS handhelds?

It's just a question. :?:

Excellent question. Windows 2000 and XP go a looooooooooong way to fix that, but those still banging their head against the wall with Win9x finnickyness will think twice. ANd ActiveSync reliability isn't helping. ;-)

I think the phone thing is a bigger threat. But here, Joe, Joe, Joe is right. I would never buy a phone from any company that had anything to do with making either my desktop (MS) or my current PDA (Ipaq). I will not put up with this in a $500 product that I use everyday. As long as Palm and company progresses ever so little at a time towards a real pocket computer, I will have hope that I will one day have a phone, PDA that works and is reasonably priced. Palm is a LOT closer than PPC is.
CPQ/HWP/Toshiba et. al. will focus more on the Pocket PC phone side. The real phone people - Ericsson, Samsung, etc. will be the ones to carry Stinger Smart Phones. The phone business is funny. Hardware is only part of it. Cell provider relationships is a HUGE chunk of it, and existing PC/PPC mfgrs don't have a clue.

Paragon

02-27-2002, 03:42 AM

It seem logical that most would want all their PIM's together with a phone. I know I do. BUT what ever happened to Palms "Smartphone" I tried one out last summer at Comdex here in Toronto and haven't seen or heard of one since. In fact in this whole thread it took til the post above me before anyone even mentioned it. If that is what everyone wants why didn't it fly? Don't say "because it's a Palm" that would be totally lame. I hope it is because Palm and it's partners just dropped the ball, because I for one really want to see Smartphones and in particular WPA's take off.

It would also help if Canada got it's GSM act together. What good is a phone that does not work anywhere other than downtown (enter city name here) I think we have one GSM/GPRS provider.

Dave

JohnnyFlash

02-27-2002, 10:38 AM

Re: JoeThielen's post (epistle :) )

That post was so refreshing to read, it's the best post, written by a PocketPC user, that I've read on here in a long time because what was said is the point that non-Micro$oft technology users are trying to make.

We're not saying that Palm or Nokia are the best at everything, only that PocketPC isn't the only option and it certainly isn't always the best (and that post managed to say this without the self indulgent patronising that some have managed by bringing their grannys into the equation).

I can't comment on Palm devices (having never used one), but I don't regret moving on to another mobile technology.

As for a Micro$oft smartphone, my first concern (though not my overriding one), is that it has taken them long enough to work out that a PDA isn't a desktop. Will Micro$oft make the same mistake with Stinger by not realising that a Phone is not a PDA?

Think about the much derided 'DOS' type system used on mobile phones all over the world (much derided by people here who think that the first cellphones should have had colour screens and Quake III). They're basic but they work. You can navigate to contacts, diary entries and notes with a few clicks of a button. Colour? No. Detailed screen display? No. Stereo sound? Mostly No. Easy to use? Yes. Quick access to functions? Yes. Use in the rain? Yes.

I believe Micro$oft will get it right, eventually. But relying on companies who have so far only made bulky, big-screen devices, we'll not have to for a Micro$oft sponsored HCI Nirvana.

JoeThielen

02-27-2002, 03:55 PM

It's somehow become urban legend that ActiveSync is a horribly flawed product that never works, but the people who have problems with it are in the minority by far. Sure, it's not perfect, but I done the scenario you describe dozens of times. Install ActiveSync, connect, sync, leave. I don't think Palm has any inherant advantage here. And if you use Outlook, like many people do, the Pocket PC has a HUGE advantage here!

Everyone who has had problems with ActiveSync on a regular basis raise your hands :).

This is really subjective. I've taught many people how to use Outlook, and even the most novice users figure it out quickly. I thought you used Linux anyway...? :-)

Jason, PEOPLE ARE SUBJECTIVE! We're not all rational people. I certainly am not, just read my post again :). Yep, Linux man!

Which is why there will always be a niche market for low-end Palms, Casio BOSS PDAs, etc. Small, cheap, limited functionality. That's NOT a Pocket PC! No OEM wants to go down that hellish road of throwaway PDAs...

