iPAQ 5450 Windows Mobile 2003 Upgrade

[Jason Dunn]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.pocketpcminds.com/miraserver/article.php?id=138' target='_blank'>http://www.pocketpcminds.com/mirase...icle.php?id=138</a><br /><br /></div>Over at Pocket PC Minds, Corey has written up an article and used Spb Benchmark to get before and after benchmarks on his iPAQ 5450. Here's a blurb from his article:<br /><br />"Today I received my long awaited Windows Mobile 2003 upgrade for my iPAQ5455 from HP. I say long awaited because it was delayed no less than 4 times. Each time when I call HP I was told that they were wanted for the manufacturer to send them the discs. I find this hard to believed based on the fact that other Pocket PC manufacturers where sending out the upgrade for their devices. As I would have liked to have taken some screen shots of the upgrade I do not know how I could have done this. So I would have to describe it for you..."<br /><br />What I find really strange is that almost everything is slower than the 2002 OS...which is the exact opposite of what <a href="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/articles.php?action=expand,16788">I saw in this article</a>. :? Very strange!

[szamot]

in short my experiance with WM2003 on the 5450 was nothing short of a pain in the arse although I must say I am finally enjoying the ease of connecting to wireless networks effortlessly. However, to this day my alarms are sporadic at best. I guess the jury is stil out on this upgrade.

[rudolph]

Yea.... I'm finding PPC 2003 (yea... WM 2003... whaterver, I still like to call it PPC) has more slowdowns than 2002. Playing games or emulators is much faster (SNES roms are quite playable now), but it feels slower when you've got a couple of apps open and are switching around (yea, I got plenty program memory free).

[svenllr]

Mmm, well I don't run multiple apps at the same time. Never have. Since WinCE 1.0, it's had ill effects, so I just kill each app as I'm done with it. I will from time to time run two apps (eWallet and then another application, for example), but I've noticed no slow downs. In fact, I've noticed apps like VOCalendar are much faster as is PocketBible. Opening is faster is faster as well. Also, Pac Man was sooooooo choppy in PPC2002, I removed it from my install, but now, it runs as I remember it as a kid in the arcade of the 80's! PocketVCS runs great, too!

Overall, I'm very happy with the upgrade and the networking fixes alone are worth the $30 and wait. No more resets for WLAN driver, woo hoo!

For those with slower performance on PPC2003 then PPC2002, remember who makes this: Microsoft. Inform me of *any* OS upgrade that ran faster on existing hardware and then I'll be just as amazed as you from the slow down. :lol:

sven
____________________________
read the blog: svenrox.com

[Jason Dunn]

Inform me of *any* OS upgrade that ran faster on existing hardware and then I'll be just as amazed as you from the slow down. :lol:

Umm....did you read this article? (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/articles.php?action=expand,16788). :wink: In general I agree with you, but in my tests on the 3650, it was quite a bit faster at almoste everything. But that's also why I was confused with these results - things SHOULD go faster on the 5450 after the 2003 update...I'll have to wait until I get mine to weigh in with my opinion.

[jpjehu]

I think the upgrade is good, too. The main area of obvious improvement is the video capabilities. I can now watch Seinfeld episodes in almost perfectly smooth fashion with the WMP 9 - there's only just a second or less delay in the sound/video syncrinization (sp?). I've tested all of the current models with the same action video and the best (no delay at all) is the h1945, with the 2210 and 5555 tying almost exactly (with milisecond delay). I'm still hoping for a perfect processor and video match up! Either way, the 5455 is now good enough to last me for a few months until I can afford the 5555!

[Dave Beauvais]

I have also noticed that WM2003 on my upgraded h5455 seems very sluggish when compared to PPC 2002. The Start menu is slow, opening program folders from the Start menu is slow, and switching among multiple apps seems sluggish, as well. Overall, I'm very happy with the upgrade, but it was certainly not the speed boost I'd expected based on reviews posted prior to the official release.

FYI, I've removed the Bluetooth tray app from the Startup folder, disabled menu animation with a registry setting, and have allocated 32 MB of RAM for program memory. Tapping the start menu results in a two-stage event: First, an empty "box" pops open, and then it's filled with icons. In PPC 2002, this was nearly instantaneous.

There are some things which are much, much faster than they were in PPC2002, though. Pocket EverQuest Episode III is extremely smooth now. Under PPC2002, the framerate was a bit low and movement was slightly jerky. Under WM2003, it's a pleasure to play. I do notice that the new system-wide ClearType settings in WM2003 do some very nasty things to some of the text in Pocket EQ, though.

Map loading and searching in Mapopolis (http://www.mapopolis.com/) is also significantly faster than in PPC2002, though I've noticed some very annoying problems with it if I happen to turn off my PPC while Mapopolis is running.

Having used WM2003 for a couple days now, I have no desire to return to PPC 2002, though I am beginning to notice the annoying "features" now.

--Dave

[rudolph]

...Tapping the start menu results in a two-stage event: First, an empty "box" pops open, and then it's filled with icons. In PPC 2002, this was nearly instantaneous...Dave

Arg.. exactly... that annoyed me a lot when I first got WM2003... I was used to having the start menu load instantly. Same with File Explorer. I can see the folder/file items being drawn from top to bottom whenever I open file explorer. In PPC2002 it was instantaneous also, but I've got used to that and the start menu now.

