White
Paper on Palm vs. Win CE
Copyright © 1999 EDECAP
Services
|
Palm Sized Computer
Operating Systems: Abstract In recent months, Microsoft has taken solid aim at the Palm Size Computer market with devices by numerous manufacturers running the Windows CE Operating System. This is in direct response to the phenomenal success of the 3Com/Palm Computing Family of Connected Organizers which run the Palm Operating System (Palm OS). Advertising and literature for these Windows CE devices touts the numerous benefits of the Windows CE over the Palm OS in Palm Sized Computers. Manufacturers tout the Hardware advantages of their Palm Size PC’s over the Palm III Organizer. These advantages include higher resolution screens, increased memory, advanced connectivity options, voice recording and recognition, and smoother integration with desktop computers. On the surface, Palm Sized Devices running the Windows CE Operating System appear to be vastly superior to the 3Com Palm Computing Family. But is it? If one goes strictly by the numbers, the Palm Computing line currently outsells ALL Competing CE devices combined by a margin of nearly 2-1. Further, software developers for the Palm OS are much more prevalent than their CE counterparts. It can be stated categorically that the Windows CE Operating System is, in itself, a much more robust operating system than the 3Com Palm OS. It is in the comparison of these operating systems in the context of the Palm Sized PC that one realizes that Windows CE falls short of the 3Com Palm OS. This document seeks to objectively examine the claims made by Microsoft relative to the Palm Size PC, and to define why Windows CE may not be the right choice for those requiring a Personal Digital Assistant of this type. Comparison How does one compare the Windows CE platform to the Palm III? The question is not as rhetorical as it appears on the surface. Windows CE is designed to run on numerous devices ranging from Car Radios to Sub-Notebook Computer Systems. The Palm OS is designed to run on Personal Information management devices. Microsoft licenses CE to any portable device manufacturer, while 3Com limits Palm OS to devices of a common design and form factor. For the purposes of this document, we will seek to compare the 3Com Palm III Connected Organizer to its Windows CE Brethren based upon the claims made by Microsoft on their web site. This information can found on the Internet at www.microsoft.com/windowsce/ppc/basics/compare.asp. In their comparison table (shown on the next page), they tout the hardware and software superiority of the Palm Sized PC to the Palm III. To the average person, this comparison would indicate that Windows CE in a Palm Size PC is preferable to the Palm III running the Palm OS. But is the comparison realistic? Let’s examine the claims in detail and see what exists beneath the surface. Comparison Chart for Palm Devices Source: www.microsoft.com/windowsce/ppc/basics/compare.asp
In comparing these devices it is important to remember that Palm Computing and Microsoft both market their solutions as extensions to the desktop PC, not replacements for it. The average purchaser for these devices is looking for a way to carry information from the desktop environment in a format that is readily accessible, and easy to understand. Data entry and collection is a secondary consideration to the function of allowing the user to access critical information conveniently while out of the office. Further, as an extension of the desktop computer, the method by which data is synchronized to and from the Palm Device must be seamless and effectively transparent to the user. Solutions must include support for local and remote data synchronization from desktop to device to desktop. Field data entry or capture for a palm-size device must be simple and intuitive. Primarily, the average user will enter data in the field using a pen-like stylus through some sort of handwriting recognition system. With these requirements in mind, let’s examine each of the Microsoft claims in detail: Manufacturer Microsoft makes the point that more companies manufacturing product of this class means more support for their operating system. They list 6 manufacturers for Windows CE Devices to 3 for the Palm OS. In fact, they missed two manufacturers for their OS, and one for the Palm OS. Compaq has recently announced a Palm Device powered by Windows CE, while QualComm now makes a Digital Cellular Phone which integrates email, paging, web access and PIM features and utilizes the Palm OS. But is more really better? 