My Opinion...

[Darius Wey]

Why I Won't Be Rushing Out To Get a Windows Mobile 2003 Second Edition Pocket PC...

Okay, I've thought about this one for a while, and I thought I'd just share my opinion, and maybe after reading this, I could get yours as well. This post is in no way meant to offend anyone, and I apologise if anyone is to take offence from this.

I currently have an HP iPAQ h1940. It, along with many other well-known iPAQs, runs Windows Mobile 2003 First Edition, and was neglected by HP in being upgraded to WM2003SE. So where does that leave me? I now have a device that does not have WM2003SE, and so I don't get native support for landscape, no native PIE enhancements, no nice OS interface changes here and there. But is that all? Now that Microsoft has released Windows Media Player 10 Mobile, I, along with many other WM2003FE users, will miss out on a potential upgrade to one of the most commonly used media players out there in the market. Why is this so? Microsoft have only chosen to make this available to WM2003SE users, and in itself, has to be provided by the manufacturer of the device.

So here I am: (1) Without WM2003SE on my existing device due to HP's actions, and (2) Without a potential upgrade to WMP10 Mobile because HP did not provide a WM2003SE upgrade in the first place.

But from a broad perspective...does my Pocket PC do what I want it to do? Yes it does. As a portable media device, it suits my purposes. Sure, I'd like to have the upgrades, but if they are not available, well "tough" is what I say! And as a PIM, it also serves me well. Not to mention being a quick on-the-go note taker, e-book reader, etc.

Yet I still sit here thinking, "Man...I'd so want the new updates offered in WM2003SE!" But...does it warrant the shelling out of hundreds of dollars so that I can lay my hands on a WM2003SE (VGA or not)? Probabaly not. The way things have happened in the past with minimal companies offering OS updates, and many program updates being restricted to specific OS versions, I'd like to sit and think that the device I have at the moment would be safe for another few years from being outdated. Sadly, this is not so. WM2003SE has raged the market and brought all sorts of goodies, yet in the big picture, it is just another variant of the initial WM2003FE OS (Windows CE 4.2). So when Windows CE 5.0 makes its debut, where will that leave WM2003SE users? Without ROM updates to the new OS? Without an update to WMP11 Mobile? The possibilities are endless, and whether such events happen, only time will tell.

So what was the point of this little rant? Well, for the average WM2003FE user, I'd like to think that you can look at your device now and wonder whether the benefits you gain from having a nice new WM2003SE device are really that significant. Sure, the "cool" factor is there, and perhaps even on a productivity scale, it's there as well, but if you look well into the future when the even newer Pocket PCs running the newer OSes are released, the WM2003SE devices may not look too "cool" after all. And with current company practices on updates made available to devices, you'd think that that "cool" factor has sunken even lower.

So while I'd like to lay my hands on a WM2003SE device, I think I will keep the cash in my piggy bank for the next year or two as I really cannot complain with what I have now. And hopefully, when Windows CE 5 graces the Pocket PC market, I would be considering an upgrade then. In my opinion, if you own a WM2003FE device and are thinking of updating to a newer device running WM2003SE, I urge you to reconsider the benefits you would get. And if indeed you decide to go ahead with it, consider where that would leave your WM2003SE in a couple of years time. For the first time Pocket PC buyer, there is nothing wrong with purchasing a WM2003SE device. But for the current WM2003FE user, is it really worth it? That is my question and my opinion. What are your thoughts? :)

[juni]

I agree with everything you said. But there is one reason I need a new device: The VGA screen.

I would like to be able to make skins for this :)

[Darius Wey]

I agree with everything you said. But there is one reason I need a new device: The VGA screen.

I would like to be able to make skins for this :)

So would I. You may have seen that in one of my old set of skins, Aquatic and Fire for WA 1.x, I managed to create a set of VGA skins by working off "guesses" and resolution-emulating software. That is why I was tossing up between getting a VGA screen and knowing that the skins I make would be 100% VGA compatible, or holding off the decision for now and staying with my 240x320 resolution and using emulation software to check for compatibility.

That is why, to save the trouble at the moment, I may just stick with my current low-resolution device and wait a couple of years before I make the purchase. And that is why I think I have decided to keep my current projects of WA 2.x skins at low-resolution, although I may change my mind about that in due course.

But Juni, for someone of high reputation like yourself, I can see your hasty need to get a VGA device to please the many people out there that use your skins. If I had the time to make skins as frequently as you, I too would be thinking about a pending upgrade to a VGA device. :)

[juni]

I wouldn't say "hasty need" :D

Those devices are expensive, but a VGA screen would be nice for all the wireless websurfing I do too (that is almost my main use of the device).

[Deus]

I agree with everything said. My problem is that I am a tech junkie. I feel as though I am being bullied around by these companies who are putting out devices that they 'purposely' plan to phase out. understand the whole purpose of the business is to make money but the lifespan of PPC OS's are the shortest.


I am a PPC junkie and its not nice to constantly give me more to get. I have a problem here, a handicap.! :lol:

Honestly though I think the VGA screen is a good selling point. They can't upgrade old devices to have VGA screens. And they add usability. I know I will wind up with new devices int he future but thats my hobby and I like the new advancements. So for me...

random ramblings

[OSUKid7]

Congrats DJ Apod! Made the front page. :D

(hmm...either PPCT is trying to publicise forum posts more, or there's a serious lack of PPC news this week. :|)

[T-Will]

You make really good points that I totally agree with, but the one and only draw I have towards WM2003SE are the devices with VGA screens, but at the moment I think I'm going to wait for the next incarnation of Windows Mobile.

[Gen-M]

I totally agree with all your arguments - and I don't even have a WM2003FE device 8O . Your arguments are the same even for my PPC2002 1910 and e740.

[zehubert]

Most of the time, I don't have access to a free or non-encrypted hotspot, I gave up browsing in VGA on my iPaq 4155.

The VGA screen would remove the frustration from the web pages display, but not the pain from accessing the net connected via a bluetooth phone.

Wifi is cool... when you can access it :)

[JackTheTripper]

I've been wanting a new device but everything seems to change from month to month. New devices, new OS's, new this, new that. And really I just use mine as an extension of my desktop calander and address book. When I got it I was in love. loaded tons of programs and games onto it. But lately it's just a calendar I can take into a meeting and say "Nope, not that day but how's this one work for you." which is why I origionally got it.

so for now my Toshiba e310 running PPC2002 is all I need. Maybe sometime next year when the next next devices and OS comes out and there are more Wifi hotspots around I'll concider it. Cause I WON'T buy another one without wifi.

[Ed Hansberry]

Quite content with my 2215 for the same reasons you listed. And my next device will not be an HP iPAQ. I've had a 3630, 3870, 3970 and now a 2215. The end. See ya HP. No support for the last generation, no support from me for your next generation.

[OSUKid7]

I've had a 3630, 3870, 3970 and now a 2215.Not to get too OT, but what's the difference between the 3870 and 3970? Did the 3970 come with WM2003? I thought they were pretty much the same PDA.

[Deus]

Quite content with my 2215 for the same reasons you listed. And my next device will not be an HP iPAQ. I've had a 3630, 3870, 3970 and now a 2215. The end. See ya HP. No support for the last generation, no support from me for your next generation.

Well said

[horseflesh]

I've had a 3630, 3870, 3970 and now a 2215.Not to get too OT, but what's the difference between the 3870 and 3970? Did the 3970 come with WM2003? I thought they were pretty much the same PDA.

3970 had a newer processor I think, otherwise pretty much the same.

[spinedoc]

How do you think some of us feel, the ones who bought a 2003SE Pocket PC and then find out that we probably wont be able to upgrade to WMP10? Kind of makes me wish I had waited for the Dell, even though I purchased the best out of all the VGA PPC's (Loox 720).

Something open ended needs to be done here, so users can upgrade if they want to just like with desktop OS's. I dont mind paying for the newest OS at all, I just wish it was available. If HP and other companies cite the cost of an upgrade as prohibitive, hell why dont they just sell it for $50?

[foebea]

As for the coolness factor, I have the only ppc I know of which supports case mods (red sides on my ipaq 2215).

As for the windows media upgrade, I have removed all links and associations to the player and replaced it with the latest betaplayer (.092 or something with the wmv codecs added) which has about 500% the functionality of wmp.

This message was posted from Reensoft PIEPlus Browser Enhancement, microsoft can keep their enhancements, as log as they continue to support plugins.

I will upgrade my ipaq in 8 years most likely.

[Fishie]

I've had a 3630, 3870, 3970 and now a 2215.Not to get too OT, but what's the difference between the 3870 and 3970? Did the 3970 come with WM2003? I thought they were pretty much the same PDA.

3970 had a newer processor I think, otherwise pretty much the same.

Yah, the others had the old Strongarm procesor while the 3970 used the XScale 250 running at 400MHz.

I regretted selling my toshiba e800 and none of the current machines really appeal to me so I too decided to wait.

