New Pocket Loox Models: All That And a Bag of Chips?

[Pat Logsdon]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://firstloox.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1528' target='_blank'>http://firstloox.org/forums/showthr...=&threadid=1528</a><br /><br /></div><i>"The new Loox models (particularly the 720) look pretty exciting. The latest Bluetooth version is included so both sets of wireless should be able to be used simultaneously. Consumer IR means they will be able to function as remotes for TVs, projectors etc. A USB 2.0 [slave] port means ultra-fast synchronisation - and USB 1.1 host means, presumably, the ability to use the new Loox models with USB peripherals such as hard drives and keyboards. A built-in VoIP receiver means they will be equipped for the latest killer application - voice over WiFi.</i><br /><br /> <img src="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/images/web/2003/logsdon_20040623_loox720.jpg" /> <br /><br /><b>Full Specs for the Pocket Loox 710:</b><br /><br />• Processor: PXA27x 416Mhz<br />• ROM: 64MB (appox. 28MB user accessible LOOXstore)<br />• RAM: 64MB<br />• Display: 3.5", QVGA (240x320), 65K colours<br />• Dimensions: 122 x 72 x 16.1 mm<br />• Weight: approx. 175g<!><br /><br /><b>Full Specs for the Pocket Loox 720:</b><br /><br />• Processor: PXA27x 520Mhz<br />• ROM: 64MB (appox. 28MB user accessible LOOXstore)<br />• RAM: 128MB<br />• Display: 3.6", VGA (480x640), 65K colours<br />• Camera: 1.3 Megapixel; integrated video capturing and flash<br />• Dimensions: 122 x 72 x 15.2 mm<br />• Weight: approx. 175g<br /><br /><b>Both models will have:</b><br /><br />• Windows Mobile 2003 Second Edition<br />• Bluetooth 1.2 (latest version)<br />• 802.11b<br />• SDIO/MMC card &amp; Compact Flash type II<br />• 3.5mm headphone jack<br />• VoIP Receiver<br />• 1640mAh replaceable battery<br />• Jog dial, SpeedMenu and voice recorder buttons<br />• Pocket Loox Choice software voucher<br /><br />Pretty solid specs, especially for the 720; it looks like they're gunning for the HP rx4700. What the heck is a VoIP Receiver, though? Anyone care to speculate? Anyone have their sights set on this already?

[Chris Spera]

To my understanding a VoIP Receiver should be a VoIP Phone Client... If you have a compatible VoIP server on your network, you should be able to use the LOOX on your LAN as a phone... I think.

[bbarker]

The specs look good.

• Jog dial, SpeedMenu and voice recorder buttons
It would be hard for me to have a model without this feature. I do a lot of reading on my PPC and a scroll switch on the left side is very convenient.

[arnage2]

these specs look very similar to the Asus A730. i bet this will be well over $500, though

[Dermot81]

My guess is "VoIP Receiver" is fancy talk for a microphone :)

Still a nice looking device though!

[Ryan Joseph]

Whoa. 8O That 720 looks like a sweeeeeet device!
(and for a time, I was tempted to get rid of my phone edition device for this one. How long a time? Zero point six eight seconds, sir.)

If only it were possible to create a phone edition device with those specs. I'd drop some serious money for something like that. But battery life would be almost non-existant if you added GSM/GPRS wireless to the mix.

Oh, well. Someday!

[mar2k]

these specs look very similar to the Asus A730. i bet this will be well over $500, though

Its all but certain that this is a rebadged and slightly repackaged Asus A730, the specs, even that keypad layout is basically identical.

[davenicholls]

I believe a VoIP receiver is a sort of hardware pre-fetch buffer for VoIP packets. It collects the packets off the network side and sorts them into the correct order to be turned into speech. If a packet is required and hasn't arrived from the network the VoIP receiver uses neighbouring packets to 're-create' it as best it can.

All this can, of course, be done in software but a hardware module should improve the quality of VoIP on the Loox.

