New 5" VGA screen computer

[Eric Greenwell]

Has anyone seen the Oqo computer (www.oqo.com) so they know how good the
screen is in sunlight?

It's spendy at $1800, but it's Windows XP computer with a 5" VGA screen,
just about the ideal size for a glider. Physically, it's only slightly
larger than an Ipaq 38xx. Of course, the key feature is how well the
screen works in a sunlit cockpit, but if that's good, it's very intriguing.

It doesn't have a serial port, but with Bluetooth, wireless, and USB, it
might connect anyway, such as with a USB-serial adapter. With a 1 Ghz
processor and 20 Gb hard drive, it ought to be up to the task of running
glide software!
--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Bill Thar]

The hardware specs describe the screen as a "...color transflective
display..." which is the same type as the ipaq uses. It does look
interesting, but for soaring, the only advantage I can see is the screen.
Why pay for so much computing power?

"Eric Greenwell" > wrote in message
...
> Has anyone seen the Oqo computer (www.oqo.com) so they know how good the
> screen is in sunlight?
>
> It's spendy at $1800, but it's Windows XP computer with a 5" VGA screen,
> just about the ideal size for a glider. Physically, it's only slightly
> larger than an Ipaq 38xx. Of course, the key feature is how well the
> screen works in a sunlit cockpit, but if that's good, it's very
> intriguing.
>
> It doesn't have a serial port, but with Bluetooth, wireless, and USB, it
> might connect anyway, such as with a USB-serial adapter. With a 1 Ghz
> processor and 20 Gb hard drive, it ought to be up to the task of running
> glide software!
> --
> Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
>
> Eric Greenwell
> Washington State
> USA

[Mark Zivley]

With all that extra computing power you could hook up a mass flow sensor
to your relief tube and then calculate in real time the amount of energy
lost when you took a leak.

Bill Thar wrote:
> The hardware specs describe the screen as a "...color transflective
> display..." which is the same type as the ipaq uses. It does look
> interesting, but for soaring, the only advantage I can see is the screen.
> Why pay for so much computing power?
>
> "Eric Greenwell" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Has anyone seen the Oqo computer (www.oqo.com) so they know how good the
>>screen is in sunlight?
>>
>>It's spendy at $1800, but it's Windows XP computer with a 5" VGA screen,
>>just about the ideal size for a glider. Physically, it's only slightly
>>larger than an Ipaq 38xx. Of course, the key feature is how well the
>>screen works in a sunlit cockpit, but if that's good, it's very
>>intriguing.
>>
>>It doesn't have a serial port, but with Bluetooth, wireless, and USB, it
>>might connect anyway, such as with a USB-serial adapter. With a 1 Ghz
>>processor and 20 Gb hard drive, it ought to be up to the task of running
>>glide software!
>>--
>>Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
>>
>>Eric Greenwell
>>Washington State
>>USA
>
>
>

[Eric Greenwell]

Bill Thar wrote:
> The hardware specs describe the screen as a "...color transflective
> display..." which is the same type as the ipaq uses.

You can't go by the technology used, as even the Ipaqs vary a lot in
their sunlight visibility; e.g., the older 38xx series is more readable
than the newer ones, like the 22xx (I've got both!). You have to see it
to know.

> It does look
> interesting, but for soaring, the only advantage I can see is the screen.
> Why pay for so much computing power?

It's the screen that's most interesting: 5" of VGA (800x600) has got to
be much easier to see and use than 3.8" of 320x240. Even though the
screen is much bigger, the unit is only slightly bigger than a 38xx Ipaq
like I use, so it would still fit easily in my glider and on my mount.

For most of us, the cost would hard to justify for glider use only, but
prices do tend to fall. A bigger problem, I just noticed, is the screen
isn't a touch screen, but requires a "digital pen" for touch use. That's
a show stopper, I think, as all the PDA glide software depends heavily
on the touch screens.

Another choice for a bigger screen might be the NavAero t-pad 800, an 8"
touch screen (www.navaero.com), but it requires a cable connection to a
laptop mounted somewhere. The 8" might be TOO big to really be better,
overall, than a 4" PDA screen.

More choices are appearing, but not quite what we wish for, just yet.

>
> "Eric Greenwell" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Has anyone seen the Oqo computer (www.oqo.com) so they know how good the
>>screen is in sunlight?
>>
>>It's spendy at $1800, but it's Windows XP computer with a 5" VGA screen,
>>just about the ideal size for a glider. Physically, it's only slightly
>>larger than an Ipaq 38xx. Of course, the key feature is how well the
>>screen works in a sunlit cockpit, but if that's good, it's very
>>intriguing.

