Same Chassis, Different Options: A Big Deal? You Bet!

[Jason Dunn]

The most interesting news of the past week was the leaked rumours about the Dell Axim X3. <a href="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=157368">You can read all about it here</a>, but the big news is that Dell has shaved off a lot of the original Axim's size, and it seems like this model will hit an even lower price point than the current X5. Dell representatives made a lot of noise earlier this year about hitting a $150 USD price-point with a Pocket PC, and it seems like the X3 just might do the trick - but they're also going to offer models with Bluetooth or WiFi, and possibly an option for both (if the rumours are to be believed, which might not be the case).<br /><br />If this is the case (and I have to stress <u><b>if</b></u>), this is an important paradigm shift in the Pocket PC arena, because Dell is offering people the same form factor (chassis), but different internal options. The inability to get "function X" in "body type Y" has always frustrated me - if someone wants a small Pocket PC like the iPAQ 1940, why can't they get one with 128 MB of RAM, or one that works with folding keyboards? Imagine going to a car dealership and looking at a sedan, then when you ask for air conditioning, they say "Oh, that model doesn't come with air conditioning, you need to move up to the truck." As consumers, we've grown to expect that we can specify certain types of components for our computers (how much RAM we want, CPU speed, etc.), but the same hasn't been true in the Pocket PC world. Obviously, there are engineering issues to be factored in here (a Bluetooth/WiFi/800 Mhz CPU iPAQ 1940 would last all of 30 minutes before needing a re-charge), but the basic compromises we have to make are frustrating.<br /><br />As much as I laud HP for their aggressive movements in the Pocket PC market, I can't give my wife a good answer when she says "I love the size of the iPAQ 1910 that I'm using now, but you're telling me I have to move up to the bigger iPAQ 2215 just to use a folding keyboard?". I've heard similar questions from iPAQ 2215 owners who want to use a Bluetooth headset, only to find out that they need to move up to the bigger iPAQ 5550 in order to get Bluetooth headset support. HP has the difficult job of making sure each of their products have differentiated features, but something as basic as external keyboard support and full Bluetooth profile support should be supported across all models. HP has made a small step by offering the same form factor (1930, 1945) with different features, but this is quite limited in scope.<br /><br />When someone is buying a personal device like a PDA, the form is as important as the function, and if Dell can offer people the same form factor, but give them choices about the functionality built into that form factor, they will have done something that no other OEM has yet done - only time will tell.

[Kevin Remhof]

Form factors are a major pain. Two examples:

1. Compaq/HP iPaq. The entired 3000 series of iPaqs are almost the exact same form factor. But, they tweaked it with the 3800. No problem, right? Whoops, the connector is different. You can't use it with your old peripherals.

This has been my biggest complaint with iPaqs. They have been basically the same size and shape for years. But, you can't interchange cradles, keyboards, etc.

2. Palm. The Palm had, in my opinion, the best connector ever on any PDA. It was tough, had a retractable cover, and just plain worked. Then Palm messes things up with the V series. Not a major difference but still a change. Then, the 500 series comes up with an even different connector. Why? The 500s are the same size and shape as the Vs.

All I really want is a standard connector across multiple devices from the same manufacturer. If the iPaq 3800 had just dropped the power cable but kept the same connector, no problem.

I do like what Dell is doing. They can do this because they are Dell. Their goal is to sell customized products.

OK, I'm starting to ramble. I'll stop now...

[bjornkeizers]

What we need is a universal connection for everything. Like USB for your Pocket PC. You could connect every keyboard, gps, camera, cradle etc. without having to buy new stuff every time you change PPC's

[famousdavis]

Jason, you have hit the nail on the head!

I'm new to PDAs -- been using my iPAQ 1910 since March. I chose the 1910 because, well, it was the cheapest PDA I could find and the smallest PDA I could find and the best-lit PDA I could find. (At the time, I was initially looking to get a Palm device, but during my evaluation process, I moved to picking a PPC instead -- and I'm so glad that I did!).

