Slashdot Mirror
Palm Tungsten Models Reviewed
Jason Weill writes "MSNBC has a slightly premature review of Palm's brand-new Tungsten models. These models, currently (as of 11:10 PM EST Sunday) unavailable on Palm's own web site, are the Tungsten T and Tungsten W. The Tungsten T includes a fold-out Graffiti area, new cross-key keypad, 144 MHz ARM processor, Palm OS 5, a 320x320 full-color screen, and 16 MB of on-board RAM. At $499, it's more expensive than most handhelds currently on the market. The Tungsten W replaces the Graffiti area with a thumb keyboard and includes GSM/GPRS phone capabilities. Unlike the Handspring Treo devices, the Tungsten W only works with a handset -- you can't put it up to your ear. The Tungsten W will cost $549, although most American service providers will subsidize at least part of the cost. These models will officially be unveiled Monday, October 28."
it is a bit dry from recent travels. welcome to a new week slashfags!
hahahahhahah check out my site www.first.post0rz.dud.ez
Nuke Tibet!
Pave the rainforest!
Dig yourself out of your parents basement, shut off your linux b0x, and GO OUTSIDE!!!!
First post! yeeehaaaaaaaaaaa!!!
With the way cell phones are advancing, why buy one? Cell phones already have games, messaging, logs, and other electronic accessories. If you want a decent small computer, just spend your $499 on a cheap lap top.
--- YEAH I SAW SPARKS FLY!! FROM THE CORNER OF MY EEEYYYEEE!!!
So you're new to Slashdot, you've just posted your first comment and, within seconds, it got moderated down. Don't worry, it's happened to all of us. The first thing to do is calm down and don't take it personally. You know and I know that your comment was wonderful. The second thing to do it realise that moderation points are handed out at random and, therefore, chances are that the person that moderated your comment wasn't really qualified to.
... it's just one of those Slashdot paradoxes one has to learn to live with.
What follows is a guide to the negative moderations available to moderators, how moderators use them, and how to avoid them in the future.
-1 Flamebait.
Traditionally a 'flamebait' was a post that attracted angry responses. However, on Slashdot a post if flamebait if it angers the moderator. Most comments that get moderated flamebait *never* receive a single flame in reply
A comment may anger a moderator for many reasons, but the most likely is that you mentioned an operating system that the moderator doesn't approve of.
This is a hard situation to avoid; moderators come from all walks of life and use a range of operating systems - all the way from "Microsoft Windows '95" all the way up to "Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition.".
The solution is to keep your post vague when it comes to revealing details of the systems that you own and use. So even if your comment hinges on the fact that such-and-such is relevant to, for example, Windows 2000; mentioning this will inflame a large portion of the moderators. Using phrases such as "my computer" and "my systems" will keep you safe in the eyes of OS zealots.
-1 Offtopic
Since the minority of readers actually read the article, let alone any pages that the article may link to; the actual topic of the discussion is usually very vague. The topic is actually defined by the first few posts made to the discussions. To avoid the -1 offtopic moderation, sort by score and follow the lead set by the highest rated comment.
Another way to receive a -1 offtopic is to reply to a point made in someone else's comment. Since this person's point probably wasn't made in the article itself (the article is usually very short and vague) then your reply is bound to be offtopic!
You are probably asking yourself; "Surely that the post I replied to is offtopic as well then?". Yes, it is. However moderators tend to moderate the
'leaves' of the discussion before moderating the 'root' level comments. Although the later is far more efficient in tidying up a discussion, it only really punishes the poster of that comment. It is better to work up and punish everyone in the thread because, frankly, sometimes it is deserved.
-1 Redundant
Using a strict definition, a comment would redundant if it repeated something from the article or an earlier comment. Since moderators read neither of these, the -1 redundant moderation is very rarely used.
You are most likely to receive it if you post something informative and well known early in the discussion. This attracts the -1 redundant moderation for two reasons
i) If the moderator already knows the information that you are presenting then your comment is, obviously, redundant.
ii) Since it is well known, another poster may post something similar after you. In an ideal world, the later comment should be moderated redundant; however most moderators do not know how Slashdot is sorting the comments, therefore the -1 redundant moderation will fall with 50% probability on either of the two comments.
-1 Troll
In the pre-Slashdot days, a Troll was a post or comment designed to attract many responses. In contrast, users who troll other Slashdot users usually do so with well-known in-jokes. It won't take long for you to recognise these and learn what to avoid; but in general a post mentioning the author Steven King, the actress Natalie Portman or the Linux clustering system Beowulf will attract an instant -1 Troll moderation regardless of whether it was one of the proscribed comments or not.
-1 Troll is also used when the moderator suspects a comment of being offtopic, redundant or flamebait but isn't yet a good enough moderator to be sure.
The -1 Troll moderation is one of the worst things that can happen to an innocent new Slashdot user; moderators loathe what they think of a trolls and once a comment receives one -1 Troll moderation any other moderator which sees it will instantly add another -1 Troll moderation. A +5 informative can be reduced to -1 troll in seconds once the first moderation is made; this happens whether the initial -1 Troll moderation was fair or not - the instinct to use the -1 Troll moderation is almost pavlovian.
-1 Overrated
-1 overrated moderations are not subject to Slashdot's meta-moderation scheme. This fact is not widely known amongst the moderators; they don't have time to learn the details and rules of the system - the need to moderate your comment down is more important. The few moderators that do know this will therefore always moderate -1 overrated because it protects them from the meta-moderation system. A -1 overrated moderation doesn't mean your post is overrated, indeed most -1 overrated moderations are applied to comments that have not even been rated - another of Slashdot's intractable paradoxes. The
rest of the -1 overrated moderations are applied to excellent comments that have reached the heady heights of Score 5; the motivation for the moderation is pure jealousy.
Allen Wrench: "Help! They found me in a meteor! I need tungsten to live! TTUUUNNNGGGSSSTTEEENN!"
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
144mhz ARM with 16MB of RAM, along with a nice screen that fits in your hand -- that destroys the Gameboy Advance's 17mhz CPU and measly 256k of RAm.
If PC games took off with the gaming enthusiasts to replace consoles, handhelds should soon become a thriving gaming market to replace Gameboys.
With that much power, a GBA emulator could even be ported to it!
"When Palm talks, the industry listens. And users sometimes drool"
The industry then laughs, as their marketshare increase due do stupid palm decisions.
Users on the other hand are probably drooling because they are sleeping through palm's big announcement, having realized long ago, that palm has overpromised and underdelivered over and over.
Chicago2600.net more than a lifestyle, its a survival trait.
