Pocket PC Universal Connectors: Why It Probably Won't Happen

[Jason Dunn]

I saw this question on a mailing list I'm a member of, and I thought my response would make some good Thoughts-fodder:<br /><br /><i>"Why don't Pocket PCs have a standard connector for accessories?"</i><br /><br />Simple: profit. Manufacturers might make 20% profit on a Pocket PC if they're lucky (Dell really changed the game in this regard), but on accessories, they can make 50%+ in profit, often times much more (like charging $9 for three Styli or $19 for screen protectors). If customers were able to re-use things like keyboards, cables, GPS, cradles, etc., all OEMs would lose a valuable source of revenue.<br /><br />The frustrating fact is that all the OEMs <i><b>want</b></i> you to have to buy all new accessories when you purchase a new Pocket PC (unless it's bought from them, which is why we see iPAQ accessories compatibility to a limited degree). The only incentive they have to adopt a universal connector and kill a good portion of their accessory sales is to make it easier for customers to switch away from their devices. It's easier to keep a customer locked into using your product once they've invested $500 in accessories than it is to get a new customer to buy your product and the $500 in accessories.<br /><br />Some people have asked why Microsoft doesn't just mandate a universal connector for all Pocket PCs - my guess is that they fear alienating their OEM partners. With the declining desktop computer market, major OEMs are on the prowl for areas where they can make money. The mobile devices market is still growing quite rapidly, and the OEMs want to make money while they can, and this includes the accessories. Microsoft is the only company who could implement a standard connection anyway - I seriously doubt the OEMs would get together and say "Let's make it easy for customers to jump ship from one Pocket PC brand to another." So the long and short of this is that I don't expect to see this happen soon, if ever. Bluetooth may be our only hope, and it's still too difficult to use.<br /><br />Universal connector? I don't think we'll ever see it happen. :|

[johncruise]

wouldn't it make sense also if they didn't standardize the processor? People would be forced to buy software for your (say if your an SH3-PDA user...) Jornada and later would be forced to upgrade to another Jornada if you want to retain/reuse your old softwares.

having a standard connector should doesn't necessarily means that OEM's (say Dell) can get more profit for buying accessories intended for the Axims directly from them. Who's stopping other vendor (ie Targus, Belkin, etc) to create accessories that would fit Axim's connectors? Doesn't that take the market away from them also? I know there are things like licensing to use that connector but they won't make profit much from it.

weighing pros and cons on promoting their own standards has no clear cut winner and I still believe (IMHO) that having a standardized connector would be more beneficial to all including OEM's.

[Jason Dunn]

wouldn't it make sense also if they didn't standardize the processor? People would be forced to buy software for your (say if your an SH3-PDA user...) Jornada and later would be forced to upgrade to another Jornada if you want to retain/reuse your old softwares.

Correct. The OEMs were not terribly pleased when Microsoft said "ARM only" (well, Compaq was), but that was a decision that made sense for Microsoft to make - they were wasting resources testing and coding for multiple CPUs. Their resources are limited enough as-is, so unifying the code was the right thing to do. Short term pain for long-term gain.

[Timothy Rapson]

One correction. PPC OEMs have made as much as 40% profit on the successful models (basically Ipaqs) Only recently have Toshiba cut that to 20%, and Dell to basically 0%. This is by my own reading on how much the OEMs pay for hardware and how much they sell them for.

I really think that all the PDA makers have missed a big opportunity here. I would bet that a LOT of buyers are simply not interested in hopping on an upgrade path that has all these pitfalls on top of those they already battle on their desktops.

But, I guess it is the same with Palm OS, phones, and older organizers. Like you say, they want the money from the geeks who buy all the extras. I believe some day they will wish they had played it straight.

Then again, the printer companies have gotten away with this since the advent of the ink jet cartridges. There appears no end in sight to the companies that pretend to give great deals on initial hardware only to gouge us on followup products.

But, for every such problem there is an opportunity for a better manufacturer. Hopefully one will come to the fore.

[Ed Hansberry]

The only one that can force a standard connector would be a large third party company, and there really isn't one. It was Kodak that forced Palm to come up with one connector across all models that would be around for a few years or Kodak wasn't going to keep making the PalmPix attachment. Funny thing is, soon after Palm's Universal Connector was born, PalmPix died anyway.