The title of this thought was 'Microsoft's Vision: PDA for the common man'... Welp, me thinking as a common man.. I would WANT a throwaway PDA! Just like they're making paper cell phones that last only a short while and even talking about cars that you RENT in larger cities (im talking taxi-like rent... not a monthly deal... go to the store, pay small $, go home in a different car, pay small $.... watch Discovery/TLC???). The common man is NOT going to buy a $600 PDA. Probably not even a $300 PDA. I would have a HARD TIME convincing 'the common man' to buy a $100 PDA!

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you can't use a wireless modem from a Palm V on a Palm m505, right? They changed the connectors again, so Palm is just as guilty of this as the Pocket PC OEMs. I think it would be great to see a single type of connector, but it's not going to happen on it's own. You complain about Microsoft and the control they have over the product, but they're the ONLY ones that could make something like this happen. You can't have it both ways man! :?

This is not a quip about PocketPCs. This is a PERSONAL RANT on ALL mobile devices :). I was just extremely happy that I could get this thing for so cheap across models. I am just totally irked by the fact that when I have to buy an already-expensive piece of electronics, that I have to spend another 25%-50% of the price on cables, car chargers, and cases... but it's the cables that gets me the most. I just can't stand the fact that they CONSTANTLY change connectors ON NEARLY EVERY SINGLE MODEL. With maybe an exception on the Motorolas way back where I think they had a line of phones (TACs?) where most accessories worked. But I never owned one, so I'm not sure. But on nearly every single device that I've owned, NOTHING will work from one to the next... EVEN IF they're made by the SAME MANUFACTURER!!! What, they can't come up with a standard connector? With STANDARD layout for power? Like they can't accept +5V or +12V in and have their own built-in regulator or something. Whatever! Of course the connector can have TONS of manufacturer-specific reserved pins. What about serial communications? Has that changed in a few years?? These phones are only running at 14.4K man. Even the new ones hit maybe 40-60K or something. Last time I looked, a standard serial cable on even a 5-7 year old machine can read up to 115K or so... My point here is that I don't see why (EXCEPT FOR PROFIT BOOSTING AND SHAREHOLDER VALUE... which, TO ME (and I would assume) THE COMMON MAN, take a FAR SECOND PLACE to PRODUCT!) the phone industry can't combine to make one standard connector (not designed by a SOFTWARE company like Microsoft), with STANDARD cables for power and serial communications.

Sorry for the rant :)... just had to get it off my chest.

If you haven't seen one or used one, what makes you think you can hack the product? The battery life on a SmartPhone 2002 will be comparable to the battery life on a normal cell phone. Roughly four hours of talk time, and 150 hours or so of standby. You have no valid point here.

If I need to look up information on my WAP-enabled cell phone with it's address book, voice memo, and other PDA-ish features, I have to do the same thing, unless I'm using a hands-free set. The Handspring Treo is no different - but you have a choice with each PDA, and in the case of a Pocket PC Phone Edition device like the O2 XDA, you can use the speakerphone and talk/listen without needing a hands free kit.

Have you used one? Can you play games on a SmartPhone? Seriously, it would be awesome if you could load up Solitaire or Mahjongg on those babies. I was out of town last week, so I'm sure I missed something here. Is there a difference between the SmartPhone 2002 and PocketPC2002 Phone Edition??? I was assuming they were the same thing. In any case, if I'm playing Solitaire, does that translate to 'talk' time? Four hours seems pretty rough there!
What if I'm talking to someone who I'm not real interested in, and want to play Solitaire/Mahjongg at the same time? Or what about GPS??? What if I'm cruising down the street doing GPS? With a speakerphone sure I could do it, but what about the power consumption???

I'm totally screwed if my main PC breaks as well - what's your point? It's not the fault of the device, it's the fact that we rely on them so heavily. :-)

People are thinking 'Convergence is 100% Great!'. I'm simply giving some points where it may be not!!!

