P810/P900

David Wood <[email protected]> wrote in news:ZiIZJ0Pe$SO
[email protected]:

> There's one problem with saying Palm Tungsten - there's now four models
> in the Tungsten range! The original Tungsten T, which you're thinking
> of, has now been superseded by the T2.

Good point, I was talking about the T, but as you said there are other
models. I won't be upgrading to the T2, as it doesn't offer that much more,
really, plus I prefer the colour of the T.

>
> Personally, I'm a Pocket PC user - with an iPAQ 3970. The 3970 is a
> great machine - still superior in some ways to the new 2210, but if
> buying now, the 2210 will take some beating.
>

I alternate between Palms/Pocket PCs on a fairly regular basis, but my
preference is Palm because they don't get bogged down when you start
installing system apps on them (e.g. launchers/taskswitchers), and there's
much less maintenance than with a Pocket PC - Palms just work!

Pocket PCs are nice though, and much better for MP3/video/games. I hooked
up my last one to a garmin GPS, which was very useful as a car navigation
system. Ideally I'd like both

---

› See More: P810/P900

On Wed, 13 Aug 2003, M@rtin wrote:

> Good point, I was talking about the T, but as you said there are other
> models. I won't be upgrading to the T2, as it doesn't offer that much
> more, really, plus I prefer the colour of the T.

Definitely no point in getting the T2. A Chinese site (sadly now gives
page not found) had what appeared to be some shots of a T3 model with a
480x320 screen. That'd be the one worth waiting for.

--
Jose Marques

"Andrew Fenton" <[email protected]> wrote:

>The P900 won't be a quantum leap, very much an
>evolution.

A quantum leap is the "smallest possible change". Is that really what
you meant?

Iain
--

The Hairydog Guide to UK mobile phones
http://www.hairydog.co.uk/cell1.html

Iain Harrison <[email protected]> wrote:

>>The P900 won't be a quantum leap, very much an
>>evolution.

> A quantum leap is the "smallest possible change". Is that really
> what you meant?

I beg to differ.

From the "Compact Oxford English Dictionary":

<http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/quantumleap>

| quantum leap
| (also quantum jump)
| *noun* a sudden large increase or advance.

I know what you mean, but evidence is against you.

M.

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.ericsson - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on Wed, 13 Aug 2003 14:22:03
+0100, Iain Harrison <[email protected]> wrote:

>"Andrew Fenton" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>The P900 won't be a quantum leap, very much an
>>evolution.
>
>A quantum leap is the "smallest possible change". Is that really what
>you meant?

That's a common misconception:

quantum jump,
1. Physics. an abrupt transition of a system described by quantum
mechanics from one of its discrete states to another, as the fall of an
electron in an atom to an orbit of lower energy.
2. any sudden and significant change, advance, or increase.
Also called quantum leap.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:


>That's a common misconception:

No, it's a correct interpretation, often thought to be a
misinterpretation by people with a poor grasp of physics.

You should be able to expect better in this newsgroup.

Iain
--

The Hairydog Guide to UK mobile phones
http://www.hairydog.co.uk/cell1.html

Michael Pronay <[email protected]> wrote:

>I know what you mean, but evidence is against you.

Clearly that dictionary is defective. Yes, a lot of people get it
wrong, and that is frequently what they think it means, but that is
NOT what it really does mean.

Iain
--

The Hairydog Guide to UK mobile phones
http://www.hairydog.co.uk/cell1.html

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.ericsson - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on Wed, 13 Aug 2003 22:03:45
+0100, Iain Harrison <[email protected]> wrote:

>John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>That's a common misconception:
>
>No, it's a correct interpretation, often thought to be a
>misinterpretation by people with a poor grasp of physics.
>
>You should be able to expect better in this newsgroup.

You do get better here, as you did in this case. My definition is from the
respected Random House Unabridged Dictionary, and thus far you've presented
*nothing* to back up your contention, so it seems that you're the one out in
left field. ;-)

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

"Michael Pronay" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Iain Harrison <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >>The P900 won't be a quantum leap, very much an
> >>evolution.
>
> > A quantum leap is the "smallest possible change". Is that really
> > what you meant?
>
> I beg to differ.
>
> From the "Compact Oxford English Dictionary":
>
> <http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/quantumleap>
>
> | quantum leap
> | (also quantum jump)
> | *noun* a sudden large increase or advance.
>
> I know what you mean, but evidence is against you.

