HP is pleased to announce that it will support MS Windows Mobile 2003 SE on new products planned for launch in 2H2004. After extensive assessments of MS Windows Mobile 2003 SE support on current products HP has decided not to offer this upgrade on existing product platforms. However, HP will provide users with a more secure experience through the use of WiFi Protected Access Support (WPA) on selected models.
Assessment of Core Microsoft Windows Mobile 2003 SE Features:
- VGA Support - Landscape Support - WiFi Protected Access (WPA)
VGA Support: While the VGA viewing experience might be more enjoyable for certain users, the support is designed for products that contain VGA screens. The operating system alone does not enable VGA viewing on current QVGA (240 x 320) screens. HP provides 3.5" and 3.8" Transflective Display Screens on HP iPAQ h1930, h1940, h2200, h4100, h4300, h5100 and h5500 series products.
Landscape Support: This support provides dynamic switching between screen orientations from Portrait to landscape. With the March announcement of Windows Mobile 2003 Second Edition, tools became available to the extended application Development Community, so the wide variety of third-party application could take advantage of the landscape mode. While Microsoft's standard applications will function in landscape mode not all of the value-added software could take advantage of this feature. Many developers are focusing their efforts on the next release of their applications, as opposed to devising a retro-fit for existing versions.
WiFi Protected Access (WPA) Support: WPA is designed to make wireless networks more secure. HP has already offered this on our current iPAQ Products as a ROM update under the MS Windows Mobile 2003 Operating System. This update can be found on our Support and Drivers website for the HP iPAQ Pocket PC h5500 series product. Currently, we are working on a release for the HP iPAQ Pocket PC h4000 series. Please check the HP website for release of these ROM updates.
**PPC 2003 SE FAQ's**
1. Why did HP not offer Microsoft Windows Mobile 2003 SE on current shipping products?
HP completed extensive assessments of the Microsoft Windows Mobile 2003 SE in supporting current shipping products. The majority of our customers have been asking for HP to provide more security for their wireless networks, so the decision was made to offer WiFi Protected Access (WPA) Support. Our customer feedback for the landscape support was that it was a nice to have but not critical to the use of their product.
2. Can I get Landscape support by itself?
No, landscape support is part of the Microsoft Windows Mobile 2003 SE. Unfortunately, because it is part of the core operating system, it is not offered as a stand-alone feature.
3. Can I have WPA support for my h22xx/h19xx devices when used with an SDIO WLAN Card?
WPA support is available for the h2200 & h1940 series Pocket PC with ROM update version 1.10.xx. The h1940 is available in limited languages.
4. Will future models from HP be able to support Windows Mobile 2003 Second Edition?
Yes, you will find Microsoft Windows Mobile 2003 SE available on new products from HP this year.
5. Will HP update the current shipping products in the future with new Windows Mobile releases?
HP cannot make assurances of future ROM image updates that provide enhancements to Microsoft Windows Mobile 2003. Our goal is to maintain a quality product release and provide resolutions to issues on existing ROM images while releasing new iPAQ products with the latest offerings from Microsoft. HP evaluates each release provided from Microsoft and determines the value and quality of that release before making the decision to invest in developing the enhancement of a ROM image for existing products. HP must also weigh the amount of development time required to complete a new release for handheld devices with the timing of future HP and Microsoft updates. Going forward, ROM sizes are going to play a key role in the decision to offer OS enhancements. As more features are added to the ROM image, fewer devices will have the capability to support these types of enhancement update.
Regards, HP iPaq Team
Note: If you are the author of this question and wish to assign points to any of the answers, please login first.For more information on assigning points ,click
here
thanks for popping in and keeping us updated... I'm sure I speak for all of us when I say your presence is more than welcome, its semi-comforting.
Please know that personally I do not begrudge the poor techs and help-desk gurus currently fielding all the angry calls; this decision was made on high, and the guys in the trenches work hard and certainly deserve respect. I just wish the powers that be could tune in here and read through some of these posts, since we all use our handhelds for a variety of tasks- meaning some may appreciate the update that others deem unnecessary. I would gladly pay for an SE option on my new iPAQ, 60$ sounds reasonable, and you can bet that I won't be calling in to whine if one of my programs doesn't quite work right out of the gate.
thanks again for making your presence known, have a good night and don't hesitate to email myself or an of the other helpful people here regarding the update or our opinions on iPAQ in general.
I purchased an HP iPAQ 4150 just on two weeks ago. Before that I was using an HP 620LX and after looking at the competition (both Win OS and Palm OS) I came to the conclusion that the 4150 was the 'best fit' for me. It is robust, does not seem very 'buggy' and it does what it advertises. Just because I cannot get 2003 SE does not make it out-of-date. It still does all it did last week, even though I now hear that I cannot get (do I REALLY need it) 2003SE update. I think part of the issue is more the 'overclocker' sub-culture who buys hardware in the hope that sometime inthe future it will do more than it is advertised at the time of purchase. A serious user (not a hobby user) is not that concerned with features like landscape mode ... after all you can buy programmes that do switch to landscape. The serious user is interested in using the handheld to enhance his or her productivity and not as a 'bragging' conversation point at parties. You may surmise from this reply that I am satisfied with what I bought three weeks ago and I do not feel short-changed because the (so-called) 'latest and greatest' may not now be offered to me as an upgrade. The 620LX served me well for about six years and I know that I will get a similar run out of the 4150, because of the PROVEN quality of HP products. Enough said!
I do consider myself to be a serious user. I find browsing with Pocket IE in the portrait mode inferior to browsing in landscape mode. I have tried several landscape programs. They only prove that landscape must be handled in the the firmware.
I cannot see the point of buying something purely on the basis that it can be upgraded and indeed upgrading is a much more complex and costly task on portable devices such as these handhelds. I tend to the view that if I need something more up-to-date then I will have to face the fact that sometimes in life you have to buy a new product. There seems to be an awful lot of hysteria about the non-availability of 2003 SE on existing models when those models the hardware was never designed and tested for use with windows 2003 SE. Where I do have sympathy is in cases where people purchased models based on incorrect representations that 2003 SE would be available as an upgrade.
Charles, I am absolutely with you. Yes, i agree and have to admit ... my 5555...is outdated. Well, all will be resolved buying a brand new HP 4705 or a 6315.
Everybody, Face it like life. Life changes, and even more so do the technology. Like i remember one phrase: a Toyota will be still Toyota, it will never be like driving a Lexus. In terms of speed & more functionality, it is good to upgrade our current models. Yes, that include the 5500 series, 5400 series and even 4150, 4350.
Let forget about this thing and dont waste time on such a ridiculous-no-results-debate and MOVE ON.
I don't think HP is shaking too hard with the fear of losing business over this. If your company switches to Dell you will have the same problems and not be able to upgrade to 2003SE (last word is they aren't supporting an upgrade as well). Also for everyone that switches from HP for this issue (relativly small concidering other possible issues i.e. handgrips, previous patches, etc.) there are a number of people switching to HP because of some other issues with the hardware they currently have.
Hopefully we can all have a change of view but maybe if we do not share it we can at least all help. I accept that expectations have been raised as to the availability of WM2003SE on existing models. It is also clear that some people have purchased equipment on the premise and indeed in some cases a misrepresentation that an upgrade would be available. There is a remedy in such cases subject of course to being in a postion to evidence the misrepresentation.
Dell are NOT offering the upgrade so threats against HP to buy Dell are being harsh to HP. Is it mere rumour that Toshiba are pulling out of the market? Is Toshiba only making it available so far on one model? If anyone can confirm what is the postion I think it would be helpful.
If there is widespread demand for HP to supply an upgrade and with a proviso that people are prepared to pay for it then even though I undestand the dilemma for HP I would think a fair campaign for a change of heart would be reasonable. Everyone here probably has a lot of contacts who do not participate in the forum but have Ipaqs. Everyone has opportunities to lobby HP on a mass scale. You all have the e-mail addresses for the CEO and Corporate Advisory Group and the Board of Directors. You all have all the PPC magazines online and otherwise and you can all post so that they become aware of the depth of feeling. You can all contact your local media - newspapers, magazines, radio and television. If there is really massive demand for a change of heart then I would like to feel that HP will take this into account. It is important, therefore, that those who feel strongly about the issue should focus strongly on it and lobby, lobby and lobby. Even those who feel neutral or do not see a burden rests with HP to do anything might well support - not for their own benefit but for the common good. After all it is a community where you can all row in the same direction and not end up attacking each other on past or current differences.
But it is well to bear in mind that for say a couple of hundred people it is just not economically viable for a manufacturer to make available upgrades over a range of Ipaqs. There are not so many posters here from the UK but I have been asking around today from people who have purchased Ipaqs - 5 so far and the feedback is not one of outrage. In fact it has been more that they are happy with what they have got and why do they need an upgrade rather than it being life and death to have one. I think therefore if there is any evidence of there being wholesale demand for a product upgrade that has to be clearly established. It's no use just say 50 or 100 people posting here - it will not change anything.
It is right to be fair to HP - if they are to listen to views that there is huge demand that must be demonstrated. It would be wholly unreasonable for HP to go through a program to make upgrades available only to find that most people never bothered to order. I think, therefore, that HP needs to be convinced.
To HP. I was a previous owner of a Toshiba's e740 and was very angry about the whole PPC2003 upgrade issue at the time. My decision was to change to HP, hoping for a better understanding that I won't change device each time an OS upgrade is made available. I surely didn't do that with my PC over the years. So, I bought an 4150 a few months ago. Beside the fact that the 4150 is a great device, I want to have a choice to upgrade it or not, knowing that it is technically possible and that I am willing to pay for the upgrade. I think HP is better to make a 50$ profit for an upgrade than a 0$ profit because my next PPC might not be a HP. Thank you.
I too have no further plans to purchase any more technology equipment from HP. The old saying "too big for their britches" comes to mind. I work in a technology department where I have some say in the product lines we acquire and support. We have already stopped all printer purchase and leases with the HP name on them. PDA's went from the 360LX, 620LX, Jornada 680, 820, 690, 720, 540 series and currently the 2200, 5400 and 1900 series iPAQ's. We are in the process of changing all future models away from HP because of the company's recent attitude. We have already deployed 5,000 Symbol units instead of HP products in the past year.
While I can certainly understand the business decisions to not upgrade existing equipment and would rather concentrate efforts on selling new hardware; I find it difficult to stay away from competitors that are offering upgrades in an attempt to stay loyal to their existing customer base. It is the companies that are loyal to their customers that we will turn our loyalty and support to.
As a final note - historically with Compaq, and HP - we will see if this thread magically disappears if there are more negative comments than positive. Time will tell.
I'm very disappointed with your decision to not offer a WM2003SE upgrade for current iPaq devices. I love my 4150 and after seeing the specs on the new PPC devices to be available soon, I will not be buying a new device - the 4150 is the perfect combination of power and style. I believe that it is irresponsible to not offer an upgrade for current iPaq models. WM2003SE has many desired functions (most namely landscape support without needing 3rd party software) that ALL handhelds can take advantage of. These units must have Flash ROM for a reason - for ROM updates and upgrades. I know that current iPaqs were being flashed with a WM2003SE BETA upon Microsoft's announcement of the new OS, so HP had to have spent SOME time developing the new OS for its devices.
Long story short, it is a poor business practice to state that a device is upgradable, yet neglect to provide an upgrade (free or a small charge) to consumers. This decision will influence my decision to buy a handheld from HP in the future - I probably won't now - and also other products.
Big mistake! 3 Time iPAQ purchaser... Now I will indeed look else where. A company that is willing to offer me OS updates is increasing the compatibility of my device with the inevitable changes that will take place in the developement of software. Notice how PPC2002 is starting to wane in the presence of wm2003. Fewer and fewer applications will support wm2003. My iPAQ is less then 1 year old and has a flash rom that will just go to the grave unused!
sorry to double post... I did not notice an edit option...
Not only does SE offer Landscape support but more importantly increased ability to control font sizes globally, increased speed and efficientcie in pocket IE and automatic scroll bars in applications that may be hard coded for specific window sizes. I want that functionality!!!
Anyone else think that it's a bit strange that HP offered PPC 2002 to WM2003 upgrades a while back for existing Ipaqs which technically was a bigger "invest(ment) in developing the enhancement of a ROM image for existing products" than a WM2003 to WM2003 SE upgrade? Or not, as HP is about to launch a number of new PDA's, most of them with less ROM space & RAM than my current 5550? Come on HP, think again about this. My 5550 is less than 6 months old and I don't want to be stuck with a version of the OS that might not support future releases of software.
We could also use a clearer explaination on what happens to the existing lines as far as support, fixes, and updates.
- Will there be any further work (beyond the already delivered WPA updates), or is all support now 'frozen'?
- What is the sunset date for these lines, where basically HP says, 'unsupported, buy the current machine'?
Sorry, but it looks to me as if HP has taken the position that one's device is only supported until the next product cycle, ie: under 12 months. If I were looking at the economics of rolling out iPaqs to my organisation, where I can start expecting major support and supply issues within one year, the ROI is extremely NEGATIVE. I can get better ROI with ThinkPads and know I'll have OS and hardware support for a much longer period.
The dot.com bubble burst awhile back. HP can look at themselves as an example of what business and individuals will NOT accept; spending each year $650 per unit for a device that has a value of $175 nine months later (the offical HP.com recycle value for the H5555). Go ask Ms. Fiorina and the HP board if they'd authorise an expenditure that loses about 67% of it's value in a year.
I'm a professional using the H5555 as a TOOL. It does some amazing gee-whiz things, but it's still a TOOL. It still works as well today as it did yesterday. But it still has problems and deficiencies to be addressed. I don't expect them to all be fixed for free. But I also do not expect to lay out $650 per unit to be a test bed for next year's product, with the fixes applied to THAT version, not mine.
One thing I really respect and egotistical of HPâs Marketing is that⦠they have so many âLoyalâ customers⦠look at the forum, people just step in to âVoiceâ their suggestions to HP⦠and HP wants to delete these valuable marketing information? I donât think any idiots will delete these, because this is the actual report card to HPâs Marketing and Managements⦠Please consider these â
HP iPaq Team, You guys must be drinking too much or dozing off during work.. what have you guys been thinking?? If you leave all your current iPaq users in the behind, who dares to buy another product from you?? You guys really don't care about your users and what your users wants.. and if you think you can get away with this kind of attitude to your customers you are very wrong..
BTW, who ever decided to scrap the upgrade for all the current models, be very carefull, you might loose your job one day because of what you have done.
My device is six months old; I am wholly impressed with it and WM2003 (having had a 3600 which updated from 2000-2002 OSes, I looked at nothing else but iPAQ for my new PDA).
Personally, I do expect WM2003SE to be made available to me; I use PIE a lot and the improvements there, coupled with hot-switching to/from landscape would be invaluable. It would be absolutely wonderful if it was a ROMPAQ for my product line - free or charge, I don't mind.
My expectations are this; that I don't expect to be offered an upgrade path to WM2004 (or whatever that'll be called) - but WM2003SE is in theory not so distant from WM2003 and in my opinion, it should be made available with HP deciding the cost, if any, to the customer. After all, this is what was done with PPC2002 upgrades and WM2003 upgrades.
It's all well and nice telling me that I, the customer, wanted greater wireless security. Perhaps I do, perhaps I don't - but I can tell you that I _do_ want WM2003SE on my h4150.
I can also say that how this situation evolves will have a direct impact on any purchasing decisions I make in the future. Can someone buying a new model iPAQ really be sure that they won't be left dead in the water in six months?
It is particularly disappointing since HP still haven't fixed outstanding bugs in the WM 2003 upgrade that they provided for the IPAQ 5455. I experience ongoing problems with bluetooth connections to GPRS. HP appear to have simply ignored this problem. If they aren't going to provide the latest software then they should at least make sure that the software that they do provide works properly.
I've been using Ipaqs since the first one came out. Sadly because of this policy my HP2210 will be the last HP product I'll buy. If anyone asks about what handheld to buy I will no longer recommend HP devices (and I do get quite a lot of those questions).
I can tell you why HP isn't going to lose sleep over this issue-most buyers of handhelds never upgrade their unit at all.
I did the 02-03 upgrade on my 3970 for one reason only-SDIO support. Other than that, nothing in the upgrade enhanced my experience at all, and I would never have bothered with it otherwise.
The vast majority of us use our iPaqs as tools for our business. Worrying about landscape mode is a long way from the top of my list as I go about my daily business. Internet browsing convenience? Heck, that's one step removed from worrying about game support. I have Bluetooth built into my iPaq, and Peacemaker Pro-but most of my peers still use Daytimers!
The first thing that came to mind with this announcement is that HP had done it again.
My first Pocket PC was a Jornada - HP promised 64K colors, instead delivered 256. Fortunately, I was able to get a refund.
I was happy when Compaq allowed me to PURCHASE an upgrade for my iPaq 3650. I felt it was worth the money.
Unfortunately, HP has decided for me that native support for portrait/landscape is not something I want. Well, I've tried the various third-party solutions, and I find them too cumbersome...soft resets and graphics irregularities. I would be happy if I could just add this functionality to my 4150.
HP, please reconsider. Even if the patch for landscape costs $, I'd rather have native OS landscape support than pay $ for something that is less convenient and sometimes works.
Well, even the SE landscape support is perfect. The errors on graphic cut-off is because the most number of program for WM2003 is made for PORTRAIT mode, not LANDSCAPE. the programs do not work as easy as a plain white paper able to turn any orientation you like anytime.
This whole thing about landscape support should BE provided in the future Windows CE 5.0, so by that time, most PPC2002/WM2003 programs will be adapted to the landscape mode. Note, anyway you will not be able to FORCE VGA mode on the current QVGA model, NO WAY. Landscape mode has lots of problems on current programs which were already NOT DESIGNED for landscape. SO, HP decision to not UPGRADE older models is perfectly fine with me.
The only thing is, if the SE does provide some other hardware fixes and fixes for my 5555's fingerprint , that's great. But it seems, there is no different in that area.
I purchased an HP h2210 half a year ago. One of the main selling points was the inclusion of a âflashable ROMâ which allows for updates to the operating system, drives, programs etc.
WM2003Se has been released for a long time, and even Toshiba backed out on their promise to release an update to the operating system not long ago. But now, I was told no upgrade to my h2210!!!
I understand upgrading to WM2003Se will bring a lot of headaches probably much more than you can image. But the point is: most of the problem are because of those programs was not wrote specific for WM2003SE. Now, since more and more programs have added the support for this new OS system, I don't think it will remain to be a headache.
I purchased your Pocket PC because of its built-in capabilities, expandability, and more important, the future value. Without this update, the future value of this device is zero!
I have one suggestion, why not release a demo upgrade of this WM2003SE? Then, anyone who want to take his own risk can go ahead to upgrade to new OS, but lost his warranty. I think it can release your guys from support headaches and also satisfy your user.
I am extremely disappointed in HPs decision to not support an incremental update to the Windows Mobile 2003 software.
I currently own an iPAQ 5555, a product that was a current model when Microsoft announced the 2003SE update (and even now is still shown on HPs product page). It is incomprehensible, at least to me, that HP will not offer an update for a nominal charge, which I would gladly pay. It would be one thing for HP to not support models that are several generations old and might not function properly. However, to my knowledge, some of HPs new offerings that will include 2003SE are based on the same processor as the 5555, and actually have less RAM.
At this point, my 5555 suits my needs and I do not wish to upgrade the hardware (partly due to another foolish decision by HP to drop support for expansion sleeves). The operating system is a difference story. However, the landscape mode is extrememly important to me. There is software available for purchase that provides a crippled version of landscape mode so I know the 5555 can do it. I would prefer to have this support built into the operating system so I would not have to soft reset to make the switch between modes.
So the bottom lin eis I have a new $600+ iPAQ that cannot be upgraded. I hope my new HP ze5478cl notebook supports the next release of Windows XP. I hope our HP Proliant servers support any incremental release of Windows Server 2003.
I have owned an iPAQ 3835, 3870 and now the 5555. Based on HP's decision and indifference to their customer base, the 5555 will be my last iPAQ. I will give another company the chance to support their product.
Over the years our company has purchased numerous HP products including workstations, servers, notebooks, laser printers, color laser printers, ink jet printers, Designjet plotters and iPAQs. In the last 9 months we have been disappointed by HP customer support on the Designjet and now the iPAQ. Our next hardware purchase will not be a matter of which HP product to buy, but which non-HP product we will buy.
Sorry for the previous post, it looks like something wrong with it.
Here it comes again.
I purchased an HP h2210 half a year ago. One of the main selling points was the inclusion of a flashable ROM which allows for updates to the operating system, drives, programs etc.
WM2003Se has been released for a long time, and even Toshiba backed out on their promise to release an update to the operating system not long ago. But now, look what HP did to his customers!!!
I understand upgrading to WM2003Se will bring a lot of headaches probably much more than you can image. But the point is: most of the problems are because those programs were not written specific for WM2003SE. Now, since more and more programs have added the support for this new OS system, I don't think it will remain to be a headache.
I purchased your Pocket PC because of its built-in capabilities, expandability, and more important, the future value. Without this update, the future value of this device is zero!
I have one suggestion: why not release a demo upgrade of this WM2003SE? Then, anyone who want to take his own risk can go ahead to upgrade to new OS, but lost his warranty or support from HP. I think it can release your guys from support headaches and also satisfy your customers.
What do you think?
If I can not get the WM2003Se for my h2210, (even a demo is also fine with me.), I will never buy any HP pocket PC in my future, no matter how fancy it might be. I probably will think about Toshiba instead of HP.
I think HP should listen to its custmers. Who told you most people don't want landscape? Who told you most people only care about WPA? At least, I care much more about landscape support than WPA or anything else.
I would appreciate if you can at least provide me a demo of WM2003SE, even if this means no warranty, no support from HP anymore!
I read a reply to a posting by Kusuma but I can't see any posting to which it might refer.
Is it the same situation as it happened this spring when a *whole*thread* on a similiar issue - no upgrade for the GSM/GPRS pack to be usable under WM2003 - was killed?
It's good see that finally an announcement is made at all.
The message, however, is really bad. The policy leaves too many loyal users in the rain.
FWIW: All who have asked for the possibility of an upgrade to WM2003SE prior to buying their new iPAQ and can *prove* this information (even it was not written) will be entitled to give their device back.
To keep messages down to just the one's dealing with PPC 2003 SE several were removed.
This included: Kusuma's message - He was answering questions regarding the author's legitimacy. One from myself questioning the author's legitimacy prior to the HP Logo being added Another from myself Bumping the thread One in which other members of the forum were attacked. I believe one other message questioning the author's legitimacy was also removed.
This was in part at my request to keep the thread dealing only with PPC 2003 SE.
Attacking of other members is not tolerated, you may vent all you want on HP, and its policies but YOU CANNOT ATTACK OTHER MEMBERS.
This message as well as your message questioning censorship will likely also be removed within the day, since both are non-relevant.
Basically all non-relevant PPC 2003 SE posts will be removed.
I have heard much on other sites about concerns over HP not being the place to post these concerns because they are not neutral.
This HOWEVER is THE BEST PLACE TO AIR CONCERNS. HP will not blantantly delete them (I have Gary's assurances on that)and if they keep piling up they cannot be ignored. If you notice This thread is now on the first page amoung the top read in not only this forum but the mobile products forum in general. It is too hard for HP to ignore or make it disapeer at this point.
Again, this message as well as your message questioning censorship will likely also be removed within the day, since both are non-relevant to PPC 2003 SE.
To not offer a free OS upgrade when I purchased the PPC only this year is disgusting. To not offer an OS upgrade for $20 - $30 is unacceptable. What is the use of flash ROM if ROM upgrades are not going to be offered? I feel misled.
HP can change its policy. HP probably did calculate the costs involved in supplying a WM2003SE ROM update. However, there are two considerations in a Discounted Cash Flow or Internal Rate of Return analysis -- cash outflows and cash inflows. I believe HP has overestimated future inflows due to purchases of its new units that include WM2003SE caused by its decision not to supply an upgrade and has underestimated the reduction in goodwill failure to supply an upgrade will cause. History is replete with intelligent business people underestimating the negative reaction and consequences from their customer base (i.e. New Coke).
If HP does not change its policy, I will not scrap my Ipaq, but it will be the last HP product I purchase (⦠except for maybe a printer). As much as I LOVE my Ipaq and try to spread the PPC gospel, because of principle alone, I will need to move to a Handheld PC or one of the 2.5 lb. laptops after my Ipaq becomes painfully obsolete.
It was just the other day I was speaking with my father pressing him to demand a new PPC from Toshiba, since he has already sent it in once for warranty work and it still periodically hard resets. If he could not obtain satisfaction from Toshiba, I encouraged him to consider an Ipaq. I told him the two reasons I decided on my Ipaq over the Toshiba e755 -- software package and support. So much for support. I will steer him away from an
Well I must say that I'm very disappointed in HP for not offering an upgrade to SE. I had a Toshiba e740 and their customer support was abysmal, so since I'd had a good experience with the original Compaq Ipaq 3650 I went back to HP and purchased my 2210 about a year ago. I needed the dual slots and it's a great device, I use it for many things being in IT management for a university.
The landscape support and improvements in PIE would have been most welcome for times when I need to access applications on the internet and I'm out of the office. But I will not purchase a new device just for that and the ill will that HP is creating with their decision not to upgrade current devices will be difficult to erase. In the future I will not recommend HP or their products, and my university spends a great deal of money on technology.
Some people are under the impression that PDA power users are a small minority of gadget freaks and that "we" don't matter in the great scheme of things to HP's bottom line. But many are probably like myself, working in the information technology field and may exert considerable influence over purchasing decisions on a much larger scale. So not developing an update now may save them a few dollars in the short term, but in the long run?
as you can see your former "questionaires" were wrong and you have to think about your decision not ot offer an upgrade for current IPAQ's. A reason for this is this forum thread. Here you can see the REAL oppinions of (really interested) IPAQ users and you can recognize that most of them want this update especially for native Landscape support. Same for me. I'm a proud owner of a 4150 and I love it. I'm also was also a proud owner of a (german) 3850 and was really disappointed that HP didn'offer a german Windows Mobile 2003 for this device. I bought this 4150 and am now again I'm very angry. I'm a fool to believe that I thought you would upgrade this (for me) 2 month old and not cheap device
Enough said for now. I'm sure in the future I'll choose a device from another competitor.
I personally believe that the decision not to offer an upgrade on existing machines is a mistake. Even if it costs HP, they will make up for it as their image for reliable support would have been strengthened. That translates to more customers which translates to more profit. Eqution balanced. However, this is going to cost them. I was waiting for the new releases. but I have changed my mind. If my present Ipaq has no future, I am reluctant to buy the relatively costlier HP products. I have already placed an order for a Toshiba E800. It is cheap and I get most of what the hx4705 will offer, and some more which it wont, like usb host and the ability to switch between SE and FE at will. So bye-bye HP. Hello Toshiba.
There will be no unwarranted censorship of this thread, all that has been removed are replies regarding the legitimacy of the author, a reply by TJ bumping the thread to the top and replies with personal attacks on community members, which are always deleted without question.
