More Windows Mobile 2003, Second Edition Upgrading Goodness from HP?

[Jonathon Watkins]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.ipaqabilities.com/reviews_articles/articles/0304-windows_mobile_2003_se.php' target='_blank'>http://www.ipaqabilities.com/review...ile_2003_se.php</a><br /><br /></div>IPAQabilities have a Windows Mobile 2003, Second Edition Overview, with a sting in the tail. They report the following: "My contact at HP has informed me that HP will be releasing a ROM update for current iPAQ Pocket PC's from the H2200 series and up (H2200, H4100, H4300, H5100, and H5500 series). Even though I asked, there was no timeline given to me as to when we can expect the ROM updates to become available at HP's Support website.” So far so good, but……..<br /><br />”Yes, that means the H1900, H3600, H3700, H3800, H3900, and H5400 series are being left out since these are not current models. This will quite potentially upset owners of those iPAQ's, especially the one's looking forward to these enhancements provided by Microsoft. Even though the H193x and H194x are current models, they are being left out because of memory limitations on its ROM. Furthermore, future iPAQ Pocket PC's that will get released by HP will ship with Windows Mobile 2003, Second Edition pre-installed.” Note that this is not currently official, but it does not look good. :|<br /><br />Is this more OEMs testing the water, or a worrying sign of things to come? First Toshiba, then Dell and now HP are leaving their users without an upgrade path for really very recent devices. If there is not enough Flash ROM available then that’s one thing, but there is enough for a lot of these devices that are not going to be supported. These are *Pocket PCs* we’re talking about here. :roll: They are designed and marketed to be upgradeable. PPC2003 was faster and more stable than PPC2002 for me, and like most of you, I was looking forward to the enhancements of PPC2003SE. Toshiba learned, will Dell & HP learn it time as well? :?: It's not like we want these for free for slightly older devices. We are willing to pay a reasonable fee for the upgrade - it's only fair.<br /><br />Let’s hope that there is still time to change the manufacturer’s minds about this. :?

[c38b2]

By now I'm quite sick of your (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=26274) griping (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=229516#229516) about OEMs not providing upgrades. I think this site sums up my opinons nicely:

http://www.thepdaguy.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=51

[Zensbikeshop]

I may be wrong... but I don't think I've ever seen a PPC advertsied with OS Upgrade as a USP.

I think expecting upgrades for 3600 series is ridiculous! That's a 3 year old PDA.

The 1900 series has too small a ROM so there can't be an upgrade for those.

I think 3900 and 5400 should be supported but at the end of the HP are in business to make money - they have a responsibility to their share holders to do so and as such they need to sell new PDAs not extend the life of old ones.

I think some people need to be a little more realistic. You weren't promised OS upgrades when you bought your PPC so if you get one view it as the bonus that it is.

[Jonathon Watkins]

By now I'm quite sick of your (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=26274) griping (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=229516#229516) about OEMs not providing upgrades. I think this site sums up my opinons nicely:

http://www.thepdaguy.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=51

Thank you for your kind comments. 8)

Actually I think that the article you cite agrees with what I'm saying: "

There's been lots of debate over whether the OEMs that make and sell Pocket PCs should offer operating system upgrades to their customers. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that they shouldn't have to but that they should if they are customer focussed.


I'm just reporting that many users are asking their Manufactures to support them. Manufactures that do will have the change to show that they are customer focused - and will get repeat business.

[c38b2]

Actually I think that the article you cite agrees with what I'm saying
The article also mentions that it is the benevolence of the OEMs, nothing else, that allows people to upgrade:
When I buy my Pocket PCs, I don't expect operating system upgrades. Just because a new operating system is available it doesn't make my current device any less useful. Sure, there might be better ways to do things but your current devcie is still working isn't it?

[Jonathon Watkins]

The article also mentions that it is the benevolence of the OEMs, nothing else, that allows people to upgrade

Yes, and it's my 'benevolence' of buying their units, expecting decent customer service that keeps them in business.

Capitalism - choices - responding to customer demands etc.

There is nothing unreasonable in asking for an upgrade we are willing to pay for. Especially for current systems like the Dell X5 and X3.

[Jonathon Watkins]

I may be wrong... but I don't think I've ever seen a PPC advertsied with OS Upgrade as a USP.

They are sold with Flash ROM and are touted as being upgradable. It's not a Unique Selling Point beucase ALL PPCs can do this.

I think expecting upgrades for 3600 series is ridiculous! That's a 3 year old PDA.

I'm not expecing it, I'm reporting it that another site have posted a story about it.

1900 series has too small a ROM so there can't be an upgrade for those.

As I said in my original post.

I think some people need to be a little more realistic. You weren't promised OS upgrades when you bought your PPC so if you get one view it as the bonus that it is.

I don't expect a free upgrade. I paid Dell £22.33 for the PPC2003 upgrade. I'm willing to pay to cover the costs. Especially for a current unit. Good customer service is not a bonus - it decides if you get repeat customers!

[Jaap van Ees]

I find this very disturbing. Sure, I can understand that this is relatively new technology. With the current pace of innovation, new models are being released with extremely short intervals. Of course, money still has to be made. Apparently this is being done by, amongst other things, I am sure, cutting back on the support for devices less than 18 months old.

Yes, I had to pay for the upgrade to WM2003: the iPaq 5450 hit the Dutch market after the free upgrade deadline. I didn't like it, but € 75 is still a lot less than €700 for a newer device. Now it seems I can't even buy :evil: the WM2003SE upgrade for my iPaq 5450.

This can only mean one thing: with upgrade paths this short, I will have to think hard before spending another euro on this technology. Well, not on HP products, at least. I have been checking the Toshiba E800 though ....

[Zack Mahdavi]

I don't think we can expect PDA companies to provide Operating System upgrades for PDAs after it has been purchased, not even for current PDA models. It's definitely nice when a company does, but it's absolutely not required.

I guess this comes from my experience with Palm. My first Palm came with OS 3.5, but then OS 4 came out. Palm didn't upgrade any existing models and I only bundled it with their new handhelds. Of course, then OS 5 came out, but that was a completely different operating system architecture, so no one could have expected their handhelds to be upgradeable.

Anyway, that's my 2 cents...

[Jonathon Watkins]

This can only mean one thing: with upgrade paths this short, I will have to think hard before spending another euro on this technology. Well, not on HP products, at least. I have been checking the Toshiba E800 though ....

Totaly agree.

I'm planning to get a new VGA unit myself anyway, but I will be passing the X5 onto someone else, who could use the extra capability. The X5 and a lot of these units are more than capable of running PPC2003SE.

This is not charity - it is good business sense.

