Palm Commissions Competitive Analysis Report

[Ed Hansberry]

<a href="http://www.veritest.com/clients/reports/palm/competitive.pdf">Report Available here in PDF format</a><br /><br />Palm commissioned VeriTest to compare the Tungsten T and Tungsten C with the HP iPAQ 1910 and 5450 Pocket PCs. They looked at battery life, document size and WiFi performance. Of course Palm won hands down. No one commissions and releases a report when they lose. ;)<br /><br />Palm developed the testing methodology with VeriTest to encompass real world usage. Just for reference, remember Palm defines real world usage in terms that allows them to say their devices have 3 weeks of battery life. Palm also paid for all of the devices. All were off of the shelf items except for the 'C which was unreleased.<br /><br /><img src="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/images/hansberry/2003/20030520-battle.gif" /><br /><br />The highlights of the test are:<!><br /><br />• The Tungsten C lasted 1hr 35min longer than the iPAQ 5450 in the 802.11b test. Screen brightness was set to 50% on both devices and screen autodiming was disabled on the 5450. Question: Is it a real world test to disable autodimming on the iPAQ? Just because the Tungsten C doesn't support autodimming doesn't mean it isn't part of the iPAQs battery features.<br />• The Tungsten C was more than twice as fast as the 5450 in WiFi downloads. This test is misnamed. It was a HTML rendering test because they timed the download and rendering of CNN.COM, a 177KB page. Finally! Conclusive proof PIE's rendering speeds leave a LOT to be desired. The question is, what was visible in the browser's window when done? According to an <a href="http://www.msnbc.com/news/904655.asp?0bl=-0">MSNBC report</a> the Tungsten C lacks the ability to render complex pages at all. <i>I had to reset the Tungsten C before it found my home WiFi network. Once it did, it locked in for a smooth ride. Surfing on the Web via PalmSource’s Web Browser was very, very speedy for a Palm device. But it flunked my first test: drawing MSNBC.com’s home page. It didn't even come close: One part of the page was screen left and the bulk of the page was eight or nine screen widths over to the right. The Opera browser on the Sharp PDA, Handspring’s Blazer, and Pocket PC’s IE browsers all do a much better job of handling intricate Web pages.</i> For now, I'll take readability vs. speed right now. Still, Microsoft, we need a better rendering engine than what PIE 3.0 currently has.<br />• The Tungsten T outlasted the iPAQ 5450 by a factor of five in the leave-the-device-in-your-desk-for-a-month test. The T|T lasted 21 days, while the 5450 lasted only 4 days. I think this was done by running the device down until it went into a power saving mode. Then they waited to see how long it would take before you applied power and the device woke up to a hard reset. I don't know if they configured the 5450's data conservation settings or not. I honestly don't know if the 5450 has that setting - I know the 3900 does so I am assuming the later 5450 does. Regardless, the 5450 wouldn't come close to 21 days in any event.<br /><br />There were several speed tests shown, some of which were not quite on an even scale. First, they compared the video speeds of the Tungstens to the iPAQs. The 1910 doesn't have the latest X-Scale tweaked player and neither the iPAQ nor 1910 are tweaked much (if at all) for the ARMv5 processor, which the X-Scale is. Furthermore, both have the old PXA-250 processor that Intel has as much admitted isn't that good at processing code developed for the ARMv4 chips like the StrongARM. Palm OS5 devices were designed from day one as ARMv5 devices, so have a bit of an advantage. Doesn't invalidate the results one whit. Palm waited until the fall of 2002 to come out with a powerful OS and of course chose the latest processor technology. Microsoft developed the core of Windows CE in 1997 and with legacy devices and code to support, they can't drop everything and make a new ARMv5 only class of product.<br /><br />The document storage thing is laughable to say the least. I won't touch on it but to say that my iPAQ currently has over 550MB of total storage capacity between the 512MB SD Card, the file store and RAM allocated for storage. I'm not concerned that my Excel spreadsheet is 261K rather than 163K on the device. At least I can open that spreadsheet from an email without having to rely on a desktop converter. ;)<br /><br />I think it is an interesting study, but some of it should be taken with a grain of salt. The settings they used, like 50% volume and 50% screen brightness, are meaningless. They should set each device so they are putting out the same amount of decibels and lumens. Still, Palm has come a long way in the past few years. As Palm's own Chris Dunphy put it recently, <a href="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=111660#111660">PalmOS has been busy evolving out of the dark ages.</a> I agree. This test should keep Microsoft on its toes.

[alex_kac]

To me, these kind of tests are meaningless. What about the apps? What about the usefulness of the device?

I will admit. I sometimes waver between devices just because it seems the other big two - Symbian and Palm are more universal in their desktop OS support - but the PPC always wins for me. Its just more user-friendly once you get to know it.

