Brighthand: iPAQ Sleeves Officially Dead

[Janak Parekh]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.brighthand.com/article/HP_Confirms_the_End_of_Sleeves_and_iPAQ_h5500' target='_blank'>http://www.brighthand.com/article/H..._and_iPAQ_h5500</a><br /><br /></div>We speculated on this a <a href="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=27674">few weeks ago</a>, but now Brighthand is reporting that HP has confirmed that their sleeve formfactor is officially dead.<br /><br /><i>"The h5500 is the last classic 100-pin connector model from HP...The company believes these peripherals are no longer necessary. Many of the functions they offered are now built into the handhelds, or are available as CompactFlash or SDIO cards. Also, sleeves were created at a time when the iPAQs were much larger than they are today...HP's Dev News also explicitly states that the h5500 series will be discontinued this year."</i><br /><br />It's sad to see an era go: my first Pocket PC was an iPAQ h3650, and I was the envy of my officemates when I got the hard-to-obtain PC card sleeve for it. :) It's still at home, along with a CF sleeve, a Silver Slider sleeve, a CF Plus sleeve, and many other accessories. I also bought an iPAQ h3870 because of, among other things, its sleeve compatibility. However, most of them are now stuck in a closet gathering dust -- the integrated functionalities of my i700 and e805 have rendered them moot.<br /><br />That said, I think there are still vertical applications for which the sleeve formfactor is incredibly convenient -- it allows size flexibility, which products like the <a href="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=28213">YellowJacket</a> use. On the other hand, companies could still build a "virtual" sleeve that wraps around a PDA and uses a CF slot to interface with the device. At the same time, without a standard formfactor specification, such sleeves are likely to be short-lived as PDAs keep evolving. What's your thoughts on the situation?

[joelevi]

On the other hand, companies could still build a "virtual" sleeve that wraps around a PDA and uses a CF slot to interface with the device. At the same time, without a standard formfactor specification, such sleeves are likely to be short-lived as PDAs keep evolving. What's your thoughts on the situation?

One word: Bluetooth

[OSUKid7]

Interesting, those were my first two PDAs too. Got a 3650 in early 2000, and am still using my 3870 that I got in 2002. I'm planning on getting a 4700 series, if they're as good as they sound. :D Still sad to see sleve support go. I'm suprised they can't change the iPaq design and still keep it sleevable.

[JonnoB]

One word: Bluetooth

Maybe - if BT ever increased to respectable speeds. Native bus interfaces will always have a place. That said, I did not care for the proprietary nature of iPaq sleeves.

[chris234]

it's interesting that you mention the YellowJacket. That device actually uses a CF serial card as it's interface to the iPaq, so really isn't dependant on the sleeve for anything other than a CF slot.

[joelevi]

One word: Bluetooth

Maybe - if BT ever increased to respectable speeds. Native bus interfaces will always have a place. That said, I did not care for the proprietary nature of iPaq sleeves.

What options did iPaq sleeves add? YellowJacket is cool. CF & PCMCIA sleeves had their place. What am I missing?

With WiFi built in, there goes your need for a WiFi card. SD/MMC capacities are at 1GB or more. SDIO enables a bunch of stuff (cameras, etc.).

Bluetooth built in allows you to (theoretically) sync, print, connect to modems, cell phones, keyboards, and even GPS receivers (some with maps stored inside of them).

Seems like the perfect solution...

Granted, saturation of devices is anything but ideal, and often Bluetooth doesn't work the way it's supposed to, but it's a step in the right direction. IMHO

[Jonathon Watkins]

On the other hand, companies could still build a "virtual" sleeve that wraps around a PDA and uses a CF slot to interface with the device. At the same time, without a standard formfactor specification, such sleeves are likely to be short-lived as PDAs keep evolving. What's your thoughts on the situation?

One word: Bluetooth

Has Ed been informed of the situation? :wink:

I agree that while it's sad to see the sleeve finally slide of this mortal coil, it's good that we now have PDAs that are so much smaller and better equipped. The sleeves showed that it was possible, even desirable to keep adding functionality to the early PPCs I'm not sure how you would deal with a PC card and a PDA these days. :?

[Jonathon Watkins]

One word: Bluetooth

Maybe - if BT ever increased to respectable speeds.

I think you may be interested to peruse the front page shortly. :wink:

[foldedspace]

The Bluetooth Special Interest Group today launched Enhanced Data Rate (EDR) Bluetooth, which permits speeds up to 2.1 Mbps—three times faster than the 721 kbps that current devices can manage—while maintaining backward compatibility. Simultaneously, chipmaker CSR (Cambridge Silicon Radio) announced silicon supporting the new data rate.

Your first question might be: Who needs faster Bluetooth? In introducing Bluetooth EDR today at the WiCon World show in Amsterdam, the Bluetooth SIG is arguing that the faster rates are becoming necessary. Users are now asking PCs to support higher numbers of Bluetooth peripherals simultaneously, including mice, keyboards, audio and telephony headsets, and mobile phones. Meanwhile, mobile users increasingly need to download large image files from their mobile-phone cameras. A 1-Mbyte image that takes 12 seconds to download over Bluetooth 1.2, the group points out, would take 4 seconds to download over Bluetooth EDR.

Moreover, the group emphasizes, Bluetooth EDR equates to a significant power-consumption advantage for mobile devices: Transferring a given amount of data in one-third as much time translates into a big reduction in battery-sucking radio activity.

Bluetooth EDR achieves the higher data rate by making a move from the GFSK (gaussian frequency shift keying) modulation used in Bluetooth 1.2 to PSK (phase shift keying). Existing Bluetooth devices will be able to work with EDR devices because the spec still uses GFSK for packet headers, uses the same process for link establishment, and sticks with the same packet timing and structure. In fact, the symbol-transmission rate of 1 megasymbol per second also remains unchanged. PSK simply allows each symbol in the packet payload to carry more bits.

[more]

http://www.reed-electronics.com/ednmag/article/CA424022?industryid=22043

[SeanH]

One word: Bluetooth
Maybe - if BT ever increased to respectable speeds. Native bus interfaces will always have a place. That said, I did not care for the proprietary nature of iPaq sleeves.
We have covered this before. Name one common sense peripheral that is needs more speed then Bluetooth offers today on a PDA with built in WiFi, Bluetooth and SDIO for storage.

