Tentative Specifications on HP Mobile Messenger HW6500/6700 [Archive]

Ekkie Tepsupornchai

03-05-2005, 12:00 AM

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.mobile-review.com/news.php?language=en#news4290' target='_blank'>http://www.mobile-review.com/news.p...age=en#news4290</a><br /><br /></div><img src="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/images/web/2003/ekkie_hp6515.jpg" /> <br /><br />Mobile-Review have reported on what they call <i>"tentative data"</i> with regards to the duo of couple of upcoming HP PPCPE devices: the HW6515 and the HW6715. Looking at the specs, both would appear to be fairly similar sporting a 520 MHz Intel xScale PXA270 processor, 240x240 screen, 4-band GSM + EDGE, 64MB DRAM, 64MB ROM, 1.3Mpx Camera, integrated GPS, and mini-SD slot. The main difference seems to be that the HW6515 comes with an additional SD/MMC slot but no WiFi, while the HW6715 comes with built-in WiFi but no additional SD/MMC slot. Hmmm... GSM, GPS, AND WiFi? Sounds tasty! :)

bradolson

03-05-2005, 12:03 AM

The 240x240 screen just kills it for me. Should've been 480x480. I'll stick with my i-mate JAM for now. Otherwise a great device. Almost makes up for the 6315.

brianchris

03-05-2005, 12:05 AM

WOW....I had dismissed this PDA because of its lack of integrated WiFi.....but now: integrated Bluetooth, GPS, and Wifi? Its at the top of my list all of a sudden.

What's more important to me: VGA or integrated GPS.......honestly, I think the integrated GPS is more important. Any release date?
:drool:

MS Mobiles

03-05-2005, 12:17 AM

The 240x240 screen just kills it for me. Should've been 480x480. I'll stick with my i-mate JAM for now. Otherwise a great device. Almost makes up for the 6315.

Sorry being killjoy, but there is no such format like 480x480 in Windows Mobile Second Edition, there are only: 240x240, 320x240 and 640x480. So even if HP could do it, they couldn't.

Anyway: built-in GPS makes up well for the smaller screen size. The only problem is that this phone won't be cheap (700 Euro = 800 USD) and it will be late (model with Wi-Fi after summer, the model without Wi-Fi but instead with 2 card slot in May).

Dyvim

03-05-2005, 12:49 AM

Darius Wey

03-05-2005, 01:00 AM

Sorry being killjoy, but there is no such format like 480x480 in Windows Mobile Second Edition, there are only: 240x240, 320x240 and 640x480.

Are you sure about that? Microsoft has released WM 2003 SE emulators for VGA Square (480x480). It's simply the 192 DPI version of 240x240 square.

You are correct. WM2003SE is supposed to support square screen resolutions: 240x240 @ 96dpi and 480x480 @ 192dpi. I'm not sure how the misunderstanding earlier came about. :?

MS Mobiles

03-05-2005, 01:09 AM

I was wrong :oops: - indeed there is 480x480 in WM2003SE. What a pity that HP is not taking advantage of it! :?

Paragon

03-05-2005, 01:21 AM

This looks like it could be a good device, now that it looks more definite that there will be a WiFi version. I have one worry though....I wonder how many of those messages we are getting while installing new software that says that it may not appear properly are because it doesn't support square screens. Am I wrong in assuming that most software will NOT run on this device's square screen.......Please, please, please, someone tell me, and convince me I'm wrong??!!

Dave

Darius Wey

03-05-2005, 01:37 AM

Am I wrong in assuming that most software will NOT run on this device's square screen.......Please, please, please, someone tell me, and convince me I'm wrong??!!

Unless the programs have been hard-coded for 240x320 screens, I think it's safe to say that most will work, since it will be able to detect the screen resolution, and stretch to fit it (much like how many of the programs out there work in landscape mode and/or on a VGA resolution). No guarantees of course. I honestly question how usable it will be in 240x240. Especially when your input plugin takes up half the screen space. :roll: 480x480 is the way to go, IMO.

cmorris

03-05-2005, 01:43 AM

Especially when your input plugin takes up half the screen space. :roll: 480x480 is the way to go, IMO.

Isn't part of the point of having a built-in keyboard not having to have the input bar showing? It would seem that the effective displayed data on a 240x240 screen would then be pretty close to a 320x240 with the input bar showing.

Darius Wey

03-05-2005, 01:47 AM

Isn't part of the point of having a built-in keyboard not having to have the input bar showing? It would seem that the effective displayed data on a 240x240 screen would then be pretty close to a 320x240 with the input bar showing.