[dorelse]

Goodness from HP?

Absolutely.

[Jonathon Watkins]

My first Palm came with OS 3.5, but then OS 4 came out. Palm didn't upgrade any existing models and I only bundled it with their new handhelds.

Not true. I had a Palm IIIc, which came OS 3.5 as you say. However when OS 4 was released, I paid Palm £28.79 and upgraded it to OS 4.

Again - fair and reasonable. They offer an upgrade, I pay for it.

[DualShock]

I still don't get the part of the 1940 series having a smaller ROM than the 2200 series. They both have 32 MB ROM's. But then again, the 1940 has a larger iPAQ File Store from what I understand. Personally, I think I'd rather have WM2003SE than a larger File Store.

[thendless]

I still don't get the part of the 1940 series having a smaller ROM than the 2200 series. They both have 32 MB ROM's. But then again, the 1940 has a larger iPAQ File Store from what I understand. Personally, I think I'd rather have WM2003SE than a larger File Store.

Me either. People keep saying there is not enough memory in the 1900 series, the 1910 and 1930/35 series I understand, but the 1940 series has the same amount of ROM and even more File Store memory than the 2210 series. I'm confused, can anyone explain the diff from the 1940 and 2210 series in terms of memory then?

[meroupow]

I have more respect for my 4350 than for my desktop pc.
this is why i would like to be able to choose my OS between Windows, linux or whatever.
Choose the hardware like and then install the OS i think is the best.
if it is possible for PCs i want it for PPCs.
2 years ago nobody imagined that you could hold so much power wirelessly in your hand.
I see ppcs closing up with pcs.
is it unrealistic?
You just bought your Longhorn sd card. you format the rom. you boot the ppc. "No system, please insert a bootable disk". you insert longhorn reduced version sd card. "installing...". Reboot. "Windows Starting..."

separating hardware and software completely. i could go from palm to wm2003 or whatever gnustuff.

I think it will be like this soon. :lol:

[Aerestis]

If it's expensive, the upgraded device should be paid for by the user of the device. There's absolutely no reason that the upgrade should be free, unless for some reason it really should be. I think an upgrade to make alarms work, for example, should be free. However I'm sure that it's also hardware related. Anyhow, I don't like it when I see people expecting an upgrade for free. You never expect anything free from a company who sold you a device to make money off of you. It's entirely fair that they expect money for their work, in my opinion. But if you're willing to pay, and it is a viable option to upgrade, then I think you should be aloud to.

I hope it becomes available for the people who are willing to pay (If it would function properly on their device), I think that would be cool.

[Zack Mahdavi]

My first Palm came with OS 3.5, but then OS 4 came out. Palm didn't upgrade any existing models and I only bundled it with their new handhelds.

Not true. I had a Palm IIIc, which came OS 3.5 as you say. However when OS 4 was released, I paid Palm £28.79 and upgraded it to OS 4.

Again - fair and reasonable. They offer an upgrade, I pay for it.

Oh really? Sorry.. I guess my Palm IIIxe wasn't upgradeable. I ended up buying an m505 just to stay current with the OS.

[mkemper]

1900 series has too small a ROM so there can't be an upgrade for those.

As I said in my original post.

Sorry, but you are wrong. The IPAQ 1940 has 32 MB of ROM, as much as a 2210. And in fact, Toshiba is able to squeeze WM2003SE into 16 MB.

If you don't like HPs policy, then sign the online petition http://www.petitiononline.com/IPAQ1940
There are 100 signatures now!

Michael

[arebelspy]

http://www.petitiononline.com/IPAQ1940

mkemper has it right on the money - there is PLENTY of ROM space in the iPAQ 1945s (same as 2210s and more than Toshibas) and everyone should sign the petition! :D

-arebelspy

[danesh]

I had mailed HP support asking them to provide the WM2003SE upgrade for ipaq 1940 and this is the reply I received.

We understand that you wish to have Windows Mobile 2003 second edition in your iPAQ. Please note that the iPAQ originally comes with a license for one operating system, any updates or upgrades will be purely at the discretion of Microsoft. If there are any updates in the form of service packs, then device specific updates will be released by HP consequently. If there are any operating system upgrades, then you should purchase the same, as and when they become available.

Does this mean that HP might be willing to offer an upgrade for the 1940, if we pay for it?

[dorelse]

Looks like the 1940 does have the space...does the WM2003 Premium vs. Professional play into it at all? (Besides being cheaper to purchase by the OEM's).

That seems to be all that's left as a difference...well, and the processor, but ARM support is ARM support, so that shouldn't be a factor either...

[gorkon280]

No one said that the upgrades should be free. But devices like the 3900, the 5400 and the 1900 series, are, again, not that old. No one expected the upgrade for free. What I don't get is that there are 100s of users out there that will PAY for this upgrade. HP, Toshiba and Dell are pretty much telling us they don't need/want are money unless we buy the shiny new PDA. With PDA's getting to be as powerful as desktops (they already are.....400 MHz and 64 MB of ram was state of the art not all that long ago.....only thing that is constrained is ROM/Hard Disk space....). Microsoft need to start treating Pocket PC's for what they have become...a pocket version of what we use everyday. Microsoft needs to get this to the point that users, if they so choose, can buy a OS upgrade FROM THEM and not from the OEM. If you think about it, OEM's have us over a barrel in this case. IN every other computer they sell besides pocket pc's, the user can upgrade or switch OS's easily. PPC's...it ain't so. PPC's also saddle the OEM as being the only source for OS upgrades and instead of dealing with the support costs and any even minimal development costs, they chose not to even offer us the chance of giving them more of our hard earned cash. I am starting to think a Symbian phone may be the way to go to replace my PPC and my cell phone...at least it should work. The crux of this issue is, like Window's itself, Windows Mobile 2003 is full of bugs (ie the ALARM bug and many other issues that just keep going on and on after every revision unfixed....). The only way Microsoft fixes these is through rom updates and upgrades. The only way to get them is from the OEM.

That said, given the situation, I would not expect a 3600 to be upgradeable. It's not even in the same league as the current list of upgradeable machines.

[alex_kac]

Considering there is a FAIR amount of work that needs to be done to get drivers, third party ROM apps, and lots more built for a specific device, I can understand why they may not want to offer new OS's on every device that CAN handle it. It takes them about 3 months of work for each device to get a new OS shippable. Especially one that makes large demands on new display drivers as WM2003 SE.

That being said...I would prefer seeing far more upgrades available than not. I think Dell is being irresponsible. I think HP far more responsible, though I think the 194x series should be upgradeable as well, without knowing all the facts.