Didnt stop me from buying four PDA´s while in japan though(two Older PalmOS machines and two WinCE machines(one win CE3.0 and the other WinCE 4.1)

My sigmarion kicks ass and damn that screen be nice.

[allenalb]

I've had a 3630, 3870, 3970 and now a 2215.Not to get too OT, but what's the difference between the 3870 and 3970? Did the 3970 come with WM2003? I thought they were pretty much the same PDA.

3970 had a newer processor I think, otherwise pretty much the same.


3970 was the first ipaq with a transflective display, and if you put the two devices side by side, the difference was incredible.

[Wasp]

I have bought HP pocket devices since the the HP 95LX. I currently have the HP 4355; but, like Ed, the next product I buy won't be HP. The VGA screen is nice, but I don't normally surf the web. So I will also wait until the next version of Windows CE occurs, and buy a Dell or some other Vendor. Hopefully that version will have a more robust Pocket Word, Pocket Excel, and a Pocket Power Point. 8)

[gorkon280]

I feel the same way. In some ways, I traded down when I go tmy current 4355 (from a 5555). One thing I hat the most with PPC's is that none of the new crop have a keyboard. While I am comfortablt with character recognizer, I hate using it because it's too slow. I am tons fastere two thumbing it with my keyboard. Since getting the 4355, I have never opened charcter recognizer. SE has no keyboards on any device except BT keyboards. I already carry around enough crap. One WINCE stage I missed was clam shell devices and I surely wish they were still around.

[freitasm]

And no Windows Media Player 10 upgrade, since it's only available for Second Edition devices.

No WMP10, no DRM content moved into your PockeT PC... Well done, HP...

[Gen-M]

I have bought HP pocket devices since the the HP 95LX. I currently have the HP 4355; but, like Ed, the next product I buy won't be HP. The VGA screen is nice, but I don't normally surf the web. So I will also wait until the next version of Windows CE occurs, and buy a Dell or some other Vendor. Hopefully that version will have a more robust Pocket Word, Pocket Excel, and a Pocket Power Point. 8)

I've been waiting 4 years for "more robust Pocket Word, Pocket Excel, and a Pocket Power Point." :(
We will get that AFTER we get a real Close button :evil:

That's why I'm looking seriously at the OQO.

[ooosadface]

Currently I have an iPaq 2215. I love. I STINKIN love it. I am very much wooed by the new Dell X50v and mid X50 however and believe that to be my next PPC. I have convinced myself to wait 6 months, at least, to see where prices go and find out what bugs rise to the surface. I also want to spend some time to determine whether to go VGA for $100 extra or stick with QVGA until the next line of PPC. That for me is the big issue.

[ecard]

I don't care about SE. I will upgrade only if they come out with a version of my 4150 with a VGA screen. For me, the size is more important.

Eric

[bcries]

Can anybody comment as to the theoretical feasability of a crack that would allow WMP10 to run on WM2003 First Edition? It would be interesting to know just how much WMP10 is expected to rely on SE features, aside from the obvious "advertised benefits" of SE (landscape, VGA). If it were a minor modification, do you think Microsoft would ever decide to offer the upgrade for older devices?

[Pony99CA]

Quite content with my 2215 for the same reasons you listed. And my next device will not be an HP iPAQ. I've had a 3630, 3870, 3970 and now a 2215. The end. See ya HP. No support for the last generation, no support from me for your next generation.
While I won't go so far as to say that I won't buy another iPAQ, I certainly agree with the basic premise. I've had an iPAQ 3650, 3870 and 5550, but my next Pocket PC won't necessarily be an iPAQ. Why not, you may ask (but probably won't)?

First, HP killed sleeves. I liked the ability to have three slots, although it's not as important to me as it used to be. I won't go into why, but you can see my thoughts in the Requiem for iPAQ Sleeves (http://thoughts.svpocketpc.com#THOUGHT_IPAQ_SLEEVES) that I wrote.

Second, HP's lack of an SE upgrade for "old" WM 2003 iPAQs (and announcement that they won't likely provide one for the 6300s, either) has gotten me to wonder if not providing upgrades is HP's new policy.

HP commanded a premium price for iPAQs because they were more flexible than other Pocket PCs (originally), had better software bundles and had better support and upgrade policies. That first point is no longer true and the third is in doubt now. HP gave reasons for the lack of an upgrade, but, as another editiorial I wrote (http://thoughts.svpocketpc.com#THOUGHT_IPAQ_WM2003SE_UPGRADE) explains, I don't buy them.

Of course, Dell didn't offer an SE upgrade, so they're not perfect, either. However, Dell is a budget Pocket PC and I wouldn't expect the same level of support from them as from HP.

Basically, HP has killed any "iPAQ inertia" I (and perhaps others) have had with their decisions, so my purchasing decision will now be "What Pocket PC will I get next?" not "What iPAQ will I get next?"

Steve

[Pony99CA]

I've had a 3630, 3870, 3970 and now a 2215.
Not to get too OT, but what's the difference between the 3870 and 3970? Did the 3970 come with WM2003? I thought they were pretty much the same PDA.
3970 had a newer processor I think, otherwise pretty much the same.
3970 was the first ipaq with a transflective display, and if you put the two devices side by side, the difference was incredible.
Actually, the list was quite a bit longer.

400 MHz XScale processor (although it supposedly wasn't much faster than a 206 MHz StrongARM)
Transflective display
48 MB ROM (22 MB iPAQ File Store)
Nevo remote control
4-bit SDIO slot (better performance with SD cards)

I'm sure there were other items, but I think those are the big ones.

Steve

[Anthony Caruana]

I agree that Wm2003SE is just not worth it unless you really want VGA.

I posted this (http://www.thepdaguy.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=146) at my site a little while ago. A lot of what SE gives can be had with software utilities at a far cheaper cost.

Like some of the others my next purchase will be a "which Pocket PC" and not a "which iPAQ" decison.

[Pony99CA]

In my opinion, if you own a WM2003FE device and are thinking of updating to a newer device running WM2003SE, I urge you to reconsider the benefits you would get. And if indeed you decide to go ahead with it, consider where that would leave your WM2003SE in a couple of years time. For the first time Pocket PC buyer, there is nothing wrong with purchasing a WM2003SE device. But for the current WM2003FE user, is it really worth it?
I would consider paying $30-$40 for an SE upgrade for my iPAQ 5550, because I want on-the-fly landscaping and the new Pocket IE single-column view. However, I agree that buying a new device isn't worth it, but others may have different opinions, of course.

At least Toshiba made the decision easier by providing a free upgrade. Maybe Toshiba was hurt by their old upgrade policies (something HP may experience given their apparent new policy).

Steve

P.S. What's with "WM2003FE"? I thought it was a typo of SE at first, but finally realized you meant "First Edition". In my experience, WM 2003 is the first edition and WM 2003 SE is the second edition.

[deich]

I still have the original Axim. I was wanting one of the VGA devices - not that there's a lot of software right now with true VGA support. It would be very cool. But for $500 and up???? You can buy a decent laptop for twice that (or a little more, depending on your taste). You can be sure you will be able to load updated operating systems on your laptop when they become available. And you can't beat the Word and Excel compatibility. :wink: How much are these PDAs really worth?

[paris]

WM2003SE is not a big deal!

A VGA pocket PC on the other hand is a VERY big deal!

[Jonathon Watkins]

You make good points DJ Apod. However I believe that I will be making the switch to this current generation of devices. I am still using an Axim X5 and I used your own arguments during the last upgrade cycle. However, it's now time to upgrade for me. My X5 is showing it's age and I would really like a VGA device. I hear what you are saying, but at some point you have to say 'it's enough'. Conversely, at some point you have to say 'it's not enough'. For me in PPC terms, that time is now. :)

[Pony99CA]

I agree that Wm2003SE is just not worth it unless you really want VGA.
I think whether it's "worth it" depends on how much you're paying. As I said above, I wouldn't buy a new Pocket PC just to get WM 2003 SE. However, I would certainly consider purchasing an upgrade at $30 (what HP charged for the WM 2003 upgrade).

If the upgrade is free, like Toshiba's, it's definitely worth it.

It's not like producing an OS upgrade is magic. Compaq, HP and Dell used to do it and Toshiba already has.

Of course, if some programs you have don't work under SE, and no upgrade is available, that changes things.

I posted this (http://www.thepdaguy.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=146) at my site a little while ago. A lot of what SE gives can be had with software utilities at a far cheaper cost.
You listed the cost of those utilities as $35. That's only "far cheaper" than buying a new Pocket PC. It's not cheaper than $30 or free. :-)

Specifically, you mentioned NYDITOT and ReenSoft's PIEPlus. Let's look at those.

First, NYDITOT requires a soft reset to switch modes (as you mentioned), which is why I don't use a similar program (dotPocket) to switch. Why should I have to kill all the programs I have running just to change the display orientation?

Yes, NYDITOT offers resolutions beyond QVGA, but how many people really use them? Stuff either becomes unreadably small or you have to scroll a lot, which is why most people want landscape mode -- to avoid horizontal scrolling.

