Why Can't I Upgrade My Device?

[Ed Hansberry]

<a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/windowsmobile/archive/2005/10/06/477999.aspx">http://blogs.msdn.com/windowsmobile/archive/2005/10/06/477999.aspx</a><br /><br /><i>"We released Windows Mobile 5 a few months ago and devices are starting to hit the market now. A question I've seen asked in a number of places is, "Why can't I upgrade my existing WM 2003 SE devices to WM5?" The answer is sure to get me a bunch of angry comments from people who abbreviate our name "M$." You can choose to see this as spin from a greedy marketing wonk, or you can see it for what it is--an honest attempt from a developer to explain how this stuff works."</i><br /><br /><img src="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/images/hansberry/2004/20040326-frustrating.gif" /><br /><br />I can certainly understand the frustration on a user's part that the device they paid $500 or more, considerably more in the case of some phone devices, when they learn their device won't be upgraded by their manufacturer. Anyone pay $900 for an iMATE PDA2K? :evil: Yeah, I know. For that particular model their are illegal alternatives, but that isn't the point. I am not going to steal the upgrade, which is what that amounts to.<br /><br />This blog goes a long way towards explaining the economics of providing upgrades as well as what they plan to do about it with Windows Mobile 5 devices. <i>"In WM5 we spent a lot of time building an infrastructure for enabling updates that anyone can do. We're heading toward a Windows Update sort of experience, where you're using your phone and it suddenly pops up a box that says something like, "An update is available, would you like to have it installed?" Then you just need to select "Yes" and it'll happen for you. How much OEMs and Mobile Operators make use of this infrastructure is up to them, but it's there now. This should solve the "could your grandmother do it?" problem, especially for smaller updates like security fixes."</i><br /><br />I hope this works, but the cynical side of me recalls the "XIP Updates" introduced in Pocket PC 2002 that were used for only one or two OS updates and then left for dead.

[Duncan]

I hope this works, but the cynical side of me recalls the "XIP Updates" introduced in Pocket PC 2002 that were used for only one or two OS updates and then left for dead.

Wasn't that because many manufacturers went for a cheaper FlashROM type that wouldn't support XIP updates?

[unxmully]

Couple of things, major rant time I'm afraid.

1. I may be wrong but didn't Microsoft mandate much of the hardware for the Pocket PC Platform and isn't the range of hardware much reduced compared to the desktop/laptop world?

On that basis, why is the Windows Mobile team unable to do what their desktop brothers have been doing for years and provide a build which can be installed on any Pocket PC which meets minimum requirements?

I don't see HP spending months reworking parts of Windows to allow it to be installed on their laptops, other than specific drivers, so why is WM5 any different.

2. Microsoft have continually underestimated what people want to do with a Pocket PC. Why does the find not search outside my documents or explorer show dlls? 8O

I want to be able to do everything on a Pocket PC that I can on my Laptop other than things that require huge amounts of storage or CPU - DVD or CD ripping for example. I want a proper browser, decent e-mail client, read Usenet and a whole host of other things. Microsoft on the other hand are still following the Palm "simple is best", or whatever it was, mantra.

And this is just another example.

3. I liked the "it's not just greed comment". So it is greed, but what are the other reasons? Lack of desire to service customers appropriately to protect their investment? My 4700 cost me over £400 new and now HP seem (note the seem, I'm not sure yet) to be reneging on the upgrade deal.

Why is the 4150 not supported for an upgrade? It has similar specs to the new piece of junk HP have shipped, or do they just want to churn people through new devices?

Incompetence? Yes, well perhaps.

I have a pretty strong feeling this will be the last Pocket PC device I own. I'm getting pretty fed up of the whole vendor/Microsoft thing and how I, the owner, get's c**ped on by both :?

Andy

[gt24]

Notice how there is an artificial upgrade cycle kinda built into devices at this point?

My first pocket pc device (true, I entered the game kinda late) was a device running Mobile 2002 and running at 400 Mhz. With no BIS, yet decent RAM, this device wasn't a crown jewel (liked to soft reset) but specification wise, it was ok.

Next device was a 2003 SE device running at 624 Mhz. This was a step up in speed and provided hardware features I wanted. The OS update was nice as well. This device won't be able to upgrade to Mobile 5.

Now, with Mobile 2005 out, are there devices selling that are slower than 624 Mhz? Are there devices selling that are either the same specifications, or worse, than devices that cannot upgrade to Mobile 2005? Heck, are there devices selling that are slower than 400 Mhz? (I know, inaccurate comparison, the original ARM 400 Mhz processors were pretty slow beasts due to low FSB)

The point I am making is that hardware is moving on kinda slow... and to keep people buying new devices, they use the software to drive those sales. Wouldn't a ton more people buy new computers every couple of years if that was the ONLY way to get the newer version of Windows? You have that problem with pocket pc devices.

Considering the low amount of competition in the mobile world (OS wise) and the fact that the competition doesn't specifically want to fix this upgrade issue either, I doubt there will be much innovation here. Want a new OS, prepare to pay dearly for it. However, for consumers like me, unless you offer some snazzy new hardware to go with that OS choice, I won't even be all that tempted. At the end of the day, my device still works just as fine as when I first recieved it and while I would like a Mobile 5 upgrade, it certainly isn't necessary.

Interesting point I would like to add... notice how on the Desktop, there was only 3 phases of incompatibilities? There was the DOS era of drivers (load via autoexec.bat... blah blah blah) followed by the Windows 9x days and then the Windows 2k+ days. In reality, there was around 5 or so years of OS upgrades that a person could take part in (excluding DOS... that was quite a period of time. :)). Meanwhile, on the Windows Mobile side, things have DRAMATICALLY changed with each OS revision (correct me if I am wrong...) and that is just what the end user notices. I bet that on the driver side of things that upgrades can be seen as a nightmare.

Then again, the one time where it wasn't so much of a nightmare (Mobile 2003 to 2003 SE), device manufacturers didn't want to upgrade devices because they didn't see the upgrade as changing enough! So, on one hand, either the update is so major that it would cost too much to offer... or it isn't major enough to be considered a worthy update to push. (this is on the manufacturer's side of things, the end user view will be different) Although the new update feature will be nice and might start changing things for the better, I don't forsee any major changes with the next OS... manufacturers aren't really getting hurt by the no-upgrade policy that they have, at least overall.