But to me, unless there is a really good reason technically and business wise (like they only sold 50,000 x units and to break even on the dev needed for the upgrade would require 40,000 upgrades which they don't expect), there is little reason for mfgs to not upgrade.

[sponge]

Yea, I'm a 3900 user with no upgrading in the future, and I understand. Seriously, people are complaining because they aren't supporting a set of SIX devices, most aren't on the market! That's very easily over a year of work!! This complaining is getting pretty ridiculous.

[scargill]

The problem that I have with the whole thing, is that I purchased for £40, Windows Mobile 2003.
Now if there's major changes and so forth, I expect to have to pay that again to upgrade, but WM2003SE sounds more like a service pack to me, so I don't see why I should be missing out on the new features offered.
Remember, that the API hasn't changed much, so it shouldn't be ALOT of effort for HP to upgrade any WM2003 device to 2003SE

[JustinGTP]

Well, there must be more to this than only customers wanting updates. If I had bought an older Nissan Sentra, it would not look like the new 2004 Sentra, and I wouldn't just go complaining to Nissan when they wouldn't give me the new grill insert and the new 17" wheels for free now would I? There has to be a distinction between old and new, and quite frankly HP is doing that by having a cutoff between these models. They have to make money too, and they are doing this by making you buy a new model of Ipaq. If you don't like it, buy something else! It's business and I bet there is nothing you can do to change their decisions. Updating an old X5 and 3850 just doesn't make sense, they are too old and too big anyways. Get in with the new and out with the old! :D

[pepemosca]

I have a h5450... Is not fair! I want the WM2003SE :cry:

[sprawlgeek]

I have been in the IT profession for over 16 years. I am a VP of a Technology Firm. There is just one phrase for this that comes to mind. Planned obsolence. I bought a 3900 a year ago this time. For no upgrades to be offered is obscene. This is an embarrassment to all technology professionals. I have been deeply disappointed in in HP's handling of the transition and this echos my concerns. Dispite my love affair of ipaqs ( I have owned a 3670, 3760 and now my 3900). I will voice my disgust with the checkbook. I will be moving to the Toshiba. What a waste of such a great hardware design.

Ironically, I had been researching the IPAQ platform for some mobility applications for a client. It potentially could represent over 100 PDAs in a 2 year lifespan. HP are you listening?




Sprawlgeek.

[rock]

I think it's good. Making people adopt new technology is a must. I say anything over a year old should be forgotten.

THE FASTER WE BUY NEW HARDWARE, THE FASTER WE'LL GET BETTER HARDWARE.

[dmacburry2003]

*Looks down at his Pocket PC, then quietly walks over to the corner and cries.*

I'm so depressed... no upgrade... and I just spent all those $$$ to get my iPaq fixed...

*Continues crying.*

:cry: :cry: :cry:

[toxostoma]

I still don't get the part of the 1940 series having a smaller ROM than the 2200 series. They both have 32 MB ROM's. But then again, the 1940 has a larger iPAQ File Store from what I understand. Personally, I think I'd rather have WM2003SE than a larger File Store.

Me either. People keep saying there is not enough memory in the 1900 series, the 1910 and 1930/35 series I understand, but the 1940 series has the same amount of ROM and even more File Store memory than the 2210 series. I'm confused, can anyone explain the diff from the 1940 and 2210 series in terms of memory then?

I specifically paid the extra money for the 1940 over the 1930 because of the extra ROM. In most ways, the 1930 would have been sufficient for my needs. But I knew there would never be an OS update offered for it, both because of it's price but especially since it had 16 MB ROM. So, what do I get for the extra $100 dollars I paid? Besides a faster processor (which is nice but I'm not sure if it's essential for me...) I get screwed.

I'm so tired of companies doing people this way. :bad-words: For the love of all things good and pure HP, OFFER THE STINKING UPGRADE!

[Darius Wey]

I agree. I originally planned to purchase a 1930 until I saw that the 1940 had a whole lot more features that would at least keep it futureproofed for a few years (both in hardware and software upgradability). As far as I know, the 1940, 2210 and 4150 all have the same ROM size, and the fact that Toshiba are willing to offer it on a 16MB ROM size proves the ridiculous approach that HP are taking.

Second of all, why are HP taking so long to make an official public statement on WM2003SE? Toshiba announced their plans even before Microsoft previewed WM2003SE at MDC.

The way I see it - HP are putting a huge hole in their so-called 'respectable corporate image' and at the moment, Toshiba shines in many more ways than HP. A message to HP: come out with your plans and make all your iPAQ users happy by telling us what we want to hear! And as 'toxostoma' said, "for the love of all things good and pure HP, OFFER THE STINKING UPGRADE!"

I want my 1940 to enjoy the goodness that WM2003SE has to offer! :bad-words:

[Philip Colmer]

The 3600 didn't get the original 2003 upgrade - 2002 was the only OS upgrade offered for that device, so I'm not exactly surprised that HP aren't offering 2003SE for it.

--Philip

[Philip Colmer]

Having just bought an Axim X3i, I'm in the same boat as the other Axim owners that want the SE upgrade.

It is curious to see the reluctance on the part of the manufacturers to provide the OS upgrades, though, and it does make you wonder what their thinking is on this matter.

If they provide the upgrade, it costs them money because they've got to test it against another device and it also costs them money because they are, in effect, making that device useful for longer and so customers won't want to upgrade.

If they don't provide the upgrade, they are saving money because they aren't doing the testing, but they are also potentially losing money because customers want the upgrade and if they don't get it, they'll buy a different brand next time.

Rock & hard place spring to mind :?

I guess I'm just glad I'm a consumer and not a manager faced with making these decisions :roll:

--Philip

[xyberfish]

I got an ASUS PDA would I get an upgrade as well?

[Rudolf]

I specifically paid the extra money for the 1940 over the 1930 because of the extra ROM. In most ways, the 1930 would have been sufficient for my needs. But I knew there would never be an OS update offered for it, both because of it's price but especially since it had 16 MB ROM. So, what do I get for the extra $100 dollars I paid? Besides a faster processor (which is nice but I'm not sure if it's essential for me...) I get screwed.

More nonvolatile storage memory, faster processor and bluetooth ?

[fairyliquidizer]

I guess this comes from my experience with Palm. My first Palm came with OS 3.5, but then OS 4 came out. Palm didn't upgrade any existing models and I only bundled it with their new handhelds. Of course, then OS 5 came out, but that was a completely different operating system architecture, so no one could have expected their handhelds to be upgradeable.

Anyway, that's my 2 cents...

I owned Palm devices from the Palmpilot, Palmpilot Pro (bought upgrade to Palm 3, effectively), Palm V, and Palm Vx.

