Next Gen PalmOS Treo will run Cobalt...

[gfunkmagic]

Pray you ask, how would I know such a thing?! :confused:

Well because PalmOS Garnet (or FrankenGarnet) does NOT have support for 1xEvDo telephony stack!! Thus, I highly doubt Palm would release yet another 1xrtt based PalmOS Treo when they have already stated that the WM Treo 700 will indeed support 1xEvDo. (However dumber things have happenned)

Thus assuming support for a 1xEvDo radio and thusly the need for Cobalt based PalmOS, I think it's possible to deduce now the specs of the next gen PalmOS Treo which imo will almost completely resemble the specs of the WM Treo 700 (with exception to a 320x320 rez screenie).

Any thoughts? :D

[NRG]

Pray you ask, how would I know such a thing?! :confused:

Well because PalmOS Garnet (or FrankenGarnet) does NOT have support for 1xEvDo telephony stack!! Thus, I highly doubt Palm would release yet another 1xrtt based PalmOS Treo when they have already stated that the WM Treo 700 will indeed support 1xEvDo. (However dumber things have happenned)

Thus assuming support for a 1xEvDo radio and thusly the need for Cobalt based PalmOS, I think it's possible to deduce now the specs of the next gen PalmOS Treo which imo will almost completely resemble the specs of the WM Treo 700 (with exception to a 320x320 rez screenie).

Any thoughts? :DI would be down with it, if the 700 wasn't sooooooooooo .........................so ........ah, I don't know .....ugly.

[DrDoom]

Pray you ask, how would I know such a thing?! :confused:

Well because PalmOS Garnet (or FrankenGarnet) does NOT have support for 1xEvDo telephony stack!! Thus, I highly doubt Palm would release yet another 1xrtt based PalmOS Treo when they have already stated that the WM Treo 700 will indeed support 1xEvDo. (However dumber things have happenned)

Thus assuming support for a 1xEvDo radio and thusly the need for Cobalt based PalmOS, I think it's possible to deduce now the specs of the next gen PalmOS Treo which imo will almost completely resemble the specs of the WM Treo 700 (with exception to a 320x320 rez screenie).

Any thoughts? :D

:thumbsup: ... :bow: ... :cheers:

[surur]

You've listened to the engadget podcast, haven't you. I do not think there is any guarantee. Did POS have a support for WIFI or bluetooth?

Surur

[t2gungho]

I sure hope so but isn't there another possibility? What if palmsource (or whomever owns the software side) is done building the OS for a treo for sprint? Sprint and Verizon are the parties who have EVDO in the marketplace. What if palmsource says "We can't compete with WM5 so we will just keep what we have and put it into the cheaper flip phones." I mean, isn't there a lot of articles already that say that the POS is pretty much a year or two behind in development?

Your idea (however novel) seems to be based on the assumption that the next treo that comes out for Sprint will be a POS. Isn't it more likely that the next OS on a sprint treo will be WM5? And if it is, then how much longer can Palmsource wait before releasing something that will support EVDO? Assuming it does come out next year, will Sprint want to wait that long? I am thinking that Sprint is probably working overtime to get a EVDO treo out before people migrate over to Verizon.

Maybe Im missing something...I don't follow much on the OS side :-)

[DrDoom]

I would be down with it, if the 700 wasn't sooooooooooo .........................so ........ah, I don't know .....ugly.
:hmm:

[NRG]

:hmm:Doom are you aware of the smiley site I use? It might help expand your um, vocab.

http://community.the-underdogs.org/smiley/gallery.htm

[gfunkmagic]

You've listened to the engadget podcast, haven't you. I do not think there is any guarantee. Did POS have a support for WIFI or bluetooth?

Surur


Yeah I listen to the podcast, but I have been saying this loooong before as well:

http://www.1src.com/forums/showpost.php?p=824174&postcount=47

My observations at the time were based on conversations with Palm execs at the Treo Roadshow last year. Obviously, many things have chnaged since then including the release of Cobalt 6.1 which apparently significantly increased the telephony support in the OS I assume.

In regards to BT/Wifi, Garnet and even PalmOS 4.x have always supported this. Howver the issue of drivers for 3rd pary accessories is a different matter...

[surur]

If Garnet POS can support WIFI and bluetooth I'm sure it can support EVDO also. If NVFS can be backported from Cobalt, so can EVDO support. On the other hand rumors for a Cobalt Treo have become stronger and stronger recently, and rumors in general seem to be more right than wrong. I'm just saying I'm not sure EVDO automatically means Cobalt.

Surur

[gfunkmagic]

I sure hope so but isn't there another possibility? What if palmsource (or whomever owns the software side) is done building the OS for a treo for sprint? Sprint and Verizon are the parties who have EVDO in the marketplace. What if palmsource says "We can't compete with WM5 so we will just keep what we have and put it into the cheaper flip phones." I mean, isn't there a lot of articles already that say that the POS is pretty much a year or two behind in development?

That is a possbility, but I think most people realize the Garnet has really reached its EOL (end of life) as a sustainable platform. You arguement that perhaps Garnet will continue to be used in low end phones may be plausible, but you would then have to assume all these 'low end' phones will support 1xEvDo only? Where would the market for that be? I'm pretty certain that both VeriZon and Sprint will want to quickly shift most of their phones to 1xEvDo. Even if users will only want to use/pay for 1xrtt, most of these 1xEvDo phones will be backward compatible with 1xrtt. In short, i just don't see a market for Garnet based devices in the low end in the future anymore...


Your idea (however novel) seems to be based on the assumption that the next treo that comes out for Sprint will be a POS. Isn't it more likely that the next OS on a sprint treo will be WM5?

No, because Palm has already stated that Verizon will have an extended period of exclusivity for the WM Treo 700. Thus if Sprint wanted the WM Treo, it would have to wait a very looong time, perhaps even into the second part of 2006. It is more likely imo, that a Cobalt based Treo could be released by Sprint in the interim imo. Recall there is no exclusivity given to Verizon afaik for a next Gen PalmOS based Treo...


And if it is, then how much longer can Palmsource wait before releasing something that will support EVDO? Assuming it does come out next year, will Sprint want to wait that long? I am thinking that Sprint is probably working overtime to get a EVDO treo out before people migrate over to Verizon.

Maybe Im missing something...I don't follow much on the OS side :-)

Like I stated above, 1xEvDo is already supported in the current version of Cobalt PalmOS. Palm Linux won't be read until late 2006 at the earliest which means we won't see any Palm Linux devices (if at all) until perhaps 2007! Until then, the only plausable OS is Cobalt for all the reasons stated above...

