hey jack! look!

[mike p]

http://reviews.cnet.com/Dell_Axim_X30_64MB_624MHz_processor/4505-3127_7-30887647.html?tag=pdtl-list
8.1. very good


highest rated non vga hp:
http://reviews.cnet.com/HP_iPaq_Pocket_PC_rz1710/4505-3127_7-30974549.html?tag=pdtl-list
entry level pda, dont even compare, 7.7

only ho tghat does compare:
http://reviews.cnet.com/HP_iPaq_rx3715_Mobile_Media_Companion/4505-3127_7-30974568.html?tag=pdtl-list
only gets a 7.4

[Tam Hanna]

Erm, what does that say???

[SamuraiCatJB]

he is trying to prove that Dell Axim's are the best.... me thinks he is trying too hard...

[zackepceo]

They're uuuuugly!

[SamuraiCatJB]

just shy of fugly.... but they make my new remote look even better. actually, they make ME look even better by comparison... ;) :p

[JackAxe]

I like this quote, because it mostly describes my Axim; :)

"The rx3715 is a strong PDA, but its digital entertainment features aren't ready for prime time."

I haven't given up on the PPC, but can wait a few more years for someone to get it right. Sony was almost there, but do to their EVIL audio format and inability to openly welcome other formats without making it difficult, they didn't cut it either in my book.

I want a cross between a Nintendo DS(Because it's a great game machine) and an iPod.(Because it has by far the best interface software, overall ease of use, doesn't play favors to any one of it's supported formats, and it has tons of storage.) ;)

<]=)

[JackAxe]

Oh and the DS has a touch screen like a PDA and WiFi. :)

<]=)

[mike p]

im trying to say that dell dont suck

[foghead]

Opinions vary - I've had three Dell PPCs and haven't kept a single one. They have incredible pricing, but like I was always told - you get what you pay for.

No offense

[JAmerican]

http://reviews.cnet.com/Dell_Axim_X30_64MB_624MHz_processor/4505-3127_7-30887647.html?tag=pdtl-list
8.1. very good


highest rated non vga hp:
http://reviews.cnet.com/HP_iPaq_Pocket_PC_rz1710/4505-3127_7-30974549.html?tag=pdtl-list
entry level pda, dont even compare, 7.7

only ho tghat does compare:
http://reviews.cnet.com/HP_iPaq_rx3715_Mobile_Media_Companion/4505-3127_7-30974568.html?tag=pdtl-list
only gets a 7.4

My non-WiFi UX40 got a 8.3. Looks like processor speed doesn't really matter. LOL

Question: Why does Wireless take so long to enable? My WiFi card is in my device and up and running in 2 sec?
JAmerican

[mike p]

beats me

id like to know my self

[foghead]

I have no idea either.

I just did a Wi-Fi test on the HP 4705, HP 2755, Loox 720 and Asus A730W. All four devices connected in less than five seconds. I'm not sure exactly how long it took because I just started Wi-Fi and then switched to IE and went to a web site. This probably took about five seconds. But by the time I selected a site all of the devices were connected and started loading.

The really cool thing was that since they are Pocket PCs rather than UX-40s I could run other apps while the pages were loading. :p

[zackepceo]

From experience I know that you won't be doing much else exept for maybe glance at an eBook while loading that page. Multitasking is not good on PDAs.

[JackAxe]

Multitasking on a PPC is like multitasking on a 486; why... :confused: :p Behold, I opened a text document in the background, feel my *power.* :D

Blah. It's 2005 and PPCs are still relying on the CPU to render and handle most graphics. This is kind of pathetic. Even whith the newer ones that have graphic procs, it's mostly dead wait with little to no support. Fortuanately for PPCs, OpenGL ES which is primarlily targeting *phones,* will help push the PPC graphic capability forward. But the sad part is that by the time that happens, phones will most likely have more capabilities and raw power. ;)

<]=)

[JAmerican]

The really cool thing was that since they are Pocket PCs rather than UX-40s I could run other apps while the pages were loading. :p

Which leads to the lose of a lot of battery power due to the fast processor and multitasking. ;) :D

JAmerican

[foghead]

Which leads to the lose of a lot of battery power due to the fast processor and multitasking. ;) :D
Multitasking does not necessarily use up an appreciable amount of power - especially not when you compare it to the power of driving the radio.

As I noted in your power thread, I have never run out of power with a PPC (or a Palm OS device). So this is just a ridiculous statement. I have noticed that you seem a little obsessed with battery size. ;)

I guess when that is the only strength of your PDA you have to take solace where you can.