When Palm OS 4 came out I bought the flash upgrade (so you could have upgraded if you had a flashable model). I resented it not being a free upgrade, but that was because I was used to free upgrades from Palm. However they were within there rights and I always got a lot of mileage out of my Palm PDAs.

As for supporting models, I think a fair update policy would be :

1. minor updates (and SEs) free or low cost
2. all current models: get free minor updates, and paid for major updates (new versions).
3. all last generation models: get paid for updates
4. earlier models are no supported
5. if an upgrade is not physically possible then tough luck
6. it is not unreasonable entry level/budget models may be excluded from non-essential updates.

Ultimately I think most of us would rather not pay but would rather pay than not get, hence 2 and 3 above. Moreover there comes a time when it's not viable to produce updates because a model is too old.

We need a model where a PDA gets a good life with quality support but eventually the model gets too old for updates.

The debate is really how long does it last and when should we pay. Personally I would be happy to pay $15-30 for SE and $50 for a full update.

Fairy

[fairyliquidizer]

I agree. I originally planned to purchase a 1930 until I saw that the 1940 had a whole lot more features that would at least keep it futureproofed for a few years (both in hardware and software upgradability). As far as I know, the 1940, 2210 and 4150 all have the same ROM size, and the fact that Toshiba are willing to offer it on a 16MB ROM size proves the ridiculous approach that HP are taking.


I have been pondering the reports that my 4150 (32Mb ROM) is getting the upgrade from HP but the (32Mb) ROM of the 1940 is too small for the update. Have none of the journos thought this a little strange. The update is either less than 32MB or greater than 32Mb. If less than it will fit both devices. If greater than it'll fit neither. Moreover the 4155 has to include drivers for it's wireless card and therefore should require a bigger update than the 1940. Go figure...

Fairy

[S0ylentK]

Can you imagine the stupidity of what I am seeing.
last week we were being told that we should be trying to upgrade our PC rather than dump them and buy a new machine and quiet rightly to but when it comes down to a device that is comparable it seams that message has not gotten trough.

Some people get these things handed to them as part of there job and relay don't know or care what they should to do with them (which is fine by me) but then there are others who have to save up to buy their machines.

Most of the PCs available in the shops came with XP can be upgraded to run Longhorn when it comes out (without upgrading the hardware), but if these were PocketPCs then we would be told that you couldn't by the upgrade if your machine is over a year old, just because someone thinks the MIGHT shift a few more boxes.

I am willing to pay £100 for my 3970 new OS, but don't think that I'm going to buy a new machine just because someone else doesn't value my machine a much as I do.

I still use my h3630 (OS 2002) and my 3970 (OS 2003) can do any thing that the currant machines can do so why do I need a new machine? because there will be software that wont run on any thing older than 2003SE.

I'm not expecting an upgrade for the 3630 but when I compare it to whats in the shops at the moment I think its just as good. In 4 years I would have expected there to have been so much more advance on the hardware side of things, OK so you dint get fluff inside the screen any more but when it comes to what the machine is capable of there is nothing the new machines can do that the 3630 cant. So you can see to be virtually told that my 3970 is out of date makes me more than a bit angry. I am going to keep using my 3970 until there is a machine out that is in real terms faster or can do more than what my 3630 can do.

[Jonathon Watkins]

As for supporting models, I think a fair update policy would be :

1. minor updates (and SEs) free or low cost
2. all current models: get free minor updates, and paid for major updates (new versions).
3. all last generation models: get paid for updates
4. earlier models are no supported
5. if an upgrade is not physically possible then tough luck
6. it is not unreasonable entry level/budget models may be excluded from non-essential updates.

Now that is an extremely sensible list. I totally agree -it's fair and reasonable. If this model was followed, then users with currect devices (Dell X5 or X3) as well a slightly older devices (HP 5400 19XX) would be fine.

As previously said, if PPC2003SE is essentially a service pack, then integrating it should not exactly be too difficult.

So, ironically, it looks like my next PPC may be a Toshiba (as they leaned from their earlier mistake) or possibly an Asus - depending on their support level in the future.

[Jonathon Watkins]

I think it's good. Making people adopt new technology is a must. I say anything over a year old should be forgotten.

THE FASTER WE BUY NEW HARDWARE, THE FASTER WE'LL GET BETTER HARDWARE.

Say Rock, would you mind sharing some of your fabulous wealth with us?

Most of us can't afford (and don't want) to get a new PDA every year. Why should we have to? These things are *designed* to be upgradeable.

If manufacturers offer me new hardware, like a VGA screen, then Yes, I'll upgrade. If a company tried to force me to upgrade purely to get an updated OS, then the actual result will be that I (and others) will not be buying from that manufactures again. Their choice, our choice etc.

[Kacey Green]

I still don't get the part of the 1940 series having a smaller ROM than the 2200 series. They both have 32 MB ROM's. But then again, the 1940 has a larger iPAQ File Store from what I understand. Personally, I think I'd rather have WM2003SE than a larger File Store.

Me either. People keep saying there is not enough memory in the 1900 series, the 1910 and 1930/35 series I understand, but the 1940 series has the same amount of ROM and even more File Store memory than the 2210 series. I'm confused, can anyone explain the diff from the 1940 and 2210 series in terms of memory then?

Dosen't that model run tho standard version of the os and not the premium?

[Jonathon Watkins]

They have to make money too, and they are doing this by making you buy a new model of Ipaq. If you don't like it, buy something else! It's business and I bet there is nothing you can do to change their decisions.

They make money because we buy their products. We buy their products partially because they support them with OS upgrades. If they don't support them, then we don't buy from them in future, exactly as you said. It's business, and in capitalism, the customer is king. If they aren't - the customers go elsewhere. I know there are a lot of unhappy Dell and HP customers at the moment who are seriously considering their next upgrade.

Arguing that there is nothing you can do is the council of despair. We are not sheep. We are making a reasonable request – to pay for an upgrade/extended service pack. It’s up to the manufacturers to respond.

Updating an old X5 and 3850 just doesn't make sense, they are too old and too big anyways. Get in with the new and out with the old! :D

Justin, Dell are still selling the X5, so it’s *not* too old. Personally I find it to be a very reasonable size & shape etc.

I will get a new device when there is a compelling reason to do so. Refusing a software upgrade for current and very recent devices is not a compelling reason.

[orol]

My first Palm came with OS 3.5, but then OS 4 came out. Palm didn't upgrade any existing models and I only bundled it with their new handhelds.

Not true. I had a Palm IIIc, which came OS 3.5 as you say. However when OS 4 was released, I paid Palm £28.79 and upgraded it to OS 4.

Again - fair and reasonable. They offer an upgrade, I pay for it.

Oh really? Sorry.. I guess my Palm IIIxe wasn't upgradeable. I ended up buying an m505 just to stay current with the OS.

palm IIIxe was upgradable to palm os 4.1. for sure. I know it because I had one, a long time ago :-)

[ctitanic]

thepdaguy wrote:
When I buy my Pocket PCs, I don't expect operating system upgrades.



Well I do.

[ctitanic]

I think that our pocket pcs are not cheap and that we are the market. We are the one who say what we want to see and what we are willing to pay, do not forget about it. Toshiba did not offer wm2k3 to e740 owners but now it was the first one to say that this update will be free for current users of wm2k3. This means to me one thing many users have voted with their pocket in the same way I did selling my e740, buying a different brand, and no recommending anyone to buy a Toshiba product in anywhere I can. And this is the only language that OEMs understand clearly. 0X

[jffcurt]

Well HP, if you are saying that my 5400 is obsolete after only owning slightly over a year I guess I'll just have to buy a new device to stay updated.........a MOTOROLA MX!! When are they coming out??????

[bnycastro]

IMHO we customers are entitled to support and upgrades. That being said I hope all the companies offer the win mobile 2003 se to all current models for minimal fee or even better free :-) I'm waiting for wm2003se am also waiting for new hardware innovations, and of course the fix to the alarms:roll:!!!

Bny Castro

May the FORCE Be With You...

[goaliemn]

you all have to realize this may not be HP's choice. Microsoft could be charging them per device for the upgrade, or they could "encourage" them all to charge the same price for the upgrade. based on the number of Ipaqs out there, even if its afew bucks a piece (which I highly doubt its that little) there is no way you can expect free upgrades.

I have a Tivo Generation 1. Its hit the end of what they can do with it software wise. It doesn't have the processor or memory to handle any more features. Thats whats happening with some of the older Ipaqs. You can't expect them to add more features, but try to cram it into the same little bits of memory.

[markcrump]

The thing that gets me is MS has made these features available, but I have to wait for Dell to decide if I'm going to use them. I didn't see anyone having to wait for Dell to decide if they could use Win98SE, or 2k, or XP on their computers.

How is it that we, as PPC users, are so chained into the OEM for these updates? If there's a standard they have to follow from MS to build the updates, why can't MS just handle the patches like they do for the Desktop OS's?

At $4-500 a whack, these arent' gadgets that consumers can upgrade every year, especially in a crap economy. As an X5 Advanced owner, I'd expect Dell to provide an update for the simple reason that you can still buy the device!

[Jonathon Watkins]

you all have to realize this may not be HP's choice. Microsoft could be charging them per device for the upgrade, or they could "encourage" them all to charge the same price for the upgrade. based on the number of Ipaqs out there, even if its afew bucks a piece (which I highly doubt its that little) there is no way you can expect free upgrades.

Goaliemn, we are *not* asking for a free upgrade. We are perfectly prepared to pay a reasonable fee. The problem is that we are not being give *any* option to upgrade.

[goaliemn]

How is it that we, as PPC users, are so chained into the OEM for these updates? If there's a standard they have to follow from MS to build the updates, why can't MS just handle the patches like they do for the Desktop OS's?


The ROMS are proprietary for each manufacturer. Plus, I'm sure each manufacturer may use different chipsets for some of the perhiperals (bluetooth, wifi, etc..) bundled with the unit.

[Jason Lee]

I really don't see any problem with what hp is doing. The 3900 is old. The 1900 and 5400 may be a bit iffy...
Now everyone is praising toshiba for offering the upgrade... :!: :?:
WHat??!
Where is the upgrade for the 755? 740? 330? 310? Oh they are only offering it on current models the 800 and 400.... Oh wait.. isn't that what hp is doing?

hey it's the price you pay for technology. You buy it and a week later it's half price and there is something better out. It may not be right but that's the way it is.

I bought a new laptop and 2 months later they are shipping it with 3 times the front side bus speed and a HT processor.... I just spent $3000 on hardware that is old in 2 months. yeah it sux but what do ya do? Life is alot happier if you don't complain all the time. So put on a happy face! :mrgreen:

[Icebaron]

How is it that we, as PPC users, are so chained into the OEM for these updates? If there's a standard they have to follow from MS to build the updates, why can't MS just handle the patches like they do for the Desktop OS's?


The ROMS are proprietary for each manufacturer. Plus, I'm sure each manufacturer may use different chipsets for some of the perhiperals (bluetooth, wifi, etc..) bundled with the unit.

Yeah, because all desktops use the same chipsets and peripherals. :roll: Sorry but this argument just doesn't hold water. Windows XP has excellent hardware support and driver detection, it would be very reasonable to have a ROM-flashing utility that detects what hardware is present, downloads the latest drivers, and builds a custom ROM. Maybe it wouldn't have all the whizbang features of the proprietary ROM build (custom software and the like), but I don't think it's unreasonable to ask microsoft to provide us an upgrade option when the OEM's don't. Linux volunteers, often with no support from the hardware manufacturers, manage to reverse-engineer driver protocols enough that they are able to make builds that will run on many different pieces of PDA hardware. If volunteers can do it, I'd think the largest software company in the world could manage.

[DarkHelmet]

Ok everyone, hurry home, and throw out every piece of technology you have because today, a new version of your tech has been released. Better yet, go home and set fire to everything you own. I urge evryone to immediately drive their cars, regardless of age, into the nearest highway abutement - completely demolishing them.

In this way, we can rebuild our world in the image of today - quickly, and without burdening any manufacturer with the need to support anything - ever. By the way, tomorrow, I will be releasing a product that will make you want to junk everything you buy today.

- Here's the reality check - it's reasonable for HP to offer an upgrade for a FEE to it's customers. No one (except for idiots & children) expects a free ride. My 3955 is 15 months old - it has WM2003 on it - I paid for it & I paid for the upgrade. Is it unfair to expect HP to "invest" in making the "upgrade" available? I don't think so.

So HP - do the right thing...

[ctitanic]

We are missing one point I believe. Could be that those devices can't be upgrade for some technical reasons. If this is the case HP should let users know about these reasons.

I believe that the case in the 39xx and h54xx is the same: pxa250 ;) and that was the case with the old Toshiba e740. Those processor were very bugy and they are trying to get rid of those devices using this processor.

[goaliemn]

The ROMS are proprietary for each manufacturer. Plus, I'm sure each manufacturer may use different chipsets for some of the perhiperals (bluetooth, wifi, etc..) bundled with the unit.

Yeah, because all desktops use the same chipsets and peripherals. :roll: Sorry but this argument just doesn't hold water. Windows XP has excellent hardware support and driver detection, it would be very reasonable to have a ROM-flashing utility that detects what hardware is present, downloads the latest drivers, and builds a custom ROM.