Two that were mentioned in a past post were a VGA card and an external HD. I still believe those a foolish options for a PDA.

Another point is the new 2GB 4 bit SDIO card shipping in July will out perform any CF card shipping today.

Sean

[foldedspace]

BT wireless STEREO headphones, perhaps? :)

[Jonathon Watkins]

Cheers for that FoldedSpace. That was indeed what I was hiniting about (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=253618&sid=946c9aa382fb4f16959848df4d5f8d84).

Now, that's surely enough about Bluetooth in a thread about the death of iPAQ sleeves? :wink:

[SeanH]

BT wireless STEREO headphones, perhaps? :)
Bluetooth supports Stereo headphones today with three standards of audio.

Here are a couple of links.

http://www.macnn.com/news/22779
http://www.azzurri.com/go/bluetooth-stereo-headphone


Sean

[bbarker]

I never liked the original iPaq form factor or the sleeve concept. The first iPaq succeeded because of its superior speed and display. But requiring a bulky sleeve just to add memory was kludgy. I can see that for certain specialized applications the sleeve could be useful, but the same solutions could have been provided through a CF slot.

I'm glad to see the sleeves gone forever.

[Jeff Rutledge]

While I think the sleeves were a great innovation for their time, I think it's time for them to go. I have the PC Sleeve and Extended PC sleeve and they got their workouts in their time, but I can do everything that I need to do without them now.

Does anyone else see this as the last remnant of the old Compaq days? It's all HP now (even though the new HP devices are more like the old Compaq devices than they are the old HP devices :silly:).

[Ethan]

As another purchaser of the original 3650, I was pleasantly surprised to see sleeve support continue for as long as did - nearly four years and through 5 or so generations! (36x, 38x, 39x, 54x, 55x).

Especially after HP purchased Compaq I was stunned that they kept the sleeve support for a few more models. I was sure the sleeve would die with the Compaq name.

Ethan

[SeanH]

I also have the iPAQ 3650 and thought the sleeves would go away with time. I still use my iPAQ 3650 everyday with the sleeve I modified almost four years ago.

http://mbu.com/ipaq/

Sean

[joelevi]

One word: Bluetooth

Maybe - if BT ever increased to respectable speeds. Native bus interfaces will always have a place. That said, I did not care for the proprietary nature of iPaq sleeves.

Seems like the speed issue is being addressed: http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=253618&sid=3d6dc49ac6a9f0903abece1edd03d936

[ctmagnus]

I've only had a sleeve on my 5550 once since I got it (viewing pics from a camera), but I have to wonder if HP would possibly make an adapter to allow newer, smaller iPaqs to use the sleeves?

[SeanH]

You can buy an 8+ in 1 PCMCIA card for your laptop to read all the standards of memory cards that are out there. It would be great if someone created a device that combined an 8+ in 1 card with a Bluetooth profile to browse what’s on the card on the PDA over Bluetooth. At 720Kb it would take a few seconds to view an image but it beets having to hang a sleeve on the PDA.

Sean

[Gremmie]

I never liked the original iPaq form factor or the sleeve concept. The first iPaq succeeded because of its superior speed and display. But requiring a bulky sleeve just to add memory was kludgy. I can see that for certain specialized applications the sleeve could be useful, but the same solutions could have been provided through a CF slot.

I'm glad to see the sleeves gone forever.

The sleeves were also developed because CF accessories were uncommon. During those early days, CF modems, network cards, etc. were rare. PCMCIA was much more common and only needed a simple driver to accomidate. Usually, chipsets were similar so one driver set could serve several cards. I think the sleeves helped advance the PPCOS. Sure the Casio E200 or Jornada 548 could connect to the internet, but how could they without the accessory. Also, many pioneering accessories were developed as a sleeve (e.g., Nexicam)

[Pony99CA]

http://images.svpocketpc.com/iPAQ_Sleeve_Death.jpg
Steve

[Pony99CA]

We have covered this before. Name one common sense peripheral that is needs more speed then Bluetooth offers today on a PDA with built in WiFi, Bluetooth and SDIO for storage.
So you don't believe there are any peripherals that require Compact Flash even? Talk about not using common sense. What about MicroDrives? What about memory cards with more than 1 GB storage (or more than 2 GB if the card you mention below is released).

Two that were mentioned in a past post were a VGA card and an external HD. I still believe those a foolish options for a PDA.
And I still believe the most foolish thing is you saying how foolish those are when other people have said that they want them. :roll:

Another point is the new 2GB 4 bit SDIO card shipping in July will out perform any CF card shipping today.
First, which card are you talking about? If you mean the Pretec 2GB card (http://pocketnow.com/index.php?a=portal_detail&t=news&id=2395), that's not even an SD card; it's an MMC card. Yes, it should fit in an SD slot, but it's still not SD.

Second, take a guess what the price of one will be. Who cares about speed if you can't afford it?

Finally, I don't believe that memory cards need to be "SDIO".

I also have the iPAQ 3650 and thought the sleeves would go away with time. I still use my iPAQ 3650 everyday with the sleeve I modified almost four years ago.
I notice that you use a MicroDrive in that sleeve. Are you going to buy a 1 GB SD card to replace that in any new Pocket PC you buy, or are you going to get a Bluetooth hard disk? :lol:

Steve

[Pony99CA]

I'm glad to see the sleeves gone forever.
Why? Do you dislike those of us who want sleeves? Is this a touch of schadenfreude? :evil:

It's one thing to say that you don't want them and you were glad when you got a Pocket PC that didn't need one. It's quite another to say you're glad that people with an investment in sleeves won't be able to use them with new iPAQs.

Steve

[ChristopherTD]

I use my sleeve on my 5550 so that I can use CF Cards. I used to use a CF Modem, but now I have a Zoom Bluetooth Modem and that works really well. So now my sleeve is only used for CF storage.

If the new iPaqs have CF and SD slots then they will keep me happy. My camera uses CF so I have a lot of CF memory.

It could also be that the miniUSB port that some people spotted will give rise to a new class of iPaq expansion options.

So I am not particularly bothered by loss of sleeves but I hope that CF slots are retained/added to the replacement iPaq. I don't quite understand why people are so keen to see the demise of CF (but that is a different thread).

