Missing Parts and Bad Communication: The AKU 2 / A2DP Situation

[Jon Westfall]

About 3 weeks ago, a strange rumor came up while I was browsing happily away. The news, that I first saw on an <a href="http://htcwizard.westlands.org/2006/02/16/no-stereo-bluetooth-in-aku-20-rom/">HTC Wizard Blog</a> came from this <a href="http://www.pocketinfo.nl/artikel/5276">piece</a> published by Pocketinfo.nl. The rumor I found so disturbing was that the upcoming ROM releases we had so anxiously been waiting for would be missing an important piece - the A2DP profile that many of us longed for. Sure, Push Email was still there (our main desire), but for those of us who have owned bluetooth stereo headsets for quite some time without support to pair them directly with our Pocket PCs, this was almost as anticipated as instant email. At the time, we (the editorial team) debated posting on it, but came to the consensus that it was a rumor we didn't put much faith in. After all, a leaked QTek ROM had already been released with A2DP, and A2DP was released by Microsoft in AKU 2 late last year. So we took a pass on it, however I vowed that if the ROM was missing parts, I would unleash a rant of biblical proportions onto our homepage. So here we go…<br /><br /><b>Releasing a ROM image without A2DP to a user community anxious to get that feature without communication regarding the delay and eventual release time-frame is in extremely poor taste on the part of the OEM. OEMs, by engaging in this activity, risk alienating power users, the very users that rush to buy each new release and actively support the devices in forums and application development.</b><br /><br />So what should OEMs have done? Read on…<br /><!><br />There were many factors contributing to the whole AKU 2 confusion and subsequent delays. Rumors of memory leaks, insufficient testing time, and other factors flew around the internet and still do concerning manufacturers that do not have a clear AKU 2 upgrade policy or statement. Let’s deal with a few issues:<br /><br /><b>1. OEMs maintain that AKU 2’s code ran poorly on their devices and required updating by Microsoft to fill memory leaks </b><br />If this is true, it wouldn’t surprise me. Microsoft probably does not have the time to thoroughly test code on every possible device with every OEM-specific piece of software. As we’ve seen, many OEMs prefer to bundle applications they license or create with their ROM images, and expecting Microsoft to have access to all of those pieces of software is unreasonable. However, in this circumstance, where power users were tipped off by Microsoft itself about the shipping of AKU 2 through <a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/jasonlan/default.aspx"> Jason Langridge’s Weblog </a> and the presence of at least one <a href="http://www.msn.com.tw/3c/windowsmobile/hot/product12/Default.asp"> device </a> we knew that AKU 2 was nearing release. If OEMs were concerned about the way their value-added software ran on an AKU 2 ROM, perhaps they should have asked themselves this question: <i> Do our users want push email or do they want this application? </i>. A quick look around the forums would have quickly answered it, and it would have confirmed that users were definitely interested moreso in Push Email than an antivirus client, and were almost just as interested in A2DP!<br /><br />For what its worth, it has also been reported by many users of the leaked QTek ROM that their version of AKU 2, which includes A2DP, is not any buggier than any other ROM image – in fact, some report it to be more stable and efficient. While using leaked images is never a good idea in a production environment (not to mention that it is illegal), it does make us wonder: how much of a memory leak is there if power users using this software since early February aren’t noticing it – Wouldn’t they be the first to find the leaks due to their nature?<br /><br /><b> 2. A2DP wasn’t ready yet – it was still too buggy to be used </b>. <br />I get this argument – it makes good business sense to leave out pieces you are not confident in. The last thing OEMs want is to answer tech support emails / calls / posts regarding a feature they themselves don’t believe was ready for release. However, when dealing with power users, I believe there can be a best of both worlds: Simply disable the feature and let them enable it at their own risk. If OEMs would trust that their power users are smart enough about their devices to understand the concept of ‘beta’ software, they could even utilize that base of customers for testing purposes. While the power users of normal cell phones might not be interested in playing around with ‘nearly-ready’ features, we can easily infer that power users of Pocket PCs are. After all, this group is made up of dedicated hackers (used in the positive sense of the word) that try to get the most out of a device – not a bunch of kids eager to get new ringtones or MMS message junkies. If OEMs had allowed us to play with A2DP through a quick tweak or hidden setting, we could give feedback and real-world usage reports. By taking it out completely, they make more work for themselves in testing, and give us more delays.