The two things I think the PPC REALLY needs to expand on is better input, ala the new Zaurus and a few more good apps (which, um, should be out this year).

[scottmag]

Question: Is it a real world test to disable autodimming on the iPAQ? Just because the Tungsten C doesn't support autodimming doesn't mean it isn't part of the iPAQs battery features.

If you are actually using the device autodimming would not activate, right? So it is a closer simulation of real-world interactive usage to deactivate it for a battery life test. This is not the case for things like MP3 playback where you would turn the screen off, but you also wouldn't want the screen to dim during movie playback.


The document storage thing is laughable to say the least. I won't touch on it but to say that my iPAQ currently has over 550MB of total storage capacity between the 512MB SD Card, the file store and RAM allocated for storage. I'm not concerned that my Excel spreadsheet is 261K rather than 163K on the device.

OK, I disagree with you here. Why would you NOT want your files to be 37% smaller if they would retain all their formatting?


At least I can open that spreadsheet from an email without having to rely on a desktop converter. ;)

True. I think Iambic offers a Palm solution (email and office suite) that can do this, but if the included Docs-to-Go does not that is a big disadvantage for the Palm in the specific situations this test inplies. Namely, it suggests doing serious office work at a remote location over a wireless network. In such a case battery life becomes a critical issue. After a certain point though usability becomes more important. And we know the areas PPC beats Palm there.

Palm has some great hardware out there now. It's nice to see some life breathed into the PDA market. It's time for MS and its licensees to kick it up a notch and come out with some new ideas.

This test should keep Microsoft on its toes.

That's really the best case scenario for you PPC advocates - not finding ways to refute the results.

Scott

[freitasm]

Just a comment on comments:

The Tungsten C lasted 1hr 35min longer than the iPAQ 5450 in the 802.11b test. Screen brightness was set to 50% on both devices and screen autodiming was disabled on the 5450. Question: Is it a real world test to disable autodimming on the iPAQ? Just because the Tungsten C doesn't support autodimming doesn't mean it isn't part of the iPAQs battery features.


I hate to say this but just because a feature is available doesn't mean it's good. I don't like the auto dim set in the iPAQ. It keep the backlight floating up and down, and I get really :evil: with that.

[lonesniper]

This is why I do not like religion. It just teaches hate.

It is interesting to read the forums over at www.pdainfocenter.com about this report, a lot of people wondered if PPC sites would even report it, or report it and dismiss it.

Why can't we all just get along and stop these crusades against something that is different from us. There is so much propaganda from both sides, I just don’t think we will ever have world peace if we fight about everything including PDA’s.

[RedRamage]

I'll concur with the others that this test isn't really that meaningful. However, I do want to comment on a few items:

SCREEN ON TEST: Aren't PPC screens bigger than Palm screens? So, the palm has more battery life because it has a smaller screen... kinda a good news bad news thing, ain't it?

MP3 TEST: First of all, they measured the Battery life based on when the device STOPPED playing the MP3 file. So what if the palm devices simply let the battery drain longer before refusing to play the MP3? Additionally, they turned off the backlight... but with my old Jornada, I can completely turn off the screen, not just the backlight. Can that be done with the palm?

VIDEO PLAYBACK TEST: Two different format were used for this test. Where the formats of compatible quality? I would imagine it would take more processing power (and therefore more battery power) to replay a higher quality video/audio track.

TOTAL DATA LOSS: I never lose my contact data. You mean Palm doesn't have a SafeStore option to take advantage of unused Flash ROM?? :wink:
[/b]

[Kevin Remhof]

I found this survey to be quite interesting. Yes, it leans towards Palm but that's what they were paid to do, right? ;)

But, that doesn't discount the fact that Palms have better battery life in some situations. In fact, that's what this report did... It showed that in some situations, Palms perform better than Pocket PCs. I'm sure that a survey sponsored by Microsoft would show similar results in their favor.

Remember, as Mark Twain said, "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."

I'm not going to lose sleep over any of these "findings". Palm makes great PDAs. They are simple and easy-to-use. Microsoft also makes great PDAs (yes, I know, they don't really make them, but you know what I mean). It's up to you to decide which way to go. Every time that Palm releases a new model, it adds something new and exciting. Same thing with Microsoft.

I think that there is a place for both Palm and Pocket PC in the marketplace. I'd much rather have this choice than be stuck with just Palm or Pocket PC. The competition pushes both makers to build better products. Each user gets to choose what matters most to them.

[szamot]

I am truly shocked that Palm’s commissioned report finds its devices “better” than PPC, really I am – was the Palm single tasking at the time? I don’t know who VeriTest is or what they actually do but before we start jumping at each others throats over here let’s all remember that Enron and WorldCom also hired external companies to do various thing for them including audits and both of them look good on paper. We all know what happened to those two. Need I say more?