HP and Dell have been on the top of the PPC market for a long time. Now, with Toshiba scaling back its entries into the PDA market, and soon to completly exit the market, there is already Marketshare grabbing by many of the smaller PPC companies. This could be their entry into greater market share, as they steal some of HP and Dell's. Because of HP and Dell's decision not to offer the WM2003 SE upgrade on current models, the market leaders have angered a large amount of PPC "power-users." Although the "Power-users" are only a small percentage of PPC consumers, they are a very powerful group. They are the people that basic consumers ask when they go to buy a PDA. They are the people who are responsible for the technology buying of many companies. My business does consulting on many different things. When we are consulting on technology, we often lay-out the strengths and weaknesses of different manufacturers. In the past, HP had been listed as dependable with excellent support on all of their products. They had been listed as an "A-Class" manufacturer. Now, because of this failure to support current PPC customers, that rating falls to an A-. And they are now listed as, "Dependable Hardware, but undependable product support." The problem with an A- rating, is that there are other manufacturers that have an A or A- rating. And HP no longer fares well against the A- manufacturers. This is not necassarily because of the importance of WM 2003 SE, but because of the importance of the precedent that they are setting. I can no longer run the risk of having my company loose almost 70% in one year on a piece of technology. That is not smart business practice for me. It will b interesting to watch the sales in the PDA market next year. I wouldn't be surprised to see devices like ASUS take the leading market share. My company is always willing to purchase upgrades for our technology. But when upgrades are not offered, then we move to Hardware that will be, and HP will not be in the list of manufacturers that make that we will consider.
1) Would HP please give us a time period (specific date or general span, ie: '1 July 2005' or '12 months after production ceases') after which current iPaqs will no longer be repaired or supported. In my specific case, I would like to know when I can no longer send in my H5555 to have the USB/power connector repaired (2 out of 3 have failed for me in the last 9 months, so it's not a question of IF it fails, but WHEN). This will help determine at what point to cut one's losses and dump them before they fail at a critical time.
2) Based on the initial price and current tradein value, the HARDWARE cost of an iPaq H5555 should be calculated at $1.50 per day. Operating costs, including warranties, internal support personnel, software, compatibility, etc are not included. It may not sound like much for one person, but multiply it out by time and/or units and see if the ROI passes your management (boss and/or spouse).
3) Lindsay, the term I think you'd be looking for, in American IT slang, is ORPHAN. That is, a device that is no longer supported by the vendor. Orphans do not get any software support or fixes and hardware fixes are either much more expensive or not availble from the vendor. Please understand that eventually every piece of hardware or software becomes an orphan. As an example, Microsoft has been trying to drop support for Windows 95 for some time now. There is a point where the number of users are too few and the costs of support too great to justify continued support. Dropping support for say, OS/2 or the HP LX200 handheld, is extremely reasonable. On the other hand, if all the existing iPaqs, particularly the 2xxx, 4xxx, and 555x are now orphans, or will be in under a year, this appears unreasonable and sends the message that any HP iPaq must be budgeted on a life of under one year. This bodes particularly ill for the new 4705 or any other business-oriented iPaq, since the ROI would be unacceptable.
HP iPaq Team, many years ago Ford Motor Company publicly embraced the term 'planned obsolenscence'. The public had a response. Coca-Cola changed their formula, claiming 'New Coke' was what the public wanted. The public responded. Do you really want to use the announcement at the top of this thread to push HP to continue such a tradition as Ford and Coke? Remember that IBM once owned their markets, too.
1) Thanks for your useful intervention and clarification.
2) Can you please ask the HP Ipaq Team to have the courtesy to answer the questions that have been put to them in this thread and show that they have your impeccable standards of communication. So far it looks as if they think they can come and post here and then disappear without any further obligation to respond to the concerns that have been expressed.
Best Regards Charles
PS Maybe we have not heard back because you suspended their posting rights for breach of the forum rules. Am I right that posters must appear as a single person and not a collective team? Just kidding .... please ask them to enter into a constructive dialogue here. In my business every complaint was always taken seriously because it was one complaint too many and surely the HP Ipaq team should act responsibly and follow a similarly good business ethic.
I too am very disappointed by this news. I have an H5550 that I have had for about 6 months. It is my first IPaq, switching from Palm devices. Now I'm starting to question my decision. I have had 3 different Palm devices over the last 5 years and decided to try a Pocket PC device. When looking at which one to buy, there was no question, it had to be an IPaq. I am really starting to question HP's support of their products especially since I had to send my unit in for repair when it was only a month old for the notorious sync connector issue and was promptly met with an attempt to charge me over $150.00 to repair it. I had to escalate it up until finally HP aggreed to repair it as per the warranty. They initially tried to claim physical damage, although it was only a month old and there wasn't a mark on it. Now this news surfaces.... While I do appreciate the Wi-Fi updates, if the OS provider issues an updated version of the OS, and providing the hardware can handle it, I should be able to update. Imagine buying a computer with Windows 2000 and being told, too bad, so sad, you can't upgrade to Windows XP, no real reason why, we just aren't going to let you. I truly hope that HP reconsiders this decision. If they don't listen to their customers any better than this, it looks like I will being going back to Palm.
With my 5550, I was hoping to gain some new functionality that was lacking in my 5455 (which died for no reason, and was replaced), like LEAP on WiFi, Landscape view, etc. However the bugs (and enhancements) that will be accounted for in 2003 SE are unavailable for us poor saps that just invested heavily in our current products (and support). I utilize my 5550 for business & pleasure, and using some of the enhancements that would come in this upgrade would be great, however I'm getting used to disappointments with this product line. After my first unit died, I tried to ensure my new 5550 wouldn't leave me high/dry by purchasing a support agreement for my product - boy did that not work out. I focused on the hardware problems, and totally forgot that the SW could be the primary problem! I've already had to hard reset my unit 3 times in as many months, and although my hardware isn't failing, my support agreement won't allow for software assistance, so the techs are adopting the "hard-reset" policy - which i can't blame them for, as they can do little else to support me with this ever-buggy product. Ironically, I've installed very few 3rd party products, and even w/o any additional s/w on the unit, I've had to do a hard reset this month already (wifi stopped working for no reason)!
Long complaint short (sorry for being long-winded), the LEAST HP could do is offer the upgrade (which I would consider paying for if not ridiculously expensive)! C'mon HP, pull your head out of the sand, look around you and realize that you can make a difference here. Being a market leader doesn't entitle you to jank your current customer base around - you do, and you'll start to lose us. Running the risk of being cheesy, I'll steal a tagline from a 'motivational' poster I saw today: "The sea of change can pull customers in many directions. It is our responsibility to light the way and take care of them...before the competition does."
PPC2003 SE is percieved in the marketplace as a service release that fixes many problems besides adding a few new features. Not providing it for existing recent models creates the impression that HP is not providing fixes to known issues, even though the fix is available.
Considering the new features "non critical to the use of the product" may be debateable but is acceptable. I can not say the same about the fixes.
I just want to through my two cents in. I too am very disapointed that HP will not offer an upgrade to Windows Mobile 2003SE. My wife and I each have a iPAQ 2215 and love them. This is not the first time I have had an issue with purchasing a HP product with the assurance that future upgrades would be available and free and they were NOT. I can't help but take this issue into acount as I make choices to purchase other electronic gadgets. As a matter of fact my this issue kept me from purchasing a HP digital camera (I purchased a Kodak instead). I have been a very loyal customer (and even a stock holder) and have had great experieces with HP's customer service (repaired my 2215 w/ 2day turnaround). I hope HP listens to all of us here who have taken our time to let them know how we feel in a fairly constructive way.
what really agitates me most is the fact that HP has made the judgment that this update isn't critical to the operation of our devices. That they somehow know whats best for me. This is a subjective value-judgment and certainly does not reflect everyone's interests. One size does not fit all.
I'm trusting HP will do the proper thing and expeditiously release this update to those that wish to purchase it, if only as a show of good faith to their customers.
I have been thinking of moving to HP ipaqs for my PPCs because of the good support they've had in the past, but this seems to have changed.
While I would have been disappointed in HP for not providing an SE upgrade if they *hadn't* promised one, I'm *very* disturbed by the comments users have made about sales reps saying that an upgrade would definitely be available. Especially if this was a condition of a sale, and the rep claimed the upgrade was coming, this is false advertising.
I would suggest that those who were actually told there would definitely be an upgrade by an HP employee DEFINTELY email the CEO of HP to (intelligently and non-abusively yet clearly upsetedly if that's not too many adverbs) complain SPECIFICALLY about falsehoods spread by their employees.
Frankly, if someone at HP had promised me an upgrade and that was a condition of my purchase, I would definitely write that email. And if their response wasn't at least halfway apologetic, I would file a report of fraud with the Better Business Bureau (http://www.bbb.org/).
Although I'm quite a user that would really glad to have updated OS/Software on my device, or even in a PC. I think I'd like to give my own opinion that probably I would agree with the decision of HP. Besides, to think of it...probably HP would really suffer much if they give the 2003SE upgrade for the current models.
I have an HP IPAQ 2210, bought this year. I love it, and have regarded HP's service as one of the best I'd ever had. It's decision not to release Windows Mobile 2003 SE caused me to feel bad at first...but now, I think having 2003SE on my PPC or not, doesn't really give me an edge to other PPC users who have Windows Mobile 2003SE. I've read Brighthands review (http://www.brighthand.com/article/Windows_Mobile_SE_Upgrades_No_Big_Deal), and it supports my thought about this.
Probably Microsoft has really made a great fuss on its new OS, but I think HP has had enough patch to at least give the 2003FE models efficient functionality (e.g. the WiFi patch that is available in 2003SE is available too in 2003FE). All other features of Windows Mobile 2003 SE are more of aesthetics (on-the-fly landscape switch, PIE improvements - features I could still live without). And with Brighthand's review, it does give me an idea why HP doesn't have to heed to it's customers demands (I did take the survey HP had re: features in SE) due to business practicality. I think HP is just protecting itself from a mistake foreseen if they release upgrades.
I have to say that I will also not be buying another IPAQ PDA, this is the second time for me that they do not upgrade and it will be the last. I had a Dell and decided to sell it because of quality but to be honest at around $300 or so dollars you can afford to upgrade to the current model and still be ahead unlike when I purchase a COMPAQ, I have a 4350 and will keep it until I see another brand that will meet my needs. This has been a very unsatisfactory decision for HP to make.
Not only am I dissapointed in what I finally read here - after I had been led to believe that HP was an honorable organization and was going to offer an upgrade for my relatively new IPAQ 2215 - I have to reach the decision to drop HP products from those I recommend, service and sell. I am tired of the changes I have seen and the lack of real support for consumers over the last seven years. I am on my third PDA from HP and, unfortunately, my last.
I understand the adage that you get what you pay for but at HP it is you have to PAY MORE for what you end up getting, and then pay more, and more....
I stopped doing business with HP years ago, when the quality of their computers, printers, and support became substandard for the price. The only product I continue to purchase from HP is the IPAQ (mostly because I came over from the Compaq side -- another company that went down the HP lack of quality road before being acquired).
Anyway, I can certainly understand everyone's frustration. The lack of SE support is not that big for me, because I truly use my PDA to the fullest of it's potential (causing me to burn through the screen in about a year). Rather than pay for a new screen, I use the opportunity to upgrade to the latest and greatest IPAQ.
Notwithstanding, I am not happy about the fact that my newly acquired 4155 is already yesterday's news. This is an issue because we all know that software and accessory support will go by the wayside once the new products standardize to SE. For me, it's only a problem for about a year, when I upgrade to a new Pocket PC (which won't be an IPAQ) and never look at HP again. However, it is an issue for those that want (and expect for the price) a PDA lifetime of at least three years.
In the end, HP already lost me as a loyal PC and printer user years ago. Now their short sightedness is going to be the last nail in their coffin when they loose me as a loyal IPAQ user.
First, I agree with most here that this decision is a poor one. Compaq and HP have set expectations of one OS upgrade per device (for most iPAQs, 1900s excluded). Pocket PC 2002 was available for the original iPAQs, and Windows Mobile 2003 was available for 3800s, 3900s and 5400s. This is a *huge* step backward, especially for those of us who purchased higher-end iPAQs.
Second, there is more to WM 2K3 SE than VGA, landscape and WPA. There is also the single-column mode in Pocket IE, a significant update for people who use their Pocket PCs to browse the Web.
Finally, while programs exist that add landscape mode, HP is missing the boat on three points.
* Switching to landscape mode with current products requires a soft reset. When you encounter a program that isn't usable in landscape mode, another reset is required to switch back to portrait mode. This would be akin to having to reboot your PC to change the resolution, forcing you to shut down all of your programs.
I have dotPocket, but don't use it much because of the time taken to soft reset. If I could switch to landscape and back without the soft reset, I would use landscape a *lot* more.
* While programs may need to be rewritten to work properly in landscape mode, I suspect most would work in portrait mode just as well as they do now. With on-the-fly landscape switching, it would be simple to switch back and forth.
In addition, many developers are making upgrades which support WM 2K3 SE available already. Even better, many of these upgrades are available for free.
Given that, claiming that programs won't work properly in landscape mode, while true in some cases, isn't really a problem and the problem will lessen rapidly as the number of programs supporting landscape mode grows.
* One thing neglected in most discussions of SE's landscape support is that Microsoft's programs included in the Windows Mobile 2003 OS don't handle landscape mode well in many cases. However, those same programs in SE will work properly in landscape mode. Existing landscaping programs won't help with these in the slightest.
For the above reasons, I urge HP to reconsider making the Windows Mobile 2003 SE upgrade available for users of iPAQ 2200s, 4000s, 5100s and 5500s.
I believe that you, and others who expound the "life moves on, accept it" argument are wrong, and the indignant HP users are entirely right. There is no justification for allowing customers to buy expensive products believing they will continue to be supported and then selling them short. When people buy a product they invest in that company. They want to like the product and the company. Indeed this forum has done much to engender such positive feelings. But when something like this is announced the coin flips, and loyal customers can quickly turn into bitter and angry critics. HP should know that such damage is never repaired. Unlike the product, the customers have big memories. HP should change its mind, reverse the decision and consider damage limitation strategies before its too late. If the support really cannot be justified on commercial grounds - because of costs etc - then hp should do all in its power to carry existing customers with them by offering them replacement products at greatly reduced prices through a trade-in system. This would have to be an extremely attractive scheme for customers to take it up. It is true that all products go out of date eventually. But this is premature. When the product is finally obsolete how the company behaved during that time is what makes the difference to what we buy when true replacement time comes. Be warned HP, you are about to blow it.
As everybody said before, I bought iPAQ Compaq, simply because they ALWAYS provided Good support and Upgrade, I was never really Crazy about HP products since it was always the opposit, now by "merging" Compaq to HP we lost one of the great advantage of the iPAQ.
I will sign ANY petition in this world in order to have 2003SE, I could understand thar it may not be possible in order to upgrade to an 2004 or 2005 OS, but it is just an simple upgrade of 2003 so bring it to us, remember who guys are paying your salary, it is US the clients, so maybe you should reconsider your position.
I am also willing to Buy a Tablet PC TC1100 for my personal use and fun, and since it is an HP Product, I am really scare that the same will happen again... so please take action to provide clients Upgrade before that you loose much more that a PDA buyer, Not everydody here are simple user, and some are sometimes the people that you HP Staff have to face when it is time to sell your servers of PC to big corporate.
Understand this. I would be willing to buy the upgrade. I am not will to buy another HP product (Printer, PPC, Computer) unless HP does in fact offer this upgrade to current model owners
I can't believe HP has let this thing fester for 3 days -- how long does it take for someone to draft a response and have it approved? Maybe they're waiting for this thread to hit a magic number.
In any case, I'm not fussy about replacing my 5450 -- I've got lots of HP stuff, PCs, laptops, printers, cameras, scanners, etc... and I buy HP because of their superior engineering. I hope this decision doesn't signal a change in company direction...
I am very disappointed in this decision by HP, I too will consider taking my business elsewhere in the near future. I might be just a small drop in the bucket and I am sure you top management are looking at this as "ah they will get over it" but if you keep thinking that way one day you will look back at this and say "That was a mistake, the decision we made" but will be to late. I do hope that everyone that is as disappointed as me stop buying HP products to teach them a lesson.
HP have always updated there ipaq's, this was the reason I bought one. There is not a chance in hell of me buying another ipaq from HP unless they back track on the WM2003SE issue, I would have to be stupid to give HP ANOTHER £300+, for HP to decide they can't be bothered with updating, and lets face it that is the issue here! HP want to sell more Expensive ipaqs and not bother with updating them when the next version of windows mobile is released, NO THANKS HP, My business will be going to TOSHIBA in future they know how to treat there customers IE they offer updates on there PDA's that can technically except an update, The H2200 series CAN take an update and some people actually have them running this update, I will pay for an update if it becomes available and HP will pay if one isn't because they will loose a huge customer bas
Well, my little iPAQs (5555 + 1940 + 3970 + 3650) may not worth much. But if I never ever buy another Designjet Printer and two pavilions + 1 Compaq presario 2100T notebooks
I tell you, HP you are going to lose alots of customers like me. OK, i may not be a big buyer like some businesses, but the "word-of-mouth" will generates lots of 'no-businesses' by anyone of my friends, my past collegues, my dad's a thousands business partners, their clients in turn, their client's customers in turn, and so-on.
Be afraid, be very afraid, for you have been warned not only once, not twice, but hundred times during the whole months of delays you have made since the release of WM2003SE by Microsoft.
Folks, when are you going to realise you need to RESPOND in a TIMELY fashion or the response will be assumed and it shan't be favorable. By saying nothing, or putting out messages in PR doubletalk ('HP is pleased' to hang you out to dry), you permit others to define you. Do you, the HP iPaq Team, really want HP to be portrayed as it is in this and other forums?
Of course not. And even if you stood on Ms. Fiorina's desk with irrefutable proof of the financial folly of this decision's implications, I rather doubt you'd get the policy reversed in a few days. But you need to say SOMETHING beyond the empty PR phrases (actually, you really need to say SOMETHING as the silence is just reinforcing the negative opinion). If you folks are doing something, say so. I don't expect play-by-play or NDA info and most certainly no more empty promises. But give an indication you actually give a damn about the customers. Is the customer reaction going anywhere other in a file? Is it going up the management chain? Is there any reaction? (And even if the reaction is 'screw em', it would be better to be honest about it rather than have it leak out and REALLY fire people up).
There's a matter of respect here. In management classes it's been taught that people will rise to your expectation level (called 'Theory X and Theory Y'). Treat your employees as cretins and that's what you get. Treat them as valued contributors and they bend over backwards for you. The same theory works with customers. Right now HP is demonstrating the Theory X version. Show us you understand Theory Y as well.
Start responding to the questions here honestly and without the 'pleased' phrases that are actually quite insulting and patronising.
HP iPaq Team, this is a big mistake that will cost HP many users including myself. For the same reason I'm not buying Toshibas any more and I think that I'll start doing the same with HP. For me is unbelievable that a year old Pocket PC can't be upgraded and becomes obsolete for this reason. What a Shame!
I do understand that someone up the corporate ladder had to make some sort of decision regarding the possibility of an upgrade for extant iPAQ models.
As an owner of a 3900 and a 5500, I was saddened to hear of the announcement that an WM2003SE would not be available for the 5500. I can understand it not being offered (although it does sadden me) for the 3900, but I had hoped that perhaps for the higher end present models, at least a choice might be made (sort of like what happened when WM2003 first came out) by the owners of the Pocket PCs. I was able to upgrade my 3900 via a CD that was mailed out for a fee.
That being said, I do enjoy my 5500; it just seems a shame that if I would want the features of the Second Edition, I would have to purchase yet another Pocket PC. I do not see that happening. While I am not so arrogant as to suggest that my boycotting HP would change their corporate mind, I will not easily forget the feeling of abandonment that I currently experience.
I appreciate the opportunity to express my sadness over this decision by HP.
"After extensive assessments of MS Windows Mobile 2003 SE support on current products HP has decided not to offer this upgrade on existing product platforms."
I guess that means there is no point in buying any of the current IPAQ offerings. I hope that all current products will be clearly markes as not upgradeable, so buyers can make a smart decision on the product to purchase.
It also unfortunately means that I will have to return the unit we just purchased to the supplier or dispute the purchase with American Express as having been sold an obsolete product by deception.
Can HP please reconsider its decision not to release a ROM update to WM2003SE for existing iPAQ users? Whilst I might not even take up such an offer were it available, I'd like that to be *my* choice please. If the flash ROM can take the upgrade, please make it available.
I am extremely disappointed in HPs decision to not support an incremental update to the Windows Mobile 2003 software. A sales representative assured me in april 2004 that HP would defenitively support the update.
I currently own an iPAQ 5550, a product that was a current model when Microsoft announced the 2003SE update (and even now is still shown on HPs product page). It is incomprehensible, at least to me, that HP will not offer an update for a nominal charge, which I would gladly pay. It would be one thing for HP to not support models that are several generations old and might not function properly. However, to my knowledge, some of HPs new offerings that will include 2003SE are based on the same processor as the 5550, and actually have less RAM.
At this point, my 5550 suits my needs and I do not wish to upgrade the hardware (partly due to another foolish decision by HP to drop support for expansion sleeves). The operating system is a difference story. However, the landscape mode is extrememly important to me. There is software available for purchase that provides a crippled version of landscape mode so I know the 5550 can do it. I would prefer to have this support built into the operating system so I would not have to soft reset to make the switch between modes.
So the bottom line is I have a new $600+ iPAQ that cannot be upgraded. I hope our HP Proliant servers support any incremental release of Windows Server 2003.
TO CEO HP (E-mailed yesterday) -------------------------------------------- I am writing to you to seek an explanation as to what your Ipaq Division is doing to destroy future sales revenue for HP by refusing to release the Windows Mobile 2003 SE upgrade for existing systems. People are prepared to pay for this and thus the Ipaq division are depriving HP and its stockholders of potentially large revenues. The policy they are operating could undermine the foundations of HP.
Today there are hundreds and soon thousands - who buy not just Ipaq's but lots of other HP equipment and who have the power to stop purchasing of HP products in their businesses. You had better act quick and reverse the policy otherwise HP could be faced with widespread rebellion amongst its customers and the likelihood is that you will also lose orders for desktops, servers, laptops, printers and other equipment.
Have you reported this matter to the Stock Exchange together with the impact that the growing threats of boycotts of HP products will have on the future of HP. Stockholders are entitled to know what is going on. I submit that the Board of Directors should urgently consider this matter and reverse the decision which runs contrary to the aspirations of your customers and the interests of the stockholders. As this is a negative situation I submit that you have a duty to analyse the detrimental impact and report it to the owners of HP - the stockholders. --------------------------------------------
It is amazing how quickly one cam purchase somthing and have it become obsolete a month later. Native landscape support was somthing I had been looking foreward to for a long time.
"4. Will future models from HP be able to support Windows Mobile 2003 Second Edition?
Yes, you will find Microsoft Windows Mobile 2003 SE available on new products from HP this year."
What about the next Update, will all the people who buy their PDA at the end of this "Windows Mobile 2003 Second Edition" generation of PDAs be denied updates also? Evan if his/her PDA can support the next OS.
There should be an overlapping roolout with all updates, where the latest PDAs from the last generation recieve an update if supported, while all new PDAs continue to have the Updated OS natively installed on them.
I honestly think we have a much better chance of getting a "small price reduction" on a new iPAQ from HP rather than getting this WM2003SE upgrade from them...
I don't think we are going to change their SE "no-upgrade decision" as it opens a "Pandora's box" regarding issues caused by a inadequately tested ROM upgrade (we all remember those early ROM updates on the 3600 series, right?)
A $50 (you pick the amount) voucher from HP for use in the purchase of a new machine is something that HP "can do" -- no issues (other than the cost of buying some good will back from those of us who are not real happy right now...)
Not acceptable when I just paid $450 for a new h4355 that was supposed to be upgradeable.
I might consider replacing it with a SE version of the 4355 for $50 however, but frankly even that is not acceptable from a company that I previously respected and trusted.
I believe I can get $175 for my 5555 on the HP tradein program right now. $50 against a $650 iPaq isn't much.
I would propose that for a period of time the tradein be far more generous. I'd also encourage the acceptance of the now orphaned sleeves also be given a value in the tradein (or at least collected so they don't pollute landfills).
I would think if I were going from the H5555 to the 4705, a payment by me of $150 would not be unreasonable (I'd prefer a lower cost, of course, but HP is a business, after all and $150 should probably be close to actual manufacturing costs).
It's kind of like I leased the 5555 for a year for $0.50 per day.
Michael, As I said ..."you pick the amount". I think a voucher will be more palatable to HP than supplying the SE upgrade. I agree that it should be more than $50 -- I was just introducing the idea...
I think it's a GREAT idea and thank you for suggesting it!
I was just putting in my 2 cents as to what would be reasonable to me as a customer. HP, should they read this at all, will doubtless have their own ideas, but at least they can't claim they didn't get a real user's feedback.
Once again, no disagreement with you. You've provided what may be a way for HP to get out of this gracefully.
Michael, Your comments regarding a trade-in is something I hadn't considered -- I was saying keep your current unit, but have a voucher toward a new one. A trade-in may be more appealing to some folks, but I'm not sure how HP would handle it. Interesting thought...
Re: ...abandoned again! In less then 1 years time...
Good point William. HP would need to somehow spell out what "real" support and upgrades the user could expect in future.
From where we are right now, I'm not sure what HP is planning to do -- sure doesn't look like they plan to respond to the comments in this thread. Very disappointing to this point.
Who will ever accept a voucher to get a 'discount' (MEAGER!) on a device which costs as much as a normal desktop computer? Speaking for myself with the h5550 iPAQ which runs at 400Mhz with 128MB RAM, I am surely not going to be sent away with a voucher for a small discount on one of the new devices, they do not match in capabilities at all with the h5550! Less RAM, more ROM, no sleeves.. what am I going to do with more ROM? ROM wears out when written to, less processor power means more waiting and less power for multitasking or processor intense applications, and then the price for it?! I paid 800 euro's for the h5550! after return I can't even buy the lowest end model Palm for the money I would get! I should be paid to be ripped off like that, not pay!
Frankly, I'm not interested in a trade-in/up program, I like the 4155 just fine and none of the new models seem to have the feature set that works perfectly. I just want an SE upgrade and some sort of apology from HP regarding this whole thing. As a first time Pocket PC user this has really shaken my faith in general in regards to HP.
I don't mind paying for upgrades, but vouchers are as insulting as this fork-tongued press release that they are so ecstatic to announce. I have looked across every forum I care to troll and NO ONE is happy about this.
First and foremost, I'd like HP to explain themselves and show us this user survey garbage. Then I want to see them take the appropriate action to make things right and make their customers happy.
SO YOU MADE A MISTAKE?! we all do, admit it, rectify the situation and lets move on... forgive and forget. BUT! Not a single reply from a rep in who knows how many messages certainly doesn't look like the sort of support I was sold on in the store.
My first HP product was an HP-35 scientific calculator purchased in about 1975. I bought lots of computers and printers since, both for my company and myself. Not having an upgrade to my ipaq 2215 kinda tees me off. For my next PDA, I may buy another brand.
I believe civilized arguments are the best arguments. Don't make threats or compromises just because you are desperate. In my opinion, whoever wrote that letter to Carly, did a great job. It expressed how I felt and others feel without threatening HP. Many posters claim to order the technology for large corporations and that will never use HP again. Don't be riddikulus you make yourself and this forum, look foolish. I too am very disappointed with HP's complete disregard of customers and support. I think the best way to show your disapproval to HP is to buy a new device. Unlike the threats, "I'm going to go buy a new pda, up yours HP", I think just not buying HP will show them that false advertising won't be taken lightly.
I know for sure that they have tested the windows2003 SE beta on all platforms, mostly the oems do. I think it`s a shame whe won`t get the upgrade for our ipaq line and they force us with their HP marketing to get a new type of ipaq. I also be shure that they do the same thing when they finish windows mobile 2004 version so no upgrade but get again a new machine. I think they can learn for the old compaq time they serv what they could do to even old machines to upgrade them ,but now their goal is to play save with new typo`s of ipaq machines and let the customer pay again a lot of money....
