Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

PocketPC buggy??

Last response: in Cell Phones & Smartphones
Share
Anonymous
August 21, 2004 3:44:46 PM

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

I'm about to purchase a PDA and I'm leaning towards HP iPaq models
(over Palm), but I've read too many (unbiased) posts stating how buggy
and unreliable the software (Windows 2003 for Pocket PC) and hardware
are:

- Alarms don't go off
- Frequent need to reset
- System stalls (and quite slow at times)
- Constant loss of data

I generally prefer the Windows environment over PalmOS but many say
Windows 2003 for PocketPC isn't similar at all to the Windows
environment (besides the logo!!).

I want a PDA that's designed for (very) general purposes, not just
storing contact info, that has excellent compatibility with desktop
applications, and that is RELIABLE!!

I'd like to hear people's opinions on this forum on why (or why not)
the PocketPC is better than PalmOS..

Thanks for your replies!!

More about : pocketpc buggy

August 21, 2004 7:38:59 PM

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

I'm not sure where you obtained all of those interesting facts ... but if I
believed them as you apparently do I sure wouldn't buy a PPC.

I enjoy my PPC find most a lot of the problems you identify as user error.
The few people I know who have Palm's can't use them ... and are forever
asking me "how to" which I can't answer!

--
____________________
Ann
"Jessica Loriena" <jloriena@hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:9beb2b43.0408211044.4cbdc41d@posting.google.com...
> I'm about to purchase a PDA and I'm leaning towards HP iPaq models
> (over Palm), but I've read too many (unbiased) posts stating how buggy
> and unreliable the software (Windows 2003 for Pocket PC) and hardware
> are:
>
> - Alarms don't go off
> - Frequent need to reset
> - System stalls (and quite slow at times)
> - Constant loss of data
>
> I generally prefer the Windows environment over PalmOS but many say
> Windows 2003 for PocketPC isn't similar at all to the Windows
> environment (besides the logo!!).
>
> I want a PDA that's designed for (very) general purposes, not just
> storing contact info, that has excellent compatibility with desktop
> applications, and that is RELIABLE!!
>
> I'd like to hear people's opinions on this forum on why (or why not)
> the PocketPC is better than PalmOS..
>
> Thanks for your replies!!
Anonymous
August 21, 2004 7:56:54 PM

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

Well, i'm quite happy with my iPAQ 5550 Pocket PC and it's not all that
buggy as some people may say a PPC can be. Sure it's a mobile computer
and it will have it's little quirks like any computer, but it works
fine when it is operated properly.
the 'rumour' that the PPC OS (Windows Mobile) isn't similar to the Windows
desktop environment contains only a very small amount of truth. and the
truth is, it is just smaller and has less functions than a full-blown
desktop PC. You'll still find the Start Menu, the Search, Explorer,
Internet Explorer, Media Player, Excel, Word, Outlook, etc.. on a PPC.
all in their miniature versions, but still very familiar i'd think..

about those 4 points you listed;

- Alarms can be fixed in existing PPC's and newer PPC's would have them
fixed, so this should not be an issue. If there is, there are third
party solutions to fix them. (With Spb Pocket Plus! for example)
- Resetting is only needed after installing specific software or when
some program (often a third party program) locks your device up.
- Same as point 2, it's often how the device is used. If you like to
browse the internet a lot and leave all your programs running the
device will have a memory shortage, and it will slow down a little.
There is also a tiny bug in the 2003 versions of Windows Mobile where
the builtin Notification Database fills up with entries after every
reset, slowing the device down. this however can be fixed with a free
utility from ScaryBear Software, called ClearNotifications.
whether or not this has been fixed in 2003SE devices, I don't know.
- If a PPC frequently loses data or hard resets itself without a reason
it can be various reasons: a bad PPC in need of repairs, bad software
was installed by the user, a bad memory card, or the user simply fails
to recharge the unit before the battery drains.
I certainly have not lost any data yet on my PPC and if I do, it will
be my own fault for not charging the battery or making a decent backup ;) 

As far as compatibility with the desktop applications goes, in a general
sense a PPC with Windows Mobile on it IS compatible, as it was designed
to be integrated into the desktop's PIM functions. (Email, Notes, Word
and Excel documents, Contacts, Media Player, etc.)
Some things might require something extra but this is usually user
preference. many applications designed to extend the PPC's features
have been designed and some are bound to find your interest when you
feel something is 'missing' from your setup.

I won't say Pocket PC's are better than Palm, simply because in basic
terms, both are the same. they just look different, and have differently
named applications that provide functionality to the user in their own
specific ways. Both are portable computing devices, can do the same
basic PIM tasks and keep in touch with your Desktop PC through software
that synchronizes data between the two.
I chose Pocket PC over Palm because of screen size, available expansion
options, familiarity and processing power. and overall just because I
liked how my 5550 looked ;) 

But t's up to you to decide which you like better. Palm or PPC :) 



$0.02



~S.






jloriena@hotpop.com (Jessica Loriena) wrote in
news:9beb2b43.0408211044.4cbdc41d@posting.google.com:

> I'm about to purchase a PDA and I'm leaning towards HP iPaq models
> (over Palm), but I've read too many (unbiased) posts stating how buggy
> and unreliable the software (Windows 2003 for Pocket PC) and hardware
> are:
>
> - Alarms don't go off
> - Frequent need to reset
> - System stalls (and quite slow at times)
> - Constant loss of data
>
> I generally prefer the Windows environment over PalmOS but many say
> Windows 2003 for PocketPC isn't similar at all to the Windows
> environment (besides the logo!!).
>
> I want a PDA that's designed for (very) general purposes, not just
> storing contact info, that has excellent compatibility with desktop
> applications, and that is RELIABLE!!
>
> I'd like to hear people's opinions on this forum on why (or why not)
> the PocketPC is better than PalmOS..
>
> Thanks for your replies!!





