Re: IPAQ Display

[André Somers]

Herbert Kilian wrote:


> Is there any new technology on the horizon that would address the
> situation without costing a fortune?

First of all, you need transflective screens, that is, with a frontlight.
The Sharp Zaurus series have these screens, and it is said that the screen
of the SL6000 is *really* good. Personally, I use the SL5600 while flying,
and I did not have problems reading the screen in the air.
However, it does not run windows CE, but linux. Winpilot, SeeYou Mobile and
the likes will not run. Cumulus will though ;-)

André

[Derrick Steed]

>>Herbert Kilian wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Is there any new technology on the horizon that would address the
>>> situation without costing a fortune?
>>
>>First of all, you need transflective screens, that is, with a frontlight.
>>The Sharp Zaurus series have these screens, and it is said that the screen
>>of the SL6000 is *really* good. Personally, I use the SL5600 while flying,
>>and I did not have problems reading the screen in the air.
>>However, it does not run windows CE, but linux. Winpilot, SeeYou Mobile
and
>>the likes will not run. Cumulus will though ;-)
>>
>>André
>>
>>
If you want a decent display now, get a IPAQ 3850 or 3870 off eBay (both the
same - '70 has bluetooth) - I have tested the 3870 in direct sunlight while
airborne and running the SeeYou demo and it is better than my Zaurus SL5500
running Cumulus (This does not detract from the functionality of Cumulus,
just the Zaurus screen being somewhat worse than the IPAQ screen - Cumulus
is definitely worth a look). DO NOT get one of the later IPAQ's with
transreflective screens - these are backlit and like the Palm Tungsten T3
almost impossible to view in direct sunlight.

It appears there is an answer on the horizon in the shape of OLED (Organic
LED) technology which an active light emitting technology, but is low power
apparently, maybe next year will see some hardware appearing with this type
of screen.

Rgds,

Derrick Steed

[Derrick Steed]

>> >Derrick Steed wrote in message news:...
>> > If you want a decent display now, get a IPAQ 3850 or 3870 off eBay
(both the
>> > same - '70 has bluetooth) - I have tested the 3870 in direct sunlight
while
>> > airborne and running the SeeYou demo and it is better than my Zaurus
SL5500
>> > running Cumulus
>> >> Derrick Steed
>>
>>
>Anyone know for sure if all the 38XX series use the same screen?
>
>
>Andy
>
Check the HP web site - the specs say the 38xx and earlier series use the
reflective screen - the screen technology changed when they moved to the
400MHz XScale processors in the 39xx series.

Rgds,

Derrick Steed

[Doug]

I've found that the biggest problem with the 3955 and ClearTouch is glare
from wearing a white or light colored shirt.

Doug


"Jamey Jacobs" > wrote in message
om...
> I've followed a few of these threads, and they generally concluded
> that the iPAQ 3955 was the "least bad" of the options, especially with
> the ClearTouch anti-glare screen. So I bought a 3955 and plan to
> install it in the traditional articulated panel mount approach in my
> new glider within the next month.
>
> However, I have not heard of success / failure with a shade hood. Has
> anyone tried this approach, or is the problem when the sun is coming
> from over your shoulder (thus a hood would be ineffective)?
>
> Thanks
> Jamey
>
> (Herbert Kilian) wrote in message
>...
> > After years of denial, I finally have to admit to myself what I've
> > know for a long time: the visibility of my IPAQ screen in sunlight
> > really sucks! I've tried a couple of 'anti-glare' shields without much
> > success and ultimately removed them, btw.

[Eric Greenwell]

Jamey Jacobs wrote:
> I've followed a few of these threads, and they generally concluded
> that the iPAQ 3955 was the "least bad" of the options, especially with
> the ClearTouch anti-glare screen. So I bought a 3955 and plan to
> install it in the traditional articulated panel mount approach in my
> new glider within the next month.
>
> However, I have not heard of success / failure with a shade hood. Has
> anyone tried this approach, or is the problem when the sun is coming
> from over your shoulder (thus a hood would be ineffective)?

I don't think a shade hood will help, based on my experience with a 3835
and a 2215 (same screen type as 3955, I'm told). The problem with the
2215 doesn't seem to be light washing out the screen, since full
sunlight on the screen makes it quite readable. The screen is hard to
read when there is sunlight, but it isn't directly on the screen,
perhaps because my pupils are contracted and the backlight isn't strong
enough. Under cloud, my pupils expand, and the backlight is adequate.