[heov]

the tungsten c has better battery life all around. the thing as a 1550mAh batter in there and it uses the PXA255 and it has a smaller screen. Of course it's gonna have better battery life ;) we should just accept the fact.

but what it doesn't have is a removable battery. I personally would take the ipaq's replacable battery over the higher cap battery in the tungsten; but that's just me.

The Tungsten C uses the NetFront browser. It's pretty much identical to the one available for PPC. So they should have done speed tests w/ that; but I believe the palm is still faster. I believe they rebranded the browser though...

Also, if i'm not mistaken, the latest release of QuickOffice (maybe Docs To Go, not sure...) can open office files natively... so no desktop conversion.

again, i wouldn't be too shocked. as mentioned, palm paid for this test ;) But they sure have come a long way since their palm v days... I think w/ PPC2k3 and the new, cheaper devices, things will shine brighter on the ppc side...

i just want to know what Sony's got up their sleeves... it's that time again (1-2 months, lol. they release 12 handhelds a year!). I'm thinking an updated NX series. One w/ BT and os5.2. Too bad that thing's a brick!

[James Fee]

Ed you hit it right on the nail. Good Palm handhelds cause PPC to try harder. Palms have gotten better over the past year because of PPCs and now I only hope that with PPC 2003 and new processors, PPC manufactuers will take charge again...

[bdegroodt]

True. I think Iambic offers a Palm solution (email and office suite) that can do this, but if the included Docs-to-Go does not that is a big disadvantage for the Palm in the specific situations this test inplies. Namely, it suggests doing serious office work at a remote location over a wireless network...
Scott

And Pocket Excel? Ever taken a spreadsheet sent via email, opened it up and made edits, saved and sent it back to the original sender? Real cute mess. It's an insult to Excel to even use the name in the same breath.

[Ed Hansberry]

Also, if i'm not mistaken, the latest release of QuickOffice (maybe Docs To Go, not sure...) can open office files natively... so no desktop conversion.
There is a version with that capability but from what I hear, it has the same format limitations that Pocket Office does. When it comes to third party Office apps, nothing touches SpreadCE for spreadsheets, TextMaker for documents or the number of Powerpoint apps for presentations on the Pocket PC. Oh yeah, the file sizes might be bigger though. :roll:

[Foo Fighter]

This test was fair...conclusive...unfiltered...and clearly relevant. :roll:

I'll be sure to print off a few copies. I'm running low on toilet paper anyway. :twisted:

[felixdd]

I think the point of posting the report was to comment on the many flaws that the tests had. I completely agree with the lumens/decibel thing -- if 50% volume on an Ipaq can blow your eardrums off, then would a battery test using 50% volume still be "real life"?

I think that was the problem with this test -- it wasn't standardized. And I think because of this it is quite justified that we criticize it. We're not spreading the hate and I don't see how this posting is any more propaganda than the skewed nature of this report.

[miradu]

There are many points to be critisized about on both sides of the issue... Note to Ed though, it doens't matter what the technology is NOW, these are current shipping devices, and if HP didn't upgrade them immediatly they are perfectly fine to use for comparison... 2003 will difinantly change that.

Competition is what makes the market be alive - and this report finally prooves that Palm has got something in it to keep going... However it also shows that Microsoft has to keep working, and will always have to keep working for it to stay competative. I don't envision this becoming a 1 player market. Each device has it's own ups and downs yadda yadda yadda...

Frankly I want to see these OS 5 innovations in a Treo... My Handspring Treo 180 is getting old ;)

[kaiden.1]

So where is HP's test doing the same thing?

What really matters is how are the devices being used? If the Palm does everthing that you really want and need it to; then great! If PPC is what you need based upon what you do, then that is what you will buy!

It is all relative...... I know many business owners that like Palm and they use it just fine. They are not in the least bit interested in changing over to PPC because it doesn't matter if they have spread sheet capabilities!

I still really don't think that Palm will entirely dissappear; I know that many are predicting it, but what is the reason for it? People aren't just going to quit buying Palm because MS has PPC! They will switch because they will have a need to do so or they would have to because they can't get the palm to do what they are looking for. As long as Palm is able to do the same things; it will still be a second option, and people like choices. Besides it will keep both of them in line. If MS is left to be KING; they would not try as hard to do anything for us! It is never good to have a monopoly on anything. We should hope that Palm keeps going.
I think that is will.

The only other way that Palm will die is if the Manufacturers just quit making them. And I seriously do nt think so. :D

[acollet]

I have both the 545x and Tungsten|C Prior to the purchase of the Tungsteh|C, the 545x was my Mail PDA. While I do linke the advanced features of the Pocket PC, I must say that the Tungsten|C is by far much faster at looking up things. I also do far less reboots (soft resets) on the tungsten than the iPAQ. I'm hoping this will change when the 2003 upgrade ships for the ipaq. As for the wi-fi, I do not notice problems accessing sites. Of course MSNBC site is not a fair test since its written by, and for Microsoft. I also wish Palm updated the datebook. I like the PocketPC datebook better, but what can you do.

[Scott R]

I'm not sure why people are dismissing the findings as irrelevant. Battery life irrelevant? Amount of time till data loss when battery is drained irrelevant? Sure, Palm picked and choosed what this company would test and even helped them "figure out the best way to test it all," but I think the data, while probably somewhat flawed in certain areas, is still useful.

Scott

[dr_skinner]

A The Tungsten C lasted 1hr 35min longer than the iPAQ 5450 in the 802.11b test. Screen brightness was set to 50% on both devices and screen autodiming was disabled on the 5450. Question: Is it a real world test to disable autodimming on the iPAQ? Just because the Tungsten C doesn't support autodimming doesn't mean it isn't part of the iPAQs battery features.

50% brightness is really meaninless comparison. They may have different brightness scales for all we know, so "50% brighness" on iPaq could be twice brighter than "50% brighness" on Palm. They really had to clarify that.

[cyp]

:roll: comparing apples and oranges again :roll:

We have stopped comparing mac and windows OS. Why can't we accept that Palm and PPC are different? Built different, for different people, for different purposes.

Having said that, I love my my 3970! The Palm III that I have is becoming a dust collector in my desk drawer. :D

[ombu]

:roll: comparing apples and oranges again :roll:

We have stopped comparing mac and windows OS. Why can't we accept that Palm and PPC are different? Built different, for different people, for different purposes.


Agree. :wink:

Regards.

[TawnerX]

PocketPC thoughts should comission itself a study about T|T, T|C vs E750, h1910, Axim, h5450

just as a tongue and cheek reply to this report. We haven't had a good chuckle at the expense of Palm Inc fo a good while.

In the study, It should say: T|C wins because it gots more buttons, we all know a more advance gadget has more buttons. I mean look at calculators.

It also makes better doorstops, where the h1910 will definitely get flinged across the room because it has no weight.

T|T also should win the study: because it has sliding d-pad, and the termite like the softer side of .mp3, and we all know there are more termites in the world than humans. :P

.... heh

[Timothy Rapson]

What a pointless flamebait waste of money this study was!

[TawnerX]

...well at least that explains why their stock is utterly screwed.

[Brad Adrian]

Why can't we all just get along and stop these crusades against something that is different from us. There is so much propaganda from both sides, I just don’t think we will ever have world peace if we fight about everything including PDA’s.
I don't think we need to get too worried about the kinds of discussions that take place here. After all, these are tools we are all passionate about, so we admittedly will sometimes voice our opinions passionately. As long as we can keep from making personal attacks, I don't see anything wrong with a little friendly debate.

[Jonathan1]

I'll be sure to print off a few copies. I'm running low on toilet paper anyway. :twisted:

http://www.toiletpaperworld.com/tpw/product_custom_toilet_paper.asp

[Jonathan1]

Ya know if I was a zealot one way or another....I still wouldn't care. :razzing:

The proof is in the product. MS has put out pro\con lists it hardly effects sales. Palm does the same ditto.
At the end of the day guess what? A product or product line will get a rep from its users not from the spin any one company puts out. It is said the best lies are the ones that are half truths. This concoction is proof of this. I'm quite sure there are some legit facts scatted throughout the "Competitive Analysis" but for every truth there are half truths in there such as the 50% backlight as an example. :| A this point I would treat Palm like a small child who comes up to dad saying look what I made! ::A mudball with a twig in it:: *pat pat pat* That's nice son.
*pat pat pat* That’s nice Palm.

[TawnerX]

oh come on, that study doesn't even pass the equivalent of mud ball in the marketing world.

It's not believable, it doesn't pass the giggle test upon first reading!

[Pony99CA]

The Tungsten T outlasted the iPAQ 5450 by a factor of five in the leave-the-device-in-your-desk-for-a-month test. The T|T lasted 21 days, while the 5450 lasted only 4 days.

If PDAs are criticial to your business, or if you're a PDA fanatic, do you really leave your PDA alone for four days, much less 21? If you do, do you leave off of its charger? Come on!

Steve

[Pony99CA]

I hate to say this but just because a feature is available doesn't mean it's good. I don't like the auto dim set in the iPAQ. It keep the backlight floating up and down, and I get really :evil: with that.
I think that you're refering to the automatic brightness setting of the iPAQ, while the "auto-dim" feature refers to the ability to turn off the backlight if the device hasn't been used for a certain period of time.

They aren't the same.