Other definitions from dictionary.com and m-w.com disagree with Oxford.
They leave out words that dictate either large or small. I am not a
physicist, but I think the term refers to an oddity about particles. The
important part of the definition is always a word like "sudden" or "abrupt,"
and the specific physical amount of change within a given time is not at all
significant compared to the fact that the particular type of change has
occurred at all. A good analogy using the term would refer to a complete
change in which any particular physical measurement is not the real issue.

With that in mind, Andrew's positioning of "quantum leap" opposite of
evolution makes the definition even clearer than Oxford, Webster, or others
have (assuming you have a sensible mind about evolution). Evolution is as
far from sudden and ubrupt as you can get, especially since the individual
organisms don't change, and each "step" along the way is no more than a
small refinement over the previous. Of course, this assumes that Andrew
meant to say what I am deducing he said, that the new product is not any
miraculous change over the old one, but will be gradually improved later
with updates.

Software-wise, a quantum leap would be the change between Win 3.1 and Win
95. Maybe they both sucked as far as we could measure, but the underlying
system was completely different (dos add-on vs a "real" operating system).


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.509 / Virus Database: 306 - Release Date: 8/12/2003

John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:

>My definition is from the
>respected Random House Unabridged Dictionary, and thus far you've presented
>*nothing* to back up your contention

There is nothing to present. It is what the word means: it is a very
specific term used in quantum physics, and there is no doubt whatever
about that meaning.

Iain
--

The Hairydog Guide to UK mobile phones
http://www.hairydog.co.uk/cell1.html

"Carl." <[email protected]> wrote:

>Software-wise, a quantum leap would be the change between Win 3.1 and Win
>95.

No, a quantum leap is literally an electron switching from one orbit
to the next orbit: they can't go "half an orbit": it is the smallest
step possible, and only seems sudden because the electron has to be
in one orbit or the other, not in between.

So the analogy would be to go from win 3.1 to win 3.11.

Iain
--

The Hairydog Guide to UK mobile phones
http://www.hairydog.co.uk/cell1.html

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.ericsson - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on Wed, 13 Aug 2003 23:06:46
+0100, Iain Harrison <[email protected]> wrote:

>John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>My definition is from the
>>respected Random House Unabridged Dictionary, and thus far you've presented
>>*nothing* to back up your contention
>
>There is nothing to present. ...

I didn't think so. Case closed.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

Iain Harrison wrote:
> "Carl." <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Software-wise, a quantum leap would be the change between Win 3.1 and Win
>>95.
>
>
> No, a quantum leap is literally an electron switching from one orbit
> to the next orbit: they can't go "half an orbit": it is the smallest
> step possible, and only seems sudden because the electron has to be
> in one orbit or the other, not in between.
>
> So the analogy would be to go from win 3.1 to win 3.11.
>
> Iain

Yawn...pedantry never suited anyone.

It seems that what we arguing over here can probably be best summarised
as "small change, big difference".

Unfortunately, all too often in IT, what we get is the exact opposite
i.e. a complete redesign for no apparent benefit.

RM

"Iain Harrison" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Carl." <[email protected]> wrote:
<snip>
> No, a quantum leap is literally an electron switching from one orbit
> to the next orbit: they can't go "half an orbit": it is the smallest
> step possible, and only seems sudden because the electron has to be
> in one orbit or the other, not in between.

I always thought Quantum Leap was a rather enjoyable TV show from a few
years back starring Scott Baccula.
:-)
--
>>> Unlock Your Phones Potential <<<
>>> http://www.thephonelocker.co.uk <<<
>>> http://www.uselessinfo.org.uk <<<

"Richard Colton" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:QZy_a.165092$B%[email protected]...
>
> "Iain Harrison" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > "Carl." <[email protected]> wrote:
> <snip>
> > No, a quantum leap is literally an electron switching from one orbit
> > to the next orbit: they can't go "half an orbit": it is the smallest
> > step possible, and only seems sudden because the electron has to be
> > in one orbit or the other, not in between.
>
> I always thought Quantum Leap was a rather enjoyable TV show from a few
> years back starring Scott Baccula.
> :-)

It was just "OK," but I watched it every day anyway. A-Team, Renegade,
McGyver, etc. All those lame shows, and I watched every episode.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.509 / Virus Database: 306 - Release Date: 8/12/2003