As for PIEPlus, I agree that a browser enhancment is nice. I have MultiIE, but that doesn't support a single-column mode. I also suspect that PIEPlus wouldn't play nicely with MultiIE (if somebody has tried it, let me know), and I'm not willing to give up MultiIE to spend another $15. I'm guessing that people who bought Spb PocketPlus would feel similarly.

Steve

[ctmagnus]

I use MultiIE as well, and it has the ability to be switched off. Can any users of PIEplus confirm/deny if it does the same?

[rmasinag]

I have a 2210 and it serves me well. The only reason I would get VGA is really to see my PI 5 calendar better and would even consider buying Datelens then. The main reason I want to upgrade is to get a PPCPE device and I'm willing to live with a smaller screen like the P50 and iJam. If I miss big screen and VGA, I would get an ipaq 6300 type device.

[foebea]

I use MultiIE as well, and it has the ability to be switched off. Can any users of PIEplus confirm/deny if it does the same?

Yup yup. click the pieplus button in PIE and choose either Standard View or Pocket View.

Standard View is natural widescreen format.
Pocket View is reformatted to fit your screen. It really does a good job of it too.

[JD Silver]

I have been thinking over the question of upgrading to SE or not, and I think that I'll pass for now. I currently have the iPaq 4150, and just love the formfactor. Certainly I would really enjoy having a VGA screen, but the lack of universal support for either the Intel 2700G or the ATI graphics coprocessor tells me to wait for CE 5.0. Hopefully, by then, DirectX or 3D support will present a unversal API to the graphics HW, and facilitate more complete support for VGA graphics.

I'm also a little disappointed that some of the VGA models only include 64 MB of RAM. The additional flash memory is nice, but for a device of this generation I expect better.

[sracer]

Quite content with my 2215 for the same reasons you listed. And my next device will not be an HP iPAQ. I've had a 3630, 3870, 3970 and now a 2215. The end. See ya HP. No support for the last generation, no support from me for your next generation.
You'll have to scratch Dell off your list (if it was ever on it). They didn't provide an SE update for their devices either.

[sracer]

It still amazes me that people who were perfectly happy with their 2210/2215 devices (before SE) suddenly claimed that without an SE update, their device was a worthless brick.

How "must have" can on-the-fly landscape support be if one bought a device that didn't have it in the first place? :?:

Common sense is slowly (but temporarily) returning to the PPC scene. As time goes by, people are calming down and understanding that what they were capable of doing yesterday, can still be done today... without the availability of an SE update.

I have been the lone voice in various PPC forums highlighting the fact that HP was the only one to provide an updated ROM for WM2003 that fixed the nagging bugs. My 2215 running ROM 1.10 runs lightning quick and smooth as silk. And except for installing PocketWeather (which puked all over my system) it has been rock-solid.

People are also realizing that they will be "stuck" with whatever version of the OS their device ships with. So whether they are "stuck" with WM2003 or WM2003SE, the likelihood of an upgrade in either case is pretty remote.

Unfortunately, people are NOT hammering manufacturers over their "device churn". Since devices rarely last more than a year in sales, there is no opportunity for prices on them to drop. I'm sure that a new 2215 for $200 would be very appealing to many people.

[kdog]

Dimensions of HP hx4705
5.17(W) x 3.03(L) x .59 (H) in
131mm x 77mm x 14.9 mm
Weight 6.6 oz (186.7 g) without cover and cards

Dimensions of Sony U70
Size: 6.57(W) x 4.25 (L) x 1.03 (H) in
167mm × 108mm × 26.4 mm
Weight: 1.21 lbs / 550g

[Pony99CA]

I use MultiIE as well, and it has the ability to be switched off. Can any users of PIEplus confirm/deny if it does the same?
Yup yup. click the pieplus button in PIE and choose either Standard View or Pocket View.

Standard View is natural widescreen format.
Pocket View is reformatted to fit your screen. It really does a good job of it too.
I don't think that's what Magnus meant. I think he was asking whether PIEPlus could shut itself down completely, not whether the page view could be changed.

I just shut down MultiIE with two browser windows open, and the MultiIE button was gone, but both windows were still there (which is good -- no data loss).

To me, the issue is of academic interest only. I wouldn't want to be toggling back and forth between browser enhancers while reading a page.

Steve

[Darius Wey]

Congrats DJ Apod! Made the front page. :D

Haha...I know. I couldn't quite believe it myself. I woke up this morning, brushed my teeth, had breakfast, and logged on, and thought...WOW!

Anyway, I hope what I have said spurs a lot of thought amongst all of us. :)

[Pony99CA]

It still amazes me that people who were perfectly happy with their 2210/2215 devices (before SE) suddenly claimed that without an SE update, their device was a worthless brick.
While there are some people who may have said that, I don't think most people who want SE have.

I still like my 5550, but it's certainly less valuable if no upgrade is available. If somebody wanted to sell their iPAQ, do you think they'd get more for one running SE or plain old WM 2003?

How "must have" can on-the-fly landscape support be if one bought a device that didn't have it in the first place? :?:
Are you serious? No Pocket PC had on-the-fly landscaping until WM 2003 SE came along. so I think the question is ridiculous (to put it mildly). :roll:

However, people have been asking for that feature for years and, now that it is available, some people think it's a must-have (just like VGA). I don't see any contradiction here at all.

Common sense is slowly (but temporarily) returning to the PPC scene. As time goes by, people are calming down and understanding that what they were capable of doing yesterday, can still be done today... without the availability of an SE update.
A PC running DOS is still capable of doing what it did when it was purchased. Want to buy one?

I have been the lone voice in various PPC forums highlighting the fact that HP was the only one to provide an updated ROM for WM2003 that fixed the nagging bugs. My 2215 running ROM 1.10 runs lightning quick and smooth as silk. And except for installing PocketWeather (which puked all over my system) it has been rock-solid.
I wouldn't give yourself that much credit. I think others have said HP provides decent support for OS updates, too. I just wonder how long they'll do that for our existing iPAQs now that the new generation is out.

People are also realizing that they will be "stuck" with whatever version of the OS their device ships with. So whether they are "stuck" with WM2003 or WM2003SE, the likelihood of an upgrade in either case is pretty remote.
If a manufacturer won't provide upgrades, it would be nice to announce that before people bought them. If they later decide to offer an upgrade, people will be pleased instead of pissed. HP seems to have done that with the 6300, so people contemplating purchasing one can take that into account.

However, Compaq/HP set the precedent for offering upgrades, providing them for both Pocket PC 2002 and Windows Mobile 2003. Now they have reversed that policy after lots of iPAQs were sold, many to people who were expecting an upgrade (and some who were specifically told by HP reps that there would be one). I think that stinks.

Notice what I said -- I don't think my iPAQ stinks; I think HP's policy (and the way it was announced (http://forums1.itrc.hp.com/service/forums/bizsupport/questionanswer.do?threadId=641503)) stinks. Do you honestly think HP handled this the right way? Can't you understand at all why people are upset?

Steve

[christak]

...HP commanded a premium price for iPAQs because they were more flexible than other Pocket PCs (originally), had better software bundles and had better support and upgrade policies. That first point is no longer true and the third is in doubt now. HP gave reasons for the lack of an upgrade, but, as another editiorial I wrote (http://thoughts.svpocketpc.com#THOUGHT_IPAQ_WM2003SE_UPGRADE) explains, I don't buy them.

Of course, Dell didn't offer an SE upgrade, so they're not perfect, either. However, Dell is a budget Pocket PC and I wouldn't expect the same level of support from them as from HP.

Basically, HP has killed any "iPAQ inertia" I (and perhaps others) have had with their decisions, so my purchasing decision will now be "What Pocket PC will I get next?" not "What iPAQ will I get next?"

Steve

I agree with you, only I feel certain that my next PPC will not be an HP unless there is a big improvement in HP's prices. I'll go with a "significantly" less expensive machine, like the Dell X50v (as compared to the HP 4700), and accept the fact that PPCs are no longer going to be getting future software upgrades.

[Darius Wey]

And yet the bottom line is, from WM2003FE to WM2003SE, we see a step up in Windows CE from 4.20 to 4.21. And from that, there is so much controversy over the availability of software updates.

If an update in revision number of such a small extent is able to yield such effects, where will that leave all WM2003SE users when 5.0 is released on consumer Pocket PCs?

I've sat on it for a while, and made observations over this entire thing, and have really decided it's not worth updating to WM2003SE yet.

HP's new range offers something new for new Pocket PC users, but for pre-existing iPAQ users, I don't think what they offer warrants a whole new upgrade. Even as enticing as Dell's X50v is, I've made the decision that I'd rather get a VGA device with a newer OS, than VGA with WM2003SE.

[disconnected]

I started out being 99.9% sure that I'd get the HP4700, but the longer I wait (have a CompUSA TAP I want to use), the less sure I am.

