Database Users

Fujitsu Siemens N500 WM5 PDA *much* faster than Jasjar

Why! ?
See http://www.solopalmari.com/content/view/564/38/1/5/
For benchmarks

Hmm,
it seems it has an integrated gps .. but NO 3G / UMTS ??? No thanks.
- Superbowl

skearon said:
Why! ?
See http://www.solopalmari.com/content/view/564/38/1/5/
For benchmarks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If your gonna link us to somewhere, please make sure it's in English yeah?
If you prefer the other device, that's great, go buy it and be happy. :lol:

I really wouldn't compare, but i cant find details on the Fsc LOOX N500,
but both the LOOX 720 and 420 both use Microsoft Windows Mobile 2003 for Pocket PC,
so the comparison is flawed to say the least.
PS, Fsc is short for Fujitsu Seimens, trust me i know!!!! something to do with my employment!, and no i cant get you free kit !!!

Is Spb even WM5 compatible?
Carnivor said:
I really wouldn't compare, but i cant find details on the Fsc LOOX N500,
but both the LOOX 720 and 420 both use Microsoft Windows Mobile 2003 for Pocket PC,
so the comparison is flawed to say the least.
PS, Fsc is short for Fujitsu Seimens, trust me i know!!!! something to do with my employment!, and no i cant get you free kit !!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for that Carnivor. Information I can read and understand. Not even WM5.0? Why did they bother to compare two devices which are totally disparate in nature? Anyway, Spb Benchmark, is it yet optimised or been re-written for WM5? If not, then another reason to discard the results!

I felt I had to register just to say this...
The N500 is the unit being tested, not the 720 (which I have myself), or the 420. Both these devices run WM2003SE, but the 720 is due to be upgraded any time soon.
Anyway, the N500 DOES run Wm2005, which you would know if you'd have actually even looked once at the article, and thus, it IS a fair comparision.

lt_weasel said:
I felt I had to register just to say this...
The N500 is the unit being tested, not the 720 (which I have myself), or the 420. Both these devices run WM2003SE, but the 720 is due to be upgraded any time soon.
Anyway, the N500 DOES run Wm2005, which you would know if you'd have actually even looked once at the article, and thus, it IS a fair comparision.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey weasel! If you had bothered to read the first post and clicked on the provided link, you too would have seen that it is not in English!! Furthermore, I have not and will not research a product i have no interest in!! Additionally, I only clicked on this thread because it's subject heading looked intrtriguing, but that's as far as it goes when provided links are not even in english!!

yeah, I read the article before I even came here.
And if you claim you have no interest in the article, and so are not interested in makking ACCURATE statements, why did you bother to post, rubbishing skearon's post, and the article's findings?

weasel weasel....don't worry about it. This is about all the time I'm going to give this argument, discussion whatever you want to call it.
I'll contribute elsewhere. Bye... :lol:

mackaby007 said:
lt_weasel said:
I felt I had to register just to say this...
The N500 is the unit being tested, not the 720 (which I have myself), or the 420. Both these devices run WM2003SE, but the 720 is due to be upgraded any time soon.
Anyway, the N500 DOES run Wm2005, which you would know if you'd have actually even looked once at the article, and thus, it IS a fair comparision.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey weasel! If you had bothered to read the first post and clicked on the provided link, you too would have seen that it is not in English!! Furthermore, I have not and will not research a product i have no interest in!! Additionally, I only clicked on this thread because it's subject heading looked intrtriguing, but that's as far as it goes when provided links are not even in english!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The article is from an Italian web site and there is no English link, however Google will translate it for you.
The whole point of the post was the difference in the benchmarks for two WM5 devices, not to compare the devices directly.
With so many people saying the JJ is slow, I thought it interesting to see the results from another WM5 device.

New here as well though I have been reading for about 6 months.
While I can see where a comparison of Windows Mobile 5 devices would be useful to help detemine if the JasJars performance is abberant, I do not think the N500 would be my first choice for comparison. The N500 is a QVGA device if the specs I found are correct, and that should make a significant difference in both processing time and memory used. For that matter as has been mentioned before, the SPB benchmark has not been rewritten for WM 5 yet. While SPB Benchmark works, I do not think the numbers could be considered reliable given the large variations in hardware.
QVGA vs VGA, No Phone capability on the Loox (?) thus no need to task for handling phone/messaging functions, no Wifi, No Bluetooth, and so on. The JasJar has a great deal of things it is doing, and if iMate followed their previous models they added additional software to bog it down a bit more.
I am not arguing either way on the comparison of speed. My point is that the two models may be using the same OS, but the purpose and needed subsystems for the two units are very different. So comparing the two is flawed unless you want comparison as a buyer who needs a QVGA PDA with other features desired but optional.