--
======================
ACE!!! a.k.a. ~S.
OS. Osaris / Psion 5mx
iPAQ 5550 / Nokia 6310
HTTP://www.xarane.com
======================
Windows Mobile 2003 Second Edition Petition:
http://www.petitiononline.com/HPWMK3SE/petition.html
9708 Total Signatures on Saturday, Aug. 21st 2004!
HP 'Windows Mobile 2003 SE Support' Forum:
http://forums.itrc.hp.com/service/forums/questionanswer...
Related resources
Anonymous
August 22, 2004 2:22:04 AM

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

"ACE!!!" <ace_rules_bbs@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<Xns954D99FF1126FearIsTheMindKiller@207.46.248.16>...
> Well, i'm quite happy with my iPAQ 5550 Pocket PC and it's not all that
> buggy as some people may say a PPC can be. Sure it's a mobile computer
> and it will have it's little quirks like any computer, but it works
> fine when it is operated properly.

I really have an issue with the PPC fans when they make statements
like this and refuse to acknowledge that palm is just more "RELIABLE"
than PPC, rather than say things such as "works fine when it is
operated properly" or blame it when it isn't on a "user error" as one
above poster said.

I have this year switched to PPC after years of using palm and found
that PPC requires work, an inordinate amount of work to get it to
operate "properly", which actually is still with some compromise if
you've experienced the stability of a Palm. I do *not* recall an alarm
not going off in a palm and I do not recall losing my data on a palm
in the 4 years I used them, which are, unfortunately, frequent
occurences on a PPC and are bound to happen to a new user until he
gets it to "work properly", which in reality just meant implementing a
strict backup routine to SD and computer that 1) can still be done on
a palm (SD) 2) is done automatically on a palm and as default with the
hotsync process. I still get the frequent, more than once a day
soft-resets and the odd hard-resets, and I still do *not* trust my PPC
to wake me up for an important appointment even after installing the
"fixes", such as wakeuptweak and check/clearnotify etc.

Now to the OP, it depends on what you want. If you want PIM that is as
reliable as a rock for the 4 points that you mentioned, and yes they
are true, then get a palm. If, however, you want media playback such
as watching videos in different formats, the ability to use CF cards
including microdrive (though don't rely on the microdrive for your
important data!), and the option of extended batteries, then get a
PPC.

So yes, if you're asking if PocketPC is buggy, the answer has to be
yes in comparison to the palm, if you've been using palm and got used
to its reliability.

here's a comparison

http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-3127_7-5120845-1.html?tag=...


You should see what's best for you.
Anonymous
August 22, 2004 7:56:02 AM

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

Jessica Loriena wrote:
> - Alarms don't go off

I haven't managed to take advantage of the alarm feature for even once. It
just doesn't wake up the device like it should to be useful.

> - Frequent need to reset

If you have a lot of applications running active or in the background, this
tends to happen. It can be avoided by closing applications manually and with
a few 3rd party tools too.

> - System stalls (and quite slow at times)
> - Constant loss of data


Do a simple Google Groups query ( for example
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=ipaq+died ) and you'll find out that many
people have had battery and memory issues with iPaqs and other Pocket PCs.
But things are improving, for example the latest iPaq models have more File
Store memory than before.

> I generally prefer the Windows environment over PalmOS but many say
> Windows 2003 for PocketPC isn't similar at all to the Windows
> environment (besides the logo!!).

This is the case for me too. I've got used to the Pocket PC user interface.
When my iPaq works, it just a wonderful tool. If I wanted a more reliable
tool, I'd go for a PalmOne device. But it's not that easy changing to whole
another OS and UI, and I've already bought quite a few apps for Pocket PC.

> I want a PDA that's designed for (very) general purposes, not just
> storing contact info, that has excellent compatibility with desktop
> applications, and that is RELIABLE!!


I think you can cope with a Pocket PC device as long as you

- save all the important data on memory cards (MMC/SD or whatever is
supported)
- disable wireless features (Bluetooth/WLAN) when not needed - this saves
the battery
- purchase a backup battery
- make sure you never let your battery run out totally, because this may
result in a hardware reset.

I've beenusing HP iPaq h5550 for less than a year and this been in
maintenane already twice. Fortunately I don't own this, my employer does.
Secondly I'm glad that Hewlett-Packard has a very fast maintenance service
for corporate customers, it takes only about 4--6 days to get a 'dead unit'
[1] back working. My colleague has an iPaq h5450 and his unit is in for
maintenance at the moment -- for battery and memory issues too.

So, probably I'll using a PPC PDA for a long time, but once in a while it
makes angry and frustrated. I guess I'm not a true Pocket PC "believer"
then.

[1] = Meaning that the device doesn't react to a hardware reset, battery
power or anything whatsoever.