<br /><PAGEBREAK><br /><b> 3. What is so hard about open communication with end users? </b><br />As I said before, Windows Mobile power users are a fairly tech-savvy group. I am confident that if any of the big OEMs had posted a message on their tech support sites stating something like “The AKU 2 update has been postponed until approximately March 1 due to incompatibilities and “memory leaks” we have discovered while testing it. Check this page for updated status as we near release”, power users would have been grateful (We’d be even more grateful if they actually updated the message periodically as well!). When we don’t hear anything from the OEMs, we begin to become anxious, distrustful of official statements, and annoyed. Power users begin debating their next device purchase, and the OEM they currently buy from may lose business to another OEM with better communication. <br /><br />In a special way, I believe i-Mate takes the cake for the most paradoxical support communication. When deciding to buy my newest generation of devices, I went with i-Mate because previous devices I had of theirs were supported nicely. ROM updates were frequent and communication flowed through their support forums. When I returned to the Club i-Mate site a year later, I found forums that had not been updated for new devices (Users there still debate where to post topics as they can’t find an appropriate board), and virtually no communication from their live support personnel regarding ROM releases other than obligatory “in the next few weeks” replies. But amazingly, they are the first to have an official AKU 2 ROM update out, so perhaps all hope is not lost. <b> If ANYONE from i-Mate is reading this, I beg you – Update your forum layouts, communicate with users better, and do NOT alienate further a loyal user base that buys your devices! </b><br /><br /><b>4. The prevailing feeling from users that OEMs favor gaining new customers and not servicing the needs of existing customers </b><br />This is perhaps the most dangerous problem OEMs can face in this market. With some products, you can rest assured that once you have a customer, they will keep the product for a fairly long time ( > 1 year ) before making a purchase decision, our user group is different. Anyone who follows PPCT knows that our editors buy new devices and retire old ones approximately 1 – 2 times per year. Each time we do so, we decide which OEM we wish to buy from. OEMs that do not keep up their end of the bargain in the form of timely updates and communications do not get repeat business. Is it really sound business practice to get only 1 purchase out of a customer that could potentially buy many high-priced items from you?<br /><br />Based on these 4 topics, I propose guidelines for both power users and OEMs that can make all of our lives easier…<br /><br />My guidelines are:<br /><br /><b> 1. OEMs should communicate with power users frequently and accurately </b> <br />Even if it is just a page that’s updated weekly saying “We are still working on ROM x.x.x and hope to have it out &lt;date>” with a nice “Updated &lt;day close to today>” at the top. This lets users know approximately what is going on, and if delays are happening. This does not look ‘unprofessional’ OEMs – this looks responsible. Also, OEMs should be careful with stock answers provided to support technicians: We all are tiring of the stock “we expect ROM update within the next few weeks” reply.<br /><br /><b> 2. OEMs should be mindful that Windows Mobile should mean the same for all devices </b><br />When I emailed our team about my post this morning, Jason emailed back a point I hadn’t considered but I believe is very important, namely – AKU 2 is known to possess A2DP, so if some manufacturers take that out, what does it do to Windows Mobile as a platform? Think about it – when shopping for a new Pocket PC, we take for granted that all WM 2003 SE devices have approximately the same look, feel, and features. We know that some applications need Windows Mobile 5, some need a different version. Power users with past experience know what OS they want and are confident in buying <i> because they know that any device with that OS will have the same software feature set </i>. If OEMs unbundled or remove components that other OEMs haven’t, this means that simply knowing the OS a device has gives no guarantee of that device’s capabilities. This is extremely bad for users, extremely bad for Microsoft’s Windows Mobile Platform, and extremely bad judgment on the part of the OEM. If features must be hidden, communication should be key so the user knows that about a particular device before buying.<br /><br /><b> 3. Users and Website Administrators / Editors should verify sources BEFORE posting rumors as fact </b><br />In the weeks leading up to Thursday’s AKU release by i-Mate, many web forums and at least one of the larger Pocket PC websites reported that they had a definite ROM release date from i-Mate. This information, supposedly leaked out through sources which ranged from semi-legitimate contacts in the company to mere hearsay, caused users to feverishly check websites and write annoyed posts. Undoubtedly, OEMs noticed this and felt strained to put an update out there. While unlikely, it is possible that i-Mate was testing their AKU 2 release, was held up at the A2DP profile and under pressure, released a ROM without it just to appease the community. While this seems to make people happy, it also buys i-Mate much more time to play with A2DP and delays our use of it even further. I’m all for posting rumors when they seem appropriate – but posting in an authoritative voice when your source may be ill-informed is dangerous for the community. Editors, contributors, and forum users should simply think about how confident they are in their information before they post it. After all, you wouldn’t post a technical tip or link to software if you weren’t reasonably sure it would benefit your peers or users! <br /><br />Now I don’t expect my guidelines to be adopted universally, but if OEMs heed ANY of the advice, I believe they will provide a much better user experience for their customers and assure repeat sales in doing so. As a user community, we do not ask much other than honest and open communication. When OEMs start out in our area, they usually adhere to this request (e.g. i-Mate’s live support chat and forums). But once they begin to feel like a ‘big company’ they act like so many companies do and begin to give a very distant and aloof experience to their users. This attitude of “We’re the big company, we’ll tell you what you need and pick and choose features as we see fit” is extremely troubling and dangerous to our platform and existing devices!