[possmann]

Many Business Apps still use the 3850 - with sleeve (often) for wireless connectivity and extra battery life - I know this for a fact as I'm in an IS department of a major healthcare orginization an am playing around with one now - getting it configured and tuned. Kinda neat to see several boxes from Compaq full of nothing but sleeves - LOL.

I think we'd ditch the whole sleeve thing if we could get a decent ppc device that incorporates CISCO's LEAP and decent battery life (performance).

[SeanH]

So you don't believe there are any peripherals that require Compact Flash even? Talk about not using common sense. What about MicroDrives? What about memory cards with more than 1 GB storage (or more than 2 GB if the card you mention below is released).
Still no one has brought up a common sense peripheral that will not work with a PDA with built in WiFi and BT. We all know that SD/MMC drives will continue to be offered in larger sizes 1GB, 2GB, 4GB, 8GB it just a matter of time. My first HD was a 5 ¼ Full Height 5MB device.

And I still believe the most foolish thing is you saying how foolish those are when other people have said that they want them.
If there were such a demand there would be many vendors offering products like CF VGA cards. There were over 15 Bluetooth GPS units release in the last 12 months because it’s a common peripheral that has a large consumer demand.

First, which card are you talking about? If you mean the Pretec 2GB card , that's not even an SD card; it's an MMC card. Yes, it should fit in an SD slot, but it's still not SD.

Second, take a guess what the price of one will be. Who cares about speed if you can't afford it?

Finally, I don't believe that memory cards need to be "SDIO".
SD and MMC cards have the exact same electrical interface, the exact same driver will support both cards and they have the exact same form factor. The only difference is SD has the ability to add encryption for digital rights management. We all know price on storage drops very fast. A 250GB HD a year ago was $400 now you can buy one for $150.

I notice that you use a MicroDrive in that sleeve. Are you going to buy a 1 GB SD card to replace that in any new Pocket PC you buy, or are you going to get a Bluetooth hard disk?
Bluetooth is not for HD’s it works well with peripherals. I had to buy that microdrive back then because I needed the storage for GPS maps. I will either buy a 1GB SD/MMC card or get the new 2GB MMC card that will be out in July. Another option is to wait 6 months because I am sure a 4GB card will be out by then.

Sean

[ChristopherTD]

Still no one has brought up a common sense peripheral that will not work with a PDA with built in WiFi and BT. We all know that SD/MMC drives will continue to be offered in larger sizes 1GB, 2GB, 4GB, 8GB it just a matter of time.


Common sense for me is price per megabyte. CF Storage cards are cheaper. Even as larger SD cards come out, still larger CF cards emerge.

Having two memory card slots while on the road for a long period is also very useful.

[SeanH]

Storage and memory year after year changes rapidly. I agree that CF is lower cost then SD/MMC today but that will change with time. There was a time were CF memory cards used to cost a lot more then PCMCIA memory cards. The industry moved to CF because if its small form factor and there are very few new PCMICA cards being produced.

DRAM follows the same pattern we went from Fastpage mode, to EDO memory, to SDRAM, to DDR and its moving to DDR2. DDR memory is cheaper then SDRAM. That was not true 12 months ago.

SD/MMC now out performs CF in read/write speeds and is a lot smaller form factor. Over time CF like will not go away but SD/MMC will the low cost high volume standard. There are a few people still making PCMCIA cards out there. There are people that still make Fastpage and EDO DRAM out there but both markets shrink every year.

Sean

[Gremmie]

SD/MMC now out performs CF in read/write speeds and is a lot smaller form factor. Over time CF like will not go away but SD/MMC will the low cost high volume standard. There are a few people still making PCMCIA cards out there. There are people that still make Fastpage and EDO DRAM out there but both markets shrink every year.

Not when the actual SD port being utilized is not at full performance. For the consumer, CF is still faster.

[Pony99CA]

So you don't believe there are any peripherals that require Compact Flash even? Talk about not using common sense. What about MicroDrives? What about memory cards with more than 1 GB storage (or more than 2 GB if the card you mention below is released).
Still no one has brought up a common sense peripheral that will not work with a PDA with built in WiFi and BT.
Yes, we have. They just don't seem to make sense to you.

That's OK, of course; nobody is trying to force you to buy a Pocket PC with a Compact Flash slot. I just want you to admit that Compact Flash peripherals (and even, God forbid, iPAQ sleeves) may make sense to some of us. So why do you keep insisting that the rest of us who want these things are lacking common sense?

And I still believe the most foolish thing is you saying how foolish those are when other people have said that they want them.
If there were such a demand there would be many vendors offering products like CF VGA cards. There were over 15 Bluetooth GPS units release in the last 12 months because it’s a common peripheral that has a large consumer demand.
There are a few vendors that make VGA presentation cards and hard disk cards. Remember that there's a big difference between "common sense" and "common". Peripherals that make sense for PDAs may not necessarily have large consumer demand.

For example, I really doubt there's a "large consumer demand" for Bluetooth GPS systems. How many people in the general population have a device that would work with one? How many even have GPS?

First, which card are you talking about? If you mean the Pretec 2GB card , that's not even an SD card; it's an MMC card. Yes, it should fit in an SD slot, but it's still not SD.

Second, take a guess what the price of one will be. Who cares about speed if you can't afford it?

Finally, I don't believe that memory cards need to be "SDIO".
SD and MMC cards have the exact same electrical interface, the exact same driver will support both cards and they have the exact same form factor. The only difference is SD has the ability to add encryption for digital rights management.
Geez, you just won't admit when you're wrong, will you? :roll: The point was that you were wrong on the facts -- it's an MMC card, not an SD card.

By the way, you're wrong again. SD and MMC do not have the same form factor. SD cards appear to be 2.1 mm thick, while MMC cards are only 1.4 mm thick.

We all know price on storage drops very fast. A 250GB HD a year ago was $400 now you can buy one for $150.
"Very fast" is relative. I think it's taken 1 GB CF cards a long time to drop to a price where I'd consider buying one. 2 GB CF cards aren't there yet, nor are 1 GB SD cards.