Steve

[Pony99CA]

50% brightness is really meaninless comparison. They may have different brightness scales for all we know, so "50% brighness" on iPaq could be twice brighter than "50% brighness" on Palm. They really had to clarify that.
Which is likely why, at the end of the story, Ed said:

I think it is an interesting study, but some of it should be taken with a grain of salt. The settings they used, like 50% volume and 50% screen brightness, are meaningless. They should set each device so they are putting out the same amount of decibels and lumens.
Steve

[TawnerX]

The Tungsten T outlasted the iPAQ 5450 by a factor of five in the leave-the-device-in-your-desk-for-a-month test. The T|T lasted 21 days, while the 5450 lasted only 4 days.

If PDAs are criticial to your business, or if you're a PDA fanatic, do you really leave your PDA alone for four days, much less 21? If you do, do you leave off of its charger? Come on!

Steve

why oh why didn't they use h5450's safe appointment on flash feature?

[Brad Adrian]

I agree that this data needs to be taken with a grain of salt. Studies show that 82% of all statistics are made up, anyway.

[ctmagnus]

show that 82% of all statistics are made up, anyway.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[TawnerX]

Anybody actually read the test?

here is a funny number, The h5450 actually last longer in continuous video test loop then sitting idle with screen on. (2:27 vs 2:43)

hmmm.....

any h5450 owner can attest to this weird phenomenon?

-major omission in the test ithink, their failure to use store address in flash feature in h5450.
-failure to use OC utility, a very effective way to extend battery life .
-They didn't mention if they use any patch or not.
-failure to mention replaceable/extended battery option.

-h1910 obviously beats the crap out of T|T if they know what they are doing with xScale clock.

[a_feigl]

As this VERITEST report states at the top, this "test report (is) prepared under contract form Palm, Inc". So this will definately be a one sided report, why would Palm let Veritest mention that pocket pc is better in some areas under the circumstances.

This debate will never evd, pocket pc vs. palm. There are pros and cons of each medium, whether it be battery performance, or the applications available.

For me the biggest draw back of the pocket pc os is the poor battery life, and the fact the palm users have access to better applications for word, and excel.

[dazz]

I hope that all of these numbers are true and that Palm has taken over the top seat again!!!!

If this were to happen then MS would fall all over itself to have a PocketPC that is THAT MUCH better than Palm.

Then Palm does the same...MS again...Palm..MS...

In the end we will win no matter the platform. GO PALM!!

dazz
(for the record, they haven't jumped past MS yet but version 6 is coming...

[heov]

:roll: comparing apples and oranges again :roll:

We have stopped comparing mac and windows OS. Why can't we accept that Palm and PPC are different? Built different, for different people, for different purposes.

Having said that, I love my my 3970! The Palm III that I have is becoming a dust collector in my desk drawer. :D

uhh... no.

how are they for different people? Sure 3 years ago they might have been for different people, but the tungsten C and the iPaq 5450 are pretty much intended for the same type of people.

They're not different, they both are intended to do pretty much the same things. Palm wants iPaq marketshare, and hp want palm market share. They both have wifi, great screens, 64mb of ram, sd slots, etc.

Both devices have great interent, both devices have a lot of ram, but devices have wifi, both devices have PIM, both devices have office capability, etc.

Oh, as you can tell, they're not comparing OSs, they're comparing devices.

[PlayAgain?]

Regarding the comments that this report must be bias toward Palm because Palm commissioned it, I say; "Well duh! Of course!".

First thing anybody should do when reading a report like this is check out who is behind it. I mean, how many reports have come out saying that Windows is more secure and cheaper than Linux (for example)? And I wonder who paid for those reports?

Palm is no different.

If nobody is willing to blow your trumpet, you're going to have to give it a go yourself aren't you?

Do people here prefer salted or dry roasted peanuts?

[wirelessgeek]

Comparing PDA devices must be done based on software, chips, built-in wireless, price, extra's ....etc. Most of the time people are comparing a BMW with a Suzuki Alto. Both have there pros and minors imho.

But shouldn't we also take PPC vs Palm PDA tests coming from the PPC camp with a grain of salt ditto!?

[pradike]

8O Palm could have saved alot of money on this study if they had just assigned the same glittering generalities and useless comparative information to their own marketing department.

I agree with most of the comments here that:

1) Most of the content compares data and feature/function that is both questionable and sometimes negligible.

2) Palm clearly had their own agenda when directing the content. Some of their "value points" are valuable only to Palm, and not even their users.

3) Palm clearly does not understand the difference between features and capabilities - one is "bells & whistles", the other is "what personal or business needs does it solve". In the case of the later (the most important), Palm fails miserably, in that they have been in "catch-up" mode now for over 2 1/2 years to numerous other devices which have been avaiable to perform the same tasks (often with better results).

IN SUMMARY - this is more Palm propoganda. Long live the PocketPC.