To compare performance you don't have to sum up other functionalities like UMTS... thats my opinion.
I use the Universal about evey 10 minuts a day.
The device is the best PocketPC I ever had - but I also was hoping for a better performance.

MBastian said:
To compare performance you don't have to sum up other functionalities like UMTS... thats my opinion.
I use the Universal about evey 10 minuts a day.
The device is the best PocketPC I ever had - but I also was hoping for a better performance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I apologize, I guess I was not clear. I was not trying to argue the functions but the fact that the functions use some CPU/Memory, and thus are an influencing factor on performance. It does seem that at least some people need to "tweak" the JJ to get good performance out of it, but most seem happy.
Since the US does not have UMTS I am planning on replacing my PDA2K with a K-Jam but would have had a much tougher debate if UMTS were available.

Al though mackaby007 reply seemed a bit harsh to you but he is right as Carnivor stated that the comparision is flawed in the first place. 8)
Additionally, JanetPanic also right because pda/phones have alot more handles which are running in the backgound either when seem idle or even without inserting a SIM card.
Which lead to this conclusion:
Whoever wrote this article or did the research does not have the suffeciant technical background to distinguish between these two devices other than loading & running SPB Bechmark thus embaracing himself , which lead to another conclusion, it was paid for either directly or indirectly by Fujitsu Siemens. :twisted: go figure .
Just my 2cents here

My turn...
The fact that the cpu speed of the Universal came out quicker, but specific processes came out slower obviously suggests that the JasJar CPU is being used for a lot more processes.
So not really a very good comaprison to make then?

its like saying my goat is better than your pig. sure.... the both got 4 legs, 2 eyes, 3 ears, a tail. etc etc. but theyre different!!!!!
anyway, my goat is better!!!!! pfft

Carnivor said:
its like saying my goat is better than your pig. sure.... the both got 4 legs, 2 eyes, 3 ears, a tail. etc etc. but theyre different!!!!!
anyway, my goat is better!!!!! pfft
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Excuseme, mine has 2 ears :?: :!: :lol:

OMFG. how embarassing. what a place to typo

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
hehehe never laughed so much on this forum! well worth wasting 10 mins for, cheers guys!
BTW don't ask my opinion....I got my exec 3 days ago and still haven't even worked out how to turn it on (joke) :!:
HPJ

The biggest Universal problem

Microsoft behind the thing! Operating system and applications in one dish and no big boy can eat in it. No competition. No killer apps coming from who knows where. No unskeduled innovations. No hurry to cover, bugs created, market holes.

And now in English? :shock:

S'funny I seem to have quite a few third party apps on my Universal, some of which I use more than any pre-installed ones from MS.
Also if you don't want to use MS products why not buy a nice Symbian based pda phone? The Motorola a1000 is nice and the SE P range.

IMHO
The biggest problem is not any one thing in particular...
Yesterday I used an old, disregarded & completely discarded Sony Ericsson T610 - which is about 3 years old.
So T610 Vs. Universal?
Of course one is a bluetooth mobile phone the other is clearly much more... but when you look at the fact that surely the primary function for a Universal has to be voice communication it made me think...
The T610 paired with my Motorola H500 BT headset immediately, it dialled, redialled and held calls with perfect clarity & reception. For being an old phone.. I was actually amazed at how speedy it responded making calls, accepting calls, switching from BT to phone, etc etc
all this was achieved with absolute effortless stability....
That made me think how 'awkward' my M5000 is in similar operations... the dropped calls, the dropped BT connections & so on... you know, all the issues we simplly just 'put up with'
Sifting through this forum again & reminding myself of these many different issues we've all at one time or another experienced with our Universals such as stability, responsiveness, performance & the like are the biggest problems
Shame really.. as on paper the Universal is indeed a very fine unit - in operation however it leaves a lot to be desired...

philtech44 said:
IMHO
.. but when you look at the fact that surely the primary function for a Universal has to be voice communication it made me think....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Fact? Get real. No one in their right mind (not even MS or O2) would claim that the primary function of the Universal is voice communication. Even your own sig makes that obvious