[gfunkmagic]

If Garnet POS can support WIFI and bluetooth I'm sure it can support EVDO also. If NVFS can be backported from Cobalt, so can EVDO support. On the other hand rumors for a Cobalt Treo have become stronger and stronger recently, and rumors in general seem to be more right than wrong. I'm just saying I'm not sure EVDO automatically means Cobalt.

Surur

HUH? How did you make that jump? :eek: The Palm OS 4.x Alphasmart Dana support wifi, so does this mean it also should be able to support 1xEvDo? :rolleyes: :brick:

Wireless telephony stacks are completely different fyi and not related at all...

FYI, it is common knowledge that is was Handspring/Palm that made significant investments into the CDMA telephony stack in Garnet when it developed the Treo, not PalmSource. In fact much of the rebranded "Garnet for smartphone" OS was based on optimizations (including 5 way nav etc) made by Palm and later integrated into the OS by PalmSource. It is primarily for this reason (lack of backkend driver support, telephony support etc) that Palm was initially hesitant on using Cobalt. Why should they (palm) make all these investment into the OS only to have them adopted by other lisencees for free? Instead they waited until PalmSource developed the backend functions necessary. This would also explain the certain "development milestones" stipulations that are mentioned when Palm renewed its lisence with PalmSource fyi...

[u_m_rasmussen]

Palm have licensed PalmOS into 2009 which would definitely mean Cobalt. I'm quite confident that they are planning/working on a cobalt device.

[CmdrGuard]

I'm confused does POS mean piece of **** or palm os?

[JimmieGeddes]

I also think the next Treo could possibly run Cobalt. Same specs as the Treo 700p like Gfunkmagic said:)

[JimmieGeddes]

I also believe they have worked/working on a Cobalt device, they've had it for how many years. If anybody can tweak an OS it's Palm.

[JimmieGeddes]

If this company can make Cobalt work, can't Palm?:)
http://www.palminfocenter.com/view_story.asp?ID=7874
I know that is old news, but it gives ya some idea that Cobalt was not DOA like many assume.

[t2gungho]

You and gfunk may be right (I hope you are) but if they have had it so long, why is it taking this long to get to market? I would have been trying to push it out the door ASAP if I was sprint or cingular (knowing Verizon had the WM treo).

[JimmieGeddes]

It might be on it's way out the door. I just wrote an article that inspired me from reading all this, I think gfunk is on to something.
http://www.gadgetsonthego.net/2005/10/treos-with-choices.html

[xenophonite]

I'm having a hard time seeing a company with decreasing profits to have the R&D $ for two product lines on entirely different technology. Windows Mobile 5 will probably win out. OTOH, if Treo/Windows flops, they may continue on the PalmOS wave. But I don't see PalmOS winning corporate America.

[whmurray]

Pray you ask, how would I know such a thing?! :confused:

Well because PalmOS Garnet (or FrankenGarnet) does NOT have support for 1xEvDo telephony stack!! Thus, I highly doubt Palm would release yet another 1xrtt based PalmOS Treo when they have already stated that the WM Treo 700 will indeed support 1xEvDo. (However dumber things have happenned)

Thus assuming support for a 1xEvDo radio and thusly the need for Cobalt based PalmOS, I think it's possible to deduce now the specs of the next gen PalmOS Treo which imo will almost completely resemble the specs of the WM Treo 700 (with exception to a 320x320 rez screenie).

Any thoughts? :D
Wouldn't tea leaves, frogs entrails, or birds serve as well?

[Perry Holden]

I believe. (Chant)


:D

[JimmieGeddes]

I believe.

[whmurray]

I believe.
Yes? And what is your position on the Great Pumpkin?

[dutchtrumpet]

Yes? And what is your position on the Great Pumpkin?
sincerity is the key ;)

[samkim]

I'm having a hard time seeing a company with decreasing profits to have the R&D $ for two product lines on entirely different technology. Windows Mobile 5 will probably win out. OTOH, if Treo/Windows flops, they may continue on the PalmOS wave. But I don't see PalmOS winning corporate America.Palm's net income for the most recent quarter 1Q06 is UP slightly from the prior quarter 4Q05 ($18.2M vs. $17.7M).

Compared to year earlier, 1Q05, net income is down $1.4 million ($18.2 vs. $19.6) but that's primarily because R&D is up over $10.4 million ($29.0M vs. $18.6M). Gross profit is way up ($104.4 vs. $91.3).

Palm's profitability gives them plenty of room to invest and grow.

[JimmieGeddes]

My position on the great pumpkin is, self explanatory, it's a great pumpkin. I'll stick to the discussion here at "treo"central though. I believe!

[t2gungho]

That is a possbility, but I think most people realize the Garnet has really reached its EOL (end of life) as a sustainable platform. You arguement that perhaps Garnet will continue to be used in low end phones may be plausible, but you would then have to assume all these 'low end' phones will support 1xEvDo only? Where would the market for that be? I'm pretty certain that both VeriZon and Sprint will want to quickly shift most of their phones to 1xEvDo. Even if users will only want to use/pay for 1xrtt, most of these 1xEvDo phones will be backward compatible with 1xrtt. In short, i just don't see a market for Garnet based devices in the low end in the future anymore...I guess that sounds plausible. However, in sprints marketing for data services, didnt they use a model that allowed lower costs to the end user with the belief that they would have many more users paying for the services? Theoretically, couldnt sprint roll out evdo at a price point of $15 dollars and have twice as many subscribers than verizon (at whatever they charge? $30?) and be able to have evdo on the low end phones as well (just a thought).

No, because Palm has already stated that Verizon will have an extended period of exclusivity for the WM Treo 700. Thus if Sprint wanted the WM Treo, it would have to wait a very looong time, perhaps even into the second part of 2006. It is more likely imo, that a Cobalt based Treo could be released by Sprint in the interim imo. Recall there is no exclusivity given to Verizon afaik for a next Gen PalmOS based Treo...True but how long is exclusive agreement for? If its just for 6 months, does anyone really believe that a POS will be out by then anyway? Its been a year since the 650 came out on sprint right? I hope you are right on the Cobalt platform...if it comes out about the same time that sprint gets the 700, then it will make it much harder for palm folks to switch (assuming cobalt delivers what wm5 delivers.) Palmsource must be banking on this.