[UnLoGiC]

I think this all comes down to $$$$$ :( I bet most PDA manufacturers make less $$$$$ by releasing OS upgrades than forcing users to buy a whole new PDA, or atleast thats what they think :evil:

[ipaq_wannabe]

I think this all comes down to $$$$$ :( I bet most PDA manufacturers make less $$$$$ by releasing OS upgrades than forcing users to buy a whole new PDA, or atleast thats what they think :evil:

that could be the case - but moreso is that M$, which dictates the terms the WindowsMobile is handled by the OEMs; just turns a blind eye to it...

well, more PDAs sold, more licensing fees to M$, right?

as a previous post did mention - if the Desktop Team can make it happen, why cant the Mobile Team?

as my father used to say, "if you really want it, you'd get it done... if you dont really want it, there are just TOO many excuses..."

the M$ Mobile Team are nothing more than excuses...

PS: and no, up until, M$ (as well as other vendors) shows true responsibility and gives value for money to the customers, forever it would be known as "EM-dollar-S"...

[lapchinj]

Like it was mentioned in the MSDN article that it's not greed but just cost too much to do an upgrade and thier not sure how many people take advantage of it. I think that's a bunch of hogwash. If their marketing can figure out if something is worth persuing then they can come up with numbers on whether or not to justify an upgrade. I'm sure that wouldn't be too hard to figure out when it comes to upgrading my iPAQ 3600 series PDA but what about my iPAQ 4150? Like unxmully pointed out that the hardware is not too much different than the stuff their offering today. Does that mean I just put the thing in a draw.

I upgraded to a Dell x50v because of the VGA but also because I would be able to upgrade to WM5 when it came out. But I had no intention of putting my 4150 into the draw. I still use the 4150 because of it's slim form factor and I would have upgraded to WM5 in a heartbeat if it was offered. But then again I might not have bought the Dell if an upgrade was offered.

Like others I have talked with I have reached the end of my hardware buying days. My 4150 and Dell should serve me for some time to come and I don't see any great technical breakthroughs that can enhance the PPC enough for me to buy another (unless of course someone comes up with a built in virtual 20" screen to go along with my virtual keyboard and mouse and not to forget a built in 300gb HD with three card slots and a battery that can last 2 weeks all in the 4150 case 8) )

BTW both my 3600 and 3800 series iPAQ's were upgraded to OPIE. I got envolved in the respective communities and am having a ball hacking away - which satisfies the geek in me. So now both my 4150 and x50v are used only for work (and minor diversions :wink: ).

Jeff-

[Fuzzy John]

I think this all comes down to $$$$$ :( I bet most PDA manufacturers make less $$$$$ by releasing OS upgrades than forcing users to buy a whole new PDA, or atleast thats what they think :evil:But these manufacturers do not fail to use the flash-ROM as a selling point. They only fail to deliver on that.

[ipaq_wannabe]

I think this all comes down to $$$$$ :( I bet most PDA manufacturers make less $$$$$ by releasing OS upgrades than forcing users to buy a whole new PDA, or atleast thats what they think :evil:But these manufacturers do not fail to use the flash-ROM as a selling point. They only fail to deliver on that.

yep - i did post a similar-sounding comment to the MSDN blog...

unfortunately, im not really sure it would make any difference, though...

-----

personal note: would it be possible to send this entire thread to the MSDN blog?

... maybe... just maybe a means to get their eyes and ears opened...

[Duncan]

But these manufacturers do not fail to use the flash-ROM as a selling point. They only fail to deliver on that.

Nonsense. Name me one Pocket PC manufacturer - since FlashROM became a requirement - who hasn't offered ROM updates. That is the primary purpose of the FlashROM - not OS upgrades which (and yes - I do mean this) we are damn lucky to get at all.

Do manufacturers want upgraders to buy new Pocket PCs rather than upgrade existing ones? Of course they do...! Out of greed? No - out of a desire to make profit. There is more profit in one than the other - and no self-respecting company with shareholders is going to ignore that.

Remember - if we can't upgrade our OS - our machines don't suddenly become useless. A PPC running WM2003/SE can still run the latest software, is still as fast and capable as ever etc. Expecting that an OS upgrade is a right, or worthwhile for the company,is just silly. If it was worthwhile then it would be offered - no company sits there thinking - 'hey - how can we piss off our users toay?'.

To believe this is MS greed is just as silly - I would imagine that the OS costs the same whether an upgrade or in a new device - as such MS will have no motive in pushing one or the other - though I imagine it pleases them when manufacturers do offer upgrades.

As to those comparing Windows Mobile to desktop Windows - do you really need spelling out the difference between a desktop PC and a consumer PDA?

Hell - I'm no defender of bad customer service or company arrogance - and it would be nice if companies told the unvarnished truth about upgrades etc. (HP anyone?) - but this is one area where people seem unwilling to deal with the realities of the PPC market and thus have very unrealistic expectations (the worst cases being those people who insist they saw a promise to upgrade when they bought their last PPC - I don't believe *any* have made such a promise on release).

[Paragon]

But these manufacturers do not fail to use the flash-ROM as a selling point. They only fail to deliver on that.

Fuzzy John,

Many will agree with you that they don't see the volume of OS upgrades that they would like, I'm sorry but you are very wrong on this point that they fail to use the flash ROM. Imagine...just take a minute and try to imagine what the Windows Mobile platform, and community would be like if devices were not able to be flashed....think about that. Since day one we would never have seen an update. Never. We see updates from OEMs on a regular basis to fix problems, add features and repair bugs. The Dell Axim x50 is now on it's 5th ROM.

I honestly and truly believe we have all misssed the point of having flashable ROMs.....Firstly and far more importantly is the ability to update our devices for the above reasons....secondly, to upgrade the operating systems.

I know there are some real sour points in upgrading. The 4700 Ipaq is a good example. I think Mike points out some very important factors in the whole upgrade procedure, though.

Personally I believe that the biggest problem with the upgrade issue is misinformation. I don't think enough is know about the procedures involved. Mike has sure helped in that area in his blog. I think more has to be know at the time of purchase if a device is going to be upgraded. I realize that is far from an easy thing to do, but in many cases it is possible. As Mike stated in his blog, MS builds its OSs so that devices "can" be upgraded at least once. In the case of many WM2003 devices, they were built with an upgrade in mind. Look at the Dell Axim x50, or the Loox with their memory configuration and that is plain to see. Now look at the 4700 Ipaq and I think that shows what can go wrong when an upgrade is promised.....so it is not and easy thing to do....but we did put Neil Armstrong on the moon several decades ago, so I think there is probably a way to improve the upgrade system.