3Com insists that the licensees of the PALM OS retain the form factor and functionality of the Palm III. Microsoft provides guidelines for the Palm Size PC format running Windows CE, but allows licensees to design with the features and functions they deem best for their target client. Many of these designs now have an "everything but the kitchen sink" format with an array of buttons, dials, switches and menus on every surface of the device. Further, there is no standardization of the graphic description of these controls or their placement on the device. The Everex Freestyle series has 10 separate controls arrayed on the sides and face of the device. Compare this to a mere 7 on the Palm III, all located on the face of the device (except for the contrast knob). Their justification is that this makes the device usable with one hand. In fact, the positioning of these controls is cumbersome, and decidedly unfriendly to that percentage of the population cursed by left-handedness. Further, in low light or crowded conditions, identifying the proper button can be extremely difficult. Operating System Microsoft defines Windows CE as an operating system designed to be the basis for "many radically different types of devices". In theory, this allows developers to "pick and choose" those features consistent with the size and function of your device. While this does provide support for a greater range of devices, it takes a toll in overhead. Based upon the Win32 Application Programming Interface, the Win CE kernel is an order of magnitude larger that the Palm OS. The Windows CE goal is to provide a standard by which device builders can interface with existing systems and utilize a pool of development expertise already available. In practice, the very complexity of the Win32 API limits development of even simpler applications in the Palm Sized Computer Arena to those with extensive programming skills. This is both proven and contrasted by the sheer number of "regular users" who have developed and deployed robust applications for the Palm OS Platform. A simple internet search will show that developers of every level are rapidly developing and deploying applications for the Palm OS ranging from simple arcade games to robust and extensive enterprise applications. The question is not one of the capabilities of Windows CE, but rather its suitability to Palm Size Personal Digital Assistants. Our company is currently developing a number of Enterprise applications for Windows CE devices of a larger form factor, such as the Vadem™ Clio™ or the Sharp® TriPad™. In these larger devices, Windows CE is a stable and robust development platform. In smaller devices, the overhead inherent in the operating system is problematic at best. These problems most often manifest themselves in shortened battery life, data collection and memory utilization problems, as well as user interface issues. Price The prices listed on the Microsoft Comparison Chart are now out of date. The Palm III has just been cut in price by a substantial margin. Comparing prices in the current market shows that the Palm III, the "high end" Palm OS device, is very price competitive with its "low end" Win CE counterparts. Comparing by storage capability, the Palm III is substantially less expensive than a comparable Window CE Device. In terms of the number of contacts that can be stored on each device, the Palm III at an average street price of $280.00 compares extremely well with the larger, heavier Philips Nino 300 at just over $350.00 (without modem). Further, software prices for third party applications is much lower for the Palm OS than the Win CE OS. This is attributable to the relative ease of development and integration for the Palm OS compared to Windows. There are vastly more shareware applications for the Palm OS than Windows, and many more web sites devoted to this platform for hardware, software and support. RAM Windows CE devices have a minimum of 4 Megabytes of RAM, and more frequently 16 MB. The Palm III by comparison seems wildly outclassed at a mere 2MB of RAM. Again, the comparison fails to survive scrutiny. The latest variation of the Palm Computing Operating System consumes (including Serial and IR Communications) consumes 86,000 bytes of memory. Subtract this from the available 2,000,000 bytes and you are left with 1,914,000 bytes for programs, data, utilities, etc. Contrast this with the Everex A-10 Associate, which utilizes 1,300,000 bytes of memory of the available 4,000,000 for the system alone! You could argue that even with the operating system being 15 times larger, that the Everex still has more remaining memory available for applications and data. Sadly, this is not the case. Remember that the Windows CE operating system is based upon the Win32 API. This means that all programs and data formats must conform to and recognize this Applications Program Interface. For this reason, even with the additional remaining RAM, the Windows CE device can store just over 1/3 the amount of the same types of data as the Palm III. Further, this need for increased RAM takes a serious toll in battery longevity which we examine later in this document.
