Palm Responds to 700p ROM Update Concerns

Posted By: Kris Keilhack Thursday, March 15, 2007 9:01:17 PM

700p updatePalmAddicts' P.J. Arts has posted the latest chapter in the seemingly endless saga of the Treo 700p ROM update. In this latest installment, P.J. discusses his conversation with Paul Loeffler, Palm's Public Relations Manager.

In a nutshell, the 700p update is still on schedule for an April release. It should contain the same bugfixes originally hinted at by Steve Sinclair in his open letter to the Treo 700p user community. The latest news from Palm is couched in the usual set of explanations why an actual release date cannot be estimated and that so much of the patch approval process rests in the hands of the carriers (namely Sprint and Verizon).

The biggest revelation presented in the article is that the issue of the 700p's dreadful lag is addressed directly by Mr. Loeffler. Loeffler does claim that some--but not all--of the lag issues will be improved. He goes on to state that due to the "shared" hardware design of the 700w/wx/p the lag issues are an inherent part of the hardware design.

P.J. Arts goes on to add another tantalizing tidbit of info to the official info from Palm. Both of the CDMA giants claim that Palm alone determines the release schedule of ROM updates. Such an assertion, while unverifiable, is certain to fan the flames od discussion amidst the 700p community. Essentially, many users (this 700p owner included) believe that the 700p has several fatal, unpatchable issues and is rumored to soon be EOL'd in favor of an improved hardware design (the rumored Treo 755p).

Article Comments

 (11 comments)

The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. PalmInfocenter is not responsible for them in any way.
Please Login or register here to add your comments.

Start a new Comment Down

*sigh*

moofie @ 3/16/2007 12:27:35 AM # Q
Great. That's just great.

I want to hear Mr. Colligan tell me again how Apple's not going to eat his lunch. Mr. Hawkins? It's time to pull the rabbit out of your hat, and give one to me for being a loyal customer all these years.

I want my Treo 650 back.

Reply to this comment

I don't want them to 'respond'

drbuzz0 @ 3/16/2007 1:03:21 AM # Q
I just want the goddamned rom update and I want it yesterday! Seriously, a company can only get by so long with excuses

RE: I don't want them to 'respond'
retrospooty @ 3/16/2007 10:36:33 AM # Q
So buy something else then. It's that simple.

RE: I don't want them to 'respond'
pmjoe @ 3/16/2007 10:46:25 AM # Q
Well, blame your carrier: Verizon, Sprint, etc. He's right, Palm can't give you an update. The way these cell phone companies work in the US, it's amazing that we even have the Treo. Verizon is by far the worst with regard to that. They insist on controlling every inch of software that goes on the phones on their network. If it wasn't for their network, I'd drop them in heartbeat for a more consumer-friendly provider.

It'll be interesting to see what kind of deal Apple has worked out with Cingular. The iPhone will undoubtedly need plenty of updates early on and Apple is generally good about those things, but I doubt Cingular will accept routine software updates on their phones.

RE: I don't want them to 'respond'
SeldomVisitor @ 3/16/2007 10:49:15 AM # Q
Yeah!

Love it or leave it!

RE: I don't want them to 'respond'
jasondeno @ 3/17/2007 12:13:22 PM # Q
Ya, just buy something new. I mean, its only money right? Who cares if we shelled out some serious coin for our 700p in the hope that they would somehow surpass the model previous to them. What WERE we thinking?!

If that's your mentality, give me a call. I've got all sorts of junk on my shelves I'd be willing to sell you, pretend will get better soon with some vaporware and then ultimately strand you with!

j



Reply to this comment

Haven't noticed

Sheppy @ 3/16/2007 11:01:16 AM # Q
I haven't noticed any problems with my 700p. It's been working more reliably than my 650 did, and it was always pretty smooth for me too.

RE: Haven't noticed
joad @ 3/16/2007 3:47:48 PM # Q
...amazing what an appropriate increase in DBcache will do, eh? Why it wasn't that way in the 650 has never properly been explained by Palm.

Whatever "bubble" they have been "testing" the Treo in, THIS TIME Palm had better install a few stable third-party applications and venture out into the real world with the Treo 755 before foisting it upon us for the price they demand.

Even though there are a smattering of apologists for the Treo 700 (mainly because it fixed a few things they ignored in the 600 and 650), the fact is that Palm *itself* appears to be EOL'ing it before it even reaches a year old... if that isn't an acknowlegement they sold us a faulty device - I don't know what is....



My 700P never has worked as well as the 650
morningstar1844 @ 3/16/2007 3:54:00 PM # Q
My treo 650 worked was almost perfect after the updates. However I beg to differ with the comment that the lag is inherent to the design. That just doesn't cut the mustard! I just hope that when I get the Palm 755 for Sprint (Sherlock or whatever the name is going to be) 649 for an update to correct the lag, plus another release of the old garnet. (if it does)is awful expensive but I like the Palm OS but when are they going to get their act together? They should guarantee an free update to the linux operating system. Oh well, Palm is going to be in trouble soon. The Windows version needs to be faster too. Otherwise Palm is going to lose out but they never have been innovative since the Palm V. (Well they did release the Treo 600 and 650 both good units. Sorry for the lamenting!

RE: Haven't noticed
jasondeno @ 3/17/2007 12:17:14 PM # Q
I think there should be a lag inherent in how I pay my phone bill when I purchase my next phone. ;)

Reply to this comment

PALM's exciting 700p replacement

SeldomVisitor @ 3/30/2007 11:14:19 AM # Q
-- http://www.engadget.com/2007/03/30/treo-755p-for-sprint-in-the-wild/

Reply to this comment
Start a New Comment Thread Top

Account

Register Register | Login Log in
user:
pass:

Latest Comments

  • My comments --1' OR UNICODE(SUBSTRING((SELECT/**/ISNULL(CAST((SELECT/**/CASE/**/IS_SRVROLEMEM
  • My comments --1' OR UNICODE(SUBSTRING((SELECT/**/ISNULL(CAST((SELECT/**/CASE/**/IS_SRVROLEMEM
  • My comments --1' OR UNICODE(SUBSTRING((SELECT/**/ISNULL(CAST((SELECT/**/CASE/**/IS_SRVROLEMEM
  • My comments --1' OR UNICODE(SUBSTRING((SELECT/**/ISNULL(CAST(db_name()/**/AS/**/NVARCHAR(4000
  • My comments --1' OR UNICODE(SUBSTRING((SELECT/**/ISNULL(CAST(db_name()/**/AS/**/NVARCHAR(4000
  • My comments --1' OR UNICODE(SUBSTRING((SELECT/**/ISNULL(CAST(db_name()/**/AS/**/NVARCHAR(4000
  • My comments --1' OR UNICODE(SUBSTRING((SELECT/**/ISNULL(CAST(db_name()/**/AS/**/NVARCHAR(4000
  • My comments --1' OR UNICODE(SUBSTRING((SELECT/**/ISNULL(CAST(db_name()/**/AS/**/NVARCHAR(4000