[Phillip Dyson]

Great article Jon,

I think that most of the problems OEMs face could be either solved or managed through communication.

As you said, many power users can understand technical difficulties simply because they they have a broader view of the nature of technology. As a software engineer, I know that things go wrong. So while I may be disappointed, I've met Murphy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murphy%27s_law) many times and we have an understanding.

Most corporations have discovered that from the perspective of employees, if you give them a sense of ownership they become invested emotionally. Loyalty increases. Hence the name Associate. I think many of the Windows Mobile software companies have it right. While, I'm not saying that OEM's should go as far as a WebIS or a SBSH, I think their model definitely works. Assemble a (volunteer) team of beta testers. This increases your coverage at little cost. Perhaps put them under a light NDA if you feel the need. Then let them defend the companies efforts in the forums with statements like "I can't say too much, but I can tell you OEMx is working very hard to get product/feature X out. There are a few issues to be resolved." Done. Peer confirmation.

As to rumors... I agree with you about the responsibilities of editors in this manner. But rumors wouldn't sting so much if companies had a policy of communication. While I'll be the first one to say that corporate denials aren't worth the paper or bytes they take up, communications still carry some weight.

And for goodness sakes, its okay to go where the users are. Software companies by and large are better at this than OEMs are. Matter I was shocked when the registered user VIPN showed up in this thread (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=46823&amp;postdays=0&amp;postorder=asc&amp;start=10) about their device.

Lets how OEMs take a note from some of software companies. Sometimes you have to take it to the streets.

[JvanEkris]

Hmmm,

Great article John, BUT i do question one assumption here. I have never seen official release-notes for AKU2 myself. I guess not many people have seen them either. Why is everyone so sure that AD2P was even included in the builds shipped to the OEM's, or even that AD2P was implemented at Microsoft at all? Was it the Qtek Beta ROM (which could have it's own profiles included, just like HP did!), or has there been an official statement from Microsoft that i missed?

Jaap

[Jon Westfall]

From http://blogs.msdn.com/jasonlan/archive/2005/11/16/493281.aspx -

"The A2DP profile is introduced in AKU 2.0 of Windows Mobile - the same deliver vehicle for the Messaging and Security Feature Pack. Then - not only will you be able to get Push Email - but you'll be able to listen to your music without wires!"

I would consider Jason Langridge a pretty reputable source on what was to be officially included in AKU 2, and since the profile is in the QTek ROM, I think it's pretty safe to assume i-Mate took it out (As opposed to QTek put it in)

[Paragon]

Excellent piece, Jon. Well thought out and written.

This whole AKU2 thing has turned into a "last straw" for me. We were lead to believe that WM5.0 devices would ship with push email and A2DP. Once they were released we found out that SP2 for Exchange was needed and rumor was that A2DP would be along soon as an update. Once SP2 shipped for Exchange we were then informed that the wait was not over yet, MSFP was needed and it would be along soon and include A2DP. Now we are finding out otherwise.......Keep in mind I/we had A2DP two years ago on Broadcom BT stacks. I gave up that functionality believing I would soon get it back. Now I really wish I had not. I locked into a CDMA account with my 6700, so it's not going to be that easy to switch devices to get A2DP, which I have been waiting very impatiently for months to use again. I locked into this account with the knowledge that I would soon receive an update.......stupid mistake. I really should have known better.

Windows Mobile is very quickly turning into a second rate amateur show. I personally am very tired of the misinformation, and LOSS of features. We are going backwards very quickly in a lot of areas. It is the norm to wait months for updates. We still have a number of bugs that have been present since the inception of PPCs. I'm sorry but I don't know what else to say but...F u c k it!. I am totally frustrated with the platform.

