The main reason to consider using a handheld computer is its degree
of portability. Since size of larger computers can add to ease of use
in terms of data entry (keyboards), data retrieval (bigger, easier to
read screens) and general power, a computer with limitations is preferable
for one of, or a combination of the following reasons:
As you might expect, I'm often asked what people should look for in handheld devices. Over the past year, my advice has been shifting, and I thought I'd list some of the changes that have occurred and why.
First, it is becoming clear that handheld devices "in heavy use" should not be expected to last more than 3 years, and in some cases possibly less than 2 years. I currently define heavy use as probably more than a half hour per day of data entry. This number is not fully researched, but going back to my earliest use of Newtons, that number seems to be significant. Less than a half hour per day of data entry with more than an hour of use is possible if you are using the device mainly as a reader. But reading doesn't wear out the data entry parts.
The screens of my Newtons are still functioning perfectly, but one has a major scratch. On the other hand, as far as I can tell, the touch sensor layer on my Palm IIIx eventually became faulty. By the time that happened, the case of the Palm was getting "soggy" and buss seemed to be getting erratic, so I had to replace the whole unit. Moreover, the Newton system required spreading the workload over the whole screen while current handhelds focus more on the lower part of the screen. I don't know how long the Newton screens would have lasted, but it would not have surprised me if it would have lasted about twice as long under the same workload. I still have the Newtons, but since I don't really use them anymore, the fact that they still work doesn't say anything useful. Other brands of handhelds do not appear to be made in a way that would last significantly longer than the Palm.
Since I don't expect these devices to last more than 2 - 3 years, I have changed my mind about batteries a bit. I still prefer replaceable standard size batteries (like AA and AAA), but built-in rechargeable packs are not quite as high a negative as before. While I still expect such battery packs to wear out, it now appears more likely that they will last about as long as the rest of the device. However, there is still the issue of maintaining charge.
The problem with a built in rechargeable battery is that if you forget to recharge it over night, and you don't have a *very* long battery life, then it could go bad during the day. The problem becomes worse if you are travelling and forget your recharge kit. I still think the best idea is to use standard size batteries and use an external recharger.
One thing that hasn't changed yet is that monochrome is still preferable over colour units. But that is in the process of changing. Reflective colour screens are almost as good as monochrome. They are not as bright indoors as backlighted screens, but they are usable outdoors. But at this time some people find them "annoyingly dim and hard to use in almost all situations" (the angle of view tends to be narrower).
My first impression of these screens is mixed. I can understand the criticism, but in the cases where I've seen them demo'd it only took a moment for my eyes to adjust and get the angle right. They didn't seem that bad. But I really need to use one for at least a month "in the real world" to know for sure.
[2001/05/09]
One piece of advice that I use to give to people getting into computers which contradicted many enthusiasts was that "if you can't afford two, then you probably can't afford one." I'm not talking about the advice that you should decide how much you need and then double the amount. Even that is an underestimation.
When most enthusiasts say that, they are just thinking about all the stuff that you don't anticipate, such as additional software which adds capability, or unforseen missing pieces in the original budget. No, I meant literally that it was predictable that things would break and there was a really good chance that when you needed something, you might not be able to get what you needed, so literally, you needed to buy a backup system. To an extent you could simple keep the money budgeted and go out and buy it when needed, but in some cases, it was wise to buy the backup piece immediately, or as soon as it became apparent that there might be a shortage.
This weekend I was reminded of that advice doubly. First, as I finally got around to replacing a computer that died roughly on May 29, 2000. As you can tell, I had another computer which took its place. And while I was trying to put together the new computer that was replacing that computer, I had problems with a new motherboard. In effect, I needed a spare motherboard to check the parts that were going to populate the new motherboard. I didn't literally have that perfect a testing rig, but instead, I had an another old computer that at least confirmed what I needed to confirm. But literally, I needed another computer just to test the parts.
Ironically, while I was in the middle of building the new
computer, my Palm IIIx, yes, the refurb that replaced my
original Palm IIIx only a few months ago, started to go
bad. It happened rapidly with a series of fatal exceptions.
So late last night and today, I ran tests and tried to fix
the Palm IIIx. In fact, it seems that either the TRG
Xtra Xtra Pro memory expansion card has gone bad or the
Palm IIIx's buss has gone bad. The Palm IIIx seems to
be working perfectly without the expansion board.
Unfortunately, I need the extra memory now. But how do I
know which is the culprit? Do I send my Xtra Xtra Pro
card back to TRG or do I take my Palm IIIx back to Palm's
service depot? Practically, I think I'll take my Palm
back first. But I'll feel bad if I waste their time and
it's not the problem. But I have no way of testing it
on my own. To do it, I'd really need to have another
Palm IIIx and another Xtra Xtra Pro card. Moreover, it's
hard to predict how long it'll take before I have the unit
running properly again. So I should really have a spare,
even aside from trying to debug the problem on my own.