P.S.> I bought h4150 three months ago in the firm belief that HP will release WM2003 SE for this device, but now I want to send it back, because it was just LIE! Return me my money and my company will never buy HP hardware again! Korean customers very angry about this brutal lie.
I am extremely disappointed that I spent $600 on a top-of-the-line, state-of-the-art iPaq h5555. To hear that it is now obsolete and unsupported by HP. This is extremely inappropriate behavior for a "technology company" and will do nothing but alienate you from your customers. I will certainly not make the mistake of buy HP again.
Well I will say that I have always thought that I would purchase from HP. I purchased the HP 1935 so I have a little investment unlike some of you others but I will not be purchasing any other items from HP. I sit here looking at a HP digital camera, three HP printers and a HP dvd rewriter, I know that is a little bit of money for you HP but thats all youll get from me. I will look for products from companies that will fully support the decision of the consumer when the decide to purchase an item a company makes and offer upgrades or some sort of buyback program.
I think your situation mirrors mine perfectly. I purchased the 4155 a month ago now, and there was actually an HP Rep! in the store. He assured me that I needn't go with the Palms as a forthcoming update for windows mobile would solve my problems (i.e. landscape mode).
This was a selling point for me. Now naturally the guy didn't know, and I will not hold him to it, but HP should have known better than to send reps into the field promising the sky, so to speak.
Now with the announcement, my iPAQ is just OLD ENOUGH so that I cannot return it to the store. Great. Plus, after looking at their new model line, there is nothing that appeals to me and fits my needs as closely as my 4155.
Love the machine, hate the company I suppose. I do know that in my business I'll bend over backwards to make something right between the customer and I; My good name is at stake otherwise (even if that means breaking even, or taking a loss).
Perhaps HP is not aware of just how fragile their good name can be, or how far reaching peoples' memories are in situations where he/she feels personally slighted.
please HP, lets just do this the easy way, do you really want some hideous class action lawsuit tha could drag on for months (years?)
I certainly don't want to wait while all the involved parties litigate 'till the cows come home (pardon the texas expression).
I'm very upset with you decision not to offer software upgrades to existing models. I've always believed in the iPAQ line and always readily recommended it our clients.
Your recent decision has caused my organization to begin re-evaluating the future recommendation of your iPAQ product line in favor of other manufactures. This decision not to offer upgrades has not only made your organization look poor, but ours as well for recommending your product.
I sincerely hope that you will reconsider offering the upgrade--even at a small cost--to offer the quality of service that previously existed for iPAQ users.
I have been using PPC device since compaq launched their 1st Ipaq 3630. I do remember that this Ipaq were the only PPC device that can have ROM upgraded on that time, & I have upgraded it to Microsoft Pocket PC 2002. But now, seems like HP is not offering any upgrade for the current Ipaq products, where Toshiba did. I bought the Ipaq 4150 about 1 month ago & feel damn disappointed that HP is not providing SE upgrade for my 4150. I should have bought Toshiba E800 or Dell Axim x30 instead of 4150. So now, Hp is going to launch new Ipaq with MS Windows Mobile 2003 SE....You want us to throw our current Ipaq & get the new Ipaq with SE? If HP is not going to provide any upgrade for my 4150, this will be my last HP PPC. Hopefully "Compaq" will get back their name on "Ipaq"..only Compaq will care & concerned on their royal customer. Hope HP understand that we spend quite alot of money on your Ipaq products because of brand & company status. I hope you do consider this point & provide us the SE upgrade.
Just a thought...but I purchased my 2210 (in fact we bought three) only 8 months ago. I think I have a very good case for going back to the retailer and saying "this product is not what I thought I was buying as HP is reneging on its support commitment - money back please." If anyone else in a similar situation does likewise, then that will get this matter to the attention of the big-buyer retailers. I dare say that should help get HP's attention and perhaps even force a change of policy.
HP have clearly dissapointed the majority of customers with this decision. I personally have a 2 month old h4150 which, given Compaq's past support, was sure I would be able to upgrade, even if a charge was levied.
Whilst my device will still do everything I bought it to do without the upgrade, these tasks will remain harder, more difficuly or more time consuming, using third party software, than if the upgrade was available.
When it comes to replacing the device, I will look hard at the competition's products and support history.
I urge HP to rethink and offer the upgrade to existing WM2003 users.
I just purchased a 5550 3 months ago and have eagerly anticipated the SE upgrade. Now I understand that my top 'o the line PPC is obsolete? This is an unacceptable turn of events after being told the the upgrade would be available. Both the WEP capability and landscape mode are very important to many users. I would suggest you re-think this frustrating business strategy and release the upgrade for capable HP products.
I am so upset with HP not making the windows mobile 2003 se available to have as an upgrade, I have owned one flavor or another of ipaqâs my current HP5555, I was upset to find after upgrading from my 5455 and losing ânevoâ but now to loose SE? sorry for me because now I will be buying only NO-HP products, being in the consulting business I loved to tell people to buy HP, now I will tell them how you dropped the ball for end users Jeff Kimble ACT Management & Consulti
You know, this is why I quit Audiovox and the Maestro. You poeple need to learn to support US. We pay your bills. Make the update something for us to buy if we want it so bad, if you're worrying about it's costs. This reminds me of my brother constantly buying power rangers toys to keep his kids happy cuz they make new products and discard the old ones. That may work with toys cuz kids cry and whine, while adults will say srew it, and try another route. I think I speak for most of us when I say that I am happy with what I have and don't wnt to buy another device again, and that can't afford to drop $400 everytime YOU want to leave us behind. I bouught a 2215, and am p***** off that such a new device will be abandoned. I expect a lot morew from you HP...you are the leader in this type of product.
I am the Lead Programmer / System Adminstrator for the Interactive Media department at a post-secondary institute in Canada (The Banff Centre for Continuing Education). I am consulted regularly for advice on purchases and provide daily consultations to faculty, staff and guests.
I purchased an iPaq 2210 3 months ago and recommended it highly to others. This resulted in at least four people close to me purchasing the same machine. I am unsure how many may others may have also purchased the machine with my recommendation.
I'm very upset about this decision and can not see how I can continue to recommend HP equipment in the future.
I don't know if anyone saw it today, but the PC Magazine First Looks email had a link to a review of the new iPaqs.
I emailed the author and asked her to visit this thread.
I also mentioned that they should remove the line in the review where they said "The hx4700 is an investment in the future." Based on the announcement at the start of this thread, we know that is a false assumption.
As a longtime user of the Ipaq range (started with the 3650 - for which I bought the ROM upgrade when it was offered - and currently on the 2200) I too am disappointed by the decision not to offer the upgrade.
Well thank goodness for that. I just had a look at the PC Mag reviews and was slightly apprehensive in case there was one (or more) machine that I'd really like to have 'cos it was so much better than the 5550.
Thank goodness, but they're all junk. My 5550 is as good as most of them, looks nice and curved and sexier, and with a bluetooth phone, does it all already. It also takes all the jackets (except the GSM/GPRS, but there's another example of HP brain-dead short-sightedness in forced obsolesense (sp?).!).
HP! Where's your "renowned" innovation? These are just rehashes of what has come before. The only improvements over the 5550 are that the 4700 has a built-in CF slot, a marginally bigger screen and slightly faster processor, and the 6315 has built-in GPRS and a camera. The 6315 has a crappy slow processor.
These are meant to be the "next generation" are they? Well in my view, they're a step back. The only plus is that THEY GET WM2003SE.
Come on HP, live up to your promises of the machines being upgradeable and give us the upgrades. It's not just for new features but some pretty irritating bugs that have been persistent through firmware updates. Just look through the forum and others to find them all.
Do the right thing, HP. Give your loyal customers the upgrade before we take our loyalty to another company that WILL live up to promises.
On Jul 25, 2004 at 12:13:34 GMT, Sander Overvliet wrote:
"Speaking for myself with the h5550 iPAQ which runs at 400Mhz with 128MB RAM, I am surely not going to be sent away with a voucher for a small discount on one of the new devices, they do not match in capabilities at all with the h5550! Less RAM, more ROM, no sleeves.. what am I going to do with more ROM? ROM wears out when written to, less processor power means more waiting and less power for multitasking or processor intense applications, and then the price for it?!"
Microsoft seems to be setting the direction of more ROM and less RAM. The point is that programs and data will be stored in ROM and RAM will only be used to execute programs. This has a rather nice benefit -- hard resets won't lose your programs and data.
The big issue is whether ActiveSync will look in the user-accessible ROM to synchronize data; if not, and it has to be kept in RAM, it partially defeats the purpose of this strategy. Sure, you may not have to restore your programs, which is nice, but losing your data is worse. If you're not near your PC where you can synchronize when you hard reset, you'll be out of luck.
As for the number of writes that can be done with ROM, what's the limit? I recall seeing 100,000 mentioned in the past, which equates to more than 91 writes per day over a three year cycle (probably the typical life of a PDA). As those writes apply to a block of memory (like 64 KB chunks), that might be an issue, but probably not for most people.
However, if you only keep programs in ROM and store data in RAM, the write problem goes away. You'd only write to the ROM when you installed or removed a program, which shouldn't be that common.
Please reconsider this decision as not providing OS-upgrade possibility to hardware platforms which have been bought as recently as just a few months ago (I just bought an 4150) doesn't make sense. The power of computing platforms is the very fact that they are software (OS) upgradeable. Especially on a Windows PocketPC, where the OS is very visible (it includes the user interface) and still very buggy on top of that!
Even the cheapest version of the new ipaq has a 204 mhz chip and NO bluetooth,wifi..
My 1940 is more faster and has bluetooth!!
The specs of even a cheaper version of the new ipaq is bad.... the older series still ruelz from the 19xx till the 55xx line...
Shame they droped sutch a good series of ipaq`s and wanna give us a step back instead of foreward..See only the removeble battery this cannot do by the new series. give us the only new thing the upgrade to 2003se from microsoft...You at HP tested the 2003 SE on all types of the 19xx till 55xx range but you are scared that the new series won`t sell....And i know as a MS BETATESTER...
I bought a 4155 a few months ago. My next PDA will most certainly not be an HP - I will not to business with a company who treats its customers like this.
It is clear from the lack of a follow-up response in this thread that HP is not concerned about maintaining customer satisfaction. It is my opinion that the rightful complaining by us is a complete waste of time, as we have been abandonded.
This is my take on the situation: HP is coming out with completely different ipaq lines. They have not been able to get them out on time and they probably expect an extremely large volume of calls to tech support to work out the new bugs and answer consumer questions. Given this, they would not be able to absorb the overwhelming calls to tech support by people trying to upgrade their previous 2003 releases with 2003SE.
They also appear to be trying to make the old ipaqs obsolute, as suggested by others. The proof is in their own statement to PCmag, written in their current review:
"When we asked HP why the new rz1710 doesn't measure up to the h1945, we were told that the h1945 was an end-of-life product."
So there you have it. They are sacrificing the old for the new. A calculated risk, but.....
HP is no longer the top dog for printers, as they were in the past. They were never a serious contender in the laptop/desktop computer market and they will never come close to matching Dell, IBM or Apple. Their nitch has been the PocketPC market. But it looks like that will be changing soon. They are losing their existing customer base with this recent announcement not to offer a simple 2003SE upgrade, even though they continue to market their ipaqs as uprgadable. The new lines are not being well received in reviews.
The track pad is a great addition to the ipaq family, but that is all that I have seen of interest. HP is crazy if they think they will maintain their market share by abandoning their small and sleek designs with new bulky and larger footprints. HP, it is a POCKETpc. If I cannot carry it comfortably in my POCKET, then I will carry my IBM laptop with me. I do not carry a PocketPC for picture taking or use it as a primary computer for any applications. It is supposed to be HIGHLY portable.
Even though HP is the current market leader in PPCs, my prediction is that you will soon see other companies take the lead. They will stress HPs known weakness now - lack of customer support - and promise upgrades that others will not offer. They will also see that HP is abandoning designs that promote the primary function of a PPC - portability. Don't worry if you don't see any other option right now. My guess is that in a year, HP ipaqs will be at the bottom of your consideration.
If I was an HP shareholder, I would be very concerned by the lack of vision or commitment demonstrated by HP. The least that I would do is to contact the board of directors, but really, I would dump the stock. HP will go through some rough times before the organization gets reorganized to try to regain their market presence. HP is looking pretty inept right now.
Last month, I retired my old Sony CLIE. I had to choose between the ipaq 4155 and clie TH55. Then I heard that HP was not releasing a Windows Mobile 2003SE update for the 4155, so I went with the TH55 instead, knowing that it is the top of the line Sony CLIE and is the last model they are releasing. I'm one of those tech-heads that has to have the top of the line from whatever brand I buy from. Knowing that HP was soon releasing new models, but none in the form factor of the 4155 was very disappointing. Further learning no SE update was going to be released for the 4155 just sealed my decision for which PDA to purchase. Bad move HP. I was going to purchase at least four 4155's.
On July 27, 2004, at 20:08:00 GMT, IsLNdbOi wrote:
"Last month, I retired my old Sony CLIE. I had to choose between the ipaq 4155 and clie TH55. Then I heard that HP was not releasing a Windows Mobile 2003SE update for the 4155, so I went with the TH55 instead, knowing that it is the top of the line Sony CLIE and is the last model they are releasing. I'm one of those tech-heads that has to have the top of the line from whatever brand I buy from."
This seems contradictory. The iPAQ 4155 is by no means the "top of the line" iPAQ. Both the iPAQ 4350 and iPAQ 5550 are "higher-end".
The 4150 is the best *in that form factor*, perhaps, but that's not the same thing unless you define "line" very narrowly.
"Knowing that HP was soon releasing new models, but none in the form factor of the 4155 was very disappointing. Further learning no SE update was going to be released for the 4155 just sealed my decision for which PDA to purchase. Bad move HP. I was going to purchase at least four 4155's."
Again, it seems odd to complain about HP not releasing an OS upgrade and then choosing a Palm OS PDA from a company that is *leaving U.S. market entirely* (at least temporarily).
While I think HP's recent decisions about sleeves and OS upgrades *stink*, at least they support iPAQs with bug fixes and updates. Of course, we'll see how long they continue providing updates for my "ancient" 5550....
HP should learn from history. A lot of people stopped buying Toshiba Pocket PCs because Toshiba had a bad habit of not releasing OS upgrades for fairly recent models. Toshiba seems to have learned their lesson, having released *free* SE upgrades for their e400 and e800 series.
It's sad to see HP heading in the opposite direction. Maybe they'll have to learn the hard way, too. If you're interested in more of my thoughts about a reasonable upgrade policy, see my editorial at:
Well the 4155 is top of the line in its form factor.
As for choosing the CLIE even though Sony is leaving the market...
At least I know it's as good as it can get since Sony won't be making ANY CLIES at all for the everyone except for Japan. As for the 4155, HP is not getting out of the PDA business and can still produce update for it, but they already announced that they would not release a SE update for the 4155.
--Snip-- "While I think HP's recent decisions about sleeves and OS upgrades *stink*, at least they support iPAQs with bug fixes and updates. Of course, we'll see how long they continue providing updates for my "ancient" 5550...." --Snip--
I think we'll find that HP won't be doing much on the older line of iPAQ's anymore with the new 'innovations' they are so proud of right now. I saw no statement of guaranteed future releases of bugs that still remain unadressed in the current ROMs on the iPAQ's, some of those bugs are so obviously inconveniant they should have been addressed at production time.
HP, you've been silent long enough. It is time to answer to your customers and tell them why you have been eagerly receiving their money without offering anything in return for it.
I'll remind the readers of this thread of my previous post where I offered the idea to print this entire thread and mailing it to HP's main office(s). If we all send at least ONE letter, there will be a better chance of something positive coming out of this thread. HP needs to hear it's customers.
Ok we FORCED to buy a new PocketPC, in a way it the fact, we cannot upgrade or present Pocket PC which are FAR enough able to run 2003SE or let's it compare to the PC world you have a PII 500Mhrz with 256Mo de Ram running under Win98, well guest what WinXP Pro work well on it ! Anyway
Now the fact that HP is strangely quite here, and the fact that they won't provide a "light" Update to a present OS, once again it is the a SE, not a 100% purely new OS, I am pretty scare to buy any of the new HP PocketPC, let's say you buy a 4700 649US, and 6 month later MS provide to OEM the 2004OS, I am damm scare that HP will screw up us again... and won't release any Update to 2004...
Let's imagine if each time MS provide a new OS you should buy a new PC. (my wife run XP Pro on a PII 266 with 128 Mo of RAM laptop, ok the boot is slow, but for email, word and internet... it is far enough)
Wow. You know, for the first time, I had a hand in helping my company purchase HP hardware, in fact, I talked them in to the iPaqs, so many 2210s. Annoyance was that with all the writing done in word and excel, it was hard to get as much done on such a small screen, everybody wanted landscape mode. I was pleased when I heard on a forum that 2003se would offer landscape mode, and then to hear this, that HP isn't even going to do it. Worst thing is, I could have gone for the Toshiba, for me the deal breaker was lack of bluetooth. At my organization I've spent quite a bit of time setting up a bluetooth server, to allow every mobile device the ability to connect interact with the database, there was also the lack of CF slots. I didn't want to get stuck buying more expensive SD hardware in the future, money counts for a lot, and staying within the budget is crucial, I was counting on these 22xxs to last me a long time. Other than that, the 400 was more attractive because of it's extra memory and lower price. What a fool I was. So much money down the drain. The decision not to offer upgrades was a big one, and extremely important to me with regards to future purchases, in the future, I'll stick with Toshiba, lower prices, and from the looks it, better support.
I am currently in the process of purchasing a new warehouse stock control system for my company.This involves replacing workstations,server,printers etc.The total budget for this part of the equipment is £40k.Not a huge amount of money, but a significant sum for my company.This morning, I reluctantly told my providing company that HP equipment was no longer to be considered.I cannot afford to do business with a company who seem to be oblivious to the need of their customers.Unfortunately I can only interperet their statement and subsequent silence on the offering of Windows Mobile 2003SE to existing users with compatible machines as a deliberate marketing strategy to sell their new product range. My links with HP go back many years,and I find I am more sad than angry making this decision. HP do something now before you lose more small but significant customers like us. The ball is in your cou
Must be Toshiba - Dell isn't upgrading their existing units either.
I'm getting the feeling that HP just doesn't care (the silence being as deafening as it is). I've been using/recommending HP equipment since the late 70's, but lately I've been reevaluating that position.
Used a fixed ROM instead of "flash" since there won't be any upgrade on ipaq products. If possible, please used back the name "Jornada" instead of "Ipaq" for your future HP PPC products, because Ipaq belongs to Compaq where we first known it can be upgradable.
I'm agree with Bill Parton, I've seen the new iPAQ models and let me say that I'd prefer my 2 months old iPAQ 4150 it's design is perfect to me. I've also seen the reviews for the new iPAQ models that have SE and it is not only the landscape the unique attractive enhancement. I respect people who may like the new models, but according to this thread most of the users like me, have recent purchased hardware and want this hardware to work with SE, that would be just fair. To me, my iPAQ 4150 it's an investment, it was not cheap, I had to sell my former iPAQ 3765 in order to complete the amount of money necessary to buy it, just 2 months ago. So, HP, it is just fair that you release the SE upgrade to the models that many of us have just purchased making a little sacrifice spending our money in an expensive device that we all hope at least it will count with the upgrades, updates and support that any serious company can make as a policy. My iPAQ 4150 has an OS in spanish, so it would be nice that the upgrade will come in this language too. I´ve just signed the request, we are almost 5000 who have signed it, HP, you can't ignore 5000 people!
Well I just bought a 2215 and I was going to buy one for my girlfriend ... but with this announcement my IPAQ will go straight to Ebay and I will never buy an HP product again.
We're not talking about a product that was released 10 years ago you still sell the 2215 !!!
I was just on the HP site today, and under the home user side of the house, they no longer have links to the driver downloads. For about 6 to 8 months their product registration site was down, and they said they were aware, but could do nothing about it. I have been nothing but DISSATISFIED with their so called support, to the point of no longer wanting to do business with them. (both with ipaqs, and any other product that they sell. HP has lost my confidence. Hope their sales $$$ reflect that attitude among us formerly loyal customers! Regards,
It's quite clear that HP really doesn't care what any of us are saying here or in the petition because, in raw business terms, none of us matter. The mindset is of the order that this is just a few people who really won't impact sales. They let us use this thread because if they don't, we might get the attention of the press.
If people REALLY want to get their attention at this point, there are two things one can do:
1) Contact your HP Rep and tell him why he can look forward to reduced sales and missed quotas. Keep in mind that you have to actually be able to deliver, or he'll just snicker with the guy at your company who DOES make the decision over golf and drinks. If you don't have an HP Rep per se, inform the company that you purchase equipment from (include PCs, Servers, Printers, cameras, paper, etc). If the field starts reporting lost sales, that gets a lot more attention then this forum. Bonuses are on the line now, kids.
2) Contact your local media. Remember that August is a Sweeps period for the TV stations, so a story about a big company rolling over the little guy will be more appealing this month. In the SF Bay Area, try contacting KNTV and KRON. Contact the tech media. If you see a story about the iPaq, contact the author and give him/her the rest of the story. The more people contacting the media the better. One person is a 'nutjob'. Twenty or more starts looking like smoke, as in the old adage, 'where there's smoke...'.
IMPORTANT: BE CIVIL! Present this situation without namecalling and/or insults. I can assure you that if you write a diatribe of "hp suckz!", you will be ignored and will sway the recipient to favor the HP position, which you know will be presented calmly.
I'm sorry it's come to this, but HP's silent dismissal of us as unimportant really leaves no alternative then to raise the issue to where it can no longer be ignored.
HP can still salvage the situation, but the silence implies an arrogance and/or ineptitude not seen since Enron (and we know what happened to them).
I already did your first part of your statement, I have rejected the sales manager from HP in promoting their new sets of iPAQs, it means they are loosing the sales to near 2000 pieces of these little gadgets, which they give really good volume discounts to us, but I put that as "Monopoly Offer" our company IT Departments and Sales Forces uses these device like pen and paper, for just the Flash Memories, it cost us a lot of money to purchase them for a 1GB SD and CF cards, not to mention the sleeves for it to use the GPS for our sales teams... but, I am tire of doing this in wasting my time for a company that I don't even take it as a company anymore, as with your second question, we need some other people who have the connection, and I do believe that there are some other sites which they really don't care about this petition, and HP seems to ignore this issue and tries to play "Going around the Circle" with us, even their HP Management is playing this type of games, the replys are strangely stupid, and their Sales Manager couldn't even answer my questions, due to their lack of knowledge in this issue, what a way to train their "Highly Knowledgeable Sales", well now a day, non have the old concept of Trainning their Sales people throughly before sending them to sale... anyway... see what happens, what comes around goes around, HP will not be able to avoid this... besides "The Highier you go the heavier you fall", I seem this type of situation on other companies and there are of these things happend, HP is one of them oneday!!! so I can wait and see.
On July 29, 2004, at 04:55:22 GMT, Michael Butler wrote:
"HP can still salvage the situation, but the silence implies an arrogance and/or ineptitude not seen since Enron (and we know what happened to them)."
While most of your points were good, this last comment was completely ridiculous. I think Enron was almost a criminal enterprise, basically stealing from California by gouging them for energy, while being criminally mismanaged and bilking many people out of their pensions.
HP isn't providing upgrades to some Pocket PCs. While I think they should, it's hardly criminal, nor is it on the scale of what Enron did.
Encouraging people to avoid "HP suckz!" arguments, while at the same time using rhetoric like this, undermines all of your otherwise excellent points.
I have been reading this thread since I first discovered HPs decision. I read and agree with one recent post that HP is more than welcome to let us vent on the matter here becuase it keeps us from doing it in the main stream. I posted a remark about it on the Pocket PC Magazine website and the only replies I have been getting are from the moderators of the forum who are also the magazine editors. At last count it has been read nearly 300 times but no other posts of outrage or dissapointment. Here is the link to my post on PocketPCMag:
Just for the record, I am an owner of a 2215 recently purchased in the last few months and was expecting to be able to purchase the SE upgrade when it became available. I too was told by HP themselves that the upgrade was forthcoming. Read my post on the PPCmag website and start posting to it also. Perhaps if the publishers there see this amount of traffic on the subject it may become a feature article and shed a little unwanted light onto HP. Lets work more on getting it out into the mainstream.
Having more than 5,000 loyal iPaq users in little more than a week, many of whom make purchasing decisions for large organisations, perhaps HP would to well to take a leaf out of Apple's book. When they upgrade an OS, minor upgrades are free and the more significant upgrades, about once a year, are chargeable - but recent purchasers of the previous system get the upgrade free of charge. When Apple made the big leap from their OS9 system to OS10 a couple of years ago, or more, they designed the new OS so that the previous version could be run "inside" it, thus providing a way to run new and legacy software simultaneously. Even now, two or three years later, it is still possible to run the OS9 operating system within the latest version of OS10. This way, Apple get the revenue from major steps forward - as well as a happy and extremely loyal bunch of users. I am not suggesting that HP should offer a way to run two parallel systems on a humble iPaq, but they would do well to look at Apple's policy on upgrades.
I have just come across the ongoing petitions for HP to release a WM2003 SE update for IPAQ devices. Having just purchased WM2003 for my IPAQ 3375. I am extremely disappointing to see HP will not actually be supporting that update.
I dont see the point of selling the OS update if they are not even going to support it for any period of time. Especially with the number of problems in WM2003. It is completely ridiculous to expect people to keep paying for the upgrades if they dont actually offer any benefit.
I am better off with my old PPC 2002 OS at the moment. The upgrade in the UK cost me around £45 when it can be picked up in the US for about $30, or £17 at the recent exchange rates. On top of that had to pay for delivery in the UK where as its free in US, and given the price of IPAQ devices in the UK compared to the US. It just adds up to not really being much of a business model to operate.
I have owned several IPAQ's formerly from Compaq, based on the current situation i cannot see myself buying any more, or recommending them to anyone else. Is it me or when it was just Compaq the updates for the IPAQ were far more frequent, and available quicker?
Maybe it needs some pressure applying to Microsoft if as HP claim its too complicated to release these updates. But you would have thought given how long they have been doing this any issues like that would have raised there heads long ago.
HP iPAQ Team, Your users purchase with an expectation that HP will provide a reasonable path for upgrades. Some iPAQ users purchased iPAQ's only after WM 2003 SE was released because they believed HP would provide this upgrade. Some assumed this. Others were shamefully misled by HP. Resolve this growing complaint by providing a reasonable path for upgrades and you will earn (!) the loyalty of your users.
My HP iPAQ Pocket PC h4355 is just over one month old. I hope it has a future.
"Maybe it needs some pressure applying to Microsoft if as HP claim its too complicated to release these updates."
This won't do anything really. Microsoft has done their part of the deal by building the 2003SE upgrade and ship it to every OEM that wanted it. All HP had to do was adapt it to the iPAQ's they want to run WM2003SE by adding in the stuff needed to support the hardware it is going to run on such as drivers and firmware. HP however made the choice to not even bother with the current line of iPAQ's, they just moved straight on to the new unreleased line and stuck it on their ROM's. HP is the one who deserves to be pressured more to support it's customers instead of ignoring the living daylights out of them.
I got a non-form reply to my message to Carly, which is nicer than a form response, but I don't think they read my message very thoroughly...
-----
My message to Carly:
I am a moderator over at Pocket PC Thoughts (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com). I am looking to buy a new Pocket PC in the near future, and had narrowed down my choices to the upcoming ipaq 4700 series and the upcoming Asus 730.