This is just a fact of life unfortunately. Sell the base product at low low margins and make it up on the extras down the road.

[kagayaki1]

Interesting point about Bluetooth. Perhaps this is why we haven't seen widespread adoption by OEMs to develop not only hardware, but more importantly, good interoperability software.

[shindullin]

This analysis may work for HP which has the lion's share of the PPC market but wouldn't smaller OEM's like Toshiba be more interested in using whatever the companies with the larger market share want to use the connectors of those with greater market share in the hopes of stealing? Yet I don't see that happening either... I think OEM's just do what they want, not referencing the designs of other OEM's and that's why everything is different. It's all about internal momentum sending companies into different directions.

[gorkon280]

It may take a long time, but it will happen. First off, dongles suck. I have a USB host dongle for my e740 and if I lose it, I have to buy another one. Thank god it's semi cheap. Now that I have that, I have been able to find a USB to serial cable that works with the PDA. This allows me to use the GPS I already have with it rather then spending an exhorbitant amount on a Pharos GPS. CF and SD are good standards and Dell, Toshiba or Compaq would not dare come out with their own memory card standard. Eventually, standard connections will come. This will happen as more and more of these are being used by vertical market segments. It's already happened on the e740/755 and it will happen on others as well. People want to easily connect things and proprietary standards prevent that. Cradles, well, that will almost never happen, but there will soon be some way (be it a extra connector or dongle or even bluetooth) to connect things. Also, with exception of cradles and dongles, I don't see Compaq or Dell actually making keyboards or other things for their respective handhelds(exception, iPaq sleeves). If they came out with a standard cradle, it would hurt noone. Belkin will just make a mess of keyboards for the new standard. The same things kind of happens in Amateur Radio. My current HT has a weird Speaker Mike connector (4 conductor with a set of screw threads at the back). I can buy a cable that separates the TX and RX audio, but I still have to buy it from Yaesu. Noone makes this connector but them (or at least I have not found anyone yet! ).

[lurch]

The only one that can force a standard connector would be a large third party company, and there really isn't one.
Just what I was going to say -- Microsoft may be able to mandate a processor, but they can't control the connector specs, that's up to the OEMs.. the only thing that would get them to unify (besides a sudden urge to be NICE) would be a huge third-party company that could force it. Hmm... Does Pocket PC Thoughts count as that third party?? Do the little flashlights and stuff count as "third party products"? :)

[kagayaki1]

The only one that can force a standard connector would be a large third party company, and there really isn't one.
Just what I was going to say -- Microsoft may be able to mandate a processor, but they can't control the connector specs, that's up to the OEMs.. the only thing that would get them to unify (besides a sudden urge to be NICE) would be a huge third-party company that could force it. Hmm... Does Pocket PC Thoughts count as that third party?? Do the little flashlights and stuff count as "third party products"? :)

I don't think it's a matter of MS forcing it (we all agree that can't quite happen), but if a single company came out with a whole bunch of encompasing solutions, it just might fly. Unfortunately, what messes up that pipe dream is the already established companies (Belkin, Fellowes) have been around a while, have enough established retail presence, and create a ton of things that are *just* good enough to the average user.

Us power users are SOOOOO needy! :bad-words: Give us everything!

[Paragon]

Unfortunately Jason is right, we aren't likley to see it any time soon.

Personally I think it is a true sign of Pocket PC's immaturity. I think, until PPC OEMs can show they can get along well enough with each other and allow thinks like this to come to pass they are going to be seen by many large enterprise type as a bit too unstable to put their companies needs on the line. I'm sure that for many they are afraid to put much money and effort into PPCs only to find the whole concept go belly up. If OEMs came together like they have with desktops which have many standardized components I think it would be a huge step toward a solid future.

Dave

[danmanmayer]

Would it help if i said i really really wanted one?

[quidproquo]

I agree with Paragon.....if the OEM's weren't being so short sighted, they would consider advocating a universal connection/connector.

That way it would be one less hurdle for the consumer :clap: and would likely solidify the life of the platform for the long term so the OEM's can continue to make money on the base hardware.

[bdegroodt]

2 points- A) The PPC accessory market is pretty new yet. It's only second generation right now and nobody (Aside from HP) has a lion's share of any add ons. At least nobody that has the resources to force a standard. Perhaps 3rd generation revenue will give somebody the mojo to begin the push.

B) Why can't MSFT ship PPC that supports a new standard (The same way they do for USB in XP etc.)? It would seem to me that MSFT would have the greatest amount of interest in generating churn as each PPC sale would result in additional license revenue. Making it easier to move your accessories to a new PPC would generate another license sale.

[rubberdemon]

What about some new standard like USB On-the-Go? It's not quite the same as the usual peripheral connector on a pda, but sounds like it has some interesting promise...

http://news.com.com/2100-1033-985217.html

[Paragon]

I agree with Paragon.....if the OEM's weren't being so short sighted, they would consider advocating a universal connection/connector.

That way it would be one less hurdle for the consumer :clap: and would likely solidify the life of the platform for the long term so the OEM's can continue to make money on the base hardware.

......and thus enabling them to have a piece of a bigger pie, opposed to a bigger piece of a much smaller pie that they have now, and are forcing themselves to be contented with.

There are 30 licencees for PPC now. In stead of thinking they are going to loose sales because people will buy accessories from other OEMs.....perhaps they should see the other side of the coin....maybe they will sell more accessories because they will have a bigger market to draw from. They may even find that they can lower the cost of their accessories because the manufacturer they are buyig from no longer will need to build 10 different cradles to satisfy their customers. The handful of companies making accessories will be able to offer people like HP, Dell, and the others a much slimmer, and possibly better line of products?!

Dave

[Gremmie]

I agree with Paragon.....if the OEM's weren't being so short sighted, they would consider advocating a universal connection/connector.

That way it would be one less hurdle for the consumer :clap: and would likely solidify the life of the platform for the long term so the OEM's can continue to make money on the base hardware.

I fail to see the profitablity in a universal connector. Nothing prevents Targus et. al. from making connectors other than resources, thus why they make only few keyboard models. Standardizing the connectors will increase the competition pool and decrease revenues. Like said earlier, PDA's are sold at low margin (high margin by the retailers) but the accessories are sold at high margin (low margin by the retailers). A limited pool of accessories enables a strict MSRP, only competition on the retail level drives accessory prices lower, but thats not skin off Dell, HP, or anyone elses back.

It WOULD be great to have universal ports, for the consumer, but you always got to find the equilibrium when bargining for features. However, we really haven't seen any price gauging in the accessory market so I'm not overly concerned about universal connectors, other than for ease.

At least power plugs are somewhat standardized :)

[bdegroodt]

I agree with Paragon.....if the OEM's weren't being so short sighted, they would consider advocating a universal connection/connector.

That way it would be one less hurdle for the consumer :clap: and would likely solidify the life of the platform for the long term so the OEM's can continue to make money on the base hardware.

I fail to see the profitablity in a universal connector. Nothing prevents Targus et. al. from making connectors other than resources, thus why they make only few keyboard models. Standardizing the connectors will increase the competition pool and decrease revenues. Like said earlier, PDA's are sold at low margin (high margin by the retailers) but the accessories are sold at high margin (low margin by the retailers). A limited pool of accessories enables a strict MSRP, only competition on the retail level drives accessory prices lower, but thats not skin off Dell, HP, or anyone elses back.

Does this remind anyone else of Dr. Nash's Nobel prize winning theory on competition?

[Paragon]

Standardizing the connectors will increase the competition pool and decrease revenues. .

Sorry, Gremmie I have never been one to take this kind of view. Increased competition does not mean decreased revenues. In this senario along with increased competition comes a huge increase in market for many of the OEMs. For may of them their market is the 50,000 or so of those who have purchased their PPCs. With standardization that market grows to millions. And, if, as everyone says, the real profits are in accessories why not shoot for that bigger more profitable market?

20 years ago when desktop computers were just coming on, how many companies were willing to spend money on them? Not many until they saw that the industry was maturing, and they began to see some standarization. Then everyone started jumping on board. They were confident that their money was well spent. I think it's the same thing now with PPCs. I think there are a lot of large companies out there who would buy thousands, and thousands of PPCs if they saw some indications that this was a market segment that was going to survive. Until PPCs can make this step toward maturity that ain't going to happen. It will always be a niche market.

