What's Up For e310 Owners?

[Ed Hansberry]

Reader Herbert Dijkman sent this in a few days ago. "Bad news for Toshiba e310 owners(like me). I asked Toshiba when the e310 upgrade will be released (the e740 upgrade is available for about a month now). This is their response. 'Unfortunately, the E310 has been discontinued and as far as I know, there is no plan to release a EUU3 update at the moment. Please check our site or <a href="www.pocketpc.com">www.pocketpc.com</a> frequently for any new updates that may be released for the Operating System. Thank You.'"<br /><br />Well, first of all, Microsoft provides the updates to the OEMs to test and distribute and you won't find them on <a href="www.pocketpc.com">www.pocketpc.com</a>. Second, after various attempts to contact both their PR and Tech Support departments going back to December 3rd, we've had no response to clarify this issue. I am still optimistic that the above quote was a response from an employee that didn't have all of the facts.<br /><br />I think it is very important for us to keep the upgrade and support record of companies for discontinued devices in mind when making purchasing decisions. I have no illusions that my 3900 is still really an active product with the 5400's coming out, but given Compaq's track record in the past, I am reasonably confident that they will not only keep providing EUUs for the device, but also a future Pocket PC upgrade assuming the 3900 meets the hardware requrements, just as they did for the 3600 series last year. Compaq also makes a solid effort to keep supporting older products with new hardware, like sleeves and keyboards. Toshiba's new keyboard, in contrast, seems to only be available for the brand new e330/335 and e740 devices, not the recently discontinued e310. :( See the <a href="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6036">comments in this thread</a>.<br /><br />Toshiba makes a fantastic product. Let's hope they are going to support them past their discontinuance date and not leave older e310 and e570/Maestro owners out in the cold.

[jet8810]

yea...also since e310 has no usb hosting capabilities none of the new keyboards released work with it either...glad I upgraded to an e740! :lol:

[mar2k]

&lt;soapbox>
This is definitely the dark side of Pocket PCs as I see it....the fact that Microsoft releases the EUUs to hardware vendors and not the end users themselves.

As many choices as there are now, its still just downright scary to buy from anyone but HP if you want to make sure that your device is future-proof. I was amazed that Casio released EUU3 even though the E-200 was discontinued, but that is certainly the exception to the rule. I do think that Dell will keep pace with HP on the end support side at least.

I had my heart set on buying the Asus A600 even at a premium until I tried to find out if they would be releasing the EUU3 update and no one had a clue what I was talking about, thus I would up with the H1910.

Microsoft needs to get a grip and somehow get these updates directly to end users or else a lot of people are going to be very unhappy down the road. Involving vendors is the kiss of death - an OEM now may not hold a Pocket PC license a year from now, meaning a lot of "orphaned" devices. What good is Flash ROM if no one releases the updates to the users who hold the devices.
&lt;/soapbox>

[dbrahms]

exactly the reason to go with a company that has a mild history in the Pocket Pc arena...ie: HP/Compaq etc. ALSO, i found a comment (http://forums.pocketmatrix.com/viewtopic.php?t=8534) here that said this guy used the EUU# from compaq on a Casio and HP568...ever try that?

[arndb]

Let's hope they are going to support them past their discontinuance date and not leave older e310 and e570/Maestro owners out in the cold.

They will leave you in the cold! I´m a owner of a e570. They never published a EUU2 for that device. And it´s only one year old!
:(

[bikeman]

I provide this update at your own risk :twisted: - the Compaq EUU3 works perfectly on the e310. I could not load it onto the device into main memory, even after freeing up memory. So I extracted it onto my MMC card using a card reader/writer connected to my PC. Then I was able to install the EUU3 off of the MMC card. Got the Bliss theme and the upgraded media player. :D I had gone out and installed the EUU2, but it turns out that it is included in the EUU3 anyway.
Dan

[johncruise]

what happend to the customary 2 year support for products that are in their end-of-life cycle?