Quite rightly so, but not everyone is a fan of the keyboard. Many out there prefer to use Letter Recognizer or even Fitaly. That's where the problem arises.

MS Mobiles

03-05-2005, 01:48 AM

Isn't part of the point of having a built-in keyboard not having to have the input bar showing? It would seem that the effective displayed data on a 240x240 screen would then be pretty close to a 320x240 with the input bar showing.

You are right, but only partly. The other part of the story is that WM2003SE has no proper support for keyboard-only operation as a guy from Geek.com noticed it (in a review of MDA III/Blue Angel):

The real issue I have with the keyboard is that Microsoft has not implemented them into the OS at all and you still have to use your stylus for launching applications, accessing the bottom menus, performing basic cut/copy/paste functions, etc. and this is where the Palm shines with the Treo 650.

I hope that Windows Mobile magneto will solve this problem...

Anjuan Simmons

03-05-2005, 02:16 AM

I agree, the screen is just too small. Plus, this is just a "me too" product from HP that steals the form factor from RIM's Blackberry. Although the Blackberry excels at one handed operation, I don't want to give up both screen real estate and screen touch sensitivity. I think this design won't last long in the PDA world.

Paragon

03-05-2005, 02:49 AM

Unless the programs have been hard-coded for 240x320 screens

This is what scares me most. It seems that more often than not when I ask this question the answer is....probably most are hard coded. I think this is going to be one of those questions where we are going to have to "wait and see." I don't think I will be one of the first kids on the block with one of these. I'll wait and see if the hundreds of dollars I have spent on software will work on this machine. I sure hope I'm wrong. :)

Dave

OskiO

03-05-2005, 02:52 AM

Will you be able to buy this for whoever your carrier is or will it only be released for a specific carrier? and which one?

C

beq

03-05-2005, 03:11 AM

Is this made by HTC also?

Anyways, what kind of GPS performance can we expect to get? Is it using that new SiRF Star III chipset that just came out?

BTW I just got my SIII-based BT-338 Bluetooth GPS receiver in the mail yesterday. What surprised me was how small the unit is, even with a touted very large 1700mAh battery and all. So I'm wondering, is it really a big thing to integrate a GPS chipset & antenna into a PPC, or does it in fact take up very little physical space and can be squeezed into a PPC relatively easily (if that's the case I have to wonder why not more PPCs add it)...

JohnJohn

03-05-2005, 03:46 AM

NO BLUETOOTH? in PPC Phone? huh?

Did I miss something? I was hoping to use the EDGE via Bluetooth to my Laptop. What did I miss?

Ekkie Tepsupornchai

03-05-2005, 04:57 AM

NO BLUETOOTH? in PPC Phone? huh?

Did I miss something? I was hoping to use the EDGE via Bluetooth to my Laptop. What did I miss?
Yeah. I certainly hope that is just an oversight in terms of the stated specs. I'd be really surprised if these units did not include Bluetooth.

szamot

03-05-2005, 05:52 AM

Humm 240x240 screen, yes I will look for this device at the local Dollar store shortly. What a waste of space this is.

Willmonwah

03-05-2005, 08:00 AM

I'm really disappointed by the resolution as well... we're trailing behind the clies again. This device was so exciting too... of course, the resolution is still competitive compared to the old blackberries but even the new RIM Blackberry 7100g (http://www.mobileburn.com/review-brief.jsp?Id=1112&source=HOME) has 240x260 resolution.

:cry:

carphead

03-05-2005, 09:10 AM

Look at the screen shots. There's no BT icon in the tray. 8O

Of course that would be standard for hp. Build a really cool product and then miss out a important bit.

Maybe TomTom were concerned that you could hack it and turn it into a BT GPS receiver. :mrgreen:

ricksfiona

03-05-2005, 09:48 AM

The WiFi version would be very cool! I think as a purely messenger device, it could work. I think this is a RIM/Treo killer. If this doesn't haven't have Bluetooth, that's a very serious lapse in thinking.

If I were to pick a communications device though, I would pick the iMate JAM cause it lacks the built in keyboard. I just hate those things. The screen is bigger on the JAM and it's only a tiny bit bigger than my t610 cell phone.

KTamas

03-05-2005, 10:16 AM

240×240 display?? dam, i can already see tons of disappointed users with incompatibility problems...

