I've used every PocketPC - this is the best
Written: Aug 03 '00
|
Product Rating:
|
|
|
Pros: Speed, Battery Life, USB, TFT reflective display
Cons: No CF slot, 'milky' display appearance indoors, poor button hardware
|
|
|
| bitbank's Full Review: Compaq iPAQ H3650 Pocket PC |
I am a software developer and wrote the PacMan emulator for Microsoft's PocketPC release in April. Being a software developer working with Microsoft, I have owned and/or tested every HPC/PPC/PocketPC device and so far, this is my favorite one. It does not score a perfect 10 on all points, but overall it is the 'coolest' PocketPC. Let's not bring the Windows CE operating system into this opinion since I am aiming to compare this hardware with similar functioning devices. Currently available devices to directly compare with the iPAQ are:
1) Casio E115
2) HP Jornada 54X
3) Compaq Aero 21xx
4) Compaq Aero 15xx
The characteristics most important to me about the hardware are the following:
1) Size/Weight
2) Display readability and responsiveness
3) Battery Life
4) Buttons
5) PC Interface
6) Speed
The size/weight of iPAQ is superior to all of the above devices except the Aero 15xx. This, however is a slow b&w device and not really a fair comparison. One thing to note is that if you plan on using CF or PCMCIA cards with the iPAQ, the sleeve needed to use them will make the iPAQ the thickest and/or heaviest of all of the devices. This is an important consideration, but I don't need these extras so the iPAQ is the slimmest and lightest of the current devices.
There is a debate now as to whether the display of the iPAQ is superior or inferior to that of the Casio E115. In a way it is both superior and inferior at the same time. It uses a TFT (active matrix) reflective display with side lighting. This allows it to be used indoors and in direct sunlight. It looks great in sunlight, but looks a bit 'milky' indoors compared to the E115. The HP display looks a bit worse than the iPAQ's and is a passive matrix (slow response) which is not good for game playing. The Aero 21xx display is similar to the iPAQ's, but the backlighting is much dimmer and looks pretty poor indoors. The iPAQ has an innovative feature which uses a light sensor to automatically adjust the display brightness to the ambient light. This fact, along with the outdoor performance put the iPAQ's display quality above all the others.
The iPAQ uses a new battery technology called Lithium Polymer which has a longer life than the Li-Ion used in other devices. Compaq claims a 12-15 hour battery life which is far superior to the other devices. I do not have any personal experience draining the battery, so I will believe them. The only negative side is that the battery is not user-replaceable. If it behaves better than Li-Ion, then by the time you need to replace the battery the iPAQ will be obsolete (~ 1 year :) )
The button layout of the iPAQ is intelligent and includes a 'game-pad' with 4-directions and a center 'action' button. This is very similar to the Casio and superior to the other devices. The iPAQ looks like it was designed to allow gaming, but a fatal flaw is that the buttons use a 'serial' interface and only 1 button can be used at a time. In other words, if you are holding a direction button then a 'fire' button will be disabled. This means that gaming is severely limited. There may be a 'fix' for this in the future, but for now we are stuck with it. The Casio wins for the best and most functional buttons.
The iPAQ comes standard with the USB cradle. The data transfer rate is faster than a RS232 interface, but does not appear to run at the USB max rate. There is an optional RS232 interface for the iPAQ (which one can use with an external modem). The Casio only has a RS232 interface, the HP has both and the Compaq Aero's only have RS232 (as far as I know).
The iPAQ has the fastest CPU of all of the current devices (206Mhz ARM) versus the 131Mhz MIPS (Casio), 133Mhz SH3 (HP) and 75Mhz MIPS (Aeros). In my testing, game code seems to run about 3-5 times faster than the Casio E115. This could be due to a better compiler, better caching, faster video memory or a host of other issues, but basically the iPAQ is way ahead of the pack in terms of speed. The CE interface is quite zippy and the built-in apps run noticeably faster than the other devices.
Overall the iPAQ wins because of its display attributes, size, weight, battery, speed, USB interface and 'cool' look/feel. It has some minor flaws, but it is basically a 'best of breed' product compared to the current offerings of other CE hardware manufacturers.
Recommended:
Yes
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID:
bitbank
|
|
Member: Larry Bank
Location: Coral Springs, Florida
Reviews written: 17
Trusted by: 9 members
|
|
|
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.