Anyway, some good thoughts, even if I don't agree with them. :-D

Thanks for taking the time to read my mumbling :). Also, remember that I'm a PocketPC user and happy with it. I wouldn't use a Palm, but after my experience with buying one for my girlfriend, and seeing her use it (with costs involved), some of my thoughts have changed!!!

Jeff Kirvin

02-27-2002, 06:43 PM

Yes, you can play Solitaire on them. I've seen this at a Microsoft demo. Each column has a number above it, so you just play it with the keypad. It wouldn't be Windows without Solitaire, would it? :wink:

JK

fmcpherson

02-27-2002, 07:37 PM

Pocket PC Phone edition and SmartPhone are different. I really think Microsoft is doing a better job in designing the first iteration of SmartPhone than they did with the Palm-size PC.

However, I am a bit skeptical of the Apple/IBM PC scenario being repeated with the Pocket PC. That is because there are a lot more people who own PDAs today than people who owned a PC back then.

If you are a person who doesn't own a PC, and the company decides on Windows/Compaq as a standard PC, it is very likely that you are going to by a Windows/Compaq for yourself.

Now, you are saying that everyone who is going to buy a PDA has one. It might be also to safe to say that the majority of those people who already own PDAs are white collar workers who would be the targets for a corporate handheld standard. So, what happens if a person already owns a Palm handheld, and the company decides on Pocket PC as a corporate standard? Are they going to replace their Palms with Pocket PCs?

My point here is that it is not an apples to apples comparison. The people who don't own PDAs today probably are not the people who would be subject to a corporate handheld standard. Those same people probably own a mobile phone, but they probably also won't be interested in a SmartPhone either.

Scott R

02-27-2002, 11:42 PM

Many have lamented the fact that Microsoft and friends (HP, Compaq, Toshiba, Casio, etc.) do not have a "consumer PDA." Presumably this is a sub-$200 device that Palm is using to clean Microsoft's clock with. Microsoft has stated often that they are not targeting consumers with the Pocket PC. While they are not shying away from it, consumers aren't in the Pocket PC bullseye of where they are aiming.
...
So, how is MS targeting consumers? Simple. Stinger.
So you're suggesting that the new MS Smartphones will cost less than $200? If they aren't, your argument falls apart. You begin by suggesting that a "consumer" PDA is a sub-$200 device. You then suggest that MS is targetting the consumer with Stinger. I will be very surprised if Stinger is less than $200.

But it's worse than that. I'd suggest that most of these consumers are not simply buying sub-$200 Palm OS devices, more specifically, they're buying lots of m100s. Those are only $99. I'd further suggest that most consumers are spending less than $50 (in most cases $0) on new phones, since most are given away free with a contract. If Stinger comes out at $400 (which is about where I expect it to), the main people buying them will be the same folks currently buying Treos, Samsung i300s, and Kyocera 6035s. Interestingly enough, many of those users are, in fact, business users who will, IMO, be disappointed by the poor text input mechanism of Stinger.

I think Stinger can, indeed, kill Palm's low-end if it is priced right (under $200). I just don't see that happening.

Scott

Jeff Kirvin

02-28-2002, 12:18 AM

Scott R

02-28-2002, 06:31 PM

So you're suggesting that the new MS Smartphones will cost less than $200? If they aren't, your argument falls apart. You begin by suggesting that a "consumer" PDA is a sub-$200 device. You then suggest that MS is targetting the consumer with Stinger. I will be very surprised if Stinger is less than $200.

I think it's pretty likely that Stingers, marketed more like phones than PDAs, will have a low cost to consumers and be heavily subsidized by the carriers. I have a Cricket cell phone here in Colorado that offers a flat-rate, unlimited minutes plan, for which I pay $44/month. I would love to see them offer a $99 Smartphone with unlimited voice/data for $75-100/month. I'd pay that in a heartbeat.

I don't see it. I'd be willing to bet that the hardware behind Stinger is more expensive than the hardware behind any of the current Palm OS smartphones (Treo, Samsung i300, or Kyocera 6035). I'd also be willing to bet that the MS licensing fee is no lower than for Palm OS. Yet all of these Palm OS smartphones were introduced at about $400 (or more). So, if what you're suggesting is going to happen, they're either going to be making significantly less profit or they are going to be able to negotiate a much better deal with the carriers (where the carriers will be losing more money up front).

Scott

Jason Dunn

02-28-2002, 06:53 PM

Have you used one? Can you play games on a SmartPhone? Seriously, it would be awesome if you could load up Solitaire or Mahjongg on those babies.

Sure. It's a real programming environment with the same Windows APIs as the Pocket PC. Within the limitations of screen size and controls, you can do whatever you want on a SmartPhone 2002.

Is there a difference between the SmartPhone 2002 and PocketPC2002 Phone Edition??? I was assuming they were the same thing.

For the love of God, YES! :roll: The SmartPhone 2002 is a CELL PHONE, the Pocket PC 2002 Phone Edition is a POCKET PC. :-)

In any case, if I'm playing Solitaire, does that translate to 'talk' time? Four hours seems pretty rough there! What if I'm talking to someone who I'm not real interested in, and want to play Solitaire/Mahjongg at the same time? Or what about GPS??? What if I'm cruising down the street doing GPS? With a speakerphone sure I could do it, but what about the power consumption???

I imagine playing Solitaire would be less taxing on the battery than using the radio for constant transmission, so it should last longer than four hours. As for the rest of your scenarios, who knows? I don't know if they'll have GPS for the SmartPhone, although it certainly COULD be done considering they have a bottom port and most will have SD cards for map storage.

Can any other cell phone on the market do what you're asking and last longer than four hours? I somehow doubt it - I sure don't use my cell phone in scenarios like that now, but if I did, I know it wouldn't last more than a couple of hours.

Jason Dunn

02-28-2002, 06:59 PM

Jason Dunn

02-28-2002, 07:03 PM

Yet all of these Palm OS smartphones were introduced at about $400 (or more).

Is that with or without carrier subsidy? If that's WITH carrier subsidy, jeese, smartphones will never take off. But I'm willing to bet you're talking retail here. And remember that first generation phones like that are always more expensive. It will take time for phones like this to come down in price for mass market penetration - this isn't a process that will happen in 12 months. In Canada at least, it took a few years for the Motorolla Startac phones to become common. When they were first released, they were $600 CND WITH a new contract. Now they're $49 or even free...

"If you build it, they will come..." - that still holds true, even in this industry. :-)

Ed Hansberry

02-28-2002, 07:03 PM

I don't see it. I'd be willing to bet that the hardware behind Stinger is more expensive than the hardware behind any of the current Palm OS smartphones (Treo, Samsung i300, or Kyocera 6035). I'd also be willing to bet that the MS licensing fee is no lower than for Palm OS. Yet all of these Palm OS smartphones were introduced at about $400 (or more). So, if what you're suggesting is going to happen, they're either going to be making significantly less profit or they are going to be able to negotiate a much better deal with the carriers (where the carriers will be losing more money up front).
Keep in mind that Stinger based phones do not have expensive touch screens and the screens themselves are physically smaller, though of a higher resolution, than the PalmOS based phones. No Graffiti area either.

I am not saying they are cheaper to make. I don't know. They also do not have (AFAIK) external speakers for music like PPC's do. I presume you use the earpiece or handset itself for listening.

Now, what is the price diff. in a ARM processor vs the Dragonball? I don't know. RAM? The Treo has 8MB. I think most Smartphones will have between 8-16MB. No biggie there. Also, SP's come in grayscale and B&W. Given the Treo has a $500+ price (without subscription) for the color model, I find it hard to imagine the SmartPHone hardware specs costing more.

pda2012

02-28-2002, 07:13 PM

Now, what is the price diff. in a ARM processor vs the Dragonball? I don't know. RAM? The Treo has 8MB. I think most Smartphones will have between 8-16MB. No biggie there. Also, SP's come in grayscale and B&W. Given the Treo has a $500+ price (without subscription) for the color model, I find it hard to imagine the SmartPHone hardware specs costing more.

