PDA Buyer's Guide Reviews HP iPAQ rz1715

[Jason Dunn]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.pdabuyersguide.com/ipaq_rz1715.htm' target='_blank'>http://www.pdabuyersguide.com/ipaq_rz1715.htm</a><br /><br /></div>I'm still waiting for HP's PR department to respond to my request for a review unit, but the incredibly fast people at PDA Buyer's Guide have cranked out a review of the iPAQ rz1715 already!<br /><br /><i>"They're here! HP's new iPAQs running Windows Mobile 2003 Second Edition (WM 2003 SE) will be announced on Monday July 26, 2004. We just happened to get ours a bit early . The rz1715 is HP's new entry-level iPAQ, while the iPAQ 1945 was their previous entry level PDA. The seldom seen iPAQ 1930 was actually HP's most basic model, and the rz1715's features are very similar to that model. This new iPAQ will please those on a budget who are looking for a very compact device and have no need for integrated wireless networking. Unfortunately it lacks two key features that the 1945 had: Bluetooth and a user replaceable battery. For these two reasons, I might choose the 1945 while it's still available from retailers."</i><br /><br />I'm not usually the kind of person to judge something before I've had a chance to try it it out, but the rx1715 doesn't seem very compelling to me. Everyone has a different idea of what's attractive (my wife married ME after all! 8O), but to my eyes the design of the rx1715 is grotesque. Perhaps it's more compelling in person, but why did HP abandon the 1900 body design? That was sleek, sexy, and felt great in the hands. Design issues aside, I can see no compelling reason why someone should spend $80 USD more on this device than on the entry-level Dell Axim X30. To each his own, but I simply don't find this product competitive. Am I missing something?

[marovada]

I agree. For what this device can achieve, get a cheap Palm instead (and I mean a really cheap Palm :mrgreen: ).

[Duncan]

It is a monumental misjudgement by HP. The big question is - why? Why did they design it so badly, why did they think it would be worth releasing, why did they think it should be released at such a price?

HP are hardly green at this - between them and Compaq they have more PD experience than pretty mcuh everyone - which just makes the decision to release the rz1715 all the more staggering...

[Jonathan1]

Gone is the stylish HP look, though this isn't an ugly PDA.

I think they are being overly generous. From every picture I've seen the cheap plasticy look makes this/these device/s look down right fugly. While I don't really care too much about the looks of my desktop/laptop/PDA. I would appreciate the OEM to put SOME quality in their devices. I shouldn't have to compare my PDA to a Fisher Price Pixter
http://home.comcast.net/~jonnormand/FisherPrice.jpg

Now more then ever do we need someone like apple to step in and give this industry a kick in its complacency.

[Jonathan1]

It is a monumental misjudgement by HP. The big question is - why? Why did they design it so badly, why did they think it would be worth releasing, why did they think it should be released at such a price?

HP are hardly green at this - between them and Compaq they have more PD experience than pretty mcuh everyone - which just makes the decision to release the rz1715 all the more staggering...

I can think of two worse case scenarios that scare me.

1. That HP is starting to pull a Sony. I hope to god not but what if they think the market is drying up?

2. HP is top dog with little to no competition. What incentive do they have to innovate?


I can’t think of any reason why they did such a craptacular job on these low end devices (and frankly some of the moves on the high end are baffling.) Does anyone know if there has been a shuffle in management at all at HP? That could be another possibility.

[c38b2]

Everyone has a different idea of what's attractive (my wife married ME after all! 8O)
Yeah, I was wondering about that when I saw you in that photo from the MVP conference... :lol:

[whydidnt]

I can’t think of any reason why they did such a craptacular job on these low end devices (and frankly some of the moves on the high end are baffling.) Does anyone know if there has been a shuffle in management at all at HP? That could be another possibility.

My theory (only a theory) is that the Compaq design team has either been moved out or moved on to something else. I'm guessing that the 1900 & 4000 series we saw last year were the last of their work. These devices all have the same big, boxy, industrial look that HP's laptops have had for the last several years, and remind me somewhat of the Jornada PPC in shape and size.