Ineedtoys said:
philtech44 said:
IMHO
.. but when you look at the fact that surely the primary function for a Universal has to be voice communication it made me think....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Fact? Get real. No one in their right mind (not even MS or O2) would claim that the primary function of the Universal is voice communication. Even your own sig makes that obvious
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What? not a phone?
Then why is it provided by mobile phone companies?
... as a flagship model!!!

philtech44 said:
What? not a phone?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You claimed that voice was the PRIMARY function. If that's the case, why did you pay all that money for the VGA display, large keyboard, 3G, and Pocket PC / Windows Mobile OS, for something that doesn't even have a caller display on the cover? But since you've got the M5000, let's look at Orange's own buy-line:-
"The Orange SPV M5000 is a 3G PDA that can be used to make and receive voice calls"
There you go. 3G PDA first, voice last. No attempt to call it a "phone", like Sony make no attempt to call the T610 a "PDA".
Then why is it provided by mobile phone companies?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Err... Now you are being silly. Who gets the revenue from 3G and GPRS usage?
... as a flagship model!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It might be flagship model, but it's a DATA centric device for business users, which is why the whole design is geared to using as it as a mini-laptop replacement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Indeed. There are plenty of other devices more suited if you need something more "Phone" like. Sounds to me like you just bought it because it was the most expensive, instead of what was right for your needs. That's hardly HTC's fault. :roll:

I kind of agree. I think alot of the phone has been spoiled by ONLY using Windows. (i dont think windows is crap and are not trying to slate it)
There are a few features that other phones have that make them well trick, wee lights that change colour, torches - a bunch of stuff that, lets be hounest you do not need but, makes the phone cool and helps to justify the massive brick in your pocket.
like why was VGA not supported properly? why dont the external buttons light up? why not a torch with the flash?
just my tuppance worth
JAmes

I think one of the major issues here is that the PDA operating system is trying very hard to fit in with its parent, Windows XP. So, just as Outlook, MS Access etc struggle to work with vCard formats, so does the PDA. In this day and age, when even kids tend to have two mobiles (or two cell phone numbers), how can your Contacts database be limited to one mobile number but umpteen fields for landline voice/fax numbers.
Soon, at least in the UK, mobiles are going to overtake landlines (it may already have done so for private/residential users, I don't know).
As a Mac user, I can easily transfer numbers between the Mac, SE P910i and Nokia 9500, and all the mobile numbers for each contact come across (on the N9500 you have to just change the field def, which isn't a prob) but having transferred 600+ vCards to the M5000, I lost all primary mobile numbers and only got the second or third preference mobile across.
At the very least, you should be able to add/redefine fields in the Contacts database -- I've looked and can't find any info or facility for this. That is just one of the deficiencies of WinCE/WM5.
Actually, I'm hoping that now Apple has adopted Intel chips, one of these days they're going to announce a Mobie version of OS X -- now that would be something. I'm sure a lot of users would at least try it, and many of those would even migrate (I can dream, can't I?)

Ineedtoys said:
philtech44 said:
What? not a phone?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You claimed that voice was the PRIMARY function. If that's the case, why did you pay all that money for the VGA display, large keyboard, 3G, and Pocket PC / Windows Mobile OS, for something that doesn't even have a caller display on the cover? But since you've got the M5000, let's look at Orange's own buy-line:-
"The Orange SPV M5000 is a 3G PDA that can be used to make and receive voice calls"
There you go. 3G PDA first, voice last. No attempt to call it a "phone", like Sony make no attempt to call the T610 a "PDA".
Then why is it provided by mobile phone companies?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Err... Now you are being silly. Who gets the revenue from 3G and GPRS usage?
... as a flagship model!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It might be flagship model, but it's a DATA centric device for business users, which is why the whole design is geared to using as it as a mini-laptop replacement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Indeed. There are plenty of other devices more suited if you need something more "Phone" like. Sounds to me like you just bought it because it was the most expensive, instead of what was right for your needs. That's hardly HTC's fault. :roll:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ineedtoys - has the cheek to say I bought the most expensive toy with a username like that?!
javascript:emoticon(':?')
I'm not going to argue whether the primary function is a phone or mini-laptop/pda, etc etc
or whether a T610 is PDA or indeed a bacon sandwich or something...
As with any MULTI-FUNCTION device - they are simply different things to different people dont you think?
ineed, the title of this thread is "the biggest problem..."
I believe the fact that the phone function of the Universal is not what it should be makes it the biggest problem for me & I suspect quite a few others...
It's quite clear you don't agree with that.. I never made that statement to p*** you or anyone off... or feel the need to argue my case... it's my opinion... and essentially what I'm saying I suspect many would agree with.. However, you haven't yet joined in with the thread and offered your OWN view on what you believe is the biggest problem...??
So, in your view, what is the biggest problem with the Universal ??

