09-04-2003, 09:00 PM
|
|
Contributing Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 8,228
|
|
Beware Of "Savings" on the 1910 iPAQ
I'm not sure why this is happening but the iPAQ 1910 seems to still be out there at full price. CompUSA even has it for $339 on their web site despite it having a MSRP of $299 from HP before it was discontinued. There is nothing wrong with the 1910, it is a great PDA, but when the new 1940 series costs $295, $5 less, but includes an iPAQ File Store, bluetooth, an SDIO slot and the new Windows Mobile 2003 for Pocket PC OS, the 1910 at $299 makes no sense.
Someone sent us an email today that a CompUSA flyer was distributed with his Thursday paper that the 1910 would be $199 after a $100 HP rebate this weekend. Well, that makes no sense either. You can get the 1930 series for $199 after rebate. It is virtually identical to the 1940, sans bluetooth, the file store and has a slightly slower processor. It is still more machine than the 1910 is, and a machine I've been recommending to anyone asking my opinion of PDAs. The 1930 is a great deal!
So, if you find a 1910 for $150 or so, go for it. But anything much more than that? Just get the 1930. I guess some of these retailers will continue to find people that aren't as savy on the latest models and pricing. :| (Affiliate links)
|
| |
|
|
|
09-04-2003, 09:15 PM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 13
|
|
CompUSA even has it for $339 on their web site despite it having a MSRP of $299 from HP before it was discontinued
:soapbox:
Yet another reason to boycott CompUSA. Seriously, has there ever been a less consumer friendly chain? 15% restocking for all items (even if defective), price gauging discontinued items (OK, except the Maestro, which was a decent deal), changing their TAP policies (and possible commiting massive breaches in contracts). It just never ends.
On the other hand, I guess maybe screwing consumers does put the USA. in CompU$A :devilboy:
|
| |
|
|
|
09-04-2003, 09:38 PM
|
|
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 516
|
|
Has anyone done any performance benchmarks between the 1910 and 1935? I suppose a case could be made for the 1910 over the 1935. Some certainly seem to prefer the "right-side-up" screen over the 1910 over the 1935. Still, I would agree that I would personally recommend the 1935 over the 1910 at the same price, if for no other reason than to be at the latest version of the OS.
Scott
__________________
Tapland
|
| |
|
|
|
09-04-2003, 09:41 PM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 49
|
|
Sorry if this is an underinformed and completely wrong post that causes a giggle or two among the bigwigs in Pocket PC authority :lol: but doesn't the 1930 use a Samsung processor that means it is incompatible with the vast majority of PPC apps? Because if you want PPC apps at a cheap price, then your only choice seems to be the good ol' 1910.
But then small form factor, cheap price etc. make the 1xxx iPAQs more geared towards getting as many of those crappy Palms out of people's hands as possible, and these people will not need lots of apps so much as a personal organiser. So that means this is ridiculous: i was expecting the 1910 to fall to about $130-150. I guess CompUSA decided they could get away with charging this stupid amount of money :evil:
__________________
Soft Reset Application loading, please wait......
|
| |
|
|
|
09-04-2003, 09:45 PM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 13
|
|
Quote:
|
doesn't the 1930 use a Samsung processor that means it is incompatible with the vast majority of PPC apps?
|
Nope - The Samsung is ARM architecture. Don't feel bad though. A lot of people asked teh same thing when the X-Scale CPUs came out. Most programs that run on ARM architecture will work (barring WM 2003 issues)
|
| |
|
|
|
09-04-2003, 09:46 PM
|
|
Contributing Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 8,228
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Scott R
Has anyone done any performance benchmarks between the 1910 and 1935? I suppose a case could be made for the 1910 over the 1935. Some certainly seem to prefer the "right-side-up" screen over the 1910 over the 1935. Still, I would agree that I would personally recommend the 1935 over the 1910 at the same price, if for no other reason than to be at the latest version of the OS.
|
The 1930 smokes the 1910 in no uncertain terms - http://www.pdaavenue.com/forum/displ...?threadid=3045
What do you mean "right side up?" Is the 1930 screen upside down or something? :confused totally:
Don't forget the 1930 also has SDIO whereas the 1910 doesn't. It is more than just the OS.
|
| |
|
|
|
09-04-2003, 09:53 PM
|
|
Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 335
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ed Hansberry
What do you mean "right side up?" Is the 1930 screen upside down or something? :confused totally:
|
Probably the same thing I saw when trying out a 1940 in CompUSA. The screen has a yellowish tint to the white areas when held in a normal operating position, but a perfectly white screen if held upside down. It's as though one of polarizing layers in the LCD has been installed backwards.
When specifying LCDs it is standard practice to specify its viewing direction. The PDA LCD should be viewed from on or below the normal to the screen axis, but the screen seems to be built for viewing above the normal by mistake.
|
| |
|
|
|
09-04-2003, 09:59 PM
|
|
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 516
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ed Hansberry
|
Good to know. Thanks.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ed Hansberry
What do you mean "right side up?" Is the 1930 screen upside down or something? :confused totally:
|
Back when everyone was discussing the 1945's "yellow" screen (let's not go there again), I mentioned that my "findings" at CompUSA indicated that the 1910 screen looked identical to the 1945's and also exhibited the yellowing phenomenon. Many posts later, someone seemed to discover that the 1910's and 1945's screens seemed to be identical (and different than the 2215's, for instance) but that the screen was now being installed "upside down." Apparently, the yellow tint is worse when tilting the screen away from you (more towards the ceiling) on the 1945 and worse on the 1910 when tilting it more parallel to your body (assuming you're standing up). I believe the consensus was that the 1910's installation was superior because you'll view it aimed a little up more often than a little "down." I think I got that right, but maybe I dreamed the whole thing.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ed Hansberry
Don't forget the 1930 also has SDIO whereas the 1910 doesn't. It is more than just the OS.
|
Thanks again. Definitely a worthwhile improvement. Though, out of curiosity, is this really because of new hardware or is SDIO support now built into PPC 2003? Not that it much matters.
Scott
__________________
Tapland
|
| |
|
|
|
09-04-2003, 10:01 PM
|
|
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 516
|
|
Ah, my longwindedness allowed someone to post ahead of me...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PJE
The PDA LCD should be viewed from on or below the normal to the screen axis, but the screen seems to be built for viewing above the normal by mistake.
|
I wonder if it was really "by mistake" or if they did it intentionally because they needed to wire things differently (e.g. - make room for the Bluetooth circuitry).
Scott
__________________
Tapland
|
| |
|
|
|
09-04-2003, 10:02 PM
|
|
Contributing Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 8,228
|
|
SDIO is new hardware. The 3900 and 5400 series have SDIO too and they were 2002 devices.
BOth of you - thanks on the "upside down" thing. I read many of the yellow screen posts but never saw the polarization threads apparently. I wonder if this is somethign PPCTechs could fix for a fee for distraught 1930/40 users?
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