The ipaq would have been my #1 choice if not for two reasons, listed in order of importance:
1. Lack of WM2003 upgrade possibility for the most recent ipaq models. This does not bode well for the future upgradability of the 4700 series. Since I plan to purchase a high-end Pocket PC this time, I would like to be able to upgrade it at least once while I own it. I had decided some time ago that my next Pocket PC would be an HP ipaq because of dependable upgrade support and excellent add-ons, but this seems to no longer be the case.
2. The touchpad on the 4700. While my primary use is business-related, I also use my Pocket PC for entertainment purposes, including digital audio and video as well as games. I feel that the touchpad is significantly inferior to a directional pad for both gaming as well as manipulating audio programs while the device stays in my bag.
Note that I had sent the touchpad comment to HP support a week or two ago, had 5 confirmations that they received my message and would respond within a business day, and never received an actual response. This also makes me less than comfortable with the quality of HP support. I don't really expect HP to turn around, redesign the 4700, and give me one free to make me feel better, but a "we passed on your comments to our design team" message would have been nice.
In conclusion, I've been moving more and more towards choosing the Asus 730 as my next PPC, and mostly due to the actions of HP.
------
HP's Response:
Thank you for sending your email to the Hewlett Packard Executive Offices. We are excited that you are considering an IPAQ 4700 series or the Asus 730 product. We would recommend you call 1-800-848-4589 for presales information for further insights into the features and advantages of these products.
Best Regards,
HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY Executive Customer Relations 1-800-756-0608 press 7 on menu email_ecag@hp.com fax 1-650-852-8330
"Microsoft has done their part of the deal by building the 2003SE upgrade and ship it to every OEM that wanted it. "
:D I was being a little sarcastic. Its obvious that HP dont think its easy enough for them to produce upgrades based on their announcement. I guess they are just in the wrong business of selling/supporting mobile devices and associated firmware, surprising really given all their business position and sales/marketing is it.
Replies to serious emails like that from a big company such as HP make me furious when I know they know better than to stick their heads in the sand instead of giving you a worthy, seriously thought-through reply.
I really debated as to whether I should include the 'Enron' comment. I was looking for an example of arrogance that was business-oriented but would not be construed as 'overtly political' or an 'opinion'.
"HP can still salvage the situation, but the silence implies an arrogance and/or ineptitude not seen since Enron (and we know what happened to them)"
I had thought that prefacing the comment as I did, referring to the arrogance, would have made my point clear. The reference is to the now infamous 'trader' tapes, where Enron traders are heard cheering when a wildfire was threatening to burn a major power line, giving orders to shut down power plants, and expressing contempt for the people being hurt by their actions. Whilst one can argue that Enron had political connections, those are irrelevent to the 'trader' tapes and have no bearing in my reference.
Under no circumstances should anything I have writen be construed in any way, shape, or form as suggesting HP has engaged in criminal behavior in this matter. Inconsiderate, yes. Short-sighted, yes. Illegal, no.
I regret that my attempt to cite an example that no company can treat their customers with such contempt and not suffer consequences was too esoteric or not clearly recognisable as such.
I don't think your comment was so far out of order and Im not sure why it received the rebuke. (Though that's what free speech is all about). You did not say or even suggest HP had done anything criminal, you merely made a comment, or indeed a comparision, about a level of arrogance and customer contempt. It is a view. You are entitled to hold it and some may agree with you. I guess it is possible that HP are still trying to figure out how to respond to this outpouring of disappointment and anger. But the longer all this goes unanswered, the more fitting the charge of arrogance and contempt for customers appears to be. Rather than get distracted by criticising each other, I suggest its more productive to remain focused on the route of the problem.
Since it seems so true that HP is firmly standing ground on their decision, perhaps they will consider releasing more detailed technical specifications and engineering schematics so we can all install LINUX.
At least THEN we'll be closer to receiving the functionality we expect by using this technology.
yes, please try to stay calm and construct your words carefully before writing them over here. This isnt an debate arena!! All, please stay focus on the scope of the problem and avoid any proofless claims (like Micheal said about HP acting like Eron, it is RIDICULOUS ) & AVOID absolutely OFFENSIVE words. Thank You. May this problem regarding WM2003SE be solved soon, without anyone's falsehood accusement of anything unrelated to anyone else or HP!
HP has given me great product support all along. I do think HP is doing a lot of things right.
About this SE upgrade: I was really looking forward to it, especially since I do a lot of PIE websurfing and would have liked a fast landscape mode option. It was rather disappointing to see that HP had decided not to support current models.
2002 to 2003 was offered, but 2003 to 2003SE is not? SE beta was able to be put on devices; I'm sure the release version can also be put on. I don't mind giving up the file store since I don't use it. Could HP release a non-support version of SE?
I am not able to buy a new Ipaq every year. The lack of upgrade will cause me to think twice before buying HP again, but they do make quality hardware.
I see that there are comments for and against HP's policy in this matter, but there seems to be far more against. I am not sure of HP's future if they ignore this, but they know what is feasable for their company, and I hope they'll make the right decision.
I work at an ivy league medical school and have purchased the H4155 only a couple of weeks ago. I love the unit and was excited to show it off and recommend it to everyone.
However, I assumed that I would be able to acquire the 2003SE update given my recent purchasing of the unit. I didn't even expect it to be free. But given HP's decision not to make the update available (and their complete abandonment of their existing customers for sake of directing all efforts into their new ipaq lines), I have gone back and told everyone to avoid HP and consider only the Sony or Toshiba.
I know HP is just going to sit back and weather the storm out, but for every dissatisfied customer, over 10 acquaintance's will be told of their dissatisfaction. That has been the case for me. I am so pissed off, I am going to make sure that I tell everyone that is willing to listen.
A reputation is easy to destroy and exceedingly difficult to restore.
Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard founded HP in 1939 and, in 50 years, earned the high reputation to which the message above the last post refers. "Management by objectives" was one of their more innovative techniques. In July 1999 HP named Carly Fiorina as President and CEO after nearly 20 years at AT&T and Lucent Technologies. As CEO, she "leads HP's reinvention as a company that makes technology work for businesses and consumers". At least, until now.
I have still not had a response from the CEO to my suggestion that HP provide Windows Mobile 2003 SE support.
This is absurd. I've actually been looking at getting a second PDA (my wife has an Ipaq 4155)and a future Ipaq is now out of the running. I wanted landscape mode, etc. and I loved the Ipaq 41xx form factor. I'm now going to look at an Asus or Dell :-(
Guys! Flashing ROM on a small device like this that is fairely new and high-end is not Rocket science. My next printer will now likely be a Lexmark! Later. :-p
Thanks for your link to the forum discussion on the Pocket PC Magazine webpage. Although the sentiments are very similar, I think that the more opportunities to share our concern in as many different forums might spread the word around regarding the decision not to offer upgrades.
Who knows, perhaps there are iPAQ users who do not belong to this forum but do belong to the Pocket PC Magazine forum discussions.
My first Pocket PC was the Italian version of Compaq iPAQ 3850. I'm not Italian, but I bought it because it was the only version available on the Italian market.
When Microsoft released Windows Mobile 2003, I was unpleased to see that HP released ROM updates to the new operating system only for the US version of my unit.
I said to myself: Well, you know that HP will always give you any possible update to your unit, so, if they didn't updated this time, there was something stopping them from doing that.
Then I decided to purchase an iPAQ 5550. I was seeing Toshiba customers at that time complaining about the non-update of their 70x units and I was happy about chosing HP.
I have spent several months trying to purchase the English version of the iPAQ 5550 and when I finally found it, I paid 15% more. I was too happy with the new iPAQ.
When I first heard about Windows Mobile 2003 SE and the first declarations from HP stating that they would release the update and Toshiba saying that they wouldn't, I felt good about myself on having chosen an iPAQ.
Then Toshiba changed their instance about this OS and I was happy about it, but then, guess what? HP changed their instance too... WOW, I was not feeling happy about my iPAQ any more...
HP was saying that there were no features in the new release to justify the update, just ignoring Internet Explorer improvements, Compact .NET Framework updates, UI improvements, the new start menu, stability improvements, bug fixing and many other goodies available on the new release. They have just provided the WPA support for iPAQ and said that I should be happy with that.
No HP, I won't be happy with that any more. I feel cheated and I'm really sorry about being an HP customer. More when I see that Toshiba has just released their update for Windows Mobile SE, making their users very happy and I'm here, stuck in news sites trying to discover what HP is planning to do.
I'm not the kind of person who purchase a new PDA every year. No, I like to purchase all my gear (laptop, PDA, cell phone, etc) every two years, get the topnotch in the market and be confident that I will run it for a long time to justify the investment. That's why I have chosen iPAQ 5550. I will not buy any of your new iPAQs and it will be that way until end of 2005, when I will replace all my gear.
The problem is that if I have to use the first edition of Windows Mobile until that date, I will do that, but be sure that HP is a past name on my brands of choice.
I think that the cost to release ROM updates for the current family of iPAQs does not represent much more cost than releasing 1.10 as you did for major part of the devices, but you would have made lots of users very happy with that.
I really hope that you reconsider your instance about that. That's all.
I am completely resigned to the fact that HP will not honor its customers. My opinion is that anyone thinking that they will cave and provide the update is kidding themselves.
My only goal at this point is to make HP pays for their deceit. I am around MANY professionals that use PDAs and PPCs. I will do everything in my power to dissuade them from purchasing HP, and I really mean it.
That petition and getting the word out is just a way to instill passion in people and make sure that HP gets what they deserve.
Wait for the storm to pass? They are crazy. It is already approaching hurricane speeds and there will be nothing but destruction for HP to deal with after.
HP was proud to announce that they don't give a $%#@ about current owners and that they are looking beyond us to maximize their profit margin. HP, I am pleased to announce that I will make sure that no one around me thinks twice about buying your products. You are damaged goods.
HP WILL learn that customers ALWAYS have the last word in the end.
From my own experiences and recommendations, I have DIRECTLY converted 5 people to DELL computer laptops. Those were high-priced items, not cheaper ipaqs. I will guarantee that I can dissuade more people than that to ditch any consideration of HP ipaqs. It may not sound like alot, but the word is passed on from each person that you tell, like a pyramid.
I am a central person at the IT department of the firm, (2300 employees) I recently spoke with salesman about HP SAN solution, but will choose better provider from now on.
(Printers is not an issue, we recently changed the policy to *****)
It looks quite interesting that this week we arrived to a deal with a customer that will be developing a large sales force automation solution and I have designed all the software and so, designed hardware requirements.
Instead of buying the new iPAQ 63xx series, we're going with QTEK 2020 and Motorola Smartphones, depending on the situation. For me it doesn't matters, as the operating system and development platform always remains the same.
The dutch pocket pc club also put up the link on their much readed dutch board so more people can be reached this time..Whe all sighn the form even me a microsoft Betatester on manny platforms... And i can tell you all even the dutch users are very angry...
Reading back through this thread I was delighted to read the message by gary cantwell that the thread would not be unnecessarily censored. And it hasn't. But it sure has been read! How many queries to the corporate suite have been answered? Only one (mine) has been posted. And that reply came from a robot.
The most important feature to me is the landscape view. Also it is very disappointing to buy a 2210, and then to have the product become non-upgradeable in around a year since it's launch. Last year, the 2210 offered a new form factor and also a departure from HP's previous handheld designs and functions. This haldheld should surely have had a life of longer than a year.
Having heard about all this WM2003 SE upgrade probs, I feel that once again a large corperate body has taken control of the needs of its customers/clients in order to profit from forced sales of new products.
In my opinion this is an absolute disgrace and an enormous "kick in the teeth" to all those who have invested heavily in products which have been designed to be "kept up to scratch" and so called FUTURE PROOF!
Sorry HP you've shot yourselves in the foot if you don't give us all this upgrade that should be automatically easily sorted, even for a small fee!!!!!!
I have begun another post on another website in an attempt to get the word out and show the corporate powers that be there is a true concern out there. It's difficult to locate on the PCMag.com site so here is the link:
I think that if the moderators begin to see this much traffic on a single post that it will garner some degree of noting in a future publication of their magazine. Lets work on these publications in an attempt to get the information out to the public instead of keeping this within the "inner sanctum" of the HP website.
"Landscape support is nice but not critical" - It seems an odd reason to exclude a feature, your customers want it but not badly enough.
Landscape mode is not a "nice feature" like the ability to change the background of your today screen or jawbreaker it actually adds functionality and value to the device.
I have been a bit unclear as to HP's attitude towards its customers sometimes I contact a good customer service agent whereas at other times I am virtually ignored. I would have expected better support considering the premium price people pay for these devices (this is not a £40 printer, but the level of customer service is the same). This announcement perfectly illustrates the value that HP places on its customers. This is contrasted by Toshiba who have already started rolling out the updates (free of charge!), I think that when making future purchases (Not just PDAs) I know who I will consider first.
I doubt I will be buying any future iPAQ even if they do eventually release this update. If they need this much convincing I don't fancy placing any trust in them in the future.
Im very disapointed in hp, I have only recently bought my ipaq 2210 and thought since HP was reputable company i would have support for many years to come. HOW WRONG. WISH NOW THAT i HAD PURCHASED THE DELL SYSTEM. After this I definately wont ever purchase another HP product again YOU CANNOT BE TRUSTED
The center of attention on that page right now (7-30-04) is the slogan, "Putting customers first: Survey ranks HP Services #1 in customer satisfaction"
Hmmm... Does this WM2003SE issue factor into that sloganeering?
Having just purchased your IPAQ 5550 top of the range Pocket PCs, precisely because of the claims in your promotional material that the model is upgradeable and expandable, I find it very disturbing that you should announce that you are not going to make available an update to the Windows Mobile 2003 Second edition on this model, chargeable or otherwise.
Are you aware that claiming upgradability in your promotional materials and then denying any upgrades is an offence against the UK Trade Descriptions Act?
Could you please explain on what technical or business grounds the decision was made?
You can be certain that I shall not buy or recommend the purchase of another IPAQ until I have a satisfactory response from you.
This coming from a website (dave's ipaq) that disrespects others?
HP not offering this upgrade, and based on the amount of upset users, this type of negative feedback will eventually trickle into their bottom line.
I'm growing more and more upset with this since they said this...
"4. Will future models from HP be able to support Windows Mobile 2003 Second Edition?
Yes, you will find Microsoft Windows Mobile 2003 SE available on new products from HP this year."
...and now the story seems to be changing yet again?
"Does the newly launched h6300 come with Microsoft� Windows Mobile� 2003 Second Edition?
It is unlikely that HP will provide an update to Windows Mobile 2003 Second Edition on this product. Windows Mobile 2003 Second Edition would not provide any significant enhancements, as most of the key functionality that is important on a device such as the iPaq h6300 series has been taken into consideration prior to its release."
...hmmm, sounds like my H6300 plans might be headed the way of an Mo
I found that interesting, as you note at the top of the message I asked about the 6300 Series.
As far as updates, and functionablity, that is not the case, PPC 2003 SE, in fact has many updates designed for Smart Phones, to move away from the Phone version of PPC.
It listed some other reasons the upgrade won't be offered, namely that the ROM is too small to accommodate the SE operating system and HP's other value-added programs and that some of those value-added programs won't run well in landscape mode. Does anybody buy that?
The iPAQ rz1715 has Windows Mobile 2003 SE, even though it doesn't have a VGA display or WiFi and only 32 MB ROM. Maybe this means HP is cutting back on their value-added programs.
As for them not running well in landscape mode, that's probably true. So what? We can switch back to portrait mode on the fly if we don't like how they behave in landscape. As long as they don't crash, it's not a big deal. (Of course, HP could also fix the programs, which they presumably have already done for their SE-native iPAQs.)
It listed some other reasons the upgrade won't be offered, namely that the ROM is too small to accommodate the SE operating system and HP's other value-added programs and that some of those value-added programs won't run well in landscape mode. Does anybody buy that? ---
Most certainly NOT.
--- The iPAQ rz1715 has Windows Mobile 2003 SE, even though it doesn't have a VGA display or WiFi and only 32 MB ROM. Maybe this means HP is cutting back on their value-added programs. ---
a h5550 has 48MB flasheable ROM. more than enough to accommodate the 2003SE image while still leaving room for the iPAQ FileStore, no VGA either and built-in WiFi/Bluetooth/iRDA.
HP is beating about the bush with their statements, they are trying to fog the view with praise for the new models in hopes that people will forget what those models have cost them and what they can do.
I've always hated dave's ipaq, but this is blatantly misleading, sounds like somebody from HP got him to spread their rumors. After all, the 1715 fits 2003se into 17 megabytes of space, I'm sure that HP could do more for those of us that bought good PPCs.
I was going to give HP A CHANCE. But hey, if they don't give a crap about nearly 7,000 customers, they obviously have their minds on another horizon. I work in at a computer shop and will most certainly persuade people to buy Gateway or any other company that is actually focused on the customer. HEAR ME LOUD AND CLEAR HP, I WAS GOING TO GIVE YOU A CHANCE, ESPECIALLY SINCE WE SENT YOU A PETITION... But now that you have shown me that you won't even respond, I will be investing my money elseware. Good Bye.
"It listed some other reasons the upgrade won't be offered, namely that the ROM is too small to accommodate the SE operating system and HP's other value-added programs and that some of those value-added programs won't run well in landscape mode. Does anybody buy that?"
It's solid bull. Besides, if their "value-added programs" don't run well in landscape, maybe they should fix that. After all, what are these new 2003SE machines running? The same programs that won't run well in landscape?
"The iPAQ rz1715 has Windows Mobile 2003 SE, even though it doesn't have a VGA display or WiFi and only 32 MB ROM. Maybe this means HP is cutting back on their value-added programs."
The h2215 has the nearly the same features: * Both sport a 3.5" screen, 240x320 (QVGA) resolution, transflective TFT * The rz1715 has a non-replaceable battery (this is a step backwards!!!) * The rz1715 runs at 203 MHz. WHY??? The h2215 is twice as fast. * Both have 32MB ROM, while the h2215 has TWICE as much RAM (64MB) than the rz1715's 32MB * Both have a speaker, mic, Pocket Media 9, etc. * The h2215 has both CF and SD slots, while the rz1715 has only the SD * The h2215 has built-in Bluetooth, while the rz1715 has none
And yet, with the VASTLY superior statistics, the h2215 is deemed incapable of running the SE operating system. Oh, and also take note: the rz1715 has 10.33 MB available on the ROM for File Store. This means that the 2003SE OS takes up a mere 22MB of space. 22MB!!!!
Oh, and while I'm at it, let's compare the rz1715 against the previous entry-level h1940:
So tell me again why we should downgrade to get the new OS? Because this new handheld's only $20 less than the old one, but it's A LOT WORSE. This is bull, HP.
"...(Of course, HP could also fix the programs, which they presumably have already done for their SE-native iPAQs.)"
Exactly what I said above.
This whole situation is beyond words. Nothing can describe how much of a catastrophe these HP idiots are causing. There comes a point when customer satisfaction should bear more importance than profit margin. This is why I got an HP after owning a Sony handheld: I got tired of Sony's inflated prices for sub-par equipment. Well, gee, now I have to pay twice for the same stuff? Fortunately, according to the end-of-life link posted earlier, my h2215 will be around until the end of next year, at which point I will SERIOUSLY consider NOT getting another HP. I don't feel like dealing with the bull anymore.
I mean, it's not like I really care that much about landscape mode. It's not that big of a deal. It's the principle behind the matter, the fact that we're being forced to buy completely new handhelds when our current models are completely capable of being upgraded.
Here's an idea, HP: instead of spending money on the more expensive Flash ROM, why not just put regular ROM chips in your handhelds? It's not like you're taking advantage of the "flash" part of the ROM. You seem to enjoy putting out new handhelds for every OS update, rather than putting out software updates. You guys are officially schmucks in my book.
I sincerely hope this is short sighted. Service is the only long term market segment what will offer new and residual sales growth, and a market differentiator. You need only look internally to HP's own corporate acquistions to see what happens when potential sales are left unsold.
On August 1, 2004, at 00:51:52 GMT, Joshua Foster wrote:
"It's solid bull. Besides, if their "value-added programs" don't run well in landscape, maybe they should fix that. After all, what are these new 2003SE machines running? The same programs that won't run well in landscape?"
I think you misunderstood. I believe that HP means the programs in their pre-SE WM 2003 iPAQs don't work well in landscape. HP has probably fixed them in their SE machines (for example, look at the new iPAQ Wireless program in the iPAQ 6315), but doesn't want to retrofit the new programs back.
However, why can't they do that? If the value-added programs are working under SE on the newer iPAQs, is there anything that would prevent that retrofit?
HP seems to claim that most developers are working on new versions, not fixing older versions of programs, but that's wrong; most developers are releasing new versions of programs that work in both WM 2003 and WM 2003 SE. HP has it even better, because they wouldn't have to worry about the programs working in earlier versions of the OS because they'd be included with an OS upgrade.
"And yet, with the VASTLY superior statistics, the h2215 is deemed incapable of running the SE operating system. Oh, and also take note: the rz1715 has 10.33 MB available on the ROM for File Store. This means that the 2003SE OS takes up a mere 22MB of space. 22MB!!!!"
Yes, that was my point. If HP can get SE running on the anemic rz1715, it should run on the more capable devices. If they have to shrink the iPAQ File Store somewhat to accommodate the OS, I can live with that.
"Oh, and while I'm at it, let's compare the rz1715 against the previous entry-level h1940:
So tell me again why we should downgrade to get the new OS? Because this new handheld's only $20 less than the old one, but it's A LOT WORSE. This is bull, HP."
Actually, at the time the 1715 was announced, the iPAQ 1945 was listed FOR THE SAME PRICE on HP's consumer store. The 1945 isn't listed there now; I wonder why. ;-)
"Here's an idea, HP: instead of spending money on the more expensive Flash ROM, why not just put regular ROM chips in your handhelds? It's not like you're taking advantage of the "flash" part of the ROM. You seem to enjoy putting out new handhelds for every OS update, rather than putting out software updates."
I realize that you're probably being facetious, but I'll pretend that you aren't.
First, HP has released ROM updates for iPAQs (several for my iPAQ 5550), so using regular ROM wouldn't be a good idea.
Second, I believe Microsoft has required Flash ROM support since Pocket PC 2002.
It would be nice if somebody on the iPAQ team would try to address our concerns here. (And I mean a technical person, not a PR flack.)
Ah, I see, HP is saying, in effect, that their former flagship iPaq, the H555x, intended for the corporate market, is incapable of being updated due to design deficiencies.
One could draw the conclusion (caveats below) that HP has difficulty determining long term viability for devices they sell. After all, any company purchasing the units should consider this a capital asset that needs a depreciation stream of at least 2 years. This device will be essentially abandoned in late August 2004, barely a year old, if I recall the introduction date correctly.
Therefore, if HP could miscalculate so badly on a pocket PC, what other assets could they miscalculate on, such as printers, servers, PCs, etc. I'd be very careful about making any capital purchases from this company.
Michael
CAVEATS: Please note this is my opinion, with no "proofless claims" (Ronald, what I wrote was publicly documented on American News media (ABC, NBC, CNN, etc) and unchallenged by the participants; however, it might not have been covered so widely outside the US) and I'm making no comparisons with any company. Merely drawing a logical conclusion from what HP states is the reason older iPaqs, including the H555x, are unable to be upgraded. The premise has been obtained from URLs and commentary posted on this thread by others, who I believe are relaying accurate information. That I have to defend and tediously justify my opinions and facts is regrettable, but there you are. We now join our calm, reasoned, discussion which is already in progress.
"I was wondering today why I had assumed 2200s would get 2003se, and then I remembered something that I had seen shortly after my large purchase of 2200s, oh yeah, HP UPGRADED 2200s TO 2003SE AT MOBILE DEVCON."
So let me get this straight. HP put forth effort to create a beta SE flash upgrade for the h2215, but they didn't bother to go any further? If they've already gotten this far, why stop?
Just don't buy HP again, Even if they do reconsider I know my 5555 is my last ipaq period. Just got a T3 and I'm quite happy with it and never expect an OS upgrade
have JUST purchased this PDA because of HP's high status for customer support. Now I find out that you are not going to offer an upgrade to 2003SE.
This excuse you are offering is not acceptable, I have paid for a brand new product only to find I cannot upgrade it. If you think this will force me to purchase another HP PDA then think again. I will never buy another HP product and will recommend to my friends to steer clear of your products.
I suggest you re-evaulate your decision on upgrades to 2003se, this is ANOTHER customer WHO IS NOT IMPRESSED with your corporate attitude towards the end user.
I think they just figured, screw it, why bother spending a month fine tuning SE for old ipaqs, when we can hopefully force them to purchase newer ones. I think they probably realized this was a problem, but are now too scared of looking like fools to give in to our demands.
Gary can you please post a message here explaining why the HP iPAQ Team have not had the courtesy to respond to the complaints posted in this forum following their message on 20th July 2004.
Gary can you please post a message here explaining why the HP iPAQ Team have not had the courtesy to respond to the complaints posted in this forum following their message on 20th July 2004.
Many thanks
Charles"
Goodluck getting a reply from Him, or anybody at HP.
Well if you become a stock-holder you are technically part owner of this company and have the right to ask questions that the general public do not have the privilage to get answers to.
The current price of HP stock is not relevant in my opinon. Both H and P are dead. The company is not currently representing their past quality with respect to this issue. They are ignoring customer requests.
It also really doesn't matter whether you can or cannot get your display to rotate 90 degrees or 270 degrees.. . What is important is whether HP as it now exists is any better than RadioShack as a company. Printers, copiers, monitors, computers......hairdryers and bread makers. Most are not made "state-side".
The important factor in this discussion of Hp is the absence of a human response from a company to humans who who had confidence in the company. Robotic answers don't make it unless the CEO is an actual robot. Heck, maybe it is Martha Stewart!!!!
The most profound indicator of the future is the past.
I have written to the CEO and have posted repeatedly here. My towels, sheets and 4350 still look the dame.
I suspect there is "no one home" at HP with respect to this matter.
Don't forget to save a copy of all your posts to this string.
Does anyone remember "Class Action"? They take years to mature. . . not weeks. Maybe we will not benefit from SE but we SURE have learned from this experience.
Well done for at least getting some reply from HP.... However, have you ever had the feeling (some of) HP really don't know what they're talking about?
"Even if an OS upgrade were available, the 2215 is not capable of being upgraded to the newer operating systems due to the limited memory available in the unit."
Hasn't the 2200 series got a lot more ram / flash rom space than the newer rz1715?
This is simply a case of the large corporation looking at its bottom line and not at its customers. HP's Board evidently thought is would be better to release new iPAQs in order to entice new buyers and existing owners (who are non tech savvy). Hence generate new revenue.
HP should have spent a insignificant amount of money on retrofit R&D for 2003SE (as they must have spend significantly in order to release new iPAQs with SE)
As a FREE download would have been the right thing to do. Microsoft Windows XP SP2 is a good example of that (i.e. CUSTOMER CARE).
With the increasing convergence of Mobile Phones and Windows Mobile (take Motorolaâs upcoming MPx flip/landscape phone as an example). HP could find itself losing even more customers than this forum. Yes, mobile firms are going to be even less inclined to upgrade software - but as it cost little to upgrade my mobile every year or so anyway - that does not matter. (can't do that with my £500 iPAQ)
A converged new phone (Windows Mobile) device with a large screen and WiFi fits the bill perfectly for what I need an iPAQ for. Couple that with a iPod or better still a Mobile Media Center for anything multimedia and bye bye iPAQâ¦..!!