--
Tero Lehto
http://lehto.net/tero/
August 22, 2004 9:44:04 AM

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

And I have an issue when someone challenges someone else's integrity by
insinuating that they aren't being truthful when everyone has different
experiences.

I stand by my comments based on my experiences.

--
____________________
Ann
"Mike Henley" <mnhenley@msn.com> wrote in message
news:6005702b.0408212122.b295056@posting.google.com...
> "ACE!!!" <ace_rules_bbs@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns954D99FF1126FearIsTheMindKiller@207.46.248.16>...
> > Well, i'm quite happy with my iPAQ 5550 Pocket PC and it's not all that
> > buggy as some people may say a PPC can be. Sure it's a mobile computer
> > and it will have it's little quirks like any computer, but it works
> > fine when it is operated properly.
>
> I really have an issue with the PPC fans when they make statements
> like this and refuse to acknowledge that palm is just more "RELIABLE"
> than PPC, rather than say things such as "works fine when it is
> operated properly" or blame it when it isn't on a "user error" as one
> above poster said.
>
> I have this year switched to PPC after years of using palm and found
> that PPC requires work, an inordinate amount of work to get it to
> operate "properly", which actually is still with some compromise if
> you've experienced the stability of a Palm. I do *not* recall an alarm
> not going off in a palm and I do not recall losing my data on a palm
> in the 4 years I used them, which are, unfortunately, frequent
> occurences on a PPC and are bound to happen to a new user until he
> gets it to "work properly", which in reality just meant implementing a
> strict backup routine to SD and computer that 1) can still be done on
> a palm (SD) 2) is done automatically on a palm and as default with the
> hotsync process. I still get the frequent, more than once a day
> soft-resets and the odd hard-resets, and I still do *not* trust my PPC
> to wake me up for an important appointment even after installing the
> "fixes", such as wakeuptweak and check/clearnotify etc.
>
> Now to the OP, it depends on what you want. If you want PIM that is as
> reliable as a rock for the 4 points that you mentioned, and yes they
> are true, then get a palm. If, however, you want media playback such
> as watching videos in different formats, the ability to use CF cards
> including microdrive (though don't rely on the microdrive for your
> important data!), and the option of extended batteries, then get a
> PPC.
>
> So yes, if you're asking if PocketPC is buggy, the answer has to be
> yes in comparison to the palm, if you've been using palm and got used
> to its reliability.
>
> here's a comparison
>
> http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-3127_7-5120845-1.html?tag=...
>
>
> You should see what's best for you.
Anonymous
August 22, 2004 3:55:37 PM

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

"Ann" <nospam@netzero.com> wrote in message news:<uzkk6UDiEHA.2544@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl>...
> And I have an issue when someone challenges someone else's integrity by
> insinuating that they aren't being truthful when everyone has different
> experiences.
>
> I stand by my comments based on my experiences.
>
> --

Oh. So now we're getting hostile, aren't we?

You're "insinuating" things I didn't insinuate.

I stand by my comments based on my experiences, and strangely,
verified by the experiences of quite quite quite quite quite quite
many.

Here's what it is. On a palm, reliability is something you take for
granted and you never need to worry about, you don't think twice about
it, on a PPC it is a matter of getting it to "operate properly",
searching for fixes, being subject to "user error" because she/he
didn't spend the time getting it to "operate properly".. etc.

Here's what it is. A palm operates properly out-of-the-box. It's a
simple fact. It is my experience and the experience of many many many
many people who used both; reliability on a palm is something you take
for granted out-of-the-box and it almost never fails you with any of
the 4 issues the OP mentioned, and that's not the case for the PPC.

I am yet to read from someone who used both Palm and PPC long enough
and said that the PPC is more reliable than a Palm. Is that your
experience? tell us about it.
August 22, 2004 6:47:49 PM

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

I have never had a palm nor would I plan to purchase one. The PPC meets my
needs because I'm looking for a mini PC that is capable of being
interoperable in my work environment. The Palm devices are not a fit for my
work environment ... if it works for you then great.


--
____________________
Ann
"Mike Henley" <mnhenley@msn.com> wrote in message
news:6005702b.0408221055.4217d6cc@posting.google.com...
> "Ann" <nospam@netzero.com> wrote in message
> news:<uzkk6UDiEHA.2544@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl>...
>> And I have an issue when someone challenges someone else's integrity by
>> insinuating that they aren't being truthful when everyone has different
>> experiences.
>>
>> I stand by my comments based on my experiences.
>>
>> --
>
> Oh. So now we're getting hostile, aren't we?
>
> You're "insinuating" things I didn't insinuate.
>
> I stand by my comments based on my experiences, and strangely,
> verified by the experiences of quite quite quite quite quite quite
> many.
>
> Here's what it is. On a palm, reliability is something you take for
> granted and you never need to worry about, you don't think twice about
> it, on a PPC it is a matter of getting it to "operate properly",
> searching for fixes, being subject to "user error" because she/he
> didn't spend the time getting it to "operate properly".. etc.
>
> Here's what it is. A palm operates properly out-of-the-box. It's a
> simple fact. It is my experience and the experience of many many many
> many people who used both; reliability on a palm is something you take
> for granted out-of-the-box and it almost never fails you with any of
> the 4 issues the OP mentioned, and that's not the case for the PPC.
>
> I am yet to read from someone who used both Palm and PPC long enough
> and said that the PPC is more reliable than a Palm. Is that your
> experience? tell us about it.
Anonymous
August 22, 2004 11:30:37 PM

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

"Ann" <nospam@netzero.com> wrote in message news:<eG6KjEIiEHA.1384@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl>...
> I have never had a palm nor would I plan to purchase one. The PPC meets my
> needs because I'm looking for a mini PC that is capable of being
> interoperable in my work environment. The Palm devices are not a fit for my
> work environment ... if it works for you then great.
>

See, I thought so. I used palmOS for 4 years before before I started
using PPC 2003, and from my experience of palmOS and the palmOS
standard of reliability, PPC 2003 is really really poor at reliability
in the 4 points mentioned by the OP.