The presentation of data in this format tries to emulate the Windows Desktop Interface in look and feel, but instead compresses the view into a tiny and confusing display. Contrast this with the screen of the Palm III, which presents applications as icons, and allows users to change font sizes within programs to suit viewer preferences. In the photo to the right, we can see the relative differences in presentation of the desktop to the users for a palm sized CE device (left) and the 3Com Palm III (right) The larger Windows CE display is substantially reduced by the writing area, when in use. Further, the use of "Windows-esque" tool and scroll bars additionally depletes the useable area of the screen. The graffiti writing area of the Palm Computing Line is a fixed size, and does not impinge upon the display. In terms of back lights, all PDA's have electro-luminescent backlights. However, the larger display and higher resolution of the Windows CE Devices takes a greater toll on battery life than the Palm Computing Devices. Input Methods The primary method for entering data directly to the 3Com Palm III is through a text recognition system called Graffiti. This system, which uses characters similar to printed text to enter data easy to learn and can be used to rapidly enter data. For those who prefer, the Palm III also has a "soft-keyboard" which presents the user with a keyboard on the screen which he "taps" for each letter. New users invariably start with the keyboard, and migrate to graffiti as the become more familiar with the unit. Various studies put the learning curve for Graffiti at anywhere from 20 minutes to 1 day, depending on the publisher and the motive. We have found through our training classes that the average person can be taught Graffiti in a single 1/2 day session and will be fairly proficient after only a week of use. On Windows CE Devices, the user is given a greater range of choices for data entry. Of these, the handwriting recognition systems are both similar to graffiti. One, called Jot, is said to be more intuitive than graffiti. While this is arguable, those who have a preference will find that there is a version of Jot available for the Palm OS. All of these methods allow for fairly rapid data entry, but you would not want to use any to write a letter on your Palm. Then again, referring to the mission for these devices we note that this is not something we would want to do anyway. Remember, these devices are extensions of the desktop, not replacements for it. Palm devices are used to collect data (such as notes) which is transmitted to the desktop to be manipulated. For entering large amounts of data into any palm sized device, it is much simpler to enter the data on the desktop computer and "sync" it to the palm computer. Of note, Win CE Devices do support recording of voice messages. A very nice feature, but is memory intensive and uses a lot of battery life. There is at least one add on device for the Palm Computing platform which allows for recording of voice messages. Called Jet-Talker, it includes the self powered recording unit and integration software. For the Palm Computing Family, there is now available a keyboard manufactured by GoType. This keyboard allows the user to directly enter data into their PDA. The cost for this device is approximately $80.00. Please note that, once again, the vast developer support for the Palm Computing products has resulted in a greater choice of options via third parties than the Windows CE units. Both Palm OS and Windows CE Support E-Mail. Microsoft claims superiority in the fact that their e-mail supports group scheduling and file attachment. However, the group scheduling support functions only with their native product line (Outlook), and attachment support is memory intensive. Palm Sized Devices are Personal Information Managers, which means that the schedule on the PIM is YOUR schedule. With a wide array of third party support, Palm III users can have access to group scheduling features across a wider range of desktop or network platforms. For example, using Intellisync by Puma Technology, a Palm OS user could coordinate schedules, notes, e-mail, etc with the Macintosh computer they have at home, the Windows 3.1 workstation at their desk running cc:Mail, the Mainframe at the home office, and their secretary's Windows 98 Workstation. Windows CE does not support nor integrate with any operating system other than Windows 95, 98, or NT 4.0 Calendar, Contact, Tasks All of these devices have calendar, contact and task functions integrated into the device. The primary advantage of the Palm OS over the Windows CE Line is in connectivity. While you would expect the Windows CE device running Pocket Outlook to seamlessly integrate to the Windows 95/98/NT Outlook, this is not the case. Pocket Outlook truncates field lengths in the data transfer. Further, while it is fairly easy to integrate CE with Windows 95/98/NT, there is not support for other operating systems, including Windows 3.x, Macintosh, Unix/Linux, or OS400. Palm Computing offers desktop applications and synchronization for all of these platforms at little or no cost. Further, by using any of a vast number of third party software components the Palm OS can seamlessly integrate with all major desktop information managers on the market including Outlook, Lotus, and ACT. The Palm OS is clearly superior in the integration of dissimilar information manager software packages. This is important in large scale or enterprise deployments where different offices use different calendar, contact or task-management