VGA is great in theory, but I'm not sure I want to deal with apps that don't play well with it (ereader, Mapopolis, and who knows what else). I know there's SE_VGA, but I don't want to have to remember which apps work with that and which don't and soft reset in between them... and then there's Tweaks2k2 for a similar but different? affect on individual apps?
I also hate to go from 128mb to 64.

I loved my 3630. Then I got a 3870, and it had a lot of problems. The 3970 was a much improved 3870, and still the most stable iPAQ I've had. I skipped the 5400 because I'd read about a lot of problems that it had. The 5500 seemed to be a big improvement, so I got that, and have been pretty happy with it. Now the 4700 seems to be somewhat problematic, so maybe I'll wait for the next version of it.

[Zack Mahdavi]

I agree with you DJ Apod. WM2003SE provides no real incentive to upgrade. I may have upgraded if the landscape mode was implemented better, but unfortunately it wasn't. The input space should not take up 2/3 of the screen when in writing mode, and that large "white space" on either side of the input shouldn't be there either. Microsoft should have put more thought into implementing the landscape mode rather than just rotating the screen. Microsoft, maybe it's time to look at your other competition? :)

In the end, although VGA is that great, it doesn't merit the $500+ cost. I'm happy with my PDA currently, and I think I'll be waiting to see what the next OS has to upgrade. Till then, me and my iPaq 4155 will remain bros. :D

[Darius Wey]

P.S. What's with "WM2003FE"? I thought it was a typo of SE at first, but finally realized you meant "First Edition". In my experience, WM 2003 is the first edition and WM 2003 SE is the second edition.

Sorry. I was working on the general assumption that for new Pocket PC users, the WM2003 tag would be referring to the general OS code in general, and so I used WM2003FE and WM2003SE as a general way of referring to the two different variants of the WM2003 OS. I also refer to WM2003 First Edition as just plain old WM2003, and Second Edition as WM2003SE, but for the first-time Pocket PC user out there, I thought it'd be best to not be too confusing in my thread.

[Darius Wey]

Can anybody comment as to the theoretical feasability of a crack that would allow WMP10 to run on WM2003 First Edition? It would be interesting to know just how much WMP10 is expected to rely on SE features, aside from the obvious "advertised benefits" of SE (landscape, VGA). If it were a minor modification, do you think Microsoft would ever decide to offer the upgrade for older devices?

Read this thread here. (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=32468)

It may answer your questions, although the fact is, it would be hard to lay your hands on an installer for WMP10 Mobile alone in the first place. Especially since Microsoft have chosen not to make it available for download.

[sracer]

Notice what I said -- I don't think my iPAQ stinks; I think HP's policy (and the way it was announced (http://forums1.itrc.hp.com/service/forums/bizsupport/questionanswer.do?threadId=641503)) stinks. Do you honestly think HP handled this the right way? Can't you understand at all why people are upset?

Steve
Yeah, I can understand it. Because people for the most part are self-centered with a huge sense of entitlement. They make the unreasonable assumption that an upgrade will be offered even though nothing on HP's website or press releases stated or implied it. They then expect HP to meet these expectations and assumptions.

Did they handle it the right way? Well, they never said an upgrade would be available. People didn't like the answer so they pressed for a different answer. HP offered some lame-o excuses because they knew that telling the truth wouldn't help. Unreasonable people cannot be reasoned with.

Short of providing an upgrade, I can't see how anything HP could've done would have satisfied the unsatisfied.

[Pony99CA]

And yet the bottom line is, from WM2003FE to WM2003SE, we see a step up in Windows CE from 4.20 to 4.21. And from that, there is so much controversy over the availability of software updates.

If an update in revision number of such a small extent is able to yield such effects, where will that leave all WM2003SE users when 5.0 is released on consumer Pocket PCs?
I don't think the transition will be that bad. The transition from Pocket PC 2002 to Windows Mobile 2003 also moved from Windows CE 3.0 to Windows CE 4.2, so we can look at that transition to see how well that went. Some programs broke, but I think the overwhelming majority worked fine; major programs that didn't typically got updates so that they did work.

Steve

[Pony99CA]

Notice what I said -- I don't think my iPAQ stinks; I think HP's policy (and the way it was announced (http://forums1.itrc.hp.com/service/forums/bizsupport/questionanswer.do?threadId=641503)) stinks. Do you honestly think HP handled this the right way? Can't you understand at all why people are upset?
Yeah, I can understand it. Because people for the most part are self-centered with a huge sense of entitlement. They make the unreasonable assumption that an upgrade will be offered even though nothing on HP's website or press releases stated or implied it. They then expect HP to meet these expectations and assumptions.
So you're insulting most of the people who are upset with HP, eh? You'd think the self-proclaimed "Lancelot of the Information Superhighway" would be more chivalrous. :roll:

But let's look at your claims. You said the assumption that there would be an upgrade was unreasonable. I think it's quite reasonable given Compaq and HP's history of providing one OS upgrade for most of the iPAQ line.

You say HP's Web site and press releases never stated or implied there would be an upgrade. That may be true, but see the previous point. Also, what about the people who have said that HP representatives specifically said there would be an upgrade available? Are those people all lying?

A PDA is an odd cross between a PC and an embedded system. The former gets lots of upgrades, the latter not so many (if any). I think a reasonable compromise is to offer one OS upgrade for every Pocket PC (assuming the manufacturer is releasing any Pocket PCs that will have the new OS; if they drop out of the business, they obviously won't be held to that standard). See my suggested upgrade policy editorial (http://thoughts.svpocketpc.com#THOUGHT_OS_UPGRADE_POLICY) for my reasoning. Tell me if you think it's reasonable; if you don't, let me know why not.

Did they handle it the right way? Well, they never said an upgrade would be available. People didn't like the answer so they pressed for a different answer. HP offered some lame-o excuses because they knew that telling the truth wouldn't help.
So HP offering B.S. excuses is OK? I think that only made matters worse by insulting our intelligence.

By the way, what is the truth?

Short of providing an upgrade, I can't see how anything HP could've done would have satisfied the unsatisfied.
Maybe your imagination isn't as good as mine. :-) I know of one way. After stating the reasons why they weren't going to offer an upgrade to WM 2003 SE, HP could have said that they did plan to offer an upgrade to Windows Mobile 2005 (or whatever) assuming the OS would work with existing hardware. That way they'd be seen as looking out for their users. Even better, if they were lucky, many people would buy new devices before WM 2005 was released and very few people would need to upgrade those older devices anyway.

Of course, that assumes HP will provide any upgrades in the future. If their new policy is no upgrades at all, my suggestion is moot.

Steve

[Jonathon Watkins]

Quite content with my 2215 for the same reasons you listed. And my next device will not be an HP iPAQ. I've had a 3630, 3870, 3970 and now a 2215. The end. See ya HP. No support for the last generation, no support from me for your next generation.
You'll have to scratch Dell off your list (if it was ever on it). They didn't provide an SE update for their devices either.

No, but they *did* offer an upgrade from PPC2002 o PPC2003 for a small fee, which was reasonable.

If I buy a PPC would expect to be able upgrade at least to the next major PPC OS, for a fee. HP's policy will only hurt them in the long run.

[Darius Wey]

And yet the bottom line is, from WM2003FE to WM2003SE, we see a step up in Windows CE from 4.20 to 4.21. And from that, there is so much controversy over the availability of software updates.

If an update in revision number of such a small extent is able to yield such effects, where will that leave all WM2003SE users when 5.0 is released on consumer Pocket PCs?
I don't think the transition will be that bad. The transition from Pocket PC 2002 to Windows Mobile 2003 also moved from Windows CE 3.0 to Windows CE 4.2, so we can look at that transition to see how well that went. Some programs broke, but I think the overwhelming majority worked fine; major programs that didn't typically got updates so that they did work.

Steve

That is true. When making that previous post, I failed to mention what I was actually referring to in terms of "software updates". I was referring to two major branches of these updates - (1) ROM updates in the form of OS upgrades, and (2) updates in the form of Microsoft program updates.

The transition from Pocket PC 2002 to Windows Mobile 2003 was a quantum leap back in those days, and yet, the majority of Pocket PC manufacturers and Microsoft itself were able to accommodate to market demands and provide a vast array of updates for many Pocket PC users out there. However, this is the past that we are talking about. In recent times, with Windows Mobile 2003 SE in the market, such practices are rarely seen. Very few companies offered WM2003SE updates for their pre-existing devices, and Microsoft have even chosen to limit their availability of Windows Media Player 10 Mobile to WM2003SE only. As for the reasons behind such a move, I am not sure, yet in times like these, it is hard to state that there are a lot of similarities between the jump from Pocket PC 2002 to Windows Mobile 2003, and from Windows Mobile 2003 to Windows Mobile 2003 SE.

I'd like to think that public outcry may make companies change their stance on updates, but only time will tell. I do hope that companies take note of what us, as major Pocket PC consumers, believe to be the current response to their actions, and hopefully, when Windows CE 5.0 debuts on consumer Pocket PC devices, that the transition from Windows Mobile 2003 SE to Windows CE 5 will be a smooth one.

