Name: Mitch Waite Group
Location: Sausalito, CA
Date: 2008-02-06
Customer Rating: - 
Summary: Takes some getting used to
Comment: I must be one of the first to own a iPAQ 211, which I purchased directly from HP Shopping. I plan to write a more extensive review but for now I think the most important thing is that you understand what the new high resolution 480 x 640 screen is like. The 211 is BIG. Taller, wider and thicker than an iPhone. Heavy. Roughy 33% larger than a iPAQ Classic 100.
Understand as I am writing this that the word I hear on the street is the days of the stand alone PDA are numbered (the 200 seriers are stand alone devices). The only kind of PDA that can be a success in the market is one that has a phone built in, or looking at it another way, celluar manufacturers are choosing to use the Mobile 6 OS to give users a very rich platform.
Most importantly you need to understand this. Yes there are 4X more pixels on this screen than on the 240 x 320 standard screen BUT Microsoft has not taken advantage of this higher resolution. What they have done is basically expand the size of interface to fit the screen. So icons are bigger, text is larger, everything is much easier to read for old and tired eyes. But it is not what I expected.
What they could have done is keep the fonts and icons the same size as the 240 x 320 screen and then distribute more of them in the screen area. that way there could be way more information packed on the screen than the smaller handhelds.
In other words imagine you bought a new video board that had double the resoution of your old one. But when you played DOOM on things just got bigger, you saw no new detail.
Anyway that is my PITA at this point. I hope to have more to say in a few days.
So the feeling I get is that the interface is big and lumbering, not refined and tastful as the resolution would allow.
This may not prove to be of major importanct to people, but this is my personal take and parly gripe on the iPAQ 211.
Name: Mitch10
Location: San Francisco, CA USA
Date: 2008-07-20
Customer Rating: -
Summary: iPaq 211 vs iPaq 2755
Comment: I have been using the iPaq 211 now for a couple of weeks after upgrading from the iPaq 2755 that I purchased when it first hit the American market - 3+ years ago. I haven't had a chance to really test the multimedia capability but am willing to bet the 211 will be better for MP3 and movies. Overall, it is a good devise, but not as much of an improvement over the 2755 as I was hoping for. Below is a comparison between the two devises.
Screen
2755 - Bright and easy to read but type gets more difficult as it gets smaller. Web pages are really difficult to view making Internet Explorer nearly pointless.
211- Even brighter in comparison to the 2755. It also has automatic brightness adjustment that actually works well. But the biggest difference is the VGA resolution on a comparatively BIG screen. Web pages, books and everything is much easier to read on this devise. I have been using my iPaqs for reading books for several years and this devise is really a pleasure for that! The on screen keyboard is also a lot easier to use, almost good enough to use with just a finger.
Processing power
2755 - HP's second unit with the 624 MHz processor blew away the previous units for speed of applications and handwriting recognition. It made the unit much more useful that previous with slower processors.
211- It has the same processor which is a mixed blessing. Since the 211 lacks a high powered graphics processor, it is actually slower on some tasks than the 2755 due to having a screen with 4 times the resolution. That said, it is only a little slower and only in certain aspects like initially opening a document. Handwriting recognition is actually slightly better for some reason; possibly the increased memory.
Internal Memory
2755 - More than adequate for several documents and programs to be stored. Bogged down or crashed if several apps were loaded at the same time, but that was easily solved by the task manager that allowed you to close individual apps or all of them at the same time.
211 - Even more memory, making easy to store loads of applications and files without issue. It does still slow down if you keep the Internet Explorer, Word and other large apps running. I couldn't find a task manager that worked like the 2755's included so installed a freeware program TMAN that works even better.
Touch screen
2755 - Good but sometimes difficult near the edges of the screen. It was often hard to hand write anything due to the size of the screen and my writing style (or lack there of.) Taps and gestures were very responsive, but it was nearly impossible to use a bare finder or even a man's fingernail.
211 - The screen is only about 95% as responsive in comparison which isn't that bad though occasionally annoying. But due to the screen size you can actually use your finger tip for many applications including the contact list making the 211 slightly better than the 2755 overall.
Included programs
2755- HP included the standard office mobile, image viewers, media players and a backup program. You also got Outlook on the disk for your desktop computer just in case you didn't have Office.