If they started distributing ROM upgrades on 512MB flash cards, perhapse. Yes, XP has driver/hardware detection, but you also have at least 1 CD full of compressed drivers and such for it to work with. Remember, non-techie people don't want a complex installation. They want point-and-click. I think it would be expensive to make a "techie install" available for the limited market that would use it.

Plus, some companies would probably object to having their "proprietary drivers" released on a roll-your-own custom rom installer. Microsoft would have to get permission from all the hardware companies. If one says no, it pretty much derails it. It would almost have to be all or none. Otherwise, you'd be leaving people out who would be forced to go with a "default" install provided by the company.

Remember, the hard drive that your computer uses is more than likely standard IDE. You'd have to have information on every single manufacturers ROM setup and how they store/encrypt/compress information into their little bundles of joy we call PocketPCs

[markcrump]

The ROMS are proprietary for each manufacturer. Plus, I'm sure each manufacturer may use different chipsets for some of the perhiperals (bluetooth, wifi, etc..) bundled with the unit.

Firstly, most handhelds don't have the bluetooth, wifi, and even then most of them are at least based off the same chipsets (Prism for wifi). Also, I don't think that Dell, HP and Toshiba each re-invented the wheel when they decided how to do their ROM upgrades.

The point I'm getting at is there are features I want in the upgrade, but I'm being told by Dell I can't have them. The IE improvements and the Landscape mode are important to me. The big "feature" to the Axim Advanced was all this ROM space for upgrades. So, I got the upgrade for WM2k3, but that's the end of the road? I don't think so, and not for a device still in production.

Where HP has many, many legacy devices, I can see where they have to draw the line and say "these aren't the ones we can upgrade". I was accepting of the fact that I couldn't get WM2k3 on my 3700, and would still be using it if the battery hadn't died.

I'm not walking away from my X5, but you can bet that my next PDA purchase will go to someone who does support this incremental upgrade.

[Icebaron]

If they started distributing ROM upgrades on 512MB flash cards, perhapse. Yes, XP has driver/hardware detection, but you also have at least 1 CD full of compressed drivers and such for it to work with. Remember, non-techie people don't want a complex installation. They want point-and-click. I think it would be expensive to make a "techie install" available for the limited market that would use it.

Plus, some companies would probably object to having their "proprietary drivers" released on a roll-your-own custom rom installer. Microsoft would have to get permission from all the hardware companies. If one says no, it pretty much derails it. It would almost have to be all or none. Otherwise, you'd be leaving people out who would be forced to go with a "default" install provided by the company.

Remember, the hard drive that your computer uses is more than likely standard IDE. You'd have to have information on every single manufacturers ROM setup and how they store/encrypt/compress information into their little bundles of joy we call PocketPCs

The ROM upgrade could be on a CD just as it is now... an app runs on the device, detects what hardware is required, sends the info back to the PC via activesync, and the PC builds the ROM. Unless things have changed a lot since last time I did it, ROM updates still require a PC running activesync.

As far as the driver permission issue, you're talking about the largest and most powerful software company EVER here. Do you really think someone is going to risk pissing off microsoft by not letting them distribute drivers? MS delivers drivers for nearly every type of pc hardware to ever exist with its windows XP CDs, because of this very fact. I fail to see how the PDA market would be any different. Most of the software drivers in PDAs are NOT written by the PDA OEMs, they are written by the chipset manufacturers. If the chipset makers allow HP to distribute their drivers, why wouldn't they allow M$ to do so?

And as far as your hard drive quip, the point you were trying to make is that PC hardware is much more standard than PDA hardware. Give me a break. There are only a few processors and a few main peripheral chipsets that are used in PDAs. XP supports literally hundreds of type of network cards alone. Oh, and my PC doesn't use an IDE hard drive, it uses SCSI. XP also supports hard drives using firewire, usb, multiple versions of the ATA stanard (above and beyond your simple IDE example), SATA, RAID arrays, etc etc etc. If anything, it should be WORLDS easier to provide a generic OS install for PDAs, because the amount of available hardware is vastly less. The real reason they aren't doing it because Microsoft doesn't really care about the platform all that much. When PDAs start helping M$ perpetuate its stranglehold on the market, I guarantee the support available for them will skyrocket.

[possmann]

I really wish we could get to a state when I buy a PPC device like I buy a computer desktop... I can configure it with different options, Bluetooth, more or less memory etc... rather than be locked into something vendor specific that will expire rather than allow me to update it - as long as my device meets the system requirements.

I don't want the vendor to tweak the OS to their specific desires. When an upgrade like this is availible I want to go to the source: MS and find out what my system requirements are. Kinda like picking up a Windows XP OS box and determining if I have the hardware requirements on my desktop PC to upgrade from an earlier version of Windows.

Why the difference? If I have the memory it needs and the processing speed - theoretically.... what is all the hub-bub about? It would be great if we could click on a download, pay some bucks for the upgrade (again like a desktop OS upgrade, but not taht much! :D ) and then upgrade our devices. Why do we have to wait for the vendor to "test" everything out? Unless, of course, the vendor did something to the OS specific to a PPC model series... I just don't get it.

How much does each vendor, HP, Dell etc... have to do in order to make Windows Mobile 2003 run on their devices? What is so damned special? Too bad they can't follow the same JIT model fpr PPC devices that they do for their desktop devices... or maybe they can and just don't think it's that profitable so they don't????
:?

[goaliemn]

As far as the driver permission issue, you're talking about the largest and most powerful software company EVER here. Do you really think someone is going to risk pissing off microsoft by not letting them distribute drivers? MS delivers drivers for nearly every type of pc hardware to ever exist with its windows XP CDs, because of this very fact. I fail to see how the PDA market would be any different. Most of the software drivers in PDAs are NOT written by the PDA OEMs, they are written by the chipset manufacturers. If the chipset makers allow HP to distribute their drivers, why wouldn't they allow M$ to do so?

They would have to be in an "open" format, or they'd have to provide multiple copies for each different manufacturer. So many manufacturers are scared of people using their drivers for other than intended purposes. I run Linux and other forms of Unix at work and home. There are companies that refuse to release open drivers for Linux/Unix even tho its a huge market base for their products. Companies that have done that have seen sales go up, but still many want to keep them closed. I think you could run into similar things here. There are people that have loaded Linux on Ipaqs and some companies, for some reason, want to keep the usefulness of their products away from other O/S's.