Yessirree.... and there goes Toshiba's tech support for outdated products.

johncruise

[bikeman]

Oh, forgot to add, TOSHIBA - WE WANT A KEYBOARD! :evil:
Dan

[Ed Hansberry]

&lt;soapbox>
This is definitely the dark side of Pocket PCs as I see it....the fact that Microsoft releases the EUUs to hardware vendors and not the end users themselves.
I disagree. There are a lot of hardware differences and each device needs to be thoroughly tested - and that is the job of the OEM, not MS. EUU3 as released from MS will fry the Jornada 928's WMP capabilities. So, HP has to keep working on it with MS. If MS had released that and killed a bunch of Jornada 928 users, who pays? HP? Why would they? They would claim HP didn't test or release the software. MS? How - by sending them to HP for repair?

The Palm OS side does the same thing. Palm releases fixes to Handspring, Sony, etc. and they release to the users. There are just too many things to deal with on individual devices for MS to take ownership like that.

[cpoole]

Like any other area of the computer market, there are companies that support their products and other ones who do not.

I purchased a uMax scanner that sort of turned into a paper weight once Win XP came out. I ended up giving it to someone who was still running Win 98. There are lots of companies that feel if they are not selling the product right now then bye bye support. The ultimate in support has to go to NVidia where they still support old TNT video cards in their current driver releases.

Everytime I read about a company that does not support their product, I make sure to remember that fact the next time I purchase a related product. There are enough choices on the market without supporting companies that do not support their customers.

[jpaq]

I'm shivering out here in the cold (left out in). My Maestro is wanting a fresh update and it sounds as if its creator has forgotten about it.

Funny about the E570 comment. Audiovox had EUU2 for the Maestro. Not sure why Toshiba wouldn't have the same for the E570.

I am noticing a strange Toshiba trend though. Several things seem lacking:
1. None of their PDA's provide any ROM access to the end-user. Aren't they the only ones that do this? If not, they are one company of few. Compaq, HP (now the same), Casio, Dell, others, provide ROM access.
2. Extremely slow to release updates, (EUU and otherwise).
3. Poor PR response and /or action (see E740)
4. Now we hear of abandonment on the E570.
5. Strange release strategy on the E550 (CompUsa only?????)
6. Slow to react to competitive pricing strategies.

What is happening at the formerly great Toshiba? Have they lost their way?

:(

[jeasher]

Sorry to be ignorant, but what is an EEU? I get that it is some sort of OS upgrade, but what exactly does it accomplish? Thanks.

[dbrahms]

Sorry to be ignorant, but what is an EEU? I get that it is some sort of OS upgrade, but what exactly does it accomplish? Thanks.

end user update.....do a web search for pete's sake!

[bikeman]

Has anybody tried the infrared keyboard from Micro Innovations? It specifically does list the e310 as being compatible. :) I have not tried it, but was hoping that somebody has. :wink:
http://www.officeonthegogo.com/products.html
Wireless Keyboard
Wireless Portable Infra Red Keyboard--from Micro Innovations, the cutting edge of the cutting edge. No more wires. Works with any PDA that has infra red port and the ONLY portable keyboard to work with the Handspring Treo.
Only $99.99 plus applicable tax and shipping and handling.
International orders will take 4 to 6 weeks for delivery

Dan

[tylosaurus]

I have successfully used the iPaq EUU3 on my Audiovox Masetro. :D I did it a week ago and have had no problems. I've also heard that it works on the Toshiba e570 too.

[Wiggin]

&lt;soapbox>
This is definitely the dark side of Pocket PCs as I see it....the fact that Microsoft releases the EUUs to hardware vendors and not the end users themselves.
I disagree. There are a lot of hardware differences and each device needs to be thoroughly tested - and that is the job of the OEM, not MS.
Although I religiously follow Ed's conclusions as the enlightened truth, I have to step out of that attitude just this once :roll:
I agree with the Dark Side post, for one simple reason. PPC2002 is an OS that runs on many different devices, and it should be treated NO different than an OS designed for the PC. I have never understood why OEMs have to "do their magic" to any ROM update or EUU. Consider how ridiculous it would be if every XP update had to be administered by ALL of the PC OEMs. It would bring the PC world to a near gridlock halt.
Why should the PPC world be treated different? I believe that OEMs should manage their device to be independent of the OS so that ALL updates issued from MS are available quickly &amp; universally.
To make the case that OEMs carry the burden just perpetuates end-user frustration.... IMHO...
But, you are still a PPC God Ed 8)

[mar2k]

The real point of my "dark side" post was that I feel Microsoft EUUs should apply to all devices. If OEMs want hardware specific enhancements they should release separate ROM updates for those devices. This would make everyone's life a lot easier...........