software. Further, users can easily synchronize with their home computers as well as their office computers regardless of type. This reduces overhead and support for IT managers. Industry Standard Infrared Port Windows uses the industry standard IrDA infrared communications protocol. The Palm III uses a proprietary Ir Protocol. The reason is that the Palm Computing team identified that the primary use of Ir was to share information between like devices. The Palm Ir port supports the "beaming" of files and applications from unit to unit, while Windows CE supports printer output, direct Ir output, and Infrared data synchronization. Once again, the simplicity of the Palm OS programming interface has led to several freeware and shareware applications supporting IrDA protocol standards. It has also led to the development of shareware which allows the Palm III to be used as a universal remote control for stereo and TV equipment, and a universal Ir "lock-pick" for Ir controlled door locks on newer vehicles. Consultants within our company regularly utilize both the proprietary Infrared communication as well as the Freeware IrDA software to communicate with other devices. Voice Recorder Windows CE Palm Devices do include a Voice recorder which can record and save voice input as wave or Audio files. While on the lower-end CE devices the voice quality is marginal, higher end devices have exceptional quality. This is one area where the CE devices do have an advantage over Palm III's. For the Palm OS, there is an add-on device called the Jet-Talker which attaches to the Palm III and has exceptional quality. The downside of using voice recording with any palm device is that voice files use up RAM at a prodigious rate. The voice system is also intensive in terms of battery use. In fact, one Windows CE device manufacturer goes so far as to advise against "unnecessary use" of the voice recording and playback system in order to avoid "rapid" loss of battery power. Pocket Streets Included with the CE devices is a software product called Pocket Streets, which allows users to look up street addresses and view maps for selected regions on the device. Palm Computing is now bundling Trekware maps software with the Palm III, which is analogous to Pocket Streets. Both platforms also support numerous third party mapping software and will integrate with common GPS receivers. Compact Flash Slot for Additional Storage Microsoft builds this support into CE. Palm does not. The main reason is that the Palm memory utilization attenuates the need for additional storage for most users. Socket Services for a flask slot add unnecessary overhead to the unit and slow the processor down appreciably. Again, it is an issue of mission. Palm avoids needlessly complicating its OS and concentrates on making the unit simple, fast, and intuitive for the user. Synchronization Microsoft touts their synchronization as automatic. They are correct in that as soon as one connects the unit to the docking cradle it tries to synchronize. In actuality, the setup and administration of the CE synchronization process is less than easy. In fact, in operating systems other than Win 95, 98 or NT it is not even possible. As to the "manual" nature of the Palm OS Synchronization, even the greenest neophyte can learn to press a SINGLE button. With the Palm OS, synchronization setup is easier and the synchronization process more transparent to the user than with Windows CE. Microphone See previous comments regarding Voice Recording. AC Adapter Correct. The Palm Computing Family dos not have an AC Adapter. When you can run for a month on a single pair of AAA Alkaline batteries, you don't need one. Even with heavy use, I have never had to replace a set of batteries in my Palm III more than twice in a single month. No AC Adapter means there is one less hardware piece to lose for the user. For the reasons enumerated throughout this text, Windows CE drains power at a prodigious rate. The need to be able to tap into AC Power is not something that a Palm Computer User likes to brag about. Rechargeable Batteries OK, let's sum it up. Windows CE uses up batteries at a rate exponentially higher than the Palm III. It does this because the Operating System and associated files take up more memory. Memory requires electricity. Windows CE Palm Devices use rechargeable batteries because they MUST. Our Everex Associate can not run for a long business day without being recharged. Our Palm III's go WEEKS on a pair of Energizer AAA's. I applaud the marketing department at Microsoft for marketing a liability as a feature. Summary Windows CE is an excellent operating system. It is stable, can be loaded onto devices with a form factor smaller than a notebook, and provides a programming interface for a slew of consumer products. In terms of a personal digital assistant, it is slower, less efficient and more cumbersome than the Palm OS. This is why, in spite of a media blitz, the Palm Computing Line of connected organizers outsell their CE Counterparts by a wide margin. There is a much greater pool of enterprise and development products available for the Palm OS than the CE OS. Most importantly, the acquisition costs and learning curve for the Palm Computing products is much less than a comparable CE deployment. If the user needs dictate a Pen Based Computing Solution with a sub-notebook form factor, consider CE. But if you need a PDA in a Palm Sized form factor with great potential in the enterprise, the clear choice is the Palm Computing line. Sometimes you just have to look beyond the hype to see the facts.
|