The other thing that I find confusing when people complain about the availability of upgrades is that in a poll (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=42504&amp;highlight=) I did awhile back, 74% of those who responded said that they actually had an OS upgrade available for their device at some point. That only leaves 26% of us who have been left out in the cold. Now, please don't go chewing my butt for this, I'm only pointing out what appears to be reality. :)

I think another issue that could be covered in attempt to help the average user understand some of the difficulties in doing an upgrade to an OS is to explain why it is difficult for MS to put out an OS that the OEMs can then simply distribute to their customers without touching it, in the same way that desktop OSs are released as has been asked in other posts in this thread and elsewhere around the community.

[edit] I see Duncan and I agree on some aspects and posted at the same time. :)

Dave

[Duncan]

[edit] I see Duncan and I agree on some aspects and posted at the same time. :)

Ah - but you expressed yourself much more diplomatically...! ;)

[ipaq_wannabe]

Do manufacturers want upgraders to buy new Pocket PCs rather than upgrade existing ones? Of course they do...! Out of greed? No - out of a desire to make profit. There is more profit in one than the other - and no self-respecting company with shareholders is going to ignore that.

how do you know? have you ever owned a BIG company, or at least be at the helms of a BIG company?

the reasoning "the desire to make a profit," is nothing more but textbook case studies - it is but human nature to always find ways to outdo the other... and especially when MONEY is concerned...

If it was worthwhile then it would be offered - no company sits there thinking - 'hey - how can we piss off our users toay?'.

To believe this is MS greed is just as silly - I would imagine that the OS costs the same whether an upgrade or in a new device - as such MS will have no motive in pushing one or the other - though I imagine it pleases them when manufacturers do offer upgrades.

how do you know? do you work at M$? do you know what goes in the minds of those in the helm?

if you do throw the question back at me, i would reply with "No... I havent been at the helm of M$, nor know what goes on in their minds... But I have my share of being with people at the helm of smaller companies, and quite privy to their un-written rules of conduct..." If smaller companies can do it, why cant the BIGGER boys?

[Paragon]

[edit] I see Duncan and I agree on some aspects and posted at the same time. :)

Ah - but you expressed yourself much more diplomatically...! ;)

Thank you Duncan. I don't think anyone has ever classified me as diplomatic before. :D

[Duncan]

how do you know? have you ever owned a BIG company, or at least be at the helms of a BIG company?

the reasoning "the desire to make a profit," is nothing more but textbook case studies - it is but human nature to always find ways to outdo the other... and especially when MONEY is concerned...

No - I've never owned a big company. Therefore I have absolutely no ability to judge the obvious and openly stated motives of big companies. See also why I can't possibly judge how good a football game is :roll:

I'm curious - if I can't know how can you? Do you own a big company? At the moment I'm really struggling to follow your argument...

how do you know? do you work at M$? do you know what goes in the minds of those in the helm?

if you do throw the question back at me, i would reply with "No... I havent been at the helm of M$, nor know what goes on in their minds... But I have my share of being with people at the helm of smaller companies, and quite privy to their un-written rules of conduct..." If smaller companies can do it, why cant the BIGGER boys?

*sigh* - of course. How can I be so blind. Small companies are small because they don't piss off their customers. Clearly the big companies got to be so by pissing off as many customers as possible. Obviously too - MS can't possibly be interested in selling their new OS to existing custmers as well as new ones - it's not as if that's their primary business now is it...? :roll:

By the way - you might want to get your keyboard checked out - your 'S' key seems to be malfunctioning.

[ipaq_wannabe]

how do you know? have you ever owned a BIG company, or at least be at the helms of a BIG company?

the reasoning "the desire to make a profit," is nothing more but textbook case studies - it is but human nature to always find ways to outdo the other... and especially when MONEY is concerned...

No - I've never owned a big company. Therefore I have absolutely no ability to judge the obvious and openly stated motives of big companies. See also why I can't possibly judge how good a football game is :roll:

I'm curious - if I can't know how can you? Do you own a big company? At the moment I'm really struggling to follow your argument...

well, i did note my reply if ever you did throw the question back at me...

how do you know? do you work at M$? do you know what goes in the minds of those in the helm?

if you do throw the question back at me, i would reply with "No... I havent been at the helm of M$, nor know what goes on in their minds... But I have my share of being with people at the helm of smaller companies, and quite privy to their un-written rules of conduct..." If smaller companies can do it, why cant the BIGGER boys?

*sigh* - of course. How can I be so blind. Small companies are small because they don't piss off their customers. Clearly the big companies got to be so by pissing off as many customers as possible. Obviously too - MS can't possibly be interested in selling their new OS to existing custmers as well as new ones - it's not as if that's their primary business now is it...? :roll:

maybe i didnt explain myself clearly - my point with the smaller companies is that if small companies, small as they seem; have their unwritten rules on HOW to make a profit [greedily], why cant the bigger companies be any better?

in other words - if small companies already know how to find ways to squeeze out every cent from their customers, moreso the bigger companies (especially with the bigger overhead due to many many factors, ie., burecracy, ect.)...

By the way - you might want to get your keyboard checked out - your 'S' key seems to be malfunctioning.

i dont think there is something wrong with my keyboard - as you can see, my 'S'es are coming out okay...

but for some reason when ever it follows is a capital 'M' it suddenly turns into a US dollar sign... :roll:

[guinness]

I'm still running a WM 2003 device, and I'm not all that upset about the lack of any further upgrades, since it's served me well, and quite frankly, the WM2005 devices don't seem to offer any real advantages in upgrading to a new device. Some are faster and offer VGA screens, but there are still quite a few models featuring a ho hum QVGA LCD and small amounts of memory. WM2005 almost seems analogous to Vista, a few improvements here and there, but what's really worth upgrading for?

IMO, the PDA seems rather stagnant, or the market is shifting towards convergence devices.

[shawnc]

I was quite upset to find out that the premium price I paid for my 4150 did not entitle me to purchase at least one upgrade. But quite frankly, with all the issues I'm hearing about WM5, I'm glad to be staying right where I am. However, I am taken aback by a couple of comments.

That is the primary purpose of the FlashROM - not OS upgrades which (and yes - I do mean this) we are damn lucky to get at all. ).

This is just an inane comment. Anyone who drops $500 on a stripped-down minature version PC should not be considered lucky to be offered the opportunity to pay for an OS upgrade.

Do manufacturers want upgraders to buy new Pocket PCs rather than upgrade existing ones? Of course they do...! Out of greed? No - out of a desire to make profit. There is more profit in one than the other - and no self-respecting company with shareholders is going to ignore that. ).