Like I stated above, 1xEvDo is already supported in the current version of Cobalt PalmOS. Palm Linux won't be read until late 2006 at the earliest which means we won't see any Palm Linux devices (if at all) until perhaps 2007! Until then, the only plausable OS is Cobalt for all the reasons stated above...I hope so but I think 6 months will be the max amount of time that Verizon will have the WM5 treo. I can't imagine that palm and windows would agree to much longer than that simply because from a cost benefit analysis, Verizon must be paying big to keep it from sprint (i.e. paying what palm and MS would get if both Sprint and Verizon were selling them.) If Verizon isn't paying for both, then there has to be some other incentive for them to withold it from Sprint (or maybe sprint wasnt ready with their evdo market? I don't know.)

[Stig]

Maybe I’m wrong, but a reason why a lot of people don’t like the idea of a Windows Treo is that they would have to lose all their precious PalmOS software collections. However, surely Cobalt would have its own compatibility issues for Palm software anyway. Either way, Palm alienates the existing Treo community.

[craigdts]

Back at the Treo Roadshow in Dallas in '04 (I think, when we got to order our treo 650's cheap). I talked to Ken Wirt after the show and asked him about Charles Wolfe's (sp?) comments on PalmOne making a windows mobile treo. He flat out denied it, but now we've got one so take this with a grain of salt.

I then asked when will you produce a cobalt device? We laughed over palmsource creating a product no one was using. Then seeing that I thought it was important, he said that they might make on in '05, then conditioned it with "maybe not even till early '06." I inferred from that conversation that no cobalt devices until '06 (and treo's were what we were talking about), if ever. Basically he said Palm was able to do what it wanted with OS 5 just fine so far. He stated also they didn't want to switch to cobalt yet because it would confuse developers. Some developers could better explain that last comment. But again this was over 1 year ago and much has changed (WM Treo).

[JimmieGeddes]

I think *most* apps would work due to PACE in Cobalt. It would provide emulation.I think if we want EVDO, and Sprint will want a Treo running EVDO to compete with Verizon, Palm will do what it can to make it happen.

[gfunkmagic]

Wouldn't tea leaves, frogs entrails, or birds serve as well?

HUH? Nothing supernatural about this. No support for 1xEvDo stack in Garnet is a fact...

[whmurray]

HUH? Nothing supernatural about this. No support for 1xEvDo stack in Garnet is a fact...
Perhaps that is true. Not related to the assertion, "I believe" to which I responded.

[gfunkmagic]

You and gfunk may be right (I hope you are) but if they have had it so long, why is it taking this long to get to market? I would have been trying to push it out the door ASAP if I was sprint or cingular (knowing Verizon had the WM treo).


I imagine, because they (Palm) were still waiting for PalmSource to update Cobalt adeqautely. Recall, PalmSource delivered Coblat to lisencees December 31, 2003!

http://palminfocenter.com/view_story.asp?ID=6409

Obviously, the OS wasn't exactly a success with lisencees for various reasons. It took another 9 months after (Sept 2004) that for PalmSource to finally release an update to increase telephony support in Cobalt 6.1 for smartphones:

http://palminfocenter.com/view_story.asp?ID=7166

This was only about a month before Palm announced the Treo 650 last year:

http://www.treocentral.com/content/Stories/472-1.htm

Thus if you look at the timeline, it hasn't even been a year since the release of Cobalt 6.1 for smartphones! Furthermore, it is not exactly certain when PalmSource finally completed the CDMA telephony stack for Cobalt which may have been even later than that!!

Couple this with the fact that typical development times to market for smartphone devices like the Treo are upwards of 18 months or more, and it is NO wonder why there haven't been any Coblat Treo's to market yet. If you stick to the 18 month product development cycle from last year's release of Cobalt 6.1 or the release of the 650, then the most appropiate expected launch time frame for the next gen PalmOS Treo would be around March 2006...which incidently is also the time frame all previous rumors regarding the next PalmOS treo state....

In addition, if you read all the articles about the WM Treo developments, you'll see that Palm has been working on the WM Treo for nearly TWO YEARS now (barely a couple months after the release of Coblat):

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1040_22-5883320.html


THat's how long is takes to develop these devices. Thus you can imagine how long Palm Linux devices really are from the marketplace considering that Palm hasn't even yet FINISHED the OS...

[gfunkmagic]

I hope so but I think 6 months will be the max amount of time that Verizon will have the WM5 treo. I can't imagine that palm and windows would agree to much longer than that simply because from a cost benefit analysis, Verizon must be paying big to keep it from sprint (i.e. paying what palm and MS would get if both Sprint and Verizon were selling them.) If Verizon isn't paying for both, then there has to be some other incentive for them to withold it from Sprint (or maybe sprint wasnt ready with their evdo market? I don't know.)


I'm not sure how long Verizon's exclusivity period is. I don't recall reading that anywhere. But if look at the past exclusivity aggreements made by Palm with Sprint for example, then they should be for 2-3 months afaik. Thus you could then conjecture that other CMDA providers like Sprint may support the WM Treo by the later half of 2006, assume though that they want the WM Treo in the first place. FYI, Palm also said not to expect a GSM WM Treo until the second half of 2006 as well...

[gfunkmagic]

Maybe I’m wrong, but a reason why a lot of people don’t like the idea of a Windows Treo is that they would have to lose all their precious PalmOS software collections. However, surely Cobalt would have its own compatibility issues for Palm software anyway. Either way, Palm alienates the existing Treo community.


That is what PACE is meant for... Also, the general 80% rule applies from previous OS upgrades. That is approx. 80% of 'properly written' legacy apps should be able to port over easily...

[t2gungho]

I'm not sure how long Verizon's exclusivity period is. I don't recall reading that anywhere. But if look at the past exclusivity aggreements made by Palm with Sprint for example, then they should be for 2-3 months afaik. Thus you could then conjecture that other CMDA providers like Sprint may support the WM Treo by the later half of 2006, assume though that they want the WM Treo in the first place. FYI, Palm also said not to expect a GSM WM Treo until the second half of 2006 as well...What you have said so far makes sense but two things now come to mind:

1. Why wouldnt sprint want the WM treo?
2. If it takes this long to get a cobalt treo, then how long has WM treo been in the works?

[dutchtrumpet]

What you have said so far makes sense but two things now come to mind:

1. Why wouldnt sprint want the WM treo?
2. If it takes this long to get a cobalt treo, then how long has WM treo been in the works?
The WM treo has been at least two years in the works they said.


edit:nearly two years...(gfunk with the exact info ;) )

[gfunkmagic]

What you have said so far makes sense but two things now come to mind:

1. Why wouldnt sprint want the WM treo?
2. If it takes this long to get a cobalt treo, then how long has WM treo been in the works?