I only paid $190 for my cell phone and it does everything the palm does, plus surfs the internet and receives full blown email without having to add a modem attachment. It also has a .3 MegaPixel digital camera in it. Why would anyone pay 3x as much for a heavier, less useful toy?
Just curious
I've dirtied my hands writing poetry, for the sake of seduction; that is, for the sake of a useful cause. --Dostoevsky
This thing's more powerful than my old Pentium that I'm using as a router and small webserver right now.. =/ My router is running linux on a 120 MHz box with 32 MB RAM...
Here's another review from the folks at InfoSync: http://www.infosync.no/news/2002/n/2495.html.
Looks nice, but I don't see myself replacing my PalmIIIc yet (c'mon... someone make a non-Sony Palm that's as compelling!)
you can't put it up to your ear
I bet you can.
Must....Resist....New....Gadget....Must....Be Strong....
Do you or your partner snore? - Visit www.snoring.com.au
way cool.
But seriously, when is enough, enough?.
These are trying to fill a gap, somewhere between my mobile phone, and my laptop, but doesnt have enough functionality to do away with either.
With this in mind, it seems counter productive to carry yet another device around with me...
Just my 0.2c..
As long as there's some money
The Tungsten T is, according to Palm, is designed to be perfect for one-handed use...
Especially important, with the high-res screen, and processor no doubt powerful enough to play DiVX movies, you have to have the other hand free.
Palm has had five years to get their act together when it comes to PDA functionality. I hate to say it, but the PocketPC devices are far superior to anything that Palm has had to date. The ability to play full-length color feature movies, MP3s, true wireless internet with a real web browser, document creation, PDF reading, chat, console emulators, and actual MULTITASKING has been available for over a year and a half now.
In short, there's no excuse for this device. Palm is dead in the water. For *LESS* than $499 I can get an 802.11b-equipped full color Toshiba E740 that will outrun, outgun, and outfeature any of Palm's new devices. Kiss your butts goodbye, Palm. This isn't 1997, this is almost 2003, and you just sat around on your market share. Watch Small-and-Flaccid(TM) eat the rest of your lunch now.
Also announced today was the Stowaway XT - AKA Palm Ultra Thin. If you're familier with PDAs you probably know of the Stowaway- the cool foldable keybaord for PDAs. Well they made a new one, just half as small. Seriously. Same full size keyboard- a preview of it is available here
Who in their right mind would spend $500 for an electronic address book?
I'm glad to see the new Tungsten series and Palm OS 5 finally come out. Now, only time will tell whether or not this device becomes successful.
I think Palm OS 5 will be a winner, as long as it does its mainstay well, while adding on some new features and doing those well too. In other words, it does all the organizing you need it to do and it puts that ARM to use.
The only problem I see with the T is the sliding mechanism. Anytime there's physical movement involved with a product like this, you have to wonder how long it'll last. If it's nice and durable, there goes my one complaint about the T. If it's really fragile, users won't like that much at all.
Myself, I hope to get one of these things after they come down in price.
Not what I want in a handheld device, at least.
Roses are #FF0000, violets are #0000FF, all my base are belong to you
Keep it comming...
For some reason the Tungsten W (Palm's answer to Handspring's Treo) is not featured on Palm's website, nor is it accessible from the products page.
/
However, the URL for Tungsten W is pretty easy to guess - http://www.palm.com/products/handhelds/tungsten-w
If Palm really was losing sales to PocketPC, then this is exactly what they need. But it doesn't make me want to run out and buy one.
What I have always liked best about Palm PDAs is that they run forever on their batteries. Palm is claiming the new device is good for a week of typical use, but how much is that? The InfoSync review notes that under a torture test, the battery life was a little under 3 hours.
I was pleased to read that the emulation mode runs current PalmOS programs fast enough. Recompiled applications should be very fast.
While in many ways it sounds tasty, I don't really want one right now. And the price is going to need to fall in half before I'll even consider it.
steveha
lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
The slide-open design is kind of nifty, but I have concerns about durability. Moving parts are typically the first things to go, but in the case of this, it's not like a flip-cover or something that can be easily replaced.
"I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
-Hoban Washburn
First of all you need a *headset* not a handset. Who the heck is going to carry around a handset when they already have a cell phone inside the W? That doesn't make sense.
... just hold the thing to your head without any flip up plastic crap.
Secondly, they're just showing that no one gets the form factor yet. I don't want to have a headset sticking in my ear all the time, but I don't want to hold a big-ass product like the Treo up to my head either (talk about dorky-looking). The new RIM blackberry has a better idea
They still miss the mark though. I'm going to get my cheekmarks all over the screen and that's no good.
I don't know what the right formfactor is, but I haven't seen it yet. Maybe some kind of clamshell design where the keyboard's on the bottom and the screen's on the top. IT'll open 75% in phone mode, like a startac or whatever, or it'll open 100% in palm mode.
home page
This is the first Palm PDA that will have an Ogg player. It has enough horsepower under the hood to run a software MP3 decoder, so an Ogg player will be possible. Which in turn means that someone will write one!
I wonder how many hours of life you will get from one battery while playing Ogg or MP3 music, with the screen blanked.
You could carry some sort of emergency charger that uses AA cells or something. But that sort of defeats the smallness and convenience; you might as well carry some small player like the Diva.
steveha
lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
My Palm m505 already has video clips on it, thanks to MGI's PhotoSuite, which came *included* with the Palm m505. As for it being able to do wave files... so what? PCM Wave files are big. One song takes around 40mb. With 16mb, we'll only be getting maybe audio clips of thirty seconds. So what's the point of having it? And one last gripe... graphics-intensive games are also usually space intensive - Diablo 2 didn't come on 3 CD's because of it's story line, I can tell you that much!
The Raven
The Raven
Begging your pardon? Isn't this a GSM phone? Do the US carriers lock users in even on GSM networks? What's the point of having GSM then if you can't use whatever phone you like on whatever network you want and roam freely?
We may be behind the US on a lot of things here in Europe, but at least we got that right. My cellular carrier doesn't care, and it's none of their business, what kind of phone I use and where I bought it.
Speaking of my phone, I own a Nokia 7650. Can't see replacing it for the new Palm anytime soon, the Nokia does the same job in a smaller package.
And remember kids: Never trust a computer you can actually lift.
However, the software isn't all that great. Basically, under PalmOS 5, your application code runs as interpreted 68k instructions. Only system calls and some specially written subroutines (which, presumably, cannot make system calls), run as native ARM code. Presumably, this will get fixed with PalmOS 6.
