CGTalk - Handhelds / Pockets

Vertizor

10-02-2005, 05:46 AM

The future Palm devices seem to be running Windows Mobile OS so the differences between Palm vs. PocketPC are wearing thin. From a few years ago the differences were a lot more clear. Quick historic comparison:

Palms were lighter in weight, last longer in terms of battery, very simple and straight forward operating system (PalmOS) that did not reek of bells and whistles. It did what it was suppose to do. You can whip it out and quickly scribble down a note or do whatever you need to do. It didn't have a whole lot of memory capacity, 32mb was considered a lot, 8 or 16 was typical. The CPU originally was in the class of the classic Nintendo Gameboy (Z80, 4 Mhz).

PocketPCs were over stuffed with features, the OS was not as plain and straight forward. You have to navigate a bit more to get at data or progams. The benefit here, is a more robust OS that allows for more sophisticated software. Because it's still Windows, it takes a bit more memory to run and a faster CPU. Earlier models drink battery juice like water.

- I like Palms' screen better because they're so much easier to read in direct sunlight. PockPCs have always (and still) suck when used outside in natural light.

- Although Palms last longer in terms of batteries, the models are sport a rechargable battery are NOT user replacable. That means when the batt craps out, you have to mail it in. From reviews I've read, this seems to happen quite often, and mailing it in to be serviced costs almost as much as buying a new one. Most PocketPCs have replacable batteries, except for earlier iPaq models that used lithium polymer.

I'm biased towards PocketPCs because, I write software for them for a living :D

Between HP and Dell, I don't know enough about the HP model. I did a Google search, glossed over the reviews, meh. What do you need a handheld for? That would help determine which makes more sense to have. As far as the Samsung vs Intel processor, I'm not sure what the Samsung processor really is, but I would imagine it is ARM or a variant of that. Microsoft has standardized all "Pocket PC" devices to use ARM compatible CPUs to make life easier for software developers. So it really doesn't matter all that much.

Is Palm faster than PocketPCs? Depends on how you look at it. Newer Palms are using new CPUs as well, so you'll start to see the MHz figure in the hundreds. Raw MHz doesn't matter so much here, because PalmOS is a much more lite-weight OS, stuff gets done faster because of the simplicity. As I said earlier, the interface is quick and simple, thus giving the user the impression that it's faster. So it's a little bit of both.

It really comes down to what you plan on doing with a PDA. If you need a Data Assistant and all you're doing is taking notes, keeping contacts, To-do, appointments, etc. it really doesn't matter how fast the CPU is, this is different from picking laptops or desktop computers. Features to focus on are memory, screen visibilty, battery life. Those factors are far more imortant than the CPU. Unless your intention is to play games, then get a Gameboy or PSP instead. Movies... really not worth it on a PDA screen and considering the limited memory and battery life. MP3's... regular MP3 players do that job way better than a PDA ever can.

Palm or PocketPC... if Palm (the company) really is ditching their OS and going with Windows Mobile for all future products... it really doesn't matter anymore. People used and loved Palms for the OS (kinda like the Mac users and thier precious OS).