VisorCentral.com - Windowx XP and Palm

Pages (4): « 1 2 3 [4]
Show 20 posts from this thread on one page

VisorCentral.com (http://discussion.visorcentral.com/vcforum/index.php)
- Article Comments (http://discussion.visorcentral.com/vcforum/forumdisplay.php?forumid=17)
-- Windowx XP and Palm (http://discussion.visorcentral.com/vcforum/showthread.php?threadid=14006)

Posted by dick-richardson on 04-14-2001 06:55 PM:

"And that Donna Dubinksy seemed like such a nice lady."

She's got teeth like a tiger, apparently.

__________________
-Joshua
Abortion: Darwinism at its finest.

Posted by Gameboy70 on 04-15-2001 10:52 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by foo fighter
Really? Hmm, that's interesting...because it's just as ugly as ever to me! Personally, the only hope Linux ever had for achieving any real usability, would have been to license the BeOS UI and layer it over the Linux Kernel. Gnome and KDE are hopeless trainwrecks. Both interfaces are over-beveled and clunky, and I especially love how the UI renders huge beveled buttons to display even the simplest text message, such as "OK" or "Cancel". And the fonts...oh god!, what is with the tacky UNIX style font rendering? Looks like something from 1985. Ever hear of PostScript?

Linux does not equal Gnome and KDE. Those are desktop environments for many Unix derivates. Most of the time, I use nothing more than a window manager like Enlightenment, which is finally lean enough to be useful. Even within the aforementioned desktop environments, changing or eliminating the bevelling of the buttons is trivial. I have major issues with many defaut settings with both intefaces, and the average newbie won't have the patience or the will to correct them, but they are correctable. And although I prefer Gnome to KDE for reasons that aren't relevant to the discussion, the transition from the Windows UI to KDE is relatively minor. Both environments have evolved at a much faster rate than even their advocates would've imagined three years ago, myself included. If the last time you've used them is a year ago (as opposed to just looking at screenshots), you might have a different opinion on the matter.

But yes, the pixmap fonts do suck. It's possible to compile TrueType fonts when building the kernel, but only techies are willing to do that. The larger problem is licensing a proprietary solution. Linux isn't a company, which is its greatest strength and its greatest weakness. If Red Hat and SuSE go out of business, Linux will still be around. But if there's an elegant commercial solution that needs to be licensed, that only threatens to fragment standardization attempts even more than now (hence the debate over TrollTech's QT license, now largely resolved). So the current thrust of development within Gnome (and KDE, I assume), is to develop a non-proprietary font solution, like FreeType.

quote:
Perhaps when Linux adopts a real GUI, then it might become more pervasive. For now it's just a hobbyist OS for hackers, but it's kicking Microsoft's ass in the server market. But as a commercial desktop/workstation OS, it's a lost cause. Linux will never make it onto consumer desktops.

As profit margins for hardware vendors drop asymptotically toward zero, those vendors will look for ways to preserve what little they make. You can only cut staff so much. You can innovate in the design area, like the iMac, but that's taking a risk that can hurt as much as it helps. You can try to move away from the PC arena altogether by turning out internet appliances (this is precisely why IAs were such an industry buzzword last year). Or you can avoid paying the Microsoft tax by using Linux. It's an uphill battle, a very uphill battle, but not a lost cause. Twenty years ago, it was unimaginable that IBM would be the thin shadow of itself it is today.

quote:
In fact, according to the latest market data, Linux desktop usage has actually gone down while Microsoft picked up more market share.

That's news to me, but even giving you the benefit of the doubt, it needs to be pointed out that as long as the code is out there to be used and shared by anyone at anytime, the momentary highs and lows of Linux's "market" share are irrelevant. This is a very fundamental point. Think of the terror many Mac users experienced back in 1997, when Apple was on life support. The future of the OS was entirely dependent on the health, the very existence, of the company. The same is happening right now with Be, which is projected to run out of cash within a matter of months. Even in cases where it's not a matter of life and death, like IBM, the future of the platform depends on management -- as an OS/2 Warp 4 user can attest.

quote:
The Linux bubble burst last year along with the dot coms, and since then it's popularity outside the geek community has been in decline, and many Linux vendors/developers are now facing financial ruin. Face it, it was over-hyped.

And? Exactly how is this different from any business venture? Dot-coms were over-hyped (I know, I was downsized by one, which went out of business two months later) for the same reason: tech companies with young management conjured up valuations based on speculation rather than production. And they forgot -- no, arrogantly defied -- the fundamental rule of business: cash in must exceed cash out. As much as I love a company like Eazel, I don't understand its business model. But that's because I don't see much of a future in software subscription, proprietary or open source.

quote:
Any hope the OS has for making inroads onto commercial desktops (especially consumer desktops) will go out the window as soon as Windows XP hits the market. The only ace in the hole the open source community has, is whether or not Microsoft will be broken up. If that happens, then all bets are off, and god only knows what that outcome will bring. As for me, I will immediately migrate to Macs.

The hype is cyclical: we see Linux hype with each major Linux release; the same goes for Windows. Microsoft won't be broken up (ultimately), Linux will carry on. Because Linux isn't proprietary, it's not vulnerable to the zero-sum game that threatens the likes of Apple and Be. Microsoft's success doesn't equal Linux's failure, so Linux (and BSD) remains a persistent threat, even if MS bought up every Linux company on the planet tomorrow. The code belongs to the people.

quote:
I keep hearing the same argument being played out over..and over. The open source advocates always believe that when KDE version x.1 or Gnome version X.X hits the market, it's all over for Microsoft and Apple. Sorry guy's, it ain't gonna happen.

KDE and Gnome are less than four years old. A year may be an eon in internet time, but let's not forget that Windows 3.x was seven years in the making. I personally don't recall anyone saying that the next versions of those environments would kill MS or Apple. Most people just hang their hopes on the next version finally delivering the usability that irons out the kinks they have in their own user experience. I believe in evolution, not revolution. It was trade unions, not Marxists, that won the eight hour work day. Optimism within the bounds of realism adds up. Everything counts in large amounts.

Every month, I participate in a Linux "installfest" and help people get Linux onto their PCs. Most people at these events install Linux out of curiosity, not to "stick it to The Man." When you interact with these newbies in person, it's extremely rare to hear anything derogatory toward Microsoft, contrary to what people might assume from reading sites like Slashdot. It's a much more communal atmosphere. The nature of debates on "discussion" groups seems to polarize issues to ridiculous extremes, so that the smallest criticism of X leads to an inevitable diatribe against Y.

quote:
The truth is, the mainstream computing environment is stuck squarely on Windows. For example, look at the creative/design field, which I work in....why do you think that Adobe and Macromedia don't port all their apps to Linux? Because no one would want them. There is a certain culture that exists within the graphic/design/publishing industry, which is still very heavily Mac oriented, but also fixed to Windows. If Macromedia offered Dreamweaver/Fireworks/Flash to Linux, it would be like throwing a big party and no one shows up. Adobe ported FrameMaker over to Linux some time ago, and since then it has gone no where. Windows is here to stay. Macs will continue to be the preferred choice for graphics design and publishing. Linux will continue to kick MS around in the server arena, but on the desktop? Nope.

It's a chicken-and-egg problem. The culture doesn't exist because the apps aren't there, and vice versa. Steve Jobs' genius was to spot a killer app for the Mac, desktop publishing, at a time when DOS machines were busy crunching spreadsheets. Even five years ago, it was hard to get many Macromedia and Adobe products for Windows. Things change. Right now, there's a hugh vacuum in the design area for Linux users. Linux developers are still refining office productivity solutions. There are a lot of home users out there who do virtually nothing beyond using word processors and accessing the net. That's the first rung of the Linux/OSS market. Publishing and design tools will follow with time and effort. I can still remember when the phrase "word processor" was virtually nonexistent in Linux culture -- that was 1996. Now there are several.

quote:
But what really aggravates me is how clueless the hardcore Linux community is about real world computing. The fact is, the vast majority of PC users don't care about other Operating Systems.