Dave

[thunderck]

I would love this with carrier wireless :mrgreen: But I know that is just not possible yet. :(

Sorry Ryan did not see your post before I posted. DooH!! :lol: Darn Refresh :wink:

[Duncan]

these specs look very similar to the Asus A730. i bet this will be well over $500, though

Its all but certain that this is a rebadged and slightly repackaged Asus A730, the specs, even that keypad layout is basically identical.

I thought that for a while - but there are some key differences that make me wonder:

The Asus a730 is 190g - the Loox 720 is 175g
The key layout is very different
The Asus has a 1150 mAh battery compared to the Loox's 1640 mAh
The dimensions of the two devices differ in every direction
The Asus has a 3.7" screen as compared to 3.6" for the Loox (though the Loox screen size may have been a typo?)
The Asus screen is 18-bit compared to 16-bit for the Loox
It doesn't seem as if there will be an Asus equivalent of the Loox 710

I don't know whether or not the a730 will have CIR or BT 1.2 or USB 2.0 sync - I don't think that much info has become available yet - has it?

[Ryan Joseph]

I think two of the coolest features of this device are the USB 2.0 sync ability, and the USB host ability.

Imagine syncing large music, video, or picture files at 2.0 speeds. And to be able to just plug in a USB keyboard and go...wow...very cool.

And hey! Both of those features could be added to a Phone Edition without compromising battery life too much! :mrgreen:

[GoldKey]

This does seem to have everything! I am glad to see the USB host. If I stick with PPC's (rather than going the OQO route at some point) USB host is a necessity. That combined with a usable VGA screen could do the trick for me.

[huangzhinong]

these specs look very similar to the Asus A730. i bet this will be well over $500, though

Its all but certain that this is a rebadged and slightly repackaged Asus A730, the specs, even that keypad layout is basically identical.

I thought that for a while - but there are some key differences that make me wonder:

The Asus a730 is 190g - the Loox 720 is 175g

a730 BT is 165g, 190g is for dual wireless with bigger battary.


The key layout is very different
The Asus has a 1150 mAh battery compared to the Loox's 1640 mAh

ASUS dual wireless version has 1440mAh battary, I doubt loox's 1640 mah is correct.


The dimensions of the two devices differ in every direction

very little difference, must come from the plastic housing.

The Asus has a 3.7" screen as compared to 3.6" for the Loox (though the Loox screen size may have been a typo?)

The 3.6" MAY be a typo.



The Asus screen is 18-bit compared to 16-bit for the Loox


ASUS VGA is 16bit too.

loox 720 may be a repackaging of dual wireless a730, which is scheduled to release in Augest.

[Jonathon Watkins]

Hmmmm, or it could be convergent design - arriving at the same point from different directions? It's possible that it's just a coincidence that the units are so similar.......

[Sven Johannsen]

• Camera: 1.3 Megapixel; integrated video capturing and flash


ARRGGHH, now PPC OEMs are doing it. Phone, w/built in camera, PPC, w/built in camera, mp3 player, w/built in camera, sunglasses, w/built in camera.

Believe it or not, the places you can't take a camera are increasing. This thing has two Flash slots and a host USB. If I needed a camera I could buy one, and when the 3Mp CF or SD cameras come out I could upgrade.

[Janak Parekh]

ARRGGHH, now PPC OEMs are doing it. Phone, w/built in camera, PPC, w/built in camera, mp3 player, w/built in camera, sunglasses, w/built in camera.
I hate to say this, and I know Jonathon will want to disagree with me, but this is an unstoppable trend at the moment.

Believe it or not, the places you can't take a camera are increasing.
And, believe it or not, I haven't yet been to one. ;)

Marlof posed a good question the other day that I hadn't seen answered: Pocket PCs, cameras or no, can be used as (potentially surreptitious) voice recording devices. Why aren't companies banning that functionality?

--janak

[Duncan]

a730 BT is 165g, 190g is for dual wireless with bigger battary.