Dave

[Paragon]

Does this remind anyone else of Dr. Nash's Nobel prize winning theory on competition?

bdegroodt, refreash me on Dr. Nash? :)

Dave

[Gremmie]

I agree with Paragon.....if the OEM's weren't being so short sighted, they would consider advocating a universal connection/connector.

That way it would be one less hurdle for the consumer :clap: and would likely solidify the life of the platform for the long term so the OEM's can continue to make money on the base hardware.

I fail to see the profitablity in a universal connector. Nothing prevents Targus et. al. from making connectors other than resources, thus why they make only few keyboard models. Standardizing the connectors will increase the competition pool and decrease revenues. Like said earlier, PDA's are sold at low margin (high margin by the retailers) but the accessories are sold at high margin (low margin by the retailers). A limited pool of accessories enables a strict MSRP, only competition on the retail level drives accessory prices lower, but thats not skin off Dell, HP, or anyone elses back.

Does this remind anyone else of Dr. Nash's Nobel prize winning theory on competition?

Very good! Thats where I was exacally taking it from. In pure competition, those two must find an equilibrium that benefits both of them the most. In this instance, which is debateable, companies must find a desireable level of profit while the consumers must find a desireable level of price and subsitutability. The debateable point here is, does competition really lower prices? All economists debate this, I say it does, but, we'll see...

[bdegroodt]

Does this remind anyone else of Dr. Nash's Nobel prize winning theory on competition?

bdegroodt, refreash me on Dr. Nash? :)

Dave

In this case (And many other's in business) games=business competition. Here's a summary of his work on non cooperative games (http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/sci/A0820124.html) (Sorry about the pop up ads.). And from The Nobel Foundation, his autobiography (http://www.nobel.se/economics/laureates/1994/nash-autobio.html).

Sorry for taking this kind of OT, but the issue is actually mathematically solveable (To some very very smart people)

[Paragon]

Thanks

I googled him, and found some of the same links. :)

Dave

[bdegroodt]

The debateable point here is, does competition really lower prices? All economists debate this, I say it does, but, we'll see...

Or more completely, does competition lower prices or not AND does it increase overall revenue or not?

I concur, as a dismal scientist by education, that competition does lower prices. However, there are far many more variables that impact prices than just competition (Quality, market dynamics, supply etc). In my opinion, as an immature marketplace (None of these after market vendors are a force to be feared) it's my belief that standardizing this interface and many other components of the PPC platform would increase revenues for all involved (General business abilities aside.). It would likely decrease the time to market (Always nice to get out fast as that's when you can make your best price premiums.) and reduce the amount of custom R&D that needs to be done in house to create X product/

[Gremmie]

Does this remind anyone else of Dr. Nash's Nobel prize winning theory on competition?

bdegroodt, refreash me on Dr. Nash? :)

Dave

In this case (And many other's in business) games=business competition. Here's a summary of his work on non cooperative games (http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/sci/A0820124.html) (Sorry about the pop up ads.). And from The Nobel Foundation, his autobiography (http://www.nobel.se/economics/laureates/1994/nash-autobio.html).

Sorry for taking this kind of OT, but the issue is actually mathematically solveable (To some very very smart people)

Nash's mathematical theories of cooperative gaming is not hard, the work in noncooperative gaming is difficult.

[bdegroodt]

Does this remind anyone else of Dr. Nash's Nobel prize winning theory on competition?

bdegroodt, refreash me on Dr. Nash? :)

Dave

In this case (And many other's in business) games=business competition. Here's a summary of his work on non cooperative games (http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/sci/A0820124.html) (Sorry about the pop up ads.). And from The Nobel Foundation, his autobiography (http://www.nobel.se/economics/laureates/1994/nash-autobio.html).

Sorry for taking this kind of OT, but the issue is actually mathematically solveable (To some very very smart people)

Nash's mathematical theories of cooperative gaming is not hard, the work in noncooperative gaming is difficult.

Oh. It's always easy on Monday morning to solve Sunday's game problems. You aren't giving him less than his due respect are you? :evil:

[Gremmie]

HAHAHA, oh no, he DID go insane trying to find this new definition of competition.

Talking down Nash's theory is like when Nash tried to talk down Einstein's revolutionary equation infront of Einstein himself! :jawdrop:

[Islanti]

A few thoughts... Pocket PC Thoughts! (ahem) Sorry, couldn't resist.

This analysis may work for HP which has the lion's share of the PPC market but wouldn't smaller OEM's like Toshiba be more interested in using whatever the companies with the larger market share want to use the connectors of those with greater market share in the hopes of stealing?

The smaller OEMs (should) want a universal connector, because it means more accessories for their product. That will help them compete with the bigger "accessorized" vendors like HP.

Someone mentioned OEMs wanting their own memory/expansion card formats as another way to lock in consumers. Point of fact this is what Compaq did IMO with their expansion sleeves.

On a different note, this entire discussion seems equally applicable to cell phones. They have MUCH more market penetration, yet models by the *same vendors* don't even have the same connectors. I don't care to think about how much I've spent on data cables for various cell phones over the years....

[Paragon]

The debateable point here is, does competition really lower prices? All economists debate this, I say it does, but, we'll see...

Or more completely, does competition lower prices or not AND does it increase overall revenue or not?

I concur, as a dismal scientist by education, that competition does lower prices. However, there are far many more variables that impact prices than just competition (Quality, market dynamics, supply etc). In my opinion, as an immature marketplace (None of these after market vendors are a force to be feared) it's my belief that standardizing this interface and many other components of the PPC platform would increase revenues for all involved (General business abilities aside.). It would likely decrease the time to market (Always nice to get out fast as that's when you can make your best price premiums.) and reduce the amount of custom R&D that needs to be done in house to create X product/

10-4

[Venturello]

Simple: OEM's wants your money, that's way. I also hate it.

Same with so many other things. Think CF, SD, MS, etc...

It sucks, but its part of the free market.


(have not read all posts so I might be repeating what everyone has said)

[Paragon]

Sorry...off topic

I just read Nash's autobiography. If nothing else I think he can be attributed the honor of be responsible for the line "There is a fine line between....." :)

Dave

[Gremmie]

New topic title: Applied Game Theory to Competitive Practices in the Pocket PC Accessory Market

[johncruise]

......and thus enabling them to have a piece of a bigger pie, opposed to a bigger piece of a much smaller pie that they have now, and are forcing themselves to be contented with.

There are 30 licencees for PPC now. In stead of thinking they are going to loose sales because people will buy accessories from other OEMs.....perhaps they should see the other side of the coin....maybe they will sell more accessories because they will have a bigger market to draw from. They may even find that they can lower the cost of their accessories because the manufacturer they are buyig from no longer will need to build 10 different cradles to satisfy their customers. The handful of companies making accessories will be able to offer people like HP, Dell, and the others a much slimmer, and possibly better line of products?!

Dave

I couldn't have put it any better. OEM should start consider looking into this matter.

[bdegroodt]

New topic title: Applied Game Theory to Competitive Practices in the Pocket PC Accessory Market

I like it. Sounds like a white paper waiting to happen. :D

[Paragon]

New topic title: Applied Game Theory to Competitive Practices in the Pocket PC Accessory Market

I like it. Sounds like a white paper waiting to happen. :D

...or, a new game pad for Pocket PCs. :)

Dave

[Ekkie Tepsupornchai]

......and thus enabling them to have a piece of a bigger pie, opposed to a bigger piece of a much smaller pie that they have now, and are forcing themselves to be contented with.

There are 30 licencees for PPC now. In stead of thinking they are going to loose sales because people will buy accessories from other OEMs.....perhaps they should see the other side of the coin....maybe they will sell more accessories because they will have a bigger market to draw from. They may even find that they can lower the cost of their accessories because the manufacturer they are buyig from no longer will need to build 10 different cradles to satisfy their customers. The handful of companies making accessories will be able to offer people like HP, Dell, and the others a much slimmer, and possibly better line of products?!
I couldn't have put it any better. OEM should start consider looking into this matter.
I don't know about that. One matter that doesn't get mentioned here is what happens when PPC users upgrade to a new PPC after some time. Vendors would likely lose money on any extra peripherals customers would have considered buying since they likely already have a host of peripherals that could be reused for the new device.

