Newsday Pits the iPAQ 1910 Against the Tungsten T

[Ed Hansberry]

<a href="http://www.newsday.com/business/columnists/ny-pigear3135257feb18,0,2768765.column?coll=ny-business-columnists">http://www.newsday.com/business/columnists/ny-pigear3135257feb18,0,2768765.column?coll=ny-business-columnists</a><br /><br />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.

[Foo Fighter]

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. :?

[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.

[toshm]

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!

[Macguy59]

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.

[Macguy59]

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.

[Ed Hansberry]

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.

[Macguy59]

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.

[toshm]

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!!!

[Ce]

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

[Macguy59]

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

I have found the only way to get decent video playback on the 1910 is to use speedstepper and jack up the speed to 332mhz and use PocketTV to for mpeg video.

[TawnerX]

Isn't a bit like saying, 'I just find out the only way to cruise around town is on Maybach'?

[Macguy59]

Isn't a bit like saying, 'I just find out the only way to cruise around town is on Maybach'?

??? I didn't say it's the only way to play video.

[vincentsiaw]

but still 1910 lack of bluetooth, i just hope in the next issue HP will include some wireless conectivity, then i will buy 1900 series...

[jngold_me]

I have found the only way to get decent video playback on the 1910 is to use speedstepper and jack up the speed to 332mhz and use PocketTV to for mpeg video.

Strange. 300 Turbo and 300 Run play video just fine.

[hulksmash]

Thanks for the replies to my inquiries regarding the processor comparisons. :werenotworthy: I am now in the know... lol

[TawnerX]

??? I didn't say it's the only way to play video.

h1910 can spew about 20fps at 200kb/s without OC.

[Macguy59]

but still 1910 lack of bluetooth, i just hope in the next issue HP will include some wireless conectivity, then i will buy 1900 series...

I think in the end the lack of a SDIO slot will eliminate the 1910 for me.

[Macguy59]

??? I didn't say it's the only way to play video.

h1910 can spew about 20fps at 200kb/s without OC.

What was used to measure that? And what medium?

[dbman]

Having owned a Tungsten before purchasing an Axim 400, my experience was the TT could do many things much faster than my Axim can. While this is probably due to the overhead of the Microsoft OS on the Axim, the speed difference clearly indicates that Intel and Microsoft have some work to do making their products faster. Perhaps the newer faster 200MHz bus versions of the Xscale will help, but even Intel might not be able to overcome the mighty weight of the OS.

Play videos of equal quality on either machine and compare the frame rates. The Tungsten was pumping out around 70 frames per second during a speed test where as my Axim seems to be in the 14 frames per second range. Note, neither had any dropped frames at these rates and at normal playing speeds, both videos were very acceptable. While one would not normally play video at 70 frames per second, it does demonstrate the TT's potential. Perhaps it is the integrated DSP in the TI processor that is the difference here.

[Bosco]

While he does make some good points in there, there's a lot of misconceptions in there. There are audio players out for the TT, the HP1910 doesn't have all 64 MB RAM usable and programs and data is smaller on Palm OS which allows 16 MB RAM to go farther, the TT has been $399 for about a week now, how it doesn't work with some previous programs (should have DEFINITELY stressed some), and he totally missed one of the great advantages to the TT, built-in Bluetooth. Shame he didn't get to test it out, I hear it works wonderfully. It's the cheapest PDA to incorporate it, so that's quite a good feature.

I wouldn't really rely on too much this comparison says. It's essentially a glorified spec sheet.

[Fishie]

Having owned a Tungsten before purchasing an Axim 400, my experience was the TT could do many things much faster than my Axim can. While this is probably due to the overhead of the Microsoft OS on the Axim, the speed difference clearly indicates that Intel and Microsoft have some work to do making their products faster. Perhaps the newer faster 200MHz bus versions of the Xscale will help, but even Intel might not be able to overcome the mighty weight of the OS.

Play videos of equal quality on either machine and compare the frame rates. The Tungsten was pumping out around 70 frames per second during a speed test where as my Axim seems to be in the 14 frames per second range. Note, neither had any dropped frames at these rates and at normal playing speeds, both videos were very acceptable. While one would not normally play video at 70 frames per second, it does demonstrate the TT's potential. Perhaps it is the integrated DSP in the TI processor that is the difference here.