I notice that you use a MicroDrive in that sleeve. Are you going to buy a 1 GB SD card to replace that in any new Pocket PC you buy, or are you going to get a Bluetooth hard disk?
Bluetooth is not for HD’s it works well with peripherals.
Last I checked, hard disks were peripherals. However, I know Bluetooth wouldn't make for a great hard disk connection thanks to its comparatively small bandwidth -- that's why I put the laughing emoticon after that.

However, if you think it isn't for hard disks, you're wrong (surprise!). Check out the Toshiba HOPBIT (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=5247). And with Bluetooth EDR tripling the speed, things may be getting better.

I will either buy a 1GB SD/MMC card or get the new 2GB MMC card that will be out in July. Another option is to wait 6 months because I am sure a 4GB card will be out by then.
Are you really going to spend more for that 2 GB card than a Pocket PC costs? And any 4 GB card will likely cost more than twice what the 2 GB card will cost when it comes out.

If you're made of money, I can see why you don't care much about Compact Flash being cheaper than SD. Of course, why not get one of the 12 GB CF cards and forget about that puny 2 GB MMC card? :lol:

Steve

[Len M.]

Our customers use our PDAudio-CF card to record high resolution digital audio at up to 24-bits/96 kilosamples per second. That data rate corresponds to 2 GB per hour written to mass storage. To store that data, they need a storage card that ideally will store at least two hours of data (4GB). The only PDA-compatible memory/hard disk cards out there with that much storage capacity are CF and PCMCIA flash memory cards and hard drives, and external drives accessed via PC Card and USB interfaces.

We're an HP Partner and until now have been recommending that our customers buy the h5500- and h5100-series iPAQs, along with one of the three third-party dual CF expansion packs (PiTech, Seidio and Nexian) or HP's PC Card expansion pack. It's the iPAQ's ability to accept expansion packs that is its most attractive feature.

We'd love to use the h2200-series but the maximum SD Card memory capacity currently available is 1 GB -- not near enough. Even the soon-to-be-released 2 GB cards aren't large enough.

A possible alternative is a WiFi mass storage device, like the one ASUS announced a while back, but until it materializes and can be shown to provide adequate streaming write rates, the new iPAQs won't be contenders.

Another would be a PDA with a built-in microdrive and a CF card slot.


Len Moskowitz
Core Sound
www.core-sound.com

[SassKwatch]

So I am not particularly bothered by loss of sleeves but I hope that CF slots are retained/added to the replacement iPaq.
That would pretty much sum up my thoughts as well.

I *could* live w/o my Silver Slider sleeve, but I definitely do like having 2 expansion slots available. If HP continues along the course of recent history of only including SD for expansion, then it only enahnces the probabilities I will give other devices that do offer both CF and SD a closer look when the next purchase time comes around. In fact, it all but insures my next pda purchase won't be an iPAQ.

[SeanH]

Peripherals that make sense for PDAs may not necessarily have large consumer demand.
Companies do not create devices to sell so they can make people happy. It’s all about the money. With out demand a company will fail.

I really doubt there's a "large consumer demand" for Bluetooth GPS systems. How many people in the general population have a device that would work with one? How many even have GPS?
Here is a review on 16 new Bluetooth GPS units that came out this year. http://www.gpspassion.com/fr/articles.asp?id=55 There is a huge demand. How many new VGA CF cards came out this year? I bet the number is zero. There is a couple out but they were released years ago. A VGA card is the only CF devices you mentioned that Bluetooth will not accommodate and I strongly believe not too many people need to drive a CRT with there PDA or a LCD display. They use a laptop for that. You also mentioned a CF memory card that can be address by using a SD/MMC card.

The point was that you were wrong on the facts -- it's an MMC card, not an SD card.
You are 100 % correct a SD card has nothing to do with a MMC card. But the Intel PXA250, PXA255, and PXA270 used in all PDA shipping today supports both. All PDA’s shipping today have a socket that will accommodate the .1 mm difference between the cards. As a consumer you can buy either one at SAM’s club and they will work in your band new PDA.

Are you really going to spend more for that 2 GB card than a Pocket PC costs? And any 4 GB card will likely cost more than twice what the 2 GB card will cost when it comes out.
You can buy a 512MB SD card from amazon.com today for $74. The same card was over $175 last year. Prices drop fast. I have no need for 12GB in my PDA. I would rather use the 60GB HD in my IBM T40 laptop. By the way four years ago when I bought my iPAQ 3650 I paid $499 for the PDA and $499 for the 1GB Microdrive.

Sean

[SassKwatch]

We all know that SD/MMC drives will continue to be offered in larger sizes 1GB, 2GB, 4GB, 8GB it just a matter of time.
The operative phrase obviously being 'it just a matter of time'.

Of course such things will happen in time. But I don't buy devices based on what I'll be able to do with them a year from now....I buy them to satisfy today's needs.

No matter how much SD prices will come down in the future, the reality is that CF is still far cheaper today. By the time you're proposed 8gb SD card is released and affordable by the average user, there's a good chance I'll have purchased *AT LEAST* one newer pda....or some other portable computing device.

[Gremmie]

Peripherals that make sense for PDAs may not necessarily have large consumer demand.
Companies do not create devices to sell so they can make people happy. It’s all about the money. With out demand a company will fail.

Actually, thats not always the case. Small cars usually don't make money, car companies sell them so people get familar with a brand. Retail computer companies barely make $100, if even that. Computer companies sell them so consumers get use to a store, etc.

[SeanH]

I am one of those odd people that do plan for the future. I bought a Palm Pro and used it for 5 years (1995-2000). My iPAQ with the 1GB CF Microdirve and my chopped up thin sleeve will be 4 years old in Oct http://mbu.com/ipaq/ . The iPAQ 3650 will out perform a Del X5 http://mbu.com/ppc/benchmark.gif that you can still buy today. When I bought the Microdrive I paid 2X what I could have bought a PCMCIA card for. Size was important to me back then and it is still today. I love the form factor of the 4150 and there is no room for CF in that unit. Another decision I had to make back then was the CPU used in the PDA. In 2000 most PDA’s used a MIPS or SH3 CPU and a lot of software did not support the ARM CPU. I felt confident that ARM would become the dominate CPU and it has happen. It’s very important to plan ahead. I will upgrade my iPAQ 3650 when a PDA ships with VGA, BT and WiFi.