On August 3, 2004, at 12:31:05 GMT, Harpreet Chohan wrote:
"This is simply a case of the large corporation looking at its bottom line and not at its customers. HP's Board evidently thought is would be better to release new iPAQs in order to entice new buyers and existing owners (who are non tech savvy). Hence generate new revenue."
While I agree that it's probably about the bottom line, I seriously doubt that the Board of Directors (or even CEO Fiorina) had any direct input on this decision. It was probably made by the head of the iPAQ group, or maybe one level higher.
"HP should have spent a insignificant amount of money on retrofit R&D for 2003SE (as they must have spend significantly in order to release new iPAQs with SE)
As a FREE download would have been the right thing to do. Microsoft Windows XP SP2 is a good example of that (i.e. CUSTOMER CARE)."
While I'd love a free download, too, that hasn't been Compaq/HP's policy in the past. If you bought an iPAQ within a certain time before a new OS was announced, you would get a free upgrade, but the rest of the customers got charged about $30.
Given the niche market of the iPAQ, I don't think you can compare this to Windows. I don't expect HP to lose money offering an upgrade, but I do expect the option to buy one.
I think other people here would be willing to pay for an upgrade -- if one were available, of course.
tell us more about that model, where it can be seen, and any other good alternatives to ipaq. Ive already written to the store asking for a refund on the three 2210s i bought.
Well since we all know at one time some sort of upgrade beta was made. Why doesn't HP let us try it out for ourselves. I'd be happy to become the guinea pig and let you all know what happened. Do you think this is reasonable TJ? I think that if someone outside of HP could try it, that would at least be one step to redeeming their credibility.
When HP made a beta for upgrading the 3970 from PPC 2002 to WM 2003 they left out BT functionality as, I suspect, many people who 'found' the beta on the web found out.
I certainly wouldn't guinea-pig my 5555 on this basis alone....
You can also flash back to the old operating system if it gets bad, plus I've decided to buy a new pda anyways. The HP ones look good, but I'd rather gamble my money on the upgrade for the 5555 than a new "support-less" iPAQ. I respect HP's decesion not to upgrade, but for my own sake I want to see that upgrade.
Supposidly the beta had flaws, hence why they weren't upgrading. (Dave's iPaq - But consider the source)
People did have 2200's and they worked, with the memory built in.
HP can't technically make the beta available publicly because of the issues of support, but they can make the product available.
I have continued to contact HP with little or no response, or responses that we will get no response. I will keep trying until somebody listens.
The sad things is yesterday they asked for my Part and Serial numbers. I know those aren't going to do squat to help out, so why bother asking for them?
While they had my name right (There is a suprise) they couldn't find my address, which considering it has been in several different parts of the company, sounds unbelievable.
I've honestly become cynical with this issue, and it is doubtful that we will see a resolution.
When the PR Manager for the mobile line says that he probably can't comment on this discussion or the petition, that says a lot about HP, escpecially since we want them to comment. It was like pulling teeth just to get the statement that started this thread published.
Gary Cantwell, now that I know you are listening, however on the wrong frequency. Could you please answer this one question for me. Is it possible for me to obtain, from HP, the Windows Mobile 2003 SE Upgrade BETA. I know it exists as a file somewhere at HP, so would it kill to have me test it and then end all of this wondering. HP is leaving us in the dark, but I'm seeing light. This is mutually beneficial and I think your company would do well to think it over. Especially with that petition nearly hitting 8,000. You could be losing a great deal of money, possibly even a half million (if you charged around $50$60 for the upgrade). Even a company as large as HP, that will affect the stock.
I just noted that my last posting had been removed. That was the one replying to Mr Adams, (hi TJ), stating that while I agree it is important to remain focussed, I saw nothing wrong with someone offering an alternative product to HP, given that we appear to be receiving no responses to the comments here. I made the point that I understood the point of the Forum was for existing IPaq users to offer advice to others. In the event of us being let down by HP, I put forward the proposition that it is entirely in keeping with the Forum's mission, for existing users to suggest alternatives to HP products. Would the censors, who removed my posting, and may remove this one too, care to explain what they find so contentious about such a suggestion. What is in such words that you find SO frightening?
We Ipaq users who comment here, by and large, are all out to help each other. That is our main goal. If HP does not want to be part of that, then it should not attempt to prevent us from doing so.
"You can also flash back to the old operating system if it gets bad, plus I've decided to buy a new pda anyways. The HP ones look good, but I'd rather gamble my money on the upgrade for the 5555 than a new "support-less" iPAQ. I respect HP's decesion not to upgrade, but for my own sake I want to see that upgrade."
I read (either in this post or on another website) that someone was beta testing the upgrade on the 2215 and that bluetooth did not work. He was unable to have the machine flashed back, and had to have the unit replaced. I have no info on a beta for the 5555, but beware if you get a hold of one.
P.S. I want a full upgrade (not beta) for my 5555. HP's lack of support for their "older" products is disconcerting.
lindsay that is a good point. However spinning the idealism behind the forums might not change HP's mind. To tell you the truth I'm about to say hell with HP. They send in their moderators to remove posts, so they do exist, but then don't seem to want to see this issue. If I could make a political analogy, kind of how the Dems won't see the fact that Saddam was a danger. They refuse to looks facts in the eye, in HP's case, they won't look at the ever growing petition against their company. I remain faithful though. I think HP will pull through at the end.
Well folks I don't know about you people but its becoming clear to me that HP really wants this issue to disappear under the carpet. I think we can moan as much as we like about the shabby way HP has left us, it isn't going to get us anywhere. Their existing customer base is being ignored in a way we would of expected lesser companies. I think there's only one way to show our dissatisfaction and that's to vote with our feet; my next PDA isn't going to be made by HP and if you feel as strongly as myself over this issue I suggest you do the same.
While I'd love a free download, too, that hasn't been Compaq/HP's policy in the past. If you bought an iPAQ within a certain time before a new OS was announced, you would get a free upgrade, but the rest of the customers got charged about $30.
Given the niche market of the iPAQ, I don't think you can compare this to Windows. I don't expect HP to lose money offering an upgrade, but I do expect the option to buy one.
I think other people here would be willing to pay for an upgrade -- if one were available, of course.
--------------------------------------------
Steve Let us not forget that we are the customer. These days (most) companies are too concerned with cornering the market and exploiting us rather than offering whatâs best for the consumer.
We the consumer should have more power to demand what we want. I compared this issue to XPsp2 as they have a few things in common. 1./ Both are issued by Microsoft and are considered OS enhancements 2./ Both are released by MS as generic upgrades â i.e. designed run on any platform (and from MS at least they are FOC â but I am sure cost MS millions to develop)
By all that I suppose I am implying that the hardware architecture of Pocket PC is fundamentally flawed â i.e. just as I can load XP onto virtually any PC (barring any specific drivers) â I should be able to load Windows Mobile onto any compatible handheld device (within specifications) and then just upload the drivers that I need. (again these drivers already exist standalone as HP would not offer so many updates to themâ¦!) Imagine if you had the same level of free choice on your Pocket PC as you have on your PC. E.g which Operating System, internet browser, PIM clientâ¦.etc
As an example of further corporate stupidity - we have more than 5 different flavours of recordable DVD, already 3+ different blu-ray formats, 8+ different types of memory card, and to top it all digital audio players (iPod etc) that will only play music bought from their stores. and the list goes onâ¦.. p.s. I think Sony is the worst company in the world for destroying consumer protection.
Anyway â Iâve got carried awayâ¦.. Down with corporate greed and ha
Tim, I hope your faith proves justified, but I fear Jon may be proved right.
Certainly there are aspects to this which are becoming unpleasant. I post a completely inoffensive reply, which the censors remove followed by a warning from Gary that any postings that insult other participants will be immediately removed. In doing so Gary appears to suggest that I posted just such an criticism - which I didnt and would not. To remove my innocuous posting and make such a comment, I find rather offensive. This thing is all starting to have rather a bad taste isnt it?
While I would question the censors actions above, I would caution against directing your frustration and anger over the lack of HP response at Gary. He is probably not authorised to make any response - it presumably being beyond his responsibilities. Indeed he may have specificially been barred from making any direct response to the concerns raised. However, Gary you could give an assurance to users that the issues have been refered to those responsible and that an answer will be forthcoming.
I think we all have the same objective but different ways of saying it. I have tried to keep myself relatively calm but can express things extremely forcefully as Mr Hoffman discovered when he made outrageous attacks against Laura, which every gentleman would find wholly unacceptable. No gentleman behaves like a cad to a lady.
Now we can agree to disagree and can have different view points. If HP want to cut posts then let them do so rather than ending up in exchanges between ourselves as to what is or is not acceptable. May I with respect suggest we leave HP to decide how they censor posts and get on with the main objective of this thread and others of expressing the views about HP's decision. If some of us overstep the mark then let's ignore it rather than creating an impression of division.
It may or may not be acceptable to post information about competing products - if HP do not like it they will delete. But if we remain focussed then having information about other products and what are people's intentions about switching to them is highly relevant for any company. The fact that I have an embargo on HP products may be of no consequence to HP. However, thousands indicating they will switch to this or that manufacturer would I hope be of relevance and worry to any manufacturer. HP has run the guantlet of losing the goodwill of its customers. They have scored a marketing own goal.
I have looked at the debate from the customer standpoint and from what I would have done in HP's shoes. In my humble opinion the way that HP has handled this matter is disastrous. A golden opportunity has been missed by the company to deal with this issue head on with its customers and to debate and properly explain all the detail. The failure to deal with legitimate questions - however hard they may be - is the quicksand that can undermine the perceived integrity of any company. HP is doing a dis-service to all its loyal customers by failing at least to come here and talk to us. We might all be sad at the answers but our respect for HP would be less tainted. HP PLEASE HAVE THE COURAGE TO TALK TO US ALL HERE IN THE FORUM.
Let's try to pull together as a team and not get too distracted by the different strands. If we want to address our anger or displeasure let's not direct it at each other. I apologise for anyone who wants to shoot me down for my plea for moderation towards each other. Say what you want to HP - if they do not like it they will cut it. Let's all be nice to each other.
Best Regards Charles
GARY - HP MODERATOR. You know I hold you in the highest regard. I appreciate it is an invidious postion for you to make any statement here. I ask you publicly to pass on a request that the HP iPAQ Team return to this forum and address the questions asked. I do not ask you to make that request on your own initiative but merely as passin on a request from a forum member. I do ask that you indicate here in this forum that you have passed on the request but such confirmation is nothing more than a report that you have done so. Thank you.
The article I linked to pointed them out, but they were generally minor, and were fixed for the new HP models at least.
Tim they can't release software with known flaws, that would be infinitely worse than not releasing the software at all. But it's not like they can't spend some time to fix those flaws and fine tune 2003se for older ipaqs. I doubt HP realized this would blow up in their face rather than force us to buy newer ipaqs.
Well, at least now I've seen that other companies provide infinitely better support.
Also beware dave's ipaq, he's so blatant in his preferential treatment of HP that he's gone so far as to delete several posts made by myself and others. None contained insults, we merely wondered about the correctness of his HP statements, and what he stood to gain by posting those statements. Try not to argue there, he deletes your posts if you get close to the truth.
Charles, Well said. Not for the first time we agree. I didnt see your earlier chivalrous posting or Mr Hoffman's which inspired it. I think they appear to have been removed - as has, apparently, one from Laura recently praising the moderators. Funny old world. Censorship is generally a bad idea...and while I agree no-one should be abusive, I think it is a tribute to the Forum members that, given the way Ipaq users are being treated, they are being as moderate and constructive as they are.
Looking back, I see that you have made such a plea to Gary Cantwell before. Your request is entirely reasonable and proper. Let us hope you are more successful this time round and that he affords you the courtesy of a reply.
>>"Hi Everyone, Can I once again ask you to please refrain from insulting one another, all such replies will be removed without question,
Regards, Gary"<<
So you're available to remove posts? But can't answer any of the questions posted here. Nice!
>>"While I would question the censors actions above, I would caution against directing your frustration and anger over the lack of HP response at Gary. He is probably not authorised to make any response - it presumably being beyond his responsibilities. Indeed he may have specificially been barred from making any direct response to the concerns raised. "<<
Ok I will give you that, Gary might be barred from answering the questions asked here but that is just proff of how money greedy and ridiculous HP is,this is what I am receiving from this forum:
"We (HP) will answer only questions that we feel deserves an answer, if you don't like it tough and if you complain here we will destroy your post and post a reply that makes you look like an idiot."
HP remove this forum for it only servers you and not the customer.
Well, for what it's worth, I was in Fry's Electronics today (a techie heaven in the San Francisco Bay Area known for good prices and customer service) and saw they had several versions of 'orphan' iPaqs along with the 1715.
I took the liberty of contacting Fry's and asking if they were aware they were selling discontinued and soon to be unsupported iPaqs at their 'full price'. I asked if they thought that was proper and pointed out that most likely the extended warranties would require replacement rather than repair since the units would be obsolete by 26 Aug 2004.
We'll see what happens.
BTW, I apologise in advance if I used incorrect terminology, such as 'orphan' and 'obsolete'. We would be 'pleased' if HP would deign to post here the politically correct terms and when they are in effect.
Interesting to note that the bargainpda URL listed above is currently unavailable (but then, so is the site), so I could not confirm or obtain the proper terms before posting. My apologies.
Gary cannot provide information on answering the questions, as he is not qualified to do so. He works for HP in their engineering department which puts most of his responsiblities to moderating this forum.
Micheal,
I believe your terminology would be considered correct, these are 'orphaned' or 'obsolete' units.
Thanks for the link. I went there and the last post was from someone wondering if he had made the right decision in choosing Toshiba, because he had heard so many good things about HP support and service.
I did NOT say he had misheard about HP (the repair folk are absolutely fantastic when things get sorted out). I merely mentioned he would get the update, for free no less, whilst existing iPaqs would not. I also mentioned that all iPaqs being sold, except for the new ones, would be orphaned by the end of the month. If anyone wants to draw conclusions as to product life and service, that is up to them.
HP iPaq Team, please try to understand, this isn't going away. Please wake up and respond in a constructive fashion. We really do want to be your friend and promote the iPaq. Just show us some respect and respond, please.
FINALLY A RESPONSE FROM HP, It isn't Good though, THE 6300 WILL NOT BE SUPPORTED EITHER. I have also contacted the Executive VP At HP in charge of the iPaq product line.
****** What is Microsoft® Windows Mobile⢠2003 Second Edition?
Released in March 2004 by Microsoft, Windows Mobile⢠2003 Second Edition is the newest update to the existing Microsoft® Pocket PC Windows 2003 operating system, which was delivered to handheld device manufacturers and software developers for potential consideration on their next generation of Pocket PCs, Phone Edition devices, Smartphone and/or software products. This release is not available directly from Microsoft for end-user implementation as it is intended for the developer community. _________________________________________________ What core features are included in Microsoft® Windows Mobile⢠2003 Second Edition?
The core enhancements included in Microsoft® Windows Mobile⢠2003 Second Edition are Square Screen Resolution, QVGA displays in Windows Mobile Smartphone, VGA Support, Landscape Support and WiFi Protected Access (WPA). _________________________________________________
Support for Square Screen Resolution 240x240 or 480x480 pixels â supports development of smaller devices and handhelds
QVGA Displays in Windows Mobile Smartphones Smartphone and QVGA displays (320x240)
VGA Support in Pocket PCs 640x480 pixels
Dynamic switching between Landscape and Portrait Views Applications to leverage the feature
WiFi Protected Access (WPA) Wireless Enabled Features _________________________________________________ Other features include:
⢠Enhanced Pocket PC Start menu - adds a separate vertical listing of recently launched applications
⢠Enhanced Pocket Internet Explorer - display a Web page in âOne Columnâ view, which eliminates vertical scrolling, and âDesktopâ view, which more closely reproduces layout and proportions of a Web page as seen on a desktop PC display
_________________________________________________ Will HP enable these features and deliver a ROM Upgrade supporting Microsoft® Windows Mobile⢠2003 Second Edition for the h1900 series, h2200 series, h4000 series or the h5000 series?
HP will enable WiFi Protected Access (WPA) through a separate ROM upgrade available for those models supporting integrated WiFi wireless functionality.
WiFi Protected Access (WPA) Support: WPA is designed to make wireless networks more secure. This support can be found on HPâs website under support and drivers for these platforms: h5550 (all languages), h1940 (English, French, German, and Spanish). HP is currently working on updated ROMs for the h4150 and h4350. Please check the website (www.hp.com/support) for release of these ROM updates.
All other features of the Microsoft® Windows Mobile⢠2003 Second Edition require either specific hardware components, ROM size requirements, or 3rd party application adjustments to enable the full features offered in this operating system version, therefore HP will not be offering a ROM upgrade to address the additional capabilities of Windows Mobile 2003 Second Edition on these existing platforms.
Square Resolution, VGA Support, QVGA for SmartPhones: While the VGA viewing experience might be more enjoyable for certain users, the support is designed for products that contain VGA screens and/or SmartPhone functionality. The operating system alone does not enable these features. HP provides 3.5â or 3.8â Transflective Display Screens (depends on model) on HP iPAQ h1930, h1940, h2200, h4100, h4300, h5100 and h5500 series products, therefore these products cannot make use of these features.
Landscape Support: This support provides dynamic switching between screen orientations from portrait to landscape. With the March 2004 announcement of Microsoft® Windows Mobile⢠2003 Second Edition, tools became available to the extended application Development Community, so the wide variety of third-party applications could take advantage of the landscape mode. While Microsoftâs standard applications will function in landscape mode not all HP value-added software delivered on platforms launched prior to June 2004 would be able to take advantage of this feature. Many software developers are focusing their efforts on the next release of their applications, as opposed to devising a retro-fit for existing versions. If HP added Windows Mobile 2003 Second Edition to its pre-June 2004 launched products some applications would not function in landscape mode properly, and therefore pr
_________________________________________________ Why is ROM size a factor in deciding whether Microsoft® Windows Mobile⢠2003 Second Edition can be supported on the h1900, h2200, h4000, and h5000 series?
ROM size determines the maximum amount of software and value-added features that can be inherent to the handheld device. For the majority of models in question, HP delivers Windows Pocket PC 2003 Premium, substantial value-added software and 3rd party applications. When evaluating Microsoft® Windows Mobile⢠2003 Second Edition, it was determine that HP would have to de-feature its ROM deliverable and exclude a large portion of the value-added and 3rd party applications in order to fit into the existing device ROM capacity. The Windows Mobile 2003 Second Edition is a larger operating system than that of Windows Pocket PC 2003 Premium Edition. The benefit of maintaining the value-added features outweighs the limited functionality that could be deployed on each of these units, especially when giving consideration to the fact that specific hardware changes were also required. _________________________________________________ Is Landscape support available separate from Microsoft® Windows Mobile⢠2003 Second Edition?
No, landscape support is part of the Microsoft Windows Mobile 2003 Second Edition. Unfortunately, because it is part of the core operating system, it is not offered as a stand-alone feature either from Microsoft or HP. _________________________________________________ Is WPA support available for the h22xx/h19xx devices when used with an SDIO WLAN Card?
Yes, WPA support is available for the h2200 & h1940 series Pocket PC with ROM update version 1.10.xx (varies by language). The h1940 is available in limited languages. Please visit http://www.hp.com/support to access the download page. _________________________________________________ Is WPA support available for the iPAQ Pocket PC h5500 series product?
Yes, WPA support is available for the h5500 series with ROM update version 1.10.xx (varies by language). Current products shipping from the factory include support for WPA; however those that did not ship with this support can be downloaded from http://www.hp.com/support. To have WPA function properly, you must also download a firmware driver. _________________________________________________ Is WPA support available for the iPAQ Pocket PC h4100 and h4300 series product?
Yes, WPA support for the iPAQ Pocket PC h4100 and h4300 series will be available as a web download in the early September timeframe. Please continue to check our website for updates. http://www.hp.com/support _________________________________________________ Why from time to time, does HP decide not to offer operating system upgrades?
HP reviews and evaluates all Microsoft releases to determine compatibility on its handheld devices. Not every product that HP introduces can successfully be upgraded to new or updated Operating Systems. Some of the reasons are ROM size, hardware limitations, and 3rd party application incompatibility. Some features that new operating systems and applications contain would require hardware component changes that are not always feasible in the existing device
_________________________________________________ Will HP continue to support existing products with occasional software updates?
Yes, HP will continue to provide on an as needed basis drivers updates and ROM updates as we have in the past on any platform that requires support or enhancement. There are some products that would require little or no software updates, where there are some that do require updates to enhance the functionality of the product. _________________________________________________ Will future models from HP support Microsoft® Windows Mobile⢠2003 Second Edition?
Yes, you will find Microsoft® Windows Mobile⢠2003 Second Edition available on the HP iPAQ hx4700, rz1700, rx3000 series products that announced July 26, 2004. _________________________________________________ Does the newly launched h6300 come with Microsoft® Windows Mobile⢠2003 Second Edition?
Based on the product design functionality and release timing, it was decided not to offer Windows Mobile 2003 Second Edition on this model. HP has included enhanced wireless capabilities on this product including the latest WiFi security standards. It is unlikely that HP will provide an update to Windows Mobile 2003 Second Edition on this product. Windows Mobile 2003 Second Edition would not provide any significant enhancements, as most of the key functionality that is important on a device such as the iPaq h6300 series has been taken into consideration prior to its release. _________________________________________________ Will HP update the current shipping products in the future with new Windows Mobile releases?
HP cannot make assurances of future ROM image updates that provide enhancements to Microsoft Windows Mobile 2003. HPâs goal is to maintain a quality product release and provide resolutions to issues on existing ROM images while releasing new iPAQ products with the latest offerings from Microsoft. HP evaluates each release provided from Microsoft and determines the value and quality of that release before making the decision to invest in developing the enhancement of a ROM image for existing products. HP must also weigh the amount of development time required to complete a new release for handheld devices with the timing of future HP and Microsoft updates. _________________________________________________ Does the decision to not provide Microsoft® Windows Mobile⢠2003 Second Edition mean that HP is not honoring its warranty terms & conditions?
HP delivers limited hardware and software warranty support for its iPaq handheld products. This support includes in most cases 90-day software support to address questions and issues associated with the software delivered with the device, and up-to 1 year hardware warranty which protects against hardware manufacturing defects. For specific warranty terms & conditions, HP handheld owners should reference their Limited Warranty Statements that came in the product box or available on www.hp.com/support.
HPâs decision to not deliver Microsoft® Windows Mobile⢠2003 Second Edition does
****** I asked about the fact that my 5555 has more ROM than some of these newer models, and about the lack of response here, hopefully I will hear something.
This is all fruit from much labor, including contacting 5 different people at HP Executive Offices, iPaq PR Manager, Mobile PR Manager, and much more.
All of that Just to get this information that in e-mail looks like it is in PDF Format somewhere.
If you would like this in its original form or authentication, please e-mail me.
You received a response, that's a giant leap from absolutely no contact. Maybe HP will make the upgrade available to the iPAQs that do meet the size capacity needed.
According to what I received and posted above my 5555, apparently doesn't even meet the ROM qualifications.
How is that??? I'm not sure. Considering it is the best of the iPaq Product line (STILL EVEN WITH THE RELEASE OF NEW iPAQs)
Only time will tell. Again it took a giant leap even to get this response. What annoys me more than anything is that as I said, this looks like it is in PDF, or HTML somewhere and they aren't giving it to us. (HP's Forum's really screw with the formatting)
HP communicate with your customers and they will communicate with you at the checkout counter. If you don't the reverse will obviously happen.
Again if anybody wants a cleaner copy of the above, please e-mail me (Check my profile)
My iPAQ 5555 is getting lonely and I'm planning on buying a new vga pda and the hx4700 looks nice, but I'm not going to give in until HP does. My wallet HP isn't as sympathetic as I am...
It appears the (http://forums.itrc.hp.com/cm/FamilyHome/1,,276,00.html is not receiviing coments. Perhaps it is another SE reaction. ======= Again, we appreciate your participation in the HP Business Customer Discussion Groups . Thanks for helping build a positive user community, and if you have feedback or questions about the service, please visit the 'forums feedback, usage, and help' discussion area (http://forums.itrc.hp.com/cm/FamilyHome/1,,276,00.html) and post your comments there. We will address your comments within 2 business days.
I am sorry too. The link in my post above is a direct copy from the alert from HP which I receive with each post to this thread regarding the decision by HP to not support SE in products they have already produced and recently sold to "us suckers".
Where you can see a 2210 runing in landscape mode, so running 2003SE
I love HP really they are so PRO, they provide 2003SE rom update to some people where 99% of their clients are begging for it and even don't have any answer from them
HP Guys, it is what you have been tought in your business School? I am not from US but from JAPAN, I mean do eveybody behave like this in the US? Does every company don't care about their customers?
G-GAY, don't be ignorant. Of course not every company acts this way, and to tell you the truth if you are complaining this much over this topic and judging HP as a whole over this one issue, then you have severe credibility issues. I would appreciate you not attacking my country in vain of an update. We all feel strongly about this issue, just take care to how you promote it.
Please include a ROM image update for the ipaq h1940. I have supported you by purchasing your products, now support the rest of the community and myself by including it in the releases. Thank you for your time. I know you will keep your customers happy.
Well well well, I half succeed in my goal, I made someone react (Tim Branyen) but you were not my target, I just hoped that some HP staff may react ok I know it is in vain but well I could try no?
Well, at least that is some sort of explanation - and long overdue - but it still doesnt make the policy right. Nor does it square with what I was led to believe when I was buying my Ipaqs less than a year ago. What is HP going to do put matters right for existing users? That didnt appear to be among the FAQs. Now that we are finally getting somewhere with some communication, lets see if we can progress to solutions.
You never asked the users if we wanted the upgrade. Now you have made many people upset with your company.
did you really test it on the 5400 series? Of course not because if you did it would be given to us. I sure dont mind paying 15 for it like 2003 but you sure made a big mistake offering us 2003 but not the updates.
If you say one more time it will not work on the 5400 then I will have to assume you dont know what your doing.
I Posted your FAQ several threads ago, a FAQ that I had to fight with HP to get.
I have contacted too many people at corporate, and fought too long just to recieve a FAQ, although I am glad that you have the decentcy to return and give some sort of an answer.
What about all of these complaints?
What about the fact that my 5555 has more ROM than these newer models, and you want to tell me that it is not being upgraded because there isn't enough ROM.
Can you please address these questions, and not just use a FAQ. These questions can't all be easily categorized.
I would like to add my opinion to those already stated here. So far, there has been a lot of anger and disappointment over the fact that HP will not be offering this upgrade, but very little discussion regarding the reasons offered. If some of you would take the time to research these, then maybe there might be some more progress in the area.
In the above statement (allegedly) from HP, they give a summary of the major additions to WM2003, of which there are three.
On Microsoft's Developer Network (MSDN) site however, these are the only new features that I noticed (sorry, I do not have the link with me right now, but you can easily search msdn.microsoft.com for "windows mobile 2003 second edition"):
1. Screen orientation 2. DPI (I didn't find out what this meant) 2. new ActiveSync programming methods
Now I concede that the first one is of very little use to me. My use of the iPaq very rarely requires me to use it in the landscape position, and where it is required, it is already supported by the program that requires it.
I don't know what DPI is, and didn't get around to finding out before I got lost in the programming jargon and gave up.
Now it is the third one that intrigues me. I am not a developer, so the MSDN article is gobbledegook to me by and large. However, my understanding is that it will allow addtional user interaction in ActiveSync connections. Call me a liar, but I believe that PC connectivity is an important part of the handheld experience, and any new functionality in this area can lead to improvements. One part which I thought was interesting was that it said that two Sync threads(?) could talk to each other. I assume that this means that information can be passed from one checked item to another. Say for example you could link up Avantgo with your Calendar. Pure speculation, but important and exciting nontheless.
