02-25-2003, 08:00 PM
|
|
Contributing Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 8,228
|
|
Newsday Pits the iPAQ 1910 Against the Tungsten T
http://www.newsday.com/business/columnists/ny-pigear3135257feb18,0,2768765.column?coll=ny-business-columnists
Steven Williams has written an article comparing the Palm Tungsten T to the HP iPAQ h1910. I'll spoil it for you - he is more excited about the 1910 than the TT! Booya! I personally think the 1910 is a super cool device for the average user that really wants a high powered PDA and is not interested in connectivity. Even those mildly interested in connectivity need only get an IR equipped cell phone.
|
| |
|
|
|
02-25-2003, 08:09 PM
|
|
Pontificator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,466
|
|
TT got Beeotch slapped by HP!!! 8O
I gotta say though, I really like the TT a lot...if it weren't for that damn reflective display. :?
|
| |
|
|
|
02-25-2003, 08:20 PM
|
|
Ponderer
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 72
|
|
I read the review and am curious. The article states that the Xscale processor at 200Mhz is outpowered by the Tungsten Palm's processor... However, he didn't say why or back-up this assertion with any substantive remarks. Does anyone know if this is true? Thanks in advance.
|
| |
|
|
|
02-25-2003, 08:21 PM
|
|
Neophyte
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 7
|
|
Not the best comparision feature for feature IMHO. I do currently own both PDA's. I would have choosen the iPaq 3970 to compare against the TT and I think we all know which one would come out on top no questions asked! Compare the iPaq 1910 to the new Sony SJ33. I think that is a no-brainer also!
|
| |
|
|
|
02-25-2003, 08:26 PM
|
|
Mystic
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,608
|
|
I would hardly call this a useful comparison of the two. Tungsten plays MP3's very well thank you very much. Aeroplayer is better then anything I've used on my 1910. It does point out (though subdued) how fast the TT is. Frame rates on the TT for video playback using the Kimona player is better then PocketTV on the 1910 even though it has a slower processor. I have agonized the last two weeks which PDA I want to use as the one and only. I'm still torn between the two. Since I am mostly a Mac user now, the BT capabilities of the TT is very appealing.
|
| |
|
|
|
02-25-2003, 08:28 PM
|
|
Mystic
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,608
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by hulksmash
I read the review and am curious. The article states that the Xscale processor at 200Mhz is outpowered by the Tungsten Palm's processor... However, he didn't say why or back-up this assertion with any substantive remarks. Does anyone know if this is true? Thanks in advance.
|
The TT is absolutetly more responsive then 1910. Of course it is running a less processor intensive OS though. See my post above about video playback.
|
| |
|
|
|
02-25-2003, 08:32 PM
|
|
Contributing Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 8,228
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by hulksmash
I read the review and am curious. The article states that the Xscale processor at 200Mhz is outpowered by the Tungsten Palm's processor... However, he didn't say why or back-up this assertion with any substantive remarks. Does anyone know if this is true? Thanks in advance.
|
I doubt if you put the two processors next to each other through some benchmarks if that would be true, but the 144MHz OMAP is working with the much lighter weight Palm OS and the 200MHz X-Scale is working with the heavier Pocket PC OS. So, it is like the 200hp engine in a 2,000lb sedan being faster than a 225hp engine in a 2,500lb sedan.
|
| |
|
|
|
02-25-2003, 08:45 PM
|
|
Mystic
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,608
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ed Hansberry
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by hulksmash
I read the review and am curious. The article states that the Xscale processor at 200Mhz is outpowered by the Tungsten Palm's processor... However, he didn't say why or back-up this assertion with any substantive remarks. Does anyone know if this is true? Thanks in advance.
|
I doubt if you put the two processors next to each other through some benchmarks if that would be true, but the 144MHz OMAP is working with the much lighter weight Palm OS and the 200MHz X-Scale is working with the heavier Pocket PC OS. So, it is like the 200hp engine in a 2,000lb sedan being faster than a 225hp engine in a 2,500lb sedan. |
Good analogy and one I tried to point out in my post.
__________________
27" iMac 3.06GHz Intel Core 2 Duo 8GB RAM
16GB LTE iPad3, 13" Macbook Air Core i5 w/128GB SSD
iPhone 4S (16GB), AppleTV 2.0
|
| |
|
|
|
02-25-2003, 08:46 PM
|
|
Neophyte
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 7
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by byteme
I would hardly call this a useful comparison of the two. Tungsten plays MP3's very well thank you very much. Aeroplayer is better then anything I've used on my 1910. It does point out (though subdued) how fast the TT is. Frame rates on the TT for video playback using the Kimona player is better then PocketTV on the 1910 even though it has a slower processor. I have agonized the last two weeks which PDA I want to use as the one and only. I'm still torn between the two. Since I am mostly a Mac user now, the BT capabilities of the TT is very appealing.
|
I too have agonized over the two and came to a different conclusion. Until HP comes out with a 1910 form factor with Bluetooth, I am dropping both of them for the iPaq 3970. The 1910 is nice but I need MORE POWER!!!
|
| |
|
|
|
02-25-2003, 08:47 PM
|
|
Ponderer
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 61
|
|
Re: Newsday Pits the iPAQ 1910 Against the Tungsten T
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ed Hansberry
http://www.newsday.com/business/columnists/ny-pigear3135257feb18,0,2768765.column?coll=ny-business-columnists
Steven Williams has written an article comparing the Palm Tungsten T to the HP iPAQ h1910. I'll spoil it for you - he is more excited about the 1910 than the TT! Booya! I personally think the 1910 is a super cool device for the average user that really wants a high powered PDA and is not interested in connectivity. Even those mildly interested in connectivity need only get an IR equipped cell phone.
|
I did read that the author would choose the iPaq over the Palm Tungsten....but to say he is "more excited" :?:
The author said the TT outpowered the iPaq.....your comment on this is...."who realy wants a high powered PDA" should choose the 1910 :?:
and finaly...what is the use of benchmarks numbers when a device can't play video without hickups
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