Ekkie Tepsupornchai

03-05-2005, 05:49 PM

The WiFi version would be very cool! I think as a purely messenger device, it could work. I think this is a RIM/Treo killer. If this doesn't haven't have Bluetooth, that's a very serious lapse in thinking.
I couldn't agree more. The combination of PPCPE OS, Bluetooth, WiFi, GPS, 4-band GSM, plus mini-SD would make this out to be quite a bundle.

Humm 240x240 screen, yes I will look for this device at the local Dollar store shortly. What a waste of space this is.
<...>
That's what I have been saying, if we keep going WOW every time a scrap of garbage falls of the HP "design" table they will keep producing mediocre devices in hopes of satisfying mediocre minds. We are our worse enemies.
I didn't know a 240x240 screen could imply so much?

While I understand the disappointment behind the lack of VGA-class resolution, there are still quite a few people today that find a way to survive without VGA and yet still desire the full package of wireless capabilities that this device would contain.

IpaqMan2

03-05-2005, 06:04 PM

In my line of work I see alot of business users who use PDAs. Unfortunitly with this device, it will come so close to being a Treo killer but will fail because of it's screen resolution. Granted there will be people who'll understand the difference and strengths between the Palm OS and WM, but not for the masses of people I see who use the Treo. They will just see this as a device which is inferior to the Treo 650 because of it's lower res screen.

IpaqMan2

03-05-2005, 06:17 PM

...If I were to pick a communications device though, I would pick the iMate JAM cause it lacks the built in keyboard. I just hate those things.

Just a aside note about the built in keyboards...

This is where it's all coming too. All the converged devices will have keyboards to be successful. If OEMs want to have any hope of success, there needs to be absolutely zero learning curve which imputing data with which thumb boards or built in keyboards offers the closest solution to that.

As I mentioned in my last post, I do see a lot of business users with PDAs daily. I would say about 80% of them could be categorized as first time users to PDAs (or they are only using them because their company requires them too), and of those 80% of users I would honestly say about 75% of those want, needs a keyboard, and would probably not be able to use their PDAs without one.

DaleReeck

03-05-2005, 06:38 PM

Of course that would be standard for hp. Build a really cool product and then miss out a important bit.

Yes, its good to see HP continuing their recent PDA tradition of not having a single "wow!" device that does it all. Like splitting VGA and 128MB memory between the 4700 and 2000 series. Now, we got no WiFi and a standard SD slot vs. WiFi and no standard SD slot (SD-mini is a waste of time IMO). Heaven forbid they should consider WiFi AND a standard SD slot in the same device :roll:

Except for the fast processor, this PDA phone offers nothing new that doesn't exist in some current PDA phones. And that 240x240 screen is asking for disaster in terms of third party apps. Particulary games that may not shrink properly in anything less than 320x240. While its easy for most apps to fit less pixels into more (i.e., QVGA apps on a VGA device), fitting more pixels into less (320x240 into a 240x240 screen) isn't going to work to well. Plus, even if most apps wok in this rez, how useful will many of them be? 240x240 doesn't fit a lot of info.

In my opinion, this device is not really much of an improvement over the 6300 series. In fact, I'd take a 6300 over this device easily. Especially with the hacked 6360 ROM for T-Mobile 6315's :) The upcoming Samsung CDMA device for Verizon and the BenQ seem far superior to this device. Those devices have WiFi, BT, camera and integrated keyboards. And most importantly, a non-weird screen size. Also, don't forget that MDA IV VGA phone later this year. WiFi, BT, two cameras, VGA screen and slip and rotate tablet form. Granted, this one will probably require a small bank loan to buy, but technology wise, it is top notch. Unless the HP devices are really, really cheap, or some really great services (like RIMM type support) are really well integrated, the devices I've mentioned have already outclassed the HP offerings.

Another mistake by HP IMO.

yslee

03-05-2005, 06:50 PM

Hmm, weird, now there's no BT?

Stylus input just doesn't cut it, so I'm happy to see this device with a keyboard. Now I just hope HP knows how to make a phone better this time round.

That said, did someone just say Benq? :D

Christian

03-05-2005, 08:50 PM

Maybe if the screen was competitive with my 5 year old Casio E-115 I would be more interested. :roll:

Aside - due to CF slot, it *did* have bluetooth :lol:

Ed Hansberry

03-05-2005, 09:26 PM

If they come out with a CDMA version on Verizon, my wife would snap it up.

DaleReeck

03-05-2005, 10:17 PM

Well, I wouldn't say that its embarrassing. HP did and does make some good machines. But as one guy here already suggested, HP always has one feature (or lack of a feature) that messes everything up.