Finally, to be honest, I think HP got burned with the old Pocket PC 2002 to Windows Mobile 2003 upgrade program. It probably ended up not being worth their while pressing the CDs, etc. for the return that they got. When I bought my upgrade CD, about 5-10 friends asked me to burn them a copy - I had asked all of them to register their interest in the upgrade on HP's site. So quite probably, HP's expectations were incorrectly heightened, and not matched by subsequent sales.
Also, this time around there are no results proving that the new OS will run faster on existing hardware (and maybe even the opposite), as there was in the upgrade from PPC2002 => WM2003 - where there was a significant improvement as tested by several websites. For every person here that says "I will pay $100 for this upgrade" there is probably a dozen or more who will say "why am I paying $100 for this upgrade??"
So you must see the problem that HP are faced with.
I don't have a solution, and I'm glad that I'm not the one that has to make the decisions. If HP says "no upgrade" then I will just accept, and be happy with what I've already purchased.
On August 4, 2004, at 12:52:30 GMT, Caesar Wong wrote:
"I would like to add my opinion to those already stated here. So far, there has been a lot of anger and disappointment over the fact that HP will not be offering this upgrade, but very little discussion regarding the reasons offered. If some of you would take the time to research these, then maybe there might be some more progress in the area."
Actually, I gave several rebuttals to the reasons HP offered for not offering the upgrade. If you visit the newer thread cited above, you'll find the reasons neatly listed together.
"In the above statement (allegedly) from HP, they give a summary of the major additions to WM2003, of which there are three.
On Microsoft's Developer Network (MSDN) site however, these are the only new features that I noticed (sorry, I do not have the link with me right now, but you can easily search msdn.microsoft.com for "windows mobile 2003 second edition"):
1. Screen orientation 2. DPI (I didn't find out what this meant) 2. new ActiveSync programming methods"
"Now I concede that the first one is of very little use to me. My use of the iPaq very rarely requires me to use it in the landscape position, and where it is required, it is already supported by the program that requires it."
Fine, but I suspect that's the feature that most of us want.
"I don't know what DPI is, and didn't get around to finding out before I got lost in the programming jargon and gave up."
HiDPI stands for "High Dots Per Inch", I believe. It's a fancy way of saying VGA support for Pocket PCs and QVGA support for Smartphones (there are other resolutions supported, too, which is probably why they used DPI).
It appears that Microsoft is not only defining the resolution of the displays used now, but how many dots per inch they should have. Higher resolution displays will have higher pixel density (or DPI) because the displays won't have a proportional increase in size.
"Now it is the third one that intrigues me. I am not a developer, so the MSDN article is gobbledegook to me by and large. However, my understanding is that it will allow addtional user interaction in ActiveSync connections. Call me a liar, but I believe that PC connectivity is an important part of the handheld experience, and any new functionality in this area can lead to improvements. One part which I thought was interesting was that it said that two Sync threads(?) could talk to each other. I assume that this means that information can be passed from one checked item to another. Say for example you could link up Avantgo with your Calendar. Pure speculation, but important and exciting nontheless."
I'm a developer (but not a Pocket PC developer) and it seems quite obvious to me. ActiveSync items can now get called when an item is enabled or disabled in ActiveSync. Additionally, an ActiveSync item's Settings dialog can now be displayed even if the item is disabled.
I can't think of many scenarios where enable/disable notification would be useful, but try this one. Pocket Informant allows links to be established between Calendar Items, Tasks and Contacts. If a user isn't synchronizing Contacts for some reason, Pocket Informant could decide not to synchronize links to Contacts (not that I'm saying they do *now*), saving time during synchronization.
Hmm, interesting. I am thankful that HP has finally deemed a reply to the present situation worth giving. I am not sure that I would like to consider that my previously top of the line 5500 had more life in it than HP is willing to give it. Perhaps there is a lesson here for me to learn: caveat emptor.
However, I would still like to have hoped that at least HP would have given its users (again, from a previous post, I would not expect my 3900 to be upgraded, since it was already upgraded from 2002 to 2003), as least a CHOICE as to whether an upgrade was desired or not, especially for this last generation of iPAQ users. Some might have taken it, others might not have, but it would have restored the faith in HP customer service. Perhaps, as was suggested, HP got burned by the upgrade from 2002 to 2003 by a lack of sales, and so came up with an excuse (and let's call it what it is, an excuse, not a reason) for the decision that was made. By not offering the upgrade, a wave of discontent seems to have grown into a tidal wave of saddened and angry and disillusioned customers. Not, I would think, a result that HP would have liked.
I would seem to have no choice but to ACCEPT what HP has decided. To do otherwise would aggrevate and upset me; and I refuse to give HP that type of power over my well being. I am not, however, HAPPY about it. I am one customer, but one whose faith in the company that brought me much excitement and prestige in owning other HP products has been severely shaken. If HP is so willing to ignore its customer base (and happy HP customers buy more HP products, and perhaps just as importantly, tell others to buy HP products), then it is time to return the favor.
Caveat emptor.... Let the buyer beware.... Whose to say that even if I did have the inclination to go out and purchase yet another iPAQ to replace my top of the line 5555, that I will not be left holding the bag yet again?
>>>"Caveat emptor.... Let the buyer beware.... Whose to say that even if I did have the inclination to go out and purchase yet another iPAQ to replace my top of the line 5555, that I will not be left holding the bag yet again?"<<<
Marvin has said it all, go ahead and buy an all new unit like the 4700 and next year about this time will get another shock from HP stating your less then 1 year old unit is obsolete and will not receive an upgrade, let's just say MS comes out with WM2005 you will then have to buy yet another unit just to get the new version and whatever features if any MS will offer.
I wonder what MS has to say or think about HP decision or if they even care.
The reply from HP, which most of us find highly unsatisfactory, still fails to clarify their future policy. Are we expected to assume that they will launch new products about once a year and not provide an upgrade path? I recently took out a three year Care Pack on my new (and first) iPaq, having had problems with it in the first few weeks. Does this mean that if I want to use new accessories and software that become available, and are designed for MSWM 2003SE or later, I will not be able to benefit from them because I only have MSWM 2003 Premium and I'm tied into that by a three year contract. Or would HP be magnanimous enough to offer to transfer the contract if I decide to move up to a newer model before my three year contract has ended?
"Does this mean that if I want to use new accessories and software that become available, and are designed for MSWM 2003SE or later, I will not be able to benefit from them because I only have MSWM 2003 Premium and I'm tied into that by a three year contract."
The unfortunate answer to this is most likely yes.
"Or would HP be magnanimous enough to offer to transfer the contract if I decide to move up to a newer model before my three year contract has ended?"
The unfortunate answer to this is most Definetly NOT!
Your 3 year contract is for your hardware. Read your policy. I almost bought one also but I am now glad I did not for my next PDA will not be from HP.
Yes but if your hardware is broken beyond repair, HP will send you a new unit, and since they have eliminated current product lines ....
But I don't know that I would want a new iPaq unless it is one of the ones coming out in December, those are still the only ones that can give my 5555 a run for its money. _______________________________________________ And what about all the features with the 6315 that would have been in place with a WM 2003 SE upgrade? The SE is more suited for Smart Phones, but we are getting rid of it so soon?
You are dooming your first Smart Phone to failure before it even reaches the customers hands.
HP used to show a considerable respect for their customers. This was particularly true when they produced high quality electronic test equipment under the HP logo. Then, there was an attempt parlay this former image into the computer forum and, for a while it worked. Today, you are very lucky to get a response from their bureaucracy. They are really tarnishing their former image. They now want to sell you what they make rather than what you want.
Well, I guess I will join the queue of disgruntled users. The lesson here is that once a company has got your cash, they are not really interested in taking on the responsibility of supporting the product to a very high level. Hp have offended here big time. My 4150 is about 4-5 months old. Their policy statement about not supporting an upgrade to the new 2003 OS would for me, ratify a decision not to purchase HP in the future. Why bother with buying something, if you know that anything that requires a bit of effort from the manufacturer, would be completely ignored. To be honest, I could imagine that W3000 upgrade is a matter of packing for HP more than anything else? (I am probably understating the case here, I apologise if I am.) Come on HP, there are more than a handful of people saying that they would be hesitant to buy new models given your strategy of support. Although the short term benefits of this might seem a good cost cutting exercise, look at all the marketing costs this forfeits. PDA's are becoming commodities. The product differences between brands are narrowing. Soon the differentials will be based on perceived quality, service level. Do you really want to be seen as a company shirking responsibility? Happy Customers = High Future Revenue.
That said, even petition reached 10,000 or 20,000 & they(HP) are not doing anything at all, what can we do? By the time we finished our discussion here, a new batch of Ipaq's were already out.
I do hope some simple rules of the forum are maintained here. But since this is quite a converational issue, everyone has their own views and faiths, so it is likely someone may unintentionally hurt someone without knowing the gravity of his/her own words.
Please, try not to aim at that person directly, but on their ideas and opinions.
And Charles is a real gentleman, keeping his calm posture & pose even though he has his disagreements & disappointments. Let us all try to be like him. Thank You for your precious time.
Add me to the list of unhappy customers. I love my iPaq, and I would have stayed with HP to the end. The product has proven itself to me, so why switch? But unless this decision is reversed, I don't see myself buying another HP product, simply on principle. If they're not willing to release this update for current users, what else might they pull in the future?
Regarding ROM, and the fact that my 5555 has more ROM than the newer models: ________________________________________________ Dear Mr. Adams:
I requested further information from our engineering team in order to assist you & they basically provided this statement that I am including below.
PPC 2003 SE Drawer Statement
HP is pleased to announce that it will support Microsoft(r) Windows (r) Mobile 2003 Second Edition on some on the HP iPAQ hx4700, rz1700, rx3000 series Pocket PC products that launched July 26, 2004. The h6300 product will contain the MS(r) Windows(r) Mobile 2003 Phone Edition.
After extensive assessments of MS Windows Mobile 2003 SE support on current products HP has decided not to offer this upgrade on existing product platforms. However, HP will provide users with a more secure experience through the use of WiFi Protected Access Support (WPA) on selected models.
The past & current information that I have been able to send to you is the most information we are able to provide. If you have other contacts within HP that you mentioned before, you may also try to contact them, or you may also try to contact Microsoft if you wish as well.
I apologize for not being able to provide any further information. ________________________________________________
"Drawer Statements" are frequently "Policy Statements". In this instance, the statement reflects rather poorly on the engineering team who assessed Windows Mobile 2003 SE. If they can't make it work maybe HP should find a team who can.
I just purchased an HP 2215 because I was told that HP would be releasing the 2003SE upgrade for it only to now find out that HP won't be doing it afterall.....seems like a lame attempt to make users upgrade to your newer (and from what I've heard lesser) models.
I think you found a person who actually cared to help you. That he was prohibited from doing more is obvious. Most likely he'll be in trouble for expressing regret rather than just parroting the PR.
Mike,
If you can, take your iPaq back to the store for a refund or credit AT ONCE! Just wait a few weeks and that 2210 is going to be a lot cheaper. Then you'll REALLY be upset.
On August 5, 2004, at 17:51:10 GMT, TJ Adams wrote:
"Another Day, Another Statement from HP
Regarding ROM, and the fact that my 5555 has more ROM than the newer models: ________________________________________________ Dear Mr. Adams:
I requested further information from our engineering team in order to assist you & they basically provided this statement that I am including below.
PPC 2003 SE Drawer Statement
HP is pleased to announce that it will support Microsoft(r) Windows (r) Mobile 2003 Second Edition on some on the HP iPAQ hx4700, rz1700, rx3000 series Pocket PC products that launched July 26, 2004. The h6300 product will contain the MS(r) Windows(r) Mobile 2003 Phone Edition.
After extensive assessments of MS Windows Mobile 2003 SE support on current products HP has decided not to offer this upgrade on existing product platforms. However, HP will provide users with a more secure experience through the use of WiFi Protected Access Support (WPA) on selected models.
The past & current information that I have been able to send to you is the most information we are able to provide. If you have other contacts within HP that you mentioned before, you may also try to contact them, or you may also try to contact Microsoft if you wish as well.
I apologize for not being able to provide any further information. ________________________________________________"
Did you tell your contact that this "drawer statement" is just the start of the same insulting press release that started this thread?
Not only did it not answer the question, but, if they knew that you had already read this thread, they're making things worse by simply reiterating what you knew.
I'm expect the HP iPaq Team is really "pleased" this issue is getting closer to the general media. When (not if) it breaks out, I'm sure management will want to reward each and every one of them. After all, Toshiba is looking like a hero now for reversing themselves. Doubts are being raised about HP reliability ("Will HP do this again next year? What about other products lines?"). And as the people HP has brushed off here move up in the corporate world, they will likely repeat and spread their sense of betrayal and abandonment to others and influence buying decisions. Yes, the HP iPaq Team gets to give the gift that will keep on giving for HP for years to come. And if you think HP's competitors will ignore this, guess again. Market share is tight. It would surely be unintentional for a competing sales rep to casually mention HP sells products with a life-span measured in weeks. We all know that would never happen, right.
I'm so 'pleased' you're looking at the big picture and not just the quarter.
I was in a Staples store in western Ottawa and the clerk would not believe that HP was not willing to upgrade the "Premium" software on 4150's they were currently selling. "What are we going to do with our stock?"
I suggested that he advise new customers of the decision by HP and leave the decision to them.
"HP tells Police, 'tough luck' - Today HP Support in India could do no more then read from a press release when law enforcement needed their help in the fight against crime. HP appears to be placing profit over being a good corporate citizen."
Oh, that's going to make all kinds of points.
Would you guys like to aim at the other foot now?
Regards, Michael
PS: Copy this page fast before they purge the transcript. Most inconvienient.
I am sure someone in HP has thought this through (likely not someone in customer relations, however). Unfortunately, this decision by HP (and Dell) leads me to no longer pursue, recommend or approve any further purchases in my department of Pocket PC based PDAs. As a long time Palm (1996) and Blackberry (2000) user, I had been evaluating the Pocket PC platform and some months ago bought an HP iPaq 4155. Quite an impressive device, and despite its Windows useability heritage, it had begun to find a space alongside my Palm and Blackberry.
However, if the leaders such as HP and Dell are not going to responsibly support their products after the sale, expecially given the premium price iPaqs command, they appear to be poor investments for business (IMHO). Like many early adopters who, for example, are willing to take risks with new products such as PDAs, we expect a reciprocal level of support and willingness to share the risk with the product developer (i.e. HP). I must say that my experience with HP over the past 25 years, from lab equipment to desktop/laptop PCs, and now to PDAs has been very mixed. I wish HP the best in trying to fix this - it's quite a challenge and requires attention from senior levels.
On a practical note, I will just have to make do with my new Treo 600 (and my Blackberry), and keep my shiny new 4155 handy to play games on and read eBooks (which it does admirably). I certainly can't recommend our Fortune 50 company invest in and deploy the iPaq product line for business productivity applications with such limited upgradeability and competitive shelf life.
So, I, for one, am not upset. This development simply makes my choices easier and my briefcase less crowded. I wish you all the best success in getting the HP tech support folks to raise this issue with their customer/corporate relations VP.
As I have said before, HP should be very proud as what they have accomplished in getting all these royal customers, compare to DELL, but again, HP should think twice and be shameful to loose the good and royal customers that they once worked so hard to get.
Here is a link to review: -
Because of limited Mobile 2003 SE releases, the following is occurring:
So out of all of this, hp are saying that even though thousands have purchased an ipaq 2210 for example (i have one) they are not going to ship a 2003 SE update out for them?
im personally disgusted, its a matter of "we have your money now go and buy another/newer model"
i dont think so, toshiba have released various SE updates, i think hp should do the same!
this posting does not intend to bring new aspects into the "No WM2003SE Update for shipped devices" discussion. It's written to represent a customers displeasure and powerless disappointment about this kind of Customer Service.
I understand that companies like O2 (XDA) and T-Mobile (MDA) needs more customer satisfaction and therefore deliver OS Updates/Upgrades even for really aged models.
I now understand that my 6 months old 2210 is really old in terms of HP product life cycle. It's ok, was just 499 ⬠for the device PLUS the trust in a worldwide company not to get kicked in the but with weird update descisions.
Thanks anyway for your posted statement and for advising me about what to expect for the future.
And thanks for the ipaq 2210 ROM Update V1.10, at least a bug fix that enables the shipped devices to work as specified.
RFC: Is this the time to think about devices from MEDION and others as serious alternative? Buy it for half the HP price, using them 1 year, kick'em off and buy a newer model?
I think there is a valuable lesson we (Mobile device users) can take from this situation. Many of us (including myself) have been of the more is better atitude when buying devices. When I purchased my 2215 the only thing stopping me from not going to the 5555 was the fact that my Visa Card would have had a heart-attack. If I had the credit limit (over $1000 including shipping and a few extras) at the time I probably would have picked this unit. Now less than a year later we all find out that our units life span might be alot shorter than we originally thought. The lack of upgrades has hit me before (with a Casiopea) and is affecting Dell users and Toshiba is bound to eventually drop the ball and piss-off their users. What this means is that we need to start looking more closely at what we really need from our devices. We need to streamline our purchases and not buy to top of the line models under the assumption that "I will eventally need all this power". It is starting to look like there will not be a need of excess power and a $200 unit that will last for a year is more reasonable then a $1000 unit that will last for 5 years (under the hope that upgrades will be availible).
On another note: I really don't think the vast amount of comments stating that even if HP fixes the problem users will never buy another HP device is going to sway HP to help these people that will never buy their products again (I personally doubt the ability of thousands of signatures fixing the problem at all, but these comments really hold less weight). Perhaps a challange needs to be sent to the open source community to create a stable Lynux operating system for all us "orphaned" HP users.
The manner HP has responded to the request for MS Windows Mobile 2003 SE by (former) customers is shameful. It certainly has not contributed to their former image. "invent" rubbish.
On another note: I really don't think the vast amount of comments stating that even if HP fixes the problem users will never buy another HP device is going to sway HP to help these people that will never buy their products again (I personally doubt the ability of thousands of signatures fixing the problem at all, but these comments really hold less weight). *****
True enough. I doubt that HP, if their current behavior is any indication, will do much in terms of customer service response to change the situation. While I mourn the untimely demise of my 5555 by HP and am reluctant to plop down my hard earned $$$$ for yet another iPAQ, I am at least made aware of the potential support problems and next time can make a more informed decision.
Perhaps I am just way too American in my thinking. While I may or may not have upgraded my 5555, I would at least liked to have had a choice. To think that my feelings would change HP's corporate mind would be arrogant at best. However, it is a small victory for me to voice my disappointment over this business decision.
last time i ever purchase a hp product without researching and getting proof that they are going to support updates in the future. microsoft dont bring out xp pro and get rid of 2000 do they! most widely used operating system.
Could it be that HP has built a flock of products that just can't be updated? There is a great difference between can't and won't. Until now I was inclined to think they "won't" but their responses suggest their iPAQ design team "can't". Which is it?
IMHO it's "won't" because they don't want to support the heritage from Compaq anymore. A handful iPAQ's of the current line of devices is perfectly capable of containing the upgrade ROM-wise, and running the upgrade wouldn't be a problem either given the architecture and speed of the processors (The architecture didn't change (ARM/Xscale supported), only the speed changed a little in the new devices), and the RAM size is also sufficient. Microsoft themselves said that the core improvement was the small size of SE! it even runs on the lowest end model of the new line iPAQ's. All it takes to get the SE upgrade to work on the current devices is to hook in the appropriate drivers for the mainboards, Bluetooth, WLAN and Biometric modules (On devices that sport these modules) and that's it. there is plenty of room for the 'value added software', previous OS upgrades even carried some of this 'value' on the Companion CD and not in the ROM of the device itself. some of the software was even download only.. I think it's clear enough HP doesn't want to be associated with Compaq's heritage anymore and wants the pride of their own line of devices. therefore ditching the 'old' ones for rubbish and silently signing away the responsibility of supporting these devices to their End Of Life Service dates.
The "censors" at HP seem to prefer that posts from LE and federal government agencies not reflect their reluctance to support MS Windows Mobile 2003 SE in products purchased in the past year. They seem to prefer that this string of messages reflect the 363 messages which they have left uncensored. I think only 4 have been deleted. They were quite critical of the manner in which HP has dealt with purchaser's wishes and expectations.
Actually Stan, the number is probably well over 40 messages.
PR Law Team, I concur, and that has been my arguement the whole time.
My 5555, has more ROM than the newer models coming out, yet it is ROM that is supposidly the issue.
Also, part of the "ROM" Problem is that there is a lot of garbage being added to the program that doesn't need to be there, that could easily be placed in the RAM.
I just recently bough my first IPAQ (less then a month).
I have been closely following this whole Windows 2003 SE issue, i have to say i love my 4150, BUT i will never ever buy a ipaq again.
The support on this issue is ridiculous, i cannot belive that a company like HP just wants money. Money money money, and lets bring in the money.
Maybe they fail to understand how many people will pass a negative image of HP cuz of this one upgrade issue.
If 8000 people have signed the petition, and if every one of those people give a negative remakrs about hp's support to lets say 10 more people.
thats 8000 * 10 = 80,000 potential customers.
If this upgrade doesn't become available, then i can gurantee you, this will be my last purchase with HP. You have to provide the proper support to keep your customers happy. where did the basics of support go?
HP Invent?...invent wat ? new ways of leechin more money....?
Well, I've been lurking for a few weeks and finally am getting around to putting my 2 cents in.
This probably wont surprise anyone but, as a 2215 owner I am SORELY disappointed in HP's unbelievably inept handling of this situation. From their initial drop the bomb and run approach to this thread, to their unsatisfactory and incomplete responses in their recently posted FAQ, this entire situation is a spiraling mess. Quite a shock and disappointment to me, coming from a company I believed to be relatively honest and consumer-conscious. This situation will certainly play into any future decisions I have regarding future dealings with HP as an individual consumer. More importantly, however, is that I will put forward this story when I advise my superiors at work on future IT purchases. I say shame on you HP, for your lack of respect and presumptuous distain toward your custo
Why did you delete my emails with only a reply of returning the unit that I purchased 4-6 months ago, as the original email below stated? Also deleted another question similar with no response at all. Please do NOT delete my email without proper response.
I don't understand why you've decided against supporting business users of high end iPAQ's. I have owned numerous iPAQ's & even several Jornada's. I left Dell Compaq over lack of Support for their laptops. I recently bought IBM laptops based solely on support & quality.
Why have you decided to leave your business customers hanging out to dry on entire lines we have recently purchased [iPAQ 5555/5550 series]. I guess there is no reason to buy HP any longer as there is no continued support even for business customers. We paid over twice as much for our iPAQ 5555 than what we could have bought from Dell.
Also, 8,500 petitioners & rising everyday do not agree with you decision. It seems this decision for a lack of upgrade was made in haste with no thought of who owns at least 30-50% of these iPAQ's. Most IS managers I know passionately carry & use a high-end PDA like the iPAQ H5555. You may also conclude that the way you are treating this core group might probably have some affect on your Business sales of Servers, Desktops, & Laptops for their specific company. You might want to re-think the way I was treated with little ot no response, with only a DELETED email. This is NOT smart business.
I see now that my iPAQ 5555 purchase was a bad decision. Shame on you the 1st time, Shame on me if I make the same mistake twice. That will NOT happen. Hopefully you change your mind as I am quickly moving towards being no longer an HP customer. Mike
Well, just registered to add my dissapointment to the throng of others. Recently bought a 2210 and strongly recomended it to a collegue for his small buisness (he bought 3), also to a couple of friends who in total bought another 3 when shown the various features (such as mobile movies and mp3, works well selling to young men :))
A couple of people I showed it too commented on the web browser orientation, and 'wouldn't sideways be better'. I agreed and said that an update was coming, I couldn't have been much more wrong :/
If HP asked users if they wanted the upgrade then they certainly didn't suggest how much of an improvement landscape mode is for web browsing at the very minimum, or reading documents. Landscape mode is not 'nice', its nigh on essential.
I shall not be recomending HP products any further, I am unlikely to be made a fool of a second time.
If people here want to stand any chance of getting this resolved to a favourable result, then I suggest setting up an outside web page, with a forum. Organise yourselves. Some of you may recall the Kodak ã100 digital camera debacle, get organised. Start to build a media interest, start with online reports, then build from there. You will achieve very very little from here, move it outside. At least one person of the 8000+ has the ability to setup and host thi
I may as well add my dissapointment also, though I suspect it will go unnoticed. I bought a 4155 last week in the States, I since returned home and I can't return it. Trying to sell it at the moment and probably will buy the X30 instead. Currently I stand to lose around 80euros (if I am lucky)
Damn HP for this and more importantly damn me for not doing thorough homework and buying on impulse.
Do HP even realise who the people who buy the IPAQ line of hardware are? They usually are the poeple who make the decisions in big companies. The wrong decision HP and i'm sure you will feel the shockwave at some point.
The purpose of the ITRC Forums are for peer-peer discussions in support of IT environments. The forums are comprised of a community of members, however, HP sets the guidelines for acceptable content, usage, and activity.
Any and all messages are subject to review, including those posted in this thread.
Yes, at the sole discretion of HP, messages may be edited or deleted for content, or moved to more applicable discussion areas. While HP will not censor member's thoughts, a posting that is deemed not acceptable may be edited and/or removed without notice at the discretion of HP. Examples of such posts include:
1. Off-topic comments not related to a technical issue regarding an HP product or related business support issue.
2. "Rants", "slams", or legal threats against HP or another company or competitor, similar to "chat room" behavior.
3. Threatening, defamatory or abusive posts, either between forum members or directed towards an HP moderator, employee or management.
4. Bigoted, hateful, racially offensive or religious comments.
5. Language that promotes illegal activity or discusses illegal activities with the intent to commit them.
6. Unauthorized copyrighted material.
7. Advertisements or posts that contain any form of commercial solicitation.
8. Spam messages or posts repeated on various boards and folders with little or no reference to relevant topic.
9. Personal phone numbers and addresses (to protect privacy).
10. Personal e-mail addresses that are not your own, including, but not limited to, personal HP e-mails.
11. Vulgar, obscene or indecent language, information or images.
12. Hyperlinks that lead to sites that violate any of the forum guidelines.
13. Posts that solicit or promote the use of an illegal substance.
14. The dissemination of computer viruses or other destructive material.
15. Posts where a person impersonates another person or affiliation with an entity, including, but not limited to, HP.
Thanks for taking the time to post. The "drawer statment" does not answer my question. It's only causing unncessary bloat in this thread. Believe me, I know the guidelines. And the lionk would have been just enough, otherwise.
Pls be so kind as to answer my question. Were postings deleted in her? If so: Whose? Out of what reasons.
I tzake the liberty to add that I had censorship and IMO in a public place like this one the human right of "free speech" has to be observed.
I had a telephone call from HP in Mississauga Ontario Canada earlier this morning regarding my complaint that HP won't issue Microsoft Windows Mobile 2003 SE for my 4350. The purpose of the call was to say that my complaint had been passed on to the iPAQ engineering team. So, I guess they do read some complaints, eventually.
I have to agree with Andrew. The URL of this page clearly indicates that it belongs to HP and that, IMHO, entitles them to do whatever they wish with it.
On the other hand, as long as it doesn't start looking like the flame wars on USENET, I think it is kinda cowardly for HP to delete posts which cause their ears to burn.
Jim and Andrew, you have to realize that HP is only hurting themselves by censoring replies. That just feeds the frenzy that is deemed to start the downfall of HP's success. I'm going to start monitering their stock, now that I have fully decided to not buy any HP products until I get the upgrade. Civil disobedience is the best way to receive results. If that doesn't work, I'm going to start knocking on doors.