In any event the rz1715 is stillborn IMO. They must be thinking that a certain group will figure --hey it looks the same as these other HP PPC's and it's $50/cheaper, I'll just buy it instead, since the software all looks the same. I think their wrong, at this pricepoint anyway.

The original 3600 series had similar specs, and that was released 5+ years ago, if memory serves me correctly. In PC terms, that would be like HP releasing a new PC with a Pentium II 266 Mhz Processor and 64 MB RAM today!!! I guess that just shows how little Windows Mobile has evolved compared to the desktop space. No wonder some are declaring it dead!

:?

[Duncan]

I can’t think of any reason why they did such a craptacular job on these low end devices (and frankly some of the moves on the high end are baffling.) Does anyone know if there has been a shuffle in management at all at HP? That could be another possibility.

I suggested elsewhere something similar to what whydidnt has suggested - namely that the design team (and/or management team?) responsible for everything up until the h63xx, has been replaced. I can't believe the team responsible for the iPAQ 36/38/39/54/55xx - or the 2210 or the 4xxx or 19xx - could possibly be responsible for the new bunch.

The idea that HP sees itself as unassailable is a possibility - but Palm once thought the same and had the same attitude - as did Sony too. Even if Toshiba leaves the PDA market, there are others with the interest and resources to challenge HP for the crown...

[chunkymonkey75]

They did such a terribile job with this device it makes me wonder if they are trying to kill the market for the low-end devices....Dell is starting to look better all the time.

[jpjehu]

I absolutely agree with the complaints. I can not believer that this is happening! My original reason for converting to ppc from palm was the design-genius of the first ipaq. Althought the 3xxx series of new ipaqs do offer some good things - ppc tv pro, image viewer, cir, nevo, new nevo prog, battery convertability, etc - I think they're all $100 too much. HP would truly own the market if they released EVERYTHING $100 less in these new lines. They are making a HUGE mistake. I expect some ignorant people to buy this unit, but believe it will fail miserably and quickly dissappear - which is a good thing considering how it is TAINTING the ipaq's good reputation. Where have you gone iPAQ designers?!?!

[Mark Johnson]

Now more then ever do we need someone like apple to step in and give this industry a kick in its complacency.

You are SO right on this point. I think the reporters say "the PDA is dead" are completely out-to-lunch. At the same time, there is a HUGE sense right now (largely due to Microsoft and the fairly unimaginative last couple of releases from the OEMs) that the PDA is just in a holding pattern, or maybe lost in the woods. Someone needs to come in from the outside (Sony with Linux Clie? Apple with some Uber-iPod?) and make someone in Redmond nervous again...

Also, is does seem like the BAD "the PDA is dead" reporting we've seen in recent months has possibly started to confuse the OEM's. It is ABSURD to think that people will abandon PDA's for smartphones - what is desirable in a phone (tiny size) is in opposition to the function of a PDA (reasonably large screen data access.) I've got a Siemen's SL56 phone (the smallest bluetooth one I could get with Cingular) and it's small enought to fit into my jeans coin pocket, but I still want a smaller one. At the same time, I want VGA display for my calendar and todo list. There is NO way to shrink a VGA (or even QVGA) screen into a small phone.

I could well imagine switching to an iPaq 1900 sized unit with an internal cell-phone module, but it is just arbitrary on the part of reporters to call such a device a "smartphone" and not a PDA. The future device we'll all be carrying could just have been dubbed a "CellPDA" as easily as a "SmartPhone." It simply represents a convergence, not a truimph of the phone over the PDA, or of the PDA over the phone.

[jonathanchoo]

Its sold in the UK for ₤200. I can get a Tungsten E for ₤150. T2 for ₤170. Same amount of RAM but because OS5 does not divide up the RAM area - even better. Higher res. Better looking. Bluetooth on T2. Toshiba's e400 is for ₤200. Even the Zire 72 is just ₤10 more. This is going to be slaughtered by all the cheap Sony PDAs as well (₤150-₤200).

