> whose career is now mixed up with this device, I don't think this
> sentimentality is a good idea.
I never tried to imply that my comments were based on sentiment. Nor do I
have my head buried in the sand as some others have suggested. If either one
of those were true, I'd be trying to make some sort of claim that Palm made
a mistake in supporting color or expansion slots. I said, Palm is working on
adding things to their device and OS. At the same time, Microsoft is working
on reducing the complexity of PocketPC. Just like you can't take the Wright
Brothers' plane and turn it into a Cessna overnight, you can't take a Jumbo
jet and make it a Cessna either. This is where I see the two devices. One is
currently simple and becoming more complex and the other is complex trying
to become simpler.
The real difference I see is priorities.. Palm is trying to make sure that
backward compatibility is maintained (with the similar 99% that the PC has
tried to keep over the years) and Microsoft has apparently not cared. I
remember when Windows NT 3.1 was originally announced to a select group of
developers (this was in 91 or 92, well before it was public knowledge)..
they said they planned to do away with support for DOS applications in that
version and they were almost shouted out of the room by the developers..
they learned with that product, I'm suprised its never been a priority with
them for the Pocket PC. But this isn't so much about Microsoft as it is
Palm.
> 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.
I have to disagree with you here. I have found the CE approach to be
extremely difficult. Multiple targets for different processors and screen
sizes, complex installation scripts using Microsoft's packaging, and the
tedious way in which they implemented the synchronization technology all
combine to make programming nearly as complicated as using one. And
explaining to a barely technical client that its not a bug that the iPAQ
image they took from another user didn't work on their Journada is more than
even my patience can take sometimes. Palm's API could be easier, to be
certain.. but only at risk of that priority of backward compatibility.
What would I like to see Palm add? Better sound, yes.. and a more aggressive
campaign to have third party developers create expansion modules (I would
rather have seen them support an existing standard such as CF, but that
horse is already out of the barn). But it comes back to what you think the
user really wants to use their Palm for.. a personal digital assistant or a
"Pocket PC". Its the same question I ask family, friends, and clients when
they ask me what device I would recommend for them.. what do they want to
use it for?
Wireless may be the killer technology addition, but before you start
clamoring about what they have in Japan and Europe, do a better analysis of
what wireless infrastructure is available there vs. here. Broadband wireless
is virtually non-existent in the US not because of a lack of devices, but
because of a lack of a standard. Too many wireless companies competing for
their "standard" instead of a single, government controlled approach... not
to mention the sheer difference in the amount of geography. But please don't
turn this into a political discussion on which is the better approach for
infrastructure.. you can argue until your skin turns blue and it won't
change a thing on that front. The only way to do that part right is to have
expansion technologies (SD, MMC, CF, etc) in your device and leave it up to
the 3rd party groups to make the devices for the current wireless
technologies.
Also to echo what someone else said.. I haven't had a corporate client ask
me for a color device yet, either. I've seen the opposite for the areas in
which I tend to work and Symbol released a monochrome CE device to support
that..
--
For information on using the Palm Developer Forums, or to unsubscribe, please see
http://www.palmos.com/dev/tech/support/forums/