I wish you guys would stop debating the merits of how HP runs their web service and focus on obtaining HP support for MS Windows Mobile 2003 SE. THAT is what caused all this fuss.
Stan I wish you would come up with an idea that would resolve this issue. None of us thus far have even come close to making a dent into HP's thick support skull. I'm sorry, but today I have given up on HP, now I don't care whether or not the upgrade is released they have just lost a customer for life. I will try to hold this to my grave.
I suggest that everyone who has concerns regarding HP's refusal to provide support for Microsoft Windows Mobile 2003 SE or the way in which their concerns have been addressed, contact HP directly. And when you do, keep the rest of us informed as to your progress in this string/thread. We are, after all, looking for them to provide a solution.
Over 8,500 angry signatures on the WM2003SE petition should tell you something, if you are listening, Maybe not.
8,500+ names is not a big # but HP needs to consider that people using PDA's normally are also the ones controlling where the comnpany's money is spent on IS both for Servers & laptops for their entire company. These folks also, like myself, tend to have a good memory of what company left them hanging out to dry in the past. So while 8,500+ is not a large number, it can be exponentially larger when for instance, our company no longer buys HP/Compaq OR Dell Laptops for over 200 field rep.'s [moving to IBM ThinkPads]. We also moved all of our servers from HP/Compaq to Dell for over 2,500+ locations this year, as it became time to upgrade these servers.
I don't particularly think HP should have upgrades for ALL of their current models, only those that were sold to business' such as the iPAQ 55xx, 54xx, 41xx, 43xx, & possibly even the 22xx.
So I hope those reading these emails "The HP Team", sees the error of their ways before it is too late. 8,500 is not a big number BUT if my thoughts above are correct for very many of the 8,500 customers you have decided to step on, this will prove to be more of a bad decision than you think.
Time for HP to go back to the calculator on what their decision may cost for them to leave us 8,500+ folks behind.
PS - I am surprised that HP has taken this stance with the stiff competition from Dell & PalmOne as well as the soon to be released Motorola MPX [Late 2004 OR Early 2005].
If you failed to understand my distress, I am done with HP if they choose to be done with my iPAQ 5555's & 4355's that we purchased less than 6 months ago.
If anybody wants the actual numbers, I can start looking back, I only started nitfications around message 150, but I do know at least 40 messages have been deleted to date.
I've written to Fry's Electronics and CompUSA to ask if they were aware the iPaqs they were selling at full price are no longer manufactured and will reach End of Product Life (or whatever the term for unsupported is) by the end of this month.
I wrote to the editor at ZD for the iPaq review suggesting she look at the forums here regarding the end of support and the lack of response beyond posting drawer statements.
It would be helpful if others contact the media, providing a REASONED, LOGICAL description of the situation. Rants will not do anything except get your message tossed as a 'nutjob'.
One or two messages will not do much of anything. Many messages will generate heat.
Remember, this is a 'sweeps' month for American TV markets. You have a better chance of getting attention now then 30 days from now.
Now, as far as I understand the rules here, I have not defamed or criticised any individual or organization, nor knowingly posted any misrepresentations, and neither encouraged nor condoned anyone to do anything illegal or immoral.
WOW!!! 40 msgs deleted, that's quite something. Hadn't we been offered that the disczussion could be led *freely* and no deletions would be made?
IMHO we should *seriously* think about stopping the discussions here and in the other two related threads.
If almost a quarter is missing, the postings which remain may draw a seriously wrong picture.
Just a rough thought.
Rainald P.S. I seriously disagree with those who are argueing on the basis of "privately owned place". This view is based on a certain limited approach of the basic issues of democracy and individual freedom in modern times. Unfortuntely I don't have the time to explain this deeper. Just as a guideline: In modern society the old patterns of public/private can no longer be the decisive criteria. Not only "public" power (i.e. government) is counterpart if it comes to freedom rights. Apart from that: He who opens a place for public discussions has to respect that he's gone public and adjust his behaviour. There's quite a difference between a privately owned plaza open for the usage by the public and one's private backyard. The owner of a pub has to accept that it's not his private bedroom. P.P.S. I don't know if any of my postings here have been censored away. Seems so. But I cannot remember anything I could have said being in possible conflict with the forum guidelines.
HP ought to just delete the whole thread -- maybe the whole forum!
They obviously don't intend to respond and certainly don't care about our comments or concerns...
There are plenty of other forums on the web where candid discussions can be held without posts disappearing. Brighthand and PocketPCThoughts, just to name a couple...
On August 10, 2004, at 17:40:46 GMT, Rainald Taesler wrote:
"P.S. I seriously disagree with those who are argueing on the basis of "privately owned place". This view is based on a certain limited approach of the basic issues of democracy and individual freedom in modern times. Unfortuntely I don't have the time to explain this deeper. Just as a guideline: In modern society the old patterns of public/private can no longer be the decisive criteria. Not only "public" power (i.e. government) is counterpart if it comes to freedom rights. Apart from that: He who opens a place for public discussions has to respect that he's gone public and adjust his behaviour. There's quite a difference between a privately owned plaza open for the usage by the public and one's private backyard. The owner of a pub has to accept that it's not his private bedroom."
While your sentiments may be "noble", you're wrong on the law. The owner of the pub could throw out somebody saying that his pub stunk and that people should visit the competition.
Similarly, it's HP's forum and they'll delete the posts if they want. Get over it.
Now, as was mentioned previously, let's focus on the Windows Mobile 2003 SE upgrade (or lack thereof). Would you rather get the posts replaced or an SE upgrade?
I have to add my self to the long list of people disappointed about the decision of not supporting WM2003SE on current devices. The main reason is that with wm2003se you would have the .Net Compact Framework 2.0 in ROM. Will at least HP provide a ROM update with CF 2.0 installed for current Pocket PC 2003 devices?
Oddly enough, it seemed to happen shortly after someone posted a CNET link regarding a personnel change at HP.
Regards, Michael
Note: CNET link was not included in this message. I wouldn't want the "HP iPaq Team" to be offended or possibly violate some aspect of the forum guidelines and have this thread vanish as well. However, it should not be too difficult to find if one chooses to visit CNET.
but you HAVE to wiegh the good and the bad - both of you - there was a time a while back when I clashed with someone so bad that I left for a while - but then a friend pointed out the benefits to me. In my case, I get so much out of helping and talking to people 'anonymously'.
I think that all of us, at least in the user community, know the importance of helping each other, especially when things get tough.
However, when the innkeeper (to borrow Steve's analogy) chooses to close the inn, it's a lot different then when a patron gets unruly.
Then again, I expect the innkeeper, who is obviously watching silently, would rather we leave so the new customers don't get the 'wrong' idea about how to behave at this inn.
But it should also be remembered that if there are no patrons, there is no income. And some other inns have reversed their policies in the past few weeks.
Its simple... there were too many threads on this topic being kept high in the forum... We wouldn't want anyone to really believe too many people are actually concerned with the lack of an OS update.
It's 'amok' and when you consider that he displayed info HP had unintentionally published and the new customer-oriented interactive policies, I would not be surprised.
It's not specific to HP by any means. You can find similar tactics in many large companies and in government (both parties).
Over the long term, it has yet prevent any of the organisations from being eclipsed. It usually accelerates the eclipse, actually.
Regards, Michael
PS: I personally hope that it's just a matter of TJ not posting by choice.
I am feeling much the same. The purification process to only allow what certain individuals want us to read is astonishing. It seems to show a lack of respect even to the HP iPaq team that even their update was deleted in addition to the responses. I minded to think of who watches the watchman.
Notwithstanding Laura's appeal I think that many of us rightly share the same feelings. In Laura's case we robustly sprang to her defence about the cad. Here there are fundamental principles of free speech and I hope Laura and indeed everyone else will rally together.
Gone away already!
Unbelievable.
As you are a person who obviously is most experienced in the cosmos of the BSF, could you kindly tell me what I might have done wrong?
Has anyone mentioned the "fact" that one of the other pocket pc hardware manufacturers has released "Windows Mobile 2003 SE" Professional edition for a device that only has 16mb of ROM...
Maybe they "Hacked" your computer... hey afterall, they are IT People...
I feel like I am in the RoboCop Film, the last movie about people vs. Law Enforcement??? or something???
Wasting time here is not worth it anymore, HP is now in the process of delet partial by partial, and try to make this vanish... they have no intension to do any upgrades, it's just wasting time... these HP are Hard Headed, they don't care for the old, but try to go for the new... this is where the money is...
I'll watch things for the next 2 days or so. I'm someway allergic if it comes to being forbiden my mouth. And even more if there's some Big Brother deciding on what might appear and what not, sentence by sentence.
Might have to do with the historical situation of my country. Authoritan systems as Germany has had them (once in my country, twice in the eastern part) sharpen one's sensitivity.
Apparently I posted this in the wrong forum the first time, and was asked to copy it here...
When I went about deciding to buy my 2200, I carefully weighed the devices available to me for features, long term use and cost, in addition to my past experiences with my 3600 series devices (my wife and I BOTH bought a 3600). I weighed the Ipaq's large ROM store very heavily. The fact that some it was available to me for my use is a bonus, but not a necessity. I came down to the three devices: 1940, 2215 and a Dell X3. I quickly ruled out the 1940 since I remembered HP had not made the 2k3 update available to the 1910, which for a brand new device I thought was kind of heartless. That brought me to the two roughly equivalent Dell & HP devices. The next thing I looked at was the support of Dell, knowing that it took 6 months to make available the update to customers after initially consumer outrage when they said they would not upgrade it. This placed a heavy slant toward HP (point HP). However the price for the equivalent Dell was quite a bit cheaper (~75CDN$ I think - point Dell). The last was the availability of upgrades for my 3600s. That was key. I knew HP would release an upgrade for the more robust 2200 as soon as it was available (Definite Point HP... at least I thought so). That brings the tally to 2-1. The problem is that last point ends up being a wash since neither Dell nor HP are releasing the update! That means that while I was extremely happy with the 3600s and the service I received from HP while they were trying to make a name for themselves in the PPC market, now that they have, their software service has gone out the window. Instead they put out a substandard PPC the rz1700 with SE, but say that the 2200 can't support the update? HOGWASH! I think the next time I am faced with the price vs support delema, I am going to take the cheaper model since both companies think that $500 a year for a new device is the price to pay. Of course the Dell would end up being $425... Which would you choose? Glenn
p.s. my wife and I BOTH have 2200s... Next time????
Glenn I have to post this for you. HP didn't not make nor support the 3600 iPAQ. That's why the service was so much better. I recently decided to not invest into the new iPAQ's, but instead direct my cash flow into the brand new ASUS MyPal that will be shipping soon. Are you happy now HP? I won't be posting every avoided HP purchase, but I will still contribute to this forum.
I am happy with the device. But am I happy with HP? I think the company is so focused on releasing new devices (5 in 2k4?), that they aren't looking back; not even 6 months or less! I was shocked that the 43/4100s were orphaned as well, since they are newer than mine by about 3+ Months. Since it was people like myself and others in this forum who are keeping HP's PPC line going, you wouldn't expect the "what have you done for me lately" attitude. In Canada, short of mail-order there are limited devices we can get our hands on. To be honest, I'd like to hold the devices to see if I like them rather than just read reviews. Reviews give me stats to rule out devices, but look and feel (and presumed service) get my money in the end. As you can see from my original post, upgradability is VERY high on my list (2200 has CF & SD, lots of RAM, Lots of ROM...). I don't like being left behind, but can't afford to buy once a year...
but enough to handle the update... I updated my 3600s from 2k to 2002... I had to load several apps into RAM but even so, I was not left behind. The 2200 has the Premium edition (or Pro, whichever has Term Services et al). And I have to load MS Reader (& WMP? The BT driver, MSN?) into RAM anyway because M$/HP update them. There should be lots of ways to shoe-horn SE into the device, with maybe *sacrificing* the universal remote and the memory store. Those to me are not great losses and I can choose to install them at a later date if I wish. I just know that developers, HP & other vendors will very quickly be orphaning the 2k3 in favour of SE. My device is just fine physically. The 640x480 screen would be nice, but apps will need to support the smaller screen for a while yet... I remember another comment by a user saying why have a flashable ROM if the *main* reason it is there isn't used? little updates are great, but when it comes to the OS change, we are left having to shell out within I figure about 6 months before I will have a hard time getting apps for 2k3.
On August 12, 2004, at 04:26:46 GMT, Glenn Skitch wrote:
"I updated my 3600s from 2k to 2002... I had to load several apps into RAM but even so, I was not left behind. The 2200 has the Premium edition (or Pro, whichever has Term Services et al)."
Premium has everything in ROM; Professional has things you have to load in RAM.
"I just know that developers, HP & other vendors will very quickly be orphaning the 2k3 in favour of SE."
While HP and other Pocket PC vendors will probably move to SE (in fact, they already are, except for the 6315), I doubt that software developers will orphan Windows Mobile 2003. Developers are still supporting Pocket PC 2002 (and even Pocket PC 2000 in some cases -- there seem to be a lot of 3600 iPAQs out there still). If adding support isn't too difficult, they don't want to limit their market.
Moderator: Andrew (Microsoft) Q: Will current WM2003 devices (i.e. iPAQ 3950/5555) be able to upgrade to WM2003 SE? A: Any Windows Mobile 2003 based device has the technical/software ability to be updated. However, there is a second layer of work that must be done by hardware manufacturers in order to provide an upgrade to their customers. The decision of whether or not to offer an upgrade for a specific device ultimately rests with the hardware manufacturer.
Just finished reading the transcript (from 25 March 2004!). Sure sounds like info that, if it had been worked into the info HP posted, it might have led to calmer discourse. Gee, giving the customer information to understand decisions. What will they think of next?
On August 12, 2004, at 15:07:15 GMT, Michael Butler wrote:
"Just finished reading the transcript (from 25 March 2004!). Sure sounds like info that, if it had been worked into the info HP posted, it might have led to calmer discourse."
If you're referring to the fact that Pocket PC OEMs have to add things to produce an upgrade, I thought most of us would have known that. I believe that every Windows CE device has a Hardware Interface Layer (or some similar name) that is device-specific.
HP has to integrate hardware-specific drivers for things like memory, Bluetooth, WiFi, etc. They would have to update their value-added programs to work properly under SE (which they presumably have already done for their SE-native iPAQs) and put them in the ROM image.
That's why Microsoft doesn't make the upgrades available to end users directly, like they do with Windows.
Even given all that, I'm still upset at the decision. Why? Because Compaq and HP have done that work before for their customers with Pocket PC 2002 and Windows Mobile 2003 upgrades. They have set the precedent of offering upgrades, and now seem to have changed the game.
Oh, I do realise that all computing devices require a software interface to make them all play nice. Some of those interfaces, such as the biometrics on the H5000 series, are far more complex and difficult to work with then, say, the display.
It would just seem to be beneficial to the discussions here to be made aware of what areas of the hardware interface posed difficulties. Speaking hypothetically, let's say the biometrics just refuse to talk to the system, rendering the fingerprint scanner useless. Or the 802.11b module is on a 16-bit connector and SE requires 32-bit which means redesigning the wizbang connector. In other words, something other than the 'arguments' you've already ably addressed. Or just say it was a marketing decision, pure and simple. That would effectively kill the whole discussion in this forum, since it would make the technical issues irrelevent.
It really doesn't matter whether it was a technical or a marketting decision by HP not to support the interface between their iPAQ hardware and MS Windows Mobile 2003 SE. It may, from a users perspective, have been a very good decision that spun out of control.
Each time I respond to this forum I receive an acknowledgement that says, in part: ======== Again, we appreciate your participation in the HP Business Customer Discussion Groups . Thanks for helping build a positive user community, and if you have feedback or questions about the service, please visit the 'forums feedback, usage, and help' discussion area (http://forums.itrc.hp.com/cm/FamilyHome/1,,276,00.html) and post your comments there. We will address your comments within 2 business days.
"It really doesn't matter whether it was a technical or a marketting decision by HP not to support the interface between their iPAQ hardware and MS Windows Mobile 2003 SE"
Well, I guess it has turned out that it may have been a sales decision!
"Fiorina said on the conference call that, in addition to execution problems at HP, the economy appeared to do a "stutter-step" in recent weeks, leading to a decline in demand"
"It would just seem to be beneficial to the discussions here to be made aware of what areas of the hardware interface posed difficulties. Speaking hypothetically, let's say the biometrics just refuse to talk to the system, rendering the fingerprint scanner useless. Or the 802.11b module is on a 16-bit connector and SE requires 32-bit which means redesigning the wizbang connector. In other words, something other than the 'arguments' you've already ably addressed. Or just say it was a marketing decision, pure and simple. That would effectively kill the whole discussion in this forum, since it would make the technical issues irrelevent."
I agree. If HP would just come out and tell us what was preventing an upgrade, we'd settle down and shut up. Just telling the users that their handhelds can't handle it (when newer, nearly identical ones can) doesn't cut it. HP could make things so much easier for themselves and their customers, but instead they insist on playing these stupid games with us. Come on HP, give us the nitty-gritty details! We can handle it, and if we can't, then at least we'll be satisfied.
Perhaps we should symphathize with HP... Maybe there engineers don't have the ability that the Toshiba engineers have... Afterall Toshiba was able to offer PPC2Kse as an upgrade and HP was not... Yet another reason to say bye bye HP...
I don't think HP people care this post anymore, but just to say I WOULD SPEND MONEY ON PPC2003se!!!
It is sad to see iPAQ has become a fashionable item --- My iPAQ is my functional tool, and I hate to see it falls into the mobile phone trend (ie. change every so often).
However, I would buy new iPAQ if the new ones are desirable, but they just aren't. (ie. What happened to the finger-print scanning for the new PDAs?)
In fact, new iPAQs are simply making up the missing features in the old iPAQs (ie. no combo SD/CF slots) but other brands have already been there!!! New iPAQ doesn't even have 802.11g, no finger-print scanning, and nothing that will excite new/existing users!
No excitement is the key reason for me to keep my old iPAQ.
It is because of that, I would rather spend reasonable amount of money on upgrading and adding extra accessories to my iPAQ.
Having said that, I won't abandon HP for its first mistake. If HP want users, like myself, to continue to buy new iPAQ every 18-24 months, give us the "WOW" factors as a driving force!! But don't just chew us off!
On August 14, 2004, at 01:14:31 GMT, christak wrote:
"All we are asking is for you to be honest, HP, and provide some details."
Suppose the honest answer is (as I suspect), "We lost money on the Windows Mobile 2003 upgrade, and don't want to lose more money on the SE upgrade." Or, worse, "We can make more money by assigning our engineers to developing features on our new iPAQs than by creating the SE upgrade."
Would those answers really make you happy? Anybody?
I realize HP is a business, and those are answers that would make their stockholders happy. However, if you lose the support of your users, and they start buying other Pocket PCs (and printers, laptops, servers, etc.), the decision may be penny wise and pound foolish.
HP will loose all my recommendations and sales of Servers, Laptops, Computers, Handhelds, Scanners This is a $ 750,000 annual loss to you HP. I am a computer Solutions Provider and I am disgusted at your lack of support - I recommended the 2210 as HP stated early on that the IPAQ 2210 would be supported by 2003SE - well over 200 units sold and egg on my face with some of my major clients. I seriously question the ethics of a major company, If I commit to specs or delierables to a client I deliver and in some instances need to compensate etc. If I say I will - then I WILL
I Purchased the Ipaq 5550 about 4 months ago for personal use, I went for this model for its upgradablity and features which were much more than I needed. I am now very dissapointed to find out that the windows 2003 se update will not be made available for my model, and I must upgrade to a newer model if I want to use Windows Mobile 2003 SE. This has put me off HP Ipaq due to the lack of support. My current Ipaq is the perfect tool for my use, but my next Pocket PC will be a Toshiba model and not a HP.
Hello I imagine that HP is not reading our demands... But I imagine Toshiba reading this form? They are probably very, but very happy that Hp is treating his costumers like this. Why? Because they know that HP will loose there costumers with this issue and its true well good luck HP you are giving your costumers to Toshiba. You will not sell your new Pocket PC's your gain will be your lost⦠Good Luck HP Hp costumers read this forms dont buy from HP aga
Wait until Monday in the US. (HP doesn't work on weekends.) It doesn't matter whether you are looking for a SE solution or an ozone filter for a printer. This forum is dead until Monday.... and then the "unrelevant" posts will disappear. Keep your message logs and watch this post disappear. There is really not much chance HP will be able to address our 8000 + requests for SE upgrades on iPAQS. They are already getting bad press because of other screw-ups. The Canadian and Australian reaction is subtle.
I was reading one of the magazines yesterday and was quite surprised that the iPaq was some way behind in percentage ratings of some other manufacturers in the list of PDA. Seems HP has got to get its act together or perhaps this will go the same way as the calculator business. Anyone know how much lobbying has gone on with Microsoft?
There is no point in lobbying Microsoft. They have already offered SE to HP.
"Moderator: Andrew (Microsoft) Q: Will current WM2003 devices (i.e. iPAQ 3950/5555) be able to upgrade to WM2003 SE? A: Any Windows Mobile 2003 based device has the technical/software ability to be updated. However, there is a second layer of work that must be done by hardware manufacturers in order to provide an upgrade to their customers. The decision of whether or not to offer an upgrade for a specific device ultimately rests with the hardware manufacturer."
With the recent HP report, including Ms. Fiorina's noting problems in execution, recent changes in the top of the organisation that covers handhelds, changes in the iPaq market share and growth, mixed reviews on the new line, it would seem that this would be a good time for HP to pause and perhaps review their approach to the existing iPaq user community.
Should this message survive, I would take that as a sign that HP sees a course change is needed. If not, well, I guess it will mean HP needs a bigger alarm clock. I hope not.
I just read this news on Cnet and came over here to see if it's true. I'm stunned! Having purchased a 4155 just a couple of months ago, this is really disheartening.
I was at GE for almost four years before leaving to start a consultancy a couple of years ago. At GE we bought more than a quarter of a million dollars worth of HP servers, with my recommendation, just for one project that I led. And we upgraded our MS-Exchange infrastructure with another couple hundred thousand dollars worth, plus about another eighty grand of Compaq equipment (after the merger was announced).
Now that I'm a consultant, I recommend HP equipment and personally own two HP servers, three laptops and an assortment of other HP equipment. This isn't because I'm an "HP Man" but because the upgrade analysis worked out every time in HP's favor.
But a lot of that analysis revolves around HP's standing behind (or better, beside) their customers with even fairly old equipment.
Now my three-month-old 4155 is, basically, EOL? That might be okay for a $45 calculator or a $150 printer, but I invested over $500 of my personal cash in this unit and supporting accessories in the belief that HP would support me for at least the next version of the software. I've even patiently tolerated bugs in the 4155 on the expectation that patches or a new release will soon address them. So far few relevant patches, and now no new releases?
When I decided on the 4155 my second choice was a Toshiba unit. But the scale tipped for HP (despite the higher cost of the iPaq) because of my good experience with them. If I could have seen ahead three months, the nod (as well as my hard-earned cash and client PDA recommendations) would have gone to Toshiba.
You may want to reconsider the decision in a tactical sense. Consider these actions: - HP chooses not to provide MW2003SE to existing iPaqs (reason irrelevent). - HP terminates existing iPaq lines in 3Q04. - HP releases 1715. Inferior to the mid to high-end terminated iPaqs. Gets lackluster reviews. - HP to not release high-end 4705 until late 4Q04 (actual volume availability through the pipeline likely to be early 1Q05) - Competitors reverse themselves to deliver MW2003SE, thus allowing them to offer product filling HP offering gaps. - HP rate of growth in the handheld market slows relative to competitors.
It appears that HP has effectively abandoned the high-end market during the critical Christmas (for consumers) and year-end (for corporate) selling seasons.
While one might think the strategy is customers will wait until 1Q05 to buy the new iPaqs, personal and internal experience should tell HP otherwise. Individuals aren't going to be willing to wait for months if they can get essentially the same item from another vendor now. When a company authorises an expenditure, the unit requesting the purchase will not take the chance the funds will be cancelled; they make the purchase as soon as they can.
Releasing MW2003SE would seem a short-term tactical solution to keep market share until replacement lines are in sufficient volume to smoothly transition from one line to the next. The recent events at HP would seem to provide the opportunity to revisit past decisions without being held responsible for those past decisions.
Since there does not seem to be any other viable channels to suggest such a review, it is hoped the HP iPaq Team could pass this up the line, noting the activity on this forum and other sites.
Let's suppose that HP change their position and release updates for their current product line. Do you honestly think you won't have to go through this again when WM2k4 is released?. It really doesn't matter if HP release the update or not, they will be sure not to release another without the same fight. In the mean time ya'll would have paid for Wm2k3se, some of you will have bought another ipaq device, and you'll all still be hoping for another upgrade. And thats just daft. Take this stance as the official HP position for now and the future and look elsewhere, regardless of the outcome. Change will only occur if their stockholders are hit in the pocket book. Even if an update is released, I certainly will not buy it. I would rather get the additional functionality by giving 3rd party software companies my money and be done with HP. My new T3 does a great job and now i'll wait for an Apple PDA.
You have to understand that quite a few companies and individuals have (and still are) making their iPaq purchases based on having devices that last for more than a few months. To expect that HP will keep producing updates for old iPaqs is quite unrealistic.
However, if my company went out and bought, say, 100 H5550s today (16 August 2004) and the seller does not tell me that they are no longer manufactured and their End Of Life (EOL) is a few weeks away, I would be seriously annoyed and consider various options, none of which involve future HP purchases. To think a company like HP would deliberately punch giant holes in their product line is inconceivable from a business prospective. It would imply a level of incompetence that would make we wonder just how viable is the company, let alone the product.
Releasing MW2003SE would plug those holes until the new iPaqs can be purchased (as opposed to being 'released'). At the same time, it would send a message that HP is concerned about the existing customers who, in good faith, bought HP products expecting to at least get one year, preferrably two, out of a capital investment.
Should one expect the new iPaqs, such as the 4705, to run MW2005? That really depends on when MW2005 is released and what the requirements are. It is quite possible the 4705 would never see the next version. But if one can get a reasonable life out of the 4705, it really does not matter. In business, the ROI is what matters. Spending $600 plus for a device and replacing it within a year, or even a few weeks, is unacceptable. Remember, the purchase price is only a part of the cost. A support desk does not want to have to support several different models because the lifecycle is under a year. I would be surprised if the support issue has not already been discussed within HP's own Help Desk organisation.
Bottom line: Until the product line holes are filled, HP will cede market share to competitors. Whether HP makes money selling MW2004SE is secondary to needing to plug the gaps until the rest of the new iPaq line is shipping in volume. Otherwise someone else at HP gets to explain the execution failures to Ms. Fiorina.
It seems the 'updated' thread became too hot to handle. First a document was posted only after a customer obtained it elsewhere. The arguments given could not stand up to serious inspection (Steve did an excellent job analysing each point and responding to it). Then, it was discovered that internal data had not been purged from the document. That data was presented on the thread (and no, I will not say what it was). The situation rapidly deteriorated from there. I suspect that someone finally decided the best course of action was to pull the thread.
I doubt anything more specific will be allowed to remain on this thread (and I don't see where I could have violated the rules here, since there is no profanity, name calling, posting of confidential information, etc).
"Well if it takes 3rd parties to solve the ipaq 2215 grips problem, maybe a 3rd party will offer 2003se as an upgrade."
Assuming this wasn't just a joke, I have two words for you -- dream on.
