Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Memory card questions?

Last response: in Cell Phones & Smartphones
Share
Anonymous
June 4, 2004 8:41:35 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.pocketpc (More info?)

I've been using a SanDisk 128MB+ Wi-Fi card in my h2215 and
as a convenience I've bough and installed a Kingston 256MB
SD card. Is it my imagination or is the transfer rate on the SD
card noticeably slower than CF card memory? Is this to be
expected or did I screw up and buy an inferior brand of
memory? What's the deal?
My 2215 ROM is 1.10 and I have installed the SD fix from MS.

Thanks.

More about : memory card questions

Anonymous
June 4, 2004 8:41:36 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.pocketpc (More info?)

I think it's noticably slower too. What I've done to test it is transfer an mp3 from SD to CF then reverse the process. The CF card got the data faster every time. Not a very scientific test but I'm convinced.

Don't Panic!
Bobby
Anonymous
June 4, 2004 11:23:42 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.pocketpc (More info?)

Yes. The CF cards run a lot faster!
Kingston SD cards are one of the fastests and aswell cheap cards around. The
best thing to do (apart from swiching to CF cards) would be buying Panasonic
SD card.

--

..: Jakub Kanczugowski
..: www.PDAclub.pl
Related resources
Anonymous
June 4, 2004 11:23:43 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.pocketpc (More info?)

On Fri, 4 Jun 2004 19:23:42 +0200, "Jakub Kanczugowski"
<duncan@no-spam-ever.ceti.pl> wrote:
>Yes. The CF cards run a lot faster!
>Kingston SD cards are one of the fastests and aswell cheap cards around. The
>best thing to do (apart from swiching to CF cards) would be buying Panasonic
>SD card.

I might try a Panasonic card. The reason I even bothered with a SD card was to
have as semi-permanent place to put installed programs, leaving as much
main memory free as possible.
Thanks.
June 4, 2004 11:23:46 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.pocketpc (More info?)

Don't Panic! wrote:

> I think it's noticably slower too. What I've done to test it is transfer an mp3 from SD to CF then reverse the process. The CF card got the data faster every time. Not a very scientific test but I'm convinced.
>
> Don't Panic!
> Bobby


Funny that, the guy in Dixons justified me paying £10 more for an SD
card rather than CF of the same capacity because it was faster.

As it happens, I have one of each and have never noticed much difference
in speed. However SD cards are better for transporting, they did't need
case and can be dropped without braking. CF cards are better if you plan
to keep it in the device, as they are harder to eject accidently - but
break easily when dropped.
Anonymous
June 5, 2004 2:34:11 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.pocketpc (More info?)

"Marc" <marcus.no-spam@imarc.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1086373395.1595.0@lotis.uk.clara.net...
> Don't Panic! wrote:
>
> > I think it's noticably slower too. What I've done to test it is transfer
an mp3 from SD to CF then reverse the process. The CF card got the data
faster every time. Not a very scientific test but I'm convinced.
> >
> > Don't Panic!
> > Bobby
>
>
> Funny that, the guy in Dixons justified me paying £10 more for an SD
> card rather than CF of the same capacity because it was faster.
>
> As it happens, I have one of each and have never noticed much difference
> in speed. However SD cards are better for transporting, they did't need
> case and can be dropped without braking. CF cards are better if you plan
> to keep it in the device, as they are harder to eject accidently - but
> break easily when dropped.

There are websites that show speed comparisons of different cards- digital
photography sites seem best. CF has been faster, but SD has been catching
up. I still prefer CF for transporting, the contacts are protected far
better than SD, and over 5 years of use I've never broken one even when
stood on, never mind just dropping.
June 8, 2004 1:11:55 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.pocketpc (More info?)

AlanS wrote:
> There are websites that show speed comparisons of different cards- digital
> photography sites seem best. CF has been faster, but SD has been catching
> up. I still prefer CF for transporting, the contacts are protected far
> better than SD, and over 5 years of use I've never broken one even when
> stood on, never mind just dropping.
>

They do remind me of old gameboy games! I have never broken one buy
dropping, but mine has "warning do not drop" on the back !

Marc
Anonymous
July 13, 2004 12:06:33 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.pocketpc (More info?)

earn an extra income £500 to £2000 per month visit
www.monsterlifestyle.co.uk so scary its true!!!
expansion into Europe July 2004 who do you know in Holland or Ireland please
pass onto somebody who may be able to help thankyou

"Marc" <no.s-p-a-m.marcus@imarc.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1086639115.21912.0@echo.uk.clara.net...
> AlanS wrote:
> > There are websites that show speed comparisons of different cards-
digital
> > photography sites seem best. CF has been faster, but SD has been
catching
> > up. I still prefer CF for transporting, the contacts are protected far
> > better than SD, and over 5 years of use I've never broken one even when
> > stood on, never mind just dropping.
> >
>
> They do remind me of old gameboy games! I have never broken one buy
> dropping, but mine has "warning do not drop" on the back !
>
> Marc
!