Switching amongst apps really annoys me sometimes though. I switch to another app and it takes like 8-15 seconds to draw the application I'm switching to. I could be in PIE then push the contacts button, and it'll take it's time while it draws each contact in the list. The worst is in PIE when I type in an address in the address bar, sometimes it takes 10 seconds for the first character to show up.. then 5 seconds for the next one... then 5 for the next one... then 5 for the next one... etc... and then studdenly it speeds up. This happens even if I'm doing nothing in the background. It's often quicker to just soft reset and load pie again.... really annoying.

I do like it better than PPC 2002, and the speed increase in games/videos/emulators and PIE seems to load pages quicker for me. If only it didn't have these very annoying slow-downs.

[Kevin Daly]

The one area where WM2003 seems comprehensively slower than PPC2002 is file access or more specifically directory listing. I don't know whether this is a bug or a trade-off (because sometimes, well, you just have to make choices in software design). It's noting that the review under discussion concentrates in its tests more heavily on file access than most others have, so it's not that surprising that the results are disappointing by comparison.
The problems with alarms and memory wastage on reset are more unequivocally bugs, so hopefully they'll be resolved very soon with a firmware update (hint, hint), and one that also upgrades the Compact Framework to SP1.

For all that I think the balance of evidence indicates that WM2003 is a vastly underrated upgrade. 0X

[Doug Raeburn]

Interesting... I upgraded my 5455 two days ago, and I'm quite impressed with the overall speed. I haven't experienced any issues with the Start menu at all... it pops down in its entirety virtually instantly. Nor have I experienced any issues with delays in switching apps, or with entering addresses in PIE.

Which leads me to suspect that for the people who are experiencing such problems, a "less than perfectly compatible" application may be the culprit. I experienced one of these with my 2215... I had to remove Calligrapher because it caused the unit to fail to power on several times a day, and a soft reset was required. Phatware seemed to be content with blaming the unit, although I've since found several other 2210/2215 owners who have experienced the same problem. I haven't tried it with the 5455.

[GO-TRIBE]

Inform me of *any* OS upgrade that ran faster on existing hardware and then I'll be just as amazed as you from the slow down. :lol:
Well, Windows XP runs significantly faster on the same hardware vs. Windows 2000, and on many PCs (with 256MB or more of RAM) XP outperforms 9X and ME (98 3rd Ed.) as well. ;-)

[Bill Gunn]

Interesting... I upgraded my 5455 two days ago, and I'm quite impressed with the overall speed. I haven't experienced any issues with the Start menu at all... it pops down in its entirety virtually instantly. Nor have I experienced any issues with delays in switching apps, or with entering addresses in PIE.

Which leads me to suspect that for the people who are experiencing such problems, a "less than perfectly compatible" application may be the culprit. I experienced one of these with my 2215... I had to remove Calligrapher because it caused the unit to fail to power on several times a day, and a soft reset was required. Phatware seemed to be content with blaming the unit, although I've since found several other 2210/2215 owners who have experienced the same problem. I haven't tried it with the 5455.

Ditto. My 5455 is MUCH faster after the upgrade.

[jmz28]

Inform me of *any* OS upgrade that ran faster on existing hardware and then I'll be just as amazed as you from the slow down. :lol:

Umm....did you read this article? (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/articles.php?action=expand,16788). :wink: In general I agree with you, but in my tests on the 3650, it was quite a bit faster at almoste everything. But that's also why I was confused with these results - things SHOULD go faster on the 5450 after the 2003 update...I'll have to wait until I get mine to weigh in with my opinion.

i think its lame we cant get a hold of an upgrade with the 3600's, even if we up the memory.

[John Collins]

This might be fuzzy logic, but has anyone compared the benchmarks on an upgraded 5455 to those of a 5555, I would be curoius to see the results. It is my understanding that these two products are virtually the same except for the original OSs' and the extra memory ofthe 5555. I would think this would give a clear indicator of how well the upgrade works compared to the 'built in' Os of the 5555

[racerx]

This might be fuzzy logic, but has anyone compared the benchmarks on an upgraded 5455 to those of a 5555, I would be curoius to see the results. It is my understanding that these two products are virtually the same except for the original OSs' and the extra memory ofthe 5555. I would think this would give a clear indicator of how well the upgrade works compared to the 'built in' Os of the 5555

Well, there ar differences in the Processor - one uses the 250 processor, one uses the 255. Not sure what the actually differences mean, but it won't exactly be an apples-to-apples comparison. But it would be interesting to see the results.

[that_kid]

I don't know about number benchmarks but I compared my 5455 with ppc 2k3 with my 5555 and the 5555 is faster. Using pockettv I get up to 24.9fps with my 5455 and using the same program playing the same clip from the same card I get 30 fps on my 5555. Having said that I know that ppc2k3 is a step up for the 5455 cause that same clip played with ppc2k2 only played at 14.9fps. Also voip programs seem to work better on my 5555 than on my 5455. On my 5455 with sjphone I get alot of breakups in the audio, with my 5555 I don't have any problems. Since I'm running ppc2k3 on both I have to say that the additional gain comes from the cpu and maybe memory.

[ctmagnus]

The one area where WM2003 seems comprehensively slower than PPC2002 is file access or more specifically directory listing.

The worst is in PIE when I type in an address in the address bar, sometimes it takes 10 seconds for the first character to show up.. then 5 seconds for the next one... then 5 for the next one... then 5 for the next one... etc... and then studdenly it speeds up. This happens even if I'm doing nothing in the background. It's often quicker to just soft reset and load pie again.... really annoying.

PIE on WM2003 will actually go through all your favorites searching for a match (by filename) as you enter an address. This may be contributing to the above scenarios.

[Pocket PC Dubai]

Where I can find the Benchmark comparison between h5550 and the upgraded h5450?