There have been seemingly endless articles debating the merits of personal digital assistants (PDAs) based on the Palm OS vs. Pocket PCs that run Microsoft's Pocket PC OS. All the articles I have read have focused on a mere technological comparison. But as PDA-type devices become more integrated into the corporate IT domain, more and more managers are evaluating these devices from a business standpoint, including total cost of ownership (TCO). When our organisation evaluated the two platforms, for example, we were somewhat surprised to find that the TCO to own and operate Pocket PC devices would be less than for Palm devices.
I have owned and/or used virtually every model of Palm device available. At present, I also own and use an iPAQ (H3670), the Pocket PC offering from Compaq. In this article, I will present some information that should help organisations evaluate which type of device--Palm OS (and compatibles) or Pocket PC--really is the more cost effective and useful for businesses.Email to go
What do we want to use a PDA for? This is the first and most obvious question an organization should ponder, but one that is often overlooked. If the PDA will be used merely as an electronic address book, calendar, and to-do list, either platform will suffice. If, on the other hand, you want the PDA to support email, then the Palm and Pocket PC platforms offer different performance profiles.
Reading email messages, particularly those with attachments, is not easy to do with Palm devices. To read attachments, I had to invest in a third-party product from Dataviz called Documents To Go (current price for the professional edition is US$49.95). The Documents To Go product offers read (and now write) functionality with respect to Microsoft Word and Excel attachments, but in order to use it, you must also have Dataviz's synchronising software, Desktop To Go (current single-user license price is $49.95). The Dataviz products are excellent, but with respect to TCO, one needs to be aware of the additional expenditure requirements. Pocket PC, on the other hand, has Pocket Word and Pocket Excel built in, so it can easily handle a Word or Excel attachment without needing any third-party software.
In sync…
How will you synchronise your PDA to your desktop and back-end email system? Palm has flip-flopped back and forth regarding third-party synching software. In the earlier days of Palm (3Com), there was no recommendation regarding third-party software. Consequently, organisations had to purchase their own software--such as DesktopToGo or IntellisyncPocketMirror. Now, with the exception of the M500, the company has elected not to package any third-party products with its latest offerings. What has all this done for TCO? It has significantly driven up the cost. Many organisations will have multiple software products for synching, each product with several different releases in use, all of which is a support and management nightmare.
The Pocket PC software situation is simpler and easier. There is only one ActiveSync, and while there may be different versions, there is no need to buy third-party software, which further reduces support and maintenance efforts considerably.
OS management
How will you manage your PDA's operating system? It amazes me that Palm devices have consistently required different versions of the operating system between product lines. Even the latest offerings are split between Palm OS 4.0 and Palm 3.5. Additionally, Palm requires customers to order upgrades for minor OS updates. For example, to upgrade the Palm Vs from OS 3.3 to 3.5, customers have to pay $20 for the privilege of moving up to only a 0.2 higher release! I went through that exercise simply for the sake of keeping current but found that there was no perceivable benefit to upgrading. I guess our organisation wasted $20. (Talk about adding to TCO!) If organizations were required to pay $20 per unit to upgrade a few hundred Palms in order to achieve OS standardisation, the cost and effort would be significant.
Pocket PC is currently running on Windows CE 3.0, and as the platform advances, undoubtedly so will the operating systems. My hope and expectation is that Microsoft will make CE backwardly compatible with all Pocket PC devices so as to minimise support problems.
Although the logic described in your comparisons between Palm and WinCE is pretty good, I noticed two assumptions you made that, if wrong, could completely change the balance between the two devices... and is, in fact, the reason for the continued issue in the first place.
One assumption you made was that Microsoft would make their future CE systems backwards compatible with older systems. Although this would seem to make sense, in fact it hasn't happened with a number of CE apps and systems. Many people found that older SW wouldn't work with their newer CE machines, and older machines couldn't run software designed for the next OS. Assuming, therefore, that MS will make things backwards compatible out of sheer sensibility, may be too optomistic.
Secondly, you pointed out that Compaq has committed to 2 peripherals for its CE machines. You're assuming here that Compaq will always sell CE devices. A number of other manufacturers have abandoned the CE market due to poor sales or low profitability, and it isn't impossible for the same to happen, even to Compaq. And if the other manufacturers aren't committed to the same peripherals, you lose. You're also assuming that those particular peripherals will also be available forever. Owners of the Syquest EZdrive will tell you: There's no telling which peripherals will last.
Although your argument does still hold plenty of water... that bucket is still kinda flimsy-looking. I'd watch those rust spots carefully... they could still bite you.