The 3835 screen is more visible in the glider cockpit in all situations
I've been in (don't know about night or cloud flying) than the 2215. I
prefer it, even though it's processor is as fast as the 2215.

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[PENN2P]

Easy, Easy solution to Your Ipaq problems. Go and get a Compaq Aero 1500 series
PDA. They are still available.

[Eric Greenwell]

PENN2P wrote:
> Easy, Easy solution to Your Ipaq problems. Go and get a Compaq Aero 1500 series
> PDA. They are still available.

It's easy, but I decided it's not a solution for running the newer
programs like Winpilot or SeeYou Mobile: the processor is slow, and the
gray level screen (instead of color) simply doesn't permit the programs
to display well the things I'd like to see. It is entirely adequate for
programs like Glide Navigator (formerly PocketNav), which I used and
liked for many years.

A better choice would be the 3100 series, with it's 15 level gray screen
and a faster processor. I examined one of those, but decided the 3800
series color display was much better for SeeYou Mobile (and probably
Winpilot, Strepla, and others that use color). A problem with the gray
level screen is contrast changes with temperature, leading to some
fussing with the contrast in flight and on the ground. I'm think the
3835 I have will be adequate (meaning - fast enough) until Ipaqs with
better screens are available. As a backup, I have a 2215, which is
useable in the cockpit but not as visible as the 3835. The 2215 will be
used for car and motorhome navigation in the meantime, for which it's
faster processor suits it well (and slots for CF and SD cards).

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Jim Kelly]

The Pocket-PC Windows environment has supported a four-fold higher
resolution at 640x480 pixels (and even landscape mode) for some
months now via `2003 Second Edition. HP have just produced a model
that takes advantage of these features, the HX4700 (aka HX4705).

Photos here:
http://www.ipaqabilities.com/iaforums/viewtopic.php?t=249

Specs here:
http://h18000.www1.hp.com/products/quickspecs/11982_div/11982_div.HTML

Queries:
* will the display work better in sunlight???
* will the new touchpad suit in-flight use???
* what old cables and accessories can be utilised???
* when will Win-Pilot (etc) work on this device???

I am attracted to:
* the 4" display (other iPaqs are 3.5" or 3.8")
* the higher resolution (four fold is a big jump)
* landscape mode might suit some space limitations better
* speaker on the front (H5xxx have poor sound)
* CF and SD memory cards (as many cameras use CF cards)
* `2003 Second Edition software (bug fixes and easier WiFi)

Any ideas/comments??

Cheers,

Jim Kelly





"Eric Greenwell" > wrote in message
...
PENN2P wrote:
> Easy, Easy solution to Your Ipaq problems. Go and get a Compaq
Aero 1500 series
> PDA. They are still available.

It's easy, but I decided it's not a solution for running the newer
programs like Winpilot or SeeYou Mobile: the processor is slow, and
the
gray level screen (instead of color) simply doesn't permit the
programs
to display well the things I'd like to see. It is entirely adequate
for
programs like Glide Navigator (formerly PocketNav), which I used and
liked for many years.

A better choice would be the 3100 series, with it's 15 level gray
screen
and a faster processor. I examined one of those, but decided the
3800
series color display was much better for SeeYou Mobile (and probably
Winpilot, Strepla, and others that use color). A problem with the
gray
level screen is contrast changes with temperature, leading to some
fussing with the contrast in flight and on the ground. I'm think the
3835 I have will be adequate (meaning - fast enough) until Ipaqs
with
better screens are available. As a backup, I have a 2215, which is
useable in the cockpit but not as visible as the 3835. The 2215 will
be
used for car and motorhome navigation in the meantime, for which
it's
faster processor suits it well (and slots for CF and SD cards).

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Eric Greenwell]

Jim Kelly wrote:

> The Pocket-PC Windows environment has supported a four-fold higher
> resolution at 640x480 pixels (and even landscape mode) for some
> months now via `2003 Second Edition. HP have just produced a model
> that takes advantage of these features, the HX4700 (aka HX4705).
>
> Photos here:
> http://www.ipaqabilities.com/iaforums/viewtopic.php?t=249
>
> Specs here:
> http://h18000.www1.hp.com/products/quickspecs/11982_div/11982_div.HTML
>
> Queries:
> * will the display work better in sunlight???

There is no substitute for putting on the glasses you use in the
cockpit, running the program you use, and holding the pda in your hand
outside in the sun. Turn slowly around, then step into the shade and
repeat. Currently, visibility is _King_, and this test will show you
what you need to know.

> * will the new touchpad suit in-flight use???

Also can be tested with the program of your choice. SeeYou Mobile (and
probably the other ones), can be placed entirely on an SD or CF card,
popped into the pda at the store, and given a try.

> * what old cables and accessories can be utilised???

Unimportant, considering the $600+ cost of the unit - $60 gets you the
right cable, if it needs a new one.

> * when will Win-Pilot (etc) work on this device???

It might already, since it works with the Toshiba e800, which also has a
4" VGA screen. Ditto for SeeYou Mobile.

>
> I am attracted to:
> * the 4" display (other iPaqs are 3.5" or 3.8")

The text box sizes are adjustable (at least with SeeYou Mobile and I
assume, Winpilot and others), so you end up with the same physical sized
boxes on all screens, just so you can see them comfortably. What the
bigger screen gives you is a bigger map. It shows exactly the same
thing, just bigger. It is a little less crowded, because the labels are
relatively smaller (though physically the same size) compared to the
map. Comparing my 2215 (3.5" screen) to my 3835 (3.8" screen), the
effect is noticeable but not striking to me. Going from a 3.8" to a 4"
screen would be unnoticeable, I think.

> * the higher resolution (four fold is a big jump)

I like the idea, but I can already see everything I want to see as
clearly as I need to. Unless you have excellent vision (so you can use
small fonts and keep the labels small) or study things like the terrain
closely in flight, I think there is no advantage for cockpit use. A
personal test is a must to determine any advantage - people's vision and
preferences vary a lot.

> * speaker on the front (H5xxx have poor sound)
> * CF and SD memory cards (as many cameras use CF cards)
> * `2003 Second Edition software (bug fixes and easier WiFi)

These are minor points that might be interesting if you want to use it
outside the cockpit. Remember the 3 most important points: visibility,
visibility, visibility.

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Eric Greenwell]

Eric Greenwell wrote:

> Jim Kelly wrote:
>
>> The Pocket-PC Windows environment has supported a four-fold higher
>> resolution at 640x480 pixels (and even landscape mode) for some
>> months now via `2003 Second Edition. HP have just produced a model
>> that takes advantage of these features, the HX4700 (aka HX4705).
>>
>> Photos here:
>> http://www.ipaqabilities.com/iaforums/viewtopic.php?t=249
>>
>> Specs here:
>> http://h18000.www1.hp.com/products/quickspecs/11982_div/11982_div.HTML
>>
>> Queries:
>> * will the display work better in sunlight???
>
>
> There is no substitute for putting on the glasses you use in the
> cockpit, running the program you use, and holding the pda in your hand
> outside in the sun. Turn slowly around, then step into the shade and
> repeat. Currently, visibility is _King_, and this test will show you
> what you need to know.

Well, this might be a substitute (from PC Magazine):

"The hx4700's star feature, of course, is its 4.0-inch VGA screen, which
looks positively huge, with rich, deep colors. The screen seemed dim
compared to other iPAQs, though, and seeing movies under bright light
was more difficult on the hx4700 than it was on the midrange rx3715."

The complete article is at

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1626990,00.asp
HP iPAQ hx4700


--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Jim Kelly]

Eric Greenwell wrote:
>>>>>>
> There is no substitute for putting on the glasses you use in the
> cockpit, running the program you use, and holding the pda in your
hand
> outside in the sun. Turn slowly around, then step into the shade
and
> repeat. Currently, visibility is _King_, and this test will show
you
> what you need to know.

Well, this might be a substitute (from PC Magazine):
"The hx4700's star feature, of course, is its 4.0-inch VGA screen,
which
looks positively huge, with rich, deep colors. The screen seemed dim
compared to other iPAQs, though, and seeing movies under bright
light
was more difficult on the hx4700 than it was on the midrange
rx3715."

The complete article is at
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1626990,00.asp
HP iPAQ hx4700
<<<<<<<

That was a pre-production advertorial Eric!! And who cares about
movie images?? Your original comment still stands; so let's get one
into a glider and see!!! The Northerners have borrowed our sun at
the moment ;-) so perhaps one of them will be the first to tell us
all what it is like!! (I still haven't been able to get my hands on
the 4" hx4700 - they are very new devices).

Good point about the Toshiba e800, which also has a 4" high
resolution screen. Has anyone had a chance to evaluate it's use in a
glider???

Common cabling IS important if you have multiple folks flying the
same glider (& wiring), downloading at comps etc.
Not to mention households and workplaces sharing chargers, etc.

>>>>
Comparing my 2215 (3.5" screen) to my 3835 (3.8" screen), the
effect is noticeable but not striking to me. Going from a 3.8" to a
4"
screen would be unnoticeable, I think.
<<<<<

Those of us with "wiser" eyes can easily benefit from any bigger
size, and remember that the manufacturer quotes the diagonal which
is, at best, an odd measurement. The area increases markedly for a
small increase in diagonal size and effects readability profoundly.
Today's punters must choose between a 3.5" and a 4.0" display.
That's a 31% increase in area by my estimate, with almost a
half-an-inch taller image (1cm actually)!

Resolution however is a funny thing, but it always comes down to how
well the programmer uses the available technology together with the
user adjusting font heights and map zoom to get their preferred
balance. If high resolution just means everything shrinks and we see
four times as much data then listen for the screams. However if the
view remains equally readable a small shrinkage will allow a useful
increase in the displayed area of a map for example. Text boxes
could be a little smaller and just as readable, even at arm's reach.
Which ever way you look at it, these new displays with 640 x 480
pixels are using 307,200 dots to paint their image instead of just
76,800 so we should expect a marvellous improvement if the software
and sun issues are dealt with properly.

I guess we should also be wondering how the other new (rx3xxx) iPaqs
with the smaller 3.5" low resolution displays are suited to gliding
too. As we have seen with the transition from H38xx to
H39xx/H41xx/H5xxx iPaq displays, newer is not necessarily better
these days. Let's not ever forget how communities such as this forum
are vital to help understand and publicise the true differences
between products and how they perform in the real world, beyond
marketing - and the almighty shareholder's dollar (kicks soap box
aside ;-)).

Cheers,

Jim Kelly
Australia.

[Eric Greenwell]

Jim Kelly wrote:

> Eric Greenwell wrote:
>
>>There is no substitute for putting on the glasses you use in the
>>cockpit, running the program you use, and holding the pda in your
>> hand outside in the sun. Turn slowly around, then step into the
>> shade and repeat. Currently, visibility is _King_, and this
>> test will show you what you need to know.
>
>
> Well, this might be a substitute (from PC Magazine):
> "The hx4700's star feature, of course, is its 4.0-inch VGA screen,
> which
> looks positively huge, with rich, deep colors. The screen seemed dim
> compared to other iPAQs, though, and seeing movies under bright
> light
> was more difficult on the hx4700 than it was on the midrange
> rx3715."
>
> The complete article is at
> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1626990,00.asp
> HP iPAQ hx4700
> <<<<<<<
>
> That was a pre-production advertorial Eric!!

I did say "might"! Let's hope the unit they had was inferior to
production models, but I do wonder why HP would send out one that didn't
look good.

> And who cares about
> movie images??

I don't, but if the images look dimmer than other Ipaqs, that is a bad sign.

snip
>
> Common cabling IS important if you have multiple folks flying the
> same glider (& wiring), downloading at comps etc.
> Not to mention households and workplaces sharing chargers, etc.

If I thought a $650 unit was going to please me, I'd figure out how to
get my cabling in the glider, even if it meant having two cables coming
to the Ipaq mount. I already do this in my glider.
>
> Comparing my 2215 (3.5" screen) to my 3835 (3.8" screen), the
> effect is noticeable but not striking to me. Going from a 3.8" to a
> 4"
> screen would be unnoticeable, I think.
> <<<<<
>
> Those of us with "wiser" eyes can easily benefit from any bigger
> size, and remember that the manufacturer quotes the diagonal which
> is, at best, an odd measurement. The area increases markedly for a
> small increase in diagonal size and effects readability profoundly.
> Today's punters must choose between a 3.5" and a 4.0" display.

Not so - there are 3.8" screens, such as 5150, 5450, 5550.

snip

> Which ever way you look at it, these new displays with 640 x 480
> pixels are using 307,200 dots to paint their image instead of just
> 76,800 so we should expect a marvellous improvement if the software
> and sun issues are dealt with properly.

I don't think the software needs to improve any, other than be able to
run in the VGA screen (as I know Winpilot and SeeYou Mobile already do).
There's plenty of adjustment in fonts now. The display itself must be
better than the current TFT screens to be an improvement.

>
> I guess we should also be wondering how the other new (rx3xxx) iPaqs
> with the smaller 3.5" low resolution displays are suited to gliding
> too.

Yes, I hope someone will to the "sun and shade circle test" for us, but
we should remember that "seeing is believing" and it's even better to do
the test yourself.