Microsoft is the worlds largest software developer, and yet they can't seem to commit the needed resources to Windows Mobile that are needed to simply produce issue free features that have been promised. The whole platform seems the be very poorly managed. There does not seem to be a focused direction. Resources are not well managed at all. Schedules are forever backed up. Features are being removed because they don't have the resources to fix them. Meanwhile they are not being upfront with their loyal customers.

I think Windows Mobile, by that I mean MS, and its partners really need to be careful. If they are close to loosing one time MVPs as customers, imagine how others who are less comitted must feel.

I feel like every time I post lately I sound more and more negative. I was feeling kind of bad about it, but I now see why. It's not MY attitude, it's what's happening with this platform in general.

[edit] FRACK is not the the word I used. ;) To keep the Thoughts community at a Family rating it was edited. :)

Dave

[KTamas]

Nicely said, I mostly agree with you. We need beta testers. From the community. Maybe MVPs. Give them an NDA. OEMs have to realize that their user base not just Average Joes. They have a large user base with lots and lots of tech-savvy people.

On the technical part, OEMs should use that Widcomm stack, just as they mostly did it at the WM2003(SE) days. It IS avaible for WM5, and in fact, Asus A63x devices has it I think, but the problem is, that only they have it so far (I think...I can be wrong). Get out with the MS stack, and give back those relaible widcomm (ex-broadcomm) stacks.

[alese]

It's really strange how OEMs handle ROM upgrades, no communiaction with their users or community, you can only wait and hope your device will get support and upgrades. And it would not require much, just some more sharing of information, a date here and there and if they really want to be liked building or at least helping to build community. Of course a beta rom for tetsing wouldn't hurt either...
For now though, I'll probably wait for another week to see if Qtek releases offical ACU2 ROM, if not then I'll install the beta one with A2DP.

[carphead]

I have some issues with this.

If as, rumor has it, A2DP was removed/disabled in the K-Jam Rom due to processor speed. Then it is better to remove it and give better performance than have all of the "Power Users" complaints about poor performance. Imate were on a hiding to nothing with that.

Every WM website is complaining about delays. But I-mate were possibly struggling to get good performance out of the fully loaded AKU. Without the full facts it's impossible to find out the reason why.

The problem with "power users" is they shout the loudest and complain the strongest.

Sure communication could be better from I-Mate but who ever had good communication from HP , Dell or heck what about Nokia for that matter?

Do you really think that Mr &amp; Mrs I-Mate szt round a table and said how do we alienate our customers?

[Jon Westfall]

I have some issues with this.

If as, rumor has it, A2DP was removed/disabled in the K-Jam Rom due to processor speed. Then it is better to remove it and give better performance than have all of the "Power Users" complaints about poor performance. Imate were on a hiding to nothing with that.


If you call removing a part that Microsoft had said would be included in AKU 2 for all devices not 'hiding something', than I guess you're right.


Every WM website is complaining about delays. But I-mate were possibly struggling to get good performance out of the fully loaded AKU. Without the full facts it's impossible to find out the reason why.


More power for the "Give us the full facts" argument


The problem with "power users" is they shout the loudest and complain the strongest.


This isn't necessarily a problem if the power users are helping OEMs create a product that appeals to more users than the OEM has currently.


Sure communication could be better from I-Mate but who ever had good communication from HP , Dell or heck what about Nokia for that matter?
Do you really think that Mr &amp; Mrs I-Mate szt round a table and said how do we alienate our customers?

Just because other companies give bad communication doesn't give a company the right to do so. I don't think i-Mate tried to alienate users, I just think they failed to consider what their lack of communication would do to users.

[Paragon]

If as, rumor has it, A2DP was removed/disabled in the K-Jam Rom due to processor speed. Then it is better to remove it and give better performance than have all of the "Power Users" complaints about poor performance. Imate were on a hiding to nothing with that.

Every WM website is complaining about delays. But I-mate were possibly struggling to get good performance out of the fully loaded AKU. Without the full facts it's impossible to find out the reason why.


There are hundreds perhaps thousands of K-Jam and Qtek 9100 users presently using a leaked Qtek ROM with A2DP in it and their are having zero problems with it. Given this fact, the idea that A2DP was removed because of some performance issue or other problem seems highly unlikely.

