Slashdot Mirror


PocketPC 2003 Reviewed

Sander Sassen writes "Prior to the official launch of the Microsoft PocketPC 2003 platform next Monday, Hardware Analysis puts an Asus MyPal a620 PocketPC to the test and details what new features PocketPC 2003 brings to the table and whether it is worth it to upgrade from 2002."

8 of 167 comments (clear)

  1. haha by Poofat · · Score: 5, Funny

    From the top of the page:

    Please register or login. There are 6 registered and 589 anonymous users currently online. Current bandwidth usage: 1672.32 kbit/s

    Good 'ol slashdot.

  2. Price by jesler · · Score: 5, Funny

    The article lists the price as

    Price: +/- 350 dollar, 329 euro

    I assume they use "+/-" to mean approxiamately. If not, I'll choose the -$350 option and you can pay me to use this thing.

  3. Yes, but... by cloudless.net · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yes it is, but no benchmark has been published yet so I have no idea how good the optimization is. Developers must rewrite their applications for Pocket PC 2003 in order to take advantage of the optimizations. The review kinda sucks because it tells us nothing about the performance.

  4. Familiar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Just use familiar with opie. You'll be happier, and have more spare change to buy things that matter.

  5. Palm to iPaq (student view) by 1000101 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm a CS major and recently switched from a Palm to an iPaq. Microsoft's PDA OS is so much better than Palm's, it's hard to imagine using anything else. At first I thought the $500 price tag was outrageous, but it has helped with my studies and organization tremendously. Bash MS all you want, but their PDA OS is by far the most versitile on the market today.

  6. Re:Odd... by gantrep · · Score: 5, Informative

    The operating system is officially released on the 23rd. However there have been several models of handhelds out for a little while that come with 2003. I've got a Toshiba like you that I got 3 days ago that came with it. It's an e355.

  7. Re:Small and Big by Repugnant_Shit · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I agree. I can't wait to use a slower toolkit like .NET on a handheld. Troll me if you want, but I use WinCE/VS/VS.NET for a living, and it's true.

  8. Re:You mean Internet Explorer for Windows by jameslore · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'll bite :-)

    IE isn't standards compliant because it breaks several W3C standards and doesn't support many of the standards it implements properly. That's a fact I'm afraid. Whether or not the behaviour in IE should be standard is up for debate (though I choose Moz).

    IE isn't too bad, outstanding issues which make it a pain in the arse include:

    1) Bollocks PNG support. Alpha channel support needs a custom tag (DXImage filter or something similar).
    2) CSS box model, width includes margins/padding size.
    3) Doesn't support absolute positioning without width/height size: e.g.

    top: 100px;
    bottom: 100px;
    width: 100%;

    will result in a box 0px (unless there's content in which case it's the content height) and 100% wide. In mozilla and compliant broswers it is a box 100px from the top of the window to 100px from the bottom.
    4) Background positioning from a origin doesn't work (see CSS/Edge for a demo, link is on mozilla.org/start/1.0).
    5) CSS 2 content generation support is nonexistant. CSS 2 support in general is hit and miss.
    6) No support for W3C event system.
    7) Lots of other small issues which slip my mind at present :-)

    Lists of CSS support/bugs tend to be fairly easy to find on the net though many are a little out of date.