>
> --
> ____________________
> Ann
> "Mike Henley" <mnhenley@msn.com> wrote in message
Anonymous
August 23, 2004 2:32:43 AM

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

Mike Henley wrote:
> I am yet to read from someone who used both Palm and PPC long enough
> and said that the PPC is more reliable than a Palm. Is that your
> experience? tell us about it.


On the other hand people use their devices in different ways. Most Palm
users I know use it as a simple calendar, notebook, email and web client and
so on. Then again most PPC users I know seem to install 3rd party
applications, use Bluetooth and WLAN access, take advantage of VPN tunneling
and other security solutions, and so on. That is, Palms seem to be used as
very simple PIM tools, PPCs more often as mini computers.

I'm pretty sure I would have had less problems with my iPaq if I hadn't
installed so many 3rd party applications and add-ons. But I just want more
from my PDA. Normally you can't install anything to a corporate PC either,
but as PDAs are personal assistants (as the acronym PDA says), people
install all kinds of unreliable stuff on them.

--
Tero Lehto
http://lehto.net/tero/
Anonymous
August 23, 2004 2:32:44 AM

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

"Tero Lehto" <tero-news23@lehto.net> wrote in message news:<Rv6Wc.1536$Au.1333@reader1.news.jippii.net>...
> Mike Henley wrote:
> > I am yet to read from someone who used both Palm and PPC long enough
> > and said that the PPC is more reliable than a Palm. Is that your
> > experience? tell us about it.
>
>
> On the other hand people use their devices in different ways. Most Palm
> users I know use it as a simple calendar, notebook, email and web client and
> so on. Then again most PPC users I know seem to install 3rd party
> applications,

Hmmm... most palm users install 3rd party applications. In fact,
there are far more 3rd party applications for palm than there are for
PPC. What's more, Palm's 3rd party applications tend to be more
compolex and full-featured. So no, not a valid argument. I had no
stability issues with my palm running complex 3rd party applications,
far more complex than anything on PPC side.

> use Bluetooth and WLAN access,

There's bluetooth and wifi for Palm too. My last palm had bluetooth
and it was even easier to use than the PPC's bluetooth.

> take advantage of VPN tunneling
> and other security solutions, and so on. That is, Palms seem to be used as
> very simple PIM tools, PPCs more often as mini computers.
>
> I'm pretty sure I would have had less problems with my iPaq if I hadn't
> installed so many 3rd party applications and add-ons.

You too haven't used palm, have you?

There are FAR more applications for palm, which are far more complex
and full-featured, and far more freeware than there is for the PPC,
and yet they rarely ever, if ever at all, have caused me reliability
issues.

In fact, one of the things that bothered me about transitioning from
palmOS to PPC was that the 3rd party applications for the PPC were
quite poor in numbers and complexity.

Multimedia on the PPC is better than it is on Palm. But reliability?
No no no no no; PalmOS wins 100%.



> But I just want more
> from my PDA. Normally you can't install anything to a corporate PC either,
> but as PDAs are personal assistants (as the acronym PDA says), people
> install all kinds of unreliable stuff on them.
Anonymous
August 23, 2004 7:33:18 AM

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

mnhenley@msn.com (Mike Henley) wrote in
news:6005702b.0408221055.4217d6cc@posting.google.com:

> Oh. So now we're getting hostile, aren't we?
>


As I recall you're the first who raised a sharp voice of opinion
in this thread. for your conveniance, here is a phosfor copy:

~snip~
I really have an issue with the PPC fans when they make statements
like this and refuse to acknowledge that palm is just more "RELIABLE"
than PPC, rather than say things such as "works fine when it is
operated properly" or blame it when it isn't on a "user error" as one
above poster said.
~snip~


*ding!* Congratulations, Give that man a cigar for remembering his
own postings.
Most faults (except factory faults and transport damage) are user error.
it's your own fault when you let the battery drain too far for a PPC to
retain it's data, and it is your own fault when you don't read the manual
when you get your PPC to know what it's capable of. It comes with PC and
PPC side backup programs, which can be set up quickly and painlessly to
do exactly that, make backups whenever you want to.
Even a dumb user can brick a Palm or have other problems with it, simply
because they don't take the time to learn the basics.



As Ann said, which wasn't at all hostile; I stand by my comments based
on my experiences as well.