Providing them to HP, they are relatively assured their drivers won't be "misused"


And as far as your hard drive quip, the point you were trying to make is that PC hardware is much more standard than PDA hardware. Give me a break. There are only a few processors and a few main peripheral chipsets that are used in PDAs. XP supports literally hundreds of type of network cards alone.

I agree. The biggest downfall for the PocketPc's is the ROMS don't use a standard loading process. Microsoft may not even have access to some of the loading processes. The ROMs and processors are generic. Getting the data into the ROMs may be different. Again, see above. They don't want that information "released" into evil end user hands that may try to use their PDAs for something other than windows.

And my PC doesn't use an IDE hard drive, it uses SCSI. XP also supports hard drives using firewire, usb, multiple versions of the ATA stanard (above and beyond your simple IDE example), SATA, RAID arrays, etc etc etc.

I know. was basing that on "most" end users machines. Most use IDE or a derivitive.

[goaliemn]

How much does each vendor, HP, Dell etc... have to do in order to make Windows Mobile 2003 run on their devices? What is so damned special? Too bad they can't follow the same JIT model fpr PPC devices that they do for their desktop devices... or maybe they can and just don't think it's that profitable so they don't????
:?

It keeps ya coming back for upgrades. Nuff said. Proprietary rom loading, or other things that the device looks for to make sure you bought the update from them.

They're just following Microsofts lead on the PC side.. Charge for upgrades. People will keep opening their checkbooks to have the latest and greatest, even if they don't need it. I;m not saying its the case this time (haven't really looked at the upgrade too much. Mine does what I want. Dunno if I'l upgrade), but I know my parents were talked into an XP upgrade from 98. All they do is check email and occasionally surf the web. They went to a store and the clerk made them feel essentially stupid for not having the latest, and after memory and hard drive upgrades, they are running XP.

[Icebaron]

They would have to be in an "open" format, or they'd have to provide multiple copies for each different manufacturer. So many manufacturers are scared of people using their drivers for other than intended purposes.
(snip)
Providing them to HP, they are relatively assured their drivers won't be "misused"


Why would they have to be distributed as source, or open? Again, MS distributes all of those drivers as binaries for XP, why would PPC be any different?


The biggest downfall for the PocketPc's is the ROMS don't use a standard loading process. Microsoft may not even have access to some of the loading processes.


I have yet to see any evidence that this is true, but I still don't think Microsoft would have much trouble convincing companies to give them information on these loading processes. Again, it could all be handled in binary-only form and keep it out of the hands of user.

Like I've said before, the real reason here is that Microsoft doesn't want to. The only thing stopping them from providing a one-rom-fits-all solution, is the fact that Microsoft policy says basically "we don't want to be bothered with it." It's this complete lack of interest in the needs of the customer that has me anxiously awaiting a company which will release a linux-based PDA with hardware that's on par with what I've seen from the current crop of PDA manufacturers. If I bought a Zaurus today, I wouldn't have to sit around anxiously wondering whether Sharp would be providing software updates, because I know that the community will do so. There's no toshiba-esque flip-flopping in open source; you know that updates will be available if more than a few technically oriented users want them, because they'll code them themselves!

[possmann]

I never said I expected the upgrade to be free - I just want to know why I have to wait for the hardware vendor to release the upgrade - or even choose to release an upgrade. It should not be up to the hardware vendor to make the decision. It should be up to the consumer to mae the decision based on system requirements issued by the OS vendor - kinda like any software vendor.

I really think it's a ploy to continue purchasing devices. If they don't do something special to the ROM or how things load, then they loose the control and potential profit from bleeding edgers who want to stay current with OS upgrades...

I don't want to have to rely on the vendor to determine if the upgrade is compatible. I want to make that decision myself based on the system requirements provided by MS and know what my PPC device configuration.

Afterall - I think that is what MS is ultimately pushing for...

[dhettel]

Hmm How much profit does HP make selling a $200 device with a 6 month lifespans?

How much profit does HP make selling a $400 device with a 8 month lifespan?

How much profit does HP make selling a $600 device with a 16 month lifespan?

Does customer satisfaction have a value?

Some would have us believe that HP could not make any profit with a $50.00, or $100.00 ROM upgrade. That their is more profit in selling a $200.00 device with a new ROM every 6 months.

I say there are development cost in designing new hardware, in writing new driver code. In putting together a new ROM.

Somehow things have got turn around, most people seem to think the power is in the hardware. The power is in the code! 0X

We are now at the point, where the hardware is NOT being tested adequately before it is released. And the cure is not a patch, but to replace the hardware.

I'm sorry but as an adult, no one can convince me that Windows Mobile was adequately tested. If it was we would not have a problem where after x number of soft resets you can no longer ActiveSync! That is a problem IMHO, I paid to upgrade my 3970 and my 5455 to Windows Mobile 2003 to expect it to work at a minimum as well as PocketPC 2002 does not seem unreasonable to me. Windows Mobile 2003 has lots of bugs. That is a fact of life :devilboy: To be able to ActiveSync and set an alarm that will work all the time, every time, should be the minimum anyone is willing to accept.

Anyone happen to notice that PocketPC 2002 had EUU? Anyone remember EUU1, EUU2, EUU3? Anyone notice that Windows Mobile 2003 has had ZERO EUU? Microsoft has developed them, they are in newer builds. But what about the hardware out their? :devilboy: Where are the EUU for it?

[Jaap van Ees]

I never said I expected the upgrade to be free - I just want to know why I have to wait for the hardware vendor to release the upgrade - or even choose to release an upgrade. It should not be up to the hardware vendor to make the decision. It should be up to the consumer to mae the decision based on system requirements issued by the OS vendor - kinda like any software vendor.

With you, possmann. I want to decide for myself whether I can and will upgrade or not, and I am willing to pay for that too. And I insist on a WM2003SE upgrade for my 5450!!!!! And if HP is going to be arrogant about this: to hell with them. :evil:

[Skoobouy]

I noticed the same thing as ctitatnic: the devices excluded by HP appear to have one thing in common: they lack the PXA-255 and the PXA-263. That would certainly explain the exclusion of the iPaq 5400's, which I agree seems strange.

For that reason, I think it is reasonable to suppose that there is a technical problem at work and not just marketing ploys. Of course, this does not completely take away the problem: even if WM2k3SE is only compatible with PXA-255 processors or later, it begs the question of why they developed it with an incompatibility.

I'm not too concerned, though. The biggest advantage of the upgrade seems to be special landscape support and VGA support. I think my 1935 will be quite happy without either.

[mv]

I can understand no upgrades for the older iPAQS... 1915, 3600 and 3700, even 3800, wich are older. But the 1940 is a current unit... that sucks!

[Jaap van Ees]

I can understand no upgrades for the older iPAQS... 1915, 3600 and 3700, even 3800, wich are older. But the 1940 is a current unit... that sucks!