[Johan]

Very strange to compare the percentage setting of display (also considder screen estate..) and audio volume, this says nothing at all. None of the Palm devices compare to the 5450 (Wifi, bluetooth, free SD, stereo headphone audio, rom file storage). I can't understand how they can release the Tungsten C with mono headphone output (I'm pretty sure business people like listening music...).

[cyp]

:roll: comparing apples and oranges again :roll:

We have stopped comparing mac and windows OS. Why can't we accept that Palm and PPC are different? Built different, for different people, for different purposes.

Having said that, I love my my 3970! The Palm III that I have is becoming a dust collector in my desk drawer. :D

uhh... no.

how are they for different people? Sure 3 years ago they might have been for different people, but the tungsten C and the iPaq 5450 are pretty much intended for the same type of people.

They're not different, they both are intended to do pretty much the same things. Palm wants iPaq marketshare, and hp want palm market share. They both have wifi, great screens, 64mb of ram, sd slots, etc.

Both devices have great interent, both devices have a lot of ram, but devices have wifi, both devices have PIM, both devices have office capability, etc.

Oh, as you can tell, they're not comparing OSs, they're comparing devices.

Point taken on the similarities. Even if there are comparing devices and not the OSs, they are more different than being mentioned in the lop-sided, non-independant report.

With a 5450 (or at least my 3970), I can slip in a PC card sleeve with 5GB HDD, filled with my fav videos. If I want to go light, I can remove it. If 5GB is not enough, I slip in a Storage Brick adaptor for up to what ever is the biggest hard disk available.

Then there is the size of the screen and the volume of the speaker. The iPaq has a bigger and brighter screen and a very much louder speaker.

Nobody compares the fuel consumption of saloon to a SUV. That is senseless. Would one say, "At 60mph, the Nissan has better mileage than the Hummer"? Yes, the statement is true but what's the point?

Well if a person wants fuel economy, get a Nissan. As for me I dream of crusing the road in a bad *** Hummer. :mrgreen:

[MikeUnwired]

I didn't need a study to tell me that my Palm Tungsten T & Tungsten C responds to most queries for data faster than my HP iPAQ 5455. Even my Palm Zire 71 responds faster.

I can also tell you I'd rather view a web page on the iPAQ -- even if it loads a little slower. The browser renders the pages more true to the original design. But, I can also say that, given the choice, I will forgo any PDA if a real computer with full-sized monitor is available -- cause size does matter.

[dh]

For me the biggest draw back of the pocket pc os is the poor battery life, and the fact the palm users have access to better applications for word, and excel.

I have no issues with battery life on my Axim, even when using my WiFi card.
Also, Textmaker provides a much better Word solution than any of the offerings for Palm. I know there is an Excel replacement as well.

Let's face it, most of the built-in apps are pretty basic on either platform. I have no problem with this. I like to be able to use the apps I want, not have to put up with what Palm or MS tells me I have to use.

There is nothing in that report that makes me want to return to the Palm camp. I really don't like any of the current Palm offerings, although I agree with many that they have made a lot of progress technically. I believe that the company most under pressure to respond to this is not MS but Sony, who have seen their technical edge dissapear. (They still have the style edge though).

[alcdroid]

This reminds me of a study that was done recently that found that second-hand smoke is not as dangerous as everyone thought. This research is causing a lot of controversy because it was funded by the tobacco indunstry. :D

I find this Palm vs. PPC test relevant though, but it tells me nothing I don't already know. Personally, battery life is not a big issue since I always charge it at night and I always bring the charger with me on trips. I also like viewing web pages and e-books on a 3.5" screen. I like the idea that there are several expansion options CURRENTLY available for my axim in the form of CF devices.

You have to admit though, that test is more truthful than that awful Palm vs. PPC table that Palm had on their website ( is it still there? ), but it is still propaganda in that it focuses only on points that Palm is already superior in. But why not? They paid for it.

One more thing, I'm just glad that most people in this forum are more rational than most people in other forums. If you take a look at Palminfocenter.com ( still a great site though ), there are several comments of the "in your face, PPC user!" kind. I like discussions about their differences, but not when people try to escalate it into some kind of holy war.

Cheers!

[Tim Allen]

Irrespective of the validity of the test itself, the fact that Palm themselves (rather than an independent party) commissioned it is most interesting to me, together with the fact that they chose to include high-end devices. It seems they now recognise that they must compete at all levels rather than serving different markets entirely. This can only be good for us.

[AndrewLubinus89]

[quote="lonesniper"]This is why I do not like religion. It just teaches hate.
quote]
Well, that is true but being a middle of the roader isn't exactly the best choice either, :D (I don't mean this offensively I just want to defend my non-pluralistic position,

[Cypher]

This is why I do not like religion. It just teaches hate.

It is interesting to read the forums over at www.pdainfocenter.com about this report, a lot of people wondered if PPC sites would even report it, or report it and dismiss it.