That and the fact that the Kinoma player is written all around it and the general TT hardware and you have to convert the movies to play o the Kinoma player.
You cant just take a stock mpeg and play it with Kinoma so its still comparing apples to oranges.
Im sure the Axim 400 would get at least equel results when a propierty format is written for that specific hardware and movies have to be converted first to that specific player.

[TawnerX]

T|T has all the 16 MB RAM available after installing web browser, office apps, even music player and transcriber? :roll:

[Bosco]

Im sure the Axim 400 would get at least equel results when a propierty format is written for that specific hardware and movies have to be converted first to that specific player.[/quote]

I believe Kinoma format is based on .MOV.

Oh, and BTW the NX can hit its FPS in the hundreds in a speed test. It normally runs at 30 FPS on MPEG format, I believe.

[Ed Hansberry]

The "would you stop touching me" level posts moved to the HOF&S. Play nice.

[Macguy59]

T|T has all the 16 MB RAM available after installing web browser, office apps, even music player and transcriber? :roll:

Nope it sure doesn't. But when your talking MP3's or video a storage card will be needed anyway. Regardless of platform.

[Macguy59]

[/quote]Im sure the Axim 400 would get at least equel results when a propierty format is written for that specific hardware and movies have to be converted first to that specific player.[/quote]


You mean like Microsoft's proprietary WMV format ? :wink:

[GO-TRIBE]

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!You're exactly right. This is a poor comparison as the TT is Palm's top business device and the 1910 is HP's bottom consumer device.
Compare the 1910 to a Palm with equal price like the m515, or the TT to the 3970 and you'll clearly see that there is no comparison.

[GO-TRIBE]

You mean like Microsoft's proprietary WMV format ? :wink:
Well, I don't think you can say that anymore since WM9 came out and MS licenses their codes for half of what MPEG costs. Just watch over the next few years, because many believe that WM will become the de-facto standard for media.

And before people begin to flame me and say that MS will never develop players for Palm, Linux, etc, look at the licensing terms for WM. Anyone can license the codecs and integrate them into software for any platform or hardware device at half the cost of MPEG.

Don't take my word for it:
http://www.wininformant.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=37571

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2003/jan03/01-079SeriesFinalReleasePR.asp

[MikeUnwired]

The reason for the TI OMAP processor responsiveness is the co-proccessor circuit on the chip. That, coupled with the more austere Palm OS make the T|T lightning fast comapred to even the 400 MHZ XSCALE. I don't really care what the speed of the processor is, I only care about the end result -- responsiveness. Running a unit-wide search for a string of text is VERY fast on the T|T.

The price listed in the Newsday article is misleading -- most retailers have had the T|T at $399.95 for a while now. $100 for built-in Bluetooth and SD/IO is a good deal I think. SD/IO isn't a big issue for most, but for me it is.

The T|T's lack of shipping MP3 player is a small issue. AeroPlayer is working very well for me though, and it doesn't require I sell my soul to Real to use it. If I want MP3's on a PPC, you have to add-in an app to listen -- the native format is WMA.

The article also points out that the T|T can only be charged with the cradle it ships with. Well, that's news to me as I use my standard Universal Connector auto charger and travel charger all the time. The lack of a cradle on the 1910 is inconvienent for some, but solved with the purchase of an add-on -- just like the Palm portable chargers can be bought.

My big issue with the PPC's in general is the document and spreadsheet treatment that Pocket Word and Pocket Excel inflict on their users. Roundtripping has been cited by many as a problem that M$ has neglected to date. It will be worked on and fixed in time I'm sure.

All this said, the 1910 is a nice unit and I'd recommend it to some, but not to others -- just like the T|T. $100 is $100 and if the T|T is too much machine for a user, I'd recommend the 1910 in a heartbeat.

I have stuck with the T|T over all other options because I had a mess of accessories that fit the Universal Connector, plenty of software titles I already owned, I really wanted the Bluetooth -- and it worked great the first time I tried it -- and I really am comfortable with Graffiti. With Palm going to Graffiti2, I will have one less legacy attraction to the Palm OS on my next upgrade.