Already, I'm anxious to "move-up" to a better device -- I don't really care for wireless that much (at least, I haven't found reason to care for that function -- sometimes you don't know how nice something is until you actually have it), but I long for a battery charge that can power my device for more than 2-3 hours. I'd like faster speed and bigger memory, too.

But there isn't anything like that device that doesn't also come in a bigger shell than my 1910 has. I really like the compactness of my 1910 -- it slips easily into my pocket -- and would opt for a thinner design, not bulkier.

So like your wife, I'll stick with my 1910 for now...

[Scott R]

Ideally, Bluetooth could be that "universal connector." I, too, think HP's decision to hobble the connector of the 1900-series is lame. But if and when more Bluetooth accessories become available (like a Bluetooth foldable keyboard), at least 1945 owners could have a workable solution.

Getting back to the upcoming Dell device. It seems to me that there's a lot of confusion around this. People are combining the old rumors of Dell's next device being around $150 with the recent rumors of a device featuring either built-in Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, or both. If they're going to do all that in one package, it would seem to me that they just killed their own X5 device. Either the $150 device will lack wireless or this more recent rumored device (with Wi-Fi and/or Bluetooth) will be closer to the $400 mark. Then again, I was skeptical that Dell could produce their original PPC (the X5) at the price they did. Were those ancient news reports of Bluetooth being so cheap to integrate into devices really true? If so, the idea of a $150 X3 with Bluetooth may not be out of the question.

Scott

[GoldKey]

One con to this approach is that I would think a modularized approach would not be as compact as an integrated approach. Think motherboards, if you want to customize everything you need add in cards (network, video, sound, modem, etc). If you can go with a standard configuration, everything can be put on the motherboard.

[dean_shan]

What I would like to see Dell to is slim the case, and put the scroll wheel where people's thumbs accually are and don't have it resessed. I just do not like the way the current Dell's feel in my hand. They do have a nice screen though.

[mr_Ray]

That's certainly true about the size/customisability trade-off.
It's been the case for years with laptops and is only recently starting to get better.

Of course the tiny form factor of the PPC just makes things that much worse. But then perhaps we can get around that to some extent with something like SDIO. Currently for many devices you have one socket (with the best case being CF & SD), so you can have that extra memory, OR the GPS, OR the WiFi, OR the bluetooth. IF we could squeeze things down a bit to fit in say 3 small form factor slots, that'd be better. Then basically you could offer 2-3 different CPU/RAM configs for each model, and all the "extras" you can get in your sockets. I guess it'd be like a micro-PCI.

[Brad Adrian]

One con to this approach is that I would think a modularized approach would not be as compact as an integrated approach.
Not necessarily. Most notebook PCs are built on the idea of modularity, and many of them are very compact.

[GoldKey]

One con to this approach is that I would think a modularized approach would not be as compact as an integrated approach.
Not necessarily. Most notebook PCs are built on the idea of modularity, and many of them are very compact.

Yes, but if everything was integrated, like a PPC, they could be more compact.

For a PPC, if you are going to have options for BT, Wi-fi, etc in the unit, then the system board and case have to have space allocated for them. If that option is not used, then the space is wasted and could have been used to make the device more compact.

[Jason Dunn]

For a PPC, if you are going to have options for BT, Wi-fi, etc in the unit, then the system board and case have to have space allocated for them. If that option is not used, then the space is wasted and could have been used to make the device more compact.

You're 100% right, but I think there are some logical elements that can be added/changed without altering the device size: CPU speed, RAM size, serial support for keyboards, and I bet even Bluetooth (and of course the Bluetooth profiles). My basic point was that it's frustrating as a consumer to want the size of the 1945 but the serial functionality of the 2215 or the Bluetooth profiles of the 5450, and not being able to get it.

[GoldKey]

Agreed, I just wanted to list a con of that approach. I think that one con is far outweighed by the pros of giving more choices in user configuration.