Compaq/HP had some inovative stuff. The original 3600 was a masterful PDA design (much like the Treo has become for the Palm phone world). But a non-removable battery and 4096k color screen came up short. Fast forward to 2005 and the iPaq 4705 is a great device - a gorgeous, huge 4 inch VGA screen, super thin, solid construction, built in WiFi, BT and top of the line processor. But only 64MB of memory is the rock around its PDA neck. The 2000 series has everything the 4700 has, including the 128MB of memory, but no VGA. Its always one feature that's preventing it from being the killer PDA. The last killer iPaq IMO was the 5500 - it had top of the line everything. But HP never followed that one up with a true top of the line device - rather, splitting the features between two - or more - units.

In between, some great devices like the 2200 and 4100/4300 came out. People even now swear by them. So, I would defintely not say that HP's devices - or the way customers stand by them - is embarrasing. But it is disappointing HP's refusal to push the envelope anymore.

huangzhinong

03-05-2005, 11:18 PM

Paragon

03-06-2005, 02:27 AM

My memory is foggy. Can you tell me which previous HP/Compaq PPC has followed those trend in the past?

The rz1715! ;) :)

DaleReeck

03-06-2005, 02:46 AM

I believe 240*240 is ok. Don't forget treo 600 is only 160*160. HP wants to make money. The next version, maybe 6900, may have 480*480 resolution.

Keeping both Mini-SD and SD slots in this device doesn't make sense. Considering 1gb mini-SD is cheap now, one slot is enough.

People may think SD slot using for IO. But this device already have camera, GPS, wi-fi and bluetooth buildin, there are not many SD devices left in the market now.

But Palm was designed for a square screen from the start. PocketPC was not.

I'm not saying have both mini-SD and SD. I am saying dump the mini-SD altogether. Most of us have SD cards already, including some 1GB cards. I don't care how cheap it is. Why should we be forced to buy yet another card format when the plain old SD cards we have now would work fine? Mini-SD might be fine in a device too small for standard SD to fit. But this is not the case with the 6500/6700 since one of them already has SD. So obviously, they are not too small for standard SD size. HP is making people buy a new format for no reason other than poor design choice.

Also, from what I read, these devices don't have bluetooth. And I don't think GPS is usable other than by the enhanced-911 system. You won't be able to load up a map program and use GPS in this device.

Ekkie Tepsupornchai

03-06-2005, 02:58 AM

Paragon

03-06-2005, 03:04 AM

My memory is foggy. Can you tell me which previous HP/Compaq PPC has followed those trend in the past?

The rz1715! ;) :)
...right ...and did "many people love it" because it was HP?

Certainly not here! ;)

Hehe! Very good point, Ekkie! What's the old line? Something like....not even a mother could love. :)

surur

03-06-2005, 03:39 AM

And I don't think GPS is usable other than by the enhanced-911 system. You won't be able to load up a map program and use GPS in this device.

I believe its meant to come bundles with Tomtom Navigator.

Surur

Ekkie Tepsupornchai

03-06-2005, 07:15 AM

If you get the PPCTechs upgrade, then the iPaq 4700 would have 128MB RAM - making it close to perfection for a non-phone PDA IMO. I still can't get over how gorgeous that screen is :) Some might argue that a camera would be needed to make it perfect, but, while I wouldn't mind it having a camera, adding a crappy camera (and lets face it, all these PDA/phone cameras are crappy) wouldn't add much.
Couldn't agree more Dale. I'm very happy with my 4700 and having a built-in camera has never been something that I personally wanted (in either my phone or my PDA), though I know for some people (such as my own fiancée), it does matter.

Hehe! Very good point, Ekkie! What's the old line? Something like....not even a mother could love. :)
No doubt, the rz1715 might be the only HP model that I truly have no explanation for! :roll:

But with these specs on the latest HP PPCPE devices, assuming that bluetooth will be included, I do believe there's a potential place in the market for them.

cubed

03-06-2005, 02:25 PM

I don't think this device was built with Geeks in mind. I believe that this device is intended for executives that are buying up Treos faster than teens are buying Ipods.

We are a MS shop. We develop mobile apps for PPC. However, our upper level management is screaming for Treos. We finally had to give in because there is no good form factor for Windows Mobile Phones. At least no form factor that has gained acceptance in the manner that the Treo has.

Instead of ragging on HP for the screen resolution (believe me, I would have wanted 480x480 as well), I am at least happy that there may be a starting point to get a WM device in the hands of these people.

Pa1mOne made a mistake with the Treo 600s resolution, and shortly corrected it with the 650. Hopefully HP will correct it just as quickly.