I also agree that the comparative unit for the review should have been the 3975 or even the 5455.

[Ed Hansberry]

The price listed in the Newsday article is misleading -- most retailers have had the T|T at $399.95 for a while now. $100 for built-in Bluetooth and SD/IO is a good deal I think. SD/IO isn't a big issue for most, but for me it is.
Sort of odd how Palms have suddently become overpriced. Look at what $299 buys you today - A Dell Axim X5 with 32MB and a small CF card, a ViewSonic V35, an iPAQ h1910 or a Palm M515. That is twisted IMHO.

$399 gets you an Axim with 64MB of ram and a bluetooth card, a Toshiba or two with 64MB of RAM, a 3850 and a big CF card, or a Tungsten T. :?

The TT is at best worth $350 IMHO.

[Cracknell]

The reason for the TI OMAP processor responsiveness is the co-proccessor circuit on the chip. That, coupled with the more austere Palm OS make the T|T lightning fast comapred to even the 400 MHZ XSCALE. I don't really care what the speed of the processor is, I only care about the end result -- responsiveness. Running a unit-wide search for a string of text is VERY fast on the T|T.

yes but at the cost of flat directory structure and 64kb chunks. That hinders a lot of file activity that users take for granted such as organizing files, smooth interface with add-on memory, and putting apps where users want it. They are all very difficult if not impossible in Palm OS. More and more PDA files are non text file, so text search string are becoming secondary to a hierarchical filing to find files.

The T|T's lack of shipping MP3 player is a small issue. AeroPlayer is working very well for me though, and it doesn't require I sell my soul to Real to use it. If I want MP3's on a PPC, you have to add-in an app to listen -- the native format is WMA.

I don't know about your PPC, but the rest of PPCs come with WMP that plays .mp3 just fine. There is also a very basic built in .wav player. As for the other type of media players, they are all either free or priced lower than the two .mp3 players that are available for T|T. Video are limited to proprietary kinoma in T|T. T|T is sitll waiting for RealPlayer.

My big issue with the PPC's in general is the document and spreadsheet treatment that Pocket Word and Pocket Excel inflict on their users. Roundtripping has been cited by many as a problem that M$ has neglected to date. It will be worked on and fixed in time I'm sure.

with the $100 price difference, a user can still purchase the best wordprocessor and spreadsheet for that demanding office task instead of cute conduit client, with enough change to purchase 64MB SD slot.

All this said, the 1910 is a nice unit and I'd recommend it to some, but not to others -- just like the T|T. $100 is $100 and if the T|T is too much machine for a user, I'd recommend the 1910 in a heartbeat.

exactly, $100 is a big deal knowing h1910 can do more things that are interesting. People increasingly use their handheld beyond basic PIM. All in all 1910 offers more 'sizzles' than a stodgy TT. That's the point of Newsday's reporter.


I also agree that the comparative unit for the review should have been the 3975 or even the 5455.

T|T is far from what h39xx can over in term of expandability and OS capability, let alone h5450. As you experiance yourself, peripherals options is crucial.

[Macguy59]

You mean like Microsoft's proprietary WMV format ? :wink:
Well, I don't think you can say that anymore since WM9 came out and MS licenses their codes for half of what MPEG costs. Just watch over the next few years, because many believe that WM will become the de-facto standard for media.

And before people begin to flame me and say that MS will never develop players for Palm, Linux, etc, look at the licensing terms for WM. Anyone can license the codecs and integrate them into software for any platform or hardware device at half the cost of MPEG.

Don't take my word for it:
http://www.wininformant.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=37571

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2003/jan03/01-079SeriesFinalReleasePR.asp

I like the fact that their codec results in smaller files, but I still find the quality lacking compared to mpeg.

[Macguy59]

[quote=SuccessWizard]?

The TT is at best worth $350 IMHO.

Have you used the Tunsgten Ed ?

[Cracknell]

Have you used Pocket PC?

[Ed Hansberry]

[quote=SuccessWizard]?

