Most recent comments


See all comments
Leave your own comments

Nickname: Stephanie H.
Review: I have a Sprint TREO 600. We used to have pop email accounts and everything was cool. Now we've moved to a MS Outlook Client Server and I've stopped getting email on the TREO. My tech guys said you have to buy the 700 to get email now, but I could swear I was getting email on my TREO even when I had my former email which had a c/s set up. How can I figure all of this out?
Date reviewed: Aug 18, 2006 7:30 PM
Nickname: Kam
Review: I was talking about the actual screen size where it's actually large enough for one to see without using a magnifying glass. PPC has a larger diagonal screen. Palms have smaller screens so that they can be cute and small. Makes reading spreadsheets and legal docs a real pain with the Palms.
Date reviewed: Jul 3, 2006 5:56 PM
Nickname: Steve Wildstrom
Review: My bad. I was working off and old and erroneous spec sheet. The display on the 700w is indeed 240x240. But it remains true that Palm was forced to go to a lower-resolution display because Windows Mobile does not support 320x320.
Date reviewed: Jun 29, 2006 7:16 PM
Nickname: with above
Review: The screen on the 700w is 240*240 like mentioned by the commenter above. Please get your facts straight especially before negating someone else.
Date reviewed: Jun 29, 2006 5:49 AM
Nickname: Kam
Review: I love this column. Only Apples and Palms. No useful items. You want to do real work on a PDA/phone? Get a PPC6700. It has a crisp, clear screen big enough to be useful. I can review Excel spreadsheets and Word docs while on the road (software is included with Windows Mobile 5 OS). And with a free Adobe reader software installed, I can review legal docs, no prob. Try that with a Palm OS, especially with that make-believe screen of theirs. Hmmm. Come to think of it, Stick with the Apples and Palms. Some people need to look "fashionable" more than they need function.
Date reviewed: Jun 28, 2006 4:38 PM
Nickname: Brad
Review: This was written on a user level, not an enterprise level. There are huge advantages to the way the Windows Mobile 5 software is set up. This writer is not too thrilled with the Treo 700w, but it is the only one listed here that we will probably support. The 650 is great (I have one), but it doesn't automatically tie into our Exchange servers like the 700w does. And the Q (I understand -- never held one!) runs a lesser version of the Windows Mobile 5 platform, it doesn't have a touch screen, and its recent release was marred with lots of tech support and hardware problems. I also don't agree with your analysis of the access speed differences. Anyone want to go back to dialup? It's fine for short messages...
Date reviewed: Jun 28, 2006 3:48 PM
Nickname: bob
Review: None of them. Palm is old and lacking get a real toy. iPaq maybe? Upgrade and save yourself some frustration.
Date reviewed: Jun 28, 2006 2:34 PM
Nickname: Telecom Insider
Review: Sprint's Phone as Modem plans are $39.99 for Unlimited usage. Verizon's are $59.99. And Verizon charges $40.00 for the cable/software and they disable their bluetooth functionality. I'd go with Sprint.
Date reviewed: Jun 28, 2006 2:16 PM
Nickname: Chris
Review: Actually, Palm CEO Ed Colligan announced earlier this year that Palm would be releasing 4 new Palm Treo smartphones. With the 700w and 700p released, this leaves two smartphones coming this fall. The rumored new smartphones are said to be GSM based and will be carried by Cingular. For more info and comparisons between the Palm OS based Treo and Windows Treo 700w, check out http://www.everythingtreo.com/treo-700w-review/
Date reviewed: Jun 28, 2006 1:18 PM
Nickname: Screen Size
Review: Actually, Neil was right. According to http://www.palm.com/us/products/smartphones/treo700w/specs.html the screen on the Treo 700w is 240x240, not 320x240. It's a relatively new model, so it would be surprising if a newer one were to appear any time soon.
Date reviewed: Jun 28, 2006 7:39 AM
See all comments
Leave your own comments



The views and opinions expressed in these comments do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of BusinessWeek or the McGraw-Hill Companies.