How can anyone make this distinction? Of course corporations are beholden to their shareholders. But with both greed and reasonable profit being so subjective, I just don't know how this statement is made with such absolute certainty. I don't know where the imaginary line is that separates greed from profit, but I would be surprised if anyone but the most ardent MS booster would deny that greed seems to be the overwhelming driver of their behavior when it comes to PPC's.

[Paragon]

I was quite upset to find out that the premium price I paid for my 4150 did not entitle me to purchase at least one upgrade.

I guess HP must have used more than one type of packaging on their 4150, because on mine, there was ZERO mention of me getting a WM5.0 upgrade. Shawn, you assumed you would get one, and you didn't. Now you're upset because HP did not live up to your assumptions. They lived up to mine. No way I counted on the buggers giving me an update. I figured if I got one great...bonus...if not, it's still one of the best WM devices on the market.


I would be surprised if anyone but the most ardent MS booster would deny that greed seems to be the overwhelming driver of their behavior when it comes to PPC's.

"Greed"??? You are aware that to date Microsoft has yet to make a profit off Windows Mobile. I guess we have different meanings for the word "profit" and "greed". ;)

Dave

[Duncan]

This is just an inane comment. Anyone who drops $500 on a stripped-down minature version PC should not be considered lucky to be offered the opportunity to pay for an OS upgrade.

You may think it inane - I think it simply reflects the truth. You bought a Pocket PC with a particular working OS. You have every right to expect it to be updated to take into account bug fixes etc. - you have no right to anything else. It is a consumer device - not a desktop PC. If you think your were buying something else then you were kidding yourself and letting the name confuse you.

I note the way you slipped in some indignation about paying for an OS upgrade. Please tell me you aren't one of these people who not only think they have a right to an OS upgrade but also that it should be given to you gratis?

Whether you like it or not the only obligation any of the companies have is to do what is profitable. So yes - if they do feel able to offer an OS upgrade you *are* lucky to have the opportunity to buy it.

How can anyone make this distinction? Of course corporations are beholden to their shareholders. But with both greed and reasonable profit being so subjective, I just don't know how this statement is made with such absolute certainty. I don't know where the imaginary line is that separates greed from profit, but I would be surprised if anyone but the most ardent MS booster would deny that greed seems to be the overwhelming driver of their behavior when it comes to PPC's.

Greed is destructive and takes no account of the future or customer retention - sensible and thriving companies know that profit need to be balanced with keeping the customer base happy. No matter what the prejudices against them - you can't argue that companies like MS and HP are unaware of the difference.

You may feel that this is an issue of greed. I would argue that you are being simplistic and ignoring the realities. MS, and all the OEMs, are interested in making profit and building/retaining customers - and that balance will never make everyone happy.

In the end I just don't understand what people expect. No-one has promised OS upgrades for all devices. For some it will be profitable, for others it won't. In either case your PPC doesn't become useless junk just because it won't get an upgrade - and all the petulance and stamped feet in the world won't make it any more reasonable or profitable to demand universal OS upgrades.

[unxmully]

But these manufacturers do not fail to use the flash-ROM as a selling point. They only fail to deliver on that.

Nonsense. Name me one Pocket PC manufacturer - since FlashROM became a requirement - who hasn't offered ROM updates. That is the primary purpose of the FlashROM - not OS upgrades which (and yes - I do mean this) we are damn lucky to get at all.

Good lord, that's a very fine hair you've split there old chap. So perhaps the purpose of the flash ROM should have been more sensibly publicised as the ability to fix minor flaws in the original version.

That way we'd have avoided all this disappointment and angst.

Do manufacturers want upgraders to buy new Pocket PCs rather than upgrade existing ones? Of course they do...! Out of greed? No - out of a desire to make profit. There is more profit in one than the other - and no self-respecting company with shareholders is going to ignore that.

Remember - if we can't upgrade our OS - our machines don't suddenly become useless. A PPC running WM2003/SE can still run the latest software, is still as fast and capable as ever etc. Expecting that an OS upgrade is a right, or worthwhile for the company,is just silly. If it was worthwhile then it would be offered - no company sits there thinking - 'hey - how can we piss off our users toay?'.

Though in some cases you'd be right if that was a view you held. HP with:

- the 90 day warranty, thankfull not allowable in the UK.
- removal of the 4700 from the product range.
- finding out about the WM5 upgrade delay shortly before it was suggested it would be released (note the non-use of promise).
-failure to fix the Bluetooth driver memory problem in the updates shipped.
- failure to withdraw the cancellation of the 4700 in the UK. Perhaps the comment from someone on this site was in error - http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=43388&amp;postdays=0&amp;postorder=asc&amp;start=30 Oh, spooky. That was you.

If it swims, quacks, waddles and goes well with hoi-sin sauce and pancakes it's probably reasonable to assume a duck.

To believe this is MS greed is just as silly - I would imagine that the OS costs the same whether an upgrade or in a new device - as such MS will have no motive in pushing one or the other - though I imagine it pleases them when manufacturers do offer upgrades.

As to those comparing Windows Mobile to desktop Windows - do you really need spelling out the difference between a desktop PC and a consumer PDA?

Go on, point out the differences. My Ipaq and this iBoook I'm typing on both have:

Persistent storage (hard disk v Flash ROM)
Volatile memory (RAM and, err, RAM)
A CPU
A display
Data input methods
Networking (iPaq wins here, no Bluetooth on my iBook)

Nope, there must be something I'm missing. You'll need to clue me in.

h-ll - I'm no defender of bad customer service or company arrogance - and it would be nice if companies told the unvarnished truth about upgrades etc. (HP anyone?) - but this is one area where people seem unwilling to deal with the realities of the PPC market and thus have very unrealistic expectations (the worst cases being those people who insist they saw a promise to upgrade when they bought their last PPC - I don't believe *any* have made such a promise on release).

I suspect it's more that people pay a lot of money for these devices and reasonably cannot understand why Microsoft and the vendors between them can't come up with a scheme whereby people can upgrade at low cost to the vendor.

That's all. It's a problem they cracked on the desktop in 1995, so why 10 years later are we still in a situation where upgrades are so complex and hard to deliver?

[rob_ocelot]

I was quite upset to find out that the premium price I paid for my 4150 did not entitle me to purchase at least one upgrade.