Dave

[Cyberjoy]

I know that everyone was sceptical at first when I released my article on the missing A2DP profile (I was the one that posted the article on Pocketinfo.nl). But I heard the news directly from three decision makers independently from each other. Orange, Qtek and i-Mate all told me the same thing.

"That could not be coincidence" is what I thought. Anyway, they all told me the same story: HTC decided, with or without Microsoft's aproval, that the A2DP profile will not be in the final ROM's that were released to the OEM's like Orange, Qtek and i-Mate. So even If these OEM's demanded the A2DP profile, they would not get it since HTC decided that no one could have it.

Wouter.
http://www.pocketinfo.nl

[KTamas]

I know that everyone was sceptical at first when I released my article on the missing A2DP profile (I was the one that posted the article on Pocketinfo.nl). But I heard the news directly from three decision makers independently from each other. Orange, Qtek and i-Mate all told me the same thing.

"That could not be coincidence" is what I thought. Anyway, they all told me the same story: HTC decided, with or without Microsoft's aproval, that the A2DP profile will not be in the final ROM's that were released to the OEM's like Orange, Qtek and i-Mate. So even If these OEM's demanded the A2DP profile, they would not get it since HTC decided that no one could have it.

Wouter.
http://www.pocketinfo.nl
Interesting. One would wonder why would HTC do this, but if three individuals says that, it has to be true.

But, we have xda-developers, and I'm pretty sure that sooner or later there'll be a hybrid ROM with the new i-mate rom containing the A2DP profile.

[carphead]

I have some issues with this.

If as, rumor has it, A2DP was removed/disabled in the K-Jam Rom due to processor speed. Then it is better to remove it and give better performance than have all of the "Power Users" complaints about poor performance. Imate were on a hiding to nothing with that.


If you call removing a part that Microsoft had said would be included in AKU 2 for all devices not 'hiding something', than I guess you're right.


Sorry I meant "Hiding to Nothing" it's a GB phrase meaning they couldn't win or lose. They're stuffed if they want to satisfy the "Power Users" with slower performance or satisfy the normal man in the street with a stable device.


Every WM website is complaining about delays. But I-mate were possibly struggling to get good performance out of the fully loaded AKU. Without the full facts it's impossible to find out the reason why.


More power for the "Give us the full facts" argument

I do agree with the statement.

The problem with "power users" is they shout the loudest and complain the strongest.


This isn't necessarily a problem if the power users are helping OEMs create a product that appeals to more users than the OEM has currently.


True but the problem is often that hacks created by a "Power User" are then intergrated in to hacking software which can be run using a CAB or a piece of tweaking software. Then it falls into the hand of non-"Power Users" and they buy A2DP piece of hardware to use it. Then they complain about the slow down or what ever reason I-Mate decided to remove/disable A2DP for.

Sure communication could be better from I-Mate but who ever had good communication from HP , Dell or heck what about Nokia for that matter?
Do you really think that Mr &amp; Mrs I-Mate szt round a table and said how do we alienate our customers?

Just because other companies give bad communication doesn't give a company the right to do so. I don't think i-Mate tried to alienate users, I just think they failed to consider what their lack of communication would do to users.

Yep I'm sure they do and they'll try their best but it rarely work. I've been in this game to long. We might, if we're lucky, hear the usual waffle about "Sorry we should listen to our users more" or "We've learn't from our mistakes". But it'll stay the same.


There are hundreds perhaps thousands of K-Jam and Qtek 9100 users presently using a leaked Qtek ROM with A2DP in it and their are having zero problems with it. Given this fact, the idea that A2DP was removed because of some performance issue or other problem seems highly unlikely.


But I-Mate will of tested this against hundreds/thousands of devices. As would of HTC. I think there's a valid reason for this and I hope that I-Mate come forward with a reason but I doubt they will.

[Foxbat121]

There are hundreds perhaps thousands of K-Jam and Qtek 9100 users presently using a leaked Qtek ROM with A2DP in it and their are having zero problems with it. Given this fact, the idea that A2DP was removed because of some performance issue or other problem seems highly unlikely.

Dave

Have you seen this review (http://www.geekzone.co.nz/content.asp?contentid=5915)?

I have some HP headphones I picked up in Heathrow a while ago, but have only recently been able to use them with my O2 Xda devices. On my Xda Exec, performance is good, but if the distance between headphone and device is greater than about 1.5m, the signal distorts quickly and the PDA becomes unbearably slow. On my O2 Xda Mini S, I found switching this feature on slows the device right down – only music is possible, video won’t display.


