I think his key sentence is "For now the pre doesn't do enough of what
i like on the tre680 that I have" - which is my case as well and why I
haven't yet upgraded. Also there's the fact that Palm may get bought
out and webOS will be among those OSes that would be EOLed.

Either way, there are benefits to using a mature (if dead) OS if it
offers you the products that you need/use/rely on that a new OS
doesn't. Do you buy on the hope that it will in the future or the
assurance that it does now and there is support out there even if most
of it is not from official channels?

I'd submit that the equation is different for everyone.

On 4/11/10, Craig Froehle <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 12:39 PM, trotter <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Better to wait and see if anything comes up which suits me better
>> than buy something that is lesser of a device than the Treo 680.
>
> I'm sorry, but that's just a silly thing to say.  I've owned three
> Palm OS Treos and a Centro (loved them all) and can compare them quite
> directly to the Pre, which I've had now for about 10 months.  To claim
> that the Pre is "lesser of a device" than any of the Treos is absurd
> as it flies in the face of the fact that the Pre can do many, many
> things that Palm OS Treos can not (multitask, full web experience,
> sync with online & social media PIM, run true 3D games, full GPS
> functionality, automated online backup, etc.).  In contrast, there's
> nearly nothing any Palm OS Treo does that the Pre cannot (apart from
> an SD slot...whoopie-do).  And even if it can't _today_, webOS is
> adding functionality pretty much daily, whereas nobody is developing
> for Palm OS anymore. Also, the Pre can run many Palm OS apps, whereas
> the reverse is not true.
>
> So, you might be right in believing that moving to a Pre isn't the
> right thing for you at this time, but please don't spew such nonsense
> as claiming that the Pre is an overall inferior device to a Treo.
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Reply via email to