The TT is at best worth $350 IMHO.

Have you used the Tunsgten Ed ?
I have played with it at CompUSA and the hardware is OK. As for the OS, yeah, since 1997 on any variety of Palm devices. The UI and user experience is unchanged. Sort of like using the telephone. I've done it in the bedroom, the bathroom, the kitchen and the garage, but never the utility closet. I doubt the experience is going to be overwhelmingly different in the utility closet though, just as my brief experience with the TT wasn't overwhelmingly different. :)

Now, the Sony N* series, that is different.

[Macguy59]

Have you used Pocket PC?

If your referring to me, then yes I have. In fact I have owned a Pocket PC since their intro in April 2000. If you would bother to read my posts you would have saw that I specifically mention owning a 1910.

[Ed Hansberry]

If you would bother to read my posts you would have saw that I specifically mention owning a 1910.
I've got a friend teetering on the edge of getting a PDA. He loves my 3900 but not the price. I am going to show him the 1910 this weekend. I'm betting he buys it on the spot. He has NO interest in wireless.

[Cracknell]

If your referring to me, then yes I have. In fact I have owned a Pocket PC since their intro in April 2000. If you would bother to read my posts you would have saw that I specifically mention owning a 1910.

Interesting. What is the video rip set up you use? I read your post up above regarding not being able to play video nicely.

[Macguy59]

[quote=SuccessWizard]?

The TT is at best worth $350 IMHO.

Have you used the Tunsgten Ed ?
I have played with it at CompUSA and the hardware is OK. As for the OS, yeah, since 1997 on any variety of Palm devices. The UI and user experience is unchanged. Sort of like using the telephone. I've done it in the bedroom, the bathroom, the kitchen and the garage, but never the utility closet. I doubt the experience is going to be overwhelmingly different in the utility closet though, just as my brief experience with the TT wasn't overwhelmingly different. :)

Now, the Sony N* series, that is different.

Reduce the size of it and swap the memory stick for CF(non Sony) or SDIO and I would buy it in a heartbeat.

[dbman]

That and the fact that the Kinoma player is written all around it and the general TT hardware and you have to convert the movies to play o the Kinoma player.
You cant just take a stock mpeg and play it with Kinoma so its still comparing apples to oranges.
Im sure the Axim 400 would get at least equel results when a propierty format is written for that specific hardware and movies have to be converted first to that specific player.

Funny, I thought Microsoft had a proprietary format too and they have not been able to get a good frame rate on this hardware even after standardizing the CPU with PPC 2002. Not even a piece of eye-candy to keep the masses happy. There are avi, mpeg, mpeg2 players, but nothing that remotely comes close to the Kinoma player.

Don't get me wrong, I really am happy with my Axim, but its video capabilities seem to be sub par. From what I've read, there is a tremendous commercial demand for a good video player on the PPC platfrom, even if it uses a prorietary format. Given this, why hasn't anyone, including Microsoft developed one? Anyone else want to venture a guess? Perhaps the announcement is just around the corner.

[Fishie]

WMV IS a property PPC media player?
Thats news to me.

[ppcsurfr]

There are some points which were not tackled and I guess you guys are also missing here.

On video. The T|T has been said to play video at 70fps. Great I'd say... Now let's get down to reality. Video formats are defaulted at 24 or 30 fps. This is how it goes for video. So if a device plays video at either 24 fps or 30 fps, then you are getting the best already.

I have an h1910 and I'm running ClearSpeed 2.0 on it. I ran a Minority Report 2 min + trailer on it at full screen (letterbox format) which means it actually shows a 320 x 176 screen... true to the cinema format. I can get true 24fps on it as it was encoded. No dropped frames. At least it doesn't look like it is dropping any.

But here is one advantage about having it play on a Pocket PC. I get to use the full potential of a screen. A T|T's screen, while it has a 320x320 resolution, will be so much smaller as compared to my Pocket PC's screen. Why? Because I have a 3 inch wide screen while the Palm has a 2 inch wide screen. And I think that is where the viewing pleasure is.

A 320x176 letterbox format file on the T|T will be a pain to view unless you like bringing along a huge magnifying glass.