I guess HP must have used more than one type of packaging on their 4150, because on mine, there was ZERO mention of me getting a WM5.0 upgrade. Shawn, you assumed you would get one, and you didn't. Now you're upset because HP did not live up to your assumptions. They lived up to mine. No way I counted on the buggers giving me an update. I figured if I got one great...bonus...if not, it's still one of the best WM devices on the market.


Further to that, why are we complaining in 2005 about WM5 for the 4150 when we were doing the exact same complaining in 2004 over the 4150 not getting WM2003SE? IMO the chances of us getting WM5 were far less than getting SE.

What *does* add insult to injury from HP's end of it is that they release a newer, more limited model in the same form factor two years after the fact with WM5. Now, I completely understand that the existing 4150 will NEVER be able to run WM5 properly. I accept that. If this visual replacement for the 4150 were as feature packed as the original, with more memory and VGA (though not manditory) I would have been completely happy with abandoning the 4150 for such a device. This device still has not come in my eyes. Maybe next year HP will redeem themselves. :devilboy:

The reality is that SE and WM5 don't offer any radically different updates to the functionality of the device (other than WM5's way of handing memory/ROM). Third party software vendors will have to develop programs that are friendly to three (if not four) flavors of OS now since a large protion of their revenue will be coming from an installed user base who cannot upgrade. I wouldn't be suprised if a lot of the WM5 'features' end up being replicated in third party programs like what Nyditot 4.x did for screen rotation with non-SE people -- there's demand for such functionality.

This whole situation reminds of me of Handheld and Palm PC days when there were three incompatible processors that developers had to develop for. We were jealous of all you 206 Mhz ARM boys who got all the best new software while we toiled with clunky slow Super Hitachi processors.

[Duncan]

Good lord, that's a very fine hair you've split there old chap. So perhaps the purpose of the flash ROM should have been more sensibly publicised as the ability to fix minor flaws in the original version.

That way we'd have avoided all this disappointment and angst.

No hairs split here - that was *exactly* how the purpose of the FlashROM was presented to us. Not one manufacturer has sold a device on the basis it could be upgraded to the next OS. I challenge you to find a single example.

Though in some cases you'd be right if that was a view you held. HP with:

- the 90 day warranty, thankfull not allowable in the UK.
- removal of the 4700 from the product range.
- finding out about the WM5 upgrade delay shortly before it was suggested it would be released (note the non-use of promise).
-failure to fix the Bluetooth driver memory problem in the updates shipped.
- failure to withdraw the cancellation of the 4700 in the UK. Perhaps the comment from someone on this site was in error - http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=43388&amp;postdays=0&amp;postorder=asc&amp;start=30 Oh, spooky. That was you.

If it swims, quacks, waddles and goes well with hoi-sin sauce and pancakes it's probably reasonable to assume a duck.

The 90 day warranty is a by-product of the shockingly poor counsumer legislation in the highly de-regulated USA. I may think it a very bad thing - but frankly I suspect that HP are merely the first of many who will get away with it because they can.

The others are examples of incompetence and stupidity rather than deliberate planning to piss off customers. So no - I see no duck - and you are *really* stretching to try and make your point.

Not sure why you are pulling me up for reporting what HP told me - especially when I gave the source. Would you prefer I hadn't said anything? FTR - I think it rather more likely that wheels are simply moving very slowly than that I was misinformed.

Go on, point out the differences. My Ipaq and this iBoook I'm typing on both have:

Persistent storage (hard disk v Flash ROM)
Volatile memory (RAM and, err, RAM)
A CPU
A display
Data input methods
Networking (iPaq wins here, no Bluetooth on my iBook)

Nope, there must be something I'm missing. You'll need to clue me in.

Facile argument. One is a full blown computer - the other is a consumer device that is able to run programs but is designed to a very different mandate. My Sky+ box has a CPU, persistent storage, display, means of inputting data and networking abilities. My scientific calculator has peristent storage, CPU, display, means of inputting data - and runs programs. Neither compare to my laptop in terms of purpose and nature.

I suspect it's more that people pay a lot of money for these devices and reasonably cannot understand why Microsoft and the vendors between them can't come up with a scheme whereby people can upgrade at low cost to the vendor.

That's all. It's a problem they cracked on the desktop in 1995, so why 10 years later are we still in a situation where upgrades are so complex and hard to deliver?

Because (draws breath as he prepares to repeat himself) PPCs are not desktop or laptop PCs - they are consumer devices, tightly locked down to be more efficient. On a desktop PC you can store hundreds of drivers to cover all eventualities, super powerful processors to iron over inefficiencies in code etc. - Pocket PCs do not have that luxury.

Look- as long as you keep thinking that the PC in Pocket PC means the same as PC in desktop PC - you are destined to keep being disappointed. We are heading towards the point where they are more alike - but this is an evolutionary process and takes time.

[unxmully]

Snipped



Because (draws breath as he prepares to repeat himself) PPCs are not desktop or laptop PCs - they are consumer devices, tightly locked down to be more efficient. On a desktop PC you can store hundreds of drivers to cover all eventualities, super powerful processors to iron over inefficiencies in code etc. - Pocket PCs do not have that luxury.

They don't need to. There is a small subset of hardware that is used and which drivers etc. are installed can be determined by the installation process.

Look- as long as you keep thinking that the PC in Pocket PC means the same as PC in desktop PC - you are destined to keep being disappointed. We are heading towards the point where they are more alike - but this is an evolutionary process and takes time.

OK, ignoring the condescending tone, it appears that your whole argument for the lack of upgrades stems from your assertion that we should not consider a Pocket PC to be a computer. Or at least that's the way I read it

So refute my assertion that they are computers. Offer some reasons why. Facile comments about Sky Boxes and Tivos need not apply.

[Duncan]

OK, ignoring the condescending tone,

Oh don't be so ridiculous...! :roll:

it appears that your whole argument for the lack of upgrades stems from your assertion that we should not consider a Pocket PC to be a computer. Or at least that's the way I read it

Then you didn't follow my point at all. Of course it is a computer - just not the same kind as a laptop or desktop PC. I just don't make the mistake of treating different computing devices, with different niches and purposes, as if what applies to one applies to all.

So refute my assertion that they are computers. Offer some reasons why. Facile comments about Sky Boxes and Tivos need not apply.

That was not your point at all - your point was that what applies to a desktop/laptop PC should apply to a Pocket PC - which is daft. My comparison to Sky+ and calculators stands as a (entirely non-facile) way of demonstrating why expectations of Pocket PCs (essentially conusmer devces with computing abilities) behaving just like the vastly more powerful and generalised desktop/laptop are, well, nonsensical.