Amongst PPC users, I haven't seen a whole lot of brand loyalty when upgrading to a new PPC, and when people change brands, they have to buy a new set of accessories. It stinks for the consumer, but it does seemingly force more money from the consumers to the vendors.

[Paragon]

Not if you continually offer upgraded accessories!

Dave

[Jeff from MS]

One thing to keep in mind is that the average PPCT reader knows that there are many, many third party accessories from which to choose, but most retail buyers will gravitate (understandably) to the branded OEM accessories that are available in stores. And also understandably, if you are a Pocket PC OEM and you offer a line of accessories (as do all OEMs), you would quite naturally prefer that your Pocket PC customer buy accessories from you also.

And, keep in mind even when several devices have essentially the same connector, other incompatibilities often prevent using the same accessory on both devices.

The last thing...how many of us on this thread have many, many Pocket PCs (well, at least two or three)...so a universal connector is more important to us.

It will likely be some sort of Bluetooth implementation or interchangeable connectors (starting to appear on some third-party sync cables) that will move us closer to a "universal" connector.

[Paragon]

One thing to keep in mind is that the average PPCT reader knows that there are many, many third party accessories from which to choose, but most retail buyers will gravitate (understandably) to the branded OEM accessories that are available in stores. And also understandably, if you are a Pocket PC OEM and you offer a line of accessories (as do all OEMs), you would quite naturally prefer that your Pocket PC customer buy accessories from you also.

And, keep in mind even when several devices have essentially the same connector, other incompatibilities often prevent using the same accessory on both devices.

The last thing...how many of us on this thread have many, many Pocket PCs (well, at least two or three)...so a universal connector is more important to us.

It will likely be some sort of Bluetooth implementation or interchangeable connectors (starting to appear on some third-party sync cables) that will move us closer to a "universal" connector.

Spoken with a true lack of effort, and desire to make something good happen because it might be kinda hard to do. :) Sorry, Jeff I don't mean that to be as offensive as as I made it sound. I wanted to make a point. :)

I do agree that Bluetooth or something along those lines will be what becomes the standard method of connection. I use my Dell cradle to charge batteries. That's it! I use wifi for most other things, and have an IrDA keyboard. When I stop and think about it I can't remember the last time I used the actual connector on it. Many of us really are moving away from physical connections, but I think it will be some time before the masses move away from it though.

Dave

[Mark Johnson]

Conspiracy Theory #5:
I've long suspected that MS was reluctant to standardize peripheral connectors for a reason other than concern about alienating OEMs. MS still has to ensure that the PPC never becomes powerful enough to make people think they might not need a notebook or desktop.

Now I know most readers of these forums will instantly think "Gee Mark, you've got to be nuts to think anyone would even consider a PPC powerful enough to be their primary computer." However, I can think of a lot of students and powerless-users (is there an antonym for "power user" that anyone knows?) who simply want email, ebooks, and very light word-processing. What if the PPC (and/or the HPC) included slightly larger screens (go to 640x480 like the Samsung Nexio) and you could plug in USB keyboards, mice, cd-rom drives, and such. It seems to me that there would be some threat to MS from a significant minority of users simply saying that was good enough for them.

So MS has to make sure that PPC doesn't really mature any more than they need it to in order to beat Palm.

That's why I want the Sharp Zaurus tiny-tablet Linux unit. (Once they've actually released it to the US market.) Or perhaps the A300 which is pretty close in size to the iPaq 1910. The 5600 is just huge (two year old design) compared to the 1910 or the Viewsonic. It's Sharp's commitment to Linux that is really interesting. It seem like MS will never give us a decent Access DB for PPC, but you can run mySQL on Sharp. MS still (after how many years?!?!) won't give us a browser that supports CSS or decent Javascript, etc., but Sharp give you Opera.

(Sorry, but I'm going to need to go on my PIE-is-lame rant now... Can't be helped... What do they think? Are we stuck back in the channel-browser days!? MS just can't seem to stomach supporting W3C standards unless they are dragged to it by a crowd with torches and pitchforks... :soapbox: )

As much as I love my 1910, I think we'll just be controlled by MS :robot: until there is some real Linux competition. It makes me wish Sony would drop PalmOS and put Linux on the Clie... (As much as I hate the MemoryStick but that is another rant!) :soapbox:

[Gremmie]

Then again, tell me of any handheld market (PPC or Palm) that has controlled ports across many brands. Palm standardized them within their own brand, but even that took awhile. So, at best, Compaq/HP should standarize the ports within the 1900/2200/5000 series.

[dh]

Conspiracy Theory #5:
I've long suspected that MS was reluctant to standardize peripheral connectors for a reason other than concern about alienating OEMs. MS still has to ensure that the PPC never becomes powerful enough to make people think they might not need a notebook or desktop.

I think you are correct here Mark. As much as well all might want to have a PPC that could totally replace our larger computers, it would not be in the interests of MS one bit.

As Palm OS gets more functionality and Linux offerings more refined, it's going to be increasing difficult for MS to be able to just beat the handheld competition but not screw up mainstream Windows sales.

Now, if a device was available with Linux, the Sony NX form factor and proper expansion slots (SDIO AND CF) I would be there in a heartbeat. I'll have to look seriously at the clamshell Zaurus.

[Ekkie Tepsupornchai]

However, I can think of a lot of students and powerless-users (is there an antonym for "power user" that anyone knows?) who simply want email, ebooks, and very light word-processing. What if the PPC (and/or the HPC) included slightly larger screens (go to 640x480 like the Samsung Nexio) and you could plug in USB keyboards, mice, cd-rom drives, and such. It seems to me that there would be some threat to MS from a significant minority of users simply saying that was good enough for them.
...but isn't that what MS tried to address a while back with the "network PC" or "internet PC" (that failed miserably) that was much more scaled-down and much cheaper than desktop equivalents and was aimed at the folks looking to do simple tasks?

[Jhokur2k]

(is there an antonym for "power user" that anyone knows?)

End user, or simply, average user.

[Paragon]

I think you are correct here Mark. As much as well all might want to have a PPC that could totally replace our larger computers, it would not be in the interests of MS one bit.

Right, BUT, I don't think MS are sandbagging any one mobile device to save its desktop sales. Quite the contrary. I think they are pushing mobile devices to enhance its desktop versions. They are trying to bring all the devices together with the desktop being the main, or "home" station.

Personally I think the Mobile Devices Division is named wrong. It should be The Mobile Systems Division.

The only problem I see is that at present there are too many types of mobile devices. Laptops, Tablets, Smartphones, and Pocket PCs primarily. I think that 1-2 of these will disappear. Perhaps laptops, and tablets will converge. And, as screen, and keyboard technology advances Smartphones, and Pocket PCs will completely converge, but we will still have our central "home" computer.

The world according to Dave. :roll:

Dave

[alanjrobertson]

On a different note, this entire discussion seems equally applicable to cell phones. They have MUCH more market penetration, yet models by the *same vendors* don't even have the same connectors. I don't care to think about how much I've spent on data cables for various cell phones over the years.... Although this has changed in about the last couple of years (certainly in Europe) - both SonyEricsson and Nokia have used the same connectors for quite a number of models (again this is within-brand rather than cross-brand standardisation).

Alan

[Pony99CA]

It seem like MS will never give us a decent Access DB for PPC, but you can run mySQL on Sharp.

Isn't SQL Server CE good enough? (I'm not a database person, so I don't know.)

MS still (after how many years?!?!) won't give us a browser that supports CSS or decent Javascript, etc., but Sharp give you Opera.
Somebody hasn't been reading up on what Pocket PC 2003(4?) will offer. Pocket IE will be IE 5.5 compatible with Cascading Style Sheets and improved Javascript.

Steve

[Gremmie]

Maybe MS doesn't want to supply these things, I've noticed Palm is not providing many extra software features, but instead partners with other compaies to release it. Which do you all think is better?

[Jason Dunn]

I think they are pushing mobile devices to enhance its desktop versions. They are trying to bring all the devices together with the desktop being the main, or "home" station.

You are correct sir! Microsoft has a line called "better together" that permeates all their corporate decisions as of late. They want to cross-leverage as much as they can across all Microsoft products and services.

Lovely discussion we have going on here! Some real thinking, which is a thrill to see. :mrgreen:

[Paragon]

Lovely discussion we have going on here! Some real thinking, which is a thrill to see. :mrgreen:

Yeah! Personally I think this is when discussion forums are at their best. Since I picked up my first PPC 3 years ago, or so, I have felt that they have the potential to become a very significant piece of hardware in our daily lives, and businesses. They have come along way in that time, and a good portion of that has been inspired by disussions in forums like these.

Dave

[Pony99CA]

I think they are pushing mobile devices to enhance its desktop versions. They are trying to bring all the devices together with the desktop being the main, or "home" station.
You are correct sir! Microsoft has a line called "better together" that permeates all their corporate decisions as of late. They want to cross-leverage as much as they can across all Microsoft products and services.
This isn't exactly a new strategy, at least not in the PDA space. Handheld PCs were called "PC Companions" by Microsoft way back when.

Steve

[Paragon]

Maybe MS doesn't want to supply these things, I've noticed Palm is not providing many extra software features, but instead partners with other compaies to release it. Which do you all think is better?

You are absolutely right Gremmie. I don't think MS does want to produce all these apps. I get a little bugged when I hear people whine that there isn't a better version of Word, or that they have never created a Pocket PowerPoint solution and many other apps. Well, there are pocket versions of all those apps, created by 3rd party developers.

Microsoft realized very early on that the success of PPC was dependent on software availability. They had to get as many software developers on side as possible, and as quickly as possible. I wonder how many would have been willing to develop for the PPC platform if MS was developing all these applications on their own? There wouldn't be the myriad of database programs, or apps like Pocket Informant, Textmaker, or all the different PowerPoint apps. Nor would there be many of the other applications that some of these developers have come up with along the way.

Dave

[dh]

I personally don't want MS to enhance PPC to the point that there is no need for third party development.

Rather than the "one size fits all" approach, I enjoy being able to select exactly the apps I want.

There are some very innovative developers making PPC applications (like the ones just mentioned by Paragon. I would not be happy to see MS do a Netscape demolition job on them. By focusing on a specific area and becoming experts on it, some of these guys are making better products than MS ever would. Heck, everyday I learn something else new and useful in PI.

Anyway, Palms built-in apps are no better than the MS ones. Why else do they include Docs 2 Go on their business models. Again, that's fine. Afterall, Palm OS and PocketPC are operating systems, not complete computer solutions.

[MobileRob]

It may take a long time, but it will happen. First off, dongles suck. I have a USB host dongle for my e740 and if I lose it, I have to buy another one. Thank god it's semi cheap. Now that I have that, I have been able to find a USB to serial cable that works with the PDA. This allows me to use the GPS I already have with it rather then spending an exhorbitant amount on a Pharos GPS. CF and SD are good standards and Dell, Toshiba or Compaq would not dare come out with their own memory card standard. Eventually, standard connections will come. This will happen as more and more of these are being used by vertical market segments. It's already happened on the e740/755 and it will happen on others as well. People want to easily connect things and proprietary standards prevent that. Cradles, well, that will almost never happen, but there will soon be some way (be it a extra connector or dongle or even bluetooth) to connect things. Also, with exception of cradles and dongles, I don't see Compaq or Dell actually making keyboards or other things for their respective handhelds(exception, iPaq sleeves). If they came out with a standard cradle, it would hurt noone. Belkin will just make a mess of keyboards for the new standard. The same things kind of happens in Amateur Radio. My current HT has a weird Speaker Mike connector (4 conductor with a set of screw threads at the back). I can buy a cable that separates the TX and RX audio, but I still have to buy it from Yaesu. Noone makes this connector but them (or at least I have not found anyone yet! ).

I am very interested in getting a USB to Serial cable or adapter. I have just purchased the i700 and it does not support a serial cable. So I am looking for a way to be able to use the serial connection cable that Pharos uses, which is expecting a serial data cable from the device. If you wouldn't mind, can you give details on where you got the USB to serial cable? If I had a USB data cable from the i700, would this have a female USB connector to the serial connector typically found on PDA serial data cables?

Thanks in advance for any help you can give on this. :D :D

Rob. 8)