Geeks are geeks, regardless of the particular platform they evangelize. As for myself, I never tell anyone (who's not already motivated) to use Linux, because I don't think it's "there" yet (it seems you agree) for the average user. Technologies migrate from geek cults to the mainstream either through a revolutionary "killer" application (VisiCalc) or through gradual improvements in usability and cost/benefit ratios (the pocket calculator). And you're right: PC user's don't care about operating systems. That's even more true for handhelds, which is why geeks' frustration with Palm's slowly evolving OS doesn't translate to the masses. The same is true of the iMac, which was flamed (by geeks, of course) for its underwhelming specs, but offered a revolutionary design. So while Alan might not be excited by the m505, I think it will sell by the truckload.

quote:
Don't believe me? Go to Best Buy or Circuit City and look at all the luddites buying HP Pavilions and Compaq Presarios. Do you think these poeple plan on taking their new PCs home to wipe out Windows and replace it with Linux? And as human nature follows, once they become familiar with Windows they don't want to learn something new, so that's where they will stay. That's going to be Apple's greatest challenge. How do you convert the masses of PC users into Mac users? I think it's a hopeless cause, but I wish Apple all the luck in the world. I'm all for variety of choice, and competition. Which we seem to have little of these days...thanks to Microsoft!

Every platform has it's niche. Linux will remain dominant on Servers and embedded devices (think Tivo), and continue to be somewhat popular with geeks. But for all intents and purposes...the Penguin has left the igloo!

As you say, every platform has its niche. Apple's mature enough to realize that it's unnecessary to convert the masses of PC users into Mac users, which is why it doesn't sell $500 white boxes. Wintel sells hamburgers; Apple sells steaks. You get what you pay for and pay for what you get.

As for Linux, its main obstacle is Microsoft's OEM licensing stick, which bludgeons every competitor's attempt to get its product preinstalled (hence the immortal words of at least one MS sales rep to an OEM three years ago: "Bill is not happy with you!") on the hard drives of Dell, Gateway and Compaq. Unfortunately the thrust of the antitrust trial focused on the browser issue, which misses the root of all Microsoft's "evil" entirely. Be tried to get around the MS license prohibition by creating a "personal edition" of BeOS that resides and launches from within Windows, but that strategy was a day late and a dollar short: it was implemented when Linux hype (and stock prices) peaked.

At any rate, Rome wasn't built in a day, and neither was Linux.

Posted by Gameboy70 on 04-16-2001 12:33 AM:

Foo brought up a crucial point about operating systems: Joe Sixpack couldn't care less about them. I've been tracking all the anxiety expressed here about how little Palm seems to be innovating in the OS area. But there's a gulf between our theories and Palm's sales. Take the m100. It's a completely pedestrian product: 2 MB of RAM, non-upgradable, smaller screen, etc.; it sold nearly a million units in under two quarters. Why? Because it's small, light, and it does what the average consumer needs it to do: keep appointments, contacts and notes -- for an affordable price. That's not sexy, but it's a tool, not a toy.

Given capital constraints, Palm throws most of its development efforts into the area affirmed by the market as paramount: ergonomics. No pundit would ever claim that wearability is more important than processor speed, but Joe knows that size does matter intuitively, even if he can't articulate it. He doesn't need a Shiny New Thing; he just wants something to write things down in and get info out of. It happens that PDAs are more convenient than paper organizers. Once again: not sexy, but a practical issue.

Jeff Kirvin, a Palm writer who underwent a PocketPC conversion (and has since returned to the PalmOS) was mortified to learn that Palm's plans to release an ARM product would take (gasp!) 18 months. He said that gap would turn the Palm into the VisiCalc of handhelds. That was nine months ago, and Palm isn't ostensibly halfway to oblivion. It hasn't happened because it doesn't occur to Joe to ask what processor his PDA runs on.

Pundits continually make the same mistake prognosticating Palm's fortunes as they make with Microsoft's. People have been predicting Microsoft's decline for years, but they forget that, whatever the company's faults, Microsoft knows how to do business. Similarly, the m100 was a shrewd business move, even if it was a bland one. Palm corrected the overpricing of the IIIc, and it's avoiding the same error by releasing the m505 at $450. Palm one blind spot, from a business point of view, is the Palm VII line. The razor/razorblades model is only valid if one or the other is nominally priced. The monthly service is too expensive, and the unit itself is hardly a steal.