The Loox 720 is also dual wireless - so I'm comparing like with like!

ASUS dual wireless version has 1440mAh battary, I doubt loox's 1640 mah is correct.

The 1640 mAh for the Loox 720 is official (that doesn't mean it can't be typo mind). I haven't seen 1440 quoted for the Asus a730 anywhere - and I went through every reference for the a730 I could find on Google. Doesn't mean you aren't right - but 1100 or 1150 is all I've seen...

ASUS VGA is 16bit too

Asus say it is an 18-bit screen. Every reference I can find says it is an 18-bit screen.

ASUS VGA is 16bit too.

loox 720 may be a repackaging of dual wireless a730, which is scheduled to release in Augest.

It may indeed - but as I pointed out above there are sufficient differences to make that less likely than it once seemed.

[Tye]

Didn't one of the Russian sites recently have photos of the guts for the Loox and the A730? Or was it just the same speculation that they are the same device?
Hmm, I can't find the link right now. Maybe when I get home.

[Paul P]

Believe it or not, the places you can't take a camera are increasing.
And, believe it or not, I haven't yet been to one. ;)

Marlof posed a good question the other day that I hadn't seen answered: Pocket PCs, cameras or no, can be used as (potentially surreptitious) voice recording devices. Why aren't companies banning that functionality?

--janak

Yeah, I was wondering what places are those? Wouldn't you suppose that if they won't let you enter the building with a device that has a built in camera that they wouldn’t let you in with any electronic device period? What would prevent me from disguising a built-in camera in a really old cell phone? I think if the place is really intent on keeping information secret, they will disallow all devices.

[huangzhinong]

ASUS a730 Vga is 16bits, the 18bits is a typo.
http://www.pocketmatrix.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=16798

In cebit, ASUS catalog listed two version a730, one is BT/64mB Ram/1100mAh battary, another one is BT&WI-FI/128mB ram/1440Mah battary.

[maximum360]

Looks sweet. I like the specs and the loox. 8)

If they can nix Wi-Fi and go CDMA or GPRS wireless I would be elated (they can keep Wi-Fi if it won't raise the cost much).

[Jonathon Watkins]

ARRGGHH, now PPC OEMs are doing it. Phone, w/built in camera, PPC, w/built in camera, mp3 player, w/built in camera, sunglasses, w/built in camera.
I hate to say this, and I know Jonathon will want to disagree with me, but this is an unstoppable trend at the moment.

I don't want to disagree with you Janak. I would however like the trend to stop. :?

[Believe it or not, the places you can't take a camera are increasing.
And, believe it or not, I haven't yet been to one. ;)

I've been to many including my local sports centre, local school, just about every place of work...... etc.

[Marlof posed a good question the other day that I hadn't seen answered: Pocket PCs, cameras or no, can be used as (potentially surreptitious) voice recording devices. Why aren't companies banning that functionality?

They often do. :?

[ppcsurfr]

Pretty solid specs, especially for the 720; it looks like they're gunning for the HP rx4700. What the heck is a VoIP Receiver, though? Anyone care to speculate? Anyone have their sights set on this already?

Is it possible that these things are made by HTC too???

I know HTC is making some of the FS products...

Mabuhay! ~ Carlo

[Sven Johannsen]

Marlof posed a good question the other day that I hadn't seen answered: Pocket PCs, cameras or no, can be used as (potentially surreptitious) voice recording devices. Why aren't companies banning that functionality?

--janak

Some do as was mentioned, and some haven't figured that out....yet. There have been threads about how to remove or disable the recording funtion, just as there have about disabling the camera.

Currently my office has, 'no unauthorized pictures or recordings', posted as you come in, though they don't prohibit having the devices. There are sub areas where you leave the devices outside. That includes cameras, phones and PDAs. Most of the contractor facilities I visit are the same. The military installations I do work at strictly prohibit photographic equipment of any sort without express prior approval, and the 17 year olds with guns enforce it. Phones and PDAs are OK at this point.