@philtech44
I'm wth you - the Universal should do the basic functions of a cell/mobile phone at least as good as the T610 or a K750. A SIM free Universal is between $900 - $1000. For this kind of money you should be getting the best communications device. My daughter's free Moto v3X shows the gap in communication capability of the Universal - you see these are both 3G phones and the extra capacity of 3G improves voice calls, but not on the Universal!

jah said:
@philtech44
I'm wth you - the Universal should do the basic functions of a cell/mobile phone at least as good as the T610 or a K750. A SIM free Universal is between $900 - $1000. For this kind of money you should be getting the best communications device. My daughter's free Moto v3X shows the gap in communication capability of the Universal - you see these are both 3G phones and the extra capacity of 3G improves voice calls, but not on the Universal!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My point exactly.. my crappy old T610's phone functions including bluetooth worked effortlessy well... my M5000 felt like a Nokia Cityman in comparison and this is wrong...
and yes - for a flagship 3G device.... well... I will say that out of the Universal and two baked bean cans connected via a piece of string... yes, the Universal wins... :lol:

sipat said:
I think one of the major issues here is that the PDA operating system is trying very hard to fit in with its parent, Windows XP. So, just as Outlook, MS Access etc struggle to work with vCard formats, so does the PDA. In this day and age, when even kids tend to have two mobiles (or two cell phone numbers), how can your Contacts database be limited to one mobile number but umpteen fields for landline voice/fax numbers.
Soon, at least in the UK, mobiles are going to overtake landlines (it may already have done so for private/residential users, I don't know).
As a Mac user, I can easily transfer numbers between the Mac, SE P910i and Nokia 9500, and all the mobile numbers for each contact come across (on the N9500 you have to just change the field def, which isn't a prob) but having transferred 600+ vCards to the M5000, I lost all primary mobile numbers and only got the second or third preference mobile across.
At the very least, you should be able to add/redefine fields in the Contacts database -- I've looked and can't find any info or facility for this. That is just one of the deficiencies of WinCE/WM5.
Actually, I'm hoping that now Apple has adopted Intel chips, one of these days they're going to announce a Mobie version of OS X -- now that would be something. I'm sure a lot of users would at least try it, and many of those would even migrate (I can dream, can't I?)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes sipat.. that is definitely another big problem
As far as Apple is concerned & being a Mac specialist myself, you could only imagine a OSX Mobile OS... simple, effective, robust and as far as connectivity & compatibility is concerned.. well we live to dream eh?

I'm sorry I don't agree. At the current point that technology stands you will not get an open OS multi-function device operating as well and as effeciently as a closed OS phone. Granted that Symbian may be more stable, but then it is the much older more experienced OS too.
The T610 has basically one job, it operates as a phone, using it's own software, which has all been written to work together at the expense of ignoring other possibilities.
The universal has an open OS which has to allow third parties to add software, that dosn't even exist yet. This open software is bound to be slower, it has to be, it has too many possibilities it has to consider.
Comparing the speed of a T610 and a universal is like comparing the Fuel economy of a Bicycle and a Jeep. They are 2 entirely different things.
I do know what the biggest problem for the universal is. It's the end user, the majority of which are completely outside of the intended trarget audience, and missuse a little knowledge badly.
Funny how my Universal never drops call, bluetooth works perfectly for handsfree and GPS. I can't remember the last time I soft reset, and when I did it was only part of the installation of new software. It dosn't crash, freeze or run any slower then I'd expect. Why is this? Am I just incredibly lucky?
However I have been using PDA's for a long time, and have come at this device as a PDA with a phone built in, rather than the other way round. If people think a T610 is better, (and yes I did have one once). Then you have bought the completely wrong device with a Universal, because while your T610 may be faster, my Universal is providing so many more functions.
(EDIT): lol Wow, that wasn't intended to come out as such a rant.

