The juicy iPAQ 5000 rumours

[Jason Dunn]

<a href="http://discussion.brighthand.com/showthread.php?s=1a783f82dd9000c7e223d3360b2d918d&threadid=56320">http://discussion.brighthand.com/showthread.php?s=1a783f82dd9000c7e223d3360b2d918d&threadid=56320</a><br /><br />Got your drool cup ready? Good. Someone has started a thread at Brighthand, pointed out to us by AhuhX, and it's making me weak in the knees. How would you like a Pocket PC with...<br /><br />...a 2100 mAh battery?<br />...built-in WiFi, Bluetooth, and GPRS?<br />...64K colour back-lit screen?<br />...64 megs of Flash ROM, 128 megs of RAM?<br />...800 mhz to 1 Ghz CPU?<br />...320 x 480 screen resolution?<br />...biometric security?<br /><br />I shudder to think what the price tag will be on this beast, especially considering the lofty pricing strategy HP is using with their iPAQs, but the specs...look at those specs! 100% rumours at this point, so don't take it to the bank. Do go read the Brighthand posting though - it has some very interesting information, including a type of USB connection that is quite unique.

[Kirk Stephens]

Damnit Jason, why'd you have to post that?! My drool cup overflowed onto my keyboard.

While we are dreaming here, my change to those specs would be:

-MORE RAM!! Maybe something more in the realm of 256 or 512
-Forget a normal backlight screen. 16Bit OLED display 8O
-Titanium casing, drop your iPAQ from a 2 story building without any worries!
-An ultra thin solar panel paint coating to take energy from the sun to recharge that huge battery. Go without recharging for days

I could go on for pages here, I will stop myself 8)

[Paragon]

Hmmm this looks a lot like one of those posts where you go WOW look at all the cool ideas. Then after looking at it for a while you soon realize that it's not so great or 'cutting edge informative'

First, for a device that won't hit the market for quite sometime not to have basic cellphone feature...answer a call without sticking something in your ear....ya right.

Next, 800mhz lets get 400 working first. That's not likely to happen for quite sometime either.

256 mb RAM. Myself I would rather spend the money on CF memory. OH wait NO CF slot, Sd only. Even todays devices coming out have two slots.

This whole thing sounds to me a lot like a memo asking "Can we do this" Not a memo saying "We are going to do this".

I'm usually pretty optimistic, but here I thing realistic is more fitting.

Dave

[Marc Zimmermann]

...a 2100 mAh battery?

Right, but they sure will find a way to drain that battery just as quickas they do now.

...built-in WiFi, Bluetooth, and GPRS?
...128 megs of RAM?
...800 mhz to 1 Ghz CPU?

Ah, got it!

[JMountford]

This sounds a lot like my device specs.
Let me asure everyone that it can be done. To asuage the PP issues by the time this could hit market it would cost about as much as today's high end models do today.

Someone in a thread a few days ago pointed out the virtues of Firewire. I have been researching this for a PPC and the idea is very promissing.

[Duncan]

There are several things that worry me about those specs...

Built-in GPRS, WiFi and BT. So - one technology that is in the process of being advanced (GPRS -> 3G), and one that is being 'upgraded' (and probaly to two different specs in different parts of the world (802.11b -> 'a' in the US and 'g' in Europe)?! Not sure that this is integration of a good kind...

Plus - the potential battery drain of three kinds of wireless and a screen with twice the pixels is soon going to take away from the advantages of the bigger battery!

Then there is weight... no matter how many adavnces they make - bigger battery, three kinds of wireless (even in an integrated chip that is going to add up!), screen, double the RAM, double the ROM - it isn't going to be light is it!

Still - who knows how far into the future the plan for this is (or, for that matter, what other manufacturers have lined up for their next iterations) - so perhaps we will be pleasantly surprised!

[Stefan]

Once oled is available, this will be a big step to longer battary-life.

