For what it's worth, I don't like his tone either. But though the original
post indeed smells like a troll, what better place is there to discuss
Palm's shortcomings? Too many posters view this forum as some kind of Palm
booster club, and they jump on everyone -- even thoughtful writers -- who
criticizes Palm. This stifles what could be a very useful debate. As someone
whose career is now mixed up with this device, I don't think this
sentimentality is a good idea. Palm has made mistakes and they apparently
continue to make them -- who knows this better than this group? And who has
more to lose if things don't change?
Anyway, here's the reason I bought an iPAQ: they are vastly easier to
program. Palm's API makes even the simplest programming tasks arduous. And
yes, I know why it's like that -- I don't need to be reminded. Some people
don't see this as a problem, but I assure you, my employer does. The fact
is, hardware constraints are no longer -- or at least, no longer have to
be -- what limits us. Microsoft, despite my loathing for them, has
demonstrated that they understand this. Palm hasn't.
"Richard M. Hartman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:62476@palm-dev-forum...
>
> I hadn't actually intended to respond to the original msg, but since it
has
> continued I guess I will.
>
> I don't really have a problem w/ honest criticism. Palm certainly _is_ a
> bit slow on the enhancement track. HOWEVER ... Mr, Davis' message was and
> is almost certainly more intended as flame-bait, to judge by it's tone.
To
> begin with, the subject line (I hate to say I told you so) is BS -- he
> certainly seems to enjoy it thoroughly in the body of the msg.
>
> His tone is not one of warning, but more that of a kindergartener saying
> "nyah nyah" when someone he doesn't like is getting his comeuppance.
>
> Finally, I am not entirely certain I agree w/ his analysis. Palm has had
> wireless longer than just about anybody ... how well did the VII do in the
> market? What about color? Even sticking w/ Palm and not going to the
> licensees we have the IIIc and the 505. Finally, even sound is really not
> that much in demand for a PDA. It is a cute novelty, but even the people
I
> know who have a WinCE device don't use the gimmicky little audio memo
> feature.
>
> Memory. Battery life. Ease of use. Speed. Those are what Palm has
> focussed on, and they've done a pretty good job. They're adding the rest
as
> they can. A bit slower than some of us think they should, perhaps, but
> they're adding them.
>
> I think the next generation w/ the ARM processor is going to address a lot
> of the horsepower issues. With that horsepower will come the ability to
> play MP3s (if you really want to waste that much of your memory on them
...)
> Wireless will probably remain a high-end option (unless Bluetooth finally
> takes off). Color is, of course, necessary in the future models. I don't
> really think it will be long before B&W is no longer offered.
>
> So yes, Jeremy, I _don't_ like Mr. Davis' tone. And if you want people to
> seriously consider what you are saying, that is something you have to take
> into account.
>
>
> --
> -Richard M. Hartman
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> 186,000 mi/sec: not just a good idea, it's the LAW!
--
For information on using the Palm Developer Forums, or to unsubscribe, please see
http://www.palmos.com/dev/tech/support/forums/
