04-27-2002, 11:56 AM
|
|
Pontificator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,177
|
|
Dynamics in having many Pocket PC makers
http://www.pdaavenue.com/cgi-bin/news/viewnews.cgi?category=6&id=1019350020
Andrew sent us this link to an article titled: "Does Pocket PC Owe It's Success to The iPaq?" The author, Marcus Bankuti, discusses whether or not the Pocket PC owes its success to the iPAQ Pocket PC. His conclusion is: "The iPaq was not challenged much because of mind share. If Compaq did not make the iPaq, another company would have made one like it. Current iPaq users would have still bought Pocket PC, but they just bought the iPaq because it was their favorite."
His article contains several interesting thoughts, and I agree with most of them. I really don't follow the bottom line, though. It's too easy to say that "If Compaq did not make the iPaq, another company would have made one like it.". At that time most analysts had already moved on, away from Windows CE based PDAs, recommending other platforms and announcing Windows CE dead. Not many companies could have done what Compaq did, in my opinion.
But the more interesting topic, in my opinion, is the dynamics the Pocket PC / Windows CE platform enjoys in having many makers. Throughout the last years we have seen one maker having the lead during one period of time and another maker during the next. Take the Casio E-105 for example. Without the Casio E-105 sales, the total sales of Windows CE devices would be peanuts. Literally, that is.
I have included some of the Windows CE based PDAs that have meant a great deal for the current state of the Pocket PC platform in the picture below. The question mark represent the pondering of which will be the next torch bearer. Two questions to you:
1. Which signifcant Windows CE devices have I forgotten in the picture, if any?
2. What maker will replace the question mark with its Pocket PC?
|
| |
|
|
|
04-27-2002, 12:48 PM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 16
|
|
Let me add my voice by sharing with you a letter that I have written back in January: http://techupdate.zdnet.com/techupda...839138,00.html. I think the success of the current PPC platform lies on its transformation from being an OS that was supporting 3 different processors (please correct me if I am wrong) to focusing on just 1 processor. This standardization is bound to lead to economy of scale in terms of both the development of software and hardware. As more and more manufacturers enter the market, the more competitive pressure will be created to drive further excellence in product development. I think this platform still has way to go. Having said that, I must say Sony has scored a very big point in product design with its new NR70V. It is really a shame that Sony has chosen Palm over PPC. And I really think the current Palm OS (even with a beefed up 66MHZ dragon ball) cannot bring out the full potential of NR70V. If only other Japanese PPC manufacturers will copy the NR70V.
|
| |
|
|
|
04-27-2002, 12:55 PM
|
|
Pontificator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,177
|
|
I definately agree. Going to one processor, instead of three was a major milestone. Add to that a totally revamped user interface that actually makes sense, and we're off to a good start in this discussion!
|
| |
|
|
|
04-27-2002, 12:59 PM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 16
|
|
And the number of new models that have been announced since January just make the future looks even brighter. The Loox, the XScale Toshiba and the new Jornada you just reported earlier. How exciting!
|
| |
|
|
|
04-27-2002, 02:51 PM
|
|
Magi
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,341
|
|
I doubt we will see any big changes in the line up. Sure we will see some new players come on line, but I think it will be tough for any one device to distinguish it's self above the others the way the Ipaq did.
While the standardizing of the Pocket PC has been good for the platform, I think it has been at a price. They all come with close to the same software package, and can run the same software. They are all very similar in size, shape, and even button layout. They all use the same processor. Most use the same screen. The biggest difference being in the type of expantion slots, and as SD matures that will become standard on most, as it almost is now. It has become very difficult to stand out in the crowd.
I wonder if after wireless devices settle in we may see things level off for a while. I'm sure we will continue to see faster and more efficient processors ect.. But, in basic functionality there is only so much we need or want our devices to do, and we may be almost there. If we look at Palms past success it was based on functionality. It did what the vast majority of people needed and wanted, for the price they were willing to pay. No more no less. I'm not sure that there is much left for anyone to add to a device that would propel it into the lead. Not that I'm will to pay for at least. I'm not sure I'm willing to pay the extra cost of say... having my PPC start my car for me as I walk up to it, as an example. That's not to say there aren't lots of innovative things that can't be done with the platform, it's just how much more are the masses will to pay for it. To be the new leader in the field, the device is going to have to appeal to a great many people, at a justifiable price. That will be very hard to do given the present cost of Pocket PCs. They are approaching the limits of what most people will spend on such a device.