Gajet said:
I'm sorry I don't agree. At the current point that technology stands you will not get an open OS multi-function device operating as well and as effeciently as a closed OS phone. Granted that Symbian may be more stable, but then it is the much older more experienced OS too.
The T610 has basically one job, it operates as a phone, using it's own software, which has all been written to work together at the expense of ignoring other possibilities.
The universal has an open OS which has to allow third parties to add software, that dosn't even exist yet. This open software is bound to be slower, it has to be, it has too many possibilities it has to consider.
Comparing the speed of a T610 and a universal is like comparing the Fuel economy of a Bicycle and a Jeep. They are 2 entirely different things.
I do know what the biggest problem for the universal is. It's the end user, the majority of which are completely outside of the intended trarget audience, and missuse a little knowledge badly.
Funny how my Universal never drops call, bluetooth works perfectly for handsfree and GPS. I can't remember the last time I soft reset, and when I did it was only part of the installation of new software. It dosn't crash, freeze or run any slower then I'd expect. Why is this? Am I just incredibly lucky?
However I have been using PDA's for a long time, and have come at this device as a PDA with a phone built in, rather than the other way round. If people think a T610 is better, (and yes I did have one once). Then you have bought the completely wrong device with a Universal, because while your T610 may be faster, my Universal is providing so many more functions.
(EDIT): lol Wow, that wasn't intended to come out as such a rant.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Firstly, nothing to be sorry about... BUT gajet do stop it!
Do yourself a big favour & dont try to turn my simple statement into a silly
HTC Universal Vs. Sony Ericsson T610 contest... that is not what I said!!
you've foolishly twisted my very SIMPLE point into something utterly ridiculous my friend!
Your comparison between bicycles, Jeeps and the like is also junk pal!!
Kindly go back to my original post and take it at FACE VALUE...
A phone is a phone. A PDA is a PDA.
A PDA with a phone is what it is and so is a Phone with a PDA...
the point is anything that calls itself a phone, whether or not integrated with a toaster or a kettle, PDA or surgically inserted somewhere interesting, should therefore function both properly and effectively, and with some degree of quality as a bleedin' phone!!!
Do you agree with that statement or not?
It's quite clear... the Universals performance as a phone is somewhat cr*ppy for todays technology - its a let down, no question about it. Could be & should be better!
I've compared only that function, to a phone that was designed 5 years ago, manufactured 4 years ago and released to the public thereafter.. and that FACT is my only point here in this thread...
Now as for your own personal experience of Universals, well might I suggest searching the forum for threads which cover the FACT that the Universal - for some of us - does drop calls, Bluetooth is temperamental, are forced to soft & hard reset, and so on... I mean why is the Universal forum so huge with 100's of 1000's of views in its history, with issues AND fixes abound?
But again I must stress, my personal view is the Universals phone function is cr*ppy compared to what it really should be... This is 2006... not 2001... if you dont agree lets see what phone performance will be like in HTC's next generation & equivalent of the Universal...
Do you think they will upgrade all the other functions and leave the phone as it is then?!
get me now??

philtech44 said:
IMHO
So T610 Vs. Universal?
...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually it is exactly what you said.
And my points which you completely missed are if you are going to compare the Universal to other devices, it should be compared to it's peers, not to a completely different device. Compare the Universal to the other similar PDA/phone combos by HTC, a HP Ipaq phone edition, it would even be fair to compare against a Moto a1000, SE P910 etc
Of course these devices improve over time, my Universal is considerable better than my Blue Angel, which appears in turn to have been better than the original XDA range. So yes the next device will probably be better still, but then where on earth did you get the impression I ever thought otherwise.

Gajet said:
philtech44 said:
IMHO
So T610 Vs. Universal?
...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually it is exactly what you said.
And my points which you completely missed are if you are going to compare the Universal to other devices, it should be compared to it's peers, not to a completely different device. Compare the Universal to the other similar PDA/phone combos by HTC, a HP Ipaq phone edition, it would even be fair to compare against a Moto a1000, SE P910 etc
Of course these devices improve over time, my Universal is considerable better than my Blue Angel, which appears in turn to have been better than the original XDA range. So yes the next device will probably be better still, but then where on earth did you get the impression I ever thought otherwise.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So I did!! errr... whoops!
But still it should still operate as a phone mate & do so well.. it is sold by mobile phone companies isn't it?