How can you not see how a desktop PC getting an OS upgrade is not directly comparable to a Pocket PC getting one?

[unxmully]

OK, ignoring the condescending tone,

Oh don't be so ridiculous...! :roll:

Well try to keep a more normal tone to your replies. That way people won't think you're trying to talk down to them.

it appears that your whole argument for the lack of upgrades stems from your assertion that we should not consider a Pocket PC to be a computer. Or at least that's the way I read it

Then you didn't follow my point at all. Of course it is a computer - just not the same kind as a laptop or desktop PC. I just don't make the mistake of treating different computing devices, with different niches and purposes, as if what applies to one applies to all.

Only by your rules is the distinction required, and only to support your position on upgrades. I take the opposing view which is that upgrades should be the norm for devices as capable as these, and some of the prevous generations.

So refute my assertion that they are computers. Offer some reasons why. Facile comments about Sky Boxes and Tivos need not apply.

That was not your point at all - your point was that what applies to a desktop/laptop PC should apply to a Pocket PC - which is daft. My comparison to Sky+ and calculators stands as a (entirely non-facile) way of demonstrating why expectations of Pocket PCs (essentially conusmer devces with computing abilities) behaving just like the vastly more powerful and generalised desktop/laptop are, well, nonsensical.

How can you not see how a desktop PC getting an OS upgrade is not directly comparable to a Pocket PC getting one?

Because other than repeating your PPC != Desktop mantra you've offered no technical reasons why it can't be done.

Tell me, would you prefer upgrades to be more readily available than they are now? Do you think this would be a good thing?

[Sven Johannsen]

I love these threads, they are so funny. There are so many folks that have such fascinating insight into business; small, large, software, hardware, what have you. It's amazing to me that HP, MS, Dell, et. al. are still in business, given the shoddy way they run them.

No point in commenting on all the MS and HP are money grubbing Scrooges. Those with those opinions won't be swayed by any argument I could mount. They believe what they want to believe.

I thought the following deserved a minor comment though.

I don't know where the imaginary line is that separates greed from profit, but I would be surprised if anyone but the most ardent MS booster would deny that greed seems to be the overwhelming driver of their behavior when it comes to PPC's.

If you look at the financial statements, http://www.microsoft.com/msft/earnings/FY05/earn_rel_q4_05.mspx , you'll see the mobile and embedded devices devision has been running at a loss since it's inception. Less of a loss this year than last and the year before. Not sure how you define greed, but not wanting to lose less just doesn't seem to fit my concept of it. Profit hasn't even become an issue yet.

[IpaqMan2]

I am going to throw my 2 cents in here.

Not responding to anyone's comment, but on the topic of the thread..

Simply put, Pocket PCs today should have the ability to be updated. These PDAs are more powerful than many computers just a few short years ago. So why can't they be upgraded to the new OS? The hardware on many of the 2003 SE PPCs are similar or the same as many of the newer WM 5.0. Sure there is some memory differences, but for the most part most PDAs should be able to be updated. Lets look at Dell. How long ago did the Axim 50 come out? Yet, Dell has managed to get the new OS to work on the Axim 50.

This is what Microsoft has done since the 80's You buy a PC, you keep the PC. When a newer version of the OS comes out, you upgrade. Sure there were some hardware differences from the 386 DOS days to Windows 95, from 95 to ME/2000/XP new hardware needed to be purchased but for the most part you were able to keep your PC.

I can't see why PPC can't be the same. Sure some older PPC may not run the newer upgrade, but why can't most current PPCs be upgraded?

The questions isn't that most people wont need to upgrade or that most tasks can still be done with the older OS. The question is, DO I WANT TO UPGRADE? In other words upgrading should be my decision, just like upgrading my PC should be.

I use the Ipaq 4355, running 2003, the only PPC with a built in keyboard that isn't a phone.. It can still do pretty much everything any other PPC can do, even with that OS. Now I understand I will never get VGA on that device, but if I wanted 2003SE I would have to move to another PPC because I can’t upgrade. Well I’m tired of it.


I've always owned iPaqs from the day PPCs came out. Well I am now getting tired of how HP is running them.. From this point out I will not buy another iPaq unless something dramatically changes. From here on out It looks like I will be going to Dell..because at least they give a damn about their customers.

[Janak Parekh]

This is what Microsoft has done since the 80's You buy a PC, you keep the PC. When a newer version of the OS comes out, you upgrade.
I think most the other points I was going to make on either side have been addressed, but I just wanted to touch upon this: it's no longer universally true. There are a growing class of computers (laptops, tablet PCs, UPCs, media centers, what-have-you) that do not have an upgradeable OS. That is, you might be able to install the next version of Windows, but you won't be able to install any of the original drivers available for the device, so you lose some of the functionality. Sony is, in particular, notorious about this... and I expect the rest of the consumer desktop and laptop market will follow this route.

--janak

[ipaq_wannabe]

This is what Microsoft has done since the 80's You buy a PC, you keep the PC. When a newer version of the OS comes out, you upgrade.
I think most the other points I was going to make on either side have been addressed, but I just wanted to touch upon this: it's no longer universally true. There are a growing class of computers (laptops, tablet PCs, UPCs, media centers, what-have-you) that do not have an upgradeable OS. That is, you might be able to install the next version of Windows, but you won't be able to install any of the original drivers available for the device, so you lose some of the functionality. Sony is, in particular, notorious about this... and I expect the rest of the consumer desktop and laptop market will follow this route.

--janak

well... that is why ive stopped using Sony's for almost five years now - compared to either a Toshiba (Japan, in my case), or an IBM - it is quite easy to get the drivers you need (readily available for download), compared to sony...

and as for handheld devices - after HP's track record of support (inspite of their expensive iPaqs); well, i now have an Axim x50v (upgradeable, however, to upgrade is a different question)...

*thumbs up*

[lapchinj]

I was quite upset to find out that the premium price I paid for my 4150 did not entitle me to purchase at least one upgrade. But quite frankly, with all the issues I'm hearing about WM5, I'm glad to be staying right where I am. However, I am taken aback by a couple of comments...
It seem that we share the same taste in PDA's and also the same thoughts about the 4150 and WM5. I bought a Dell x50v about 6 months ago mainly because it was a VGA PPC getting a lot of good reviews on the forum. I might have purchaced it even without the upgrade offer but it did make the case for buying the x50v. At the moment I'm not touching the upgrade to WM5 with all the issues popping up.

