Is the Agenda VR3 Linux PDA Dead?

An Anonymous Coward writes: "LinuxDevices.com has published a news item about the uncertain future of Agenda Computing and their VR3 linux PDA. According to the article, some members of the Agenda developer community are continuing work on current projects, but many have switched to other projects such as the Sharp Zaurus. Apparently there is an Agenda Germany office which is still shipping the VR3s (including to the U.S.) and which has said that they are continuing VR3 development -- but's not clear whether that means software or device development. Looks like another cool linux device has bitten the dust. Sigh."

Comments

Why are people surprised?

[not-quite-rite]

How was this groundbreakingly different, and what did it offer over any other PDAs.

Any product that tries to cash in on the "Linux is cool" will find that people are looking for substance, not gimmicks.

I doubt there were many people that considered it a serious player in the world of PDAs.

I am not saying this to start trouble, I believe it just needs to be said.

Here's why agenda got it's butt kicked

[Ukab the Great]

• It had a risc processor that was almost four times as a fast as a palm's cisc processor, but responded to user-generated events almost three times as slow. This is probably do to the fact that the linux kernel does not prioritize handling UI events whereas PalmOS does. It is probably also due the fact that PalmOS doesn't try to do serious multi-tasking because something like a PDA really doesn't require it except for a few limited daemon-type things (e.g. alarms, timers, etc). Sure, if it does serious multi-tasking, geeks can run apache on it. But then you have to ask yourself who you're really marketing the product to.
• The Agenda did not remotely have any serious human factors involved in the hardware design. Most likely they said "we'll design the hardware first, and worry about the interface later on". You can clearly see this from the strangely placed buttons and the ultra-slippery metal stylus that is ultra-hard to get a good grip on. Any UI person worth his salt will tell you that you should always come up with how the person is supposed to interface with the software/device before you ever write code/manufacture it. On a PDA, usability issues are amplified several thousand times: On a sit-down desktop, you might have half a day to navigate a poorly designed interface. With a PDA, you might have 20 seconds to get down a damned important phone number.
  
  The Palm, on the other hand, was invented after the designer carried a block of wood around in his pocket for a month, pondering what the PDA should act like. Agenda Computing could have used a good block of wood.
  
  
• The user interface was badly designed. The calendar on the agenda was nowhere near as good or as clean as the palm's. And where the palm had a global area for looking over the applications (i.e. home), Agenda made it into an application called Launchpad. File managers should have the feel of being a global entity, not an application that has to be started.
• Agenda's web site really didn't contain a whole lot of information that was helpful and only contained a few pieces of documentation here and there. There seemed to be this attitude of "if you want help or support or information, check out the agenda community". When you're a company, you just can't say that. Also, Agenda should have put all the developer community apps on their web site. People don't have the patience to follow links.
• Agenda prevented reselling, but did not provide things of as great a quality as a reseller might (if at all). For example, if someone were allowed to beef up the consumer IR software, to add a whole bunch of IR codes for various consumer devices, and make it generally easier to use and then sell it as the Ultimate Universal Remote, people would have gotten a kickass remote and Agenda Computing would have still made money of the hardware, which was their original business model anyways
• Agenda couldn't really decide who their target market was: end-users who wanted an organizer or linux geeks with a lot of patience and a love for futzing who wanted a cool toy. You always have to know who your market is if you want to succeed in any kind of business.