Sign the petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/IPAQ1940/petition.html

[omikron.sk]

Yeah, because all desktops use the same chipsets and peripherals. :roll: Sorry but this argument just doesn't hold water.

You forget about one very important thing. Desktop PCs have a standards and are mostly compatible! PPCs are too young for something like this. Back in '80s the things didn't go so sweet on the Desktop PCs. It will take time for PPCs to get to the situation in which era current Desktops.
Also you cannot expect from a 32MB (or less) OS to be as universal as 1GB OS is. One day it will be...just not today.

[mv]

I really don't see any problem with what hp is doing. The 3900 is old. The 1900 and 5400 may be a bit iffy...
Now everyone is praising toshiba for offering the upgrade... :!: :?:
WHat??!
Where is the upgrade for the 755? 740? 330? 310? Oh they are only offering it on current models the 800 and 400.... Oh wait.. isn't that what hp is doing?

:mrgreen:

Yes... Toshiba is doing just the same. They should upgrade also the e750 and e350 models. The difference is, these are not current models as the 1940/30. I think at least current models should be upgraded.

[xendula]

I bought a H1945 last summer, and now, 7 months later, I can't even upgrade it?!? Good move, HP! This ppc is STILL being sold in stores!!

Oh, needless to say, I'll look elsewhere for my next ppc.

[rock]

I say we all buy OQO's and make this a problem of the past. ;)

[pradike]

If HP decides to "abandon" the 1900 and 2200 series, as well as the 3800 and 3900 series IPAQs, then I'll let my wallet do the talking and forever boycott HP products. No longer hard to do. I can probably convince a few others in my family and friend pool to do likewise.

Based on my inventory of PCs, PDAs, printers, and other hardware - my guess is that within 1-2 years they will be losing $4000-$5000 of my future business. Small potatoes, but if everyone in the same boat did it, they'd get the message.

It is so ridiculous for HP or any other vendor to keep doing this - all of them promote "upgradable" lingo in their marketing propoganda, and then they pull this kinda stuff. Those with 1900 and 2200 series should really be ticked!

[c38b2]

It is so ridiculous for HP or any other vendor to keep doing this - all of them promote "upgradable" lingo in their marketing propoganda, and then they pull this kinda stuff.
Maybe I just haven't been paying attention but when has upgradability been a marketed feature?

[ctmagnus]

If HP decides to "abandon" the 1900 and 2200 series

The 2200 series gets the upgrade. Only the 1900 series, 3000 series and 5400s aren't getting it. Or that's what I've read so far; things may change.

[pradike]

"Upgradable ROM" is in the product documentation and on the box of some of the IPAQs.

[S0ylentK]

How about this -

you take the amount that HP makes in profit from a new machine (a) (ie what it get for a machine when it sells it to its distributors minus the cost to produce the the thing)

then add the amount that Microsoft is charging you for a license (b) (per machine)

then add say 25%

(a + b ) * 25% = what you charge for an upgrade to legacy machines like the 19xx, 39xx & 54xx

what you end up with is a happy customer who will buy more from you not just another PDA and you make more profit with less inventory and cost.

P.S. this is just an idea and I know that it is overly simplified but its a start (epically as no one at the company's who produce PDA is going to push this as it might make money in a way that hasn't been thought up by the people who can make the decision to make it work).
P.P.S I'm still waiting for a new machine that can out preform what my 3630 can do before I'll upgrade my hardware, you can take the PXA's and @~@~@ them I want a real increase in performance not just doubling the clock speed and getting no where.

and just to leave you on a happy note (because my typing always sounds aggressive but I don't mean to be)

I got a free Orange SPV e200 upgrade and £30 off my next bill, and what have they done?

Produced a free upgrade for it. :)

uh-mm I think the days of being forced to buy from HP, Toshiba etc. might be over.

[rberry88]

This is one reason that I am glad I bought the two-year replacement plan from CompUSA when I bought my HP5455. I will now be able to get a brand new HP5555 *and* upgrade to WM2003SE when available. :lol: :lol:

rberry88

[Casio Collector]

I noticed the same thing as ctitatnic: the devices excluded by HP appear to have one thing in common: they lack the PXA-255 and the PXA-263. That would certainly explain the exclusion of the iPaq 5400's, which I agree seems strange.

Sligtly OT, but I have an H5450 with PXA-255. Does that mean that I would be able to install PPC2003SE for H5550?

[kleb]

I agree. The biggest downfall for the PocketPc's is the ROMS don't use a standard loading process. Microsoft may not even have access to some of the loading processes. The ROMs and processors are generic. Getting the data into the ROMs may be different. Again, see above. They don't want that information "released" into evil end user hands that may try to use their PDAs for something other than windows.



Getting the data onto the rom's doesn't seem to be that difficult. Go to www.handhelds.org. You can already easily set up a working gui of Linux with the choice of several distros on the 3xxx series. There is work being done on the 22xx series and 19xx series. The 54xx series is working relatively well, 55xx a little less well, but getting there(I know, I tried it).
The funny thing is that Compaq supplied(and, I think, still supports) the utility that reflashes the rom :wink: And they will reflash the unit free of charge if you mess up the rom(minus shipping).
I'm not sure of HP's stand after the merger, but I know there are guys from the Compaq dept still working on Linux.

Anyways, while Linux might not work well on some units, flashing on a new rom is possible on all Ipaq from 3xxx up(pretty sure at least as far back as 35xx)

-Kleb

[looxuser]

Ok i've installed this upgrade... but does anyone know how to rotate the screen please?

[Jason Lee]

Ok i've installed this upgrade... but does anyone know how to rotate the screen please?

The Second Edition update is not out yet.

What device did you update?

[looxuser]

Ipaq 2210... I assumed since this had been announced that the release of ipaq updates shortly afterwards was the wm2003se version upgrades?

A.

[Jason Lee]

The most recent upgrade to be released just fixes a bunch of problems the 1.00 rom had.
WM2003SE has just been given to manufactures by MS so it may be 2-6 months before we see the upgrades for out existing devices. :(

[pepemosca]

If I buy a h4150 now, will it have a free update?

Will this device be able to update?

[Jason Lee]

Currently the 4150 is one of the devices HP plans to upgrade. Plus it is their newest model. You are almost garanteed an updrage... Almost. They could change their mind at anytime but HP has been good with upgrades in the past. I am counting on the upgrade for my 2215. :D

Can't wait! *happy dance*

Oh, and free would be nice but i would not complain about $29.99 like the 2000 to 2002 update. Since it is an upgrade to second edition it may be free. i hope. ;)