[Ed Hansberry]

The real point of my "dark side" point was that I feel Microsoft EUUs should apply to all devices. If OEMs want hardware specific enhancements they should release separate ROM updates for those devices. This would make everyone's life a lot easier...........
So who tests the EUU to ensure it works with all devices?
Who pays when an EUU toasts a device? This isn't like a PC that worst case scenario you just reformat the hard drive and reload the "rescue CD" on. When a device won't boot, there is nothing a user can do but send it back to factory.

[JonnoB]

I disagree. There are a lot of hardware differences and each device needs to be thoroughly tested - and that is the job of the OEM, not MS.
Ed - when MS released WinXP, it went out of its way to make sure it worked with 99%+ of the currently available machines. PC builders (any that were worth anything) posted updates to drivers that were needed to support the OS. MS should do the same thing with these updates and any patches required should be posted by the PDA manufacturer... or at least they can post something like - this EUUx works, but you will lose X until we have a patch... or if there is no patch to be made available - say so!

[mar2k]

So who tests the EUU to ensure it works with all devices?
Who pays when an EUU toasts a device? This isn't like a PC that worst case scenario you just reformat the hard drive and reload the "rescue CD" on. When a device won't boot, there is nothing a user can do but send it back to factory.

I see where you are going, but I thought the whole point of Microsoft requiring OEMs to use certain hardware specifications was to ensure this type of upgradability of the core OS.

[Pocketpcnerd]

Hey I downloaded the euu3 from compaqs site and it works fine on my e310 no problems at all. Follow these instructions:

http://www.cewindows.net/faqs/pocketpc2002sp3install.htm

get the file that you need from here:

http://www29.compaq.com/falco/sp_detail.asp?Model=4702&Div=28&Os=126&SoftwareVer=16579


I have already been the crash test dummy with my e310, so I know that it works flawlessly..........

[Jason Dunn]

The real point of my "dark side" point was that I feel Microsoft EUUs should apply to all devices. If OEMs want hardware specific enhancements they should release separate ROM updates for those devices. This would make everyone's life a lot easier...........

Indeed, that would be a good approach. The point about the OEMs is also valid - if we had to wait for Windows XP SP1 to come from our invidual OEMs, we'd be infuriated - yet we accept it as "normal" on the Pocket PC. Microsoft should control the EUU updates and leave out anything that's device specific.

[mar2k]

Indeed, that would be a good approach. The point about the OEMs is also valid - if we had to wait for Windows XP SP1 to come from our invidual OEMs, we'd be infuriated - yet we accept it as "normal" on the Pocket PC. Microsoft should control the EUU updates and leave out anything that's device specific.

Exactly. I built my desktop myself and I know I'm not going to be releasing any XP service packs anytime soon... :)

[TrojanUO]

&lt;soapbox>
This is definitely the dark side of Pocket PCs as I see it....the fact that Microsoft releases the EUUs to hardware vendors and not the end users themselves.
I disagree. There are a lot of hardware differences and each device needs to be thoroughly tested - and that is the job of the OEM, not MS.
Although I religiously follow Ed's conclusions as the enlightened truth, I have to step out of that attitude just this once :roll:
I agree with the Dark Side post, for one simple reason. PPC2002 is an OS that runs on many different devices, and it should be treated NO different than an OS designed for the PC. I have never understood why OEMs have to "do their magic" to any ROM update or EUU. Consider how ridiculous it would be if every XP update had to be administered by ALL of the PC OEMs. It would bring the PC world to a near gridlock halt.
Why should the PPC world be treated different? I believe that OEMs should manage their device to be independent of the OS so that ALL updates issued from MS are available quickly &amp; universally.
To make the case that OEMs carry the burden just perpetuates end-user frustration.... IMHO...
But, you are still a PPC God Ed 8)