Take Microsoft Voice Command for example. It is only capable of being run on Windows Mobile 2003 devices. Now when the next version comes out (2.0), will it only be able to be run on Windows Mobile 2003 SE devices, thus leaving current Windows Mobile 2003 First Edition users out to dry? I'd like to think not, yet their current stance on Windows Media Player 10 Mobile updates have left me thinking otherwise. :roll:

[maximus]

Am I the only one here who is still with a Dell Axim X5 with PPC2002 ?

Windows media 10 is cool, but I hardly use windows mobile anyway. I primarily run oggs and divx, which are very well handled by PocketMVP and Winampaq.

[Darius Wey]

I primarily run oggs and divx, which are very well handled by PocketMVP and Winampaq.

Totally OT, yet interestingly, PocketMVP is back in development. So it will be nice to see how BetaPlayer and PocketMVP, both CoreCodec projects, try and snag the Pocket PC market. :)

[jsnielsen]

Why I Won't Be Rushing Out To Get a Windows Mobile 2003 Second Edition Pocket PC...That is my question and my opinion. What are your thoughts? :)

Well, my thoughts are that you're very much right. I'm one of those guys that previously would shell out any amount to get the latest gear, but no more. It's just not worth it anymore. And, you get poor too ;)

Right now I own a Qtek 2020. I always dreamt of the converged device, Pocket PC and phone in one. But having had it for 3-4 months I've had to realize that this does not yet meet my demands. E.g. batterylife is way too short, and I constantly worry about "what if a day turns out longer and with more conversations than expeced, I will lose my data".

So for that reason I've started looking for a new device. And will be going back to ppc+phone. But, that device has to have certain functionality. VGA, WiFi and BT. And both SDio + CF. These have only now begun to appear, and I'll probably be getting an Asus 730 or more likely the Dell x50v.

And my point is... I'm never again shelling out my cash for units or software I don't have a very specific and clear idea can solve the needs that I have.

I won't even begin to worry about CE.net 5, I'm just hoping an upgrade for the PPC I'll end up buying, will be available when the time comes. And if not, I'll be waiting at least a year or two from release, to get a new device. That is, if CE.net 5 brings any true advantages that are of any use to me. Also, I usually allow a year or two to pass, to let the technology settle a bit, and let the 2nd or 3rd generation devices get released.

But basically... you're so very right, and I agree with you.

[hamishmacdonald]

I'm embarrassed. After going on and on here about how I was sticking with my iPAQ 2210, resisting the pressure to upgrade to SE, I accidentally scraped up my iPAQ's screen on a recent trip (stopped at the Arc de Triomphe, looking up my destination on TomTom CityMaps). I went and bought a LOOX 720. (HP's latest offerings do nothing for me, and I'm still ticked with them over not using their devices' capacity to be upgraded after touting that as a feature.)

I gotta say, the new LOOX is pretty sweet. I'm still trying to get my eyes adjusted to seeing smooth text on-screen. Since I'm a writer, this makes a big difference in my working day. On-board WiFi and twice the internal memory are very sweet additions, too. Yesterday I had a call with my editor in a cafe -- nothing so unusual, except that I was using Skype and WiFi to do it!

[Steven Cedrone]

I accidentally scraped up my iPAQ's screen on a recent trip...

Accident? :rotfl: And just how long did it take you to scratch up that screen? :wink:

Joking...

Steve

[GadgetMan]

Well, I had three reasons to upgrade from Compaq iPaq 3950 to HP iPaq hx4700: hardware, hardware and hardware :D

WM2003SE has a few nice improvements over WM2003 (which I upgraded my 3950 to), primarily landscape mode and PIE enhancements. However, it is dfefninitively not enought to justify purchase of a whole new (and rather expensive) device. If the differences were bigger (like they are expected to be between WM2003SE and WM2005), then it could be a different story...

However, the main reason for my upgrading was the huge hardware improvement between 3950 and hx4700. After using this device for three weeks or so, I must say - for the first time ever in case of Pocket PC's - that this baby is PERFECT. Some users complain about 64 MB RAM size as beeing too small. For me this is not an issue, as I have almost everything installed to iPaq File Store or SD Card. I therefore have not come even close to running out of available RAM, even while running a dozen of so applications at the same time. On the other hand smaller RAM translates into longer battery life, which in this particular case is a fair trade to me.

hx4700 provides instantaneous response (with exception of TextMaker and PlanMaker that take about 5 seconds to launch from SD Card, but then they are huge programs and it would not be fair to blame hardware for load time), it offers virtually instant Wi-Fi connection (I can browse Internet about three seconds after tapping on Wi-Fi activation button), the display is absolutely amazing, the casing feels light yet extremely sturdy (no cheap plastic squeaks here!), the battery seems to last forever (and is user replaceable!), the NavPad (touchpad) is a welcome change form the traditional D-Pad (at least to me), the size, shape and weight are very nice (in fact I expected it to be much larger and heavier, until I took it in my hand for the first time), etc. etc. In other words - the best hardware package I have ever seen, used or heard about.

I personally think that the amazing quality and performance of this device (hardware wise) justifies the steep price. After all, you get what you pay for :D

From what I have seen and read, it seems that hx4700 has been in fact designed with the next version of Windows Mobile (WM2005) in mind. I am therefore confdident that HP will offer OS upgrade at least for this model. I just hope that this new version will be more compelling to upgrade to than the last one (WM2003SE) was.

Cheers,

[mace]

I traded my hp 2215 for the hp rx3715, using the CompUSA TAP program. I agree with DJ APOD, that the new OS is not much of an improvement over WM2003.

I enjoy the cool features of the rx3715 and do not regret my decision to trade up to WM 2003 SE, but still it is not worth paying, in my opinion, full retail in order to get the small improvements that WM 2003 SE provides.

[Hx4700]

Can anybody comment as to the theoretical feasability of a crack that would allow WMP10 to run on WM2003 First Edition? It would be interesting to know just how much WMP10 is expected to rely on SE features, aside from the obvious "advertised benefits" of SE (landscape, VGA). If it were a minor modification, do you think Microsoft would ever decide to offer the upgrade for older devices?
And I wonder how hard it will be to get WMP10 to run on the Hx4700. If we can just get hold of a WMP10 install. I'm a little peeved that WMP10 did not come with the supposely top of the line HP machine.
Ron...

[shawnc]

Nice job DJ Apod. This is one of the more interesting threads I've read. I don't know that I can add any new reasons to this discussion but I've had my 4150 for 2 years now and I would LOVE a new device. I hate that I can't get Media Player 10 since the area that I get the most use out of my Ipaq is listening to music (with Internet a close 2nd). I would GLADLY pay for an upgrade to SE for this reason alone. I don't really want a new device for VGA because I've seen the new Ipaqs and quite frankly don't get what all the fuss is about. Maybe it's because everyone was SO excited about VGA and there was so much hype that my expectations were unreasonable. Was there a difference? Certainly. Was it as dramatic as I had been lead to believe? Not even close.

However, because I'm such a sucker, I was still willing to shell out around $500 for a new machine because I've had mine for two years, and like I said, I'm such a sucker. My biggest gripe is that eveyone seemed to forget what made Pocket PC's popular to a large majority of non-techies (like myself) is their Pocketability. That's why I love my 4150. I don't need dual slots AND WiFi AND BT. Give me a sleek machine that is slightly lighter than my 4150, with ONE slot (SD) and I'm all over it.

Adding functionality to these devices is fine. That's was progress is all about. Adding that functionality at the expense of size is in my opinion a HUGE mistake. I see big price reductions for these devices relatively soon. Oh, they'll fly off the shelves initially as the techies who love the latest innovations flock to the new devices (and there is nothing wrong with that, I'm not being critical). But I think that the majority of non-techies who buy these machines are simply not going to be interested in bigger machines that are less pocketable.

Once the single-slot, lightweight machine with VGA becomes available, I'm there. Until then, I guess I'll have to fine another toy to spend my money on.

[Philip Colmer]

One feature that SE offers that doesn't seem to be available as a separate product in any shape or form is support for WPA for the wireless card in my Dell X3i.

My home wireless network is configured for WPA, so I can't use my Axim at home. We don't yet have wireless at work but when we do, it will be WPA as well.

I know I could reconfigure the home network to use WEP instead, but that is only part of the picture. Where I work will get wireless before I get a new Pocket PC.

--Philip

[wocket]

Great Thread DJ Apod!

I own an iPAQ 2210 which I still love to bits and use every day in work. I got a Tosh E800 about 5 months ago (it's hard to believe it's that long already) at a really great price new so I could'nt resist it. I upgraded it to SE more or less straight away and from that same day to this it's been back to running FE. Lets see what next year brings!

[x999x]

Aside from my rx3115 being complete garbage, I wasn't all that thrilled with 2003se to be honest. I put it through it's paces, and even with such things as native landscape support, it really didn't improve or expediate my daily routine at all.

Upon returning it and going back to 2003FE on my 4155, I have to say I'm still doing what I want on my PPC irregardless of my OS version.

[robert_biggs]

Great thread. I was very much looking forward to purchasing a new VGA PPC a few months ago. I"m still using an Axim X5 running WM2003. But now I think I'll wait till WM2005 arrives. MS's implimentation of VGA in WM2003SE is disappointing. PIE looks nearly the same as it does on a QVGA device. Sure, icons look nicer, but the overall look of VGA displays dosen't seem improved enough to justify the need for it. Plus, most programs haven't even been optimized for use on VGA devices and probably won't for some time. Then there's the fact that these devices being released today won't most likely be able to be upgraded to WM2005, which is suppose to be released within a year. I'm looking forward to WM2005 with DirectX. MS plans to release AOE2 for that OS, which I am definetly looking forward to. My other gripe with current VGA devices is the price. When I purchased my Axim X5, it was one of the best PPC's on the market and cost under $300. Now Dell wants us to pay almost twice that for the newest technology over 2 years later. I like VGA, but not that much. And I don't have use for the wireless features yet. US wireless plans involving a Bluetooth-equiped cell phone are too expense for me and I won't be upgrading my home system to wireless for at least several more months. So for me, I'll wait another year and see what happens.

[jeffmd]

After getting the original dell, I have no intention of getting a new pocket pc untill quite a few factors happen, and 2003SE dosnt offer most of them.

the dell can do most of what I need. Therefore in order to make me want to upgrade, some significant improvements that will actually change and improve what I do on my current pocket pc needs to be made.

First, we need to see those good video chips from ati nvidia and intel. So far all of these VGA display PPCs still have the same crap video chips, and as we have seen over on the beta player boards, 640x480 video playback isnt realistic yet. Sorry, but VGA display just so I can see more icons on my desktop is not worth any amount of money. There is no real improvement in video playback using a vga display yet. infact it may actually be worse. The current videochipsets bandwidth isnt adiquet for 30fps 640x480 video. Wide screen is doable, but not full. So even if you scaled low resolution video up, you may end up viewing movies in a smaller window due to not being able to stretch to 640x480.

Second, better cpu power, namely a FPU. Currently the number one problem now when converting code over from windows or linux, is that the code assumes a FPU is present. After all ever since the first 486's, FPU is standered equipment. Also the scaling of the cpu power and speed is very crappy and still mostly all or nothing when you compare the smooth scaling of speeds seen in P4 mobile chips. (I allways end up forcing my dell to 200mhz because it bumps up to 400mhz for even the smallest amount of work. 200mhz is more then enough for music playback, web browsing, heck I converted an educational video series to 320x240 15fps with a low data rate, and even that plays fine at 200mhz)

Third, better front panel. Why are we still seeing the most crappy thumb pads.. and why arnt there ever any additional buttons and layouts for gaming? It's really dumb that were trying to push landscape mode here and button lay outs are still solely portrait.

Fourth, built in hard drives, more ram. I never build a pc with less then 256 megs of DDR ram, and the rigs often run less then a high end PPC. so why do pocket PCs still putter around with 64 and 128 megs? And with compact flash pushing 1 gig for 50 bucks, why cant we see bigger flashroms? Heck most software runs fine from flashrom, why stick it in normal ram at all?

Bigger batteries by default. For some reson the trend today is.. smaller batteries.. same amount of power. Of course the current default batteries dont last for crap. We need default batteries and case designs to accomidate 2000ma bare minimum!

[Perk]

I regret to say that I agree with you on most of your post.

I started carrying an electronic organizer back when it was Windows CE with Casio's E10, then the better Casio E100 with the next version of WinCE. Then one of my friends got the Star Trek looking Compaq iPAQ, H3635. Wow, serious cool factor, nice finish and style and you could see the display outside and the screen was scratch resistant and it had the new Pocket PC operating system and extra non-volatile memory for OS upgrades, unlike Casio. It also supported expansion sleeves so you could do more with it. So I bought it.

I stayed with Compaq because they released an OS upgrade which I bought. Then I bought a Compaq H3835. Way cooler, better cradle, power, screen, stylus, more built-in memory and the additional of a built-in card slot. Once again, Compaq released an OS upgrade and I bought it. HP bought Compaq, so I bought the H2215 which, like its ancestors, includes extra non volatile memory to support OS upgrades. Well, shame on HP. Not as smooth though as the default storage folder is the file store instead of the extra SD card or CF card. (Does anyone know of a fix?)

Now, the newly introduced HP line has ugly cheap looking finishes. They bought the iPAQ but don't appear to respect what made it so successful. As far as I'm concerned, they're riding on Compaq's efforts and innovations and the iPAQ will probably go the way of the old HP Jornada. (No offense to Jornada owners)

This is a shame because I've got friends who have iPAQs because of me and I've always felt comfortable in that. Now, I honestly don't know what to reccomend.

PS: My son got an H1910 with no extra non-vol memory, so we knew there would be no upgrade. I now know that one of the reasons I got a better model was in vain.

:|

[Mark Johnson]

I for one have no problem with OEM's not offering OS upgrades. What has annoyed me is that nothing has arrived in the 22 months since I bought my 1910 that makes we WANT to upgrade. I've got the cash burning a hole in my pocket for a VGA version of my 1910, but no one will bring one to market.

I'm not even sure I understand myself anymore: I've got to be a serious PPC enthusiast, I visit PPCT at least a few times a day. So how can a PPC-junkie like me still be using a 1910? The answer is a bummer: MS and the OEMs can't get it together enough to offer something to make even an addict like me buy it. I really, no REALLY, want to throw some cash at a 19xx VGA PPC, but instead all we got this cycle is VGA man-purse bricks and uber-lame QVGA units that don't "do" anything that I can't do with what I ALREADY OWN!

PPC2003SE is a waste of time without VGA, and only what 4? devices in this entire crop have VGA. And they're all HUGE monsters. If it's not small enough to fit in you POCKET it's not a POCKETPC and none of these brutes are. So I'm with DJ Apod - Why BOTHER to upgrade from my 1910?
- My contacts are there, SE won't change anything there.
- The 1910 plays mp3's, SE won't change anything there.
- The lame Pocket Word support for real .doc files is the same on SE.
- The lame Pocket Excel support for real .xls files is the same on SE.
- The lame lack of .mdb file support is the same on SE.
- SE didn't bring us Pocket Access
- SE didn't bring us Bluetooth keyboard support

Aside from VGA, as far as I care, SE means nothing. HP should have released the hx4700 (for those who don't mind pushing their "Pocket"PC around in a wheelbarrow :wink: ) and shelved all the other units. Sure they could have started shipping a 4150SE or a 2215SE with SE, but I couldn't care less if it doesn't have VGA.

It's not PPC2003 vs. PPC2003SE or WM9 vs. WM10
It's QVGA vs. VGA and it's also "pocketable" vs. "back-packable / purse-able / briefcase-able."

[Pony99CA]

The transition from Pocket PC 2002 to Windows Mobile 2003 was a quantum leap back in those days, and yet, the majority of Pocket PC manufacturers and Microsoft itself were able to accommodate to market demands and provide a vast array of updates for many Pocket PC users out there
You're mistaken here. The "majority" (over 50%) did not offer an upgrade. An OS upgrade to Pocket PC 2002 required two things -- an ARM processor (Microsoft no longer supported Hitachi and MIPS) and Flash ROM. I think only the Compaq iPAQ and the UR There @migo met those criteria; HP used Hitachi processors and Casio used MIPs processors.

However, this is the past that we are talking about. In recent times, with Windows Mobile 2003 SE in the market, such practices are rarely seen. Very few companies offered WM2003SE updates for their pre-existing devices, and Microsoft have even chosen to limit their availability of Windows Media Player 10 Mobile to WM2003SE only. As for the reasons behind such a move, I am not sure, yet in times like these, it is hard to state that there are a lot of similarities between the jump from Pocket PC 2002 to Windows Mobile 2003, and from Windows Mobile 2003 to Windows Mobile 2003 SE.
Not being one to believe in conspiracy theories, I'm just throwing this out for those that are. Suppose the Pocket PC OEMs asked Microsoft not to make Windows Media 10 available for anything other than WM 2003 SE. That has two benefits for them -- they'll have a good excuse why they can't offer a WM 2003 OS update with WM 10 included and a good reason to get users to buy a new device.

I'd like to think that public outcry may make companies change their stance on updates, but only time will tell. I do hope that companies take note of what us, as major Pocket PC consumers, believe to be the current response to their actions, and hopefully, when Windows CE 5.0 debuts on consumer Pocket PC devices, that the transition from Windows Mobile 2003 SE to Windows CE 5 will be a smooth one.
I like to think the public outcry over Toshiba's poor OS upgrade policies convinced them to release a WM 2003 SE upgrade (and they even did it for free). Many people refused to buy Toshibas after feeling abandoned with relatively new devices, and that may have hurt Toshiba.

It's too bad HP didn't learn that lesson. Only time will tell with WM 2005.

