Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

is palm OS dying?

Last response: in Cell Phones & Smartphones
Share
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 4:35:05 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

I am worried that it is. What does everyone think?

More about : palm dying

June 12, 2005 4:35:06 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 00:35:05 GMT, Bas wrote:

>I am worried that it is. What does everyone think?
>
I have been away from this group for awhile. I switched to the dark
side, you know. Last week, I saw this beautiful new high-end Palm
device, so I checked. Then I saw it is running PalmOS 5.4. What the
heck is going on here? Will there *ever* be a PalmOS 6 device?

I'm glad I switched.

--
"I'd far rather be happy than right any day."
- Slartibartfast
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 7:12:30 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

On Sat 11 Jun 2005 07:29:42p, Bruno, wrote:

> I have been away from this group for awhile. I switched to the dark
> side, you know. Last week, I saw this beautiful new high-end Palm
> device, so I checked. Then I saw it is running PalmOS 5.4. What the
> heck is going on here? Will there *ever* be a PalmOS 6 device?

I'm trying to think what I'm "missing" by using my Palm 4.x and 3.5.x
devices. There's like, oh... five billion programs for them. I think Palm
kicked Windows CE ass because they offered an OS that didn't try to
include everything *plus* the kitchen sink. Less packed in the PDA, less
to go wrong. M$ Mobile isn't winning on merit -- it's catching up because
of corporate pack-ins (and probably under-the-table payoffs).

But that said, not everyone uses their PDAs for the same things. Perhaps
some folks want them to include "kitchen sinks." My Treo 300 does
everything I want (except for not using a Stowaway Keyboard). I think
there are many people who just want a simple PDA -- that's why so many
series IIIs and Vs continue to sell on eBay.

--
RonB
"There's a story there...somewhere"
Related resources
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 7:12:31 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

"RonB" <ronbNOSPAM@bliz.org> wrote in message
news:Xns9672D7DAC820Fezboard1lycoscom@204.153.244.170...
> On Sat 11 Jun 2005 07:29:42p, Bruno, wrote:
>
> > I have been away from this group for awhile. I switched to the dark
> > side, you know. Last week, I saw this beautiful new high-end Palm
> > device, so I checked. Then I saw it is running PalmOS 5.4. What the
> > heck is going on here? Will there *ever* be a PalmOS 6 device?
>
> I'm trying to think what I'm "missing" by using my Palm 4.x and 3.5.x
> devices. There's like, oh... five billion programs for them. I think Palm
> kicked Windows CE ass because they offered an OS that didn't try to
> include everything *plus* the kitchen sink. Less packed in the PDA, less
> to go wrong. M$ Mobile isn't winning on merit -- it's catching up because
> of corporate pack-ins (and probably under-the-table payoffs).

Microsoft charges the developers to create apps for Windows Mobile (CE,
Pocket PC... whatever you want to call it) devices. That's the main reason
for the high price of apps for the Windows Mobile platform and also the main
reason there are not many apps out there for it either. The last time I
stopped by palmone.com and checked there were over 17,000 apps and a lot of
them are free, WIndows Mobile on the other hand had about 3,000 and very few
were free, if they worked at all since the apps are processor specific and
there are a lot of different processors they used in those devices. I'm sure
the count on Plam apps has greatly increased since then, it's been a while.

>
> But that said, not everyone uses their PDAs for the same things. Perhaps
> some folks want them to include "kitchen sinks." My Treo 300 does
> everything I want (except for not using a Stowaway Keyboard). I think
> there are many people who just want a simple PDA -- that's why so many
> series IIIs and Vs continue to sell on eBay.
>
> --
> RonB
> "There's a story there...somewhere"
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 7:45:05 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

Bruno wrote:

> On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 00:35:05 GMT, Bas wrote:
>
>>I am worried that it is. What does everyone think?
>>
> I have been away from this group for awhile. I switched to the dark
> side, you know. Last week, I saw this beautiful new high-end Palm
> device, so I checked. Then I saw it is running PalmOS 5.4. What the
> heck is going on here? Will there *ever* be a PalmOS 6 device?
>
> I'm glad I switched.

To me, all that is practically needed from a PDA is a small
schedule/alarm/MP3 player. The rest are toys because I use desktops
machines for everything unless I am out on the street.

Pocket PC's are heavy, large, and slow. In that sense, they can never
improve my life. I cannot watch films while I walk. I don't desire to
either. What's more, if you use one of the powerful operating systems, you
will need a device that's fully compatible, supported, and open. Speaking
of which, OS 6 might be conceded, I think, because of the switch to UNIX.

Roy

--
Roy S. Schestowitz
http://Schestowitz.com
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 9:51:28 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

On Sat 11 Jun 2005 09:56:57p, Scooterflex, wrote:

> Microsoft charges the developers to create apps for Windows Mobile
> (CE, Pocket PC... whatever you want to call it) devices. That's the
> main reason for the high price of apps for the Windows Mobile
> platform and also the main reason there are not many apps out there
> for it either. The last time I stopped by palmone.com and checked
> there were over 17,000 apps and a lot of them are free, WIndows
> Mobile on the other hand had about 3,000 and very few were free, if
> they worked at all since the apps are processor specific and there
> are a lot of different processors they used in those devices. I'm
> sure the count on Plam apps has greatly increased since then, it's
> been a while.

Thanks. I didn't know about much of this. Good information.


--
RonB
"There's a story there...somewhere"
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 9:51:29 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

You're welcome.

"RonB" <ronbNOSPAM@bliz.org> wrote in message
news:Xns9672F2CEDCD10ezboard1lycoscom@204.153.244.170...
> On Sat 11 Jun 2005 09:56:57p, Scooterflex, wrote:
>
> > Microsoft charges the developers to create apps for Windows Mobile
> > (CE, Pocket PC... whatever you want to call it) devices. That's the
> > main reason for the high price of apps for the Windows Mobile
> > platform and also the main reason there are not many apps out there
> > for it either. The last time I stopped by palmone.com and checked
> > there were over 17,000 apps and a lot of them are free, WIndows
> > Mobile on the other hand had about 3,000 and very few were free, if
> > they worked at all since the apps are processor specific and there
> > are a lot of different processors they used in those devices. I'm
> > sure the count on Plam apps has greatly increased since then, it's
> > been a while.
>
> Thanks. I didn't know about much of this. Good information.
>
>
> --
> RonB
> "There's a story there...somewhere"
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 11:53:56 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

Scooterflex wrote:

> "RonB" <ronbNOSPAM@bliz.org> wrote in message
> news:Xns9672D7DAC820Fezboard1lycoscom@204.153.244.170...
>> On Sat 11 Jun 2005 07:29:42p, Bruno, wrote:
>>
>> > I have been away from this group for awhile. I switched to the dark
>> > side, you know. Last week, I saw this beautiful new high-end Palm
>> > device, so I checked. Then I saw it is running PalmOS 5.4. What the
>> > heck is going on here? Will there *ever* be a PalmOS 6 device?
>>
>> I'm trying to think what I'm "missing" by using my Palm 4.x and 3.5.x
>> devices. There's like, oh... five billion programs for them. I think Palm
>> kicked Windows CE ass because they offered an OS that didn't try to
>> include everything *plus* the kitchen sink. Less packed in the PDA, less
>> to go wrong. M$ Mobile isn't winning on merit -- it's catching up because
>> of corporate pack-ins (and probably under-the-table payoffs).
>
> Microsoft charges the developers to create apps for Windows Mobile (CE,
> Pocket PC... whatever you want to call it) devices. That's the main reason
> for the high price of apps for the Windows Mobile platform and also the
> main reason there are not many apps out there for it either. The last time
> I stopped by palmone.com and checked there were over 17,000 apps and a lot
> of them are free, WIndows Mobile on the other hand had about 3,000 and
> very few were free, if they worked at all since the apps are processor
> specific and there are a lot of different processors they used in those
> devices. I'm sure the count on Plam apps has greatly increased since then,
> it's been a while.
>
>>
>> But that said, not everyone uses their PDAs for the same things. Perhaps
>> some folks want them to include "kitchen sinks." My Treo 300 does
>> everything I want (except for not using a Stowaway Keyboard). I think
>> there are many people who just want a simple PDA -- that's why so many
>> series IIIs and Vs continue to sell on eBay.

Opting for Pocket PC rather than Palm is like opting for Windows rather than
UNIX, but there are a few differences:

- Palm is very simple to use
- Palm is reliable

This, of course, isn't quite true since distros like Ubuntu and (maybe)
Fedora emerged.

There are plenty of programs for *NIX out there and they are predominantly
free and the development is open, flexible and negotiable.

Oh, and guess what??? Palm are switching to UNIX.

Roy

--
Roy S. Schestowitz
http://Schestowitz.com
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 11:53:57 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

Cross platforming is a nice concept. Everyone wins because it increases the
company's customer base and the customers benefit from more and better
written software. One example is Linux but with apps like Firefox,
personally I don't like it, I still use IE. On my portable devices I use
Palm OS. I have a Tungsten C and a Samsung i500 Smartphone. Although I've
never used a MAC with the Unix version on it I've heard some pretty bad
things about it. I don't use Macs and never will so it doens't effect me at
all. I've found Macs to be for people who don't like to fiddle with
things... almost like it was made for a simplton and I like to have the free
control to have things work the way I want to. From my very limited
experience on a Mac, you can't do that.
I agree though that Palms are very stable and reliable. My old Jornada was
unstable and battery life was very limited. The way it handled memory
management was really bad too.

"Roy Schestowitz" <newsgroups@schestowitz.com> wrote in message
news:D 8gm6e$1k3p$1@godfrey.mcc.ac.uk...
> Scooterflex wrote:
>
> > "RonB" <ronbNOSPAM@bliz.org> wrote in message
> > news:Xns9672D7DAC820Fezboard1lycoscom@204.153.244.170...
> >> On Sat 11 Jun 2005 07:29:42p, Bruno, wrote:
> >>
> >> > I have been away from this group for awhile. I switched to the dark
> >> > side, you know. Last week, I saw this beautiful new high-end Palm
> >> > device, so I checked. Then I saw it is running PalmOS 5.4. What the
> >> > heck is going on here? Will there *ever* be a PalmOS 6 device?
> >>
> >> I'm trying to think what I'm "missing" by using my Palm 4.x and 3.5.x
> >> devices. There's like, oh... five billion programs for them. I think
Palm
> >> kicked Windows CE ass because they offered an OS that didn't try to
> >> include everything *plus* the kitchen sink. Less packed in the PDA,
less
> >> to go wrong. M$ Mobile isn't winning on merit -- it's catching up
because
> >> of corporate pack-ins (and probably under-the-table payoffs).
> >
> > Microsoft charges the developers to create apps for Windows Mobile (CE,
> > Pocket PC... whatever you want to call it) devices. That's the main
reason
> > for the high price of apps for the Windows Mobile platform and also the
> > main reason there are not many apps out there for it either. The last
time
> > I stopped by palmone.com and checked there were over 17,000 apps and a
lot
> > of them are free, WIndows Mobile on the other hand had about 3,000 and
> > very few were free, if they worked at all since the apps are processor
> > specific and there are a lot of different processors they used in those
> > devices. I'm sure the count on Plam apps has greatly increased since
then,
> > it's been a while.
> >
> >>
> >> But that said, not everyone uses their PDAs for the same things.
Perhaps
> >> some folks want them to include "kitchen sinks." My Treo 300 does
> >> everything I want (except for not using a Stowaway Keyboard). I think
> >> there are many people who just want a simple PDA -- that's why so many
> >> series IIIs and Vs continue to sell on eBay.
>
> Opting for Pocket PC rather than Palm is like opting for Windows rather
than
> UNIX, but there are a few differences:
>
> - Palm is very simple to use
> - Palm is reliable
>
> This, of course, isn't quite true since distros like Ubuntu and (maybe)
> Fedora emerged.
>
> There are plenty of programs for *NIX out there and they are predominantly
> free and the development is open, flexible and negotiable.
>
> Oh, and guess what??? Palm are switching to UNIX.
>
> Roy
>
> --
> Roy S. Schestowitz
> http://Schestowitz.com
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 11:53:57 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

