When a PDA is better than a GBA for Gaming

An anonymous reader writes "Conventional wisdom says that it's silly to buy a $300+ PDA to play games when a $100 Game Boy Advance SP is going to be better at it. At the same time, no one says that it's silly to spend $1000+ on a PC to play games, when you can do the same thing with a $199 PlayStation 2. FiringSquad just posted an ASUS PDA review that focuses on some of the games that only a PDA has the horsepower for, and helps readers figure out how to pick out the right PDA."

Comments

Re:Both PDA and GBA are silly.

[more]

What can I get for less than $100 without switching

Why are you introducing this completely artificial price limit on the phone, but do not have similar artificial price limit on the PDA? This is just plain stupid. I prefer to have a new phone over an old one. Also, I prefer to spend my $500 on the phone rather than having a lousy free phone phone and a PDA.

Let me turn your point completely over to show how silly it is: I actually got my PDA for free and I am not willing to to pay more than 100 euros for a new PDA. A PDA for 100 euros sucks. Thus a modern 500 euro phone is a better solution. Also, my PDA has a gray scale display so it is pretty much useless for gaming.

... or maybe I'm remembering what I read incorrectly.

Perhaps you should recheck before posting. I have not claimed that cell phones are more powerful than PDAs. It was another person replying to my original message who put that statement into my mouth. In my original post I claimed that the performance is about the same. Really, modern phones and PDAs are in the class of their own, while the GBA is quite different.

Further, you can play in dark with the phone, which is quite important. I really do not understand why they did not have a backlight for the GBA. It is just impossible to see anything, unless you have great lighting or a separate gadget for light.

Wake up, USA. The PDA is dead. The GBA is dead.