Ya I know in a few months I will look back on this and laugh... to think I was dumb enough to think there was nothing else I was willing to pay for in Pocket PC.... What was I thinking??????
Dave
|
| |
|
|
|
04-27-2002, 04:05 PM
|
|
Philosopher
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 548
|
|
Well, the HP Jornada 430 SE or the EVEREX isn't in your photos.
Anyway, I too do not believe that if Compaq didn't make the iPAQ someone would have.
Here is my reason. At that time, Windows CE support was dwindling to the top three Hardware Manufacturers... HP, Compaq and Casio. Casio stuck to their old hardware, same processor. HP went a bit better with a new look, form factor but still the same old processor... Compaq on the other hand was brave enough to break new ground implementing a StrongARM based device with expansion sleeves. If Compaq had not gone this way, Windows CE would have either died or would have been stunted in it's Jornada 54x/Cassiopeia EM-500/E115/E125 state.
By breaking new ground... Compaq has opened the eyes of the developers... both software and hardware to push the technology to the limit. So here we are... seeking more power, more functionality and eventually a pocketable replacement to our laptops.
But you have to look at it this way too. I was a Win CE Palm-size PC user who used to use MIPS... I shifted to SH3 because I liked the form factor of the Jornada 548... and I felt that having an SH3 device would also allow me to use my old applications which were offered in both SH3 and MIPs versions. Well, it was okay for the first few months until everyone started making applications that ran better with the StrongARM... thus gaining so much popularity. Having the iPAQ as the King of the PDAs by being the first most powerful pen-entry pocketable device... other manufacturers soon followed in its footsteps... @migo, Toshiba, etc. Now, with the success of the iPAQ, plus the success of the StrongARM processor... MS finally decided that it will no longer support SH3 and MIPS... well, in a way it is good. Since the SH3 and MIPS processors lack the power or some security related functions, it seems like it is the right direction... Even Palm is moving towards ARM processors... so there you have my 2 cents.
|
| |
|
|
|
04-27-2002, 04:52 PM
|
|
Ponderer
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 110
|
|
Surely both hypotheses have some value? PPC did appear to be "on the wane" just before iPaq but there WAS still a lot of potential interest so - one could say - there was a "sweet spot" for Compaq (or anyone else) to launch a "killer device".
But I don't see why it follows that if Compaq HADN'T launched iPaq somebody else would have launched an equivalent. They might have - then again they might not and PPC could have failed! This was, after all, what many pudits seemed to be predicting at the time.
As for the question mark - I'm pretty sure it will be a "connected" device - of some sort - and I think a fully integrated device - ie as opposed to an"add-on" sleeve etc. Maybe the XDA? OK - their delivery is way behind their initial claims but then that's exactly happened with the iPaq!
|
| |
|
|
|
04-27-2002, 05:13 PM
|
|
Neophyte
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 3
|
|
i dont think i agree with yourpicture. The new jornada didnt effect the ppc industry as much as the old one did. The old one was the one that sold large numbers to big companies and helped get the PPC word out there. Also, the maestro phone doesnt really deserve a place in there since it hasnt even made it out yet. Id replace that with a regular maestro/genio because that was the one that came out to remind people that the sizes for their new models were just getting too big. :twisted:
|
| |
|
|
|
04-27-2002, 08:10 PM
|
|
Pontificator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,468
|
|
The future sees the truly high quality IT companies entering the fray - as opposed to the populist cram everything we can into a box cheap and cheerful approach of Casio, HP and Compaq.
Toshiba and Fujitsu-Siemens. Names that drip with excellence! They will produce the machines that replace your '?' (though I still wonder what Toshiba were thinking of with the two latest models).
|
| |
|
|
|
04-27-2002, 08:55 PM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 29
|
|
Thank you for posting this link.
I didn't expect many to agree with me when I stated someone else would have, but perhaps I should have changed that summarization. I said the pocket pc os was meant to be in a multimedia device like that, and think about it, if the ipaq wasn't made, would you have bought a pocket pc 2000 device. Perhaps an HP 548. I know that it is no 206 MHz processor but it would have been enough for you if the 150 was the highest available. The hp doesn't have a bad form IMO.
This was also mentioned in my article, about the same amount as the "someone else would have". I still think they would have, although they maybe wouldn't have done it as well. I basically explained I felt someone else would successfully tackle the consumer entertainment market, but then I summarized that someone else would have made a very ipaq like device. Perhaps I will change the article a bit.
Thanks again for the publicity, and the feedback!
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