The Palm can do it to... but it ends there. The Pocket PC can do it and be practical at the same time. With a T|T... I don't see any practicality anymore... unless you are used to viewing movies on portrait mode on your Pocket PC too.

ppcsurfr

[ppcsurfr]

Funny, I thought Microsoft had a proprietary format too and they have not been able to get a good frame rate on this hardware even after standardizing the CPU with PPC 2002. Not even a piece of eye-candy to keep the masses happy. There are avi, mpeg, mpeg2 players, but nothing that remotely comes close to the Kinoma player.

Don't get me wrong, I really am happy with my Axim, but its video capabilities seem to be sub par. From what I've read, there is a tremendous commercial demand for a good video player on the PPC platfrom, even if it uses a prorietary format. Given this, why hasn't anyone, including Microsoft developed one? Anyone else want to venture a guess? Perhaps the announcement is just around the corner.

Microsoft's WMV is based on MPEG-4, they have their on flavoring for it... Well, it is a highly compressed file that requires a lot of processor power to decode. That is why you occasionally experience the skips and pauses or jerkiness in movements.

I'm happy cranking out 15fps from it at full screen... and still keep the file size really small... I can cram a 2hr full length movie in a 256MB card and still have room to spare.

ppcsurfr

[gfunkmagic]

The TT is at best worth $350 IMHO

Ed,

OMG I actaully agree with you! :shocked!: In fact if you do thorough pricegrabber search, you'll find that the T|T can be purchased for less than that now (&lt;$330):

http://www.compuplus.com/insidepage.php3?refer=pricegrabber.com&amp;id=1000531

The $500 price tag was an early adopter tax and the current price is quite competitive IMO. On the other hand, intgrated wireless PPC devices are far more expensive. For example after doing a quick pricegrabber search, I found the h3975 still costs around $490 bucks even though its supposedly dicontinued while the h5455 is around $600 bucks (yes I know it includes wifi too). Even the E740 still costs around $400 bucks at best. Thus your assertion that the T|T is overpriced today is unteneble. In fact this whole review is blatantly irrelevant b/c it dose not compare apples to apples. The reviewer should have compared that T|T to another INTEGRATED wireless PPC device, not a disconnected one as others have previously stated here. Thus, if he had then chosen the PPC superior, fine... at least the comparison would have made sense...

[Cracknell]

Apple to orange.

Palm doesn't have any apple, that's the problem. If a buyer does not want BT but need ARM, his only choice is T|T. (or going SONY if not dragonball)

[dbman]

There are some points which were not tackled and I guess you guys are also missing here.

On video. The T|T has been said to play video at 70fps. Great I'd say... Now let's get down to reality. Video formats are defaulted at 24 or 30 fps. This is how it goes for video. So if a device plays video at either 24 fps or 30 fps, then you are getting the best already.
ppcsurfr

I am intimately familiar with video encoding and frame rates. The point I tried to make is that the TT hardware appears to be able to load, decode and play a proprietary video format at a high frame rate. While you would never do this in the real world, it is a benchmark that can be used as a reference point when comparing PDA performance.

Just because a PocketPC can't do it is no reason to discount the results. After all, if a PocketPC could do this, I am sure PPC owners would be boasting about it too and running a similar viewer.

That said, I switched to an Axim because of its value and the size and readability of its screen. For what I wanted (802.11b, CF and SD slots and a beautiful screen), it was the best choice at the time. I didn’t care what OS it ran or if it could play videos or MP3s. I do have Pocket MVP installed with a single video of the last Columbia launch. It plays at 14 fps and is acceptable to me, but I will never go through the hassles of trying to encode a movie that will play well on my PDA.

I use my PDA for simple notes, tasks, appointments and an occasional diversion playing FreeCell or Mahjong or reading e-books. I carry around pictures of my family and have a database of a large pottery collection that I refer to at auctions. I also read and write e-mail while I am away on business. While I was able to do most, if not all of these things using a Tungsten PDA, I could not see paying an extra $200 and still not have 802.11b or a larger SD card. I was able to purchase a 256MB SD card, 802.11b CF card, a wireless keyboard and several programs with the savings.