The reason they are done differently is because different OEM's include different supplementary applications in left-over ROM Space, or make use of extra ROM Space as a secure storage area, since PPC2K2 Premium is only 24MB's. Some of them may also have specific drivers for devices loaded (SDIO Driver, CF Driver, USB Host, Consumer IR, etc)

[Ed Hansberry]

Ed - when MS released WinXP, it went out of its way to make sure it worked with 99%+ of the currently available machines.
Not even close. Take the Dell Dimension 4500. You can get that with 3 different video cards, several different NICs, modems, hard drives, etc. You think they tested those combinations? No way, and how the HAL interacts with the BIOS and the related drivers can cause differences in the same video card in a differently configured Dell. My video card had a problem that only was affected in the Dell 4400 and maybe a few others in the Dimension line. There was no problem with that card in other boxes (cheap generic card, not a big gaming card) from other OEMs. So Dell had to create a new driver to interact with the HAL and BIOS.

I see where you are going, but I thought the whole point of Microsoft requiring OEMs to use certain hardware specifications was to ensure this type of upgradability of the core OS.

It is to ensure upgradability, but that can be implemented in various ways, and MS doesn't do the OAL (OEM Hardware Abstraction Layer), the OEM does, which is how the OS talks to the hardware. There are a variety of ARM processors out there and at least 4 used in Pocket PCs - StrongARM, 2 X-Scales and the TI-OMAP (in the J928) then there are video drivers, storage card drivers, sound drivers, blah blah blah. Those are the tests that need to happen. MS does test a wide variety of devices, but not all of them. They can't. That is part of the job of the OEM.

[Ed Hansberry]

I agree with the Dark Side post, for one simple reason. PPC2002 is an OS that runs on many different devices, and it should be treated NO different than an OS designed for the PC.
No, it is an embedded OS. If you hose your XP install with a driver update or service pack, you call MS or your OEM, they ultimtately tell you to reinstall from scratch. Case closed and error solved.

You hose your Pocket PC install and..... you have to send it back to the OEM. It is an embedded OS and those are treated differently. I know of NO EMBEDDED OS ANYWHERE where the OEM is not responsible for ensuring ROM updates are tested and distributed. Palm, Windows CE, Symbian, etc. I think most (all?) cell phone upgrades are done through the carrier as a matter of practice, not the maker. That is a bit different though because even if Nokia did release the patch, that is in a sense the OEM and the only difference in the phones among the carriers is the carrier label stamped on the back.

[JonnoB]

Ed - when MS released WinXP, it went out of its way to make sure it worked with 99%+ of the currently available machines.
Not even close. Take the Dell Dimension 4500. You can get that with 3 different video cards, several different NICs, modems, hard drives, etc. You think they tested those combinations? No way, and how the HAL interacts with the BIOS and the related drivers can cause differences in the same video card in a differently configured Dell. My video card had a problem that only was affected in the Dell 4400 and maybe a few others in the Dimension line. There was no problem with that card in other boxes (cheap generic card, not a big gaming card) from other OEMs. So Dell had to create a new driver to interact with the HAL and BIOS.


With the way ROM works now (XIP), it is almost like a drive. The fact that MS did not get it right with WinXP, but managed to release it publicly is a testament to the faith they had that they could 'work it out' in the field. The same faith should be made in the EUUx updates. For the most part, they work. I would say more-so than the experiences people have with their desktop updates. MS can post the beta to manufacturers and then let them say yes/no to compatibility. MS can then release it publicly and list the manufactures who said 'yes.'

[Ed Hansberry]

MS can post the beta to manufacturers and then let them say yes/no to compatibility. MS can then release it publicly and list the manufactures who said 'yes.'
So how is that different from what is done now? They send the EUU to everyone and they test then are just to lazy to put it on the site?

[JonnoB]

MS can post the beta to manufacturers and then let them say yes/no to compatibility. MS can then release it publicly and list the manufactures who said 'yes.'
So how is that different from what is done now? They send the EUU to everyone and they test then are just to lazy to put it on the site?

Almost exactly my point... It is more about the way it is distributed that gets people worked up. If MS hosted the download (like they do ActiveSync, etc) and then said, this should work on most PPC2002 devices - these companies have already reported that these devices work ok, but the rest probably work too. Actually, unlike WinXP, where MS undoubtedly tests hundreds if not thousands of PC combinations... how many combinations are there with a Pocket PC 2002 update?

[ShivShanks]

Coming back to the topic on hand ... Really shame on Toshiba for doing something like this! What the hell were they thinking when they released this product? I bought mine only a couple of months ago. How can they not support a product that new? You know we should really make a big deal out of this like the Viewsonic issue. How about a poll that asks if you'd be comfortable buying a Toshiba in future based on their support track record? That should force Toshiba to respond to the issue. Of course if the satement was by someone who doesn't know all the facts then its okay. In any case if Toshiba doesn't respond in a day or two then we should make a big hullabaloo about it.

[Wiggin]

With the way ROM works now (XIP), it is almost like a drive. The fact that MS did not get it right with WinXP, but managed to release it publicly is a testament to the faith they had that they could 'work it out' in the field. The same faith should be made in the EUUx updates....
Think I'll let Jon carry the torch...he's doing a fine job in this thread.
As for the fact that ALL embedded ROM machines require the OEM to release updates (per EdH), I can only say that if everyone is doing the wrong thing, it's still wrong :wink:
I agree with the post that states that the "other-OEM-specific" items in ROM creates a problem for OS updates that involve a ROM replace. Perhaps ROM should be reserved for OS and non-OEM specific items only, eh??
Sorry Ed, gotta side with Jon.

[sweetpete]

Ed - when MS released WinXP, it went out of its way to make sure it worked with 99%+ of the currently available machines.
Not even close. Take the Dell Dimension 4500. You can get that with 3 different video cards, several different NICs, modems, hard drives, etc. You think they tested those combinations? No way, and how the HAL interacts with the BIOS and the related drivers can cause differences in the same video card in a differently configured Dell. My video card had a problem that only was affected in the Dell 4400 and maybe a few others in the Dimension line. There was no problem with that card in other boxes (cheap generic card, not a big gaming card) from other OEMs. So Dell had to create a new driver to interact with the HAL and BIOS.


I would definitely agree that it's not 99%+, but I'm sure you've heard or read of the MS hardware lab. Almost every OS build during the beta got tested on several million different hardware configurations. That is why they have the HCL.

[Ed Hansberry]

Actually, unlike WinXP, where MS undoubtedly tests hundreds if not thousands of PC combinations... how many combinations are there with a Pocket PC 2002 update?
MS sells Windows XP directly to consumers.

MS only sells Pocket PC to OEMs.

That may be a fine line, but it is a line nonetheless. It is the OEMs product to package in a device, sell and support. If MS is going to be responsible for all of the testing too, then they'll need to up their licensing fees.

[Ed Hansberry]

I would definitely agree that it's not 99%+, but I'm sure you've heard or read of the MS hardware lab. Almost every OS build during the beta got tested on several million different hardware configurations. That is why they have the HCL.
But MS didn't do the tests. Beta testers did it for free! The hardware configs were reported back to MS through the beta testing tools.

They don't do that with Pocket PC because it circumvents the OEM - and that wouldn't make the OEM happy, so it all goes through the OEM.

You are all pointing fingers at MS for falling down here. The OEMs put some rules in place too you know, and part of that is distribution. They want to protect their turf. For all the money Compaq invested in the iPAQ you think they would have been happy with a bazillion beta testers getting free PPC 2002 upgrades? On their computer side, it doesn't matter. They don't sell Windows. You get that from Wal Mart.

[Chris Spera]

You know we should really make a big deal out of this like the Viewsonic issue. How about a poll that asks if you'd be comfortable buying a Toshiba in future based on their support track record? That should force Toshiba to respond to the issue. In any case if Toshiba doesn't respond in a day or two then we should make a big hullabaloo about it.

I agree. Toshiba released EUU2 for the e310 after a number of people, including, I think, Jason, complained directly to their PR Department. However, EUU2 was released in July to the OEM's. Toshiba didn't get around to releasing it for the e310 until mid-November.

I bought my e310 in the late spring/ early summer (when Amazon had their big sale and rebate offers on it), and am SEVERELY disappointed that Toshiba treats it like a red-haired step-child.

My money is just as green, and spends just as well as everyone elses. I don't understand why this product was abandond this early on.

Jason, we could really use some of your help and influence here... Can you get in touch with Dale (Pocket PC Passion), Julie and Judie (The Gadgeteer), Jared Miniman (pocketnow.com), Dave (Dave's iPAQ), and Sam (PocketPC Power) and organize a "sit-in" or something. (I can bring my guitar and lead everyone in a chorus or two of Kum-byah!)

Seriously, if all the major sites band together, I really think we can move them to make a major policy change that fixes this problem, and addresses the root cause to it as well.

Let me know how I can help.

Kind Regards,


Christopher Spera

[sweetpete]

I would definitely agree that it's not 99%+, but I'm sure you've heard or read of the MS hardware lab. Almost every OS build during the beta got tested on several million different hardware configurations. That is why they have the HCL.
But MS didn't do the tests. Beta testers did it for free! The hardware configs were reported back to MS through the beta testing tools.



Actually, MS does a HUGE amount of internal hardware testing that is automated. My reference above is to the in-house testing they do. I recall seeing a video for Win2K where they talk about the several thousand video cards, motherboards, sound cards, etc. that they test in-house with each and every build. 8O
Add to that the external beta-testing they do with testers and you have pretty good coverage.

Also, I agree with you on the PPC side for now. This is quite different than PC testing and I think the best solution is for Microsoft to continue providing EUU's to manufacturers, but also require manufacturers to provide update support for OS they license for up to x years after the OS release or licensing.

[swimmer]

I agree completely with ChrisSpera and ShivShanks. I just got my e310 a couple of months a go, and am frustrated that toshiba has done a hidiously crappy job of supporting it. I love the device, but will NEVER buy a Toshiba product again!

Can anyone even find an email address on their site(for PDAs)?

[Delta737]

Reader Herbert Dijkman sent this in a few days ago. "Bad news for Toshiba e310 owners(like me). I asked Toshiba when the e310 upgrade will be released (the e740 upgrade is available for about a month now). This is their response. 'Unfortunately, the E310 has been discontinued and as far as I know, there is no plan to release a EUU3 update at the moment. Please check our site or www.pocketpc.com frequently for any new updates that may be released for the Operating System. Thank You.'"

Well, first of all, Microsoft provides the updates to the OEMs to test and distribute and you won't find them on www.pocketpc.com. Second, after various attempts to contact both their PR and Tech Support departments going back to December 3rd, we've had no response to clarify this issue. I am still optimistic that the above quote was a response from an employee that didn't have all of the facts.

I think it is very important for us to keep the upgrade and support record of companies for discontinued devices in mind when making purchasing decisions. I have no illusions that my 3900 is still really an active product with the 5400's coming out, but given Compaq's track record in the past, I am reasonably confident that they will not only keep providing EUUs for the device, but also a future Pocket PC upgrade assuming the 3900 meets the hardware requrements, just as they did for the 3600 series last year. Compaq also makes a solid effort to keep supporting older products with new hardware, like sleeves and keyboards. Toshiba's new keyboard, in contrast, seems to only be available for the brand new e330/335 and e740 devices, not the recently discontinued e310. :( See the comments in this thread (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6036).

Toshiba makes a fantastic product. Let's hope they are going to support them past their discontinuance date and not leave older e310 and e570/Maestro owners out in the cold.
Well, I'm that Herbert Dijkman who got the topic rolling. After I received the e-mail from Toshiba I was pissed and did some research. It IS save to use the HP/Compaq one (I heard that it will work on ANY PPC). I used it myself and it worked. Although I still get that anoying "main battery low" at 50% (which was solved in the EUU3 for e740). But it seems that the e310 owners do not have a choice, than to use the HP/Compaq one.... :?