Steve

[Pony99CA]

I agree with DJ APOD, that the new OS is not much of an improvement over WM2003.
I see a lot of people say that. When they do, I point out the main improvements for existing users:

Landscape mode (on-the-fly)
VGA support (only useful for Toshiba e805 users)
Single-column Pocket IE mode
Transcriber shortcuts
WPA WiFi encryption

There are other minor items, but I think these are the most important ones.

Item #1 has been requested for years. Item #3 has also been requested by a lot of people.

Then I challenge people to name the user-visible improvements of Pocket PC 2002 and Windows Mobile 2003. Were there as many in those OS releases? Were they as important?

In my opinion, WM 2003 SE is the most compelling OS upgrade Microsoft has released. I would actually consider paying for it to upgrade my iPAQ 5550. I did not pay for the Pocket PC 2002 upgrade for my iPAQ 3650 or the Windows Mobile 2003 upgrade for my iPAQ 3870.

In fact, I feel so strongly about this that I just wrote an editorial (http://thoughts.svpocketpc.com#THOUGHT_WM2003SE_FEATURES) about it.

I do agree that it's probably not worth buying new hardware for most people just to get the new OS, but I could say that about Pocket PC 2002 and Windows Mobile 2003 as well.

Steve

[blusparkles]

I recently made the jump from an iPAQ 2210 to the iPAQ hx4700. Ever since rumours of the 4700 started making the rounds, I decided that that would be my next Pocket PC. Oh, I was very tempted by the iPAQ 4150 for the form factor, but after seeing the clarity of text on the Toshiba e800, I knew that VGA was really the only way to go.

So believe it or not, the main reason that I bought the hx4700 was because I knew text would render much better. I do a lot of reading on my Pocket PC, from news on AvantGo to eBooks, and VGA makes a big difference! As does the larger 4 inch display.

Going from the 2210 to the 4700, there was a size difference, but it hasn't bothered me at all. While the 2210 was shorter, it was also thicker. The thinness of the 4700 actually makes it seem not as large, and after having it for a couple of weeks, I must say that I really like it's form factor. And the screen is just unbelievable. If I had to pick between form factor and display quality, I'd pick the latter every time. Of course, I'm a girl so pocketability isn't so big of an issue for me - I just stick it in my purse. :wink:

With a 2GB Compact Flash card and 1GB SD card, I've got the whole second series of The Office as well as three movies, and they play like a dream. I never really watched movies on my 2210 - I always felt kinda weird holding it in landscape mode as it never looked quite right. With the hx4700, it looks quite natural to hold it in landscape orientation due to its symmetrical design.

So the move to WM2003SE has been worth it, for me.

[Darius Wey]

You're mistaken here. The "majority" (over 50%) did not offer an upgrade. An OS upgrade to Pocket PC 2002 required two things -- an ARM processor (Microsoft no longer supported Hitachi and MIPS) and Flash ROM. I think only the Compaq iPAQ and the UR There @migo met those criteria; HP used Hitachi processors and Casio used MIPs processors.

You raise a good point. Yet at least the transition from 2002 to 2003 was of a bigger magnitude than the present practices being incorporated for transitions from 2003 to 2003SE. Now that ARMs and Flash ROMs are pretty much incorporated into every Pocket PC in today's market, you would expect a more "upgradable" path for pre-existing 2003 owners. Wow...are we wrong! :roll:

Not being one to believe in conspiracy theories, I'm just throwing this out for those that are. Suppose the Pocket PC OEMs asked Microsoft not to make Windows Media 10 available for anything other than WM 2003 SE. That has two benefits for them -- they'll have a good excuse why they can't offer a WM 2003 OS update with WM 10 included and a good reason to get users to buy a new device.

I also think that that is the current stance of Pocket PC manufactuers. However, if you look at the bigger picture, who would actually shell out hundreds of dollars for the sole purposes of owning WMP10 Mobile on their device? Maybe only Mr. Gates and some of his henchmen.

I do agree that it's probably not worth buying new hardware for most people just to get the new OS, but I could say that about Pocket PC 2002 and Windows Mobile 2003 as well.

I would purchase an OS update for my device, yet for a whole hardware revamp just to get it, I'd consider otherwise.

WM2003SE is probably one of the most compelling upgrades to date, as you have said. Yet sadly, it lacks a lot of features that people still cry out for. A proper task manager, a better program launcher, "true" on-the-fly landscape support, better PIE features, proper Pocket Office applications, etc.

I'm really hoping that the future OSes deliver these features.

[Pony99CA]

Not being one to believe in conspiracy theories, I'm just throwing this out for those that are. Suppose the Pocket PC OEMs asked Microsoft not to make Windows Media 10 available for anything other than WM 2003 SE. That has two benefits for them -- they'll have a good excuse why they can't offer a WM 2003 OS update with WM 10 included and a good reason to get users to buy a new device.
I also think that that is the current stance of Pocket PC manufactuers. However, if you look at the bigger picture, who would actually shell out hundreds of dollars for the sole purposes of owning WMP10 Mobile on their device? Maybe only Mr. Gates and some of his henchmen.
Maybe people who use their PDAs for music and don't want iPods. However, I was suggesting more that it would be another reason to get a new device, not the sole reason. Landscape, better Pocket IE and WMP 10 sounds better than just the first two.

WM2003SE is probably one of the most compelling upgrades to date, as you have said. Yet sadly, it lacks a lot of features that people still cry out for. A proper task manager, a better program launcher, "true" on-the-fly landscape support, better PIE features, proper Pocket Office applications, etc.

I'm really hoping that the future OSes deliver these features.
Yes, a task manager is probably #1 on many lists, and I agree completely. Not having used WM 2003 SE yet, I'm not sure what "true" on-the-fly landscape support means, though.

As for Pocket Office, Pocket Excel is good enough for me as it is now, but I could really use an improved version of Pocket Word. I won't hold my breath, though. :evil:

Steve

[Darius Wey]

Yes, a task manager is probably #1 on many lists, and I agree completely. Not having used WM 2003 SE yet, I'm not sure what "true" on-the-fly landscape support means, though.

As for Pocket Office, Pocket Excel is good enough for me as it is now, but I could really use an improved version of Pocket Word. I won't hold my breath, though. :evil:

Steve

When you have time, head down to your local tech store and play around with a WM2003SE device. When speaking of "true" on-the-fly landscape support, this makes reference to (1) quick portrait/landscape changing at the touch of a hardware button, and/or (2) the same function but with a today screen button to do it all (although there are third party plugins which handle this). In my opinion, Microsoft could have done a much better job at this.

As with Pocket Office, Pocket Excel does the job well to an extent, yet there are still many functions it could have. Take charts and graphs for example - I'm sure many people would want that. And aside from functional improvements in Pocket Word, I'd like to see Pocket PowerPoint and Pocket Access join the ranks. Yet, as you said, I wouldn't be holding my breath either. :roll:

[Pony99CA]

When speaking of "true" on-the-fly landscape support, this makes reference to (1) quick portrait/landscape changing at the touch of a hardware button, and/or (2) the same function but with a today screen button to do it all (although there are third party plugins which handle this). In my opinion, Microsoft could have done a much better job at this.
I thought you could map a button to a Rotate Screen function in WM 2003 SE. There's no special button to do it, but that's the OEM's fault, not Microsoft's.

Steve

[Busdriver]

Think my next Pocket PC will be a laptop. :wink:

[k1darkknight]

[quote=Mace]
2. VGA support (only useful for Toshiba e805 users)


Why is VGA support in WM2003 SE only useful for e805's? Don't the other 480x640 devices use the vga resolution? What about the new Axim x50v...does anyone know if IT has TRUE VGA support? I know it has the resolution, but...


Chris, aka confused

[k1darkknight]

When speaking of "true" on-the-fly landscape support, this makes reference to (1) quick portrait/landscape changing at the touch of a hardware button, and/or (2) the same function but with a today screen button to do it all (although there are third party plugins which handle this). In my opinion, Microsoft could have done a much better job at this.
I thought you could map a button to a Rotate Screen function in WM 2003 SE. There's no special button to do it, but that's the OEM's fault, not Microsoft's.

Steve

Actually, support for this is built in to the OS, as I've mapped buttons on my iPAQ 2215 to other programs...even if I never use 'em, b/c I forget what I mapped to 'em...lol

It should be a fairly simple matter of going into Settings, under the Personal tab, that it defaults to, in the Buttons applet (or whatever you want to call it). I've actually used this feature at a Dell kiosk in the mall, on their Axim x30 demo unit. It was already set to use a h/w button, to switch back and forth.

(and yes, it is REALLY cool!!!!!)

Chris, aka k1darkknight

[Mark Johnson]

Think my next Pocket PC will be a laptop. :wink:

Another OQO customer. :)

If XP's suspend/resume function ever gets to be reliable, I'll make the switch too.

[primaz]

I have been a longtime user of CE devices and they have been able to replace my laptop ever since the days of the HP 690 Jornada. Now I use a HP 728 but long to upgrade but there is nothing to buy. I like thousands of business users need a pda with functional keyboard built in, a 1/2 type vga screen, and something small enough to fit in a suit jacket. The new OS expands the screen formats supported so hopefully somthing good will come out of this change.

