iPAQ 1945 Bluetooth vs. 2215 Bluetooth

[Mr_Skelington]

My friend and I were in an electronics store, testing out PDAs for my friend to get. I was using Bluetooth to connect 1945s and 2215s to my personal iPAQ 5455, and the Bluetooth on the 1945, sending the same file was at least 10x faster than that of the 2215. Anyone else noticed this? By the way, which one should he get?

[Excalliber]

It's hard to say that "this is better than that in all cases". More information would help. :wink:

I haven't really used the bluetooth yet, so I can't comment on that, BTW.

[Mr_Skelington]

If you mean that 1 try is not enough to make a generalization, then I can tell you that I did indeed send five files: 2 audio, 1 video, 1 text, and 1 note drawing thing. Every time, the 1945 sent about 10x faster than the 2215. The guy there said that it was because the 2215 was a multiple connection kind of device, and that the 1945 was only two-way, between it and one device.

[Excalliber]

If you mean that 1 try is not enough to make a generalization, then I can tell you that I did indeed send five files: 2 audio, 1 video, 1 text, and 1 note drawing thing. Every time, the 1945 sent about 10x faster than the 2215. The guy there said that it was because the 2215 was a multiple connection kind of device, and that the 1945 was only two-way, between it and one device.

I ment to help on which one your friend should buy. :) On the Bluetooth, did you try more than one unit? It could be defective. Try it at a different store.

[Chris Spera]

I haven't performed this kind of test, but It is very possible that they use differnt BlueTooth hardware.

As far as which one to get, many choose the 2200 because of its dual storage card slots.

The processor on the 1940/45 is new, and honestly has shown itself to rival my 5455. Its quick. Very quick.

However, you have ot ask yourself, one question: What does your friend want to do? If he will need a CF slot, then the 2200 is the way to go. If he will need more than 56MB of usable RAM, then the 2200 is the way to go.

If neither of these are important, then consider form factor.

If size isn't an issue, then consider other uses. Will your friend want to use a graphic editor? Will your friend want to do any audio editing? If so, then, in my opinion, the 1940/45 isn't the right choice.

The 1940/45 is a value PDA with connectivitiy and some expansion options. Its small and easy to carry. It can handle some of the hard stuff, but isn't as versatile as the 2200.


Kind Regards,


Christopher Spera

[Mr_Skelington]

The main things he is looking for is:

Good Bluetooth
Fits in his pockets
Some Gaming
Good Video/Audio Playback

By the way, is it worth it to get the 128mb RAM upgrade on the 5455?

[christheswiss]

Chris,

I have been torn between the 1940/45 and the 2200 for some time now. My true needs would be fullfilled by the smaller device, however, I have no definite info on weather the serial port at the bottom will accept GPS input (as I have on the 5450) or a keyboard. I know you have a 1940, any thoughts? :)

Thanks

[Chris Spera]

ok... If you're looking to use serial GPS with the 1940/45, forget it. The only way to use GPS at all with the 1940/45 is via BlueTooth.

The 1940/45 doesn't have a serial port, so this effects keyboards and other expansion devices using serial as well.

IR keyboards should work well with the 1940/45 provided you can get the port and transmitter to line up. The 1940/45's IR port is on the left side of the device.

I like my 1945. I like it a lot, despite its limitations. Again, it all depends on what you want to do and how you want to use the device. I do a lot with my devices, and therefore, moving to something like the 1900 permanently may require me to change that too drastically, and I don't know if I want to yet.

However, you may be fine with the changes. If you have a 5400, then get ready for a smaller screen, 8MB less RAM, and no built-in WI-FI. The 1900 series also cannot use any of the existing expansion sleeves.

If these are not that important to you, then you should be fine with the 1900.

The 2200 is a good choice also, but as it has a different form factor than the 3000 series, you have the same problem with expansion sleeves. It also has no built-in Wi-Fi, but if you could live without it in the 1940/45, then you should be able to here as well.

The 2200 has a full 64MB of accessible RAM, and a larger File Store than the 1940/45. The graphic processor is also supposed to be better on the 2200...

Let me know if you have any other questions...


Kind Regards,



Christopher Spera

[christheswiss]

Thanks for all the info, very helpful. I was also interested in the Fortuna Bluetooth GPS transmitter, which would solve the connection problem via serial.
One more question:
I sync and charge my 5450 with a USB cable, I therefore rarely use a standalone charger. Can the 1940 be charged via a USB cable ?

Thanks :D

[Fishie]

Actually Chris, my 2215 has 57.11MB of useable ram and the file store is a pathetic 3.81mb big.

Im verry happy with it for the rest and generally the machine is a lot faster then the 19xx from what ive witnessed tough.

[christheswiss]

Now you opened up a whole other can of worms, s p e e d ! :mrgreen:
The snappiest performer to this day is still my trusty old 3630, yes, could only load 32 Meg but compared to the 5450 does it ever react to screen tabs... Since I want similar speed I will have to go to Bestbuy and compare again side by side, when is it ever going to end !

[Mr_Skelington]

Is anyone going to answer my question? And why does Chris not open his own thread for his little problems.

[christheswiss]

Mr. Skelington,
Yes, your right, I did take up a couple of posts, I appologize. Anyway, I hope you get your answers to your problems nevertheless.

[Brad Adrian]

Is anyone going to answer my question...?
The upgrade is a bit costly, but if you load a ton of software onto your devices (like I do), it's worth the money. You can always use a large storage card instead and load your stuff onto it, but it's never as fast or convenient as internal storage.