Sean

[Pony99CA]

Our customers use our PDAudio-CF card to record high resolution digital audio at up to 24-bits/96 kilosamples per second. That data rate corresponds to 2 GB per hour written to mass storage. To store that data, they need a storage card that ideally will store at least two hours of data (4GB). The only PDA-compatible memory/hard disk cards out there with that much storage capacity are CF and PCMCIA flash memory cards and hard drives, and external drives accessed via PC Card and USB interfaces.
Well, clearly your customers don't have any common sense. They should be using a laptop to do this.

Oh, wait, I must be channeling SeanH. :rotfl: I love having three slots. :-D

Seriously, I wonder if Sean has heard of "niche markets". Just because not a lot of people need something doesn't mean that nobody needs it. And it certainly doesn't mean they lack common sense for wanting it.

Steve

[Pony99CA]

It’s very important to plan ahead. I will upgrade my iPAQ 3650 when a PDA ships with VGA, BT and WiFi.
So for all your talk of the wonders of Bluetooth and SD/MMC, you're using a Pocket PC that doesn't have either? And here I thought you were using an iPAQ 4150 or something with both. Worse, you're apparently still using an iPAQ sleeve and a Compact Flash card.

I guess that planning ahead convinced you of the worth of iPAQ sleeves and Compact Flash cards. Enough said.

Steve

[SeanH]

I was convinced four years ago that a CF 1GB drive using sleeve that I hacked down to nothing was best for my future. Over the 4 years it has worked out for me. In planning the future for my next PDA I no longer see the need for a CF cards or sleeves. HP must have the same view on the sleeves hence the beginning of this thread. “Brighthand: iPAQ Sleeves Officially Dead”

I use Bluetooth every day with my cell phone for internet access on road and I use a Bluetooth headset every day. Both work great. Here are some pics of my current configuration.

http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=26729&start=30

I will upgrade when I can get BT and WiFi in a PDA with a VGA display.

Sean

[mvp777]

I'm working on a project for an agency that needs to be able to slip on a sleeve and use a WAN PC-Card when there is no Wi-Fi available. We were just about to purchase 20 5555's w/sleeves and heavy duty batteries and are having a helluva time procuring them now that they are discontinued.

mvp777

[Janak Parekh]

I will upgrade when I can get BT and WiFi in a PDA with a VGA display.
Note, though, that the key word in this comment is "I". That is, this particular line of evolution works well for you - and that's great. :) However, HP spawned a number of interesting and vertical market applications with the sleeves, and by killing them it's making those applications difficult. You may have opinions as to what's best on your PDA, but that doesn't mean that the sleeves are useless for everyone.

I don't think Steve is implying that this is necessarily a bad business decision on the part of HP, either -- it's just sad to see them go, as they have served a very useful niche for a small but non-insignificant group. I've seen the sleeves used in a surprisingly large variety of vertical markets -- especially in the restaurant (order-taking) and warehousing (barcoding) scenes. I'm sure they'll work around this - buying specialized devices from Symbol & co., for example - but it'll be at additional cost.

--janak

[SeanH]

We are talking about two different markets, consumer and vertical markets. Many companies learn real fast that it’s not wise to embedded consumer technology based products into vertical markets and expect the consumer product to be around for more then a year. There are many SBC (Single board Computer) vendors that offer products with long life spans using the PXA255 and PXA270 in a form factor the size of a PDA. Those devices work well because they use components with a longer life span. Intel has two divisions for there PXA and IA (x86) product offering. One with a 15 month life targeting consumer devices and the other with a 5 year life for embedded designs.

There are many companies out there for people that want to use PDA like devices in vertical markets.

http://www.strategic-test.se/embedded_systems/
http://www.testech-elect.com/phytec/phytec_home.htm
http://www.logicpd.com/

Here is a list from Microsoft

http://msdn.microsoft.com/embedded/ce.net/bsp/supbsps/default.aspx#list

HP markets there handheld units to the consumer market.

Sean

[SassKwatch]

HP markets there handheld units to the consumer market.

http://welcome.hp.com/country/us/en/prodserv/handheld.html

So, I guess in the above link, the 'For Business' category is what.....a figment of my imagination.(?)

[SeanH]

So, I guess in the above link, the 'For Business' category is what.....a figment of my imagination.(?)
“For Business” and Vertical markets are not the same.

Here are examples of both.

Vertical Markets
A CF or sleeve added to an iPAQ as a 2.4 GHz Spectrum Analyzer for WiFi
http://www.bvsystems.com/Products/WLAN/YJ802.11bg/YJ802.11bg.htm
A CF or sleeve added to over sample audio
http://www.core-sound.com/pdaudio-cf.html#PDAUDIO-CF
A CF or sleeve that is used to transmit drink or food orders to a kitchen using a non standard wireless radio.
A CF or Sleeve for high speed data acquisition system

“For Business”
Corporate VPN access to check emails from a exchange server.
Access to Corporate SQL database over a built in WiFi connection using a VPN.
Customer Software to calculate Insurance damage.
Any many other customer software applications.

If you are using the PDA for vertical or embedded designs you will not be able to use your product with new PDA’s that do not support sleeves or CF cards.

If your using a the PDA for “For Business” you can upgrade all your employees and the software should run find on the new units.

Laptops are marketed for the same “For Business” applications and they are not recommend for vertical markets or embedded markets.

Usually when a vendor offers product targeting vertical markets they will give the end customer a contract committing they will continue to make that product for a pre determined about of time or offer a functional compatible device for a period of time.

Sean

[Pony99CA]

I will upgrade when I can get BT and WiFi in a PDA with a VGA display.
Note, though, that the key word in this comment is "I". That is, this particular line of evolution works well for you - and that's great. :) However, HP spawned a number of interesting and vertical market applications with the sleeves, and by killing them it's making those applications difficult. You may have opinions as to what's best on your PDA, but that doesn't mean that the sleeves are useless for everyone.
Bingo! I certainly respect Sean's belief that he no longer needs sleeves -- or even Compact Flash -- in a Pocket PC. I just wish he would stop disrespecting those of us who see a need for our uses by implying that we have no common sense. I suspect many of us know the PDA market just as well as he does, and are familiar with Bluetooth and SD.