I know there was rumors back in June 04 of HP considering getting back into HPC form factor pocket pc OS:

HP might be considering a comeback in the clamshell form factor. I just came across this article. Not so big on details, but the title and some of the content does lend some hope.

HP Considers Handheld PC Comeback

**************************************
Administrator - PDA Core
PPX Demo - www.ppx3k.com/index.php?op=description;id=571
Sites - www.pdacore.com

[pmgibson]

WM2003SE is probably one of the most compelling upgrades to date, as you have said. Yet sadly, it lacks a lot of features that people still cry out for. A proper task manager, a better program launcher, "true" on-the-fly landscape support, better PIE features, proper Pocket Office applications, etc.

I'm really hoping that the future OSes deliver these features.


I'm always interested when folks say "the operating system needs such and such feature".

Other than the landscape support, there are alot of third-party programs to provide many of the desired features you mention. Just like with PC based Windows, there are many small businesses and independent software developers identifying and providing these solutions. The beauty of having so many different choices is that it's more likely there will be something to the liking of more people.

Now, MS being a huge corporation, anytime they incorporate some of this functionality into newer versions of any of their OS's, they get creamed in the PR arena for "taking business away from the little guy" and "not doing it as well as the little guy anyway".

And at the same time, there are other (or possibly some of the same) folks bemoaning the lack of other features in the OS. So which is it to be? Should MS keep adding functionality provided by third-party programs? Or should they keep the OS simple and let other developers provide other choices for desired functionality?

Disclaimer: I'm an independent software developer, although not on the Windows Mobile platform (yet). I wish MS software was cheaper and I'm not thrilled with some of the problems that have occurred with Windows in general (just uninstalled WinXP SP2 due to issues). So I'm not a starry-eyed defender of MS. But I also take the criticism of them with a grain of salt.

[Darius Wey]

I'm always interested when folks say "the operating system needs such and such feature".

Other than the landscape support, there are alot of third-party programs to provide many of the desired features you mention. Just like with PC based Windows, there are many small businesses and independent software developers identifying and providing these solutions. The beauty of having so many different choices is that it's more likely there will be something to the liking of more people.

Fair point. But the concept of Microsoft not being able to provide a proper close button is mind-boggling itself, as the current task/memory management built into Windows Mobile is ludicrous. Consumers should not rely on third party software to fix up a simple concept such as this.

As with their Pocket Office suite, again, this is a port of the well-known PC suite, and if the interaction between the PPC and PC versions is somewhat nullified to say the least, the Pocket version doesn't seem very enticing. Many customers who purchase Pocket PC's for the first time have all the "oohs" and "aahs" of finding out that they have Office on their Pocket PCs...only to find that such excitement levels droop once they start using it. If Microsoft wants to please the PPC market with a quality Pocket Office suite, they can, if they tried, yet sadly, this is not the case at the moment.

I agree with you in saying that the availability of third party software does indeed extend the options of many Pocket PC users out there. And there is nothing wrong with that. The more options, the better. However, for native Microsoft applications, there should be some attempt to improve what is currently offered.

[Pony99CA]

2. VGA support (only useful for Toshiba e805 users)

Why is VGA support in WM2003 SE only useful for e805's? Don't the other 480x640 devices use the vga resolution?
VGA support is certainly useful for more devices than the Toshiba. However, if you read the full post carefully, I think things would be clear.

I agree with DJ APOD, that the new OS is not much of an improvement over WM2003.
I see a lot of people say that. When they do, I point out the main improvements for existing users:

Landscape mode (on-the-fly)
VGA support (only useful for Toshiba e805 users)

...

Notice that "existing users"? I was listing improvements in SE for users who would be upgrading a Pocket PC from Windows Mobile 2003. The only device with VGA capability before SE was released was the Toshiba e805 (technically, there's also the e800, but it's the same device without an image program). So VGA support wouldn't be useful if you were upgrading any other Pocket PC to SE.

Steve

[ebadger]

And yet the bottom line is, from WM2003FE to WM2003SE, we see a step up in Windows CE from 4.20 to 4.21. And from that, there is so much controversy over the availability of software updates.

If an update in revision number of such a small extent is able to yield such effects, where will that leave all WM2003SE users when 5.0 is released on consumer Pocket PCs?
I don't think the transition will be that bad. The transition from Pocket PC 2002 to Windows Mobile 2003 also moved from Windows CE 3.0 to Windows CE 4.2, so we can look at that transition to see how well that went. Some programs broke, but I think the overwhelming majority worked fine; major programs that didn't typically got updates so that they did work.

Steve

That is true. When making that previous post, I failed to mention what I was actually referring to in terms of "software updates". I was referring to two major branches of these updates - (1) ROM updates in the form of OS upgrades, and (2) updates in the form of Microsoft program updates.

The transition from Pocket PC 2002 to Windows Mobile 2003 was a quantum leap back in those days, and yet, the majority of Pocket PC manufacturers and Microsoft itself were able to accommodate to market demands and provide a vast array of updates for many Pocket PC users out there. However, this is the past that we are talking about. In recent times, with Windows Mobile 2003 SE in the market, such practices are rarely seen. Very few companies offered WM2003SE updates for their pre-existing devices, and Microsoft have even chosen to limit their availability of Windows Media Player 10 Mobile to WM2003SE only. As for the reasons behind such a move, I am not sure, yet in times like these, it is hard to state that there are a lot of similarities between the jump from Pocket PC 2002 to Windows Mobile 2003, and from Windows Mobile 2003 to Windows Mobile 2003 SE.

I'd like to think that public outcry may make companies change their stance on updates, but only time will tell. I do hope that companies take note of what us, as major Pocket PC consumers, believe to be the current response to their actions, and hopefully, when Windows CE 5.0 debuts on consumer Pocket PC devices, that the transition from Windows Mobile 2003 SE to Windows CE 5 will be a smooth one.

Take Microsoft Voice Command for example. It is only capable of being run on Windows Mobile 2003 devices. Now when the next version comes out (2.0), will it only be able to be run on Windows Mobile 2003 SE devices, thus leaving current Windows Mobile 2003 First Edition users out to dry? I'd like to think not, yet their current stance on Windows Media Player 10 Mobile updates have left me thinking otherwise. :roll:


Regarding Voice Command support for 2003 devices. The next release of MS VC which is 1.5 which will release the end of this year works just fine on 2003 devices.

[Darius Wey]

Regarding Voice Command support for 2003 devices. The next release of MS VC which is 1.5 which will release the end of this year works just fine on 2003 devices.

Well that's reassuring. Do you know what the new features are?

[SteveHoward999]

If XP's suspend/resume function ever gets to be reliable, I'll make the switch too.

I use Hybernate (not suspend) all the time with no issues, and have done with this laptop for nearly 3 years. Suspend proved unreliable with my previous laptop, and drained the battery. Hybernate has always proven reliable for me.

[ebadger]

Regarding Voice Command support for 2003 devices. The next release of MS VC which is 1.5 which will release the end of this year works just fine on 2003 devices.

Well that's reassuring. Do you know what the new features are?

Yes :D

[Janak Parekh]

I use Hybernate (not suspend) all the time with no issues, and have done with this laptop for nearly 3 years. Suspend proved unreliable with my previous laptop, and drained the battery. Hybernate has always proven reliable for me.
... but Hibernate eliminates the possibility of always-on for a XP-based handheld device. Imagine trying to quickly grab a contact. Not going to work. :|

--janak

[SteveHoward999]

Hmmm - but like I said, Suspend eats battery life. I have little doubt that a compromise is possible... there are much smarter people than me out there who can make things like that work ;-)

For instance ... the RAM in a PC is volatile, hence (at least in part) Suspend uses battery power. Is that right? Whereas the RAM in a PDA is less volatile if not actually truly non-volatile, so it could perhaps maybe possibly (hedging here, huh?) be that Suspend is a viable option for PDA ...

[Janak Parekh]

For instance ... the RAM in a PC is volatile, hence (at least in part) Suspend uses battery power. Is that right? Whereas the RAM in a PDA is less volatile if not actually truly non-volatile, so it could perhaps maybe possibly (hedging here, huh?) be that Suspend is a viable option for PDA ...
Sort of. Pocket PCs' RAM are low-power. Of course, that adds to the cost, so if you were to have a desktop equivalent, it would cost much, much more. And, of course, XP couldn't run on 64MB of RAM, so you start to see the motivations behind not running a pocket PIM on XP. ;)

--janak

[Darius Wey]

Yes :D

Ummm.... :?

Are we able to elaborate on that?

[Pony99CA]

Yes :D
Ummm.... :?

Are we able to elaborate on that?
Want to bet the answer will be "No". :lol:

Steve

[maximus]

:rotfl:

Mean mean pony :p

Seriously, will microsoft release anything significant, now that they are so close to magneto ?