--
======================
ACE!!! a.k.a. ~S.
OS. Osaris / Psion 5mx
iPAQ 5550 / Nokia 6310
HTTP://www.xarane.com
======================
Windows Mobile 2003 Second Edition Petition:
http://www.petitiononline.com/HPWMK3SE/petition.html
9708 Total Signatures on Saturday, Aug. 21st 2004!
HP 'Windows Mobile 2003 SE Support' Forum:
http://forums.itrc.hp.com/service/forums/questionanswer...
Anonymous
August 23, 2004 8:23:07 AM

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

mnhenley@msn.com (Mike Henley) wrote in news:6005702b.0408212122.b295056
@posting.google.com:

> I have this year switched to PPC after years of using palm and found
> that PPC requires work, an inordinate amount of work to get it to
> operate "properly", which actually is still with some compromise if
> you've experienced the stability of a Palm.


This, is simply because you are used to Palm, and are now stepping into
a new world. a new OS, new Applications, different Memory management,
different approaches to certain tasks. The biggest mistake is to buy
a PPC and expect it to work exactly as a Palm. it won't.



~S.




--
======================
ACE!!! a.k.a. ~S.
OS. Osaris / Psion 5mx
iPAQ 5550 / Nokia 6310
HTTP://www.xarane.com
======================
Windows Mobile 2003 Second Edition Petition:
http://www.petitiononline.com/HPWMK3SE/petition.html
9708 Total Signatures on Saturday, Aug. 21st 2004!
HP 'Windows Mobile 2003 SE Support' Forum:
http://forums.itrc.hp.com/service/forums/questionanswer...
Anonymous
August 23, 2004 12:33:55 PM

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

hey Jessica, sometime the subject gets lost in these long threads.. hope you
get to this one.

i have used palm and pocket pc. for years now. i would recomed a plam for
someone that just needs a shedule and basic PIM functions. I on the other
hand would recomend a pocket pc to someome who neeeds office functions right
out of the box (richer software offerings out of the box). as to the
quailty...both of these platforms sell many devices....there are bound to be
some mfg issues with these volumes... read the palm news group and you will
see tons of issues as well. i have had 5 pocket pc devices. some modles were
better than others. i also have had 3 palm devices. the current offerings
are the best i have seen. my 2210 had required a hard reset only once in 8
months...after i installed a free utility. i deleted the utility and it
hasnt happen again. look for the feathers you need and go after the modle
that best fits your needs. (look at ther DELL offerings,,, pretty cool)
"Jessica Loriena" <jloriena@hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:9beb2b43.0408211044.4cbdc41d@posting.google.com...
> I'm about to purchase a PDA and I'm leaning towards HP iPaq models
> (over Palm), but I've read too many (unbiased) posts stating how buggy
> and unreliable the software (Windows 2003 for Pocket PC) and hardware
> are:
>
> - Alarms don't go off
> - Frequent need to reset
> - System stalls (and quite slow at times)
> - Constant loss of data
>
> I generally prefer the Windows environment over PalmOS but many say
> Windows 2003 for PocketPC isn't similar at all to the Windows
> environment (besides the logo!!).
>
> I want a PDA that's designed for (very) general purposes, not just
> storing contact info, that has excellent compatibility with desktop
> applications, and that is RELIABLE!!
>
> I'd like to hear people's opinions on this forum on why (or why not)
> the PocketPC is better than PalmOS..
>
> Thanks for your replies!!
Anonymous
August 23, 2004 3:11:14 PM

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

I thought I was misreading your comments...

Palm apps more complex and with more features than PPC apps...

Now I'm really more curious... what apps are these again?

--
Carlo Ma. Guerrero
Microsoft MVP, Mobile Devices


"Mike Henley" <mnhenley@msn.com> wrote in message
news:6005702b.0408221846.1f68a615@posting.google.com...
"Tero Lehto" <tero-news23@lehto.net> wrote in message
news:<Rv6Wc.1536$Au.1333@reader1.news.jippii.net>...
> Mike Henley wrote:
> > I am yet to read from someone who used both Palm and PPC long enough
> > and said that the PPC is more reliable than a Palm. Is that your
> > experience? tell us about it.
>
>
> On the other hand people use their devices in different ways. Most Palm
> users I know use it as a simple calendar, notebook, email and web client
> and
> so on. Then again most PPC users I know seem to install 3rd party
> applications,

Hmmm... most palm users install 3rd party applications. In fact,
there are far more 3rd party applications for palm than there are for
PPC. What's more, Palm's 3rd party applications tend to be more
compolex and full-featured. So no, not a valid argument. I had no
stability issues with my palm running complex 3rd party applications,
far more complex than anything on PPC side.

> use Bluetooth and WLAN access,

There's bluetooth and wifi for Palm too. My last palm had bluetooth
and it was even easier to use than the PPC's bluetooth.

> take advantage of VPN tunneling
> and other security solutions, and so on. That is, Palms seem to be used as
> very simple PIM tools, PPCs more often as mini computers.
>
> I'm pretty sure I would have had less problems with my iPaq if I hadn't
> installed so many 3rd party applications and add-ons.

You too haven't used palm, have you?

There are FAR more applications for palm, which are far more complex
and full-featured, and far more freeware than there is for the PPC,
and yet they rarely ever, if ever at all, have caused me reliability
issues.

In fact, one of the things that bothered me about transitioning from
palmOS to PPC was that the 3rd party applications for the PPC were
quite poor in numbers and complexity.

Multimedia on the PPC is better than it is on Palm. But reliability?
No no no no no; PalmOS wins 100%.