[spursdude]

when will this come out?

some of this sounds plausible today (the RAM, screen, connectivity). however, the processor double the speed of today's x-scale sounds like it's years off. but then again, if it's years off, how can they predict the specs so specifically? with the brighthand author being unable to disclose his source (for obvious reasons), i have some doubts about this.

it would be a nice device, though :D

[/dev/niall]

Someone in a thread a few days ago pointed out the virtues of Firewire. I have been researching this for a PPC and the idea is very promissing.

I really don't see that happening, what with Apple "owning" Firewire, and USB 2.0 pretty muich equalling Firewire in terms of speed.

[Jason Lee]

And it can all be your's for a mear $6,748.65 USD.... :D

[paris]

my guess is that these series will be out on the first quarter of 2003 and probobly by then Pocket PC 2003 will be out with xscale support and boom.

Pocket PC 2003 yes it possible since the 2002 version has been out for almost a year.

[Sslixtis]

I really don't see this hitting the market until at the earliest Q2 2003, Probably Q3 just bacause of hardware availability(800Mhz-1Ghz Xscale). The interesting thing to me was the guy from the Brighthand article was surprised by the fact that HP said the processor would be scaleable on power usage, uh duh! That is where the name Xscale comes from, but if the scalable part is true it sounds as if they are going to have the software optimized to take advantage of the hardware by then. I don't know if that means PPC.NET or if HP is going to go it on their own but I'll take whatever I can get at this point! :wink:

[Jonathan1]

Do you know if online purchase of these new iPaq will have a remortgage of you home option on the page? Use your imagination below……..


HP.com – Compaq iPaq 5000

Compaq iPaq 5000
The new standard in Pocket PC's is here. Introducing the iPaq 5000 series. It does to PDA's what the laptop did for desktops. With its 64 thousand colors and a screen resolution of 320 x 480 you will be able to appreciate pictures and documents on a whole new level. And if you are looking for connectivity look no further. The 5000 comes equipped with 3 forms of wireless connectivity including Bluetooth, 802.11b, and GPRS allowing unparallel connectivity options! You want speed? It's got that too with the fastest CPU available in ANY PDA. The New X-Scale 800Mhz CPU blazes past its competition in speed and performance! In a world where security is the number one priority of all businesses you can feel safe knowing the iPaq comes equipped with biometric security. No more needing to remember your passwords. Finally you may be wondering about battery life with all these features. Not to worry! With a 2100 mAh battery we've got you covered. The iPaq 5000 Pocket PC. The next step in ultra mobile computing!


Specifications:
64K color back-lit screen
320 x 480 screen resolution?
2100 mAh battery?
built-in WiFi, Bluetooth, and GPRS?
64 megs of Flash ROM, 128 megs of RAM?
Biometric security

Price: $x,xxx

Purchase options:
_________________________________________________________
| Remortgage you home | Sell your organs |Buy a lottery Ticket |
| Invest in HP (Automatic 30% discount!) |
| E-mail friends asking for donations |
|_________________________________________________________|

[Sven Johannsen]

Someone in a thread a few days ago pointed out the virtues of Firewire. I have been researching this for a PPC and the idea is very promissing.

I really don't see that happening, what with Apple "owning" Firewire, and USB 2.0 pretty muich equalling Firewire in terms of speed.

Apple doesn't own the IEEE 1394 specification. It does own the tradename Firewire. I expect that they have given liberal license to that name since the IEEE 1394 forum recently adopted 'Firewire' as the official nickname for the technology.

If IEEE 1394 had been chosen as the PPC interface we would all be looking for drivers for our peripheral hardware instead of lamenting we only have client USB ports.

[/dev/niall]

Apple doesn't own the IEEE 1394 specification. It does own the tradename Firewire. I expect that they have given liberal license to that name since the IEEE 1394 forum recently adopted 'Firewire' as the official nickname for the technology.


That's why I said "own" in quotes.

If IEEE 1394 had been chosen as the PPC interface we would all be looking for drivers for our peripheral hardware instead of lamenting we only have client USB ports.