Putting Windows Mobile onto a device requires writing a hardware interface layer, which sounds like a big task. Also, they'd probably need a Windows Mobile license from Microsoft to even attempt this.
Even if somebody did that for the iPAQ, how would they ship HP's enhancements, like iPAQ Image Viewer, iPAQ Wireless, iPAQ Backup, and so on, without being sued for copyright violation?
I suppose you could try putting Toshiba's e805 WM 2003 SE upgrade ROM on the iPAQ, but you'd probably have to play around with programs to force the upgrade onto the iPAQ. Even if that worked, differing hardware layers could mean you'd brick your iPAQ. And, even if all that worked, you'd lose Bluetooth, those HP enhancements and maybe WiFi.
im on vacation and this thread is so big (through my mobile) that ill have to disengage for a bit and check in later. But I havent seen any technical solutions or change of mind offered here by HP so I assume the expert advice is still to get rid of the Ipaq and buy something else?
As I and many others have said before, I sure wish HP would listen to customers and provide a software upgrade path for 2003 through SE. How many hardware manufacturers can ignore customer requests and still stay in business?
It seems HP can do that. must be the leftover stock they sold when they finally sunk their claws into Compaq. We went from 453 posts back to 444, which now comes back to 447 with the new posts, because the moderators here seem to feel that the people's voices are getting a little too loud and realistic for them to handle. oh, and ofcourse brushing off any leads to the heritage from Compaq so they seem nonexistant. with which I mean the reputation to back the customer and the $$$$ devices they buy with quality support, updated drivers/programs and one-time OS upgrades like they did on some selected models in the past.
I'm sure this post will disappear quickly as well because of the little statement I made just now. I just wanted to make it known i'm still watching. disappointed in HP's actions as I am, I'm still waiting for them to realise that they are betraying their good name and customers, and that:
Hewlett Packard should really, seriously, reconsider providing the 2003SE upgrade to existing iPAQ's.
I'm politely asking that from a business point of view, HP moderators and execitives. I know you're watching. why not grace us with a wise response to our many questions?
By the way, I'm still keeping a log of everything I see here and manage to save.
It's interesting to note that the current iPAQ model numbers are listed at the bottom of the Google cached article that mentions the security enhancements of SE. very interesting indeed.
I would like to know if HP will be providing a trade in program for "fair market value" of a pocket pc which users may have just bought, but would rather have the newer model for a few bucks more.
I find it hard to accept that HP is willing to ditch it's customers so easily.
IPAQ TEAM: Will this be an option in the near future? Is the security enhancements mentioned in the previous posts purchased as an add-on module to a purchased pocket pc?
I own a small business. Most of our computers and some of our printers are HP. I bought a compaq computer many years ago but returned it because I was dissatisfied. Until the Ipaq came out I refused to buy any compaq equipment for many years because of the way I was treated. Since I have bought the Ipaq 2215, I have only had 1 problem that I called Support on, the grips. Tech Support promptly replaced them. I was impressed. I also have a couple of other gripes with the Ipaq like landscape not working and alarms running down the battery, forcing a hard reset. I understand nothing is perfect but when I bought this unit LANDSCAPE, ALARMS, AND UPGRADES were all important to me, and promised by you. Overall before this Update came out your scorecard was good. This unit does many things well but there were some serious issues. But Who's Perfect. I have said it before this is about trust, You and I are partners, I bought equipment based on what you said it would do. You have to make your equipment do as promised, or at least try real hard. I have made lots of promises in my life that I couldn't keep, things happen. The worst thing that you can do is ignore your partner and not at least explain yourself. How can I trust Someone like that. I have had many partners and I can tell you from experience if you can't trust your partners, you would be a fool to keep them. Please don't ignore me, I have spent a lot of money with your company and up to this point have been satisfied.
"Is the security enhancements mentioned in the previous posts purchased as an add-on module to a purchased pocket pc?"
The cached page with the security updates use to be on the HP corporate store as an add on pack to existing ipaq units specifically it mentioned 1910 1940 and 2210. And was being touted as having security enhancements similar to their other OS "Windows Mobile (SE)" however the page is no longer available.
I am hoping this means HP has changed their tact and is going to do what is most mutually beneficial to both themselves and their loyal customer base... and just offer the upgrade instead of grabbing the corporate cash bag.
As far as a 'fair market' tradein, I wouldn't count on it. However, you can trade in your ipaqs (search the HP site). Last time I looked I could get $175 for my $649 H5555. Wow...
I expect the software page was never supposed to be seen by us mortals, but if you read it, a number of the items are already integrated into (at least) the H5555 line with the biometrics.
As far as any changes, just look at all the messages the iPaq team has posted to date and I think you'll have your answer.
"As far as a 'fair market' tradein, I wouldn't count on it. However, you can trade in your ipaqs (search the HP site). Last time I looked I could get $175 for my $649 H5555. Wow..."
I wish I could say the same "Wow..." but mine doesn't even want to come out of my mouth. I paid about 850 euros in total for my 5550. let's see what XE.com says about that.. mmm.. that's about $1,047 for JUST the iPAQ and shipping cost right here in Holland. and I would get how much in return for it? $175? Good GOD. I need to sit down.
I got a 4350 and to hear that Mobile 2003 SE isn't available for it is disheartening. The PPC is good right out of the box, but future use and company support is an issue for most shoppers (like me) so that we can get total use of that $500 we "invested" in the PPC. I can understand why Microsoft isn't supplying Mobile 2003 SE directly to end-users.
But for HP not to make it a priority take the time to tweak the OS so that it will work with these PPCs is troubling and says how much they care about their customers.
It got worse for me when I upgraded the PPC to the newly available BIOS only to find no documentation or other form of help on using the advertised features. I tried to contact HP support (via chat) and was told to pay up for help (supposedly my warranty expired).
Why should I have to pay for help on features that you (HP) recommended to me in the first place? Having some pdf documents available on these features would be very helpful.
Paying $500 for a unit that starts to lose interest to its vendor a year later in terms of upgrades is bad. It's bad business to deny your existing customers new enhancements that are desired and availavble, throw them what you feel they need and then don't help them with what you do give them. That's pretty bad business.
As the once proud owner of a iPAQ 5550 I can only say that when anyone asks me to recommend what PDA to buy I say Toshiba. Before this I would have without hesitation recommended an iPAQ as I was totally happy with it until I found that I can not upgrade it.
I will not now even buy a new PDA from HP because I know that when WM 2005 or whatever comes out that my shiny new WM 2003 SE device will suddenly not be upgradeable again.
I will next buy a Toshiba as had I bought one in the first place I would now have WM 2003 SE as they have an upgrade.
Is HP so deficient technically that they cannot even match what Toshiba can do or this a revenue grabbing exercise that has nothing to do with technical details.
I hope that you do not treat your PC owners the same way when Longhorn is released and force all your PC customers to buy a new PC when a new operating system comes out.
IT IS NOT FAIR to compare LONGHORN with the WM2003SE.
While LONGHORN doesnt requires any specific OEM-customised OS to work well with any PC... WM2003 or WM2003SE REQUIRES a manufacturer to specially customize it and make possible for the THEIR own devices to suit WHAT the OS provides. HP has gone thru a long way of testing and assessment for the WM2003SE. But... they seemed to have failed to "deliver the solution" to the end-users.
5555 >>> XDA II (WORTH IT) (the name, the design, the quality, the WOW on friends' face, the recognition)
5555 + GSM Wireless Pack NOT EQUAL XDA II (expensive for the pack - i might as well get the XDA II)
5555 + Serria Wireless 750 NOT EQUAL XDA II (bulky to carry the expansion pack)
frankly speaking i dont miss my 5555 now, because the 2nd-hand XDA II with SDIO Wifi is so much better. Hey, atleast it is a phone too, mind you.
6315 ? good? bad? Only HP knows.
HIGHLY DISAPPOINTED HP customer I WILL NOT buy iPAQs anymore. Currently now changed to XDA II.
My company started buying PDA's this week :), a few people opted for Blackberrys for some reason, the other choice were ipaq's. I convinced them to go with Dell instead. Only 10 devices but still $4000. Saved us money going with the other company too. Sorry HP, thats just the way it goes.
I just purchased an IPAQ 2215 two months ago. One of the features that I made my purchase decision was the ability for FLASH ROM updates.
Since HP has abandoned my IPAQ in terms of operating system updates (WM2003SE), I am extremely disappointed and shall not purchase another HP product. I am regretting my IPAQ puchase.
HP seems to forget that WM2003SE has more than landscape mode and WPA support. It also includes a much better version of Internet Explorer with single-column viewing and faster rendering, as well as a better connection manager.
A very long thread so excuse me for not having read it all. I got the 4150 so that also means no upgrade?
I can understand all the peoples feeling about not being able to upgrade. It certainly effects the next buy. I will for me too when there is no upgrade path. I am not talking about a device that is 3/4 years old of course.
No upgrade = no more HP purchases. For sometime now I've felt that HP is starting to ignore it's customers and this just proves it. I've been though about 4 iPAQ / Aero's in my time and am a purchaser for a number of companies I support.
Just ordered my LooX 420, and popped my H5550 onto ebay. I don't expect to ever buy another HP product ever again. That includes all the printers / switched etc I purchase for my customers.
Good luck HP, and learn that keeping current customers happy is the easiest thing in the world !
I concur with most of your statements, but it seems HP is moving into a direction where it will put new devices on the market and stop developing for it right away. The moment your equipment markets it's great stuff, but it looses appael and usability after the first upgrade/update is made available by third parties. I've been a very local HP customer, having bought printers, pc's, laptops and PDA's from HP, always knowing HP would support their products for a reasonable amount of time after it stopped selling them. Nowadays, for the last 2-3 years, I only keep reading forums and statements that you really can't support new releases anymore. I still use and own an OfficeJet G95, network-capable, but HP has refused to produce a Windows2003-SBS-server package for it. Guess what; the G95 is used mainly by SOHO-market; guess what 2; what OS do they run??? Now this policy seems to spread around the company, hurting the PDA market as well. Think again, shout out loud up-to-chain-of-management and reverse this short-sighted support-policy. This will make people think twice before buying new HP equipment. Just send this thread for instance to senior-management to indicate you support the concerns of your users, or stop developing new PDA's in a couple of years; your counterparts at Dell, Toshiba and Asus are eager to gain market....
HP iPaq Team... Don't they really understand? Why HP conducts market policy aimed to persuade clients not to buy anything for the company? I bought my iPAQ h4150 two months ago and I was told that HP will provide WM2003SE upgrade for old iPAQ series. So I'm very suprised with HP decision not to develop WM2003SE version for my model (and many others). There's no technical difficulties for that. Dell had announced that there'are WM2003SE ROM updates for their products. One of Dell Axim X30 devices, for instance, has only 32 Mb of ROM with WM2003SE installed. This model has standard display with resolution of 240 by 320 pixels. So, HP, what's the matter?
What a STUPID decision!!! I just bought my wife an Ipaq 4155, and did not know about this, or I would NOT have bought it!!!! I have a Palm IIIc that I have used for several years, and is still going strong. I wanted to try my 1st PPC device, just to get experience with it, since I support LOTS of Palm devices on my job, and a FEW Ipaq's.... (2nd level support at a large Mortgage company) SINCERELY, Jim Jensen eokie1@yahoo.com
The only message getting lost here is the customer feedback being lost on a vendor. Time will tell if the customers themseleves are being lost to the vendor. I think the technical issues are clouding the company's position, but seem to clearly point out a well versed client pool, who are product recommenders, that have refuted claims so far. So the only thing I would hope that wouldn't be lost on HP is their direct influence on market share: waning product support in light of shoddy new products is not a winning combination.
Sherry and Carlos: You may be surprised with the new iPAQ offerings from HP. The fact that HP won't provide or support MS Windows Mobile 2003 SE for products sold before 26 July is quite sad but may be part of the surprises in store for the future. I have difficulty understanding why HP won't provide software support for the products they have orphaned within a year of their sale. My dad sold his shares in HP because of the ROI. And the my post explaining this was deleted.
Stan: I've seen the new devices and they are impressive. HP is trying to expand the market, while seemingly doing so at the expense of some of their installed base. This is not a new tactic. But walking away from what could/should be a provitiable business of providing software upgrades isn't being understood [or explained properly by HP] and turning users' feelings towards anger. Some of that is vented here. For me, I like some of the existing units but I'm more concerned about their business attitude which apparantly doesn't have a technical justification. I would be a new HP customer and would feel much better if this business unit were under the control [autonomously] of Compaq, which after all is how we're [iPAQ users, wannabes] all here.
The iPAQ units are what looks to me [IMHO] the market leader albeit stuck on MS/2003 [until they reverse their porting decision]. Too bad customer/software support can't match their units, but according to some reports, the latest HP units are doing just that, but in the wrong direction. The majority of users here are not your typical novice, but you don't have to be an expert to feel abandoned. While I personnally wouldn't buy a Dell, their former units are more appealing than the newest ones. It's this fact I fell raises the most ire in people that they have the best unit they could have gotten and now feeling they're being force fed a poison pill to migrate to a newer, less appealing, device. I myself am struggling to decide this very issue. Now if Dell/Toshiba were to product a less boxy unit...
Well, unless you really need the Se features NOW, or want to make a statement about HP, I wouldn't pursue the trade-in.
Point is, if the unit does what you want, use it. If you think you can unload it somewhere and get enough to stomach the loss by moving to an SE unit, so it.
I use a lot of 3rd party software on my H5555 (BTW, HP, they support both MW2003 and SE, so I could update without encountering the upgrade objections you raised on my behalf), so the unit is functional TODAY and I'll keep it until it fails on ROI. But if HP thinks I or my associates will put our heads in their noose again, based on their current practices, they will need to lower their sales estimates.
Bottom line, if the iPaq is doing what you need (as opposed to want) and you can't afford to dump it, then don't dump it.
The feature I want most within the upgrade is the landscape feature for use when browsing the internet. This is trivial for some, but very important for me. I have tried many third party products, and without going into detail let me just say that they do not work very well at all.
I will continue to use my 5555, until it makes sense to upgrade considering the prices we all pay. I sure hope that HP sees that it would make people happy if they would just give us what we want. The position that HP has taken on this issue really gives me a disagreeable attitude and will affect my future PDA purchase.
I agree. I use Pocket IE extensively and really could use the PIE improvements (and landscape would make it so much easier to read).
The original migration path I was going to recommend was to upgrade the H5550 (business version of the H5555) to MW2003SE and wait until the 4700 was available in volume (most likely 1Q05), then switch to the 4700 and rotate out the H5550.
Such an approach is not possible, both for not having an upgrade, and HP effectively not having a high-end business-quality unit for the next several months (terminating the 5000 line this month but not delivering the 4700 until at least December 2004, a 3-4 month gap).
A 'failure to execute', as a certain CEO has been known to say.
Sorry, forgot to mention why one would upgrade before starting to rotate out:
Go through the learning curve on MW2003SE, and migrate to it. Then, when the 4700 is available, support only has to learn about the new features of the 4700, rather than dealing with BOTH a new OS and new hardware at the same time. Permits faster response time on support issues.
In response to your decision not to offer the upgrade, I offer the following. Offer us the choice to upgrade at a cost from $0-$100. All models above the 1940 should recieve an upgrade. Based on Specs I have seen the 1940 series is uncapable of supporting the upgrade, yet the 2200 series and higher are well within the requirements for the upgrade. Get rid of your trade in program on the devices that recieve the upgrade. The program is an excellent show of effort from HP to please the customers, as you really don't have to offer anything, but the amount is too little. We can get the same or more on Ebay. Put the money you'd save from this towards what you may loose on the upgrade. If necassary, I would agree to void all warranties and service agreements I currently have with HP. I accept that my device is getting "old." Its almost what, 9 months, a year old now (I have a 2215)? In a couple years, when HP offers a decent alternative to my device, I will upgrade then, but for now, that is not acceptable. With the enactment of what I have proposed, I believe HP would be able to cover its losses in a amount acceptable to the loss the HP may feel as a result of their current path.
The mobile developers conference was some time ago, and I have been checking the HP site for new ROM weekly. I then found this post. My initial response was anger. I have calmed down quite a bit, but I am still not happy with HPâs position on this.
It has been a month now, and HP has hopefully been watching this post as well as all other efforts to get the SE upgrade. I have read this entire post as well as other articles found on the web, and have not seen any rebuttal from HP. They continue to stand firm on the few paragraphs that appear at the top of this post.
Is anyone listening? Does HP care what we think? I just canât believe that HP would post a statement and not have any further comments. HP didnât exactly scream out that they are not providing the upgrade. Instead HP quietly posted this.
I see that Dell and Toshiba have both released SE upgrades for their top of the line devices. What is the problem with HP? Is the problem profit? Can HP not hear us, âwe are willing to pay for the upgradeâ? How much could it cost, really? To upgrade a device that is 3 months old (ipaq 5555) is not working in my favor. Come o
The iPaq division would have to be locked away in a tower not to know the general attitude of iPaq owners towards this policy. Belive me - they know.
Has anyone at HP read "The Cluetrain Manifesto?" Does it matter to them what customers think?
All I want is landscape mode for my h4355. Well, that and for the recent ROM upgrade to work as advertised. But I think I assume too much... HP already has my money.
I just felt I needed to voice my opinion here as well.
As a previous owner of a Jornada 568, and a current owner of an IPAQ 5555 I am extremely disapointed in HPs decision to drop product support for their PDA devices so fast.
It's funny, I can remember shopping for my current PDA and thinking about how upgradable the IPAQ would be for future software updates having the larger ROM. I guess I was mistaken.
Currently, My houshold has two IPAQs. an IPAQ 5555 that I use DAILY, and my wife uses an IPAQ 1940.
I guess with the decision to make the lifespan of the IPAQ PDAs so short, I will be forced to consider other companies that stand behind their loyal customers.
Hey Antony, I haven't really had the time to post there anymore. I mean most of the questions now asked are easy enough for anyone there to answer so my services aren't really necessary. Also it's easier to post here in a few minutes.
Exactly how is that a good job for HP? Because they decided not to do anything.
HP making that statement just about sealed there fate in the pocket pc market. This and there poor customer service is giving ASUS and many others there chance to shine.
Lots of cometition out there now HP. Learn from what you and bell did in the past.
Pretty frustrating! My 2215 is not that old. It seems a shame not to allow ROM updates already - even if some features may not work perfectly. Landscape mode would be nice but it is more important to me to simply get bug fixes and updates to the basic features of WM2003. How about at least service packs? I would not even mind if they would have to be reloaded after a hard reset (which I seldom have had to do).
Charles, for the h55xx models the end date was weeks ago. for the other models, it's just a matter of time till they are announced to be discarded too. given the state of support and the many replies from HP to this thread, my guess is they have been binned already, it's just the website that is behind on the facts.
End of product life (EOL) was posted somewhere for a few seconds, and unless it has changed, every line announced before July 2004 is now dead. So, all those 2000, 4000, and 5000 iPaqs are on their own.
I concur, This is certainly my last iPAQ. a shame too since this is my first experience with HP's product line... and certainly my last since nothing serves me as well as the 4155 in terms of size and features.
ah well. the shake down is already apparent, HP is moving away from its Pocket PC line and towards the more consumer oriented devices such as the iPod. fine, but I'll stick with my Apple 4G iPod. Lord knows HP would find a way to lock out the firmware updates or make you pay for them judging by their response to this issue.
What really irritates me is how simple the solution to this problem is and how little effort would be required to rectify the situation and keep that early adopter/ hardcore user segment loyal. oh well.
As a sales associate for the number one personal electronics chains in North America, I bought the 4150 back in Feb, and have used it extensively to demo to customers. We just recently recieved the rz1410 with WM2003SE and was hoping to get the ROM update so I can demo the new features with programs I already have on my unit, but now am finding out that I can't do that... I agree with all the others out there that it does seem unreasonable to not offer an update, even for a small charge as was done with PPC2002. I feel as if I can no longer tell my customers with confidence that the 1940, 2210, and 4150 are viable products, as HP is not fully supporting them with the latest system updates from Microsoft. This is really a black spot on HP's record...
Does anyone have a list of PPC with WM2003SE with the best prices and technical specification along with how HP ranks. I read a recent review that put HP behind another manufacturer in the UK in the PPC category.
Michael, As I'm in canada, the only new iPAQ that is currently being offered here is the rz1410 by the looks of it, and all the previously mentioned "discontinued" models seem to be still their flagship models (according to the HP canada website) as the rz only seems to be an entry model. I wish HP would get everything straight and if they can get half of the new models being offered in the states here, then I wouldn't be so peeved.. Any clarification on the Canadain aspect is appreciated..
Right now in the states HP has created major gaps in their product line, and oddly enough, it seems deliberate. Some models, such as the 47045, won't be available for months.
I really haven't looked at the hp.ca site, but all models except those announced in July 2004 are no longer manufactured and have been declared dead by HP as of 26 August 2004.
It seems quite unlikely that HP would terminate support in the US, resulting in cedeing markets on at least a temporary basis, while providing full support elsewhere.
No, your 4150 will not be getting any new fixes or patches. I wouldn't guarantee any hardware repairs either, but I could be wrong.
Is there something fundamentally wrong with HP's portion of Microsoft software for iPAGS sold by HP before those launched after July 26, 2004 that makes upgrading impossible?
When I go back to their lead statement it soungs like their goal "is to maintain a quality product release". Did they blow it on previous product?
Just to add my two-penneth. I too am disappointed that HP are not offering the ability to upgrade. My wife and I are both iPAQ h2200 users. I do not use mine for business, I use it for personal use and I would have welcomed the landscape functionality.
What I want to know is why are the needs or wants of non-business users less important. I paid hard-earned money for my iPAQ!
Certainly when I eventually get around to replacing my iPAQ, HP won't be at the top of my list, unless they change their policy.
I was just in a meeting about supplying pocket PCs to assesors in the field. Before this debacle with SE I would have wholeheartedly recommended HP iPAQs as I am very happy with my H5550.
Now I said have a look at other brands as well.
This is the real damage that this has done. It is not only the 10 000 people that signed the petition but all the other people that these 10 000 people know and will recommend products to. They will now doubt the HP brand.
You are alienating your best sales team, the happy users of your products.
I bought an iPaq 4150 one whole week ago and I now discover that I am the proud owner of an obsolete device. Someone should tell Amazon.co.uk that their #1 bestselling PDA is already obsolete. The same goes for PCW who recently gave the 4150 top marks in a head to head test.
I am so disappointed and wish I had found this thread before I paid good money for my obsolete device.
The one thing that I value above all else in hardware is proper support. The best device in the world is as lousy as the software that runs on it. The most mediocre device in the world can be transformed by great software and support. Support is not just bug fixes but genuine upgrades where the hardware is capable of supporting it.
One could understand if HP were to charge a small fee for upgrades to Mobile 2003 SE, but to not offer it at all for entirely specious reasons sounds like marketing doubletalk. I'd love to know who these customers were because it certainly wasn't anyone in this thread. The demand is clearly there for it.
Unfortunately in this case I believe it will backfire badly. HP is only one of many PDA manufacturers in the world. If it hopes to retain business and brand loyalty, it had better start doing something to earn it. Otherwise, why should anyone care if they buy from Dell or whoever the next time around?
My extremely short experience with HP is certainly enough to make me look elsewhere in future. Please reconsider.
On August 31, 2004, at 08:49:36 GMT, Gary Cooper wrote:
"I do not use mine for business, I use it for personal use and I would have welcomed the landscape functionality.
What I want to know is why are the needs or wants of non-business users less important. I paid hard-earned money for my iPAQ!"
Probably because non-business users will buy one or two PDAs, while business users will buy in bulk.
Also, the price of the higher-end iPAQs are set more for business users than personal use.
Of course, the devices are useful for both business and personal tasks, and HP's current models (like the rx3715) indicate they're aiming for the consumer electronics segment, too. However, while HP does have some consumer offerings (PCs, printers and the new iPod), I view HP as primarily a business-to-business company.
I run a support website for users with memory card issues; up to four months ago I was actively updating the site with home user info. Then, out of the blue an IT support person contacted me about a high number of their 13,000+ Ipaqs having problems with certain brands of SD cardsâ¦.
Since then Iâve helped seven major multi-nationals with card issues â totalling a number of 72,000+ Ipaq PDAs. All seven companies have been made aware of this thread (and the WM2003SE issue in general), and two of the aforementioned companies are actively looking at replacing their Ipaqs with a different make solely down to the lack of reasoning regarding this WM2003SE upgrade issue. Thatâs about 25,000 PDAs.
The IT managers in question have already talked to their HP sales reps and have basically received the same answer as us⦠They made their own decision, and no way was I involved with their internal decision
If you not happy about purchasing an obsolete machine at, I assume, near full price, then only you can correct it.
If you feel the device will do what you want and are comfortable with the cost then do nothing.
If you feel the device was misrepresented (UK law differs from US law), you should contact the seller (amazon.uk?) and inform them why you are returning it. If you feel the article you relied upon was inaccurate, then you should contact them as well.
In short, you will need to address it yourself, as HP does not appear to be responding to inquiries such as yours within this forum.
Regards,
(Let me see... no criticism, no foul language, no derogatory remarks, assistance of one HP customer to another... should pass muster)
I just purchased an HP IPAQ 2215 last month and I was dissapointed to hear about HP's decision.
However, what I don't understand is that they won't provide us with a upgrade since these devices "don't have enough memory" and "wouldn't benefit from the upgrades", whereas they come out with the rz1715, which has MUCH LESS memory than the other ipaq series (like the 2210s), and only has a 204mhz processor and a QVGA screen... yet it comes with SE.
now why would a device like that benefit from this upgrade, whereas more powerful ipaqs, like the 2210 series gets left behind?
Well that's true of anyone every buying anything that the product will be obsolete. I think the issue here which I'll politely state, is that users of the existing iPAQs, near love their products and want to be able to use the latest o/s version. We only need be told how much. Being told "no soup for you", has miff'd quite a few folks but doesn't detract from my initial statement. What folks do now is vote with thier wallets. I myself wish the decision were reversed, given the lack of technical merit, and the tarnishing the product line is getting. I see no reason to switch from an iPAQ for h/w, s/w or support reasons but essentially the store is being closed on us and we're not happy. In NYC parlanse, "money left on the table".
Carlos I think you have summed up many of the disappointments already expressed in reaction to the decision by HP. What is missing is a statement by HP explaining why they have not addressed those customer dissapointments. They may figure that the consequences of their decision is "small potatoes" and need not be addressed. They may even figure their decision is reasonable. But, it cannot be denied, the decision sure has upset a lot of people.
On a happier note, eventually this issue will be replaced by another. No corporation can prosper long without happy customers.
If HP is not going to give us the ability to view this webpage in landscape mode with PPC 2003 SE, then what about formatting it to fit on an iPAQ screen??? I use my iPAQ extensively for surfing the internet and landscape mode would be a great benefit for me. Since HP is not going to release PPC 2003 SE then maybe at least they could come up with a ROM update that would allow the "convenient" use of landscape mode. Landscape mode is the major reason why I want the SE upgrade so if it is too difficult to give us the whole SE upgrade then what about just a landscape upgrade??
I am very disappointed to see that this is the stance HP is taking. I have recently purchased an IPAQ (4155) that will not meet my needs. A primary factor in the decision to purchase this IPAQ over a Dell x30 was the reputation of HP/Compaq and the quality of their hardware. I also based my decision on the fact that in the past HP/IPAQ have released upgrades to newer operating systems. Based on the information provided in this thread, I will plan on returning this IPAQ and plan on purchasing an x30. Regards, Mike
Thank you for your interest in this topic. The HP iPaq team has read all of your feedback pertaining to the orginal information posted in this thread, and we will now close the thread.
Printable version