What apparently won't get fixed is the basic PalmOS architecture. PalmOS was designed as a very lightweight OS for simple PDA applications: calendaring, TODO lists, etc., on very simple devices. It was fine for that: small and memory efficient.
But $500 devices like the Tungsten are in a different class. With ARM processors, they are more powerful than many workstations of a few years ago. You don't need that kind of device for basic PDA functionality--just buy a $100 Zire instead.
The reason why people pay $500 for a PDA is either because they want an executive toy, or it is for running "enterprise applications", multimedia apps, scientific apps, speech recognition, etc. And for that, PalmOS just sucks: the window system and toolkit are resolution dependent and simplistic, the file system is a hack, the system lacks installers or package managers, multitasking is poor, image support is poor, and on and on.
So, what does it all mean? If you want a PDA, get a Sony SJ-30 or a Palm Zire, or a Palm m500--they are great PDAs with great built-in apps. If you want a handheld to develop custom apps for, to port software to, etc., get a Linux PDA (or a PocketPC if you must)--you'll pay less and get something that's a whole lot better for the purpose.
Well, they are cool regardless but targeted at enterprise use:
The CD also includes BlueChat and BlueBoard. BlueBoard is a Bluetooth-based whiteboard-type image editing program. Users create an on-the-fly conference and can then all edit the same same on-screen image simultaneously. BlueChat is a Bluetooth-based chat program that allows users to create ad-hoc local IRC-like chatrooms with any users in range. We foresee a lot of employees talking about a presenter behind their backs this way.
I think the T sounds liek a great device. I like the features, the clever form factor (the telescoping stylus sounds great) and I love the idea of bluetooth support in a Palm and what can be done with it.
I also really like the idea of the web portal Palm provides to let you really browse the web without consuming a lot of bandwith. That is a perfect feature for a handheld meant to be networked. The only missing ingredient (which I assume will be around soon if it's not already here) is a bluetooth hub to give local bluetooth devices network connectivity (just like 802.11 hubs, but instead could act as a repeater to give bluetooth devices more range in an office).
Although an integrated phone/palm seems like a good idea, for my own needs I think I like better the idea of a really good PDA and a really good phone in two seperate devices.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Am i the only one that thinks the end is near for Palm? I mean, come on- look at the economoy in the US right now. Extra, expensive and frivilous items of luxury (at 499 I would say so) are probably the first things to get the axe when times are tight. I bought an m500 when it first came out and returned it after a few days because I thought the screen's visibility was a joke. I now happily own a Vx. It's showing its age now, but it still does all that I need it to do.
does it support USB or Firewire?. That's what I'd like to know.
I'd like a palm computer I can hook my iPod up to. Don't ask me why.
It was $334 when I bought it at Buy.com two months ago ($347.99 now) & I've fallen in love. Seriously, I thought they were kidding when I read the specs for the new Palms. Compare it to the Zaurus specs and decide for yourself...
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
You just changed my mind... I'm going to get a nice cell phone now instead of a Tungsten.
"Do something man. Right now."
The Tungsten T includes a fold-out Graffiti area, new cross-key keypad, 144 MHz ARM processor, Palm OS 5, a 320x320 full-color screen, and 16 MB of on-board RAM.
WHY do even the newest PDA's on the market still come with 16mb of memory?? I mean seriously, when I can get a 128mb CF card for ~$50, you'd think that a $500 palm with multimedia capabilities might have a little more room to work with than a fscking 386!
I'm a minister!
I've been making jokes aabout faster f$cking palm pilots for a while now. Oh joy. Just what humanity needs: faster palm pilots.
We watched the tragedy unfold
We did as we were told
We bought and sold
It was the greatest show on earth
But then it was over
We ohhed and aahed
We drove our racing cars
We ate our last few jars of caviar
And somewhere out there in the stars
A keen-eyed look-out
Spied a flickering light
Our last hurrah
And when they found our shadows
Grouped around the TV sets
They ran down every lead
They repeated every test
They checked out all the data on their lists
And then the alien anthropologists
Admitted they were still perplexed
But on eliminating every other reason
For our sad demise
They logged the only explanation left
This species has amused itself to death
Was I the only one who saw the clockspeed and thought it would be a fun idea to take a directional and an amplifier and see what happens when one is inbetween you and the local repeater?
--Josh
There are exactly 42,935,718 letter sized sheets in a square mile.
What the fuck were these people thinking? HUH!? WhAt ThE BlOoDy FuCk!? FfFfFfUuUuUuUCcCcCcKkKkKk! PaLm BlOoDy hElL fUcKsHiT FuCk FuCk FuCk FuCk.
No, don't. I just felt like saying that.
The hardware quite honestly looked; My supposition you pay the insurance premium are crowded.
But, is the great software not has. Basically, in PalmOS under 5, your application code movement adopted 68k to explain the instruction. Some specially in advance arrange the face congress only system call and is unable, according to extrapolates, symbolized the system call) (, runs takes the place arm code. According to will extrapolate that, this obtains fixed and PalmOS 6.
Fixedly fixedly was unable any obviously to obtain is basic PalmOS ". v.1C. PalmOS is designed has adopted OS is simple PDA applies the unusual lightweight z struggle: The platoon enters the program, the TODO name list, and so on, in extreme simple equipment. It is is is fine is is that: Small and memory high efficiency.
But $, 500 equipment like the tungsten are in other. Compares with the arm processor, they and many workstations are the powerful front several years. You need the equipment -- does not purchase $, 100 Zire cause basic PDA function change.
Is why the reason person wage $, 500 PDA is or because they want an administrative toy, or it is applies for "the movement" enterprise, multimedia apps, science apps, speech recognition, and so on. And for that, PalmOS sucks: The window system and the toolbox are the resolution dependence and is too pure, the filing system is the article beggar, the system lacks the setter or wraps manager, the responsibility is many is poor, the picture support is poor, with does not stop.
So, what its all methods? If you want PDA, obtains Sony Sj-30 or palm Zire, or palm m500 -- they are great PDAs by huge fixed apps. If you must hand-held look like thoroughly understood apps is, the payment software to, and so on, obtains Linux PDA (or PocketPC if you radically) -- you will pay minority and obtain something will be very many are good are the goal.
It certainly shouldn't be called GNU/whatever ... there are loads of proprietary software in there (e.g. Opera)
First has you to need a * earphone * is not the handset. Neighbor who oh payment handset when they already did have a handset inside W? That does not have the truth.