1) Who knows. They already have a number of WM devices in their inventory already like the 6700 etc. I'm not saying they won't want to offer it, just that there is a possibility

2) If you refer to the zdnet article posted above, it's been nearly 2 years and Palm and Microsoft began discussions in Feb 2004...

[t2gungho]

1) Who knows. They already have a number of WM devices in their inventory already like the 6700 etc. I'm not saying they won't want to offer it, just that there is a possibility

2) If you refer to the zdnet article posted above, it's been nearly 2 years and Palm and Microsoft began discussions in Feb 2004...Thanks Dutch.

Gfunk: this has been good. I don't know which way I am leaning but the fact that they were getting the WM treo in line 2 years ago speaks volumes about where they thought the design and the OS should be.

IMO I think sprint will want it if nothing else because the 6700 is not the same form factor as the treo and its one way that Verizon 'one ups' them. :)

[snoslicer8]

I believe too!!! Don't forget me!!!

[KRamsauer]

I don't think that EVDO necessarily means cobalt. Palm could just strap some more software onto the already over-taxed frame of Garnet (aren't you the one that coined "frankengarnet").

[gfunkmagic]

I don't think that EVDO necessarily means cobalt. Palm could just strap some more software onto the already over-taxed frame of Garnet (aren't you the one that coined "frankengarnet").

I can't take the humble honor of coining "FrankenGarnet". ;) That distinction must go to Gekko over at PIC if I recall correctly. :)

Also, I don't think Palm can simply slap on or hack 1XEvDo stack onto Garnet that easily. For one, it is definitely NOT an easy task to develop backend telephony stuff like this. Secondly, it probably would be economically cost effective either considering the way lisencee tweaks to the OS are often incorporated back into the platform cost free. Add the issue of lengthy development times and the fact that Cobalt already supports this, I dunno why Palm would continue to spurn Cobalt at this point...

The fact is imo, if Palm is to continue to use PalmOS, what other choice to the really have? Palm Linux is two years away at this piont and Garnet is almost three years old now and definitely showing it's age. How can Palm possibly rely on using Garnet only in the interim until PL arrives if ever? If they did release another Frankengarnet Treo, I would be simply shocked...hell I would freakin vomit to tell you the truth... :censored: :crazy:

[samkim]

Just curious... where does the two-year timeframe for Linux come from?

[Felipe]

I'm not sure how long Verizon's exclusivity period is. I don't recall reading that anywhere. But if look at the past exclusivity aggreements made by Palm with Sprint for example, then they should be for 2-3 months afaik. Thus you could then conjecture that other CMDA providers like Sprint may support the WM Treo by the later half of 2006, assume though that they want the WM Treo in the first place. FYI, Palm also said not to expect a GSM WM Treo until the second half of 2006 as well...

first, what is\who is Gaurav?

second, at the conf, colligan said there wouldnt be any other carriers of the 700 until mid next year.

[dutchtrumpet]

Guarav is gfunk.

Colligan said no windows treo 700 with anyone besides verizon. He didn't speak to the time frame of other treos.

[craigdts]

I'm pretty sure were going to see Garnet in our next treo. I remember reading that Access is doing something to prepare NetFront (or whatever their browser is called) for Garnet. Which tells me that Garnet is what palm and others are interested in.

I would love to see a Cobalt device . . . but I just don't hold out much hope for it anymore. If it was worth using then Palmsource would not have abandoned it in favor of a linux palm OS.

[dutchtrumpet]

I'm pretty sure were going to see Garnet in our next treo. I remember reading that Access is doing something to prepare NetFront (or whatever their browser is called) for Garnet. Which tells me that Garnet is what palm and others are interested in.

I would love to see a Cobalt device . . . but I just don't hold out much hope for it anymore. If it was worth using then Palmsource would not have abandoned it in favor of a linux palm OS.
Keep in mind palm will likely keep garnet for non-smartphones due to the lack of a need for an EVDO stack.

[whmurray]

I'm not sure how long Verizon's exclusivity period is. I don't recall reading that anywhere. But if look at the past exclusivity aggreements made by Palm with Sprint for example, then they should be for 2-3 months afaik. Thus you could then conjecture that other CMDA providers like Sprint may support the WM Treo by the later half of 2006, assume though that they want the WM Treo in the first place. FYI, Palm also said not to expect a GSM WM Treo until the second half of 2006 as well...
My recollection is that the Sprint exclusivity was de facto. Palm did not annouce it, or even acknowledge it, until after the expiration. The Verizon/WM thing is different. Do I have that wrong?

[dutchtrumpet]

My recollection is that the Sprint exclusivity was de facto. Palm did not annouce it, or even acknowledge it, until after the expiration. The Verizon/WM thing is different. Do I have that wrong?
http://www.treocentral.com/content/Stories/479-1.htm

Q: When can I get one?

A: Sprint, as previously announced, will carry the Treo 650 in all of it's channels in mid November for a base price of $599. The Treo 650 will be Sprint Exclusive until December at least, most likely heading into 2005.

[Felipe]

Guarav is gfunk.

Colligan said no windows treo 700 with anyone besides verizon. He didn't speak to the time frame of other treos.

from: http://www.microsoft.com/billgates/speeches/2005/09-26Mobility.asp


QUESTION: Ed, first of all, there is some model number for this Treo? And, secondly, how long is this period of exclusivity with Verizon Wireless, how long before we see it on other carriers?

ED COLLIGAN: Well, we'll just call it Treo on Windows for now. We haven't announced its specific naming nomenclature. As far as exclusivity, Verizon Wireless is a great partner of ours, and they are going to have a period of exclusivity on this product. We certainly plan to bring it to other networks, to other network technologies over time, but it will be some time into the middle of the next year before that happens.

[Iceman6]

I think FrankenGarnet is a more marketable solution. Call it the Treo 651 and add EVDO to the 650. PalmSource threw all their developer resources at Palm/Linux, and no one wants a half-baked OS. Most people will see Cobalt as a high-risk option.

[shneor]

Cobalt is working on a phone - but not in mass production. See here:
http://www.palminfocenter.com/view_story.asp?ID=7874

[pump142]

id accept garnet 1 more round if....if they put 64mb in, evdo and Bt1.2 0r 2.0..oh and include a real working mp3 ringer program

[xchpstang]

id accept garnet 1 more round if....if they put 64mb in, evdo and Bt1.2 0r 2.0..oh and include a real working mp3 ringer program
:thumbsup:

[JimmieGeddes]

There are real working mp3 ringers, such as ringo. Palm leaves some things out like that so the Palm developer community can make these apps for us. I am sure they could have made a mp3 ringer if they really "wanted" to. I do beieve that the successor to the 650 will have the specs you included above, and possibly wifi/ and gps.