"If you can't afford two, then you can't afford one."
[2001/06/03]
I was discussing the eMate 300 a couple of days ago and one advantage that I pointed out was that it doesn't require the immediate learning of "disk discipline". "Disk discipline" is a generic term I coined to cover the proper usage of storage media which includes formatting media, storing files, making copies and backups, reorganizing data on media, purchasing media, handling and storing media and rechecking archival media.
Those are a lot of concepts. The advantage of the eMate 300 is not that it avoids all these issues forever -- you can't really, but that you don't have to learn them early on. You can start immediately using an eMate 300 and not even bother to learn "saving" data. In most cases, data is "saved" automatically by the application. Thanks to this automatic data storing and Flash memory "virtual media", there's a very good chance that you won't actually lose data until the whole unit dies or some similar tragedy occurs.
Eventually you will have entered so much data that you will want a backup for the usual reasons. But think about the first time you used a computer. I expect that the first thing most people are taught is how to save a file. That's necessary because we presume that we are going to shut off the machine. Most computers lose their data when this happens. In some cases you might have automatic saving of changes, which might occur on a timed basis, but with many programs, shutting off the computer without specifically saving your work means a complete loss. It might have been days before you really got any substantial work done.
But with the eMate 300 you can immediately start learning the
word processor, or the spreadsheet, or the calendar, and leave
learning about media for "later." This isn't just good for
children. It's good for any beginner because it's much more
gratifying to start working on something useful than learning
to worry about whether you should save a file when you close it.
[1997/06/06]
The first computers in this size range were the Sharp and Tandy "PC" computers. The "PC" stood for "Pocket Computer". Then IBM came along and messed all that up by calling their desktop computer a "Personal Computer." This was the first really stupid piece of useless jargon created by marketing people that we'll consider. Why was it called a "personal" computer? If a corporation buys it, it's not "personal". The corporation can allow any number of people to work on it. "Desktop" computer was a more accurate description. "Personal" was just warm and fuzzy. But mindless writers latched onto it and the whole class of desktop and deskside computers tends to be labelled this way But notice that I have good terms to use in writing without the word "personal". It's utter nonsense.
I may be a bit inaccurate about who did what after that, but as far as I can remember, Panasonic came out with their "Handheld Computer" (HHC) which was a 6502 based unit. It competed against the Tandy PC-2 and Sharp PC-1500. I felt the HHC name was a good "class" name. Again, we were back into accurately descriptive names. You could use it while holding it in your hand.
The Hewlett-Packard coined "palmtop" was a class name that I think fizzled. I'm a bit thankful. The first "palmtop", the HP-95LX was NOT a "palmtop" computer. Look at the ad pictures and the only way they could fit it on an open hand was to include your fingers. The palm of your hand does NOT include your fingers. Otherwise, it's just another handheld, but more reasonably "pocketable". So we're more legitimately looking at "pocket" computers. Ironically, now that the term is pretty much dead, there are some TRUE palmtop computers -- depending on the size of your hand. The PalmPilot is close to being a true "palmtop" computer.
The "PDA" (Personal Digital Assistant). is a sad story. I really hated this term when it came out. Basically, it was coined by Apple, and possibly by Scully himself. I took it as a measure of how "out - of - touch" some people were getting. Consider a dialogue between me an a hypothetical Newton enthusiast of the day (the Newton Enthusiast's comments can be recognized by the exclamation marks): What is it? It helps you "organize" yourself! Oh, it's an "organizer". No no! It's better than just another organizer! You'll be able to hook it up to wire services with radio Modems! Uh, actually a dedicated pager is more convenient, and HP's pocket computer can use pretty much any PCMCIA card for anything like that as well as a Newton. It's still better! Oh? How? It's easier to use because it works the way YOU work! How? It recognizes your handwriting! Uh, actually, I type faster than I can write. Yeah, but most people can't! Uh, actually, most people who would use these devices probably CAN type, or will be able to learn fast enough. Ask your mother how long it took you to learn how to write. It probably took you about 2 - 4 years. Typing takes about a month to learn, and "a few" months to build up speed.
I could go on, but the pattern is the same. So a PDA is a handheld computer with a debatable interface. The latest Newtons are really good. I like them and will continue to buy them, and in truth, I don't really mind the "PDA" term as much anymore, but the term can die without any regrets on my part.
HPC -- Nuts! Lose this term fast. They are more legitimately "personal"
computers than the original "Personal Computers", but it's redundant.
How are they more "personal"? They're more personal because you can have
them with you all the time, and because of this, they will also be
exclusively used by one person. The reason you can have them with you all
the time is because of the degree of portability. They are small enough
to carry. They are hand-holdable. In fact, some are reasonably
"pocketable". Hey, we're back at "Pocket Computers" again . . . !
[1997/08/31]