--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Jim Kelly]

"Eric Greenwell" > wrote in message
...
>>>>>
Not so - there are 3.8" screens, such as 5150, 5450, 5550.
<<<<<

Except that their days are over AFAIK. Along with the H38xx, H39xx,
H41xx all of which had 3.8" displays . . . HP are apparently
refusing to offer an upgrade to "Windows 2003 Second Edition" (even
at a price) to any of these premium iPaqs!! This makes the new
models much more attractive - exactly what they wanted of course . .
..

Cheers again,

Jim Kelly

(I currently use a H5550 with the Boxwave 'Clear Touch' film
covering, and am hoping to find something much better before too
long!).

[Eric Greenwell]

Jim Kelly wrote:
> "Eric Greenwell" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> Not so - there are 3.8" screens, such as 5150, 5450, 5550.
> <<<<<
>
> Except that their days are over AFAIK. Along with the H38xx, H39xx,
> H41xx all of which had 3.8" displays . . .

They are still available new from HP and others, and will be available
used for several years (as are all the earlier series), so the choice is
still there.

> HP are apparently
> refusing to offer an upgrade to "Windows 2003 Second Edition" (even
> at a price) to any of these premium iPaqs!! This makes the new
> models much more attractive - exactly what they wanted of course . .

What would "Second Edition" bring to the gliding cockpit? Or is it
primarily an issue for people that want to use their gliding pda outside
the cockpit?

I decided the cockpit use was paramount, so that was how I ended up with
a 3835 dedicated to the glider. At $300, I figured it was worth it. My
refurbished 2215 was actually cheaper, and it's higher speed does a
better job if I want to run "track up", but it's display is inferior in
the cockpit.

> (I currently use a H5550 with the Boxwave 'Clear Touch' film
> covering, and am hoping to find something much better before too
> long!).

I assume you mean "better than the H5550", not the Clear Touch (which
does an admiral job on my 2215 and 3835, though I can hardly believe I
paid $16 for a 2" x 3" piece of 'translucent shelf paper').

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Jim Kelly]

>>>>
What would "Second Edition" bring to the gliding cockpit?
<<<<
Bug fixes (?), possibility to try landscape mode.

>>>>
Or is it primarily an issue for people that want to use their
gliding pda outside the cockpit?
<<<<
Apparently the WiFi setup is not so contorted. Perhaps BlueTooth
connections are easier too?


>>>>
I decided the cockpit use was paramount, so that was how I ended up
with a 3835 dedicated to the glider. At $300, I figured it was worth
it.
<<<<
There is a lot going for an iPaq dedicated to the job. Or perhaps
shared between glider and car :-).


>>>>
> (I currently use a H5550 with the Boxwave 'Clear Touch' film
> covering, and am hoping to find something much better before too
> long!).
I assume you mean "better than the H5550", not the Clear Touch
(which does an admiral job on my 2215 and 3835, though I can hardly
believe I paid $16 for a 2" x 3" piece of 'translucent shelf
paper').
<<<<
Both really - in the sense that we need the combination to work
well. The ClearTouch product does seem to be as good as they get,
but we still haven't got a solution that works really well in the
sun (hence my hopes that one of the new models is a breakthrough).

No doubt someone will get a chance to try one of the new hx4700
iPaqs soon. Curiously, no-one has chimed in with an experience with
the high res Toshiba . . .

Cheers,

Jim Kelly.

[Eric Greenwell]

Jim Kelly wrote:

>
> I decided the cockpit use was paramount, so that was how I ended up
> with a 3835 dedicated to the glider. At $300, I figured it was worth
> it.
> <<<<
> There is a lot going for an iPaq dedicated to the job. Or perhaps
> shared between glider and car :-).

That was my first plan, but I decided it put the Ipaq at too great an
additional risk of being dropped, battery dead, forgotten somewhere,
stolen, etc. Now it's dedicated to the glider, and the 2215 I first
bought to use in the glider serves as the backup for the glider, and as
the car/motorhome navigation computer.


> No doubt someone will get a chance to try one of the new hx4700
> iPaqs soon. Curiously, no-one has chimed in with an experience with
> the high res Toshiba . . .

The e800 was initially my top interest, and I did correspond with a
fellow using one, but neither he nor comments from other users indicated
it had better visibility than the current Ipaqs.


--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Henryk Birecki]

Eric Greenwell > wrote:

>The e800 was initially my top interest, and I did correspond with a
>fellow using one, but neither he nor comments from other users indicated
>it had better visibility than the current Ipaqs.

It will take a while till these will come close. Just think : double
the resolution, but dead space for lines and transistors does not
quite scale. Transmission is lower, reflectivity is lower, pixels are
smaller - OK for shades for grey but not for reading

Henryk Birecki