> But I just want more
> from my PDA. Normally you can't install anything to a corporate PC either,
> but as PDAs are personal assistants (as the acronym PDA says), people
> install all kinds of unreliable stuff on them.
Anonymous
August 23, 2004 3:11:15 PM

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

"Carlo Ma. Guerrero [MVP]" <ppcsurfr@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<#4tKc7LiEHA.3016@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>...
> I thought I was misreading your comments...
>
> Palm apps more complex and with more features than PPC apps...
>
> Now I'm really more curious... what apps are these again?
>

So you too haven't used palm?

I suggest the following, go compare pocketgear to palmgear, or
freewarepalm to freewareppc, or palm and ppc on sf.net, and you'll see
how, other than multimedia, palm apps are more complex and more
featured.

Take outliners for examples, which I generally relied on. The best on
the PPC side seems to be listpro, and yes, I have seen the others. In
fact, listpro won the PocketPC mag awards. Interestingly there is an
identical version for the palm, but it isn't as celebrated. Why?
because on palm there are quite a few other outliners that are "more
complex with more features", such as bonsai, shadowplan, progect...e
tc




> --
> Carlo Ma. Guerrero
> Microsoft MVP, Mobile Devices
>
Anonymous
August 23, 2004 6:27:43 PM

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

"ACE!!!" <ace_rules_bbs@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<Xns954E7F9D75BD3FearIsTheMindKiller@207.46.248.16>...

>
> As Ann said, which wasn't at all hostile; I stand by my comments based
> on my experiences as well.
>


Ann's experiences did not include using a Palm. The OP asked for a
comparison between palm and PPC where reliability, at least in terms
of the 4 points he mentioned, is concerned.

I am not talking about faulty units, I am talking about units that
should be working as they should. Take a fault-free ppc and a
fault-free palm and compare the two. Unless you've used palm long
enough to become accustomed to its reliability and be able to make a
comparison with the PPC, then your experience is one-sided.

>
>
>
>
> --
> ======================
> ACE!!! a.k.a. ~S.
> OS. Osaris / Psion 5mx
> iPAQ 5550 / Nokia 6310
> HTTP://www.xarane.com
> ======================
> Windows Mobile 2003 Second Edition Petition:
> http://www.petitiononline.com/HPWMK3SE/petition.html
> 9708 Total Signatures on Saturday, Aug. 21st 2004!
> HP 'Windows Mobile 2003 SE Support' Forum:
> http://forums.itrc.hp.com/service/forums/questionanswer...
Anonymous
August 24, 2004 2:09:51 AM

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

mnhenley@msn.com (Mike Henley) wrote in news:6005702b.0408231327.2f029193
@posting.google.com:

>
> Ann's experiences did not include using a Palm. The OP asked for a
> comparison between palm and PPC where reliability, at least in terms
> of the 4 points he mentioned, is concerned.
>
>

My experience with Palm is probably about two years ago, at which point I
stopped using it after about three years of use. The synch program started
bringing down my desktop PC after I upgraded my OS, to XP I think. This
was a known problem with the Clie at the time. I installed every patch I
could, no luck. Before that, I had intermittent problems with the Palm
Vx-- it would require a hard reset every once in a while, most noticably if
I didn't synch it for some time -- i.e., during european travel, just when
I depended upon it the most.

As a result, I've switched over to PPC, no problems since. I figured the
MS product would mesh better with the OS, and it seems to have worked. I
needed to do one hard reset, and that was when I installed some buggy
software.

When the Palm doesn't work, it really doesn't work.

Scott
Anonymous
August 24, 2004 7:03:28 AM

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

Mike Henley wrote:
> Hmmm... most palm users install 3rd party applications. In fact,
> there are far more 3rd party applications for palm than there are for
> PPC. What's more, Palm's 3rd party applications tend to be more
> compolex and full-featured. So no, not a valid argument.

I have bo problem admiting I might have guessed totally wrong, because I
made my assumptions based on PDA users I personally know. Many of my work
colleagues friends have some kind of an PDA, and for example a few Tungsten
T3 don't seem to take advantage of even half of all the features. Maybe this
applies to PPC users as well.

> There's bluetooth and wifi for Palm too. My last palm had bluetooth
> and it was even easier to use than the PPC's bluetooth.

I know, although there still ain't a Bluetooth + WLAN compo model? Let's
keep thumbs up that PalmOne is announcing Tungsten T4 soon, and that it has
all the great stuff that have been rumoured (Palm OS 6, more memory,
Bluetooth + WLAN and so on...).

> You too haven't used palm, have you?

Yes and no. I have used Tungsten T3 and Tungsten W for a few weeks, and the
PalmOne Treo 600 for almost a month. But then again I have much more
experience with PPCs.

> Multimedia on the PPC is better than it is on Palm. But reliability?
> No no no no no; PalmOS wins 100%.

I can't disagree. I'm just so used the PPC user interface, applications and
the whole concept, chaning to a PalmOS device would be very challenging. And
once again, I couldn't be satisfied with a model without both Bluetooth and
WLAN access. This is simply a basic requirement for a modern PDA.

--
Tero Lehto
http://lehto.net/tero/
Anonymous
August 24, 2004 7:07:23 AM

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

Mike Henley wrote:
> Hmmm... most palm users install 3rd party applications. In fact,
> there are far more 3rd party applications for palm than there are for
> PPC. What's more, Palm's 3rd party applications tend to be more
> compolex and full-featured. So no, not a valid argument.

I have no problem admiting I might have guessed totally wrong, because I
made my assumptions based on PDA users I personally know. Many of my work
colleagues and friends have some kind of an PDA, and for example a few
Tungsten T3 users don't seem to take advantage of even half of all the
features. Maybe this applies to most PPC users as well.

> There's bluetooth and wifi for Palm too. My last palm had bluetooth
> and it was even easier to use than the PPC's bluetooth.

I know, although there still ain't a Bluetooth + WLAN compo model? Let's
keep thumbs up that PalmOne is announcing Tungsten T4 soon, and that it has
all the great stuff that have been rumoured (Palm OS 6, more memory,
Bluetooth + WLAN and so on...).

> You too haven't used palm, have you?

Yes and no. I have used Tungsten T3 and Tungsten W for a few weeks, and the
PalmOne Treo 600 for almost a month. But then again I have much more
experience with PPCs.

> Multimedia on the PPC is better than it is on Palm. But reliability?
> No no no no no; PalmOS wins 100%.

I can't disagree. I'm just so used to the Pocket PC user interface,
applications and the whole concept that changing to a PalmOS device would be
challenging. And once again, I couldn't be satisfied with a model without
both Bluetooth and WLAN access. This is simply a basic requirement for a
modern PDA.

--
Tero Lehto
http://lehto.net/tero/

PS. Sorry for possible duplicate posts, I corrected a few spelling errors
from my earlier message.
Anonymous
August 25, 2004 7:07:51 AM

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

The examples you give are good ones and I guess the only way exact copies
for the Pocket PC can be made available would be if the developers of these
apps come up with Pocket PC versions.

Other than that, some people have been happy using Streamliner, TreNotes,
ADB Idea Library and PocketMindmap as alternatives.

There are stronger apps such as cyAct... which may be used in a way... but
it is completely geared for a different task though.

To give you examples of Pocket PC apps though which may not be available for
the Palm which offer a long list of features too where no other can compare
with would be applications such as RescoExplorer2003 which is not only a
local file explorer, but one which is capable of exploring shared folders in
a network, do FTP file transfers, view images, view files in text, binary
etc., encrypt/decrypt files, zip/unzip files edit the registry, etc. Pocket
Artist, PhotoViewer, PocketSlides, TextMaker, PlanMaker and many more are
Pocket PC apps which are packed with features which prove that not all apps
available for Palm are more powerful or have more features.

Generalizing that Palm apps are more advanced is probably a bit of an
exaggeration.

More apps... less apps...??? I think the basis of quality on sheer quantity
does not project a reliable assessment.

--
Carlo Ma. Guerrero
Microsoft MVP, Mobile Devices


"Mike Henley" <mnhenley@msn.com> wrote in message
news:6005702b.0408230222.1fde6feb@posting.google.com...
"Carlo Ma. Guerrero [MVP]" <ppcsurfr@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<#4tKc7LiEHA.3016@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>...
> I thought I was misreading your comments...
>
> Palm apps more complex and with more features than PPC apps...
>
> Now I'm really more curious... what apps are these again?
>

So you too haven't used palm?

I suggest the following, go compare pocketgear to palmgear, or
freewarepalm to freewareppc, or palm and ppc on sf.net, and you'll see
how, other than multimedia, palm apps are more complex and more
featured.

Take outliners for examples, which I generally relied on. The best on
the PPC side seems to be listpro, and yes, I have seen the others. In
fact, listpro won the PocketPC mag awards. Interestingly there is an
identical version for the palm, but it isn't as celebrated. Why?
because on palm there are quite a few other outliners that are "more
complex with more features", such as bonsai, shadowplan, progect...e
tc




> --
> Carlo Ma. Guerrero
> Microsoft MVP, Mobile Devices
>
Anonymous
August 26, 2004 12:59:26 PM

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

Do you want to know what I miss most on my Palm OS? (Other than the
built in calendar & todo :)  Documents to Go! They integrate so much
better with Word and Excel. Seems odd doesn't it???

Carlo Ma. Guerrero [MVP] wrote:

> The examples you give are good ones and I guess the only way exact copies
> for the Pocket PC can be made available would be if the developers of these
> apps come up with Pocket PC versions.
>
> Other than that, some people have been happy using Streamliner, TreNotes,
> ADB Idea Library and PocketMindmap as alternatives.
>
> There are stronger apps such as cyAct... which may be used in a way... but
> it is completely geared for a different task though.
>
> To give you examples of Pocket PC apps though which may not be available for
> the Palm which offer a long list of features too where no other can compare
> with would be applications such as RescoExplorer2003 which is not only a
> local file explorer, but one which is capable of exploring shared folders in
> a network, do FTP file transfers, view images, view files in text, binary
> etc., encrypt/decrypt files, zip/unzip files edit the registry, etc. Pocket
> Artist, PhotoViewer, PocketSlides, TextMaker, PlanMaker and many more are
> Pocket PC apps which are packed with features which prove that not all apps
> available for Palm are more powerful or have more features.
>
> Generalizing that Palm apps are more advanced is probably a bit of an
> exaggeration.
>
> More apps... less apps...??? I think the basis of quality on sheer quantity
> does not project a reliable assessment.
>
Anonymous
August 26, 2004 1:02:30 PM

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

Mike Henley wrote:
> Here's what it is. On a palm, reliability is something you take for
> granted and you never need to worry about, you don't think twice about
> it, on a PPC it is a matter of getting it to "operate properly",
> searching for fixes, being subject to "user error" because she/he
> didn't spend the time getting it to "operate properly".. etc.
>
> Here's what it is. A palm operates properly out-of-the-box. It's a
> simple fact. It is my experience and the experience of many many many
> many people who used both; reliability on a palm is something you take
> for granted out-of-the-box and it almost never fails you with any of
> the 4 issues the OP mentioned, and that's not the case for the PPC.

Sort of reminds me of the old Macintosh vs. Windows debate :) 
Anonymous
August 26, 2004 1:08:17 PM

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

NoNoBadDog! wrote:
> I have not encountered any of the issues that you cite. I use my PDA
> heavily and do reporting in the field via wireless. I have only had to hard
> reset my iPAQ once, and that was directly attributable to my own fumbling,
> no fault of the unit itself. I do make regular backups, but have never had
> to resort to using one. My experience has been overwhelmingly positive. I
> have used both the 2002 and 2003 versions of Pocket PC, and will continue to
> use it over Palm.

You've only reset once??? You are fortunate. I'm lucky if it's once per
day. Not to mention I have a nice pile of boxes from Compaq of all the
times I had to send it in to get my navigation button fixed. I think
they finally got it on the 6th try :) 
Anonymous
August 26, 2004 4:38:48 PM

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

Of the four things you've listed, I've only had problems with the
alarm. That was fixed by a small download. The other three points
you've mentioned might differ from one user to another, however. I
believe if you are technical enough and you have a will to learn, you
can properly configure / diagnose your Pocket PC and there is no
problem. Yes I've lost data on my unit before, but it was always my
mistake and I've since learned from it, and learned to do backups =)

I've had mine (iPAQ 2210 PPC) for nearly a year and would never trade
it for a PalmOS unit. We all have our different reasons for wanting
one or the other. My reasons are that I can do anything I want with
it. If I don't like something about it, I can change it. I can
multitask, play games / multimedia, emulate all my favorite consoles
and platforms. Also, I am familiar with a microsoft operating system
/ registry, so most of my knowledge can be applied on the PPC.

Forget about all the problems you hear about, it's just like a regular
computer. Depending on software, the unit, and on the user, different
issues will arise. Every problem has a solution, but knowing and / or
finding it can be tricky sometimes. That's where this newsgroup comes
into play =)

Generally, I'd tend to recommend a PalmOS based unit to someone who is
not technically strong with computers, or does not wish to be (or
wishes to keep things simple).

However, for a "techie", I'd recommend PocketPC for sure. Personally
I think they live up to their name, POCKET PERSONAL COMPUTER.

- Rocque

> I'm about to purchase a PDA and I'm leaning towards HP iPaq models
> (over Palm), but I've read too many (unbiased) posts stating how buggy
> and unreliable the software (Windows 2003 for Pocket PC) and hardware
> are:
>
> - Alarms don't go off
> - Frequent need to reset
> - System stalls (and quite slow at times)
> - Constant loss of data
>
> I generally prefer the Windows environment over PalmOS but many say
> Windows 2003 for PocketPC isn't similar at all to the Windows
> environment (besides the logo!!).
>
> I want a PDA that's designed for (very) general purposes, not just
> storing contact info, that has excellent compatibility with desktop
> applications, and that is RELIABLE!!
>
> I'd like to hear people's opinions on this forum on why (or why not)
> the PocketPC is better than PalmOS..
>
> Thanks for your replies!!
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 7:13:59 AM

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

TextMaker and PlanMaker do too... but it comes with a hefty price tag...

--
Carlo Ma. Guerrero
Microsoft MVP, Mobile Devices


"Dustin Davis" <dustin@davisvillage.com> wrote in message
news:%23NR6803iEHA.3348@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
Do you want to know what I miss most on my Palm OS? (Other than the
built in calendar & todo :)  Documents to Go! They integrate so much
better with Word and Excel. Seems odd doesn't it???

Carlo Ma. Guerrero [MVP] wrote:

> The examples you give are good ones and I guess the only way exact copies
> for the Pocket PC can be made available would be if the developers of
> these
> apps come up with Pocket PC versions.
>
> Other than that, some people have been happy using Streamliner, TreNotes,
> ADB Idea Library and PocketMindmap as alternatives.
>
> There are stronger apps such as cyAct... which may be used in a way... but
> it is completely geared for a different task though.
>
> To give you examples of Pocket PC apps though which may not be available
> for
> the Palm which offer a long list of features too where no other can
> compare
> with would be applications such as RescoExplorer2003 which is not only a
> local file explorer, but one which is capable of exploring shared folders
> in
> a network, do FTP file transfers, view images, view files in text, binary
> etc., encrypt/decrypt files, zip/unzip files edit the registry, etc.
> Pocket
> Artist, PhotoViewer, PocketSlides, TextMaker, PlanMaker and many more are
> Pocket PC apps which are packed with features which prove that not all
> apps
> available for Palm are more powerful or have more features.
>
> Generalizing that Palm apps are more advanced is probably a bit of an
> exaggeration.
>
> More apps... less apps...??? I think the basis of quality on sheer
> quantity
> does not project a reliable assessment.
>
!