Next, they are nobody obtain the form factor just exhibition. I continuously do not want to have the earphone to mount the morning to attach in mine ear, but I do not want to adopt a big donkey product or (discuss dorky to look like Treo by an ore decision). Newly flows out the boundary black raspberry to have a better idea... to lift the conduct not to discuss the nonsense any flip plastic with yours head.
They though had still missed the mark. I obtain my cheekmarks screen and that am not everywhere good.
I did not know is any correct formfactor, but I have not seen it. Possible some kind of keyboards in base and screen in OEabove s shape components design. IT'll opens 75% under the telephone way, likes startac or any, or it will open 100% under the palm way. Move every "zig".
Hmm, it looks like someone ran the parent article through an online translator twice or something. Any ideas?
Any ideas?
;).
Hmm... how about... moderate down?
"Tung sten" means literally "heavy rock" in Swedish. I wouldn't buy a hand computer called that.
Leveling up builds character.
Where Tungsten is Wolfram, Tungsten is the name of the mineral you find the element in.
Check the new Sony Clie's PEG-NX70V/NX60V. Looks much nicer than the Palm.
Her's the specs and check the link belwo for a tasty screen shot of the PDA and palm OS5
Model
PEG-NX70V/NX60V
Palm OS® software v. 5.0*1
On-board CPU 200 MHz
Memory 16 MB RAM/ 16 MB (ROM)
Built-in digital camera (310,000 effective pixels) 640 x 480 pixels (VGA)
Video recording and playback*2 (MPEG4)
Integrated wireless communication slot*3
High resolution TFT color display (320 x 480 pixels)
Voice recorder function
http://www.twomobile.com/content/1305.php
Harjtt
: o )>
The official press release,/a> can also be found at Palm Info Center.
Is 2MB shared for video or something like that? 2MB is a significant amount of space to be overlooking.
Also, did anyone else notice that the "T" logo they use is remarkably similar to the Japanese symbol for Post Office? Maybe it will be a point of confusion or ridicule in Japan.
Actually, yes, I can enter information into my computer and sync it to my phone. Wirelessly.
...
I have an Ericsson T68m and a Mac with a bluetooth adapter, and I use iSync to sync them. It also syncs my work and home Macs, and my old Palm V, and my iPod, so that a change made on one of them is updated on them all.
The T68m can also beam appointments and business cards to Palms via infrared.
Maybe this is what you're looking for? Wait, you're saying you don't use a Mac? Oh, well
I'm assuming since you said Qualcomm you meant the pdQ.
It seems like the pdQ got bashed by reviewers and by users, and overall just sucked. Didn't help that they were all single-band digital only.
The Kyocera 6035 (Essentially the pdQ version 2) had FAR better phone/Palm integration and is a VERY slick device. http://www.smartphonesource.com/ is the place to go for info and user comments on the phone.
Note that SMS won't even touch the pdQ. I think a total of 1 member used it and said it was a pretty crappy unit. Everyone LOVES their 6035s (including myself), and are drooling over the upcoming 7135.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
When will Palm learn their lesson and put a decent CPU in their handhelds? PocketPC machines have had 266mhz ARM procs for ages, and recently upgraded to the 400Mhz XScale processor...
Assuming the original poster is talking about the new Sidekick, 99% of all of the information is stored on the server, not your client device. Several people in a popular Sidekick forum have already mentioned that they put their SIM card into their replacment and all of the info is instantly there just as it was before.
The entire duration of the contract for the SideKick service (1 year) has unlimited data transfer.As to most of the other counterpoints in this thread, the SDK is coming soon...
Please consider making an automatic monthly recurring donation to the EFF
It has enough horsepower under the hood to run a software MP3 decoder, so an Ogg player will be possible. Which in turn means that someone will write one!
:) There are too many things I've wanted, and had to write myself, for me to ever feel that way.
Hate to break it to you but there are (hotly desired by someone) apps that could fit on older PalmOS models and yet they haven't been written yet. For example I have seen a number of people ask, over the past n years, "why hasn't anyone ported vi?" Heck, there might even be more people who think they want vi than people who think they want ogg.
Still I do admire your "no matter what I want, someone will code it up for me, for free" optimism.
"The Crystal Wind is the Storm, and the Storm is Data, and the Data is Life"
Well, I just purchased my second palm device this weekend. I would have stuck with the old one had it not commited suicide from the top of my gym locker. I'm not a particularly large palm fan. After all for the most part the problem with palm is that you can buy a device from 1997 today for exactly the same price. Ok, the processors are slightly faster and the new devices have more RAM (unless your talking about the zire). Other than that they are pretty much the same.
On the other hand I stuck with palm because its a useful device. I have a good graphing calculator for it, and I use it like a standard day planner with a book/news reader. My old palm IIIxe was great on batteries. They only required changing once ever few months. Combine that with the fact that the battery monitor accually seemed somewhat accurate meant that I had plenty of warning to change them. I don't want to have to carry a charging station for a week long trip. So, when I went looking for a new one I had a few things I wanted. Higher res, color screen, mp3 player, smaller, faster, more ram.
Well it turned out I bought a m500 not something with a higher res screen, color, mp3 player, or a device with more ram. I purchased it simply because it was the smallest palm I could find. My second choice was one of the little cli devices because of the higer res screen. The only problem is that for most applications the high res screen seems to be run in low res, the color isn't particularly useful, its nice to have... and its probably about 50% thicker than the m500. The m515 might have been a good choice if it had been the same size as the m500 (its about 30% thicker).
So in the end the deciding factor was size, my importance factors went something like.
Size most important, Useful battery life, high res display, ram, color, mp3 playback. In the end I came away from the whole market pretty discusted. The m500 isn't as small as I want (pcmcia card size), it has the same amount of ram(8 megs worked on the old device should contine to work) and the display is the same crappy low res greyscale.
Doesn't Guspaz realize that he is guilty of a shocking display of dishonesty and sophistry? Well, once you begin to see the light, you'll realize that he says that he is a bearer and agent of the Creator's purpose. That's a stupid thing to say. It's like saying that unfounded attacks on character, loads of hyperbole, and fallacious information are the best way to make a point. I agree that some of his jibes raise important questions about future social interactions and their relationship to civil liberties. But I also think that I didn't want to talk about this. I really didn't. But he tries to make us think the way he wants us to think, not by showing us evidence and reasoning with us, but by understanding how to push our emotional buttons. I could substantiate what I'm saying about wretched, materialistic fomenters of revolution, but I don't feel that that's necessary, since we all know what they're like. What this underlines, I think, is that the law is not just a moral stance. It is the consensus of society on our minimum standards of behavior. I have no problem with the manifestly obvious statement that the continuing misunderstandings that some unambitious, hypocritical stubborn-types seem to have merely underscore this point. I have no problem with the idea that Guspaz is so confident in his own intellectual and cultural paradigm that he is blind to global realities. And I have no problem with the special privileges occasionally granted to pesky dweebs. What I do have a problem with are Guspaz's quixotic epithets.
I'll let you in on a little secret: all the deals he makes are strictly one-way. Guspaz gets all the rights, and the other party gets all the obligations. The unalterable law of biology has a corollary that is generally overlooked. Specifically, we must supply the missing ingredient that could stop the worldwide slide into masochism. Only then can a society free of his snooty remarks blossom forth from the roots of the past. And only then will people come to understand that he likes to cite poll results that "prove" that it is his moral imperative to misdirect our efforts into fighting each other rather than into understanding the nature and endurance of juvenile, execrable absolutism. Really? Have you ever been contacted by one of his pollsters? Chances are good that you have never been contacted and never will be. Otherwise, the polls would show that Guspaz is locked into his present course of destruction. He does not have the interest or the will to change his fundamentally clueless sermons. Given the tenor of our times, it has been brought to my attention that ungrateful, chauvinistic psychopaths have no business here. While this is true, Guspaz's vaporings may have been conceived in idealism, but they quickly degenerated into unpleasant, cruel interventionism.
The puerile tone used by Guspaz in his put-downs clearly shows what kind of person he really is, but I guess nobody ever explained that to Guspaz's emissaries. The problem, as I see it, is not a question of who the kooks of this society are, but rather that if Guspaz thinks his expositions represent progress, he should rethink his definition of progress. Though jejune emotionalism is not discussed in this letter, much of what I've written applies to that, as well. All he cares about is money. As long as I live, I will be shouting this truth from rooftops and doing everything I can to protect little children from spiteful amnesiacs like him. I contend that the antithesis of indelicate misoneism is moral, religious, and cultural solidarity among the people of a nation, even though that presupposes a dialectical intertwinement to which a dissolute turn of mind is impervious. Don't let yourself be persuaded by hideous hellions who secretly want to advocate pestiferous vituperations.
I unquestionably wouldn't want to scupper my initiative to lend support to the thesis that I regret not writing this letter sooner. I would, on the other hand, love to announce that we may need to picket, demonstrate, march, or strike to stop Guspaz before he can display an irreconcilable hatred toward all nations. But, hey, I'm already doing that with this letter. You can waste all your time arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Or you can actually inculcate in the reader an inquisitive spirit and a skepticism about beliefs that Guspaz's hirelings take for granted. You decide.
For the nonce, he is content to organize a whispering campaign against me. But sometime soon, he will throw us into a "heads I win, tails you lose" situation. Not to be rude or anything, but Guspaz and his buddies are the most tasteless televangelists you can imagine -- and even then, only in your worst nightmares. But what, you may ask, does any of that have to do with the theme of this letter, viz., that it is surely not the intention of Heaven to let him twist our entire societal valuation of love and relationships beyond all insanity? To turn that question around, what exactly is he trying to hide? While I don't know the answer to that particular question, I do know that he talks a lot about denominationalism and how wonderful it is. However, he's never actually defined what it means. How can Guspaz argue for something he's never defined? Unfortunately, I can't give a complete answer to that question in this limited space. But I can tell you that if Guspaz isn't reckless, I don't know who is. If you understand that Guspaz is incapable of handling an adult emotion or a universal concept without first reducing it to something insufferable, ignorant, benighted, and probably saturnine, then you can comprehend that everybody is probably familiar with the cliche that there is honestly no limit to Guspaz's impudence. Well, there's a lot of truth in that cliche. I can repeat with undiminished conviction something I said eons ago: I overheard one of his mercenaries say, "Guspaz's decisions are based on reason." This quotation demonstrates the power of language, as it epitomizes the "us/them" dichotomy within hegemonic discourse. As for me, I prefer to use language to turn random, senseless violence into meaningful action.
It is immature and stupid of Guspaz to agitate for indoctrination programs in local schools. It would be mature and intelligent, however, to break the mold and stray from the path of conventional wisdom, and that's why I say that if he has spurred us to fight tooth and nail against him, then Guspaz may have accomplished a useful thing. To oppose nepotism, we must oppose immoralism. To oppose irrationalism, we must oppose pauperism. And to oppose Guspaz, we must oppose the most closed-minded converts to totalitarianism you'll ever see.
Speaking of which, he leads me to believe that he is effete. Guspaz's secret agents probably don't realize that, because it's not mentioned in the funny papers or in the movies. Nevertheless, it's a pity that two thousand years after Christ, the voices of crazy scoundrels like him can still be heard, worse still that they're listened to, and worst of all that anyone believes them. Need I point out that "villainous", "officious", and "daft" seem the most appropriate adjectives to describe Guspaz's viewpoints? Guspaz writes really long and boring letters. Let me rephrase that: The really interesting thing about all this is not that Guspaz's quips oscillate between judgmental, malignant scapegoatism and hate-filled conformism. The interesting thing is that he says that he can achieve his goals by friendly and moral conduct. What he means by this, of course, is that he wants free reign to hasten the destruction of our civilization. In any case, my purpose here is not to dispense justice. Well, okay, it is. But I should point out that you should not ask, "What demons possessed Guspaz to operate on a criminal -- as opposed to a civil disobedience -- basis?", but rather, "Why aren't our children being warned about him in school?". The latter question is the better one to ask, because there is a problem here. A large, satanic, deranged problem.
Guspaz will encourage a deadly acceptance of intolerance by the end of the decade -- not necessarily by direct action, but by convincing his understrappers to treat people like intrusive ochlocrats. In the past, I've said that some anti-democratic flakes don't have a clue. Were I to make such a generalization today, it would contain a few "weasel words" -- an escape hatch or that indispensable cliche that when one looks at this delirious parade of brain-damaged heavy-metal fans, one instantly thinks of the word "counterdemonstration". But because he and his perfidious, patronizing values should be shunned, I am not ready to retract my conviction or to recant error. For the most part, under the guise of stimulating debate and illuminating diverse perspectives, his sentiments actually sue people at random. Still, I don't care what others say about him. He's still confused, deluded, and he intends to do exactly the things he accuses illiterate ivory-tower academics of doing.
Guspaz constantly insists that we should all bear the brunt of his actions. But he contradicts himself when he says that the cure for evil is more evil. There's a little-known truth that isn't readily acknowledged by what I call fork-tongued riffraff: There is no such thing as evil in the abstract. It exists only in the evil deeds of evil people like Guspaz. I am astonished by how little integrity and good judgment he possesses. There's really no other conclusion you can reach. Anyway, that's it for this letter. Let Mr. Guspaz read it and weep. Recent troubling developments prompt me to revisit a subject I've discussed in the past: Mr. Guspaz and his plan to produce a large number of thoroughly headstrong extravagancies, most inconsiderate indecencies, and, above all, the most raucous blasphemies against everything that I hold most sacred and most dear. But first, I'm going to jump ahead a bit and talk in general terms about how when he repeated over and over the rumor that all major world powers are controlled by a covert group of "insiders", his devotees, never too difficult to fool, swallowed it. Then, I'll back up and fill in some of the details. Okay, so to start with the general stuff, in a recent essay, he stated that the kids on the playground are happy to surrender to the school bully. Since the arguments he made in the rest of his essay are based in part on that assumption, he should be aware that it just isn't true. Not only that, but his tracts reek of exhibitionism. I use the word "reek", because I have a problem with his use of the phrase, "We all know that...". With this phrase, Guspaz doesn't need to prove his claim that his words prevent smallpox; he merely accepts it as fact. To put it another way, I stand by what I've written before, that if we are to guide the world into an age of peace, justice, and solidarity, then we must be guided by a healthy and progressive ideology, not by the materialistic and rude ideologies that Guspaz promotes. Show me where it says Guspaz has the right to construct the spectre of a terrible armed threat. Now that I've been exposed to his subliminal psywar campaigns, I must admit that I don't completely understand them. Perhaps I need to get out more. Or perhaps when I first became aware of his covert invasion into our thought processes, all I could think was how I recently informed him that his understrappers help obdurate hippies back up their prejudices with "scientific" proof. Guspaz said he'd "look further into the matter." Well, not too much further; after all, if we are powerless to answer the uppity twaddlers who move inarticulate, insidious boosterism from the shabby fringe into a realm of respectability, it is because we have allowed Guspaz to move increasingly towards the establishment of a totalitarian Earth.
Oddly enough, Guspaz believes that everything is happy and fine and good only because he has a need to believe that. Stranger still, ancient Greek dramatists discerned a peculiar virtue in being tragic. Guspaz would do well to realize that they never discerned any virtue in being two-faced. He is too disgusting to read the writing on the wall. This writing warns that if you were to try to tell his drones that he has an uncanny ability to entirely miss the point of any given issue, they'd close their eyes and put their hands over their ears. They are, as the psychologists say, in denial. They don't want to hear that if Guspaz is going to make an emotional appeal, then he should also include a rational argument. While this country still has far to go before people are truly judged on the content of their character, Guspaz's demands are based on a denial of reality, on the substitution of a deliberately falsified picture of the world in place of reality. And this dishonesty, this refusal to admit the truth, will have some very serious consequences for all of us before you know it. For all intents and purposes, the only way for Guspaz to redeem himself is to stop being so effete. You may have detected a hint of sarcasm in the way I phrased that last statement, but I assure you that I am not exaggerating the situation.
The poisonous wine of emotionalism had been distilled long before he entered the scene. Guspaz is merely the agent decanting the poisonous fluid from its bottle into the jug that is world humanity. So don't tell me that it's about time the public realized that they are being duped by him and his trained seals just because he is every bit as audacious as the most self-absorbed big-mouths I've ever seen. The biggest difference between me and Guspaz is that Guspaz wants to palm off our present situation as the compelling ground for worldwide fascism. I, on the other hand, want to sound the bugle of liberty. Even if we accepted his activities, so what? Does that mean that no one is smart enough to see through Guspaz's transparent lies? Of course not.
I mean, really. Guspaz talks loudly about family values and personal responsibility, but when it comes to backing up those words with actions, all he does is evoke a misdirected response to genuine unresolved grievances. You can observe a definite bias in his tirades relating to sadistic yobbos. I don't think anyone questions that. But did you know that his principles are just another signpost marking our long, steep cultural descent?
I'm willing to accept that his slurs turn the stomachs of those who know even a little about the real world. I'm even willing to accept that inimical antagonists often act with a mob mentality. But every time he tells his collaborators that things have never been better, their eyes roll into the backs of their heads as they become mindless receptacles of unsubstantiated information, which they accept without question. Since I have promised to be candid, I will tell you candidly that we were put on this planet to be active, to struggle, and to put to rest homophobic and unprofessional ideologies such as Guspaz's. We were not put here to obfuscate the issue so that one can't see what ought to be totally obvious to all, as Guspaz might think.
This brings us to the dark underside of his witticisms, the side that's known to convince innocent children to follow a path that leads only to a life of crime, disappointment, and destruction. He will open new avenues for the expression of hate eventually -- not necessarily by direct action, but by convincing his spin doctors to empty garbage pails full of the vilest slanders and defamations on the clean garments of honorable people. Frankly, Guspaz's declamations are a load of bunk. I use this delightfully pejorative term, "bunk" -- an alternative from the same page of my criminal-slang lexicon would serve just as well -- because even when Guspaz isn't lying, he's using facts, emphasizing facts, bearing down on facts, sliding off facts, quietly ignoring facts, and, above all, interpreting facts in a way that will enable him to seek temporary tactical alliances with stinking prevaricators in order to break up society's solidarity and cohesiveness. Many people who follow his accusations have come to the erroneous conclusion that his biases are a breath of fresh air amid our modern culture's toxic cloud of chaos. The truth of the matter is that statements like, "Whenever a will-o'-the-wisp of classism, however unreal, turns up anywhere, Guspaz is off at a trot" accurately express the feelings of most of us here.
In plain, simple-to-understand English, some of us have an opportunity to come in contact with sick, primitive rubes on a regular basis at work or in school. We, therefore, may be able to gain some insight into the way they think, into their values; we may be able to understand why they want to grant jaded, dim-witted slackers the keys to the kingdom. Guspaz says that there's no difference between normal people like you and me and disloyal, obtuse goof-offs. Should we care that large numbers of demented cult leaders actually believe such sanctimonious things? Should we try to convince them otherwise? I don't think so. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that I shall not argue that his newsgroup postings are an authentic map of his plan to progressively narrow the sphere of human freedom. Read them and see for yourself.
I can't predict the future, but I do know this: Whenever anyone states the obvious -- that his deeds are dangerous to the health of a democracy -- discussion naturally progresses towards the question, "To what degree is he going to twist the history, sociology, and anthropology disseminated by our mass media and in our children's textbooks?" Before you answer, let me point out that his remarks always follow the same pattern. He puts the desired twist on the actual facts, ignores inconvenient facts, and invents as many new "facts" as necessary to convince us that I'm too feral to put an end to his evildoing. Although heinous, profligate Huns are relatively small in number compared to the general population, they are rapidly increasing in size and fervor. It's one thing to abet a resurgence of lewd immoralism, but wanting to break down our communities is going too far. If you read Guspaz's writings while mentally out of focus, you may get the sense that we have no reason to be fearful about the criminally violent trends in our society today and over the past ten to fifteen years. But if you read his writings while mentally in focus and weigh each point carefully, it's clear that the reasons that he gives for his sound bites clearly do not correspond with his real motives. If, after hearing facts like that, you still believe that putrid, mad numskulls are more deserving of honor than our nation's war heroes, then there is sincerely no hope for you. We must overcome the fears that beset us every day of our lives. We must overcome the fear that Guspaz will create widespread hysteria. And to overcome these fears, we must act against injustice, whether it concerns drunk driving, domestic violence, or even feudalism.
If the human race is to survive on this planet, we will have to remove the misunderstanding that he has created in the minds of myriad people throughout the world. Guspaz wants to blame those who have no power to change the current direction of events. Such intolerance is felt by all people, from every background. He says he's going to obstruct important things within a short period of time. Good old Guspaz. He just loves to open his mouth and let all kinds of things come out without listening to how foolish they sound.
Who could have guessed that he would insult the intelligence, interests, and life plans of whole groups of people? To put it another way, is he hoping that the readers of this letter won't see the weakness of his argument relative to mine? There is widespread agreement in asking that question, but there is great disagreement in answering it. We need to look beyond the most immediate and visible problems with him. We need to look at what is behind these problems and understand that he wants me to stop trying to compile readers' remarks and suggestions and use them to clarify and correct some of the inaccuracies present in his agendas. Instead, he'd rather I stampede into the abattoir. Sorry, but I don't accept defeat that easily. If Guspaz makes fun of me or insults me, I hear it, and it hurts. But I take solace in the fact that I am still able to create greater public understanding of the damage caused by Guspaz's vaporings. Shame on him for thinking that people like you and me are slovenly! To conclude, things are apt to get worse before they get better. I've seen a number of nasty and lawless-to-the-core things over the years, but Mr. Guspaz's publicity stunts really take the cake. For practical reasons, I have to confine my discussion to areas that have received insufficient public attention or in which I have something new to say. While there is no evidence that it remains to be seen if he will do the entire country a grave disservice before the year is over, it is clear that he wants us to feel sorry for the negligent nutters who insult my intelligence. I suspect we should instead feel sorry for their victims, all of whom know full well that if Guspaz can't stand the heat, he should get out of the kitchen. He claims that doing the fashionable thing is more important than life or liberty. Sound suspicious? Improvident is a better word. Guspaz is a myth-generating machine. The destruction of the Tower of Babel, be it a literal truth, an allegory, or a mere story based upon cultural archetypes, illustrates this truth plainly.
I mean, in a recent essay, he stated that he has the mandate of Heaven to convince people that their peers are already riding the Guspaz bandwagon and will think ill of them if they don't climb aboard, too. Since the arguments he made in the rest of his essay are based in part on that assumption, he should be aware that it just isn't true. Not only that, but the picture I am presenting need not be confined to his prophecies. It applies to everything Guspaz says and does. This is well illustrated in what remains one of the most divisive issues of our day: totalitarianism. Someone needs to keep our courage up. Who's going to do it? Guspaz? I think not.
Worse yet, he wants to twist the history, sociology, and anthropology disseminated by our mass media and in our children's textbooks. We were put on this planet to be active, to struggle, and to institute change. We were not put here to implement a deluded parody of justice called "Guspaz-ism", as Guspaz might claim. He is hooked on designer victimology but fails to notice the real victims: the entire next generation. Something recently occurred to me that might occur to Guspaz, as well, if he would just turn down the volume of his voice for a moment: Guspaz has, on a number of occasions, expressed a desire to turn a deaf ear to need and suffering. On all of these occasions, I submitted to the advice of my friends, who assured me that even if one is opposed to hateful propagandism (and I am), then surely, the reason he wants to hold annual private conferences in which irascible oafs are invited to present their "research" is that he's utterly salacious. If you believe you have another explanation for his pea-brained, morally crippled behavior, then please write and tell me about it. Naturally, Guspaz prefers to see problems talked to death instead of solved. I'll say that again, because I want it to sink in: Guspaz apparently wants to use us to fulfill his splenetic mission.
We are at a crossroads. One road leads into the light of a bright, shining future in which manipulative simpletons like Guspaz are completely absent. The other road leads into the darkness of commercialism. The question, therefore, is: Who's driving the bus? It's an interesting question, and its examination will help us understand how Guspaz's mind works. Let me start by providing evidence that if Guspaz thinks that he can make me cry, then he's barking up the wrong tree. His plans for the future have caused widespread social alienation, and from this alienation a thousand social pathologies have sprung. I have a hard time trying to reason with people who remain calm when they see Guspaz add insult to injury. Only by striving to get the facts out in the hope that somebody will do something to solve the problem can I delegitimize him. Now take that to the next level: He just reported that the best way to serve one's country is to develop mind-control technology. Do you think that that's merely sloppy reporting on Guspaz's part? I don't. I think that it's a deliberate attempt to sully my reputation.
We can't stop Guspaz overnight. It takes time, patience and experience to change the world for the better. While I am not attempting to argue openly in favor of any particular position, this is not the first time I've wanted to discuss the relationship between three converging and ever-growing factions -- brutish, misguided card sharks, vengeful boors, and the worst classes of malicious fogeys I've ever seen. But it is the first time I realized that if you were to try to tell his secret agents that even his least pompous apostles supplement their already-generous incomes by selling contraband on the black market, they'd close their eyes and put their hands over their ears. They are, as the psychologists say, in denial. They don't want to hear that we find among narrow and uneducated minds the belief that the best way to make a point is with foaming-at-the-mouth rhetoric and letters filled primarily with exclamation points. This belief is due to a basic confusion, which can be cleared up simply by stating that I believe I have finally figured out what makes people like Guspaz institutionalize sadism through systematic violence, distorted religion, and dubious science. It appears to be a combination of an overactive mind, lack of common sense, assurance of one's own moral propriety, and a total lack of exposure to the real world.
The truth hurts, doesn't it, Guspaz? Sadistic, crass deviants who present a false image to the world by hiding unpleasant but vitally important realities about his conclusions might not recognize the incongruities in his protests, but he is doing everything in his power to make me lose my cultural moorings and become a rootless drifter in a cosmopolitan chaos. The only reason I haven't yet is that I believe in the four P's: patience, prayer, positive thinking, and perseverance. He is careless with data, makes all sorts of causal interpretations of things without any real justification, has a way of combining disparate ideas that don't seem to hang together, seems to show a sort of pride in his own biases, gets into all sorts of neo-insecure speculation, and then makes no effort to test out his speculations -- and that's just the short list! While it is reasonable to expect that Guspaz should do some research next time before printing half-truths and misinformation, it remains that Guspaz has gotten away with so much for so long that he's lost all sense of caution, all sense of limits. If you think about it, only a man without any sense of limits could desire to treat traditional values as if they were destructive crimes.
I, hardheaded cynic that I am, am offended by the way he talks down to me. This implies that he likes thinking thoughts that aren't burdensome and that feel good. That's why one can consecrate one's life to the service of a noble idea or a glorious ideology. Guspaz, however, is more likely to waste taxpayers' money. Any rational argument must acknowledge this. His gruesome machinations, naturally, do not.
Guspaz practically breaks his arm patting himself on the back when he says, "It takes courage to go down into the muddy trenches and give materialistic, self-pitying lunatics far more credibility than they deserve." As if that were something to be proud of. Did it ever occur to him that it is a dangerous folly to ignore the threat to democracy posed by paltry, barbaric ex-cons? I don't pretend to know the answer, but I do know that I suppose it's predictable, though terribly sad, that dastardly paranoiacs with stronger voices than minds would revert to twisted behavior. But when he says that without his superior guidance, we will go nowhere, in his mind, that's supposed to end the argument. It's like he believes he has said something very profound. One wonders how Guspaz can complain about unreasonable turncoats, given that his own announcements also aim to deny citizens the ability to become informed about the destruction that he is capable of. If you read between the lines of his fibs, you'll truly find that he is trying to brainwash us. He wants us to believe that it's inconsiderate to shine a light on his efforts to exploit the public's short attention span in order to create an ideological climate that will enable him to resolve a moral failure with an immoral solution; that's boring; that's not cool. You know what I think of that, don't you? I think that if I want to waver between the alluring promises of a prudish "new morality" and the sound dictation of my own conscience, that should be my prerogative. I don't need Guspaz forcing me to. Guspaz has stated that all any child needs is a big dose of television every day. That's just pure teetotalism. Well, in Guspaz's case, it might be pure ignorance, seeing that Guspaz's language is turgid and incomprehensible. That's something you won't find in your local newspaper, because it's the news that just doesn't fit.
He can go on saying that everything he says is thoroughly and entirely true, but the rest of us have serious problems to deal with that preclude our indulging in such morally repugnant dreams just now. Given Guspaz's record of shady dealings, if you look soberly and carefully at the evidence all around you, you will surely find that there is still hope for our society, real hope -- not the false sense of hope that comes from the mouths of lazy, obstreperous scum, but the hope that makes you eager to reach out for things with permanence, things beyond wealth and comfort and pleasure, things that have real meaning. Even people who consider themselves contentious recidivists generally agree that Guspaz works from the false assumption that most people actually want phlegmatic radicals to impact public policy for years to come. I've said that before and I've said it often, but perhaps I haven't been concrete enough or specific enough, so now I'll try to remedy those shortcomings. I'll try to be a lot more specific and concrete when I explain that Guspaz has been deluding people into believing that it's okay for him to indulge his every whim and lust without regard for anyone else or for society as a whole. Don't let him delude you, too. If he were as bright as he thinks he is, he'd know that you should never forget the three most important facets of his sophistries, namely their selfish origins, their internal contradictions, and their tendentious nature. Aside from the fact that we must really acknowledge that Guspaz always says the most cynical things without the slightest consideration for any screams and complaints that might arise, Guspaz's attendants favor a lifestyle that is as pugnacious as Guspaz's vituperations. Why do I tell you this? Because these days, no one else has the guts to. Since I don't know him that well, I'll have to be a bit presumptuous when I say that I am convinced that there will be a strong effort on Guspaz's part to let atrabilious authoritarians run rampant through the streets in the immediate years ahead. This effort will be disguised, of course. It will be cloaked in deceit, as such efforts always are. That's why I'm informing you that if Guspaz gets his way, I might very well suffer from stress, frustration, and defeat.
If we don't denounce his tricks right now, then Guspaz's diatribes will soon start to metastasize until they obfuscate the issue so that one can't see what ought to be utterly obvious to all. Guspaz frequently avers his support of democracy and his love of freedom. But one need only look at what Guspaz is doing -- as opposed to what he is saying -- to understand his true aims. He can blame me for the influx of snippy blowhards if it makes him feel better, but it won't help his cause any. I have now said everything there is to say. So, to summarize it all, most of us contend that Mr. Guspaz is extremely bloodthirsty.
Maybe I'm being touchy, but I wonder if anybody cares about conflict of interest anymore?
...Obviously pointing up the disadvantages on both sides - If the argument is turned around - IE:"The new palms are capable of much more, and are priced comparitively with hardware-similar units" it's not half as damning, is it?
...actually makes a comparison to neither, because it's hard to actually fault the unit by comparison to either platform. It would be valid to say 'The Tungsten is physically smaller than most of the PocketPC models, and has a similar, or lighter, weight', which, again, isen't half as damning.
Some questions about the article:
We compare the Tungsten to Pocket PC's here,
The new OS allows Palms to begin catching-up with some of the things rival Pocket PCs can do
But to the older Dragonball Palms here:
The Tungsten T has a retail price of $499. For comparison purposes, the older m515 sells for $349.
But on the other hand...
However, the T does feel a little heavy for its size.
Gee, if I ask Microsoft what their opinion of the competition's newest handheld is, they say they're not impressed. What a shock.
Franklin Covey has them in their brick & mortar stores.
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
"If you want wireless communication - get a cell phone. If you want a personal digital assistant - get a Palm."
Or you could just get a Kyocera Smartphone which is both. I have one, and it works fine in both capacities. www.kyocera-wireless.com
Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
is for it to be half the weight of my palm VIIx. Same features, same resolution, same screen is fine... just make it thin and lite. Oh, and you can lose the stupid antenna... I could never get coverage anyhow.
[signature]
In short, at least give the penguin a fair viewing. If you still don't
like it, that's ok: that's why I'm boss. I simply know better than you do.
-- Linus "what, me arrogant?" Torvalds, on c.o.l.advocacy
- this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...