[Scott R]

This reminds me a little bit of my rant here:
http://goodthatway.com/news_arc/?id=68

Or, more specifically, some of the comments I made in the thread attached to that blurb. There I'm talking specifically about a "black box" pager-sized Bluetooth phone that would go on your belt and wouldn't draw attention to itself. This way you could keep the size of the PDA down (by not integrating cellular wireless or the larger battery needed to support it directly into the PDA). But this rant of mine actually began a while back in a Brighthand thread. There, I talked about how this "black box" could be expandable in that you could have a snap-on module for not only GSM/GPRS or CDMA but also one for Wi-Fi. So, again, the PDA would communicate with the "black box" via Bluetooth which, in turn, would communicate with your Wi-Fi network. Of course, the lower bandwidth of Bluetooth (compared to Wi-Fi) would be a bottleneck, but I think Bluetooth's speeds are fast enough for most things you'd want to use your PDA for.

Scott

[caywen]

the iPaq 1945 is the best PDA.


(I've never been good at reading comprehension. :huh: )

[caywen]

In my ideal world, I'd cut out the fat and divide the responsibility:

Device #1: The PDA
Responsibilities: User interface and data entry, storage.
Traits: Very slim, big screen, fast
Connections: SDIO and Bluetooth only

Device #2: The Phone
Responsibilities: Provide service to various networks (GPRS, WiFi), provide voice calling
Traits: Very small, who cares about the screen
Connections: WiFi, GPRS, and Bluetooth

Bluetooth would allow these devices to act as one. There would be no need to have a big color screen on the phone. That's what the PDA is for. There would be no reason to have built-in WiFi or GPRS on the PDA. That's what the phone is for. There's no reason to have expansion slots on the phone, that's what the PDA is for.

We should stop demanding every feature under the sun in a single device. Instead, let separate devices concentrate on what they are good at and let them device the labor.

[maximus]

What I would like to see Dell to is slim the case, and put the scroll wheel where people's thumbs accually are and don't have it resessed. I just do not like the way the current Dell's feel in my hand. They do have a nice screen though.

Well, If they move the SD slot to the top section of the PPC, the scroll wheel can move a little bit up. But if that happens, we asians (with small hands) will have trouble reaching it :D :D

[dean_shan]

Well, If they move the SD slot to the top section of the PPC, the scroll wheel can move a little bit up. But if that happens, we asians (with small hands) will have trouble reaching it :D :D

That reminds me of the X-Box controller. That is one of the reasons for it doing poorly in Japan. Microsoft has now redisgned it with gameplay instead of logo display. :wink:

[Scott R]

In my ideal world, I'd cut out the fat and divide the responsibility:What you went on to describe is pretty much exactly the idea that I talked about.

Scott

[dmkozak]

When someone is buying a personal device like a PDA, the form is as important as the function, and if Dell can offer people the same form factor, but give them choices about the functionality built into that form factor, they will have done something that no other OEM has yet done - only time will tell.

This assumes Dell can build a device which works as promised and support those that don't so they do. As the owner of six Axims before getting one that works acceptably for my needs (altho still not as promised) and as an owner shuffled from one Dell employee to another without anyone ever getting back to me or doing what they promised, the absolute key to any PDA is one that works and whose manufacturer actually supports it. Since Dell is unable to do either of those, Dell is off the table as a possible PDA supplier.

[andwright]

>I can't give my wife a good answer when she says "I love the size of the >iPAQ 1910 that I'm using now, but you're telling me I have to move up >to the bigger iPAQ 2215 just to use a folding keyboard?

Not at all - the Pocketop keyboard works wonderfully with the 1910. I'm currently typing in notes on the keyboard with the 1910 positioned some 2cm to the right of the k/b itself although I have to admit I'm using the supplied silvered mirror to get the 1910's left-sided IR port to communicate with the IR port on the Pocketop (which is on the top left of the k/b).

Regards
Andrew

[Jason Dunn]

Not at all - the Pocketop keyboard works wonderfully with the 1910.

It might work well for you, but I personally found it a nightmare to set up, and my wife isn't very fond of it either. Hard-wired docking keyboards are fast, simple, and stable. IR keyboards require too much fussing around IMO, and I don't consider them to be a realistic solution. HP needs to offer serial support on the 1900 series devices.