No I agree with you 100% there. However when I compare the Universal to other devices of similar functionality on the current market, then it comes out very well.
In fact where I hang out usually at 3g.co.uk, they compare the Universal against other 3g phones, (Which I do realise goes completely against my main point :roll: ), but the Universal still comes out very well.
Yes the universal could be better, (mainly speed wise), but at this current point in time it does very well.
I wish I could clone mine to pass around to all those having troubles, but my suspicion is that most troubles are generated when some tweaking, or installation of third party apps are involved, or more commonly when the damn phone companies insist on using their own versions of HTC's software, (O2 Active and the damn Orange homescreen for example).
Anyway all the above is purely my oppinion, I had no intention of getting into any personal arguements and hopefully we have come to an understanding here

Gajet said:
I do know what the biggest problem for the universal is. It's the end user, the majority of which are completely outside of the intended trarget audience, and missuse a little knowledge badly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi. I don't want to crank this up to another level, especially after the last post about coming to some understanding. Us Mac guys know that you can get quite emotionally attached to your gadjets, Gajet, but that statement above is so condescending!
I don't think you give people enough credit -- some may have bought their phone because it was the most expensive and is had good "showing-off/one-upmanship" value, but most of have acquired to manage our work and life. When you pay a premium price, you expect a premium product. Using your analogy, you wouldn't expect to have handle-bars instead of a steering wheel in your Jeep, eh?
In my opinion, it is fairer to compare the functionality of a PDA with similar functions on a desktop machine. and, my gripe is still about the Contacts database -- I want editable fields and true vCard compatibility. I don't think I'm expecting too much from what is supposedly a mature product (the Contacts bit is based on Windows for PC tech after all). As this is my first Win based mobile OS I'm still trying to sort out certain issues, but I understand that even moving data from/between supposedly similar or compatible PDAs is not straight forward.
Aaahh! Maybe Mac users are just spoiled silly, hey.

Everybody keeps talking about what the thing is and what should be, but this is not the reason i started this topic for. So i must repeat myself. Who can fix bluetooth problems? Microsoft. Who can fix radio problems? Microsoft. Who can fix performance problems? Microsoft. Who can fix basic applications problems? Microsoft. Who can fix data sync problems? Microsoft. So we totally depend on Microsoft and she can take all the time she wants.

is this true ??HTCClassAction.org

Hi
I have read this http://htcclassaction.org/
If this is true???

It is true

there is no way to fix it with a cooked rom? or maybe with a cooked rom wm6.1??

I've just done a test with the Touch Dual against a Asus P526....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yHOS7tE3AZM

gears said:
I've just done a test with the Touch Dual against a Asus P526....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yHOS7tE3AZM
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
really disappointed!

So this is the cause for choppy graphics when using things like PocketCM and S2U2?

mini_man said:
So this is the cause for choppy graphics when using things like PocketCM and S2U2?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes
I really hope HTC does something about this.

Same.
It's a bit pathetic really.

I was just about to buy this device next week, but knowing this I'm nor that sure anymore. I really hope they fix it, and (from the looks of HTCClassAction) they will

Is this because of the graphics accelerator? I thought htc were going to make a fix?

Uh. Impressive. What the hell's wrong with HTC? Being the "biggest" is good enough, so they don't give a ****?
A partial reason for me to buy the dual instead of the original Touch was because I wanted optimal ****** performance, and then it turns out that we've been royally ****** probably because they want to save money?

I have a stupid question ... possible some guys have ask it in the Kaiser Related Threads ... have some guys look around for other device, they use Qualcomm Chipsets? Possible they works with HTC?
I Think Qualcomm is Evil too ...

NetrunnerAT said:
I have a stupid question ... possible some guys have ask it in the Kaiser Related Threads ... have some guys look around for other device, they use Qualcomm Chipsets? Possible they works with HTC?
I Think Qualcomm is Evil too ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it has nothing to do with qualcomm, phones from other manufacturers that use the same chipset work perfectly, the only problem here is HTC's collective laziness in writing a fully functioning driver

Midget_1990 said:
it has nothing to do with qualcomm, phones from other manufacturers that use the same chipset work perfectly, the only problem here is HTC's collective laziness in writing a fully functioning driver
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah.. I think ASUS P525 uses qualcomm but it functions perfectly.
HTC has been getting away with this since the TyTN... so now they've been doing it on all of their succeeding devices.

Update on htclassaction.org:
Update January 20, 2008: One person reported HTC support telling him an update would be released within a week. Let's wait and see!
Update January 20, 2008 #2: Another report has come on from that HTC support has said an update will be released January 28, no further details.
Update January 20, 2008 #3: One HTC support employee has stated that he guarantees they are working on fix for the video issues. It is unclear if by video issues only video playback is meant or the complete video driver package.
Another thread on Kaiser:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=359534

NICE! Too bad I was unaware of all these problems when I got my Touch Dual :\ it really is slow!

I also astonished how slow my Touch Dual is. I cannot believe that it takes to open a over 50 seconds to open 56 kb Word document. My Loox 720 PDA can open the same document in around less than 2 seconds. It certainly is not due to lack of free memory.
Word mobile is a business essential, not a multimedia toything and it should be capable of opening small documents quickly. The Loox is running WM2003SE and uses Pocket Word in which format the document is 115 kb. Is Word 6.1 slower than Pocket Word?

According to The Boy Genius Report, HTC isn't terribly interested in fixing the issue. This is the first response that has had any hint of officialness about it and it's not encouraging in the least.
http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2008/01/22/htcs-official-response-to-drivergate-buzz-off/

coreplayer mobile - buy it, its fantastic!

..................

They did the same thing with coreavc, all sorts of things promised yonks again and never delivered.

Thanks for your post, though personally I've not rencoded anything for Coreplayer, everything plays fine.

O and O said:
Thanks for your post, though personally I've not rencoded anything for Coreplayer, everything plays fine.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Try playing some 800*480, the processor isn't capable of it alone. Album and WMP can use acceleration on mp4/h264, so are capable of running higher res/bitrate files.

DVD rips play way better on Coreplayer. And most people just can't be arsed to encode a file for an hour while they can just play it instantly and fluidly with coreplayer.

dvd rip
yawn...........

I found coreplayer to juddery for full resolution movies. I find myself re-encoding most stuff anyway since there is no AC3 support and then i play them through windows media player. Works fine for me then.

As an interim measure they could just have implemented DirectShow support.
PocketPlayer has it and consequently it has hardware acceleration.
It may not allow CorePlayer to give us support for additional codecs but at least people wouldn't get mad because they've spent good money on a program that runs far slower than the free one that came with the phone.
I'm disappointed that almost 5 months since I bought CorePlayer it's still sitting there unused. For me it's been a waste of money, and I heard that they're expecting us to pay to upgrade to version 2.

Core player 1.3
I've used CP1.3 and it playes Rips without a problem (axxo, fxg, you name it) no conversion needed. 700mb straight on SD. Word of advice from the wise Don't buy, first you try.

They don't have a trial version available... but they claim on the forum that they do offer a refund if you buy it and aren't happy.

arghness said:
They don't have a trial version available... but they claim on the forum that they do offer a refund if you buy it and aren't happy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Be creative...

I have to say i to have run out of patience with Coreplayer. None of the core products seem to do anything to be honest. I tried Corecodec on my netbook, but it didn't improve performance over ffdshow at all, if anything it just made the output look worse.
For the HD i just use MP4forHD, conversion takes but moments on my quad core anyway.

Bugblatter said:
As an interim measure they could just have implemented DirectShow support.
PocketPlayer has it and consequently it has hardware acceleration.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Pocket player is very slow when playing a .mp4 vide on my HD.
But WMP can play it fine. So either pocket player don't use the hardware acceleration or there is a settgin somewhere to enable it (so if you know about it please..pleas...).
I'm looking ofr a software that can remember where I am in a video (coreplayer can do it, I think pocket player can also do it). And that can use the hardware acceleration like in WMP.
Is there a plugin for WMP that could help me ?

Dogtag said:
Be creative...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
MOD EDIT
coreplayer is not freeware......please don't promote warez here.
thank you

Wow... nice flame, how about inviting me?
As far as stoolzo he was warned and then banned for not following the forum rules, no diff then he would here if he posted here out of line.
As far as the other posts/flames...
arfster... pls be specific to CoreAVC.... we have delivered everything we stated for 1.x including NVIDIA CUDA support. What we you looking for, higher res video not created for mobile devices? Come on.
arghness... correct we have no trial but we also have a no questions asked refund policy for CorePlayer. If it does not work for you, then you deserve your money back, simple.
Bugblatter... directshow is coming and as of now I am unaware of any other media player that supports as many hardware GPU schemes that CorePlayer does; Xscale, QtV (overlay), RMI, PS2, ATI Imageon and Coming later this year is both CUDA and OpenCL.
Bugblatter... also please tell me when PP added hardware accelleration support. For what GPU's?

beta_boy said:
Coming later this year is both CUDA and OpenCL.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Will the Blackstone make use of this? The QTv support isn't useful at all, at least it doesn't improve the playback .
You have announced (here) that you plan to support QTv, how is it going on this matter?

stoolzo said:
After reading various reviews and the bumpf on their website about qtv and codec support i decided to purchase copeplayer for my touch hd. I soon found that where it was definately better than tcmp it wasnt £20 better. The main reason for the purchase though was the promise to have full QTV support which was promised by one of the developers "betaBoy" in various forumn threads. When it because clear that these promises where becoming empty I created a few threads to discuss this and question where the delays wre coming from. For this had all my threads deleted and after question "betaboy" through the private message forum I was banned for suggesting that it would be better to rencode existing media and use the HTC album player as it had full acceleration. Coreplayer are clearly hiding the fact that coreplayr will never have full support for the TOuch HD chipset and DO NOT PURCHASE THIS..!!!. Re-encoding is a pain but the results are nothing less than miraculous.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for the useful news. But does TCPMP really work on Touch HD ? When I tried it I got an error and a log file to submit to developers... but it seems the project was discontinued. Maybe do exist more versions ? Some advice, please

forum ban
yawn............

its amazing what you can find on google
yawn..................

I've said this before and I will say it again in case you may have missed it.
We are ALL limited for supporting Qtv and by 'WE' I mean _ANY_ developer. Qualcomm has never released an SDK with any details of Snapdragon/Qtv's API's and what we have done in CorePlayer is reverse engineer what we could to support 'overlay only'. No other media player has attempted to do this and we did this are the specific request of our Community, including here at XDA.
Now as far as fully supporting Qtv/Snapdragon... we are working on directshow support atm for Windows and Windows CE/Mobile and it looks on the surface that we 'may' be able to full support the embedded CE/WM directshow filters that are on the supported devices.
The question is if we will need to finish the CE/WM port of the Haali Media Splitter. We are still a few weeks away before we get to the point but I'll fill everyone in as we continue to work on it.

directx 9 on hd2

does the gpu of hd2 is powerful enough to handle directx 9 announced as requirement for wp7

I was wondering the same thing the other day and couldn't find any official spec sheets. I asked over in one of the threads in the WP7s forums and I got the idea that OpenGL ES 2.0 was supported, which was 'basically the same.'

does any one know any useful info

http://brew.qualcomm.com/brew_bnry/pdf/brew_2007/Tech-303_Ligon.pdf
See page 15 for the best tech specs I've seen on the snapdragon / z430 / ATI LT. Still very light on details but claims direct3d sm3 support.

For that specific chipset (MSM7850) they claim DX9 support on page 31.
Their old chip (7500) supports DX7.
Since that was 2007, we can presume they've maintained similar compatibility in their newer (8250) chipset, yes?

Missed that bit, now all we need is a driver </sarcasm> for the humour impaired.

[sarcasm]obviously MS is aiming really high this time..
DX9 compatible portable devices, that use huge amounts of power so they can do what?
render a load of bloody text!
whoopppeee !
[/sarcasm]

so tje final answer is that hd2 gpu is enough for directx 9 or what?

The only correct answer to anything around here is, that noone knows nothing at all!
We can't run DX9 on WMPS7 so what ever?!
Before everyone freaks out, about fckn WMPS7, why not wait until you really see something?
Actually all the previews by microsoft were pretty ****ty! The phones worked pretty slow, I dont like that "hub" thing, and they are limited to the ground!
Thats what I would call "YaI" -> Yet another Iphone...
I'm loving WM6 and the only OS I'll be switching to, if WM6 dies (what i dont think, cuz there are more programmers who like WM6) will be android, but not another limited bull**** os

VisualD said:
http://brew.qualcomm.com/brew_bnry/pdf/brew_2007/Tech-303_Ligon.pdf
See page 15 for the best tech specs I've seen on the snapdragon / z430 / ATI LT. Still very light on details but claims direct3d sm3 support.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
after reading i think it supports it