In fact, unlike Sean, I bought an iPAQ 3870 in January 2001 at list price because I saw the future in Bluetooth (even though I haven't really made use of it yet). I could have saved myself $100 by buying an iPAQ 3850, but I don't regret it.

I don't think Steve is implying that this is necessarily a bad business decision on the part of HP, either -- it's just sad to see them go, as they have served a very useful niche for a small but non-insignificant group.
Correct again. I'm sure HP believes it is a good business decision. If their product managers are worth what they're paid, they've taken into account that people who would continue buying iPAQs because of "iPAQ inertia" will no longer be guaranteed customers like they might have been had HP announced a sleeve-compatible 5800 with WM 2K3 SE and a VGA display.

I know that I won't be, and I'm a consumer -- the market Sean insists HP is targeting. My next Pocket PC may be an iPAQ, but I won't have any backward-compatible reasons to stick with HP any longer.

Steve

[Pony99CA]

Many companies learn real fast that it’s not wise to embedded consumer technology based products into vertical markets and expect the consumer product to be around for more then a year.
Consumer technology still can function and be useful long after a year. Here's an example:

I was convinced four years ago that a CF 1GB drive using sleeve that I hacked down to nothing was best for my future. Over the 4 years it has worked out for me.
Do you know who said that? You! 8O

Steve

[Pony99CA]

So, I guess in the above link, the 'For Business' category is what.....a figment of my imagination.(?)
“For Business” and Vertical markets are not the same.
I didn't see SassKwatch mention vertical markets, so thanks for attacking that straw man unmercifully. :roll:

However, SassKwatch was quite correct calling you on your statement.

HP markets there handheld units to the consumer market.
The "Consumer" market is different than the "Business" market. You said that iPAQs were marketed for consumers, implying that HP did not market them for business use. SassKwatch correctly pointed out that they do market for business use.

It's just another example of a short-sighted statement where you won't admit you're wrong even when called on it. :roll:

Steve

[bbarker]

I never liked the original iPaq form factor or the sleeve concept. The first iPaq succeeded because of its superior speed and display. But requiring a bulky sleeve just to add memory was kludgy. I can see that for certain specialized applications the sleeve could be useful, but the same solutions could have been provided through a CF slot.

I'm glad to see the sleeves gone forever.

The sleeves were also developed because CF accessories were uncommon. During those early days, CF modems, network cards, etc. were rare. PCMCIA was much more common and only needed a simple driver to accomidate. Usually, chipsets were similar so one driver set could serve several cards. I think the sleeves helped advance the PPCOS. Sure the Casio E200 or Jornada 548 could connect to the internet, but how could they without the accessory. Also, many pioneering accessories were developed as a sleeve (e.g., Nexicam)
I actually purchased a Pretek CompactFlash modem soon after buying my Jornada 548. It may even have been before the first iPaq came out, which was about 3 months after the Jornada. A few months later I had a sled-like wireless attachment that let me browse the Web and do email from that Jornada. It was just as bulky as an iPaq sleeve, but I only needed it when I wanted to be online; the rest of the time I still had a CF slot without the bulk. CF network cards were available at the time as well.

Many more accessories became available over time for the iPaq through its expansion sleeve scheme. But this was because (a) the iPaq was the most popular PPC and (b) it had no other expansion method. The iPaq was the most popular because of its superior speed and its screen, not because of its sleeves. If that original iPaq had a CF slot, those devices would have been developed for CF.

[bbarker]

I'm glad to see the sleeves gone forever.
Why? Do you dislike those of us who want sleeves? Is this a touch of schadenfreude? :evil:

It's one thing to say that you don't want them and you were glad when you got a Pocket PC that didn't need one. It's quite another to say you're glad that people with an investment in sleeves won't be able to use them with new iPAQs.

Steve
You are right. My response was an emotional one. I didn't want an iPaq in those early days because I didn't like the form factor. I wanted extra memory all the time but I didn't want a bulky device. Even without a big sleeve the iPaq seemed too large to not include a CF slot back then. I also wanted a flip-up screen cover. But I liked the iPaq's better screen, its speed and its OS upgradability. It irritated me that for so long the only device with those features was one with what I viewed as a kludgy form factor. Hence my dislike for the iPaq. Yet I recognize that many of you misguided souls are big fans of the obsolete, misguided sleeve mess. (Just kidding! :lol: )

[Pony99CA]

I didn't want an iPaq in those early days because I didn't like the form factor. I wanted extra memory all the time but I didn't want a bulky device. Even without a big sleeve the iPaq seemed too large to not include a CF slot back then. I also wanted a flip-up screen cover. But I liked the iPaq's better screen, its speed and its OS upgradability. It irritated me that for so long the only device with those features was one with what I viewed as a kludgy form factor. Hence my dislike for the iPaq.
Yeah, it's too bad there's no "ideal" Pocket PC (at least, not for me). I would have loved an iPAQ with a built-in Compact Flash slot for memory and the sleeve interface. That way, I wouldn't have had to buy the Dual PC Card sleeve to use my Compact Flash memory card and my WiFi PC card; I could have just bought a single PC Card sleeve and saved money.

It would have also allowed me to have my memory card with me when I went out without having to carry a sleeve (I didn't usually take my WiFi card with me). At least the Dual PC Card sleeve had a big battery in it, so it did have some advantages.

I prefer power and function to size, though, so sleeves never really bothered me, and the ability to have three slots is great.

Steve

[SeanH]

I just wish he would stop disrespecting those of us who see a need for our uses by implying that we have no common sense.You have taken my original statement out of context. Here is what I wrote.
Name one common sense peripheral that is needs more speed then Bluetooth offers today on a PDA with built in WiFi, Bluetooth and SDIO for storage.Let me reword it for you. “Name one mainstream peripheral can not be addressed with Bluetooth on a PDA with WiFi and SDIO.
Many companies learn real fast that it’s not wise to embedded consumer technology based products into vertical markets and expect the consumer product to be around for more then a year.
Consumer technology still can function and be useful long after a year. Here's an example:

I was convinced four years ago that a CF 1GB drive using sleeve that I hacked down to nothing was best for my future. Over the 4 years it has worked out for me.
Do you know who said that? You! 8O

SteveI do not think you understand what a vertical market is. Let me give you an example. Let’s say a company ABC creates a sleeve for an iPAQ that has a bar code scanner and specialized RF radio to transmit data to a receiver that interfaces to a central database. ABC sells the PDA and sleeve as one part #. Target markets are for taking inventory. The Company ABC creates there product and sells 500 units in 2003, 1000 units in 2004. In 2005 they get an order for 500 units but can not ship because HP did not create there PDA’s for vertical markets. It’s not wise to embedded consumer technology based products into vertical markets

When I bought a sleeve for my iPAQ 4 years ago it was not for vertical market it was for me.
The "Consumer" market is different than the "Business" market. You said that iPAQs were marketed for consumers, implying that HP did not market them for business use. SassKwatch correctly pointed out that they do market for business use.