[Delta737]

Ed Hansberry wrote:
I am still optimistic that the above quote was a response from an employee that didn't have all of the facts.


Well, I hope so, but I doubt it. He seems to know what he is talking about....

[TrojanUO]

With the way ROM works now (XIP), it is almost like a drive. The fact that MS did not get it right with WinXP, but managed to release it publicly is a testament to the faith they had that they could 'work it out' in the field. The same faith should be made in the EUUx updates....
Think I'll let Jon carry the torch...he's doing a fine job in this thread.
As for the fact that ALL embedded ROM machines require the OEM to release updates (per EdH), I can only say that if everyone is doing the wrong thing, it's still wrong :wink:
I agree with the post that states that the "other-OEM-specific" items in ROM creates a problem for OS updates that involve a ROM replace. Perhaps ROM should be reserved for OS and non-OEM specific items only, eh??
Sorry Ed, gotta side with Jon.

So you want even more of the system RAM unavailable to the user? Aren't people up in arms over the devices using NAND Flash, that need to copy the entire OS to System RAM in order to execute it?

[JonnoB]

Well, I'm that Herbert Dijkman who got the topic rolling. After I received the e-mail from Toshiba I was pissed and did some research. It IS save to use the HP/Compaq one (I heard that it will work on ANY PPC). I used it myself and it worked. Although I still get that anoying "main battery low" at 50% (which was solved in the EUU3 for e740). But it seems that the e310 owners do not have a choice, than to use the HP/Compaq one.... :?

A thought... perhaps try the e740 update on the e310? Anyone done that yet?

[Ed Hansberry]

A thought... perhaps try the e740 update on the e310? Anyone done that yet?
Just remember the e740 EUU3 update has a new video driver in it. Don't know if that will work on the e310.

And remember - if you update the e310 with a non-Toshiba e310 EUU, you will have to pay for the fix. Very doubtful Toshiba will consider it a warranty issue.

[JonnoB]

And remember - if you update the e310 with a non-Toshiba e310 EUU, you will have to pay for the fix. Very doubtful Toshiba will consider it a warranty issue.

Now that is Toshiba piracy... they don't release an update and then don't warrant an update you do from another source. Cruel.

[Pony99CA]

With the way ROM works now (XIP), it is almost like a drive. The fact that MS did not get it right with WinXP, but managed to release it publicly is a testament to the faith they had that they could 'work it out' in the field. The same faith should be made in the EUUx updates....

I agree with the post that states that the "other-OEM-specific" items in ROM creates a problem for OS updates that involve a ROM replace. Perhaps ROM should be reserved for OS and non-OEM specific items only, eh??
Sorry Ed, gotta side with Jon.

So you want even more of the system RAM unavailable to the user? Aren't people up in arms over the devices using NAND Flash, that need to copy the entire OS to System RAM in order to execute it?
I think you missed the point. It seems like you could partition the ROM (and only the ROM) so that the lower part is reserved for Microsoft code and the upper part is reserved for OEM code. Microsoft would define where the line between the lower and upper parts was drawn, so OEMs would be secure that they could use the entire upper part.

You might get a memory model like this:

+----------------------------------------------------------------+ 32 MB
| User ROM space (iPAQ File Store, etc.)
+----------------------------------------------------------------+ 26 MB
| OEM ROM space (Device customizations, hardware
| features [Bluetooth, WiFi, etc.], pre-installed
| applications, etc.)
+----------------------------------------------------------------+ 20 MB
| Microsoft ROM space (Windows CE, Pocket PC, etc.)
+----------------------------------------------------------------+ 0 MB

For items that are shared, like the Pocket Internet Explorer home page, Microsoft would supply templates for the OEM, and the OEM would update the OEM parts and put that in the upper ROM. Microsoft also might need to provide callbacks to OEM code for certain functions, but I don't know exactly what goes on in the Hardware Abstraction Layer (which seems a lot like the BIOS on PCs).

Steve