Been to an airport in the US lately? Pull out your camera and start snapping pictures randomly and see what happens.

[ctmagnus]

Believe it or not, the places you can't take a camera are increasing.
And, believe it or not, I haven't yet been to one. ;)

--janak

One of our local grocery stores doesn't permit photography inside. And this is small-town Canada! 8O

[Gerard]

ctmagnus; are you serious!? A grocery store in Golden??? That's nuts.

I've never encountered such a restriction, but then I tend to avoid office buildings... Our kid's school (kindergarten to grade 7) has no such rule regarding cameras, and I've taken a lot of pictues of class activities and the artwork all over the hallways. It's a pretty open school with a lot of parent participation, none of the militaristic nonsense about hall passes or begging teachers to go to the can. Every last person in the school uses first names in addressing every other person. Cool place. Somehow I doubt there'll be any camera bans anytime soon.

I've not been to the US of late, but this spring I took a couple of dozen pictures at Vancouver International, right up to the place with the frosted glass where my wife and kid disappeared on the way to Japan. Nobody bugged me about it, and a few tourists were snapping last-minute pictures there too. (One Japanese man grabbed me by the arm as I was lining up my CF camera for a shot and asked "Excuse me - are you Mr. Jim Carrey?" and then apologised when I said no... that was fun!) So it's really so scary in US airports now huh? Yet another reason to stay in Canada...

This device - the better model - appeals to me a lot. Two things bug me. The D-pad looks only slightly less bogus than that of the Toshiba e800. And the screen is too small. Having looked carefully at a few apps on the e800's 4" screen it seems plain to me that VGA needs 4" as a minimum. Anything smaller just cramps text and input areas far too much. I'd really rather see a 4.5" screen or bigger, or as a compromise have a 3.6" screen with near-VGA resolution, something like 400x540 pixels.

Otherwise this looks great, a real contender going up against the iPAQ 4700 or the e800. To add GSM without worrying about battery life, just get the Pretec CF unit with a battery integrated, or do as I am doing and hang on for the release of Convergentech's tri-band GSM CF card with integrated 500mAh Li-Ion battery. It's in final software testing now, and the US rep is telling me not too much longer to wait.... he's as eager as I am to get ahold of one of these babies.

[PeterLake]

The military installations I do work at strictly prohibit photographic equipment of any sort without express prior approval, and the 17 year olds with guns enforce it. Phones and PDAs are OK at this point.

Guns, phones and PDAs, all in the same paragraph. The possible combinations of those are endless (or at least 3 factorial).

[Prevost]

Anyone have their sights set on this already?
I do...

Well, although I STILL believe in Palm OS' stability, your comments on PPC own stability [good] record keep encouraging me. Besides, VGA resolution is turning into a NEED for me. 320x320 in some cases is not proving to be up to the task.

For the time this is available, probably there will be Palm OS 6 devices around, so it will be a good time for decisions.

[Prevost]

This device - the better model - appeals to me a lot. Two things bug me. The D-pad looks only slightly less bogus than that of the Toshiba e800. And the screen is too small. Having looked carefully at a few apps on the e800's 4" screen it seems plain to me that VGA needs 4" as a minimum. Anything smaller just cramps text and input areas far too much. I'd really rather see a 4.5" screen or bigger, or as a compromise have a 3.6" screen with near-VGA resolution, something like 400x540 pixels.


As I remember, some photos of the ASUS A716 (VGA - I hope being right with the model's number) show that VGA does NOT make anything smaller, at least in the Today screen. Also, Jason explained me once that there is zooming capabilities in programs like Pocket Word, so probably there is not a problem there either.

With web pages, however, perhaps things would be different. Anyway, I don't think going from 3.6 to 4 inches will make any real difference for your eyes.

[Jonathon Watkins]

Anyway, I don't think going from 3.6 to 4 inches will make any real difference for your eyes.