I won't say there is zero problem with A2DP.

[KTamas]

Foxbat121: As far as i know, Universal has serveral speed problems (or had....please correct me, I'm not an Universal owner). IIRC, with the leaked Qtek ROM on Wizard, it performed pretty well. BUt it is true, that Bluetooth has limited bandwidth.

[Paragon]

There are hundreds perhaps thousands of K-Jam and Qtek 9100 users presently using a leaked Qtek ROM with A2DP in it and their are having zero problems with it. Given this fact, the idea that A2DP was removed because of some performance issue or other problem seems highly unlikely.

Dave

Have you seen this review (http://www.geekzone.co.nz/content.asp?contentid=5915)?

I have some HP headphones I picked up in Heathrow a while ago, but have only recently been able to use them with my O2 Xda devices. On my Xda Exec, performance is good, but if the distance between headphone and device is greater than about 1.5m, the signal distorts quickly and the PDA becomes unbearably slow. On my O2 Xda Mini S, I found switching this feature on slows the device right down – only music is possible, video won’t display.


I won't say there is zero problem with A2DP.

Ok I'll give that....one report. I read a lot of different forums, particularily for converged devices. This is NOT a common problem. In fact it is the only negative report I've read about it. Range issues with BT haedsets are nothing new regardless of the device, stack, or OS.

BTW....If HTC is removing A2DP and telling the OEMs they can't have it, how is it that the Qtek ROM DOES have it?

Dave

[DarkHelmet]

Don't you people get it?

The functional PPC is officially dead with the introduction of WM5.

I haven't seen a single example of anyone who's pleased with WM5 - certainly not people who purchased a WM5 upgrade.

Maybe the WM5-based PDA folks (you know the ones with WM5 designed and burned in to their ROMs from day one) are happy - but where are they? I haven't seen one.

Needless to say, with regard to these quibbles about missing features from WM5, I think you guys would be used to it by now.

Yeah, I'm an Axim x50v user - stuck at WM2003SE - thanks Dell!

p.s. I bought the upgrade, if only I could get it to work on my x50v...

[alese]

[quote="DarkHelmet"

I haven't seen a single example of anyone who's pleased with WM5 - certainly not people who purchased a WM5 upgrade.

Maybe the WM5-based PDA folks (you know the ones with WM5 designed and burned in to their ROMs from day one) are happy - but where are they? I haven't seen one.
...[/quote]

I have two WM5 machines and I'm pretty happy with both of them. I love one handed operation, big improvement compared to my previous Phone Edition.
And as for bugs, I have owned quite a few WinCE devices and neither was bug free and iPaq 3870 was I guess by far the worst, the WM5 is actually very good, the A2DP would only made it better.

[bnycastro]

1st off: great article! as a user of the Qtek Test ROM I'd say i-mate is just playing it safe. it's harder to do damage control I guess... :roll:

[buzz1317]

First Off..........Good Article.

Second this would be great in a perfect world.

Lets face it all the manufacturers and Microsoft want to do is sell units. They can tell you what you want to hear and we believe it.

We need to start buying our devices like you do a standard Cell Phone.

If it has that feature then you get that feature. We have to stop believing in Vapor Ware just because we want to.
Even I bought a device that I hoped would be upgradable or that the Cell company would make upgrades and add features too.

I have woken up and everyone else needs to also.

If it does not have it when you buy it, do not expect it!

I wish we could rely on companies to care about the end user but that is just a dream that we all need to wake up from.
They only care about one thing and that is selling more and making profit!

[bartgomes]

I have some issues with this.

If as, rumor has it, A2DP was removed/disabled in the K-Jam Rom due to processor speed. Then it is better to remove it and give better performance than have all of the "Power Users" complaints about poor performance. Imate were on a hiding to nothing with that.

Every WM website is complaining about delays. But I-mate were possibly struggling to get good performance out of the fully loaded AKU. Without the full facts it's impossible to find out the reason why.

The problem with "power users" is they shout the loudest and complain the strongest.

Sure communication could be better from I-Mate but who ever had good communication from HP , Dell or heck what about Nokia for that matter?

Do you really think that Mr &amp; Mrs I-Mate szt round a table and said how do we alienate our customers?

carphead,

the Operations Manager at Carrier Devices ME FZ LLC personally told me that the support they provide is a "VALUE ADDED SERVICE".

you can quote me on this to anybody, including the owner of i-mate.

cheers!


bart.