Jeff-

[lapchinj]

...If you look at the financial statements, http://www.microsoft.com/msft/earnings/FY05/earn_rel_q4_05.mspx , you'll see the mobile and embedded devices devision has been running at a loss since it's inception...
I'm not a business wiz (or a little one) but I would like to know how they stay in business if they've been running until now at a loss? Nobody there seems to be starving. I think that MS is like any other business in wanting to make a profit. They do this very, very well and when they have a target they do not stray too far from the bulls-eye so I don't buy the 'greed' part. But I would still like to know how they (and other companies that are loosing money) stay around while loosing money. Maybe I can go into business and loose money while making a living. Because right now I'm just loosing money and not making a living.

Jeff-

[carrigaline]

But I would still like to know how they (and other companies that are loosing money) stay around while loosing money. Maybe I can go into business and loose money while making a living. Because right now I'm just loosing money and not making a living.

Jeff-


You need to make some cash cow products like Windows OS for the desktop/laptop, Windows Server editions and Office Suite and then you can play around in the mobile, games console (and perhaps MP3 player hardware?) and TV sectors on a long term bet basis............best of luck! ;)

[shawnc]

I guess HP must have used more than one type of packaging on their 4150, because on mine, there was ZERO mention of me getting a WM5.0 upgrade. Shawn, you assumed you would get one, and you didn't. Now you're upset because HP did not live up to your assumptions. They lived up to mine. No way I counted on the buggers giving me an update. I figured if I got one great...bonus...if not, it's still one of the best WM devices on the market. Dave

Dave,

My guess is that HP used consistent packaging on their 4150 and that your's and mine were the same. But maybe you already knew that and your comment was an attempt at sarcasm :? . I agree that the ability purchase at least one upgrade was an assumption on my part. I don't think that was an ureasonable assumption, but if you do, then you are certainly entitled to that opinion. I thought there was an upgrade between WM5 and what I currently have, but I could be mistaken. I do know that I would not have made the purchase had I known that an update wouldn't be made available. My prior experience with HP probably caused me to have high expectations. That is certainly not the case anymore. We do agree on the fact that the 4150 continues to be one of the best PPC's on the market.

[shawnc]

Further to that, why are we complaining in 2005 about WM5 for the 4150 when we were doing the exact same complaining in 2004 over the 4150 not getting WM2003SE? IMO the chances of us getting WM5 were far less than getting SE. .

I wasn't! My issue was not having the chance for an upgrade to whatever was the subsequent release. I never mentioned WM5.

[shawnc]

Duncan,

Very good counter. I respect your perspective. I disagree with it, but respect it :wink: .

I note the way you slipped in some indignation about paying for an OS upgrade. Please tell me you aren't one of these people who not only think they have a right to an OS upgrade but also that it should be given to you gratis?

Absolutely not! You misread my indignation. I don't know who "those people" are, but no way do I ever expect a free upgrade.

[fmcpherson]

Everyone stop for a moment. Pick up your Pocket PC and look at the bottom. This is an "industry" that for 10 years has not been able to figure out how to provide the same hardware adapters on devices across brands let alone manufacturers. There is a lot more standardization in the PC world than the PDA world.

There was a day when there were OEM versions of DOS. They existed because of the differences each company insisted on having. They viewed the differences as a competitive advantage. Further they didn't want the PCs they made to turn into commodities, which happened when it became to easily interchange components. Do you think having been down this road before HP wants to do it again?

[Sven Johannsen]

Lets look at Dell. How long ago did the Axim 50 come out? Yet, Dell has managed to get the new OS to work on the Axim 50.

It's not a matter of Dell 'managing' to get it to work, and the others not being able to. Dell and other specifically designed their hardware with an eye towards potential upgrade. That's pretty obvious, as it is for the 4700 and it would seem the 3715 too. Look at the memory complement of these devices.* Now it becomes a business decision as to whether to provide that upgrade. That has to be made on an investment vs return analysis.

You'll notice that Dell is releasing an X51. What is it but an X50 with a bit more ROM (not a tech marvel, but cheaper to implement today than when the X50 came out) and WM5. They will recoup their development and testing investment by selling X51s, not by selling upgrades to X50s. They did this before when they upgraded X5s from 2002 to 2003. They continued to sell X5s with 2003.

I will bet that HP will continue to sell 4700s with WM5 on them after they release the upgrade. For whatever reason, they don't believe it is worth developing the upgrade for the 3715. My guess is that they aren't happy with the Media Companion line and will be discontinuing it. Investing in it wouldn't be prudent.

*I recall when these devices with the big ROM and usual RAM came out. "What are they thinking?" we all said. "We need RAM not ROM. How stupid they are". :)

[Cybrid]

This is what Microsoft has done since the 80's You buy a PC, you keep the PC. When a newer version of the OS comes out, you upgrade.
I think most the other points I was going to make on either side have been addressed, but I just wanted to touch upon this: it's no longer universally true. There are a growing class of computers (laptops, tablet PCs, UPCs, media centers, what-have-you) that do not have an upgradeable OS. That is, you might be able to install the next version of Windows, but you won't be able to install any of the original drivers available for the device, so you lose some of the functionality. Sony is, in particular, notorious about this... and I expect the rest of the consumer desktop and laptop market will follow this route.

--janakAwww. Cause they make those nice shiny "system restore CDs" rather than give you an actual OEM OS disk?

But you do make a point. The unfortunate part is for them to make a profit big or small. They need mass adoption. This is where they seem to be going......

"Well, this is too hard for the average user, we'll have to simplify it...more specifically dumb it down."

System restore CD, WM5 persistent storage...mainly an implementation to help Average Joe to keep his data safe and not be discouraged from the new and exciting journey of actually learning something.
Well, I can't say I blame them but gone are the glory days.... :deadhorse:

[Rob Alexander]

Simply put, Pocket PCs today should have the ability to be updated. These PDAs are more powerful than many computers just a few short years ago. So why can't they be upgraded to the new OS?

I don't get why this is so hard to understand, especially since Mike took the time to explain it in his article. Both PC upgrades and WM upgrades take large up-front costs, followed by relatively small costs per unit. There are over 800 million PCs in use today (per the Computer Industry Almanac, March 2005) and there are, what?, less than 2 million PPCs. Something like that.

So upgrades to desktop PCs can be spread among a large number of users even if only a tiny fraction actually upgrade. Upgrades to PPCs, on the other hand, have such a small number of buyers that the large up front costs cannot be recovered. He even cites the case where the per unit cost of the upgrade was higher than than the cost of a whole new device. Greed or no, it simply doesn't make sense to do that.