Well, I would really like a 4 inch device and a 3.6 inch screen just seems way to small. Granted it's a small size difference, but it makes a big practical difference

[Fishie]

Marlof posed a good question the other day that I hadn't seen answered: Pocket PCs, cameras or no, can be used as (potentially surreptitious) voice recording devices. Why aren't companies banning that functionality?

--janak

Some do as was mentioned, and some haven't figured that out....yet. There have been threads about how to remove or disable the recording funtion, just as there have about disabling the camera.

Currently my office has, 'no unauthorized pictures or recordings', posted as you come in, though they don't prohibit having the devices. There are sub areas where you leave the devices outside. That includes cameras, phones and PDAs. Most of the contractor facilities I visit are the same. The military installations I do work at strictly prohibit photographic equipment of any sort without express prior approval, and the 17 year olds with guns enforce it. Phones and PDAs are OK at this point.

Been to an airport in the US lately? Pull out your camera and start snapping pictures randomly and see what happens.

I have and at JFK International terminal no one seemed bothered that I was taking pictures WITH Flash of sparrows that were flying around inside the building looking for food.

[Janak Parekh]

I have and at JFK International terminal no one seemed bothered that I was taking pictures WITH Flash of sparrows that were flying around inside the building looking for food.
Interesting.

In any case, 90% of the places that prohibit photography prohibit the actual taking, not the carrying of a photo-enabled device. Even if airports ban actual taking of pictures, imagine not being able to carry a camera into an airport... :lol:

Sven: as for your kinds of workplaces, either they'll open up or they'll ban electronics altogether very, very soon. Cameras are the current flashpoint, but mobile electronic devices are getting smarter in every regard. You can wish for cameras to go away, but that'll get supplanted by something else.

But we're getting off-topic, so we should probably stop... :nonono:

--janak

[beq]

Wow, so much goodness packed in... wow 8O

[whydidnt]

The 720 model sounds like an excellent device. I wonder if it will ever be directly available to those of us in the US? Not sure why Fujitsu has decided not to offer their PDA's here, but so far that's been the case.

I personally prefer the 3.6" screen since it makes the device much more pocketable. Keep in mind I'm used to looking at my Clie's 3.2" screen at 320x480 and don't have a problem with small text, etc.

I still wish MS truly "VGA'd' the build-in apps, though.

[Gerard]

Just sample dimensions here, a couple of possibilities:

with a 4" screen, width 2.3" x height 3.3" = 7.59 square inches

with a 3.6" screen, width 2.1" x height 2.9" = 6.09 square inches

Seems significant to me, though not huge. 1.5"sq. more total area means an extra 25% viewing area over a 3.6" screen.

[x999x]

Looks very sexy, like a clie dare I say?

[juni]

Apart from all the other specs, there is one feature I really miss from my Loox days: SpeedMenu

That is an exellent little skinnable launcher - beats the one that came with the h2210 easily (does anyone actually use it?)

[Prevost]

Anyway, I don't think going from 3.6 to 4 inches will make any real difference for your eyes.

Well, I would really like a 4 inch device and a 3.6 inch screen just seems way to small. Granted it's a small size difference, but it makes a big practical difference
Would anyone here make the choice between each other OEM based on screen size only? For iPAQs looks as being the most popular although they steered completely towards 3.5 inch screens.

[sdemirel]

Sorry Guys

You will have (unfortunately) no chance to have problem due to the screen size in VGA models :)

Except Toshiba E800, new breed of VGA Pocket PC's cannot be tricked to run in "Native VGA Mode"

Factory installed WM2003SE doest allow to do that and dont expect the manufacturers to compile an older OS (WM2003 namely) just for hackers pleasure

The VGA imlementation in WM2003 SE (exactly) looks like including text menu bars and pictures (pixel doubling) QVGA

[Numsquat]

The 720 model sounds like an excellent device. I wonder if it will ever be directly available to those of us in the US? Not sure why Fujitsu has decided not to offer their PDA's here, but so far that's been the case.