It's just another example of a short-sighted statement where you won't admit you're wrong even when called on it. Please read my post again. I define the difference between “For Business” and Vertical markets. Let me give you another example. Cell phones are consumer technology based devices that have a shorter life then PDA’s but they are used “For Business” every day. Motorola makes phones for the consumer/“For Business” markets that have a life of 6 months and they make devices for vertical markets that have a lot longer life. HP does not make PDA’s for vertical markets they make them for consumer/“For Business” markets. I posted a few companies a while back that target vertical markets.

Sean

[Pony99CA]

I just wish he would stop disrespecting those of us who see a need for our uses by implying that we have no common sense.
You have taken my original statement out of context. Here is what I wrote.

Name one common sense peripheral that is needs more speed then Bluetooth offers today on a PDA with built in WiFi, Bluetooth and SDIO for storage.
Let me reword it for you. “Name one mainstream peripheral can not be addressed with Bluetooth on a PDA with WiFi and SDIO.
So "common sense" is now equated with "mainstream"? That seems wrong, but you would have fit in well with the "Earth is flat" people who thought Columbus would fail.

As for disrespect, here is another thing that you wrote:

Two that were mentioned in a past post were a VGA card and an external HD. I still believe those a foolish options for a PDA.
You're basically saying that you think anybody who uses a hard disk or VGA card in a PDA is foolish. That's disrespecting those who do use them. Your comment in a previous thread (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=249701#249701) about "Adding an external HD or CD-R to a PocketPC reminds of those people that pull a 19 foot boat with a Ford Escort," just illustrates your disrespect.

If you had said, "I would never use those in my Pocket PC," I don't think anybody would have an issue with that. That's your choice. However, when you start calling other people's choices foolish, you're crossing the line.

I do not think you understand what a vertical market is. Let me give you an example. Let’s say a company ABC creates a sleeve for an iPAQ that has a bar code scanner and specialized RF radio to transmit data to a receiver that interfaces to a central database. ABC sells the PDA and sleeve as one part #. Target markets are for taking inventory. The Company ABC creates there product and sells 500 units in 2003, 1000 units in 2004. In 2005 they get an order for 500 units but can not ship because HP did not create there PDA’s for vertical markets. It’s not wise to embedded consumer technology based products into vertical markets
I don't think you understand what attacking a straw man is. I also don't think you understand that neither SassKwatch nor I mentioned vertical markets. We think your statement that HP is only targeting consumers, not businesses, is just wrong.

Another thing that you're forgetting is that the iPAQ 5550 was primarily targeted for business. That's why HP removed the Nevo remote control from the 5550 (even though the 5450 had it), but added it to their more consumer-oriented iPAQ, the 2210.

Further evidence that HP targets the business market is that the 5150 is sold from the business section of their Web site, but not the consumer section.

Whether the iPAQs were targeted for your vaunted vertical market, I can't say, but I doubt you can either, unless you work for HP. Of course, I doubt HP would turn vertical market sales away.

The "Consumer" market is different than the "Business" market. You said that iPAQs were marketed for consumers, implying that HP did not market them for business use. SassKwatch correctly pointed out that they do market for business use.

It's just another example of a short-sighted statement where you won't admit you're wrong even when called on it.
Please read my post again. I define the difference between “For Business” and Vertical markets.
I don't care. I never mentioned vertical markets. You said iPAQs were targeted for consumers, but the fact is that they're also targeted for businesses. Had you said "HP isn't targeting vertical markets" instead of "HP is targeting consumers", maybe we wouldn't have disagreed with you. However, the point is that you were once again wrong on the facts.

Even when confronted with visible evidence (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=250449#250449) that you are wrong, you won't admit it. Click that link, look at your statement, then look at the picture I posted. Will you admit that you were wrong at least that once?

Steve

[SeanH]

Pony99CA you are correct everything I ever posted was wrong and incorrect information. I am a complete idiot and I have no clue what I am talking about. But I still think people that pull a 19 foot boat with their Ford Escort are foolish.

Sean

[Steven Cedrone]

O.K. guys. I think we can end this little "debate" now...

Steve

[anthonymaw]

I always thought the idea of the sleeve was kind of goofy but it was the only way get PCMCIA cards to work with the IPAQ. Now that PCMCIA card functionality, like modems and ethernet are superceded by equivalent CF form factor devices, I agree that the sleeve design is obsolete. HP should build CF TypeII slots into the body of the device for hardware expansion in addition to SDIO. I've got a 2.2 GB micro-drive that works wonderfully in my IPAQ and I understand Seagate recently announced a 5 GB CF Type II micro-drive. Unfortunately, I myself have also bought the PCMCIA sleeve, CF sleeve and even a Navman 3420 GPS sleeve so now I'm stuck with technological obsolescence. I don't think HP should go nuts trying to build the smallest, thinnest PDA possible due to practical handling and durability reasons. The CF expansion socket is a good physical size and offers peripheral hardware designers a lot of flexibility.

[Pony99CA]

I always thought the idea of the sleeve was kind of goofy but it was the only way get PCMCIA cards to work with the IPAQ. Now that PCMCIA card functionality, like modems and ethernet are superceded by equivalent CF form factor devices, I agree that the sleeve design is obsolete.
While PC Cards may be obsolete (at least for PDAs), sleeves can still provide one useful feature -- multiple slots. The only Pocket PC with three slots is an iPAQ with a Dual PC Card sleeve or a dual Compact Flash sleeve.

If HP (or some other manufacturer) made a Pocket PC with two Compact Flash slots and an SDIO slot, I might agree that sleeves were finally obsolete (at least in the non-vertical-market segment).