It's simply economics and it has nothing to do with greed. (i.e. greed may or may not exist but is irrelevant). Here's a hypothetical example.

It costs $1,000,000 to develop some upgrade. A million PC users upgrade (1 in 800) and so it costs $1 per upgrade.

Same cost for a PPC upgrade and 1 in 800 upgrade assuming there are 2 million PPC users. That's 2,500 upgrades and each upgrade costs $400.

That is why you can do this for PCs and not for PPCs. The example isn't about the specific numbers, which are made up, it's about the difference it makes to produce something for a tiny market. PPC users just have to face it. We're a tiny market and it's not always feasible to produce something that will only be used by a small proportion of us.

Since my first Velo 1, I've said the same thing about upgrades. Buy any device for what it can do today. If you're happy with it out of the box, then you'll get your money's worth. Then consider upgrades to be nice surprises. If they happen, great, and if they don't, then you've still got the same device with the same capabilities that you loved when you first bought it. It's no slower or less capable than it ever was just because there is now something faster and more capable.

[Rob Alexander]

one[/i] upgrade was an assumption on my part. I don't think that was an ureasonable assumption, but if you do, then you are certainly entitled to that opinion. I thought there was an upgrade between WM5 and what I currently have, but I could be mistaken. I do know that I would not have made the purchase had I known that an update wouldn't be made available.

As you've learned now, and many of us learned long ago, never ever buy a device in anticipation of an upgrade. The sad truth is that, even if you get one (which is by no means certain), as often as not you'll be disappointed. Many older upgraded devices of the past ended up unstable with a variety of little quirks not shared by their new cousins, and with several key features disabled. Buy your PPC for today, then sell it and buy a new one if the new features seem compelling enough. Then you'll never be disappointed.

[Ed Hansberry]

Everyone stop for a moment. Pick up your Pocket PC and look at the bottom. This is an "industry" that for 10 years has not been able to figure out how to provide the same hardware adapters on devices across brands let alone manufacturers.
They figured it out a long time ago. They also figured by changing them often, they get more money when people buy new accessories or chargers. :|

And yes, I know you knew that. :D

[unxmully]

Simply put, Pocket PCs today should have the ability to be updated. These PDAs are more powerful than many computers just a few short years ago. So why can't they be upgraded to the new OS?

I don't get why this is so hard to understand, especially since Mike took the time to explain it in his article. Both PC upgrades and WM upgrades take large up-front costs, followed by relatively small costs per unit. There are over 800 million PCs in use today (per the Computer Industry Almanac, March 2005) and there are, what?, less than 2 million PPCs. Something like that.

And something I find hard to understand is why all the people arguing the other side of the case seem to think we don't unserstand the economic model. It's obvious that it, along with the changes in hardware specifications, is the cause of the lack of upgrades.

The major complaint I have is that the PPC people have taken so long to learn from the desktop/laptop world.

So upgrades to desktop PCs can be spread among a large number of users even if only a tiny fraction actually upgrade. Upgrades to PPCs, on the other hand, have such a small number of buyers that the large up front costs cannot be recovered. He even cites the case where the per unit cost of the upgrade was higher than than the cost of a whole new device. Greed or no, it simply doesn't make sense to do that.

It's simply economics and it has nothing to do with greed. (i.e. greed may or may not exist but is irrelevant). Here's a hypothetical example.

It costs $1,000,000 to develop some upgrade. A million PC users upgrade (1 in 800) and so it costs $1 per upgrade.

Same cost for a PPC upgrade and 1 in 800 upgrade assuming there are 2 million PPC users. That's 2,500 upgrades and each upgrade costs $400.


The main problem I have, and I'm getting tired of having to reiterate this this point, is that the upgrade process is not the same. I don't buy an upgrade of an HP laptop from HP, I buy it from Microsoft. In the case of the Pocket PC, the only upgrade comes from the vendor. Why is that model so different and the upgrade process so much slower and costly.

Back when vendors put different processors and hardware in I could understand it, but PPCs are much mor standardised now.

That is why you can do this for PCs and not for PPCs. The example isn't about the specific numbers, which are made up, it's about the difference it makes to produce something for a tiny market. PPC users just have to face it. We're a tiny market and it's not always feasible to produce something that will only be used by a small proportion of us.

Though if availability is better and the upgrade process less fraught, perhaps more people might upgrade. The cost that HP charge for an upgrade seems reasonable to me, though in this case the worth of the upgrade, apart from persistent memory, is more open to debate.

Since my first Velo 1, I've said the same thing about upgrades. Buy any device for what it can do today. If you're happy with it out of the box, then you'll get your money's worth. Then consider upgrades to be nice surprises. If they happen, great, and if they don't, then you've still got the same device with the same capabilities that you loved when you first bought it. It's no slower or less capable than it ever was just because there is now something faster and more capable.

A perfectly reasonable attuitude. But not one I can subscribe to, considering the £400+ I paid for my 4700.

[shawnc]

I agree that the ability purchase at least one upgrade was an assumption on my part. I don't think that was an ureasonable assumption, but if you do, then you are certainly entitled to that opinion. I thought there was an upgrade between WM5 and what I currently have, but I could be mistaken. I do know that I would not have made the purchase had I known that an update wouldn't be made available.

As you've learned now, and many of us learned long ago, never ever buy a device in anticipation of an upgrade. The sad truth is that, even if you get one (which is by no means certain), as often as not you'll be disappointed. Many older upgraded devices of the past ended up unstable with a variety of little quirks not shared by their new cousins, and with several key features disabled. Buy your PPC for today, then sell it and buy a new one if the new features seem compelling enough. Then you'll never be disappointed.

You're absolutely correct Rob, but here's the unfortunate part. I truly think the PPC market needs consumers like me for it to grow beyond anything but a niche market. The techie's (and again, I say that as a compliment) will always buy these devices but it's gadget lovers like me who represent the numbers that the PPC manufacturers need to keep. However, partly based on the fact that I now know that an upgrade is no longer likely, my 4150 will be my last PPC purchase. There is simply no way that I will continue to spend $500 + for a device that is obsolete (worst case) or outdated (likely case) in a year or two. Greed kills. I doubt that there are numbers of folks who ARE willing to purchase a PPC under these conditions that are sufficient enough for manufacturers to make a profit. I think those making these decisions are doing everything they can to kill this market. This time I'm afraid, they may have finally succeeded.