No arguements here, but since when does having the superior technology mean you win in the market? ;)

[Timothy Rapson]

320 by 480 would be nice but a little behind the times. By the time the 500 is out the OOC or whatever it is (the 3 by 5 by 1 inch pocketable Windows XP model with 640 by 320 screen) will be out for $1000.

I would much rather know what is coming in the Ipaq 2200 for $300.

Still, a very impressive set of features.

[jffcurt]

In the August issue of CPU magazine. There's a small article stating that Arm is working on a new processsor called ARM 11 and based on the company's Jaguar architecture. ARM 11 chips will reportedly bring approx. 1 GHz processsing speed to PDA's. They say that PDA'S using ARM 11 should start showing up late this year. That's where their probably going to get the speed. They grew up with ARM. Xscale hasn't exactly been a hit.

[Will T Smith]

Someone in a thread a few days ago pointed out the virtues of Firewire. I have been researching this for a PPC and the idea is very promissing.

I really don't see that happening, what with Apple "owning" Firewire, and USB 2.0 pretty muich equalling Firewire in terms of speed.

Apple does not OWN Firewire technology. IEEE 1394 standardized technology endorsed by standards organizations. Apple does own the "Firewire" trademark. They WERE asking for modest royalty fees ($.25 per unit) but have recently dropped that requirement.

Beyond that, USB2 is still a "new" technology compared to the vetted Firewire. Firewire is the standard for video camcorders as well as the new bellweather standard for MP3 players.

WHY????? Firewire is a peer-to-peer technology. One can hook two firewire devices together with an assymetrical cable. For instance, you can connect your notebook to a desktop with Firewire using a standard capable and implement a 400Mbs point to point connection. One could hook a group of laptops to a firewire hub and implement a 400Mbs network.

USB is a Master/Slave arrangement. USB requires DRIVERS for all applications on different hosts.

Using Firewire, you could connect your PocketPC to a portable hard drive and load/unload files. One could hook two Pocket PC's together for high speed file transfer. Or you could sync with your PC at 400Mbs. At the same time, your Firewire cable has ALL the juice needed to charge high-voltage batteries quickly using the same cable you would for any other application.

Using Firewire it is conceivable that you could connect to a DV Camcorder and edit video directly on the device. That or select clips for transfering to a hard-drive, etc...

Firewire is truly hear to stay as it has been chosen for digital video buses for interconnection between components. In the future, you may drive presentations with a Firewire cable instead of an RGB or RCA cable. Even the DVI connectors may eventually change to firewire as a variety of high definition monitors will adopt firewire as their connectivity solution.

USB2 is an OK choice for desk-bound consumer peripherals like scanners. However, Firewire is better since in can provide power to the scanner as well as Data X-Fer. Same goes for printers. Firewire can banish the Wall-Warts. USB 2.0 cannot. In the end, all of our PCs will have both, the same way our legacy PC's had both Parallel and Serial Ports.

In my personal example, I shall highlight the SimpleTech 20GB SimpleDrive. It has both USB2.0 and Firewire connectivity. The drive is not fast enough to saturate either bus. However, the big difference is that when connected with the 6-pin firewire connector, it does NOT require the power adapter. Under USB2.0, you must plug in the wall wart and manage an extra cable.

All-around, Firewire kicks USB2.0's ass. It would be standard in all our PC's right now if Intel hadn't pulled their pre-emptive stunt scaring motherboard manufacturers away just as they were about to begin Firewire integration.

Oh well that's enough. BTW, don't even talk about USB On-The-Go it doesn't exist yet. Why would you want it when a better, proven technology has existed for the past four years.

[st63z]

^ I second this :)

BTW, can FW supply 5V, or only 12V?

[Barbay1]

Some of those features sounds really cool --- but in reality I have reservations (see below).

