Slashdot Mirror

"It's true that IR was slow and cumbersome"

it does not have to be:
http://irda.org/displaycommon.cfm?an=1&subarticlenbr=102

MultiSync is a free modular program to synchronize calendars, addressbooks and other PIM data between programs on your computer and other computers, mobile devices, PDAs or cell phones. MultiSync works on any Gnome platform, such as Linux.

Currently MultiSync has plugins for

• Ximian Evolution synchronization, supporting calendar, ToDos and contacts.
• IrMC Mobile Client synchronization (supported by e.g. SonyEricsson T68i/T610/Z600, Siemens S55 phones etc.) via Bluetooth or IR on Linux, or cable connection.
• Windows CE / Pocket PC synchronization. This plugin is part of the SynCE project, and can be downloaded there.
• Opie and Zaurus synchronization.
• SyncML support (supported by e.g. SonyEricsson P800/P900 and many other phones and devices, for example the SyncML server Sync4j). SyncML also allows you to do remote connection of two MultiSync programs via an encrypted connection over the net.
• Palm synchronization.
• LDAP synchronization.
• Backup of your PIM data.

More detail about Multisync supported devices

This sounds like the same arguments people were using for infrared ports a few years back, and that caught on like sandpaper pantyhose.

The only reason that infrared did not catch on is because Microsoft products do not support the IRDA Standard "out of the box". Heck, with Windows 9X, you could at least download the appropriate software to coax the OS into support but with Windows 2000, Mircosoft has dropped support altogether. Why did they do this? Because the Palm Pilot did not use their software, of course.

You'll find that Wince devices seem to work much better with Windows IR. If only they were more popular, perhaps the Microsoft implementation would be more popular.

This is wonderful---all the Palm spin in one place. But we're (mostly) Linux people, right? Aren't we immune to software marketing spin? After all, much of the following sounds strangely familiar...

Palm OS(R) handhelds are the standard

Microsoft operating systems are the standard

- Palm OS has more than 75% market share worldwide, and our installed base doubled in the last year.

Microsoft operating systems have 99.44% market share worldwide. Installed base doesn't have room to double.

- Palm OS has more than 5,000 software programs, 10-50 times more than any other handheld platform.

Windows has a (countably) infinite number of software programs.

- Palm OS is supported by the leaders in enterprise software, including Oracle, Siebel, SAP, Lawson, Sun, and Sybase

Don't get us started.

Those are all great arguments against Linux as well.

OK, on to some better ones.

Palm OS handhelds are the leader because they were designed from the ground up for your needs.

- They're designed for information management when you're on the go, not to be a shrunken PC. Key features of a handheld are different from a PC:

- Simple. You can instantly access the information you need.

Microsoft at least is making gestures in this direction in this release.

- Wearable. It's small and light enough that that you can carry it in a pocket or a purse all day, and the batteries last long enough that you can go on a business trip without fear of losing information.

Enh, the Everex Freestyle (no longer sold under that name) was always smaller than a 5000/III, and the Compaq 1500 series is competitive in size. Battery life? No question that some PalmOS devices have much bigger numbers. The Casio E-15 I play with has enough rechargable battery life that I don't worry about it much, just like my Pilot 1000.

- Mobile. You can always update your information through wired or wireless connections, even when you are on the go.

Well, duh. The only way I can read this is as a PR attempt to imply that other platforms don't have this capability. The statement itself is vague enough that an IR or cabled connection to a cellphone would qualify, and even my Newton talked nice to a cellphone.

The palm-sized CE devices out there are pretty weak in wireless communication, which is why they can get away with this implication. I don't know of any consumer-oriented palm-sized CE devices with integrated wireless net. Palm, because they're that market leader they're bragging about, does get the benefit of high quality third-party networking products (because they're the biggest market). There is nothing like the OmniSky around for CE, and it's the one product that makes me want to go drop ~$800 on a Palm V and that modem.

OK, now on to their evaluation questions. I'm going to divide up Palm operations into three notional organizations. Palm-HW builds the Palm-branded hardware like the Palm V. Palm-Opsys implements PalmOS...and also the applications bundled with it, like Address Book. Palm-Desktop builds the PC/Mac software that works with the device.

- How many software programs and hardware options are available? As for any other computing product, the number of software and hardware options determine how much you can do with it. Palm OS has by far the largest selection, with more than 5,000 software programs and hundreds of hardware expansion options.

Again, Linux people have been through this once before....

- Do the people around you use it? Handheld users share information. They use the infrared connection to exchange business cards, information, and even software programs. Make sure you're not stuck on a handheld island.

The answer to compatibility is not standardization on a single product. The righteous answer is open standards for interoperation. See IrDA's specs for a good cut at this; in particular, IrMC is relevant to PDAs. Open standards could cut the tie between Palm-Opsys and Palm-Desktop.

App sharing, well, that's a tougher nut. Blah blah blah tcl blah java blah waba blah blah. Shame about Sun, though.

- How many companies sell it? Which companies support the platform? How many? How innovative are they? Palm licensees and OEMs include many of the most innovative companies in electronics, including leaders like Sony, Nokia, and IBM, and hot new companies like Handspring, Qualcomm, and TRG.

I'm amused by this. Microsoft used to have a big pile of HW vendors, and 3com only had the single Palm-HW vendor. Then a year or two passed...

I haven't been impressed with the diversity and innovation of the manufacturers of devices that license PalmOS. They are just grafting a part or two onto the dragonball bus. In many cases, it's obvious they've licensed much of the Palm-HW design as well (why do all those cases look so similar?) The fanciest integration to date is the Qualcomm pilot-in-a-cellphone, but I don't think it's had much market success.

Some of this lack of innovation is due to limitations in PalmOS. They can't switch processors (64k limits must die) or go to a higher res screen without breaking those thousands of apps they're bragging about. (Yes, they could add LCD to the current silkscreen area, but going to a 240x320 screen will not make pixel-positioned forms very happy.)

- Is it open? Make sure your freedom of choice is protected.

...coming from a proprietary OS vendor (Palm-Opsys), this rings hollow.

Some handhelds restrict your choices by forcing you to buy all of one company's software programs,

Not CE, and I think this is another false argument-by-implication.

limiting you to a single expansion technology,

Even the CE hardware vendors appear to be rebelling against "must have CF". The iPAQ moved CF and PCMCIA support into expansion packs, and there are some MultiMediaCard CE boxes coming.

or not working with the full range of corporate software. [...]

standards, standards, standards. Not in Palm-Opsys's best interest though.

- Are you forced to pay for features you don't want? Everyone wants different things from a handheld. Adding hardware features increases the weight and cost of the system. Bundling extra software costs you money, and uses extra memory which adds even more cost and reduces battery life.

Oh, Palm is going to tout price competitiveness? That's a win for everyone, especially if it eats into those huge per-device profit margins.

More seriously, there is a complicated set of tradeoffs here. Bigger hardware can reduce software development costs, if done right (CE is a poor example, of course). Adding more software to ROM or flash adds just the marginal cost of more storage to the hardware price; it does not suck more RAM or CPU if not used. The additional software bundled then has development costs, but if the software broadens the appeal of the device sufficiently, it may amortize over a greater number of units, and push up those economies of scale.

The real fun begins once you really unbundle the system. Say, an OS like Linux as common ground for HW manufacturers, a couple choices of app framework (gtk, fltk, W, microwindows, plus extensions), a few good PIMs to choose from, all interoperating with a variety of synchronization tools on the desktop. The market could make better decisions in the bundling/feature space if component costs were explicit.

- How simple is it, really? Beware of companies that try to cram an entire PC into your pocket. [...]

- How well do the features work in real life? Sometimes features work better in a demo than they do in real life. A prime example is browsing the Web. [...]

This is the best battering ram against CE that Palm has. Trust me. I own both. :-)

I'm going to elide the feature list because they seem to be going for parity with CE rather than superiority.

Jay