Pocket PC 2002: Sweaty Palms?

joestump98 writes: "It appears Microsoft is launching the latest version of their Pocket PC. Here's the announcement from Microsoft about it." Perhaps Palm will fire back with something involving BeOS?

Comments

BeOS.

[groebke]

Why should Palm respond to a MS palm with an implementation using an OS unproven on its platform. Extolling the fashionable alternatives just to say it point to a clear lack on thoughtfullness.

Thanks,

Gerald Roebke.

Re:BeOS.

[Drakonian]

They should begin to implement it because they are starting to lose major ground to Pocket PCs. The iPaq is the beating palm in sales. (Not un units... yet.)

The big advantage of Pocket PCs over Palms offerings is multimedia, an area where Be excelled. Palm will get left behind if they don't come up with something, and fast.

Links and Screenshots

[sam_doshi]

Useful links (including screenshots)
Microsoft PocketPC 2002 Site
PocketPC Thoughts
Smaller.com
PocketPC Passion

What exactly is the market?

[tfoss]

From the article:
``It's like a kid growing into an adult and getting their first job,'' said Giga Information Group analyst Rob Enderle. ''The Pocket PC upgrade is targeted at a professional, maybe someone who's going to use this instead of a laptop.''

and

The changes in Pocket PC 2002 include a new version of Windows Media Player, which allows handheld users to listen to music and watch video clips

Music, ok perhaps...(though seems like a rio might work better), but video? This does not seem like an appropriate form factor for watching much video. Replacing a laptop 12-15" screen with a pocketPC and media player doesn't really seem viable.

Plus, at ~$600 this still doesn't seem to be aimed at the Palm demographic.

-Ted

Re:ha ha

[SpectreGadget]

While I agree with the "But Microsoft often gets it right on the third try." (look at ActiveSync), I don't agree that Palm got it right on the first try. It's just that their first try was good enough to catch a lot of interest and gave them the resources to focus on what the Palm does best. Microsoft is obviously aiming for the "gee wizz" category that will still not fit the largest target, but will undoubtably garner a following because of the neat features.

As for me, my iPaq sits in a drawer, while my Blackberry 957 goes with me everywhere because it's a business tool, instead of just a toy. :)

Excellent news.

[standards]

The question isn't if customers will buy the new Microsoft-based Pocket PCs. Some will, many more will not.

The question is if the CELL PHONE manufacturers will be able to:

1. Readily integrate the OS into their devices.
2. License the OS at reasonable fees.
3. Find reasonable benefits for integrating the OS.

So far, Palm is winning this battle, along with Java. Microsoft is not, and this doesn't seem to be a step in that direction.

The current set of PDAs are just a waypoint to fully integrated devices. If Palm tries to follow the Microsoft path, Palm will fail. As will Microsoft.

Dear Palm...

[szcx]

Remember 3Dfx? You're only as good as your last product, and your last product is two generations behind Microsoft.

Get cracking.

Re:hoping Palm doesn't play mine is bigger than yo

[sulli]

Thank you. All of this pro-Microsoft PR shite ("It's a full Outlook client!" AS IF THAT DIDN'T SUCK BALLS) won't change the fact that Palm has won, and continues to win, because it's not bloated, heavy, overpriced, slow, and with short battery life.

I use Palm and like it for this reason, and I'd rather fight than switch. Palm: please DON'T be tempted to match MS/HP/CPQ feature for feature.

Re:BeOS will take time, Micro$oft ahead

[CtrlPhreak]

You are forgetting that Be Inc. changed it's buisness plan to BeIA, a version of BeOS meant for embedded applications such as Internet Appliances. (hence the name). The site also states that it runs on Pentium class processors and all Power PC chips. If I'm not mistaked, correct me if I am, motorola's Dragonball processors used in Palm's products are a branch of Power PC. So the chalenge of porting to this platform is not hard at all. The real question is, whether this is the right move for the platform. Palm OS is tested, tried, and true. It works just the way it was intended. I believe that the BeOS platform would need much more extensive testing than the company has had a chance to perform before it could be released for Palm's products. If it isn't broken, why try and fix it? Palm OS is wonderful. Mainly, it works and is easy to use.

PalmOS has Pocket PC abilities, too.

[exceed]

While this Yahoo! article mentions alot about Pocket PC 2002's features, it does not mention that Palm OS has many of the same, as well. Here is a description of PalmOS' platform. It clearly states that PalmOS 4.0 has 16-bit color, Bluetooth wireless connectivity, faster universal serial bus (USB) connections, and support for wireless Internet. Here, the site goes into even more detail on it's features.

What I found interesting in Pocket PC 2002 is that it comes with Windows Media Player, and an Outlook client. However, users in PalmOS can listen to media and send e-mail too, it just isn't your godly Microsoft applications. Just my two cents on the matter...

Re:Too Late

[PaleGreen]

Windows 3.1 made great inroads thanks to the simultaneous availability of Office for Windows. Word and Excel quickly made mincemeat of the flat-footed WordPerfect and 1-2-3, and the rest is history.

Having "Pocket" Office apps running on PocketPC will continue the trend: a "good enough" OS combined with the dominant Office apps equals eventual market domination.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion