CE outsells PalmOS (Western European Handheld Device Operating System Shares, 2003, IDC) - Handheld

This is a discussion on CE outsells PalmOS (Western European Handheld Device Operating System Shares, 2003, IDC) - Handheld ; Captain's log. On StarDate Sat, 31 Jan 2004 21:12:06 +0100 received comm from "Sander van der Wal" on channel comp.sys.handhelds: : Series 60 already has a unified UI. Icons are different, but using them is I know. That was what ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 27 of 27

Thread: CE outsells PalmOS (Western European Handheld Device Operating System Shares, 2003, IDC)

  1. Re: CE outsells PalmOS (Western European Handheld Device Operating System Shares, 2003, IDC)

    Captain's log. On StarDate Sat, 31 Jan 2004 21:12:06 +0100 received comm from
    "Sander van der Wal" on channel comp.sys.handhelds:

    : Series 60 already has a unified UI. Icons are different, but using them is

    I know. That was what I was trying to say was a good thing.

    : identical across the different models (even for different vendors). Nokia
    : itself doesn't believe in a single UI, given the existsence of the Series
    : 40, Series 60, Series 80 and Series 90 UI's. Which are all different.

    This was also what I was thinking about when I wrote (here I quote myself):

    >distributions of it, and that's a problem Nokia solves buy setting a tighter
    >standard for it (and also license it to other hardware manufactures), with just
    >a couple of different packages of it (for different type of devices and form
    >factors).


    End of previous quote by be concerning exactly this.

    This also why I believe it's a good thing that Microsoft has different ready
    made packages (as in different software and UI) of Windows CE for different type
    of devices, like Smart Phones and Pocket PC.

    My point was just that it's (IMHO) a good thing for Symbian OS if Nokia makes a
    standard for it for different device types (Series XX), and not that every phone
    manufactures in the world tries to reinvent the wheel by themselves by providing
    different and incompatible versions of the Symbian OS.

    : > : In that case you would have Nokia, PalmSource and Microsoft as the three
    : > : mayor phone OS vendors. Nobody cares.
    : >
    : > I think you forget Linux and other OSS OS, even if they also (IMHO) suffer
    : from
    : > the same problem as the general Symbian OS (and general CE.NET for that
    : matter)
    : > when it comes to specific devices as smart phones.
    :
    : No I didn't forget them. I don't think that these will become popular. The
    : licensing price of the OS isnt't the issue.

    I agree it's likely not the main issue, but I think we still will see some Linux
    based phones on the market (but for some other reasons than being gratis).

    Best regards,

    martin törnsten

    --
    http://82.182.73.126/

  2. Re: CE outsells PalmOS (Western European Handheld Device OperatingSystem Shares, 2003, IDC)

    "Martin Törnsten" wrote:
    > My point was just that it's (IMHO) a good thing for Symbian OS if Nokia makes a
    > standard for it for different device types (Series XX), and not that every phone
    > manufactures in the world tries to reinvent the wheel by themselves by providing
    > different and incompatible versions of the Symbian OS.


    I think that the differences related only to the UI which each manufacturer
    has decied to customise. This is what still makes a Nokia phone have a better
    user interface than say a Siemens.

    And consider that there are different types of phones ranging from
    conventional handsets to PDAs with phone functionlaity.

    What EPOC32/Symbian provides is a common foundation with the basic services.
    They share kernel development, various APIs, various stacks (such as GPRS,
    SMS, MMS etc), and various base services such as image interpretors, probably
    sound/midi engines etc.

    So the different handset manufacturers do not have to re-invent the wheel for
    all the stuff that is below the UI. But they get to decide how they phone will
    look and feel, which retains competition between hansets.

    What seems to be happening though is that some manufacturers produce a batch
    of phones with one version of EPOC, while another manufacturer waits for the
    next release of EPOC to base its software on. So you have, at the same time on
    the market, phones that are based on different versions of Symbian/EPOC32.

    While on the market you may see different implementations of EPOC at any one
    time, there is still just one group developping the kernel and stacks. So
    Symbian's owners do benefit from shared development costs. Some take advantage
    of the latest release while others use a previous version.

    > I agree it's likely not the main issue, but I think we still will see some Linux
    > based phones on the market (but for some other reasons than being gratis).


    You might see Linux PDAs with a phone attachement, but I doubt that the phone
    itself would run under Linux.

  3. Re: CE outsells PalmOS (Western European Handheld Device Operating System Shares, 2003, IDC)

    Captain's log. On StarDate Sun, 01 Feb 2004 20:22:14 -0500 received comm from JF
    Mezei on channel comp.sys.handhelds:

    : I think that the differences related only to the UI which each manufacturer
    : has decied to customise. This is what still makes a Nokia phone have a better
    : user interface than say a Siemens.

    Why not let Nokia, if good at this, standardize the UI for all different types
    of devices?

    : And consider that there are different types of phones ranging from
    : conventional handsets to PDAs with phone functionlaity.

    I think Nokia (and also Microsoft) already have considered this. Smartphones
    from MS have a very different UI from Pocket PC for example. The same goes for
    Nokias different sets of packages.

    : What EPOC32/Symbian provides is a common foundation with the basic services.
    : They share kernel development, various APIs, various stacks (such as GPRS,
    : SMS, MMS etc), and various base services such as image interpretors, probably
    : sound/midi engines etc.

    Sure, also Linux and CE.NET provides a common kernel and OS services, but what
    I¨'m talking about here is 1) a standard UI for a typical device type and 2) a
    standard set of applications for it.

    I think that would be good for both end users and developers.

    Best regards,

    martin törnsten

    --
    http://82.182.73.126/

  4. Re: CE outsells PalmOS (Western European Handheld Device Operating System Shares, 2003, IDC)

    On 29 Jan 2004 08:30:50 GMT, cnahaboo@ilog.fr (Colas Nahaboo) wrote:

    >In article <3fng10d67se8u4fn05cvl89pfscf8lejjc@4ax.com>,
    > Martin T?ten writes:
    >>I also agree with JF M that it's quite difficult to what a handheld/PDA is or
    >>isn't,


    .. . .

    Well not really. "Personal Digital Assistant" (PDA) was defined
    by John Scully and Apple. Vague though that definition was, it
    was specifically a device with a high degree of ARTIFICIAL
    INTELLIGENCE. It was not simply a device to store and retrieve
    data, but to ASSIST you in storing, retrieving and transfering
    data by using that artificial intelligence capability. That is
    why the word "assistant" is there. If it does not have that
    AI component, then it is not a PDA. Most people writing in this
    field either never knew this (they did not do their homework),
    or have forgotten, or are simply being lazy.

    There are no current PDAs on the market. The last PDA
    made was perhaps the Apple Newton series, which, to a limited
    ability to deal with data using "normal English". To a limited
    extent, you could write something like "lunch with Karen Tuesday,
    13:00" and it might actually create the appropriate appointment
    in its datebook. Actually, I do not know if the above example
    would have worked. I found that you had to use "magic formulae"
    (ie fairly precise wording) to get it to do what you wanted.
    It was generally worth it to ignore this theoretical capability
    and simply going to the Datebook program and create your
    appointment manually. But still, the ability was there, even
    in the first version Newtons.

    No current handhelds are even attempting this level of
    AI capability. Therefore, there are *no* current PDAs. Any
    writer who says otherwise is either being lazy (and yes, I
    am that lazy too sometimes) or simply does not know better
    because s/he has not done their research properly (and to
    that extent is incompetent).

    There are, however, a lot of really nice little handheld
    devices out there. . . .

    >For me, a PDA is something that you can use as a brain extension,


    .. . .

    Actually, you have almost got that right. Not a bad
    guess! :-)

    Otherwise, let me comment about the original posting. Do
    not take that number at face value. There are a lot of ways
    that companies have "played" with stats like that. For example,
    a company as big as H-P can make a lot of devices and "pre-sell"
    to wholesalers (who have not even paid for them) and it looks
    really great in these periodic reports. Companies like IDC
    do fall for that kind of manipulation. It may even take a
    couple of years before that kind of thing becomes apparent --
    if ever. Looking around me in the real world, I have not seen
    confirmation of any breakthrough of WinCE devices in actual
    units in use.

    Incidentally, the newest device I have seen locally is
    the LinuxDA device by "Empower".

    --
    The Moving Target: mobile information technology
    http://www.pathcom.com/~jimomura/


  5. Re: CE outsells PalmOS (Western European Handheld Device Operating System Shares, 2003, IDC)

    wrote in message
    news:bs7d20hnk4cijopd5gptppqguec76shlgd@4ax.com...

    >
    > There are no current PDAs on the market. The last PDA
    > made was perhaps the Apple Newton series, which, to a limited
    > ability to deal with data using "normal English". To a limited
    > extent, you could write something like "lunch with Karen Tuesday,
    > 13:00" and it might actually create the appropriate appointment
    > in its datebook. Actually, I do not know if the above example
    > would have worked. I found that you had to use "magic formulae"
    > (ie fairly precise wording) to get it to do what you wanted.
    > It was generally worth it to ignore this theoretical capability
    > and simply going to the Datebook program and create your
    > appointment manually. But still, the ability was there, even
    > in the first version Newtons.
    >

    AFAICR, having seen the early Newtons in operation, if you wrote "lunch with
    Karen Tuesday,
    13:00", it would interpret that as, for example "my hovercraft is full of
    eels", or some such.

    --
    Tumbleweed

    Remove theobvious before replying (but no email reply necessary to
    newsgroups)





  6. Re: CE outsells PalmOS (Western European Handheld Device OperatingSystem Shares, 2003, IDC)

    Good day,

    > There are no current PDAs on the market. The last PDA
    > made was perhaps the Apple Newton series, which, to a limited
    > ability to deal with data using "normal English". To a limited
    > extent, you could write something like "lunch with Karen Tuesday,
    > 13:00" and it might actually create the appropriate appointment
    > in its datebook. Actually, I do not know if the above example
    > would have worked. I found that you had to use "magic formulae"
    > (ie fairly precise wording) to get it to do what you wanted.
    > It was generally worth it to ignore this theoretical capability
    > and simply going to the Datebook program and create your
    > appointment manually. But still, the ability was there, even
    > in the first version Newtons.
    >
    > No current handhelds are even attempting this level of
    > AI capability. Therefore, there are *no* current PDAs. Any
    > writer who says otherwise is either being lazy (and yes, I
    > am that lazy too sometimes) or simply does not know better
    > because s/he has not done their research properly (and to
    > that extent is incompetent).


    I take it that you say "no current *PDAs*" as per your definition as an
    assumption -- i.e., you haven't actually looked it up.

    Microsoft releases a Pocket PC 2003 program that features natural
    language voice recognition. So theoretically, you can set an
    appointment just by talking to your device.

    Naturally, it probably doesn't work all that well... ;-)

    Best regards,
    Michael Tam

    --
    -------------------------------------
    Michael Tam
    e-mail: vitualis (at) michaeltam.com
    website: http://www.michaeltam.com

  7. Re: CE outsells PalmOS (Western European Handheld Device Operating System Shares, 2003, IDC)

    On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 10:54:34 +1100, Michael Tam
    wrote:

    >Good day,


    >> There are no current PDAs on the market. The last PDA
    >> made was perhaps the Apple Newton series, which, to a limited
    >> ability to deal with data using "normal English". To a limited
    >> extent, you could write something like "lunch with Karen Tuesday,
    >> 13:00" and it might actually create the appropriate appointment
    >> in its datebook. Actually, I do not know if the above example
    >> would have worked. I found that you had to use "magic formulae"
    >> (ie fairly precise wording) to get it to do what you wanted.
    >> It was generally worth it to ignore this theoretical capability
    >> and simply going to the Datebook program and create your
    >> appointment manually. But still, the ability was there, even
    >> in the first version Newtons.


    >> No current handhelds are even attempting this level of
    >> AI capability. Therefore, there are *no* current PDAs. Any
    >> writer who says otherwise is either being lazy (and yes, I
    >> am that lazy too sometimes) or simply does not know better
    >> because s/he has not done their research properly (and to
    >> that extent is incompetent).


    >I take it that you say "no current *PDAs*" as per your definition
    >as an assumption -- i.e., you haven't actually looked it up.


    I do not understand your point. "look(ed) it up" where?
    That *is* the point. If Apple and/or Scully made up the word,
    then THEY defined it. What I am telling you is what Apple
    said was a PDA back when they were introducing the idea. I
    was part of the reporting media back then, so I had first hand
    knowledge. Ie: They told me, and now I am telling you. So
    whose definition should I "look up" and why should anyone
    consider it more of an authority than Apple or John Scully?

    >Microsoft releases a Pocket PC 2003 program that features natural
    >language voice recognition. So theoretically, you can set an
    >appointment just by talking to your device.


    That is a very good point. I have not tried that
    program yet because I have decided to skip the current
    crop of 2003 and wait for 2004. All I can say is that
    nothing in their advertising claims the level of integration
    that Apple claimed (and sort of delivered) in the Newton.
    I have worded that last sentence deliberately. Microsoft's
    advertising is a bit vague. Apple's claims for the
    Newton were also vague and, I feel, exaggerated. From what
    Microsoft seems to say in their advertising is that they
    have added some flexibility. Ie, there are more words and
    phrases that can do the same thing. That is all they seem
    to be claiming. Apple claimed, and delivered, something
    more pervasive.

    Take that example I gave before and let me
    put it into perspective. The example I gave was not
    entirely in context. That phrase "lunch with Karen
    Tuesday, 13:00", could be written anywhere, anytime.
    It could be in the middle of a memo. It could be
    something I wrote while in the middle of a 3rd party
    spreadsheet. In theory, as soon as I wrote it, all
    I had to do was highlight it (by dragging my stylus
    across it) and then double tapping on it. As I said
    before, to an extent, it actually did work. The only
    problem was that a truly natural language system
    should be able to do this with "See Karen for Lunch
    13:00 on Tuesday", "Tuesday, Karen, 13:00, hamburgers"
    or any number of other equivalent wordings. The
    Newton really could not cope with that wide a range
    of alternatives.

    The Microsoft claim seems to be more like, if
    you are at the desktop level you can say "call
    John" and if it is not ambiguous, it will dial
    John's phone number, whereas if you are in the
    Word program, you would still have to find a way
    to back to the desktop, or to directly open the
    addresses before you tried the "call John"
    command. This is partly the difference between
    a screen input and a voice input system, so it
    might not be a good example.

    Hopefully, later this year I will get around
    to testing it and then I might have more to say about
    it.

    >Naturally, it probably doesn't work all that well... ;-)


    Well, yes, nothing in voice or handwriting
    recognition seems to work all thay well. . . .
    Though, you would think that current with WinCE
    devices having around 10x - 20x the processing power
    of the original Newtons, and much more memory,
    they could have something much better if they keep
    moving in that direction.

    --
    The Moving Target: mobile information technology
    http://www.pathcom.com/~jimomura/


+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2