[foghead]

Multitasking on a PPC is like multitasking on a 486; why... :confused: :p Behold, I opened a text document in the background, feel my *power.* :D

Blah. It's 2005 and PPCs are still relying on the CPU to render and handle most graphics. This is kind of pathetic. Even whith the newer ones that have graphic procs, it's mostly dead wait with little to no support. Fortuanately for PPCs, OpenGL ES which is primarlily targeting *phones,* will help push the PPC graphic capability forward. But the sad part is that by the time that happens, phones will most likely have more capabilities and raw power. ;)

<]=)
My primary time killers are either Gin Rummy or Cribbage - neither of them are very processor intensive. But new devices with much faster processors and more memory handle most apps pretty well. I don't have any problem editing text orentering appointments while stuff is going on in the background. I don't even notice a slowdown.

[SamuraiCatJB]

My primary time killers are either Gin Rummy or Cribbage - neither of them are very processor intensive. But new devices with much faster processors and more memory handle most apps pretty well. I don't have any problem editing text orentering appointments while stuff is going on in the background. I don't even notice a slowdown.

actually, you just proved Jack correct. The software should not be processor intensive, but because the apps are graphics intensive (animation, pretty pictures), and that is handled off of the CPU, they suddenly do become processor intensive. This is similar to the idea that multiprocessing requires more power as well. you have essentially created two processes, one to emulate graphic processing states with the cpu, and one to play the game. The game should not be CPU intensive, but it is, because it has to multiprocess to achieve the desired result. You have to buy a bigger processor so that you do not max out you cpu in this application. If you are using 200Mhz in a process or series of processes, and you upgrade to 600mhz, yes you will note a savings and increase in speed. The point is, that this is an inneficient use of resources requiring you to triple or quadrouple the processor to achieve a desired result in multi-threaded form. :)

[foghead]

actually, you just proved Jack correct.
Actually I didn't prove him correct because his basic thesis is flawed. :)

The issue here is that Jack is talking about hardware that is signifigantly slower and less capable than what is currently available.

Virtually all high-end PPCs currently being made (Loox 720 is an exception) use 2D accelerators that are used for virtually all GDI output. On devices where the manufacturer has taken the trouble to replace the HAL, 2D acceration is also used for GAPI games. I have seen a few devices with lousy GAPI output because they are running the standard GAPI drivers. Luckily a number of the newer accelerators don't use memory mapped RAM so that the standard GAPI drivers won't work and the manufacturers have to use a customized GAPI driver. A few devices Like the iPAQ 4100 series had screaming GAPI performance because they used the blitter very efficiently and also have memory mapped RAMfor easy access and reads. One problem with GAPI for non-memory mapped RAM is that to work really efficiently the driver needs to allocate system RAM to shadow the video RAM, and all operations have to be shadowed to the system RAM. This is still much faster than using the CPU to do everything, but it isn't ideal.

The Dell X50V uses a 3D accelerator. Currently there are only a couple of games from Dell that support 3D acceleration. But on WM 2005, there will be a portable version of Direct-3D (not OpenGL ES as Jack predicted). This will also have a Hal, just like standard D3D, so that manufacturers can access their 3D accelerators. It will also include a portable version of DirectDraw so that GAPI will eventually go away for new development.

The main reason that I don't run accelerated, full-screen games while doing something else in the background is because full screen games generally don't expose a mechanism to switch to the background task. These games tend to hide the task bar and grab the buttons for game control. Multitasking is much less useful when you can't switch back and forth between tasks. But this has nothing to do with whether or not there is enough processing power. I have watched movies while downloading files and rendering HTML in the background, but since I don't usually watch movies on the PDA, this is not what I listed as my normal usage. My normal useage is a reflection of my habits - not device capabilities.

[JackAxe]

I read things like this and they only back up what I stated; ;)

http://www20.tomshardware.com/mobile/20041231/index.html

"Upon critical inspection, the dedicated graphics chip sounds more impressive than it really is, since current applications (save for the odd game) can't derive any benefits from the theoretically available graphics performance."

<]=)

[foghead]

I read things like this and they only back up what I stated; ;)

http://www20.tomshardware.com/mobile/20041231/index.html

"Upon critical inspection, the dedicated graphics chip sounds more impressive than it really is, since current applications (save for the odd game) can't derive any benefits from the theoretically available graphics performance."

<]=)
This quote is referring to 3D acceleration and I already wrote about the X50V and the fact that there is very little software currently available that accesses the 3D acceleration. I also wrote about what is being done on that front.

It is really nice to have somebody come along and validate what I said (even unintentionally) - thanks. :)

[zackepceo]

Eeeeew. Direct3D.

[RD100]

Multitasking on a PPC is like multitasking on a 486; why... :confused: :p Behold, I opened a text document in the background, feel my *power.* :D
<]=)Most of the current PPC models run at 300Mhz or more. No 486 ran at 300Mhz. The 486's topped out at around 100Mhz. Even the earliest Pentiums ran at 100Mhz. Today's PPCs are the equivalent of Pentium 2 and Pentium 3.

And I LOVE multitasking on my 300Mhz Toshiba PPC!!! I can have several apps going ... and switch to any one of them with a single tap. Multitasking is a BEAUTIFUL THING !!!! :D

To put it in terms you can relate to .....

Multitasking ..... GOOD !!! ;)
No Multitasking .... BLAH !!!! :p

[zackepceo]

The way the Windows Mobile OS is designed is not good for multitasking. And, FYI, Pentiums started at 66MHz. And architecture-wise, an Intel XScale has more in common with a PowerPC 601 than any x86 thingy.

[zackepceo]

And I'm not trying to say Multitasking is bad, it's just that the design approach needs to be drasticly changed in order to release the true potential of the hardware. Realistically, my 400MHz TG50 is about as useful as Mike's Axim.

[SamuraiCatJB]

Most of the current PPC models run at 300Mhz or more. No 486 ran at 300Mhz. The 486's topped out at around 100Mhz. Even the earliest Pentiums ran at 100Mhz. Today's PPCs are the equivalent of Pentium 2 and Pentium 3.

And I LOVE multitasking on my 300Mhz Toshiba PPC!!! I can have several apps going ... and switch to any one of them with a single tap. Multitasking is a BEAUTIFUL THING !!!! :D

To put it in terms you can relate to .....

Multitasking ..... GOOD !!! ;)
No Multitasking .... BLAH !!!! :p

actually... to put it in realistic terms... although multitasking was available on PCs (pentium and 486) it was blah.... It wasn't until 1ghz and beyond that multitasking finally started showing some real capability. However, since application technology keeps moving forward, the comparison is invalid. anything below about 2.4ghz is ugly slow....

[RD100]

actually... to put it in realistic terms... although multitasking was available on PCs (pentium and 486) it was blah.... It wasn't until 1ghz and beyond that multitasking finally started showing some real capability. However, since application technology keeps moving forward, the comparison is invalid. anything below about 2.4ghz is ugly slow....Successful multitasking on a Windows PC is all relative to the type of software you are running, and amount of RAM you have.

Back in the early 90's, the software wasn't nearly as resource demanding as it is now, so multitasking the software of that period was still pretty good when used on the PC's of that period. But you can't even consider running some of todays apps on the older PCs. The older PCs would choke.

And also, the more RAM you have in your Windows PCs, the better your multitasking is. However, there is a point of diminishing return. Going from 256MB to 512MB may not have as big an impact as when you first went from 128MB to 256MB.

But in regards to my PPC ... I LOVE that I can multitask !!!! :D

[JackAxe]

This quote is referring to 3D acceleration and I already wrote about the X50V and the fact that there is very little software currently available that accesses the 3D acceleration. I also wrote about what is being done on that front.

It is really nice to have somebody come along and validate what I said (even unintentionally) - thanks. :)

But... The 2700G is a 2D/3D accellerator. Here's another blurb from that article, it's a little bit more specific; :)

"Die-hards like that won't be deterred by the fact that the device's dedicated graphics accelerator is useless at present, except for the occasional gaming title."

And how many high end Pocket PCs are there? The Dell and the Fujitsu both use the 2700G. The ASUS doesn't even have an accellerator as you pointed out along with many articles. So that leaves the Toshiba and the iPAQ that I know of?. So unless I'm missing one, which I could be, :) 3 out of the 5 peeps still rely on their CPU for most graphics. So more then half support my statement. ;)

And I still stand by my statement that OpenGL ES will help push the PPC graphic capability forward. Even if it's inadvertently. Aferall, I never stated that it would be adopted by PocketPC. And on that note, the 2700G is optimized for OpenGL. :p

<]=)

[SamuraiCatJB]

OpenGL is the only way to do graphics, there is no other "right" way. :)