The bottom line is that only techies seem to care about the latest bells and whistles, or lack of them, on the PalmOS. Virtually all of the PalmOS users I've seen (very few of whom are geeks), generally pull their handheld out very occasionally, write down/look up something, and then put it away -- all within less than a minute. They don't know about ActionNames, HandDBase or WordSmith. Think about it: how many people do you know in the real world (not yourself or VC members) that actually use a PDA beyond momentary intervals? Power users in the handheld world are the exception, not the rule, and Palm caters to the rule.

None of this is to say that more features aren't desireable; it's just that they're not the driving force of the industry. People would rather have something unobtrusive. That's why EPOC has failed to gain any traction within the US. Psion's continually ignored the repeated demand for a Palm-sized form factor, choosing to release clamshell designs instead, hoping to release a Quartz product only when cell phone integration is acheived. That's too bad, because Symbian's platform combines the Palm's usability with the PPCs multimedia and fuller-featured productivity apps.

Posted by mshe on 04-16-2001 07:47 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by EricG
Linux is looking better and better every day...

Give it a try. Chances are you'll come back to Windows very quickly!

Depends on the type of work you do though.

Posted by bookrats on 04-16-2001 04:41 PM:

Pee-Wee's PDA playhouse

quote:
Originally posted by foo fighter
By the way, am I the only one here who thinks Waldman looks like Pee Wee Herman?

Boy, that leaves you with a unique visual image of Palm board meetings, doesn't it?

Particularly that damn laugh whenever someone brings up an interesting new PDA feature...

__________________
Jeff Meyer

"And he died like he lived: with his mouth wide open."

Posted by ILikeDatabases on 04-16-2001 06:43 PM:

On the core topic

I agree with the lack of innovation. I have wanted a PDA since before the Newton. I had a Casio BOSS 128K back in 1992. Then I lusted after the Newton (to expensive for me) then the HP OmniGO (a slick idea keyboard and touch screen, palm sized) but it never caught on. Then the Pilot 1000.

With the original Pilot 1000 they did what no one else could. The figured out the magic combination for the time: size + ease of use + battery life = WINNER!!.

I was able to afford a Palm III two years ago and I still use it heavily every day. I want to upgrade but nothing from Palm catches my attention. I never liked the V/Vx because the screen is a tad smaller and my III is small enough. The new M500/M505 does not impress me because of the lack of support for the SD/MMC slot. I have heard some questioning of this. The thing that I have not heard questions about is: what about the size/strength of the slot? Is that little card strong enough to hold an Eyemodule or a GPS antenna. Will it support a block large enough to hold a headphone jack or a phone jack?

The Springboard is thick enough to hold a solid module. The SD/MMC slot looks to be about 1/2" x 1/8" and I am afraid it will just snap of any $100+ external units.

Also, The best Palm OS unit I have seen is the Sony CLIE PEG-S500C.

http://www.sony.co.jp/sd/ProductsPa...-S500C/top.html

It has a 16Bit 320x320 color screen, and is the closest thing with a Palm OS to the overrated PocketPC devices. It also only runs about $450 in Yen. I am not wild about the Magic Gate Memory Stick.

Just put that screen in the Visor Edge for <$500 and you have my money!!!

Bryan

Posted by Fat_Man on 04-17-2001 12:19 AM:

I believe that you're referring to the PEG-N700C

The Clie PEG-S500C was introduced in Japan last year, it had a 160x160 color screen. Unfortunately, according to reports and customer complaints, the screen was so bad (dim, lacks color) that Sony didn't even release the model outside of Japan.

The Clie PEG-N700C is Sony's most recent Clie model, this is the one with 320x320 color screen. According to reports, it was very well recieved in Japan. Sony reportedly plans to release the unit in the US by mid. summer.

Go to the "all handhelds" section for more info. on the Clie PEG-N700C.

__________________
Fat's

Posted by foo fighter on 04-17-2001 12:31 AM:

Re: Pee-Wee's PDA playhouse

quote:
Originally posted by bookrats
Boy, that leaves you with a unique visual image of Palm board meetings, doesn't it?

Ben Waldman is not part of the Palm team. He is the head of Microsoft's PocketPC development team. Judging from his public statements, he would like nothing more than to see his creation (PocketPC) crush Palm.