I would like:

A longer lasting iPAQ with a swappable battery

(please don't add so much stuff that the cool 2100 mAH battery lasts as short a time as the current battery) It would be nice to stray a little farther from the power supply, or be able to survive a 12-13 hour plane trip without a dongle. One get looks from other passengers when you whip out the dongle, you know -- especially these days.

A fast processor and an architecture that actually supports operating at that speed would be superb.

Wireless is really cool and I think it will have a big future, but I don't want them _built-in_ to my device. How would you turn them off?
... My concern is -- how would you protect your privacy and your PDA against viruses if the wireless capability is _built-in_?

As an analogy, if I didn't have a hardware switch on my computer power supply in addition to the on/off button my computer, I would not have been able to turn off my computer sometimes. What is the equivalent of the computer power supply button for a wireless PDA? If I turn it off, it is useless to me. And just because the screen is black doesn't mean that it is _really_ off, it could still be running or transmitting wirelessly.

Personally, I prefer to be able to remove that bluetooth/802.11b/GPRS capability _physically_ and add it back or replace it with a newer version as often as I please.

That doesn't mean I'm not drooling, though! :lol:

[/dev/niall]

Apple does not OWN Firewire technology.


Sigh. Which is why I put "own" in "quotes". IEEE 1394 is a standard that most average consumers know nothing about until you tell them it's "Firewire". Fireware is a registered trademark of Apple. My bad for not making my point clearer. I don't believe Microsoft sees any advantedge in strengthening someone else's trademark by using 1394 as the technology to connect PocketPCs with desktops; never mind the fact that most desktops do not have 1394 "built in"...


BTW, don't even talk about USB On-The-Go it doesn't exist yet. Why would you want it when a better, proven technology has existed for the past four years.

Much good info, but nothing I didn't already know. *I* don't want it. I'd be perfectly happy to connect my iPaq to my AFW-4300 and be done with it. ;)

I just don't think Firewire will win over USB in the marketplace over the long run. Like I said before, technical superiority has little to do with market success in the technology business. USB, like it or not, is pervasive in this market. The perception is that 2.0 puts it on even footing with 1394. I don't like it either.

[st63z]

I don't think MS has been necessarily against 1394/FW (judging by their OS support efforts), I would say they've been fairly agnostic about 1394/USB. And anyone can now supposedly trumpet "FW" happily w/o worrying about royalties or even mentioning Apple anywhere in their literature :)

When you say "the marketplace" I assume you mean the computer industry? I guess it may be true, 1394 may never catch up to USB here. But as it stands now, I think it looks likely that 1394 will become even MORE pervasive in consumer electronics (beyond just camcorders). Seriously. Everyone and their uncle seems to like 1394 (at least as a starting point), future 1394 revs will have flexible physical transports (fiber, twisted pair, etc) -- ironic since 1394 can already be used to network now, there's that 1394 over wireless initiative, and all the big CE companies are making brouhahas over their HAVi development (their chosen solution to end today's cluttered and varying CE interconnects). Even MS is hedging their bet (to make sure their PC-centric digital home vision can interoperate with parallel develomentss) by adding support to UPnP, as I remember. I fully expect HAVi to make a bigger and bigger splash (like in the next CES) with 1394b samples finaly close by. It kinda reminds me of all the commotions over DVD when it was first rolled out :) Sure, there've been Bluetooth commotions for the longest time and look how slowly that's been going, but... :D

Then again, if MS and the PC industry score a huge, decisive victory in making the PC-centric digital home the norm, then they may be the ones dictating the major standards that we use for everything... But it's more likely that the PC industry will have to accomodate HAVi as they enter the home entertainment market. It's not (purely) a matter of politics anyway, as have been pointed out, 1394 (& HAVi) provides the technical solution to what these companies (and the CE market) need, whereas USB does not.

I realize you're not denying these facts at all, rather you're reemphasizing USB's dominance in the PC industry. But you can't forget that the CE industry exists, and nothing lives in a vacuum, and in fact the covergence of both has always been a holy grail. So as the PC companies enter the home entertainment field, I think they'll largely pick up 1394 (as they have done). Sorry, it's late and I'm slagged and rambling...

