COCOViper

Palm Investors Await 'Pre'-lude

Worse than Att's network- you're joking right? Sprint has a 3G footprint 3 times the size of Att not to mention all the capacity problems Att has.

Seriously Geddy bring something to the conversation besides FUD for once.


On Jun 23 12:28 PM Geddy wrote:

> But Sprint's network is horrible. I know you work for them but please!!
>

Palm: It's Official, Pre to Launch June 6 for $200

@Yagottabe Kidding

No it IS misinformation

Best Buy and Radio Shack don't do mail in rebates yet sell Sprint phones for the same price as their after rebate price so at those stores it will be $199 OUT THE DOOR.

And again the Touchstone dock is optional and not a required accessory. Why don't you just go ahead and tack on a leather case and a car charger to further spread FUD?

How about we talk about Att's iPhone plans vs. Sprint's? To match Sprint's $99 unlimited voice, data, text, and navigation plan requires spending almost $200 on Att. And the Pre also works on Sprint's $69 plan which still offers unlimited data, text, and navigation. How much is that on Att?

Misinformation indeed.

RIMM Responds to Competition with the Niagara

@Jon T

The "web apps" on the Pre are completely different that the first generation iPhone's apps. The iPhone were web applications in the classic sense (the actual app was run off a remote server, the application was dependent on your connection meaning it could lag, slow down, or even drop out).

The Pre's applications simply make use of web programming languages but the app resides on the phone itself and, unless functionality requires it, doesn't require a connection to the network to work. Palm set it up this way because web programming skills are everywhere today and putting a basic web application together is the easiest and quickest way to go for most programmers.

There's lots of info out there on Palm's WebOS...you might want to do some research.

On Mar 27 10:32 AM Jon T wrote:

> Despite all the high praise and attention, the Palm Pre is a version
> 1.0 iPhone lookalike. It's apps are just web apps - which the first
> generation iPhone was slammed for having. Because it's Palm it will
> now be hooray?!?

World's Biggest WiMax Bet

Quote from Geddy: "Don't be fooled that LTE is that far behind."

Quote from AT&T's VP of Network Architecture: "LTE technology will not be rolled out for at least another three years--and probably not on a large commercial scale for another five years." -www.fiercewireless.com...

Thus, those that read his comments might want to take them with a grain of salt (especially when he uses a still in development tech to bash an already launched tech.)

Sprint: Follow This Instinct

To Donald Johnson:

I work at Sprint as a Network Engineer and would like to see if I can address your problem for you. Shoot me an email at david.schmuck@sprint.c... .

Thanks!

Sprint Fights Back

RE: then tell me why

I work for Sprint and I'd certainly be willing to try to help you out. Email me at david.schmuck@sprint.c... and I'll do my best!

Just What the Telcos Didn't Want to Hear

There is simply no scientific basis for this. Not only do virtually all studies demonstrate little to no correlation of cell phone use to cancer, it scientifically doesn't even make sense.

If non-ionizing RF energy is dangerous, why are we not also warning people to stay away from WiFi, cell towers, radio towers, and tractor trailers (via their communication systems) ? All of these sources put out far more RF energy than a cell phone does. And it's not like it's a different "kind" of energy, some of them are in virtually the same frequency bands as CDMA and GSM. I love how this scientist when pushed says "well...better safe than sorry." Seriously? Do you know how many things we should get rid of if that's our criteria?

Why Cable and WiMax Shouldn't Mix

Everyone’s comments above (except Geddy who seems to know nothing about 3G (i.e. EVDO-A) vs. 4G (WiMax)) hit the nail on the head.

WiMax has its problems, and so does Clearwire and Sprint- but if anyone thinks tech boundaries get pushed without problems, it seems they have been asleep in a cave for the last 100 years. Similar problems were faced by both companies and tech in the deployment of everything from the original POTS telephone system up to the continued roll out of wired broadband today.

To the victors belong the spoils, and while it is risky, the best way to BE victorious is to take risks and fix the problems as they come; not sell off and run away because it's difficult. That's called refusing to compete and it lands you companies like Matrox, IBM's former PC division, VIA, etc...All companies that were once the best in their respective markets but as soon as they got heavy competition and problems; they surrendered and now just try to survive.