The Treo has 16MB

Ed Hansberry

02-28-2002, 07:16 PM

The Treo has 16MB

Now I am even LESS inclined to believe Palm has a hardware pricing advantage here.

Scott R

02-28-2002, 07:39 PM

The Treo has 16MB

Now I am even LESS inclined to believe Palm has a hardware pricing advantage here.

I'd be willing to bet that this is one of the cheaper components. RAM is cheap. The Treo probably has less than 4MB of ROM, and it isn't flash ROM. That's probably a bigger difference than the RAM costs. The current Treo being offered is B&W and of a lower resolution than the Stinger. I'll definitely agree with you about the touchscreen, that's probably a fairly expensive component, though remember that Palm sells it's m100 at $99, so let's not assume that that one component is that expensive. Doesn't Stinger also support MP3? There's no memory expansion on any of the current Palm OS smartphones. I believe you or Jason said that the Stinger phones would have memory expansion. The CPU is also more expensive. The Treo has a thumbboard, but 3rd parties are selling those for under $40 and Handspring is charging the same price for the thumbboard and straight-Graffiti models. The Treo is also smaller. I'd argue that that "feat of engineering" is probably it's most expensive aspect. Still, squeezing all of the functionality that Stinger offers into what looks to me like a small package for Stinger, can't be cheap either.

I look forward to hearing the price. I'm hoping to be pleasantly surprised, because I actually like a lot of what I see with this product.

Scott

Ed Hansberry

02-28-2002, 07:51 PM

I'd be willing to bet that this is one of the cheaper components. RAM is cheap. The Treo probably has less than 4MB of ROM, and it isn't flash ROM. That's probably a bigger difference than the RAM costs. The current Treo being offered is B&W and of a lower resolution than the Stinger. I'll definitely agree with you about the touchscreen, that's probably a fairly expensive component, though remember that Palm sells it's m100 at $99, so let's not assume that that one component is that expensive. Doesn't Stinger also support MP3? There's no memory expansion on any of the current Palm OS smartphones. I believe you or Jason said that the Stinger phones would have memory expansion. The CPU is also more expensive. The Treo has a thumbboard, but 3rd parties are selling those for under $40 and Handspring is charging the same price for the thumbboard and straight-Graffiti models. The Treo is also smaller. I'd argue that that "feat of engineering" is probably it's most expensive aspect. Still, squeezing all of the functionality that Stinger offers into what looks to me like a small package for Stinger, can't be cheap either.

I know SD support is available, don't know if it is required. I also don't know of FlashROM is a mandate either.

On the M100 at $99. don't count on that making a profit for Palm, at least at current volumes. It may have a gross profit, but not enough are being sold to absorb the front office and other SG&A items, hence the pretty red colors on their Income Statement.

And the Treo is smaller than the image at http://www.microsoft.com/mobile/phones/smartphone/images/onehand.jpg ? The image at http://www.handspring.com/products/treo/images/overview_treo_pp01.gif sure looks chunkier.

Jason Dunn

02-28-2002, 07:57 PM

I know SD support is available, don't know if it is required. I also don't know of FlashROM is a mandate either.

I think FlashROM will be a requirement - don't most phones have Flash ROM? There are always updates from the carriers to fix glitches and service updates. I've had my phone flashed twice in the past six months.

If the really doesn't have Flash ROM, that seems like a big problem. How are they going to update the modem to GPRS compatibility without Flash ROM....install a patch to RAM? Not a great solution IMO. :?

Ed Hansberry

02-28-2002, 08:00 PM

I think FlashROM will be a requirement - don't most phones have Flash ROM? There are always updates from the carriers to fix glitches and service updates. I've had my phone flashed twice in the past six months.

If the really doesn't have Flash ROM, that seems like a big problem. How are they going to update the modem to GPRS compatibility without Flash ROM....install a patch to RAM? Not a great solution IMO. :?

I wish the juicy specs in the SDK were public. :cry: