Toshiba makes a 5GB PCMCIA Drive. The Compaq iPAQ can use this drive in the PCMCIA Sleeve or Dual PCMCIA Sleeve (which includes an additional battery to offset the load from the drive).
The iPod is certainly cheaper, and you're getting what you pay for, an MP3 Player. It does not, however, totally outclass anything Windows CE will see for years, which is what you said in your initial post.
Ok, but how is that totally outclassing any windows CE devices we are likely to see in the next few years?
About half of the newer PocketPC Devices can use IBM Microdrives. Several of the current or near future PocketPC 2002 devices can use PCMCIA Haddrives (Like the 5GB Tochiba drive), through sleeves/sleds, and one of them has a PCMCIA Socket integrated into the device.
Re:It's great to have sites like this
on
The Guts Of An iPod
·
· Score: 2, Informative
You do know that this is an 80-133 Mhz Arm7 (80-110 for.18 micron, 100-133 for.13 micron) chip, and all current PocketPC (PocketPC2002) devices are based on a 206Mhz StrongArm with 32MB or 64MB of RAM, right?
The Intel product info says that 206Mhz StrongArm's are software compatible with Arm v4 processors (which the Arm7 is)
>Fact: Before IE there was Netscape. A standalone program which was hugely successful. It was not bundled with any OS and the creators of Netscape were well on there way to a profitable business by selling the program.
Netscape was for all intents and purposes, free. They had a constant stream of "Beta" clients for download, and the full version was free for anyone to use unless you were a business. (Not that that stopped anyone, since it was freely downloadable.) The only people "Paying" for Netscape in any significant numbers, were ISP's who were bundling it with their new user packages.
This isn't an application specific enhancement. They artificially lower image quality to boost framerate. Even though you select Highest Quality in the game, that's not what you're getting.
http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F %2Fwww.3dcenter.de%2Fartikel%2F2001%2F10-24_a.php& langpair=de%7Cen&hl=en
Check out the translation of the German Article.
Scroll down a ways, and you'll see the 100 as rendered by an nVidia card, followed by it rendered by an UNOPTIMIZED Radeon 8500. Looks pretty much identical. Then roll your mouse over the ATI Image to see the OPTIMIZED Driver. If that's better Image Quality, I'll eat my hat!
If it sees Quake3 as the executable, it drops the visual quality in order to boost the FPS Rate, it's strictly a benchmarking move. In short, it's not being compared on even footing against other graphics cards.
You could set the exact same settings in the game itself, and the ATI Driver would use lower image quality than it's competitors are using, thus artificially inflating their benchmark numbers.
But it's not optimized for the Quake3 Engine, it's optimized for Quake3 specifically. HardOCP renamed Quake3 to Quack3, and it runs slower. Any Quake3-engine game isn't going to be called Quake3, and is going to be running the same way Quack3 does which is slower than it should, if they were REAL engine optimizations, rather than cheating by checking the program name.
SD Slot so that you have integrated expansion without a sleeve, the better display, larger battery (1450 mAh vs 900mAh), and the 3870 has integrated Bluetooth.
That's committing the cardinal sin of MMOG's. The Client is in the hands of the "enemy". If you offload game relevant calculations to the Client Computer, they will be hacked. Every current MMOG has had some critical bits of the game code running on the client when they shouldn't have been, and every one of them has been bitten in the ass by it. You simply cannot allow any machine other than one under your (the developer's) full control have any say in anything critical.
The client machines should be nothing more than an interface to the game, and a display system for the game world. Anything else is flirting with disaster.
Re:The Palm is already dying
on
Pocket PC 2002
·
· Score: 1
For Starters, Microsoft doesn't make them, they just make the OS. Compaq, Casio, HP, Toshiba, etc make the devices.
Secondly, all the charts comparing the various models I've seen quote the battery life each manufacturer claims for their particular device(s).
And ActiveSync needs to do automatic file-system backups (at least as an option) every time you put the PDA in its cradle.
It is an option. Open ActiveSync, choose Tools | Backup/Restore. Do a Full Backup, then select Incremental Backup and check "Automatically back up each time the device connects." at the bottom.
I routinely go away for on the weekend, and don't take the PC Sleeve, or my charger, and I haven't run my iPaq down to the ground yet. Of course, I'm not using the thing for 10 straight hours a day.
I always take my AC Adapter with me. It's quite small, weighs less than the PDA itself. Or I take my PC Card Sleeve with me, which effectivelly doubles my battery life.
Re:battery life?
on
Pocket PC 2002
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
You're not seriously suggesting that your Palm Pilot operated for a month straight? Of course not, you said average use. Figure out how many hours of continuous use that "month of average use" actually turns out to be. I would be incredibly suprised if it turned out to be much more than about 15 hours of actual use.
Every time you put that PocketPC in it's cradle, it recharges the internal battery. I have yet to run my iPaq right down to nothing and I've had it over a year.
Some woman in another state saw a picture of a guy that was being used to promote the system (the picture was used without his permission.) She called the police believing it was her dead-beat ex-husband. The police tracked him down, had a few words with him and determined that he was NOT the man she claimed he was. The face recognition system did NOT make a false positive it was a simple case of a human making a mistaken identification.
The chart you linked to shows Compaq with 11.9% of Q1 2001 vs HP's 4.1% of Q1 2001. The number you keep quoting was Q1 2000. Year to Year, # of Units sold in Western Europe was 8,978 units for Q1 2000 for Compaq and 100,362 units for Q1 2001. In contrast, HP accounted for 16,514 units for Q1 2000 and 34,210 units for Q1 2001. That's 109,340 units for Compaq in the two compared Quarters, and 50,724 for HP. In short, Compaq has shipped more than twice as many units as HP has in the same compared periods.
Slashdot Mirror
Toshiba makes a 5GB PCMCIA Drive. The Compaq iPAQ can use this drive in the PCMCIA Sleeve or Dual PCMCIA Sleeve (which includes an additional battery to offset the load from the drive). The iPod is certainly cheaper, and you're getting what you pay for, an MP3 Player. It does not, however, totally outclass anything Windows CE will see for years, which is what you said in your initial post.
Ok, but how is that totally outclassing any windows CE devices we are likely to see in the next few years? About half of the newer PocketPC Devices can use IBM Microdrives. Several of the current or near future PocketPC 2002 devices can use PCMCIA Haddrives (Like the 5GB Tochiba drive), through sleeves/sleds, and one of them has a PCMCIA Socket integrated into the device.
You do know that this is an 80-133 Mhz Arm7 (80-110 for .18 micron, 100-133 for .13 micron) chip, and all current PocketPC (PocketPC2002) devices are based on a 206Mhz StrongArm with 32MB or 64MB of RAM, right?
The Intel product info says that 206Mhz StrongArm's are software compatible with Arm v4 processors (which the Arm7 is)
>Fact: Before IE there was Netscape. A standalone program which was hugely successful. It was not bundled with any OS and the creators of Netscape were well on there way to a profitable business by selling the program.
Netscape was for all intents and purposes, free. They had a constant stream of "Beta" clients for download, and the full version was free for anyone to use unless you were a business. (Not that that stopped anyone, since it was freely downloadable.) The only people "Paying" for Netscape in any significant numbers, were ISP's who were bundling it with their new user packages.
Application Specific enhancements are great.
This isn't an application specific enhancement. They artificially lower image quality to boost framerate. Even though you select Highest Quality in the game, that's not what you're getting.
Here's the link to the German Site, since that link didn't seem to work.
http://www.3dcenter.de/artikel/2001/10-24_a.php
http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F %2Fwww.3dcenter.de%2Fartikel%2F2001%2F10-24_a.php& langpair=de%7Cen&hl=en
Check out the translation of the German Article.
Scroll down a ways, and you'll see the 100 as rendered by an nVidia card, followed by it rendered by an UNOPTIMIZED Radeon 8500. Looks pretty much identical. Then roll your mouse over the ATI Image to see the OPTIMIZED Driver. If that's better Image Quality, I'll eat my hat!
If it sees Quake3 as the executable, it drops the visual quality in order to boost the FPS Rate, it's strictly a benchmarking move. In short, it's not being compared on even footing against other graphics cards. You could set the exact same settings in the game itself, and the ATI Driver would use lower image quality than it's competitors are using, thus artificially inflating their benchmark numbers.
But it's not optimized for the Quake3 Engine, it's optimized for Quake3 specifically. HardOCP renamed Quake3 to Quack3, and it runs slower. Any Quake3-engine game isn't going to be called Quake3, and is going to be running the same way Quack3 does which is slower than it should, if they were REAL engine optimizations, rather than cheating by checking the program name.
SD Slot so that you have integrated expansion without a sleeve, the better display, larger battery (1450 mAh vs 900mAh), and the 3870 has integrated Bluetooth.
That's committing the cardinal sin of MMOG's. The Client is in the hands of the "enemy". If you offload game relevant calculations to the Client Computer, they will be hacked. Every current MMOG has had some critical bits of the game code running on the client when they shouldn't have been, and every one of them has been bitten in the ass by it. You simply cannot allow any machine other than one under your (the developer's) full control have any say in anything critical. The client machines should be nothing more than an interface to the game, and a display system for the game world. Anything else is flirting with disaster.
For Starters, Microsoft doesn't make them, they just make the OS. Compaq, Casio, HP, Toshiba, etc make the devices.
Secondly, all the charts comparing the various models I've seen quote the battery life each manufacturer claims for their particular device(s).
And ActiveSync needs to do automatic file-system backups (at least as an option) every time you put the PDA in its cradle. It is an option. Open ActiveSync, choose Tools | Backup/Restore. Do a Full Backup, then select Incremental Backup and check "Automatically back up each time the device connects." at the bottom. I routinely go away for on the weekend, and don't take the PC Sleeve, or my charger, and I haven't run my iPaq down to the ground yet. Of course, I'm not using the thing for 10 straight hours a day.
I always take my AC Adapter with me. It's quite small, weighs less than the PDA itself. Or I take my PC Card Sleeve with me, which effectivelly doubles my battery life.
You're not seriously suggesting that your Palm Pilot operated for a month straight? Of course not, you said average use. Figure out how many hours of continuous use that "month of average use" actually turns out to be. I would be incredibly suprised if it turned out to be much more than about 15 hours of actual use. Every time you put that PocketPC in it's cradle, it recharges the internal battery. I have yet to run my iPaq right down to nothing and I've had it over a year.
No it didn't.
Some woman in another state saw a picture of a guy that was being used to promote the system (the picture was used without his permission.) She called the police believing it was her dead-beat ex-husband. The police tracked him down, had a few words with him and determined that he was NOT the man she claimed he was. The face recognition system did NOT make a false positive it was a simple case of a human making a mistaken identification.
You need to learn how to read, son.
The chart you linked to shows Compaq with 11.9% of Q1 2001 vs HP's 4.1% of Q1 2001. The number you keep quoting was Q1 2000. Year to Year, # of Units sold in Western Europe was 8,978 units for Q1 2000 for Compaq and 100,362 units for Q1 2001. In contrast, HP accounted for 16,514 units for Q1 2000 and 34,210 units for Q1 2001. That's 109,340 units for Compaq in the two compared Quarters, and 50,724 for HP. In short, Compaq has shipped more than twice as many units as HP has in the same compared periods.