And if you could see a pic of him, I think you would agree that he does look like Pee Wee.

__________________
My blog: Pocketfactory

Posted by Fat_Man on 04-17-2001 12:53 AM:

What does he look like?

Post his picture and start a poll!!

__________________
Fat's

Posted by foo fighter on 04-17-2001 01:36 AM:

Re: What does he look like?

quote:
Originally posted by Fat_Man
Post his picture and start a poll!!

OK, here is a good picture of him. Not sure a poll is necessary though.

__________________
My blog: Pocketfactory

Posted by m20h on 04-17-2001 04:02 AM:

I fully agree that Palm has not quite been on the cutting edge of the market. We all know and understand that Palm wants to remain a "simple device," one that people can easily learn and rely on. But, let's face it; it ain't perfect.

Most of the problems I see with the OS are annoying functionality flaws; you can't use graffiti when the keyboard is open and visa-versa? Come on! And how does Palm fix this? Not with a simple patch, or by including this common-sense feature into previous OS releases. They fix/add this feature into a new version of the OS (OS 4), which we must buy!

Just take a look at the new features included in Palm OS 4 (http://www.palm.com/software/palmos4.html). You will see that most of what we can expect, probably as an outrageously-priced download (for what it is), are features that could have been made freely available as 3.5.3 or the like. This reminds me of IE 5.5. Did the version number really need to be reved from 5.0 to 5.5 because it now gives us the ability to "print preview" a web page? Who cares!

Don't get me wrong. I love the Palm and use it daily, but I do agree that they have a long way to go to make this a killer PDA. No, I don't expect a Palm version of Pocket PC (do we really want to carry our desktop everywhere we go; I don't expect to run a Pocket version of Photoshop to do image editing on a 3-inch screen). But, when it takes a new version of an OS to make available features that are simply common sense, you have to rethink Palm's direction.

Posted by m20h on 04-17-2001 04:04 AM:

Posted by klowy on 04-17-2001 05:06 PM:

it's the OS stupid

i agree that the Palm OS is behind. i was a proud newton user. although the original version of the newton OS was slammed for being poor, apple worked hard to improve it. and just two years later they had an OS (for the 2100) that is still far and away better than the palm OS. it's sad that palm just doesn't care or doesn't get it. i still occasionally pick up my newton and marvel at how much better it is at so many things.

Posted by Rob on 04-18-2001 11:54 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Gameboy70
Foo brought up a crucial point about operating systems: Joe Sixpack couldn't care less about them. I've been tracking all the anxiety expressed here about how little Palm seems to be innovating in the OS area. But there's a gulf between our theories and Palm's sales. Take the m100. It's a completely pedestrian product: 2 MB of RAM, non-upgradable, smaller screen, etc.; it sold nearly a million units in under two quarters. Why? Because it's small, light, and it does what the average consumer needs it to do: keep appointments, contacts and notes -- for an affordable price. That's not sexy, but it's a tool, not a toy.

[snip]

Given capital constraints, Palm throws most of its development efforts into the area affirmed by the market as paramount: ergonomics. No pundit would ever claim that wearability is more important than processor speed, but Joe knows that size does matter intuitively, even if he can't articulate it. He doesn't need a Shiny New Thing; he just wants something to write things down in and get info out of. It happens that PDAs are more convenient than paper organizers. Once again: not sexy, but a practical issue.

[snip]

The bottom line is that only techies seem to care about the latest bells and whistles, or lack of them, on the PalmOS. Virtually all of the PalmOS users I've seen (very few of whom are geeks), generally pull their handheld out very occasionally, write down/look up something, and then put it away -- all within less than a minute. They don't know about ActionNames, HandDBase or WordSmith. Think about it: how many people do you know in the real world (not yourself or VC members) that actually use a PDA beyond momentary intervals? Power users in the handheld world are the exception, not the rule, and Palm caters to the rule.