[Pony99CA]

Someone in a thread a few days ago pointed out the virtues of Firewire. I have been researching this for a PPC and the idea is very promissing.

I really don't see that happening, what with Apple "owning" Firewire, and USB 2.0 pretty muich equalling Firewire in terms of speed.

"Pretty much equalling"? Firewire is 400 Mbps, USB 2.0 is 480 Mbps, if I recall correctly. On the surface (assuming no protocol overhead), USB 2.0 therefore runs 20% faster than Firewire.

That said, I'd love to see more Firewire. My laptop has Firewire, and I have a Sony Firewire (er, iLink) CD-RW drive and a Maxtor Firewire 80 GB hard disk. Hooking my iPAQ to those would be very cool.

We now return to our regularly scheduled iPAQ 5000 thread (I hope). :-)

Steve

[Rob Alexander]

In my personal example, I shall highlight the SimpleTech 20GB SimpleDrive. It has both USB2.0 and Firewire connectivity. The drive is not fast enough to saturate either bus. However, the big difference is that when connected with the 6-pin firewire connector, it does NOT require the power adapter. Under USB2.0, you must plug in the wall wart and manage an extra cable.


I can't speak for your SimpleTech drive, but there's nothing inherent in USB 2.0 that prevents a hard drive from runing without external power. I run a 20GB Anypak (Fujitsu HDD on the inside) portable USB 2.0 HDD every day and it doesn't require any external power source. I wouldn't begin to debate whether or not Firewire is better than USB in terms of power distribution (or anything else), but it's misleading to suggest that USB 2.0 is unable to run a HDD since it already does.

I should add that I use both Firewire and USB 2.0 and both have been solid performers for me. If there are technical reasons why Firewire would work better than USB for PPCs (like the peer-to-peer vs. master-slave issue you mentioned), then I'm all for it.

[JMountford]

I had no idea my little Firewire comment would cause so much discussion.

My whole thinking is well I have been working on designs for a pocket pc. I want some thing feasible. I am trying to implement the best technology in as small a form factor as possible.

Firewire has some benifits over USB. A big one for a pocket Device would be that the connector is smaller. It has power supplied to it standard. The downside is that there are NO that is a big wapping NONE drivers for Firewire and the pocket PC.

As for another discussion going on Concern high MHz Xscale Processors. Both Motorola and Samsung have been working on High Speed Arm Core CPUs Motorola has been working on an 600 - 800 MHz for over 6 months. Now I do not know about you guys, but if there were three different Manufacturers of a CPU using the same code one would think competition would drive down price and drive up innovation! But, Anyway, it is very feasible that there exists a market ready 800 MHz CPU at this very moment.

[st63z]

AFAIK most external devices using 2.5" laptop HDD can be run off both USB and FW bus power (there may be rare exceptions for USB with the most power-hungry 5400rpm drives and old, inefficient IDE/USB bridges).

Most 3.5" HDDs can't be run off USB bus power, but I remember having seen a couple of exceptions to this (I think they were using some special Seagate 4000rpm models or something, I forget). As a matter of fact though, I haven't been seeing many 1394 3.5" enclosures that can run off bus power either, and I've been wondering about that. Addonics for example told me they want to make their next 1394 interface cable able to run thier Combo Hard Drive 3.5" enclosure off bus power.

Maybe it's an issue of the voltage (5V/12V) support? Hence my earlier question...

[alex_kac]

Someone in a thread a few days ago pointed out the virtues of Firewire. I have been researching this for a PPC and the idea is very promissing.

I really don't see that happening, what with Apple "owning" Firewire, and USB 2.0 pretty muich equalling Firewire in terms of speed.