Steve

[bbarker]

Pony99CA, I get the impression you like iPaq sleeves.

[Pony99CA]

Pony99CA, I get the impression you like iPaq sleeves.
Not particularly, actually. What I like is the possibility for expansion that they provide.

I have only bought three sleeves:

A Compaq Dual PC Card sleeve, which I used with my iPAQ 3870 for my 512 MB CF card and my PC Card WiFi card. The battery in it seemed to be going dead, so I gave it to my wife when I gave her the 3870.

A Navman 3420 GPS sleeve, which I used for Pocket CoPilot. That sleeve seems to have died (I would lose GPS connections and now I seem to get memory corruption in my GPS data if I use it). It has been replaced by the Haicom 303MMF Compact Flash card and Bluetooth slipper.

A Nexian NexiPak dual Compact Flash sleeve, which I bought to replace my Dual PC Card sleeve. I use it with my 512 MB CF card now and either my iBiz PocketRadio, the Haicom GPS card or a Prolink presentation card.

Nowadays, I'd rather have two Compact Flash slots, an SDIO slot and USB host capability built into my Pocket PC -- assuming it would be smaller than my iPAQ 5550 in the NexiPak. If the largest SD memory cards ever get competitive in price with Compact Flash cards of the same capacity, I'd accept one Compact Flash slot and two SDIO slots.

Unfortunately, no Pocket PC has that, so I'd like HP to keep making sleeve-compatible iPAQs that I could use my NexiPak with.

Steve

[bbarker]

Actually, Steve, that was a friendly tease. I should have thrown in a :wink: or something.

[Pony99CA]

Actually, Steve, that was a friendly tease. I should have thrown in a :wink: or something.
Perhaps, but I still might have responded -- I like to write. :-D In fact, I'm writing a requiem for iPAQ sleeves that will appear on my site later today. I'll post the link when it's done.

Steve

[bbarker]

...I like to write.
You know, I had guessed that might be the case. :wink:

[Kacey Green]

...I like to write.
You know, I had guessed that might be the case. :wink:
same here

[Pony99CA]

I'm writing a requiem for iPAQ sleeves that will appear on my site later today. I'll post the link when it's done.
And here's the link (http://thoughts.svpocketpc.com#THOUGHT_IPAQ_SLEEVES). Let me know what you think.

Steve

[arutha]

We speculated on this a <a t=28213">YellowJacket</a> use. On the other hand, companies could still build a "virtual" sleeve that wraps around a PDA and uses a CF slot to interface with the device. At the same time, without a standard formfactor specification, such sleeves are likely to be short-lived as PDAs keep evolving. What's your thoughts on the situation?

Die, die, die. Expansion capability should be built into the device and not require add-on sleds, docking bays, sleeves, etc. I laugh when I think about my original ipaq 3630 with an add-on CF sleeve and how huge it was. And the aftermarket sleeves weren't terrific, either. Anyone remember PDAMotion.com and the whole Silver Slider fiasco? *shudder*

[Pony99CA]

We speculated on this a <a t=28213">YellowJacket</a> use. On the other hand, companies could still build a "virtual" sleeve that wraps around a PDA and uses a CF slot to interface with the device. At the same time, without a standard formfactor specification, such sleeves are likely to be short-lived as PDAs keep evolving. What's your thoughts on the situation?
Die, die, die. Expansion capability should be built into the device and not require add-on sleds, docking bays, sleeves, etc.
So PCMCIA support should be built into every Pocket PC, eh? :roll:

Let's face it, there are some applications that go beyond the needs of Compact Flash and SDIO. Why shouldn't there be an option available to expand the Pocket PC? And what if somebody has the temerity to want more than two slots? Why shouldn't there be an expansion capability to provide more slots?

Adding a sled, docking bay or sleeve is not much different than adding a USB or Firewire peripheral to a laptop. It makes the laptop less portable and more inconvenient, but I don't see people saying that all laptop expansion should be built-in (even though they have more space to play with).

I laugh when I think about my original ipaq 3630 with an add-on CF sleeve and how huge it was.
I laugh at people who call an iPAQ in a sleeve "huge". :lol: It's certainly bigger than an iPAQ without a sleeve, and I can accept that it's bigger than many people would want to carry. However, there's no reasonable definition of "huge" that is applicable.

By the way, exactly why did you buy a Pocket PC without built-in expansion capability? There were other Pocket PCs available that had CF slots back then.

And the aftermarket sleeves weren't terrific, either. Anyone remember PDAMotion.com and the whole Silver Slider fiasco? *shudder*
So because one company was bad, that makes sleeves bad somehow? :roll:

By that logic, if a company didn't ship an SDIO card as promised (oh, like SDIO WiFi cards for Palms :-D), then the concept of SDIO is bad. :takethat:

Steve

[bbarker]

So Steve (Pony99CA), are you now saying you like iPaq expansion sleeves? Make up your mind!
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I'm kidding!

[Fishie]

I like cheese, does that count?

[Pony99CA]

I like cheese, does that count?
Only if it fits in your Pocket PC. Try it out and let us know. :lol:

Steve

[Janak Parekh]

I like cheese, does that count?
Only if it fits in your Pocket PC. Try it out and let us know. :lol:
If HP had kept the sleeves and cheese didn't fit, we could have made a Cheese Melter(tm) sleeve!

Too bad. :cry: ;)

--janak

[ctmagnus]

Mmm... fondu!

[Kacey Green]

:drool:
does that come with a skillet or griddle option?

[Janak Parekh]

does that come with a skillet or griddle option?
Wouldn't make a difference to you... you have a 2215. :P

Nevertheless, Steve, I think we almost had a business plan going here. Darn HP. :evil: ;)

--janak

[Kacey Green]

doesn't mean I don't want a PPCGM

Pocket PC based Grillin' Machine :wink:

"you can use one of these at any cook out" :lol:

[Pony99CA]

Nevertheless, Steve, I think we almost had a business plan going here. Darn HP. :evil: ;)
I wonder if we could get George Foreman to endorse the Lean, Mean iPAQ Grilling Machine. He could also punch out the HP executives who are trying to kill sleeves and ruin the business. On second thought, maybe Mike Tyson would be better for that. :rotfl:

Steve