[Schwartz]

I'm confused does POS mean piece of **** or palm os?

Both :D

[Perry Holden]

The Palm OS on the Treo 650 does everything I want it to do. One out of two ain't bad on the POS comment.

Cheers, Perry

[shadowmite]

Just to put in my .02 here, there is no reason garnet can't run EVDO. It's a seperate radio for the most part (the way the ppc-6700 did it for instance) and as such can be controlled in the same way palmos is able to handle wifi. It requires no more power than wifi does, actually, quite a bit less. The only problem is the phone application and the system core would need to be updated to handle the switching between the two carrier signals.

There is zero reason to believe cobalt is a must. Actually, based on my knowledge, I'd say cobalt is never going to happen, it has too many flaws due to the sheer design of palm os. The scary thing is it's not even true multitasking either, they still implemented a hack to accomplish the appearance of it. In my opinion, cobalt is the worst mistake palm ever made.

[migs]

Shadowmite, you might want to take a look at iSpin Launcher.

The developer claims by November, he will have completed iSpin 2.0 a Windows style launcher for the current Palm OS that will allow multitasking apps on devices like the Treo 650 that run Garnet.
In his words "suspend one application and switch to another one. While one is running, another is just suspended (but not finished). When you switch back, application continues its work where it was interrupted."

iSpin forum: http://www.taptarget.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=367&start=15

[shadowmite]

Exactly, suspended is NOT multitasking, true multitasking will have the apps all running at the same time. Palm OS can not do this, so it "fakes" it by using events to trigger a app to run, and another to suspend... But only one task is running at any given time.

[gfunkmagic]

Just to put in my .02 here, there is no reason garnet can't run EVDO. It's a seperate radio for the most part (the way the ppc-6700 did it for instance) and as such can be controlled in the same way palmos is able to handle wifi. It requires no more power than wifi does, actually, quite a bit less. The only problem is the phone application and the system core would need to be updated to handle the switching between the two carrier signals.


Shadow, do you know what kind of radio or the manufacturer of the radio that will be used in the WM Treo 700? It would be interesting to find out if the WM Treo uses a single backward compatible radio or two separate ones. In any case, I think it would be pretty probable that Palm would use the same radio in both the WM and Palm versions of the Treo 700. Also the issue not with power consumption concerning the cdma radio. In fact, power concerns are probably the reason why Palm didn't integrate wifi, not the other way around. But I think you greatly over estimate the ease of creating these telephony libraries need in a device like the Treo.


There is zero reason to believe cobalt is a must. Actually, based on my knowledge, I'd say cobalt is never going to happen, it has too many flaws due to the sheer design of palm os. The scary thing is it's not even true multitasking either, they still implemented a hack to accomplish the appearance of it. In my opinion, cobalt is the worst mistake palm ever made.

Interesting, most of the articles I've read indicate the Cobalt is a true pre-emptive OS. True it is multithreading, not multitasking, but there is an arguement for this:

Why PalmSource May be write about Multitasking (http://www.mobileread.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4347&highlight=cobalt)

Also, I think the concensus about the failure of PalmSource to get any lisencees to adopt Coblat, was more to do with underlying driver support and economic concerns than anything technical about the OS itself:

Can Linux Put PalmSource back on Top? (http://www.informationweek.com/shared/printableArticle.jhtml?articleID=169300302)

[gfunkmagic]

I'm pretty sure were going to see Garnet in our next treo. I remember reading that Access is doing something to prepare NetFront (or whatever their browser is called) for Garnet. Which tells me that Garnet is what palm and others are interested in.

I would love to see a Cobalt device . . . but I just don't hold out much hope for it anymore. If it was worth using then Palmsource would not have abandoned it in favor of a linux palm OS.


According to reports at the time of the merger announcement, Access spokesman stated they would try to incorporate Netfront browser into Garnet:

Eventually, Access said its plan is to combine its Linux-based NetFront browser with the Palm OS version 5x--also known as Garnet. The representative said Access may even revisit the Palm OS version 6, known as Cobalt, which was not broadly licensed by PalmSource.
http://beta.news.com.com/PalmSource+sale+wont+kill+Palm+OS/2100-1041_3-5857082.html?

The reason why they won't have to do this with Coblat, is b/c Browser 3.0 for Coblat is already based on Netfront:

http://www.palminfocenter.com/view_story.asp?ID=7165

[samkim]

I'm a little light on the Cobalt/Linux knowledge, but as I understand it, the OS that PalmSource has been developing based on Linux is going to have a Cobalt "layer" (don't know if that's the right term) on it... So it's not really a matter of abandoning Cobalt in favor of Linux, because they're keeping Cobalt either way.

Right??

[UGlee]

I'm a little light on the Cobalt/Linux knowledge, but as I understand it, the OS that PalmSource has been developing based on Linux is going to have a Cobalt "layer" (don't know if that's the right term) on it... So it's not really a matter of abandoning Cobalt in favor of Linux, because they're keeping Cobalt either way.

Right??

You are right. Furthermore

1) Linux program CAN run on Cobalt over Linux if it has no UI or the developer port its UI part to Cobalt.
2) The PalmOS-Protein API program built for pure Cobalt device, NEED to be recompile for Cobalt over Linux system. That is to say, Cobalt program and COL one are not binary compatible. This will probably prevent PalmOS licensees, especially Palm. Inc, from releasing any pure Cobalt device. Otherwise, they must deal with the INCOMPATIBILITY issue when customer upgrade a pure Cobalt device to a COL one.

[christine]

Exactly, suspended is NOT multitasking, true multitasking will have the apps all running at the same time. Palm OS can not do this, so it "fakes" it by using events to trigger a app to run, and another to suspend... But only one task is running at any given time.

If you have only one CPU then you have to suspend one task to run another. Modern operating systems do this all the time. Ie linux or windows xp.

And one of the things that triggers a task-switch is if the running task is waiting for an event. Then other tasks may run until that event happens.

What PalmOS/Garnet does is to depend on the tasks to behave and thus multitask. Cobalt and linux and others force these task switches and therefore multitasks much better.

[whmurray]

If you have only one CPU then you have to suspend one task to run another. Modern operating systems do this all the time. Ie linux or windows xp.

And one of the things that triggers a task-switch is if the running task is waiting for an event. Then other tasks may run until that event happens.

What PalmOS/Garnet does is to depend on the tasks to behave and thus multitask. Cobalt and linux and others force these task switches and therefore multitasks much better.
Cooperative multi-tasking is normally used where the hardware does not have an interrupt scheme or function.