Wait...you can get a h2210 for only ₤230 and if you shop around, you can get a h4150 for ₤280. All the h19xx series are less than ₤200 and some even comes with Bluetooth and higher RAM.

This is madness.

[Mark Johnson]

1715 vs. 1945
$279 vs. $279
203Mhz vs. 266Mhz
32MB vs. 64MB
No Wireless vs. Internal Bluetooth
Ugly vs. Pretty
Non-Removable battery vs. Removable Battery

My main quarrel with PDABuyersGuide is that they really act like they are reviewing this unit "in a vacuum" when they summarize it in the conclusion section. (They probably didn't want to be too negative and risk not getting future "pre-release review opportunities" from HP.)

This would make sense if the "1700" series was the earlier, less developed model that the "1900" series replaced...

[jonathanchoo]

My main quarrel with PDABuyersGuide is that they really act like they are reviewing this unit "in a vacuum" when they summarize it in the conclusion section. (They probably didn't want to be too negative and risk not getting future "pre-release review opportunities" from HP.)


I think Lisa did the review well. She even wrote this in the first paragraph:


For these two reasons, I might choose the 1945 while it's still available from retailers.

[timmy]

When I saw this "new" device I got a feeling I saw this design before. Then I remembered my first PocketPC. Probably they brought the pre-iPaq design team out of the freezer...

:wink:

Check this!

http://www.pdasupport.com/Aero1530.htm

[Palmguy]

2. HP is top dog with little to no competition. What incentive do they have to innovate?


Heck, they didn't really even have to innovate on this device. What they have done is the exact opposite; this thing is a clear regression!

[Felix Torres]

Maybe its a "rebate-special" in the making.

1- Introduce it at $279 to establish the high price.
2- Wait out a month or so of no sales.
3- Put it on sale for $179 after $100 rebate.

Have I mentioned I hate rebates? :roll:

[DaleReeck]

Why is HP cheaping out on the memory? 32MB for the 1700? My last 32MB PPC was a Casio E-125 three years ago :D

Also, the top of the line 4700 has only 64MB when their previous tops was the 128MB iPaq 5000 series? I know the 4700 has all that ROM space, but since a lot of apps require installation in main memory or install portions of itself there, 64MB could get thin real quick if you load a lot of apps. I was expecting an increase to 256MB of memory on HP's new top line PPC, but they went in the wrong direction. Very curious. I can't imagine they saved that much money on memory costs.

[mv]

Maybe its a "rebate-special" in the making.

1- Introduce it at $279 to establish the high price.
2- Wait out a month or so of no sales.
3- Put it on sale for $179 after $100 rebate.

Have I mentioned I hate rebates? :roll:

The 1930 is about $179 and is still better than this, because it has 64 mb. And it´s nicer and you can change your battery.

And the 1940 (you can find it as low as 200 by now) is ten times better, since it has bluetooth. No way i´ll get rid of my 1940 until it dies.

This device should be sold for $149. And not a penny more than that.

[jasondearyou]

but to my eyes the design of the rx1715 is grotesque. Perhaps it's more compelling in person, but why did HP abandon the 1900 body design? That was sleek, sexy, and felt great in the hands. Design issues aside, I can see no compelling reason why someone should spend $80 USD more on this device than on the entry-level Dell Axim X30. To each his own, but I simply don't find this product competitive. Am I missing something?


Jason, I hope you aren't a bit better at HP :devilboy: lol:

Although, I agree with you, I really don't see any reason why any sensible person would want to buy such a PC. Who ever made that design and made the decision to make it less than a Pocket PC should be fired for insult us PPC user's inteligence.

[bjornkeizers]

My main quarrel with PDABuyersGuide is that they really act like they are reviewing this unit "in a vacuum" when they summarize it in the conclusion section. (They probably didn't want to be too negative and risk not getting future "pre-release review opportunities" from HP.)