One interesting factoid...Firewire is actually twice as fast as USB 2 in real world use. The reason is simply that the Firewire chip controls all transfer, while USB requires the CPU. And in many Macs and PCs, the CPU is already being used by the ATA chip and ....

but seriously...Firewire is a better tech. And thankfully, it is seeing quite widespread use.

[alex_kac]

Someone in a thread a few days ago pointed out the virtues of Firewire. I have been researching this for a PPC and the idea is very promissing.

I really don't see that happening, what with Apple "owning" Firewire, and USB 2.0 pretty muich equalling Firewire in terms of speed.

"Pretty much equalling"? Firewire is 400 Mbps, USB 2.0 is 480 Mbps, if I recall correctly. On the surface (assuming no protocol overhead), USB 2.0 therefore runs 20% faster than Firewire.

That said, I'd love to see more Firewire. My laptop has Firewire, and I have a Sony Firewire (er, iLink) CD-RW drive and a Maxtor Firewire 80 GB hard disk. Hooking my iPAQ to those would be very cool.

We now return to our regularly scheduled iPAQ 5000 thread (I hope). :-)
Steve

USB 2.0 is 480 - next gen Firewire is 800Mbps...but even so, Firewire is still faster than USB 2.0 in real life. The tests I've seen were hard drive tests - exact same hard drive with both connectors. Firewire was twice as fast as USB 2.

[Jason Dunn]

Not to drag this even more off-topic, but I was quite ignorant of Firewire's true capabilities until I finally used it - and I was quite impressed. I'm looking at a whack of Adaptec Firewire and USB 2.0 kits on my floor at the moment, and I can say with great certainty that both technologies will be around for quite some time - there's enough market space for both of them.

[Will T Smith]

^ I second this :)

BTW, can FW supply 5V, or only 12V?

It can supply up to 30V. Check out http://www.computer.org/multimedia/articles/firewire.htm

[Will T Smith]

I just don't think Firewire will win over USB in the marketplace over the long run. Like I said before, technical superiority has little to do with market success in the technology business. USB, like it or not, is pervasive in this market. The perception is that 2.0 puts it on even footing with 1394. I don't like it either.

Firewire has already won in the consumer electronics space. Digital video has sealed the deal. Virtually every digital video camera AND digital VCR uses the standard. Firewire will form the basis for digital connections between DVD players and HDTV monitors. One huge advantage here is that you will be able to simply hook all your components into a hub instead using point to point connections for every necessary link.

MP3 players seem to be choosing Firewire as well. The two best players iPod and Digital Jukebox now utilize firewire. As I recall, Sony's new car console MP3 jukebox includes Firewire connectivity.

Firewire is here to STAY. USB2.0 is also her to stay, however it has serious drawbacks in the realm of portable devices. Largely because of it's dependence on the Master/Slave hierarchy. The inability to charge large batteries and power hard drives and scanners also places it at a serious disadvantage.

PocketPC would be much better off with Firewire connectivity than USB.

[Will T Smith]

Someone in a thread a few days ago pointed out the virtues of Firewire. I have been researching this for a PPC and the idea is very promissing.

I really don't see that happening, what with Apple "owning" Firewire, and USB 2.0 pretty muich equalling Firewire in terms of speed.

"Pretty much equalling"? Firewire is 400 Mbps, USB 2.0 is 480 Mbps, if I recall correctly. On the surface (assuming no protocol overhead), USB 2.0 therefore runs 20% faster than Firewire.

That said, I'd love to see more Firewire. My laptop has Firewire, and I have a Sony Firewire (er, iLink) CD-RW drive and a Maxtor Firewire 80 GB hard disk. Hooking my iPAQ to those would be very cool.


Steve

If you can get 12Mbs out of USB I would be impressed. Equally, if you can get 480Mbs out of USB 2.0 I would be equally impressed. USB has never lived up to it's stated bandwidth thresholds. Nor has it been stable or reliable the way that Firewire has.

Firewire ver B rolls out this fall starting at 800Mbs and 1300Mbs. I don't see USB venturing into these speeds anytime soon.