The problem with cooperative multi-tasking is that its success depends upon the fact that most programs cooperate. Not too difficult for tens of programs from a handful of sources. Not likely for hundreds of programs from tens of sources.

[shadowmite]

GFunkMagic: By power, I meant processing power...

whmurray: agreed, with the nature of the palm operating system and the programs already made for it, it's fairly obvious the programs already have problems just handling events properly. Just imagine what will happen with cobalt!

I hope I'm wrong, and one day palm releases a new palm device that's running some true pre-emptive OS, but none of the existing programs will run on it unless they enable some emulation layer which will slow it all down. The best thing that could happen to palm os is to resdesign it completely to have the same look and feel but a completely new programming api and style. Everything changes, it's just a matter of when.

As for CPU execution pathways, most modern day cpu's are starting to execute multiple instructions at once, but yes, for the most part forced switched tasks are the way to go.

[whmurray]

GFunkMagic: By power, I meant processing power...

whmurray: agreed, with the nature of the palm operating system and the programs already made for it, it's fairly obvious the programs already have problems just handling events properly. Just imagine what will happen with cobalt!

I hope I'm wrong, and one day palm releases a new palm device that's running some true pre-emptive OS, but none of the existing programs will run on it unless they enable some emulation layer which will slow it all down. The best thing that could happen to palm os is to resdesign it completely to have the same look and feel but a completely new programming api and style. Everything changes, it's just a matter of when.

As for CPU execution pathways, most modern day cpu's are starting to execute multiple instructions at once, but yes, for the most part forced switched tasks are the way to go.

Palm has shown willingness to orphan application programs and even developers in the name of new products. I am on my sixth Palm Product and each new one has orphaned applications, many of which have never seen the light of day again.

[dstrauss]

...I hope I'm wrong, and one day palm releases a new palm device that's running some true pre-emptive OS, but none of the existing programs will run on it unless they enable some emulation layer which will slow it all down. The best thing that could happen to palm os is to resdesign it completely to have the same look and feel but a completely new programming api and style. Everything changes, it's just a matter of when...

And this summarizes my concern exactly - why would Palm invest in a ground up redesign of the OS if WM5 delivers this capability? Isn't it better, cheaper, and more efficient to move these users to the WM5.xx OS than to try to duplicate its capabilities via re-write and/or emulation? How many times during the press conference did Cooligan say that WM5 lets them do things now that they can't do on their existing system?

This is CPM giving way to MSDOS all over again. :(

[dr_memory]

Thus assuming support for a 1xEvDo radio and thusly the need for Cobalt based PalmOS, I think it's possible to deduce now the specs of the next gen PalmOS Treo which imo will almost completely resemble the specs of the WM Treo 700 (with exception to a 320x320 rez screenie).

Any thoughts? :D

I think that's an optimistic take on it.

The more likely scenario, however, is that there will simply never be another PalmOS Treo.

Verizon is paying enormous sums of money for an exclusive license to the 700w. Why? Because Sprint + Nextel = Vision/EVDO Blackberry (http://www.sprint.com/business/products/products/blackBerry.jsp). That's a direct shot across the bow of VZW's enormous corporate market, and since VZW doesn't want to be just another blackberry reseller, they need to have a competitive product. Enter Palm, which has the only other popular smartphone/im/email product, and is small and cash-strapped enough that VZW can dictate terms. Garnet can't be made to work with EVDO and VZW doesn't want to bother trying to make Cobalt work with WirelessSync... so WinMobile it is. (Palm's management, weary of the endless goat rodeo at PalmSource, probably didn't require too much arm-twisting.)

It sucks, but I can't blame Palm for following the money.

[samkim]

And this summarizes my concern exactly - why would Palm invest in a ground up redesign of the OS if WM5 delivers this capability? Isn't it better, cheaper, and more efficient to move these users to the WM5.xx OS than to try to duplicate its capabilities via re-write and/or emulation?No! Palm would retain some fraction of the customers that migrate to WM. But it gets to keep pretty much all of the customers who stay with PalmOS. That's a billion dollars in revenue. What would you do? Share it, or hold on to it?


How many times during the press conference did Cooligan say that WM5 lets them do things now that they can't do on their existing system?

This is CPM giving way to MSDOS all over again. :(How many times did he say that this is about growth and adding new customers?

Btw, are you deliberately misspelling his name? If it's a joke, I don't get it...

[pump142]

working mp3 players, not ones who are buggy and run into conflicts..
I was a lightwav usewr for over a year till it went south,
then a ringo user user for a month.. again south..
now trying mring..
thats alot of friggin money I spent 3rd party for something my kyo7135 did natively very well

[craigdts]

What does this mean?

http://www.vnunet.com/itweek/analysis/2143406/sight-palm

However, it seems unlikely that any further Palm OS Treos will be developed. Current models run an ageing version of the Palm platform, and to extend this to match the 3G network support in Windows Mobile 5.0 may prove costly.
If firms will not buy Palm OS handsets, Palm may simply decide to cut its losses and ship only Microsoft-based models once the Treo 600 and Treo 650 reach end-of-life."

"While Palm looks set to continue shipping Palm OS 5 handhelds for the near future, Wirt admitted there would have to be a cut-off point. "At some point in the future, we would obviously prefer to be on one platform," he said."

[dstrauss]

Btw, are you deliberately misspelling his name? If it's a joke, I don't get it...

No, just my mistake. My apologies to Mr. Colligan (and you of course).

PS - you're wrong. End times are near for Palm OS - they won't be able to get Frankengarnet to duplicate what WM5 can do, and Sprint/Cingular won't push a lower grade product for them. ;)

[Rome]

What does this mean?

http://www.vnunet.com/itweek/analysis/2143406/sight-palm

However, it seems unlikely that any further Palm OS Treos will be developed. Current models run an ageing version of the Palm platform, and to extend this to match the 3G network support in Windows Mobile 5.0 may prove costly.
If firms will not buy Palm OS handsets, Palm may simply decide to cut its losses and ship only Microsoft-based models once the Treo 600 and Treo 650 reach end-of-life."

"While Palm looks set to continue shipping Palm OS 5 handhelds for the near future, Wirt admitted there would have to be a cut-off point. "At some point in the future, we would obviously prefer to be on one platform," he said."

If Palm OS were so dead, then why:

- did Palm bid for Palmsource?
- did Palm extend its contract with Palmsource till the end of 2009?

Was Palm angry with its own money?