Gameboy70, I agree with you completely. People have got to realize that while it is fun to ***** and moan about how the P.O.S. (heh) doesn't have 320x320 resolution, 32MB RAM, built in headphones, a jog-dial or a soft graffiti area (my personal pet peeve), Palm needs to cater to the typical user to make enough money to stay in business. Even if every VC member bought a new $500 device (all the while complaining about the cost, of course) every three months, it wouldn't bring in nearly enough revenue to keep the company afloat. To keep bringing in new customers, Palm needs to integrate new features slowly, when technologies are more mature, and focus on form factor ('carryability' and 'holdability'), battery life, and usability. Does that mean we shouldn't voice our opinions about what we (the power users) would want in a new device? No, of course not. But it does mean that criticisms of Palm's business model or claims they will be driven out of business by the likes of MS or Symbian/Psion should be based on more than just "but it doesn't do multitasking!".

Posted by JustMyOpinion on 04-19-2001 01:16 AM:

About Time

I'm glad people have pointed out that Palm is selling to the masses, not just techy folk. I work with a lot of people who have just gotten their first Palm (Palm Vx) and they find that very complicated! I showed an iPaq to one of these people (who are very intelligent but not very computer happy) and they couldn't even begin to figure out how to use it. I think Palm is doing exactly the right thing. All the pundits who have said Palm is moving too slowly have been proven wrong at every step of the way.

Posted by Meeca on 04-28-2001 05:45 PM:

about the artical:

This story is misleading! Of course palm doesn't work really hard on designing their handhelds - their ultimate goal is to be 4th or 5th in handheld sales and gain the market with the OS! They WANT handspring to do good, it helps with their ultimate goal. Handspring isn't a competitor, but a PARTNER (infact, the owner of handspring used to work for palm)!they LIKE the diversity of products, it gives users options! They CAN'T have SD pripherals for sale yet!!! The Secure Digital Association is currently developing the standard for hardware! They know how to do it, i saw a barcode scanner prototype last thursday in Itasca (very small and cool, btw)! Next time, read up on the company before you write an artical, your wasting our time with bad info!

Posted by ianb on 05-06-2001 11:54 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by bigredmed
poor quality of Windows 2000 as a desktop OS and the meager Windows ME, I think I will stay with old Win98 and keep my Visor and its blissfully fast USB port. Afterall, with the USB infrastructure (scanners, printers, cameras, etc), wouldn't you think that there will be some service pack that quietly gets released and supports USB?

I have to disagree, NT was a good operating system with a few glaring defects, but Win2k is an excellent system keeping the quality of NT and adding many features that we really needed in NT. It is a pity MS never added USB to NT, but that's irrelevant now because you can use Win2k. ME is a minor step from 98SE and not worth the upgrade, although it does drastically improve the latency for audio applications.

And if we're going to point fingers they should also be pointed squarely at Apple whose OS has been at least as deficient as anything from MS regardless of what Mac zealots might say to the contrary.

WRT Palm I do think they're moving slowly, but I also want the latest PalmOS and with Handspring I don't get it; if Handspring insist on sticking with their current strategy they're forcing me to go with Palm. Handspring at the very least need to offer flash RAM on their high end models. And why is Sony the only one offering higher resolution displays?

Posted by dick-richardson on 05-06-2001 04:41 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by ianb
...WRT Palm I do think they're moving slowly, but I also want the latest PalmOS and with Handspring I don't get it; if Handspring insist on sticking with their current strategy they're forcing me to go with Palm. Handspring at the very least need to offer flash RAM on their high end models. And why is Sony the only one offering higher resolution displays?

You have to go with Palm if you want the lastest OS nominally. Palm's OS 5 is going to allow for higher resolution. 3.5 already has it with Sony and Handera. Palm's 4.0 allows for USB syncronization and hardware expansion. Handspring's 3.1 already had that. As for Handspring's decision not to use flash, that's nothing new. That topic has been hashed and re-hashed since the first release of the deluxe. Palm's OS 4 isn't flashable on OS 3 devices, and OS 5 won't be flashable onto OS 4 devices. Sounds about as effective as not having flash RAM at all. I guess one should buy a device based on what they need, not pipe dreams of what the device may or may not do at some point in the future if you're able to accurately predict what (if any) hardware of today will be compatible.

__________________
-Joshua
Abortion: Darwinism at its finest.

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:01 AM.

Pages (4): « 1 2 3 [4]
Show 20 posts from this thread on one page