On Sun 12 Jun 2005 12:53:56a, Roy Schestowitz, wrote:

> Opting for Pocket PC rather than Palm is like opting for Windows
> rather than UNIX, but there are a few differences:
>
> - Palm is very simple to use
> - Palm is reliable

And Palm does the job I want done without the burden of a bloated OS with
features that are almost useless on a PDA.

How many times have I read of folks coming back to Palm from PPC because
simple things like alarms don't work on the PPC machines (no surprise,
it's "working" on M$) -- and I'm always hearing that the Windows
CE/PPC/Mobile machines are too slow. I think "clunky" seems to be
adjective that sums up the platform.

If M$ has overcome this problem -- and they probably have to a certain
degree -- it's probably because of the advanced (and expensive) hardware
now available. This is the same way they got their clunky OS to work (as
well as it does) on the desktop -- by brute force, using a ton of memory
and very fast CPUs to achieve usability.

And, again, that's why I like the Palm OS. Simple, compact, to the point.
(Speaking for v3.5 to 4.1 -- never used the 5.x Palm OS.)

--
RonB
"There's a story there...somewhere"
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 12:26:48 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

Scooterflex wrote:
>
> Microsoft charges the developers to create apps for Windows Mobile
> (CE, Pocket PC... whatever you want to call it) devices. That's the
> main reason for the high price of apps for the Windows Mobile
> platform and also the main reason there are not many apps out there
> for it either.

http://www.freewareppc.com/ being a fake?


> The last time I stopped by palmone.com and checked
> there were over 17,000 apps and a lot of them are free, WIndows
> Mobile on the other hand had about 3,000 and very few were free, if
> they worked at all since the apps are processor specific and there
> are a lot of different processors they used in those devices. I'm
> sure the count on Plam apps has greatly increased since then, it's
> been a while.

I rather got the impression that the 'Plam app count increase' is
pretty much 'on hold' compared to the gone OS-3/-4 days.


Gruß
Uwe
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 12:26:49 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

If you read in more detail you'll see that I admit my information is
outdated. Also, there are ways around EULAs and although I'm not a
programmer by any standards I do know there are a lot of languages out there
and most are cross platform.

"U. Lippke" <shorttext@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:42abd5c0$0$308$4d4ebb8e@read.news.de.uu.net...
> Scooterflex wrote:
> >
> > Microsoft charges the developers to create apps for Windows Mobile
> > (CE, Pocket PC... whatever you want to call it) devices. That's the
> > main reason for the high price of apps for the Windows Mobile
> > platform and also the main reason there are not many apps out there
> > for it either.
>
> http://www.freewareppc.com/ being a fake?
>
>
> > The last time I stopped by palmone.com and checked
> > there were over 17,000 apps and a lot of them are free, WIndows
> > Mobile on the other hand had about 3,000 and very few were free, if
> > they worked at all since the apps are processor specific and there
> > are a lot of different processors they used in those devices. I'm
> > sure the count on Plam apps has greatly increased since then, it's
> > been a while.
>
> I rather got the impression that the 'Plam app count increase' is
> pretty much 'on hold' compared to the gone OS-3/-4 days.
>
>
> Gruß
> Uwe
>
>
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 12:26:49 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

On Sun 12 Jun 2005 12:26:48a, U. Lippke, wrote:

> I rather got the impression that the 'Plam app count increase' is
> pretty much 'on hold' compared to the gone OS-3/-4 days.

Yeah, but is it "on hold" at 17,000 to 3,000? Still a pretty significant
lead, if so. That would be 85% to 15%.

What I like about the Palm stuff that I download is that it works and
it's small. What I know about Windows for the Desktop (and suspect for
Windows CE/PPC/Mobile) is that it often crashes the system when installed
and it is bloated -- requiring much more storage than its Palm
counterpart. It also requires much more advanced hardware, while
simultaneously being slower.

But it's worse than that -- or was in the CE days. Windows CE was too
"big" and bulky for a PDA -- and they never got it through their heads at
M$ that they needed to cut back and redesign the *PDA* OS from the ground
up. The Palm OS (and the Psion OS for that matter) were designed for PDAs
from the beginning. Both were "clean" and compact. (The Palm OS more so
than the Psion, but I don't think anyone has had a better flat database
than what came built into the Psions.)

That said, I'm a bit leery of a Linux Palm. I hope they keep producing a
few Palm OS machines. I've really gotten to like the idea behind the Palm
OS.

--
RonB
"There's a story there...somewhere"
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 12:37:40 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> ...
> Pocket PC's are heavy, large, and slow. ...

Apart from smartphones Palm is desperately trying do outdo them as well as
Pocket PC manufacturers catched on.
Or in Palm terms:
Today Pocket PCs are easily III-sized and Palm doesn't do V-size anymore.


Gruß
Uwe
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 12:37:41 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

"U. Lippke" <shorttext@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:42abd84b$0$300$4d4ebb8e@read.news.de.uu.net...
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> > ...
> > Pocket PC's are heavy, large, and slow. ...
>
> Apart from smartphones Palm is desperately trying do outdo

And succeeded... you failed to mention that. Who is the biggest Pocket PC
manufacturer? I think it would be HP/Compaq and then maybe Dell. Who else? I
have no idea and nor do I care. They still hold about 10% or the market
share... there must be a reason for that. I don't know one person that has
or wants one although I know a lot of people with Palms and even more who
want them. There must be a reason for that too.

them as well as
> Pocket PC manufacturers catched on.
> Or in Palm terms:
> Today Pocket PCs are easily III-sized and Palm doesn't do V-size anymore.
>
>
> Gruß
> Uwe
>
>
June 12, 2005 12:57:10 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 03:45:05 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:

>Pocket PC's are heavy, large, and slow.

More myth. I have a hp4150. It is smaller than any Palm I have owned,
has built-in WiFi and Bluetooth, the beautiful Sony screen, plus the
battery is swappable.

--
"I'd far rather be happy than right any day."
- Slartibartfast
June 12, 2005 1:06:30 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

On 12 Jun 2005 07:25:33 GMT, RonB wrote:

>But it's worse than that -- or was in the CE days.

Once again, old information.

--
"I'd far rather be happy than right any day."
- Slartibartfast
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 1:13:00 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

Bas wrote:
> I am worried that it is. What does everyone think?

OS 4 is still alive and kicking on my PDA ;-)

Being spoiled by reading discussions at Palminfocenter.com (The sometimes
insulting tone there one might prefer to ignore or take as a grain of salt.
IMHO it's well worth it...) I would say PalmOS is struggling.
The outcome depends on the announced Palm-Linux, which is something like
PalmOS building on a Linux based kernel.
Nothing much to do with personal Linux experience on desktops or servers,
though.
Applications being developed for PalmOS, drivers and the like already around
or ready to pick-up ;-).
"Another astounding, versatile future of what Palm users will be able to
do."

Hopefully this will work.
But, frankly, IMO Palm has no credit delivering announced stuff.
But then, it's all about being lucky and improving based on experience.
Palm might need both again...


Gruß
Uwe
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 1:13:01 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

"U. Lippke" <shorttext@gmx.net> wrote:

>I would say PalmOS is struggling.

Is it the OS or the hardware that's struggling? It's hard to sell an OS if the
hardware's not there.

I couldn't find a LifeDrive demo anywhere in my area. I checked CompUSA,
CircuitCity, BestBuy, OfficeMax, and Staples. CompUSA at least had them in
stock, but no one else did. I was hot to trot with my credit card primed but no
demo. That may have cost them a sale because now I've cooled a bit after reading
about the warts. I'm probably not the only one...

And talking about Palm sales, my local Target store (where I bought an m100,
m125, TungE, and a Zire71) now stocks *no* Palms at all.

All these stores use to have a decent complement of Palms. No longer. And that's
not a good sign...
June 12, 2005 1:14:07 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 08:34:40 GMT, AaronJ wrote:

>"U. Lippke" <shorttext@gmx.net> wrote:
>
>>I would say PalmOS is struggling.
>
>Is it the OS or the hardware that's struggling? It's hard to sell an OS if the
>hardware's not there.
>
Bingo. There is no hardware running PalmOS 6.

--
"I'd far rather be happy than right any day."
- Slartibartfast
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 1:38:35 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

Scooterflex wrote:

> Microsoft charges the developers to create apps for Windows Mobile (CE,
> Pocket PC... whatever you want to call it) devices. That's the main reason
> for the high price of apps for the Windows Mobile platform

Are you sure they charge? Last time I checked (admittedly over a year
ago), Microsoft had made Embedded Visual C++ (the C compiler and IDE)
available as a free download. I can't verify this because right now
Microsoft's entire download site seems to be down, but I'd be
surprised if they've withdrawn it.

(On the good side, I got to take a survey where I was asked to give
my opinion on many things, including how I view Microsoft as a company.
One of the questions actually gave me the chance to rate Microsoft
on a scale of 1-10 on how well "Is an ethical company" describes them.
Whoa. And then there was "Cares about the needs of its customers".)

- Logan
June 12, 2005 2:09:35 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 13:24:22 GMT, DervMan wrote:

>The only advantage to almost all users of multitasking is that search
>results are saved in another window.

Multi-tasking is the first *big* thing they flout in PalmOS 6.

--
"I'd far rather be happy than right any day."
- Slartibartfast
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 3:31:39 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

U. Lippke wrote:

> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>> ...
>> Pocket PC's are heavy, large, and slow. ...
>
> Apart from smartphones Palm is desperately trying do outdo them as well as
> Pocket PC manufacturers catched on.
> Or in Palm terms:
> Today Pocket PCs are easily III-sized and Palm doesn't do V-size anymore.

If you check the dimensions on the Zires you'll find that some are smaller
than the Palm V in all but thickness, while the largest doesn't exceed the
width and length of the V by more than an inch.

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
June 12, 2005 3:56:02 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 11:11:28 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:

>Perhaps you should have gotten it fixed. In 7 years of owning Palms I have
>only had one instance in which the device malfunctioned for any reason
>other than the battery running down. I did physically break one, but it
>still worked.

You're one of the lucky ones. Try a Google Groups on "palm digitizer
problems" for kicks. Or more specifically, "palm tungsten digitizer
problems".

--
"I'd far rather be happy than right any day."
- Slartibartfast
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 4:32:49 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

"Bruno" <spamthis@notaserver.com> wrote in message
news:bs3na1dbti8g6ur3p6herkntulk2m23bla@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 00:35:05 GMT, Bas wrote:
>
>>I am worried that it is. What does everyone think?
>>
> I have been away from this group for awhile. I switched to the dark
> side, you know. Last week, I saw this beautiful new high-end Palm
> device, so I checked. Then I saw it is running PalmOS 5.4. What the
> heck is going on here? Will there *ever* be a PalmOS 6 device?
>
> I'm glad I switched.


I disgree with this approach. So what if it's running a certain version of
the operating system. It boils down to two very simple questions:

One, does it do what I need it to do?

Two, does it do it well?

If the answer is yes to both questions, it can run PalmOS 1 for all I
care...

--
The DervMan
www.dervman.com
June 12, 2005 4:32:50 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 12:32:49 GMT, DervMan wrote:

>"Bruno" <spamthis@notaserver.com> wrote in message
>news:bs3na1dbti8g6ur3p6herkntulk2m23bla@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 00:35:05 GMT, Bas wrote:
>>
>>>I am worried that it is. What does everyone think?
>>>
>> I have been away from this group for awhile. I switched to the dark
>> side, you know. Last week, I saw this beautiful new high-end Palm
>> device, so I checked. Then I saw it is running PalmOS 5.4. What the
>> heck is going on here? Will there *ever* be a PalmOS 6 device?
>>
>> I'm glad I switched.
>
>
>I disgree with this approach. So what if it's running a certain version of
>the operating system. It boils down to two very simple questions:
>
>One, does it do what I need it to do?
>
>Two, does it do it well?
>
>If the answer is yes to both questions, it can run PalmOS 1 for all I
>care...

I have tasted multi-tasking and I like it.

--
"I'd far rather be happy than right any day."
- Slartibartfast
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 5:26:46 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

"Bruno" <spamthis@notaserver.com> wrote in message
news:a2coa1lqcaflmcpo1nqqa959tkcv5efm05@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 03:45:05 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>>Pocket PC's are heavy, large, and slow.
>
> More myth. I have a hp4150. It is smaller than any Palm I have owned,
> has built-in WiFi and Bluetooth, the beautiful Sony screen, plus the
> battery is swappable.


Absolutely every PocketPC has had slower performance compared to PalmOS
devices when I've had my PIM on it. My first proper PocketPC, the iPAQ
H3950, had 64 Mb of memory and a 400 MHz Intel XScale processor. It was
only slightly quicker than my Palm IIIxe. You know, 16 MHz Dragonball EZ
processor.

PPC devices are slower when you first use them and the more you run it
before resetting, the slower they get.

Size wise, there's little between them. You can get chunky big PalmOS and
PPC devices.

--
The DervMan
www.dervman.com
June 12, 2005 5:26:47 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 13:26:46 GMT, DervMan wrote:

>PPC devices are slower when you first use them and the more you run it
>before resetting, the slower they get.

Funny. I like my hp4150 better than my Tungsten T. I have no
performance issues with it.

--
"I'd far rather be happy than right any day."
- Slartibartfast
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 5:27:44 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

"Bruno" <spamthis@notaserver.com> wrote in message
news:i6doa113ckci6sdcsqepu5j3hr1ir62tu1@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 08:34:40 GMT, AaronJ wrote:
>
>>"U. Lippke" <shorttext@gmx.net> wrote:
>>
>>>I would say PalmOS is struggling.
>>
>>Is it the OS or the hardware that's struggling? It's hard to sell an OS if
>>the
>>hardware's not there.
>>
> Bingo. There is no hardware running PalmOS 6.


What does PalmOS 6 bring to the PDA party?

--
The DervMan
www.dervman.com
June 12, 2005 5:27:45 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 13:27:44 GMT, DervMan wrote:

>"Bruno" <spamthis@notaserver.com> wrote in message
>news:i6doa113ckci6sdcsqepu5j3hr1ir62tu1@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 08:34:40 GMT, AaronJ wrote:
>>
>>>"U. Lippke" <shorttext@gmx.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>I would say PalmOS is struggling.
>>>
>>>Is it the OS or the hardware that's struggling? It's hard to sell an OS if
>>>the
>>>hardware's not there.
>>>
>> Bingo. There is no hardware running PalmOS 6.
>
>
>What does PalmOS 6 bring to the PDA party?

http://www.palmsource.com/press/2004/021004_cobalt.html

And I quote:

* Multitasking, multithreading;
* Memory protection;
* Support for more memory and larger screens;
* Industry standards-based security;
* Extensible communication and multimedia frameworks capable of
handling multiple connections simultaneously;

Top of the heap? Multitasking.

--
"I'd far rather be happy than right any day."
- Slartibartfast
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 5:51:44 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 00:35:05 GMT Bas <clahaye@stx.rr.com> wrote:
> I am worried that it is. What does everyone think?

The "kernel"/OS is headed to linux, but current applications should
continue to run on the new stuff. IMO, this is direction which will
finally get some of the benifits of garnet out to door, and improve
Palm's odds in the mobile sector. Some references:

http://www.palmfocus.com/index.php?item=79
http://brighthand.com/article/Latest_on_Palm_OS_for_Lin...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/02/15/palmsource_linu...
 almzone.net/modules.php%3Fname%3DNews%26file%3Darticle%26sid%3D534+palm+os+unix+OR+linux++garnet+2005+OR+2006&hl=en&start=4&lr=lang_en" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:q1F1jl4unY0J:p almz...
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 5:51:49 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

Palm is still alive and kicking. Check out the latest Palm LiveDrive for
update on the latest Palm development.

"Bas" <clahaye@stx.rr.com> wrote in message
news:ZqLqe.39671$j51.36639@tornado.texas.rr.com...
> I am worried that it is. What does everyone think?
>
>
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 6:12:06 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

J. Clarke wrote:

> U. Lippke wrote:
>
>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>> ...
>>> Pocket PC's are heavy, large, and slow. ...
>>
>> Apart from smartphones Palm is desperately trying do outdo them as well
>> as Pocket PC manufacturers catched on.
>> Or in Palm terms:
>> Today Pocket PCs are easily III-sized and Palm doesn't do V-size anymore.
>
> If you check the dimensions on the Zires you'll find that some are smaller
> than the Palm V in all but thickness, while the largest doesn't exceed the
> width and length of the V by more than an inch.

That should have been "by more than a tenth of an inch".

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 6:17:19 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

"Bruno" <spamthis@notaserver.com> wrote in message
news:0dgoa1hh8kkaqhiaq6b37sq8v6vt7io996@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 13:24:22 GMT, DervMan wrote:
>
>>The only advantage to almost all users of multitasking is that search
>>results are saved in another window.
>
> Multi-tasking is the first *big* thing they flout in PalmOS 6.


That's really great.

But what can a multitasking PalmOS device do that a non-multitasking one not
do?

--
The DervMan
www.dervman.com
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 6:18:52 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

"Bruno" <spamthis@notaserver.com> wrote in message
news:kagoa1l25m3btbhuvtu76npnbo1d3g9buo@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 13:26:46 GMT, DervMan wrote:
>
>>PPC devices are slower when you first use them and the more you run it
>>before resetting, the slower they get.
>
> Funny. I like my hp4150 better than my Tungsten T. I have no
> performance issues with it.


Perhaps you don't use it the same way I do?

Charlie's Tungsten T3 has the same basic hardware set up as my iPAQ H3950.
I upgraded from PPC 2002 to PPC 2003 and it improved matters, but to launch
almost every application to do something with the data in there, the
Tungsten T3 was quicker.

It also kicked PPC's ass when it came to searches too.

--
The DervMan
www.dervman.com
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 6:20:13 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

"Bruno" <spamthis@notaserver.com> wrote in message
news:o hgoa115ede2mti6v0uoa08k44qc8vtrvc@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 13:27:44 GMT, DervMan wrote:
>
>>"Bruno" <spamthis@notaserver.com> wrote in message
>>news:i6doa113ckci6sdcsqepu5j3hr1ir62tu1@4ax.com...
>>> On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 08:34:40 GMT, AaronJ wrote:
>>>
>>>>"U. Lippke" <shorttext@gmx.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>I would say PalmOS is struggling.
>>>>
>>>>Is it the OS or the hardware that's struggling? It's hard to sell an OS
>>>>if
>>>>the
>>>>hardware's not there.
>>>>
>>> Bingo. There is no hardware running PalmOS 6.
>>
>>
>>What does PalmOS 6 bring to the PDA party?
>
> http://www.palmsource.com/press/2004/021004_cobalt.html
>
> And I quote:
>
> * Multitasking, multithreading;
> * Memory protection;
> * Support for more memory and larger screens;
> * Industry standards-based security;
> * Extensible communication and multimedia frameworks capable of
> handling multiple connections simultaneously;
>
> Top of the heap? Multitasking.


And how would multitasking be of benefit?

--
The DervMan
www.dervman.com
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 6:26:20 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

"Bruno" <spamthis@notaserver.com> wrote in message
news:u0eoa1ldva20ojp37ioeiceg556q2qvsbi@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 12:32:49 GMT, DervMan wrote:
>
>>"Bruno" <spamthis@notaserver.com> wrote in message
>>news:bs3na1dbti8g6ur3p6herkntulk2m23bla@4ax.com...
>>> On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 00:35:05 GMT, Bas wrote:
>>>
>>>>I am worried that it is. What does everyone think?
>>>>
>>> I have been away from this group for awhile. I switched to the dark
>>> side, you know. Last week, I saw this beautiful new high-end Palm
>>> device, so I checked. Then I saw it is running PalmOS 5.4. What the
>>> heck is going on here? Will there *ever* be a PalmOS 6 device?
>>>
>>> I'm glad I switched.
>>
>>
>>I disgree with this approach. So what if it's running a certain version
>>of
>>the operating system. It boils down to two very simple questions:
>>
>>One, does it do what I need it to do?
>>
>>Two, does it do it well?
>>
>>If the answer is yes to both questions, it can run PalmOS 1 for all I
>>care...
>
> I have tasted multi-tasking and I like it.


Doing what exactly? The vast majority of PalmOS applications are only
useful when the user is using them. Having something else running in the
background has pretty much the same effect as it being closed, saving the
data.

The ability to use the device whilst it's Hotsyncing is moderately handy.
The ability to be recalculating a chunky spreadsheet whilst checking 'phone
numbers can be useful. Being able to play music in the background, yeah
PalmOS 4 can do that with the Sony Clie.

Sorry, but just because it can multitask doesn't mean that it's better. If
you're just wanting to show off your new version of PalmOS you kinda won't
be impressing me. If I want a multimedia device I've a laptop and a bigger
screen for movies, heh.

PocketPC's major weakness that I see it is in Microsoft's belief that the
PDA is a secondary device for viewing and occasional editing of data. This
has important side effects when synchronising to a desktop computer. "If in
doubt, duplicate" with one machine. "If in doubt, copy the desktop over to
the device" if you sync with multiple computers.

Having 2,500 contacts in the PDA is bad enough. Having 5,000 is worse. Not
synchronising to your home laptop for a week, running the sync and
discovering that you've lost your updates and you'll have to make a point of
getting the work machine to go over the PDA's information the following
working day, that utterly infuriates me. You can't work on the PDA that
evening and change data.

It's not something that I've ever come across with a PalmOS device. I've
used seven. It's something I've come across with all four of the PPC
devices I've used.

--
The DervMan
www.dervman.com
June 12, 2005 6:26:21 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

You know what? I think the PPC is a superior platform. You think Palm
is the superior platform. Nothing will change that.

--
"I'd far rather be happy than right any day."
- Slartibartfast
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 6:47:31 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

"DervMan" <dervman@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:gCXqe.19467$%21.19206@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...
SNIP

>
> Doing what exactly? The vast majority of PalmOS applications are only
> useful when the user is using them. Having something else running in the
> background has pretty much the same effect as it being closed, saving the
> data.
>
> The ability to use the device whilst it's Hotsyncing is moderately handy.
> The ability to be recalculating a chunky spreadsheet whilst checking
> 'phone numbers can be useful. Being able to play music in the background,
> yeah PalmOS 4 can do that with the Sony Clie.
>
> Sorry, but just because it can multitask doesn't mean that it's better.
> If you're just wanting to show off your new version of PalmOS you kinda
> won't be impressing me. If I want a multimedia device I've a laptop and a
> bigger screen for movies, heh.
>
SNIP
> --
> The DervMan
> www.dervman.com


I agree that multi-tasking does not make something better (or worse). I
disagree that multi-taksing has little use on a PDA. For example, I'd like
Versamail to automatically go out and retrieve email at regular intervals,
which it can do. I'd like it NOT to have to switch from my current
application (such as the web browser) in order to get that email. I'd like
to have IM on the Palm tied to my GPRS/GSM cellular phone and not have to
switch out of IM while I read or edit a document in Docs To Go or Palm
Reader.

I can also see some benefit to wireless applications like Networking as I
wouldn't want to have to build in all the networking overheard into each and
every application that might benefit from using a TCP/IP or Bluetooth
connection and I would think you'd need some basic multi-tasking for that to
work well.

I think multi-tasking has its place on a PDA but even without it I still
like my Palm.

Cheers
TC
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 7:08:42 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

"Bruno" <spamthis@notaserver.com> wrote in message
news:hqioa1ld1b7ntp0c50v6uda8k43ns9ae4m@4ax.com...
> You know what? I think the PPC is a superior platform. You think Palm
> is the superior platform. Nothing will change that.


I don't believe either to be superior. Both have their place, both have
their strengths and weaknesses.

I'm just trying to understand why you believe PocketPC to be better and what
PalmOS lacks.

--
The DervMan
www.dervman.com
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 7:10:16 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

Here in comp.sys.palmtops.pilot,
"DervMan" <dervman@ntlworld.com> spake unto us, saying:

>And how would multitasking be of benefit?

I would find it useful to be able to play music in the background while
using some other application in the foreground. For example.

Also, properly multithreaded programs can make some types of operations
a lot smoother from a user perspective, and that requires multitasking
(as well as some level of thread support).

--
-Rich Steiner >>>---> http://www.visi.com/~rsteiner >>>---> Smyrna, GA USA
OS/2 + eCS + Linux + Win95 + DOS + PC/GEOS + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven!
WARNING: I've seen FIELDATA FORTRAN V and I know how to use it!
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 8:02:56 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

"Bruno" <spamthis@notaserver.com> wrote in message
news:jjmoa1h85vomplm7543a8dkd1sd5ceev2d@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 11:11:28 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
>
>>Perhaps you should have gotten it fixed. In 7 years of owning Palms I
>>have
>>only had one instance in which the device malfunctioned for any reason
>>other than the battery running down. I did physically break one, but it
>>still worked.
>
> You're one of the lucky ones. Try a Google Groups on "palm digitizer
> problems" for kicks. Or more specifically, "palm tungsten digitizer
> problems".


I've been steeling myself for problems with our Tungsten W and T3, so far,
nothing...

--
The DervMan
www.dervman.com
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 8:43:56 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

AaronJ wrote:
> "U. Lippke" <shorttext@gmx.net> wrote:
>
>> I would say PalmOS is struggling.
>
> Is it the OS or the hardware that's struggling? It's hard to sell an
> OS if the hardware's not there.

It's the OS.

You are right, one depends on the other and around.
Don't let's get twisted with the hen-egg-problem, though. Palm made a new OS
6 and they should have had a clear vision what devices it's going to drive.
As it isn't a minor 20-employees company we are speaking of, this vision was
profoundly researched, covered, a major point in their business plan and
everything else, wasn't it?

So why aren't OS 6 devices on the market yet?
Why doesn't at least one big PalmOS licensee market the like as coming?
Why is Palm announcing a new OS version (Palm-on-Linux) the same time?

For me, this spells: Problems whatever kind with the OS.


Gruß
Uwe
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 8:59:52 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

Scooterflex wrote:
> "U. Lippke" <shorttext@gmx.net> ...
>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>> ...
>>> Pocket PC's are heavy, large, and slow. ...
>>
>> Apart from smartphones Palm is desperately trying do outdo ...
>
> And succeeded... you failed to mention that. ...

Errm, sorry, failed?
As "Pocket PC's" were the topic I just left smartphones out of
consideration.
I hereby state (IMO off-topic): PalmOS smartphones 'are' the very best and
winning team in this most important sector.
Puhh ;-) Actually I couldn't care less for smartphones - because of their
small screens.

Back on topic:
>> ...
>> Or in Palm terms:
>> Today Pocket PCs are easily III-sized and Palm doesn't do V-size
>> anymore.

I thought this to be an answer if short of being factual, then being worth
of discussion. And I ment it to say: Pocket PC's are *not* heavy, large, and
slow *anymore*.

Regards :-)
Gruß
Uwe
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 9:10:54 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

"J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:D 8hm6722e1@news1.newsguy.com...
> U. Lippke wrote:
>
>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>> ...
>>> Pocket PC's are heavy, large, and slow. ...
>>
>> Apart from smartphones Palm is desperately trying do outdo them as well
>> as
>> Pocket PC manufacturers catched on.
>> Or in Palm terms:
>> Today Pocket PCs are easily III-sized and Palm doesn't do V-size anymore.
>
> If you check the dimensions on the Zires you'll find that some are smaller
> than the Palm V in all but thickness, while the largest doesn't exceed the
> width and length of the V by more than an inch.


An inch can be critical...

--
The DervMan
www.dervman.com
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 9:10:55 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

DervMan wrote:

> "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote in message
> news:D 8hm6722e1@news1.newsguy.com...
>> U. Lippke wrote:
>>
>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>> Pocket PC's are heavy, large, and slow. ...
>>>
>>> Apart from smartphones Palm is desperately trying do outdo them as well
>>> as
>>> Pocket PC manufacturers catched on.
>>> Or in Palm terms:
>>> Today Pocket PCs are easily III-sized and Palm doesn't do V-size
>>> anymore.
>>
>> If you check the dimensions on the Zires you'll find that some are
>> smaller than the Palm V in all but thickness, while the largest doesn't
>> exceed the width and length of the V by more than an inch.
>
>
> An inch can be critical...

Ack!!! That should have been a _tenth_ of an inch--I wish my fingers would
type what I mean and not what I type <g>.
>

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 9:26:48 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

Bruno <spamthis@notaserver.com> wrote:

>You know what? I think the PPC is a superior platform. You think Palm
>is the superior platform. Nothing will change that.

Yep. You two guys are now talking religion not technology. And Bruno, it's not
nice coming into the Church of the Palm and desecrating our religion. I've been
lurking in the Church of the PPC recently contemplating a switch, having been
disappointed in Palm's latest offerings (offerings-church...get it?) and there
seem to be just as many sins over there, if not more. So perhaps it might be
better to stick with the devil we know than the devil we don't. And then of
course we could always run over to the Church of Bill
(microsoft.public.pocketpc) and do some proselytizing.
Tell em Bruno sent you... ;) 
June 12, 2005 9:26:49 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 17:26:48 GMT, AaronJ wrote:

>And Bruno, it's not nice coming into the Church of the Palm and desecrating our religion.

It's a lot of fun, though. And I used to be one of yours!

Besides, as Arthur said to the Black Knight, what are your going to
do, bleed on me?


--
"I'd far rather be happy than right any day."
- Slartibartfast
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 9:35:13 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
> Opting for Pocket PC rather than Palm is like opting for Windows
> rather than UNIX,

IMO that's a narrowed viewpoint (maybe caused by reluctance concerning
Microsoft/Windows). PalmOS as the PDA-equivalent to Unix? IMO not
applicable, neither technically nor historically.

> - Palm is very simple to use
> - Palm is reliable

Sure. Using OS 4 I whole-heartedly agree.


> There are plenty of programs for *NIX out there and they are
> predominantly free and the development is open, flexible and
> negotiable.
> Oh, and guess what??? Palm are switching to UNIX.

Aren't they just switching to Linux/Unix *kernel*-wise?
My TV's digital settop-box might running more Linux than any Palm-Linux will
ever reveal to the end-user...
Or as another try: I do not think that Palm-Linux will be in any way as
useful Linux-wise for the end-user as an Xbox.
Isn't it just all about adressing hardware driver problems - benefiting the
end-user in form of more 'usable' accessories and device options
(hopefully)? Nothing to do with application development, as I was capable to
substract ;-).


Gruß
Uwe
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 9:43:49 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot (More info?)

"J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote:

>U. Lippke wrote:

>> Today Pocket PCs are easily III-sized and Palm doesn't do V-size anymore.
>
>If you check the dimensions on the Zires you'll find that some are smaller
>than the Palm V in all but thickness, while the largest doesn't exceed the
>width and length of the V by more than an inch.

An Inch??? Methinks you exaggerate... ;) 

V/Vx 4.5" x 3.1" x 0.4" ; 4 oz
Zire 4.4" x 2.9" x 0.6" ; 3.8 oz
Zire 71 4.5" x 2.9" x 0.67" ; 5.3 oz
Z72= 4.60 x 2.95 x .67 4.8oz
TE2= 4.5 x 3.1 x .59 4.7oz
T5= 4.76 x 3.08 x .61 5.1oz
LD= 4.76 x 2.87 x .74 6.8oz
!