[shadowmite]

If Palm OS were so dead, then why:

- did Palm bid for Palmsource?
- did Palm extend its contract with Palmsource till the end of 2009?

Was Palm angry with its own money?

Palm (PalmOne) bid for PalmSource because THEY could have salvaged it. They are the coders that made the majority of #G integration happen and had the best coders available for the palm os platform. They most likely would have pulled cobalt out of it's grave and re-vived it. But Access on the other hand has a different agenda, what that is I have a few guesses, but they are just a educated guess.

As for why palm extended, it's buisness, they are selling the products, it's been successful so far. Why not make sure they still have the deal before it gets sold to someone else just in case...

I really don't think we have seen the end of palm os, but I believe we have seen the end of it as a competitive OS trying for 1st place.

[craigdts]

But Access on the other hand has a different agenda, what that is I have a few guesses, but they are just a educated guess.

I'm curious now, what are they?

[samkim]

from the article: "However, it seems unlikely that any further Palm OS Treos will be developed."

That directly contradicts what Palm has said. Either Palm is lying, or this guy is wrong.

[samkim]

No, just my mistake. My apologies to Mr. Colligan (and you of course).

PS - you're wrong. End times are near for Palm OS - they won't be able to get Frankengarnet to duplicate what WM5 can do, and Sprint/Cingular won't push a lower grade product for them. ;)
Just curious, if they produce a Treo 700p, with specs similar to the 700w, except with a 320x320 screen, would you buy it?

[Perry Holden]

Just curious, if they produce a Treo 700p, with specs similar to the 700w, except with a 320x320 screen, would you buy it?

YES!!! My 650 is perfect, except it is missing EV-DO. If better bluetooth, an SD slot that can take a 4gb card, a faster processor and more memory come along with it . . . . I guess I will just have to accept that. :D

Cheers, Perry.

[JimmieGeddes]

I agree with Shadowmite, Palm OS will not be first place. Not because of quality of OS, but because Microsoft has a way with the corporate world. Mac OS X in my opinion is a much better OS, but only has 3%, maybe 4% market share. I'm a Microsoft Certified Professional for work, but prefer OS X for home and personal user, more intuitive, faster, stable (notice the similarities). I feel like we are seeing this all over, but Palm was wise to sell a device so they get some money out of that market, as well as still selling Palm OS devices and not abandoning the Palm market.
I agree with Perry too, my 650 is near perfect, and I would updgrade for more memory, and EVDO. I am using sprints network via BT DUN to keep my powerbook online going on 2 days now, and I keep saying to myself my Treo is awesome.

Thanks to Shadowmite, and his awesome work I think Sprint stepped up to the plate and "officially" supported it. The Treo 650 is the closest thing, at the moment to perfection, and I have a feeling Palm won't disappoint with the sequel.

I've been writing how my Treo 650/ Powerbook setup has been going, it's awesome!
http://www.gadgetsonthego.net/2005/10/i-wrote-this-on-palm-addict-to-show.html

[craigdts]

I guess I need to clarify something about the article I linked to above.

"Wirt says" is Ken Wirt of Palm, Inc. an Executive Director of Palm. that's why I linked this article.

so I mean we are hearing 2 stories from Palm. I really hope for another better Palm OS treo, Garnet is fine w/ me - give me EVDO too though.

[samkim]

I was clear on who Wirt is.

I don't think there are two stories from Palm. What Wirt says in the article is very different from what the writer says. It wasn't Wirt who said there would be a "cut-off point." It was the writer. "Cut off" implies a deliberate act.

Wirt's statement is that they'd obviously want their r&d overhead to be half of what it is. "Obviously." It's an open question whether they'd pull the trigger if they don't have to.

[dstrauss]

Just curious, if they produce a Treo 700p, with specs similar to the 700w, except with a 320x320 screen, would you buy it?

If they also increased the memory, then yes, I'd buy. But no more sub-64mb ram Palm OS units for this bozo. If it added WiFi, I'd go to Palm headquarters to hand pick up the first unit released.

As much of a naysayer as I seem, I really prefer Palm; I just don't see it in the old crystal ball.

[gfunkmagic]

You are right. Furthermore

1) Linux program CAN run on Cobalt over Linux if it has no UI or the developer port its UI part to Cobalt.
2) The PalmOS-Protein API program built for pure Cobalt device, NEED to be recompile for Cobalt over Linux system. That is to say, Cobalt program and COL one are not binary compatible. This will probably prevent PalmOS licensees, especially Palm. Inc, from releasing any pure Cobalt device. Otherwise, they must deal with the INCOMPATIBILITY issue when customer upgrade a pure Cobalt device to a COL one.


Thanks UGlee! I didn't know that! :confused: You posts here and at PIC have been very helpful btw! :thumbsup:

One question though. Couldn't devs just continue to support 68k apps since PACE will be supported on both Cobalt and PL?

Also, since PalmSource/Access probably won't finish PL until sometime late 2006, which means there won't be any PL Treos until perhaps late 2007, does the incompatibility issue really matter? I mean two years is a looong time to wait for PL imo when most devs could easily just recompile their code when/if PL ever arrives...

[gfunkmagic]

I think that's an optimistic take on it.

The more likely scenario, however, is that there will simply never be another PalmOS Treo.

And that is an overly pessimisitc take on it imo! ;) :p


Verizon is paying enormous sums of money for an exclusive license to the 700w. Why? Because Sprint + Nextel = Vision/EVDO Blackberry (http://www.sprint.com/business/products/products/blackBerry.jsp). That's a direct shot across the bow of VZW's enormous corporate market, and since VZW doesn't want to be just another blackberry reseller, they need to have a competitive product.

But what if/when the PalmOS BB connect client arrives for the Treo? I think the focus is moe about Palm on how they want to make sure they don't have all their eggs in one basket. Also, the exclusivity period won't last forever and the WM Treo will probably be available on Sprint too eventually imo...

[gfunkmagic]

Palm (PalmOne) bid for PalmSource because THEY could have salvaged it. They are the coders that made the majority of #G integration happen and had the best coders available for the palm os platform. They most likely would have pulled cobalt out of it's grave and re-vived it. But Access on the other hand has a different agenda, what that is I have a few guesses, but they are just a educated guess.


Palm bid on Palmsource b/c they didn't want to see the platform fall into the hands of one of their driect competitors like Motorola or Nokia! That would put them into exactly the opposite position many lisencees were in prior to the Palm-PalmSource split and would have put them in a very unenviable positon. It was about saving their arse. The acquisition by Access was the best alternative outcome for Palm (and Palmsource since Palm is still accounts for ~80% of PalmSource's revenue).