I noticed that too. Sure, the unit would compare favoribly with say.. the very first Ipaq 3630, but that's about as generous as I would be if I was reviewing it. It's one giant leap backwards from the 1900 series.


This would make sense if the "1700" series was the earlier, less developed model that the "1900" series replaced...

I couldn't have said it better.

I was browsing pdashop.nl just now, and it listed the unit for 299 euro. At the current exchange rate, that's well over $360!

But let's stick with european prices. Here's the competition:

Palm Tungsten|E: 250
Sony Clie TJ27: 229
Zire 72: 289
Ipaq 1940: 309

These units are cheaper, and all of them - including the palms - have superior specs. Higher resolution, more memory, faster processor, and the Zire and Clie even have a camera, not to mention the Ipaq's Bluetooth.

[cubed]

Looks like HP took a page out of PalmOne's Zire play book.

1. New Model
2. Less Functionality
3. Cheap housing

HP just forgot to lower the price below $100 and pre-package it for WalMart. I'm surprised they didn't lower the RAM to 2 MB.

What are they thinking? Our company deploys mobile devices for data collection. We loved the 1945 w/ bluetooth for around $200. Now, we will be going to Dell.

[fivepetpalace]

why did HP abandon the 1900 body design? That was sleek, sexy, and felt great in the hands.


See, this is why I bought my wife the 1935 when I got a 4155... They look almost identical. She didn't have to know that mine was loaded under the hood.

Actually, if the 1935 had wifi I might have gone for it instead of the 4155. The 1935 was/is great. It's attractive, small, light, and a pretty snappy performer. It feels faster than its specs. The one thing that was bad was no cradle. But hey, for $180 after the closeout rebate, we're happy.

Maybe that new appearance of the 1715 was meant to make you think it should only have 32 MB of ram, and still be worth $279

[Jonathan1]

I was just at CompUSA about a half hour ago and they had a floor model out already. I have to say the build quality and craftsmanship of this product is wholly unimpressive. Infact I’m not kidding when I say that looking right next to the devices at Palm’s low-end the quality on those devices looked better then the rz1715. WTH is that all about!??! The buttons and D-pad are the final straw. They. God. Its bad. Really bad. The black plastic on it makes it look so tacky, cheesy, and down right cheap. The feel of the device? Obviously PDA's are intended to be light and small but there is something to having a bit of weight to the device. The weight of the thing adds to the feel of cheapness.

IMHO the only hope HP has of moving this model is to hope that people who are looking at this device fall into these demographics:
1. Are blind so they can’t see the fugliness.
2. Isn’t knowledgeable in specs. Most people who know their “stuff” would blow this model off immediately.
3. They don’t know about Dell because if they do is should be no contest.

Again. What the heck was HP thinking with this model?!?! Was this suppose to go up against the X30? If so they brought the wrong tools to war. HP must be thanking god that Dell doesn’t do brick and mortar.

[tccox]

Am I the only one thats noticed that according to the specs posted on the HP site for the 1715, it DOES NOT come with Windows Mobile Second Edition ????? A Mistake on their site or a last mintue switch by HP ????


"Microsoft® Windows® Mobile™ 2003 for Pocket PC (Professional Edition), Calendar, Contacts, Tasks, Voice Recorder, Notes, Pocket Word, Pocket Excel, Pocket Internet Explorer, Pocket MSN, Windows Media Player 9 (MP3, audio and video streaming), Calculator, Solitaire, Jawbreaker, Messaging, File Explorer, Pictures, Terminal Services Client, VPN Support (PPTP), Infrared Beaming, Clock, Align Screen, Memory, Volume control.
"

[Jonathan1]

Am I the only one thats noticed that according to the specs posted on the HP site for the 1715, it DOES NOT come with Windows Mobile Second Edition ????? A Mistake on their site or a last mintue switch by HP ????
"

I think its a mistake. The unit I was playing with did landscape mode.

[mv]

Looks like hp don´t want users to be able to buy a ppc with bluetooth for less than $400... urgh... i was expecting a 1940 with wi fi for the same old $299, not this crap... :evil: