View Full Version : Skype For PalmOS Is Just Hype
Ed Hansberry
09-22-2004, 08:00 PM
<a href="http://www.engadget.com/entry/4463683146179014/">http://www.engadget.com/entry/4463683146179014/</a><br /><br />"Despite that report on the ABC News website last week (and the fact that they just released it for Pocket PCs), not only do they not have a version of Skype for Palms coming out next month, apparently they aren’t even working on one."<br /><br />Wonder why? Do they see the declining market share or is the PalmOS not really up to the task? That whole multitasking thing again... :wink:
rob_ocelot
09-22-2004, 08:41 PM
http://www.engadget.com/entry/4463683146179014/
"Despite that report on the ABC News website last week (and the fact that they just released it for Pocket PCs), not only do they not have a version of Skype for Palms coming out next month, apparently they aren’t even working on one."
Wonder why? Do they see the declining market share or is the PalmOS not really up to the task? That whole multitasking thing again... :wink:
Definitely a hardware issue. Skype taxes a 400 Mhz XScale PPC pretty heavily and the program is designed to exit if you attempt to run it on a 206 Mhz processor. I shudder to think how even the ARM based Palm units would fare.
mbranscum
09-22-2004, 09:15 PM
Do they see the declining market share or is the PalmOS not really up to the task? That whole multitasking thing again... :wink:
Is it possible for Palm to have a declining market share with revenues up 62% from last year at this time? Just wondering.
http://www.treocentral.com/content/Stories/467-1.htm
Ed Hansberry
09-22-2004, 09:32 PM
Do they see the declining market share or is the PalmOS not really up to the task? That whole multitasking thing again... :wink:
Is it possible for Palm to have a declining market share with revenues up 62% from last year at this time? Just wondering.
http://www.treocentral.com/content/Stories/467-1.htm
I need to look at that report (thanks for the link), but to answer your question, yes. If Windows Mobile and Symbian grew at 63%, then even though Palm got bigger, the piece of the pie as a percentage of the whole got smaller, which would be a loss in market share.
ojlittle
09-22-2004, 10:38 PM
Definitely a hardware issue. Skype taxes a 400 Mhz XScale PPC pretty heavily and the program is designed to exit if you attempt to run it on a 206 Mhz processor. I shudder to think how even the ARM based Palm units would fare.
The Tungsten T3 has a 400mhz XScale processor. It would seem to me that the Skype software should work fine on a T3. The OS takes up virtually no resources (unlike the WinMobile OS) so the entire capacity of the processor could go to the Skype program and utilize all resources since there isn't any real multi-tasking.
The only real problem other than the developers not porting the application to Palm is the fact that the T3 doesn't have built in Wi-Fi...
bvkeen
09-23-2004, 12:13 AM
Interesting. I have a T3, in addition to my e800, and I think both are neat devices, although the e800 is much more powerful all the way around. IMHO, I think the problem with Palm is that they have to split focus between hardware and software, instead of just getting out of the hardware business and selling it to or Dell or or Motorola or someone. I think that, with focus, their Cobalt OS Could keep the PDA Market more competitive.
mangochutneyman
09-23-2004, 02:34 AM
Interesting. I have a T3, in addition to my e800, and I think both are neat devices, although the e800 is much more powerful all the way around. IMHO, I think the problem with Palm is that they have to split focus between hardware and software, instead of just getting out of the hardware business and selling it to or Dell or or Motorola or someone. I think that, with focus, their Cobalt OS Could keep the PDA Market more competitive.
HUH? :?: Palm split some time ago into separate Software (PalmSource) and Hardware (PalmOne) entities...
The real problem with porting Sype to PalmOS is not the OS or proc etc...it is the absolute dearth of available wifi options for PalmOS devices and in particular for PalmOne. P1 has only one available handheld with integrated wifi which is the aging TC. Sony has various models like the UX50, TH55 etc, but it no longer is a major player outside Japan. VoIP clients like Gphone for TC prove that these types of app can work on PalmOS, but P1 needs to release more wifi enabled handhelds first...
LarDude
09-23-2004, 04:14 AM
Wonder why? Do they see the declining market share or is the PalmOS not really up to the task? That whole multitasking thing again... :wink:
There you go again, Ed, taking potshots at the beloved PalmOS!
Who cares about Skype, VOIP, WiFi, or the Internet! Zen, Ed,...Zen! The PalmOS had Zen, has Zen, and will always have Zen. With the Zen of the PalmOS, I can very quickly (with blinding speed) pull up the phone number of whoever it is I want to call, run out to my car to get a pocketfull of change, run down the street to the nearest payphone (I can run really really fast), and dial the number of the person I want to call (I can dial really really fast). Obviously, you don't see the beauty and simplicity of this, so you will never understand Zen!
ctmagnus
09-23-2004, 04:31 AM
Bah! I can turn on my T68, walk down the street to where I get a signal, turn on Bluetooth on it and the iPaq and dial faster than I could get to the nearest payphone.
:mrgreen:
Janak Parekh
09-23-2004, 04:39 AM
The Tungsten T3 has a 400mhz XScale processor.
But so does the T|C, which also has WiFi. That makes me wonder if it was the effort in porting the application to PalmOS was too great for the company to do? Or is it because the T|C is too much of a niche product? Interesting thoughts.
The only real problem other than the developers not porting the application to Palm is the fact that the T3 doesn't have built in Wi-Fi...
Although, you can now get the SD card.
--janak
surur
09-23-2004, 07:42 AM
Wonder why? Do they see the declining market share or is the PalmOS not really up to the task? That whole multitasking thing again... :wink:
There you go again, Ed, taking potshots at the beloved PalmOS!
Who cares about Skype, VOIP, WiFi, or the Internet! Zen, Ed,...Zen! The PalmOS had Zen, has Zen, and will always have Zen. With the Zen of the PalmOS, I can very quickly (with blinding speed) pull up the phone number of whoever it is I want to call, run out to my car to get a pocketfull of change, run down the street to the nearest payphone (I can run really really fast), and dial the number of the person I want to call (I can dial really really fast). Obviously, you don't see the beauty and simplicity of this, so you will never understand Zen!
Brilliant!! This is when I wish PPThoughts had moderation like slashdot!
5+ funny for you :)
Surur
jonathanchoo
09-23-2004, 10:28 AM
Another cheap shot at PalmOS? Do better next time.
Skype is a hype anyway. They claim to have invented something new which is available since several years.
Skype is not compliant to internet standard-based VoIP networks and works only with other Skype users. No hardware adapters for old POTS phone etc. are available.
It isn't any better in anything than standard VoIP.
Janak Parekh
09-25-2004, 10:30 PM
Another cheap shot at PalmOS? Do better next time.
Well, perhaps you have a better explanation why?
Skype is a hype anyway. They claim to have invented something new which is available since several years.
From what I've heard (I'm not a user), the value proposition of Skype is how well it works through firewalls. Simple SIP implementations need proxies, etc. That said, it would be nice if Skype builds a standards-based VoIP gateway in the long-term. Time will tell. But in the meantime, it has a lot of grassroots support.
--janak
Skype is a hype anyway. They claim to have invented something new which is available since several years.
From what I've heard (I'm not a user), the value proposition of Skype is how well it works through firewalls. Simple SIP implementations need proxies, etc.
Well, there is some confusion. Skype doesn't work any better than SIP through firewalls or NAT routers. It just has less options and therefore seems to be simpler to setup because you are not asked which pass through options to use. SIP supports the STUN service, Universal Plug-n-Play or manual port forwarding. Skype supports only something very similar to the standards-based STUN service of SIP. It works "out of the box" but is not the best option for every case. For example for companies which have an internal VoIP network etc.. And SIP's STUN works out of the box as well as Skype does.
As for SIP proxies: SIP proxies are not needed to pass through firewalls but to route calls - especially inter-domain calls. That are calls between VoIP networks of different providers. With standards based VoIP you can even setup your own SIP proxy for a domain you own and use email addresses from that domain to receive calls. And you can use SIP proxies for a lot of features like conference calls, follow-me etc..
SIP proxies are in no way a problem but a great feature. Also you could call the Skype servers "Skype proxies" as well though they have less features and are not open. Unlike with SIP where Open Source SIP proxy implementations are available.
That said, it would be nice if Skype builds a standards-based VoIP gateway in the long-term. Time will tell. But in the meantime, it has a lot of grassroots support.
It has no real grassroots support. Mainly it has got a media hype because it was created by the KaZaA founder Niklas Zennstrom. Therefore it got a lot of attention and many people downloaded it. Unfortunatly some of the media ignored that SIP-based VoIP already works well for a long time. But as soon as some "celebs" come along and reinvent the wheel the hype starts. :(
vBulletin® v3.8.9, Copyright ©2000-2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.