That's a good question. How/where can you get either the Loox or Asus in the US? These two models, plus the new dual-slot HP would be on my upgrade radar. If I can only get the HP in the US though, I guess that would make the choice simpler. :(

[Janak Parekh]

Except Toshiba E800, new breed of VGA Pocket PC's cannot be tricked to run in "Native VGA Mode"
If you're talking about the fact that the size of the Start Menu and some other UI widgets can't be changed, that's true. But you can change the text size to something reasonably small. Frankly, running FE in VGA mode is a little too small, and I have pretty good eyes. And even if you run it with larger fonts, it's absolutely beautiful.

--janak

[Gerard]

To the question regarding choosing based on screen size alone - presumably you are asking 'given most other features being equal? If so, then definitely yes, I would choose based on screen size. The Toshiba e800 is an excellent device and offers fantastic flexibility. If I weren't broke most of the time I'd have bought one long ago. But now there's the promise of an even better device from HP, the Explorer or 4700 model, which apparently offers a 4" screen.

I have never bought an iPAQ. I was given a 3835 (and for a few months a 3870) in exchange for some extended beta testing, otherwise I'd never have bought one. The screens on the 3835 and 3870 offer terrible colour rendition and are very clouded when viewing indoors. Battery irreplaceability (at least in terms of swapping one for another as needed, when away from AC power) is a huge issue as well. And the tiny 3.6" screen was always too cramped after the larger screen of my older Casios.

The 3.5" screen of a Dell X5 I was recently 'payed' with for services is even more annoying in size alone, but thankfully the clarity and colour authenticity are both brilliant and more than make up for the size. At QVGA, it's okay. Such a small screen at 4 times that resolution would be a nightmare, for me. I have excellent vision, but as I said earlier, having seen the e800 in action I cannot imagine using less than a 4" screen for VGA. It'd just be too crowded, too small. If anyone ofers a 5" screen, or better yet a 6", I'll be in heaven and start saving my pennies immediately. Pocketability isn't a priority, as I use these PPCs as my primary computing devices and almost never access a PC. A bigger screen with VGA would be ideal for me.

[Janak Parekh]

The screens on the 3835 and 3870 offer terrible colour rendition and are very clouded when viewing indoors.
That's because they're reflective screens. Those are no longer used...

Such a small screen at 4 times that resolution would be a nightmare, for me.
Once you see WM2003SE, you'll see why it's useable: just because it's higher resolution doesn't mean the print is smaller. Instead, the print is at a higher DPI, so the fonts are not that much smaller than at QVGA, but infinitely sharper. There's a slider which lets you customize the font size. If you want to run it at the smallest size, then yes, the large screen would help. But for a consumer who values size over amount of content that can be crowded onto the screen, a 3.6/3.7" display should be fine. Of course, as you imply, that doesn't necessarily fit your requirements.

--janak

[Kati Compton]

Such a small screen at 4 times that resolution would be a nightmare, for me.
Once you see WM2003SE, you'll see why it's useable: just because it's higher resolution doesn't mean the print is smaller. Instead, the print is at a higher DPI, so the fonts are not that much smaller than at QVGA, but infinitely sharper. There's a slider which lets you customize the font size. If you want to run it at the smallest size, then yes, the large screen would help. But for a consumer who values size over amount of content that can be crowded onto the screen, a 3.6/3.7" display should be fine. Of course, as you imply, that doesn't necessarily fit your requirements.
For me, the true issue isn't that it'd be too small to read (although that could be a problem for some programs), it's that I'm not convinced the *expense* of moving to VGA at 3.6" is justified (for my purposes). I mean, if I'm paying for VGA - I want to really make use of it for viewing web pages and PDFs and stuff. But if it's 3.6" but the fonts are basically the same size and I can't fit any more tasks/appointments/etc on my today screen without squinting, I won't feel that I've gained much from having VGA, but the device will have been more expensive for having that capability.

[Gerard]

Yeah, I use PIE and NetFront and a little bit of ftxPBrowser.... at least half of my time using my PPCs is in web browsing. I would definitely want more stuff crammed into the screen, not just smoother fonts. Frankly QVGA smoothness is close to good enough for me on a 3.5" screen. One of the other main reasons for wanting a bigger screen is that I am a heavy user of Pocket Artist. Drawing and photo retouching would be vastly improved by access to a bigger screen with better resolution.

[Janak Parekh]

I would definitely want more stuff crammed into the screen, not just smoother fonts.
I suspect both you and Kati, and in fact most everyone on this site, desire cramming more information, but I think the general public will find that less critical. ;)

--janak

[Gerard]

My strong suspicion is that within the next 20 years more than 50% of internet access will be via mobile, smaller devices. The shift will take time, as people setting into the notion of looking at a smaller screen, and as wireless networks will have to become a lot closer to universal and free. Right now I can walk down almost any street in my city and find an open AP within 3 blocks. That's cool for nerds like me, but for the average user it's too complicated and bothersome. The probable turning point, where mainstream users begin to make the change psychologically, will come within a year or two after every square inch of every major city is wireless-enabled for free or incredibly cheap. At that point mobile web access will simply be too tempting to resist.

So until that time I'll just keep pecking away in forums and wherever, hoping the OEMs have some bit of vision and might be willing to push the boundaries a little more. What harm, really, in releasing two devices with virtually identical motherboards, slots, buttons, batteries (swappable for thicker, longer-lasting versions), but with the 'deluxe' model having a screen twice the size? With WM2005 or whatever it's going to be called having support for square displays and lots of resolutions this should be reduced to a mere question of screen cost (marginal, probably less than double the ~$30 cost of a small one) and a different shell, with slight rearranging of the guts. If they focus on making a daugherboard-based interior, assembling in modular fashion, that could make for easy reconfiguration to suit lots of markets but with only one basic set of specs. Targeting several specialty markets while spending only slightly more in R&D than they would on a single device model, this could actually prove a far more profitable scheme than what's been happening so far. I see a lot of design time being wasted reinventing the wheel, without much thought being given to treating the Pocket PC more like a PC tower, with even user-swappable components being something that shouldn't be too hard to develop. Not like that thing with the tabs from Thoughts' front page last week though. That was butt-ugly!

[Prevost]

I would definitely want more stuff crammed into the screen, not just smoother fonts.
I suspect both you and Kati, and in fact most everyone on this site, desire cramming more information, but I think the general public will find that less critical. ;)

--janak
You just took the words from my mouth, Janak :wink:

I feel like some people's desires are quite against physical limits, as I wrote long time ago. Even you, Janak, then told me looking at a full page in a VGA PPC weren't going to be so straining on eyes, I feel you now are making your mind up a bit on this. No matter how good someone's vision is, in the long (or not too long maybe) term he will get tired up of fighting with those too small fonts and will use the "full page mode" to allocate himself within the page to get an accurate zoom into the area he wants to see in detail.

All in all, I still think VGA will be mostly useful.

[Janak Parekh]

I feel like some people's desires are quite against physical limits, as I wrote long time ago. Even you, Janak, then told me looking at a full page in a VGA PPC weren't going to be so straining on eyes
Yes and no. VGA can offer those that want full-sized webbrowsing an option. In fact, it works surprisingly well on First Edition and I find it readable in the circumstances I want to webbrowse.

But for simple PIM applications, having the smallest print is not really necessary, and VGA's benefits are more crispness and readability than anything else -- having to tap small fields or to read a phone number while walking down a street is a bit annoying. ;)

I will grant you that much of the public won't be looking at the smallest fonts much of the time. Happy? :P

--janak

[Prevost]

I'm aware of that, Janak. What I intended to say is that I'm affraid getting crispness, full size pages, AND comfortably sized fonts in a 3.5" - 4" screen, all at the same time, is not possible.