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

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Mike I Green]

Eric Greenwell wrote:

> Has anyone seen the Oqo computer (www.oqo.com) so they know how good the
> screen is in sunlight?
>
> It's spendy at $1800, but it's Windows XP computer with a 5" VGA screen,
> just about the ideal size for a glider. Physically, it's only slightly
> larger than an Ipaq 38xx. Of course, the key feature is how well the
> screen works in a sunlit cockpit, but if that's good, it's very intriguing.
>
> It doesn't have a serial port, but with Bluetooth, wireless, and USB, it
> might connect anyway, such as with a USB-serial adapter. With a 1 Ghz
> processor and 20 Gb hard drive, it ought to be up to the task of running
> glide software!
There may be a problem with the 20 GB drive operating at altitude, at
least at the altitudes we fly in the Sierras. I seem to remember that I
didn't buy a 1GB drive for my camera a couple of years ago as the specs
indicated it wouldn't work at higher altitudes.

mg

[Eric Greenwell]

Mike I Green wrote:

> Eric Greenwell wrote:
>
>> Has anyone seen the Oqo computer (www.oqo.com) so they know how good
>> the screen is in sunlight?

snip

>
> There may be a problem with the 20 GB drive operating at altitude, at
> least at the altitudes we fly in the Sierras. I seem to remember that I
> didn't buy a 1GB drive for my camera a couple of years ago as the specs
> indicated it wouldn't work at higher altitudes.

Good point. I have no idea what altitude might be a practical limit, as
the specs don't mention altitude at all. I'm not familiar with HD specs,
either. Temperature might be a problem, too, but laptops and PDAs seem
to warm themselves!


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

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[[email protected]]

I have a digital camera that I use with an IBM 1GB microdrive and it
works at over Truckee. I was also able to record .avi movies on the
drive at altitude.

> There may be a problem with the 20 GB drive operating at altitude, at

> least at the altitudes we fly in the Sierras. I seem to remember that
I
> didn't buy a 1GB drive for my camera a couple of years ago as the
specs
> indicated it wouldn't work at higher altitudes.
>
> mg

[Paul Remde]

Hi Eric,

It does look somewhat interesting. The use of a hard drive makes it less
interesting to me.

I think your statement below comparing the iPAQ 3800 and 2200 is not quite
correct. They are not the same technology. The 3800 was (if I remember
correctly) "reflective" and the 2200 (and all recent iPAQs) are
"transflective". That explains the difference in sunlight visibility (which
I think is less dramatic a difference than many other glider pilots).

Good Soaring,

Paul Remde

"Bill Thar" > wrote in message
...
> The hardware specs describe the screen as a "...color transflective
> display..." which is the same type as the ipaq uses. It does look
> interesting, but for soaring, the only advantage I can see is the screen.
> Why pay for so much computing power?
>
> "Eric Greenwell" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Has anyone seen the Oqo computer (www.oqo.com) so they know how good the
>> screen is in sunlight?
>>
>> It's spendy at $1800, but it's Windows XP computer with a 5" VGA screen,
>> just about the ideal size for a glider. Physically, it's only slightly
>> larger than an Ipaq 38xx. Of course, the key feature is how well the
>> screen works in a sunlit cockpit, but if that's good, it's very
>> intriguing.
>>
>> It doesn't have a serial port, but with Bluetooth, wireless, and USB, it
>> might connect anyway, such as with a USB-serial adapter. With a 1 Ghz
>> processor and 20 Gb hard drive, it ought to be up to the task of running
>> glide software!
>> --
>> Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
>>
>> Eric Greenwell
>> Washington State
>> USA
>
>

[Eric Greenwell]

Paul Remde wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> It does look somewhat interesting. The use of a hard drive makes it less
> interesting to me.
>
> I think your statement below comparing the iPAQ 3800 and 2200 is not quite
> correct. They are not the same technology. The 3800 was (if I remember
> correctly) "reflective" and the 2200 (and all recent iPAQs) are
> "transflective". That explains the difference in sunlight visibility (which
> I think is less dramatic a difference than many other glider pilots).

I think you are right about the 2200/3800, (I couldn't find a reference
to "reflective" for the 3800 in brochures I have, but I remember it
being used with older models). But, it is still true that there is quite
a variation between displays of the different units, even if all are
using transflective screens, due to design and manufacturing choices.

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

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[[email protected]]

It is not as much a temperature issue as it is an air density issue.
The heads are "flying" just microinches above the surface of the disk.
We all know about the negative effects of high density altitude on
"flying".

Larry Goddard
"01" USA


Eric Greenwell wrote:
> Mike I Green wrote:
>
> > Eric Greenwell wrote:
> >
> >> Has anyone seen the Oqo computer (www.oqo.com) so they know how
good
> >> the screen is in sunlight?
>
> snip
>
> >
> > There may be a problem with the 20 GB drive operating at altitude,
at
> > least at the altitudes we fly in the Sierras. I seem to remember
that I
> > didn't buy a 1GB drive for my camera a couple of years ago as the
specs
> > indicated it wouldn't work at higher altitudes.
>
> Good point. I have no idea what altitude might be a practical limit,
as
> the specs don't mention altitude at all. I'm not familiar with HD
specs,
> either. Temperature might be a problem, too, but laptops and PDAs
seem
> to warm themselves!
>
>
> --
> Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
>
> Eric Greenwell
> Washington State
> USA

[[email protected]]

Anecdotal evidence of a hard drive surviving at higher altitudes
doesn't necessarily make it a good or acceptable practice.

Probably be best to check (and stay within) the operating limitations
of the harddrive.

Regards,

Larry "My grandpappy once took a harddrive to the top of mount everest
and it's still working today!" Goddard
"01" USA