Why can't we all just get along and stop these crusades against something that is different from us. There is so much propaganda from both sides, I just don’t think we will ever have world peace if we fight about everything including PDA’s.

A rather appropriate handle I think.
The reason most PPC sites will, if they bother to print the report, largely dismiss it is that they recognize the bias in the tests. It's clear to someone who actually uses a PPC that the tests are construed in such ways to disadvantage the PPCs. That, in and of itself, isn't the mark of a crusade, but reason. It's true that it becomes less reasonable when we fail to recognize our own bias, but many of the posts own that up front. I have noted one difference in the propaganda: While users of both Palm and PPC do engage strangely-weighted arguments to buttress their PDA of choice, the Pocket PC manufacturers almost never do that. Can't say the same for Palm hardware.

If you will pardon this off-topic paragraph, the idea that religions teach hate is severly wrong-headed and lacks perspective. While it is true that many religions have been misrepresented and abused by people and governments seeking power or gain, to say that such is a fault or worse, a teaching of religion in general, would be like rejecting politics because of Caligula or medicine because of Mengele.

World peace won't come from lack of differences of opinion or even lack of voicing them, but respect for those differences and freedom to voice them may get us closer to it.

[orangehat]

When paying for testing you can get results you want. I've owned 3 different Palm units and was very happy with them. I'm using a Dell Axim now since I thought I should know what the 'other guys' are doing. Depends on what you want to do with your PDA, I use both primarily for Calendaring and Address Book so either did what I needed. Most people I know use them for the above reasons and probably bought whatever unit their friends already owned.

[possmann]

Interesting… I’m always cautious of a self sponsored test – even if it was “clean” it still smells bad. Looking at many of the posts it comes down to the old desktop argument really – doesn’t it? Mac or PC? I think the Palm makes a great PIM, but I was never sold on it’s extended features – specifically connection capabilities and entertainment features – anything beyond a PIM. I’m actually glad to see that PALM is raising the bar in many ways. Someone in the industry needs to keep Microsoft on its toes… Somewhere I heard that the 2003 OS brings PIE up to IE5.5 should help a lot. Looking forward to it.

[acollet]

I use a Palm T|C and 5455. Regardless of what anyone thinks of the study, for daily use, the T|C is FAR more stable w/ Wi-Fi and can retreive the same data faster than my 5455 can. I can also take the T|C our for a LONG day and NEVER wory about battery. This is a real world comparison. I do like PPC better since it has more features. However, its battery life and speed that really matter in the end. And untill my PPC can meet that, I'll stick w/ the T|C as primary.

[cyp]

I use a Palm T|C and 5455. Regardless of what anyone thinks of the study, for daily use, the T|C is FAR more stable w/ Wi-Fi and can retreive the same data faster than my 5455 can. I can also take the T|C our for a LONG day and NEVER wory about battery. This is a real world comparison. I do like PPC better since it has more features. However, its battery life and speed that really matter in the end. And untill my PPC can meet that, I'll stick w/ the T|C as primary.

Time to update your signature! :D

[Crystal Eitle]

I use both primarily for Calendaring and Address Book so either did what I needed. Most people I know use them for the above reasons and probably bought whatever unit their friends already owned.

Off-topic, but, Pocket PC makers need to get Pocket PC awareness out to the general public. The only reason I even knew what a Pocket PC was is because a friend had one - I don't recall ever seeing any ads. Most people still refer to it as a "palm pilot" (until I school them, that is :bangin: )

However, on the flip side of that, I have become such a Pocket PC fanatic that another friend, who just got an old Handspring Visor from another friend of ours, calls it a "Pocket PC" :lol: .

(Friend 1, who owns a T-Mobile Sidekick, gave his old Visor to Friend 2, because we wanted him on the mobile device bandwagon. Friend 2 uses the Visor constantly. It's pretty cute. I'm hoping to get him to buy a Pocket PC, as soon as he's ready to "upgrade" 0X ).

[D.psi]

Irrespective of the validity of the test itself, the fact that Palm themselves (rather than an independent party) commissioned it is most interesting to me, together with the fact that they chose to include high-end devices. It seems they now recognise that they must compete at all levels rather than serving different markets entirely. This can only be good for us.

Back when I bought my original Palm-Sized PC (~1999 ), the basic argument was: do you want a relatively simple organizer, at a reasonable cost with a whole lot of available software (Palm, Handspring), or do you want a more expensive handheld that will allow you to do a little more, with a limited installed software base, and more expensive price-tag. This type of question is mainly no longer relevant.

Yes the test was biased, any subsidized market test will be biased, including those that appear in magazines. All these tests are biased by the self interest of those doing the testing... They want to get paid, so they'll provide the results that ensure they get paid... and that ensure they get repeat business.

I haven't been following the Palm side of the house to any extent, but I do know that they have started adding the same types of capabilities that the PalmSize PC and eventually PPC have had. Palm's market segment used to be in the low end market. What they appear to be doing is they're trying to claw back some of the high end market. As biased as this market test was, it is an attempt to show that Palms are no longer limited to low-end entries into the PDA market, but they can go head to head with any offering.

I mean it's only fair, after the beating Dell, Viewsonic and to some extent HP have given Palm in the entry-level market. Palm has a right to try to compete in the high-end market, otherwise they'll be marginalized, squeezed into lower and lower cost PDAs, which in the end will resemble some of the older organizers (Sharp, etc...). Palm's only option is to increase the feature set. But they're price tags have been growing... Can they go head to head against PPC competitively? Only time will tell.

D.psi

[shindullin]

One of the things that this survey does show is that Palm has been actively working on their OS over the last three years while Microsoft has been largely frittered away what once looked like an unsurpassable lead with non-upgrades to it's software.
Palm may not have caught up with PPC yet, but if Microsoft continues to do nothing, it will be met and beaten by Palm. Let hope (for the sake of my software investment and the sake of continually improved devices) that Microsoft decides it's sat on it's hands long enough and actually does something radical with it's software offerings in the near future. A replacement to active stink, a faster shell in general, and a better Word program come to the fore in my mind.

[bdeli]

Let hope (for the sake of my software investment and the sake of continually improved devices) that Microsoft decides it's sat on it's hands long enough and actually does something radical with it's software offerings in the near future. A replacement to active stink, a faster shell in general, and a better Word program come to the fore in my mind.

Just hoping...but from how things stand it seems that MS is focusing more on it's Tablets and Smartphone ventures.

Just my 2 cents.

[Steveb123]

I don't care how long a Palm can outlast a PPC. I just know that during the time I am using my PPC I will be infinitely more productive. That is the reason I switched over. You can just do so much more on a PPC.

[jlc, just jlc]

I also wish Palm updated the datebook. I like the PocketPC datebook better, but what can you do.

Get Datebook 5 from CESD (www.pimlicosoftware.com). It's one reason I went back to Palm from my Jornada.

[Abba Zabba]

I think we can all read the article and realize that this was commisioned by palm and take it with a grain of salt :roll:

Now why oh why would they relly put this out there :?: do they think people are numd and don't pay attention. There is no way that they can compare these devices. One person says that this is like comparing apples and oranges... well I say this is comparing plums to prunes :razzing:

Time to say :byebye: palm stop paying for :spam: and no more :cry: about how you are better. We all here can read :deal:

[wirelessgeek]

Found this....

"If this was a Pocket PC device and it said 64MB, you would only really have 32MB for storage, since the device would need 32MB to run the programs. With the Palm, you actually get all 51MB to store and run your programs, so you really are coming out ahead, If that doesn't make sense to you, post a comment at the end of this review and I will explain it further."

http://www.the-gadgeteer.com/tungsten-c-review.html

"....the Tungsten C loaded our graphics-laden Web pages at an average of about 43 seconds per page. That may not sound great, but it's the fastest we've ever seen on a handheld, and it's more than twice as fast as the performance of the Toshiba e750 and the HP iPaq H5450"

http://computers.cnet.com/hardware/0-2709830-404-21120743.html

[Jonathan1]

Interesting… I’m always cautious of a self sponsored test – even if it was “clean” it still smells bad. Looking at many of the posts it comes down to the old desktop argument really – doesn’t it? Mac or PC? I think the Palm makes a great PIM, but I was never sold on it’s extended features – specifically connection capabilities and entertainment features – anything beyond a PIM. I’m actually glad to see that PALM is raising the bar in many ways. Someone in the industry needs to keep Microsoft on its toes… Somewhere I heard that the 2003 OS brings PIE up to IE5.5 should help a lot. Looking forward to it.

Heh I actually consider it the reverse. Microsoft needs to keep Palm on its toes. OS 1 - 4 was really nothing more then bug fixes and OS tweaks. That in and of itself isn't bad but imagine if MS hadn't bothered with Windows NT or 9X and said that DOS with a Windows shell was "good enough" and continued to just tweak that. I equate that to Palm's situation until about a year and a half ago when MS started to begin to really eat into their market share. I think the boys at Palm finally woke up and realized that they were really in a position of losing not only market share but the entire ball game. (Think Netscape) Hence the first real innovative steps in the history of Palm were taken. The attitude of Palm Inc that "color and audio isn't what the consumer wants" changed overnight. We can thank Microsoft for that.
If anything we need Microsoft around to keep Palm on its toes because Palm has more catch-up to do then MS in the PDA OS arena. OS 5 is a decent OS but until REAL mutitasking can occur and until a REAL file system is implemented it’s still going to be a second class citizen in the PDA OS arena IMHO of course.

[drac]

Sad, but true.