I really don't think we have seen the end of palm os, but I believe we have seen the end of it as a competitive OS trying for 1st place.
You probably write about that. PalmOS has already ceded it's #1 postion in pdas, while smartphone are completely dominated by Symbian. But if PalmSource/Access can even get 10-15% of the future 500 million smartphone handset market, they will be pretty successful imo...

[gfunkmagic]

What does this mean?

http://www.vnunet.com/itweek/analysis/2143406/sight-palm

However, it seems unlikely that any further Palm OS Treos will be developed. Current models run an ageing version of the Palm platform, and to extend this to match the 3G network support in Windows Mobile 5.0 may prove costly.
If firms will not buy Palm OS handsets, Palm may simply decide to cut its losses and ship only Microsoft-based models once the Treo 600 and Treo 650 reach end-of-life."

"While Palm looks set to continue shipping Palm OS 5 handhelds for the near future, Wirt admitted there would have to be a cut-off point. "At some point in the future, we would obviously prefer to be on one platform," he said."

Hmmm... that is rather depressing isn't it. :cry: :thumbsdn:

However, I think Palm will make that final decision after the release of Palm Linux so it can gather its potential on either platform...

However according to this statement:

Current models run an ageing version of the Palm platform, and to extend this to match the 3G network support in Windows Mobile 5.0 may prove costly.
It would seem to validate the point that Garnet does not support 3G telephony or 1xEvDo. Thus alluding to my earlier assertion that Coblat may be the only short term palmos solution...

[dstrauss]

gfunk:

On the Wirts comment:

"While Palm looks set to continue shipping Palm OS 5 handhelds for the near future, Wirt admitted there would have to be a cut-off point. "At some point in the future, we would obviously prefer to be on one platform," he said."

The really sad thing was Palm's official position, from several spokes people, was they "Were open to other OS's" all the while they were deep inside MicroBorg's WM5 development. I don't expect them to leak company secrets, but if that was their response then, what can Wirt's comment really mean? A sad day indeed.

[samkim]

YES!!! My 650 is perfect, except it is missing EV-DO. If better bluetooth, an SD slot that can take a 4gb card, a faster processor and more memory come along with it . . . . I guess I will just have to accept that. :D

Cheers, Perry.I think we all knew you'd say yes Perry. ;)

If they also increased the memory, then yes, I'd buy. But no more sub-64mb ram Palm OS units for this bozo. If it added WiFi, I'd go to Palm headquarters to hand pick up the first unit released.

As much of a naysayer as I seem, I really prefer Palm; I just don't see it in the old crystal ball.And frankly, I knew you'd say yes too. My point is that there's real demand for a PalmOS Treo, but you think Palm is too dumb or too lazy to do the work to produce one.

[whmurray]

If they also increased the memory, then yes, I'd buy. But no more sub-64mb ram Palm OS units for this bozo. If it added WiFi, I'd go to Palm headquarters to hand pick up the first unit released.

As much of a naysayer as I seem, I really prefer Palm; I just don't see it in the old crystal ball.I understand why Palm was slow to color and hi-res and still resists Wi-Fi. It is all about battery life. Even the NVFS is about battery. I still do not understand why they are so chintzy about memory.

Since my very first Palm device I have been bumping against the memory limit. That the 650 has the same memory as the 600 and with a file system that is less efficient, is beyond me. It cannot be about the money; at most we are talking tens of dollars.

64mb for a WM is absurd. My sister runs WM on a 128mb Samsung and laughed out loud when I told her that the 700w has 64. What am I missing?

[samkim]

I don't get it either. I remember one of the managers saying that those who need more memory can always get a memory card. The problem is that many apps can't run on the memory card and so fill up the available internal memory.

My guess is that they figure they can satisfy most people's needs with very little memory.

[whmurray]

I don't get it either. I remember one of the managers saying that those who need more memory can always get a memory card. The problem is that many apps can't run on the memory card and so fill up the available internal memory.

My guess is that they figure they can satisfy most people's needs with very little memory.
The problem has been around far longer than the SD card has been available to solve even a part of it. Palm's memory is usually lower than its competitors.

[Iceman6]

The future of the Palm OS, if any, is as a user interface "look and feel", running on top of Linux. Anything that delays the availability of this new OS is time and money wasted. That's why you won't see Cobalt revived.

Linux on handhelds is just as efficient (needs less MHz, less memory, less power than M$ alternative) as Linux on desktops. Of course, if you have to run a Garnet emulator on top of Linux you piss away this advantage. So I dunno. Palm/Linux might work, but if PalmSource were smart enough to make this work, they would have been smart enough to get FrankenGarnet to work without help from Palm. I still see PalmSource as floundering.

[surur]

64mb for a WM is absurd. My sister runs WM on a 128mb Samsung and laughed out loud when I told her that the 700w has 64. What am I missing?

You are missing that the WM is WM5, not WM2003SE. No files are stored in RAM any more (unlike in WM2003SE) so more ram is available for execution. Even the $1000 HTC universal only has 64MB ram.

However, in reality this has not worked out as well as expected. A lot of the 64MB ram now gets used to store software that previously would have XIP before. The HTC Universal only has 27MB free ram after boot up, which is rather pathetic.

I think the current lot of WM devices are only fit for light work, and I wont buy until free ram after boot is at least 64MB or more.

Surur

[Felipe]

gfunk:

On the Wirts comment:

"While Palm looks set to continue shipping Palm OS 5 handhelds for the near future, Wirt admitted there would have to be a cut-off point. "At some point in the future, we would obviously prefer to be on one platform," he said."

I could take that as meaning:

we will eventually stop selling pos5 devices, but may continue selling them when we come out with a device with a newer POS, but it is preferable to sell only devices with one version of POS.



just like microsoft no longet support win 3.1, 95, 98, nt, and wants 2000 on the list.

[whmurray]

I could take that as meaning:

we will eventually stop selling pos5 devices, but may continue selling them when we come out with a device with a newer POS, but it is preferable to sell only devices with one version of POS.



just like microsoft no longet support win 3.1, 95, 98, nt, and wants 2000 on the list.
What part of "one" do you not understand? The man said "One platform." "One!" ;)

[Stig]

The upcoming Tungsten TX runs Palm OS Garnet 5.4 according to engadget (http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000703062420/)

[dstrauss]

The upcoming Tungsten TX runs Palm OS Garnet 5.4 according to engadget (http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000703062420/)

Frankengarnet - "It's alive, its alive I tell you!"

Thank you Colin Clive (aka Dr. Frankenstein) and Palm for coninued medical research on our Palm OS.
:D