I think a bigger issue to the future success of the device will rest in marketing and naming conventions of the device. Corporate execs are screaming to get a "Treo". I wonder how many are going to call their IT departments to say, "Get me one of those HP Mobile Messenger HW6500/6700 thingies."

Dyvim

03-06-2005, 05:14 PM

nevertheless can you tell me why would someone (erm, you) prefer a 4" screen than a 3.6" screen on a PDA? (the key phrase is "on a PDA")

Because some of us like to run our VGA PDA's in 96 DPI mode (so-called "True VGA") which makes things really tiny - at which point a 4" screen is much appreciated. However, I agree that for folks that would only run the device in the intended 192 DPI mode that a 3.6" screen would probably be fine.

Also, 640x480 videos look mighty fine on a 4" screen (a little less squinting necessary than with a 3.6" screen).

Paragon

03-06-2005, 06:51 PM

On topic...:)

I wouldn't mind hearing some feedback from the developer types as to the compatibility of the square screen resolution, with existing software. Does anyone have any idea as to how much is likely to be hard coded and therefore not work, opposed to how much existing software will work? It's a tough guess I'm sure, but input from the folks building the software should help.

If I have to replace most of my software or buy upgrades just to use the 6500 Ipaq, I think I can easily rule it out.

Dave

Dyvim

03-07-2005, 12:52 AM

I wouldn't mind hearing some feedback from the developer types as to the compatibility of the square screen resolution, with existing software. Does anyone have any idea as to how much is likely to be hard coded and therefore not work, opposed to how much existing software will work?

It really depends on the app. I would say the biggest problems are dialog boxes. If they have information that in portrait mode is covered by the keyboard, then that information will be offscreen in square VGA. I believe MS built in support for legacy apps in the form of a scrollbar on the righthand side of the screen for apps with offscreen controls in order to help scroll them into view, but this scrollbar aside from being a less than ideal solution can also obscure some potential information. With the developer resources for WM2003SE MS recommended making sure square resolutions were supported, but I don't know how many developers followed this advice since so far there aren't any square WM2003SE devices out yet (that I know of). I think most developers were concerned with making sure their apps support both portrait and landscape modes (often with different layouts of controls in dialogs to make sure all the info fits on-screen). For developers that decided to use a single layout for both portrait and landscape - effectively using the 240x240 square that is common to both orientations - these will probably be just fine in square VGA. Anyway, I'd guess that apps that were revised to support WM2003SE have a better chance of working with square VGA than earlier "legacy" apps.

maximus

03-07-2005, 01:12 AM

Maybe it is just me, but the shape of that device can greatly be improved. perhaps a cover for the keyboard, so it will not be exposed ala treo 6xx.

.. or perhaps a sliding keyboard, oops, that will make it an XDA IIs .. uh well. Sticking to my XDA II for now.

bnycastro

03-07-2005, 03:16 AM

IMO this will probably come out with BT as almost all hp products have been coming out with atleast BT (but alas we are not 100% sure until hp anounces it themselves) and they do know that phones usually have them to support BT headsets.

I think hp should scrap the miniSD idea and stick with SDIO on both models, beef up the RAM to 128MB, and make the thumboard backlit (as far as I can tell the thumb board looks like they will not be backlit, well from the pics I mean). GPS, I don't use so I can live without it but I know alot of folks really like GPS so this will be a selling point...

The applications compatibility issue would be something that I would worry about. So I'll just wait and see...

Steven Cedrone

03-07-2005, 01:48 PM

Discussion about killing HP product managers and the ensuing debate have been moved here! (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=38209&highlight=)

Steve

jlp

03-08-2005, 03:04 AM

On topic...:)

...

Does anyone have any idea as to how much is likely to be hard coded and therefore not work, opposed to how much existing software will work? It's a tough guess I'm sure, but input from the folks building the software should help.

...

Most Settings screens DO NEED a screen with QVGA/VGA rez to work properly.

Just take a look at most of your installed apps to see this.

bnycastro

03-08-2005, 03:51 AM

Discussion about killing HP product managers and the ensuing debate have been moved here! (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=38209&highlight=)

Steve thanks :) off topic: i saw on cnn last week that c. fiona (ex-hp) might become the new head of the world bank anyway would this spell disaster for us third world country dwellers :?:

corbishley

03-11-2005, 03:56 PM

I saw one of these new devices last week and it was nice. Didn't have a chance to play with it, but the size and weight were good. GPS worked fine. I asked about the price and it should be lower than some of those I've read in the stream.

Robert Levy

03-11-2005, 08:18 PM