In regards to the 1910 versus the TT, I would suggest that potential buyers use the same reasoning they use when buying a new computer, car or house. Decide what you need to do and pick a solution that meets these needs and has a price you accept. With a PDA, it doesn’t matter if it runs Palm OS, Linux or Pocket Windows a long as it does what is needed, you are comfortable with it and the price is right.

[Cracknell]

[quote="dbman"]
I am intimately familiar with video encoding and frame rates. The point I tried to make is that the TT hardware appears to be able to load, decode and play a proprietary video format at a high frame rate. While you would never do this in the real world, it is a benchmark that can be used as a reference point when comparing PDA performance.
[quote]

Because the propriatary format uses different encoding scheme which lead to different processor load. The only way to know if PPC will get the same fps rate as kinoma is to compare how Kinoma run on PPC, not against .mpeg. The two picture quality are very different at same bit rate.

for eg. Kinoma for instance experiance jerking, instead of mpeg's ripping when fast pace scene is beyond the decoder ability to keep up.

.mpeg in general also compreses movie to much smaller package at low bit rate than Cinepak codec which kinoma is based on. But .mpeg requries higher CPU load to process.

MPEG advantage
Higher resolution and frame rates
Better scaling
CD Quality audio
Low data rates

Compare to Cinepak weaknesses
When using low frame rate, the quality cannot be improved with faster hardware
Frame rates are slow
http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~nd/surprise_96/journal/vol4/sab/report.html

Apple has move to Sorensen Codec for their newer .mov player.

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,53952,00.asp
http://www.synthetic-ap.com/qt/codec2.html

[gfunkmagic]

Apple to orange.

Palm doesn't have any apple, that's the problem. If a buyer does not want BT but need ARM, his only choice is T|T. (or going SONY if not dragonball)

Oh please... You're comparing a dinconnected pda with a (integrated) connected pda! That is the major point here. The processor point is irrelevant b/c the PalmOS device abstraction layer does not specifically require ARM to run OS 5. Thus there are and will be several different processor platforms running OS 5. Are you only going to compare two pdas if they have the same processor? :roll: Its important to compare the MAJOR functionality of a device, and in the case of the T|T it is its BT connectivity...

[Bosco]

That's an excellent point many people fail to see. To get integrated Bluetooth functionality in a PPC, you have to spend more than a TT. Comparing a TT to an HP1910 is ridiculous, especially since the author of that "editorial" said he didn't even use Bluetooth. No wireless functionality in the 1910, not even SDIO, but SDIO and built-in Bluetooth in the TT. Could this be the reason for the $100 price difference? I wonder...

And please Ed, let's not start with this whole "Palm OS 5 has the same look" routine. That's the idea, to keep the interface unchanged and intact so it's easy to learn and remember when you upgrade. If you want backdrops and animations and other pointless, yet cool glitz, ZLauncher, MegaLauncher, Launcher X, YiShow are all just sitting there for the taking. Customize to your liking. IT'S THERE IF YOU WANT IT. With PPC, it's stuffed down your throat.

God, there's so many things I just want to say right now, it's making my head spin. I'll just leave it at, "No." Just no.

[Fishie]

That's an excellent point many people fail to see. To get integrated Bluetooth functionality in a PPC, you have to spend more than a TT. Comparing a TT to an HP1910 is ridiculous, especially since the author of that "editorial" said he didn't even use Bluetooth. No wireless functionality in the 1910, not even SDIO, but SDIO and built-in Bluetooth in the TT. Could this be the reason for the $100 price difference? I wonder...

And please Ed, let's not start with this whole "Palm OS 5 has the same look" routine. That's the idea, to keep the interface unchanged and intact so it's easy to learn and remember when you upgrade. If you want backdrops and animations and other pointless, yet cool glitz, ZLauncher, MegaLauncher, Launcher X, YiShow are all just sitting there for the taking. Customize to your liking. IT'S THERE IF YOU WANT IT. With PPC, it's stuffed down your throat.

God, there's so many things I just want to say right now, it's making my head spin. I'll just leave it at, "No." Just no.

Will you say em if I say PLEASE?

If so, please say em.