Registered: Feb 2001
Location: Atlantic Rim
Posts: 570

So Where is the Heat on Palm?

I get a kick out of all the sh*t that Handspring has taken over the past three years in creating a line of devices who's operating system is non-upgradable. Why isn't the same heat being directed at Palm, which has foresaken upgradablility for much of their current line, and all of their older equipment with the advent of Palm OS 5?

Don't get me wrong here...I know why they are doing it, and appreciate the advantages, I just wish all those posters from days-gone-by who implied we were idiots because "our units were obsolete the day we bought them" could come back with their Palm 500s and talk to us about "upgradability".

Registered: Jan 2000
Location:
Posts: 52

First. let me just say, I never complained about the OS upgrade issue with Visors. I knew what I was buying when I bought it. With that said, there is a distinct difference between what HS did and Palm did.

Palms handhelds, with a few exceptions, were ROM upgradeable and are still ROM upgradeable. However, most posters on this board recognize that OS5 is designed for a new hardware architecture and, as such, previous PDAs simply are unsuited. Palm has given users the option of being upgradeable within their relevant technology architecture.

This is a big difference from HS, where their PDAs could not be upgraded even within the same architecture due to a marketing and cost decision to EXCLUDE FlashROM for housing the OS.

Big difference. Palm's limitation is due to a technology limitation (can't play records on CD players) not a purely marketing decision (can't think of a good analogy) as in HS case.

Once again, I will reemphasize: I bought my HS VDX with open eyes, and, while I regret I can't run some software requiring an OS greater than 3.1, I don't regret my purchase!

Registered: Feb 2001
Location: Atlantic Rim
Posts: 570

quote:

---

Originally posted by dsaroff
This is a big difference from HS, where their PDAs could not be upgraded even within the same architecture due to a marketing and cost decision to EXCLUDE FlashROM for housing the OS.

Big difference.

---

Registered: Jan 2000
Location:
Posts: 52

I understand that you understand. I just feel your argument for Palm getting the grief HS received is wrong.

While functionally the result is the same, the method and cause is different. It's like say it doesn't matter if one stole $10,000 from a bank or earned $10,000 working, functionally the result is the same.

There is a very big difference between building a product that cannot not be upgraded and one that can be upgrade within its design constraints.

Your Palm 130 can have its OS upgraded to a later version(if it has Flash...I forget if it does), but the VDX NEVER could be upgraded in the OS.

You are arguing that one should be able to upgrade a horse to a car (going from the 68000 OS 4 to ARM OS 5).

Other people were complaining that with HS you couldn't even go from a pony to a horse, let alone a car.

I doubt many people complain the W2000 won't run on their 8088 machines. However people would complain if they could never have upgraded the versions of DOS from 1.0 to 2.0 to 3.0 on their 8088 because of a marketing decision determining technology architecture

Registered: Oct 2002
Location:
Posts: 36

I have been able to upgrade my Vx to OS 4.1. Of course I know that my M505 will not upgrade any further just as Apple users know there won't be a OS 9.5. I think it was good of Palm to allow me to upgrade in the first place. I have read that the Tungsten T will be able to upgrade to OS 6.

As for Handspring, and I'm not trying to bag on them, there hasn't been a single unit which was upgradable to my knowledge. I just think your argument is flawed.

By the way, I also own a PocketPC 2000 device and it also is not upgradable. I think that is a better comparison.

Registered: Aug 2001
Location: ILLINOIS
Posts: 227

Isn't that the point--

The New Palms have different hardware and hence and run on OS 5. When you get the new advanced hardware you get the new advanced OS to run that hardware--

Can't run Windows 98 on 4 meg of ram--ETC

PDA's have a faster (or had up to this point anyway) obsolescence factor -- timewise.

HS took advantage of this to save a few bucks--
A stupid decision--I think -- but marketing wise the same as creating a better product with a more advanced OS--IE Palm OS5.

I got yelled at on another site because I didn't understand why we don't have more memory now that memory is cheap--

I was stupid becauseI didn't understand the cost factor of a few cents over many units --
I was apparently incapable of understanding marketing

This is / was the same---A marketing decision --

Palm is getting cut a whole lot more slack because there is a promise of real productivity gains here--

We'll see if those gains materialize in the real world--


And we'll see if Palm get's it turn in the barrel--I doubt it.

HS was the inovator that split from Palm--so more was and is expected of it-- Even though Palm IS THE OS-