211- Actually has less than the 2755, no Outlook and no backup software. As it comes with Windows Mobile 6, the Office apps are better than the 2755. Still, plan on purchasing Sprite Backup and Outlook if you don't already have it.
Accessories
2755 - sync cable, power cable and cradle. Options include SD and CF card slots for LOTS of storage space. I have an extra battery and charger that makes it even more flexible.
211 - No cradle included. Same optional card slots except that the SD can reads SDHC cards which are a lot more versatile. There is also an optional host cable that allows you to use USB mice, keyboards and external hard drives. There is also an extended battery available that can double the amount of time before charging or exchanging batteries.
Looks and build quality
2755 - Looks are OK, though I never really liked the color tan/gray. Great build considering that I have been using it daily for more 3 years without any issue. Buttons are easy to use and can be programmed. NOTE; the first thing I do when I get a new electronic devise is put a screen saver on it.
211- It looks great in black! Same or better build quality than the 2755. Despite being lager, it is still very easy to hold and use.
Connectivity
2755 - Uses Activesync 4.5 in XP which is still my operating system of choice; sorry Microsoft but Vista totally sucks! Slow and buggy, but can be used with the included Bluetooth as well as cable.
211 - Exactly the same accept that does include a standard USB mini port for sync and charging. Charging on the USB is slower but is a welcome addition.
Security
2755 - Comes standard with password security and a biometric finger print reader that really works!
211 - No finger print reader which is a real disappointment, but does still have the password security.
Portability factor
2755 - Easily fits in a pocket and there lots of great cases available.
211 - Slightly bigger to allow the great new screen, but still pretty easy to pocket. The included case is OK, but I will be looking for a nice leather one instead.
--Summery of the 211--
Pros
Very readable screen, probably the current leader for any Windows Mobile devise that can still fit in a pocket.
Very powerful with more storage options that most people will know what to do with.
Mobile Office apps are way better under Mobile 6 and very usable. I can really create a full Word document on the devise without too much effort
Battery is sufficient for the devise, allowing several hours of use before charging is necessary.
Quite stable, very few resets and nearly all the programs that I wanted to use work great including a couple designed for WinCE 3.0.
Optional USB host adapter.
SDHC comparable.
Finger touch usable in some applications.
Opera Mobile web browser 9.5 works like a charm!
Plenty of internal memory.
Easy to carry and use.
Cons
A little slower than I would have expected.
No cradle.
No Outlook or backup software.
No biometric fingerprint reader.
No independent graphic processor for the VGA screen slows it down at times.
The speaker is a little weak.
Touch screen takes a little more pressure.
Name: AstroBob
Location: S/E Michigan
Date: 2008-12-16
Customer Rating: -
Summary: IPAQ 210/211 Enterprise Handheld
Comment: HP iPAQ 211 Enterprise Handheld (210 Series)
I had a very old Compaq IPAQ that finally died of old age so was looking to replace it. I settled on the HP IPAQ 210/211. After using it for a while I feel able to discuss features and pro/cons.
First...it has an excellent screen with 640x480 resolution. The built in speaker isn't very loud but that is a moot point as I use headphones which are plenty loud if necessary. It is noticeably faster than the old IPAQ.
Second...it has wireless built in as well as Blue Tooth. The wireless works great...as a ATT internet user I have free access from any Starbucks, city libraries, plus several other locations when traveling. The wireless is quite sensitive as I have no problem picking up the signal from Starbucks while parked in their parking lot a couple of hundred feet away. The Blue Tooth has been more of an issue. I was hoping to use it to control my various astronomical telescopes wireless through some astronomy software I own. Even though it should work I have yet to get it to work even though the Bluetooth in the IPAQ sees the Bluetooth receiver at the telescope. I finally decided to go with a wired setup. My old IPAQ had a third party multi-pin to RS 232 connector to allow me to use it to run the telescopes, while HP doesn't list one, Socket makes a CF card to RS232 adaptor which works perfectly. The neat thing is that the new IPAQ has both a SD card slot as well as a CF card slot so I can run a 8MB SD card for all the programs and files and still have access to the CF card/RS 232 adaptor. This ability makes the IPAQ a natural for people who need RS232 ability, electronic technicians, pilots, etc.
Third...the IPAQ makes a great multi-media player. I use it to play music and movies...I also have the ability to transfer specials and movies I have downloaded from TV through my home computer, edit out commercials, and than save on the IPAQ. The ability to rotate the screen lets you see the wide screen image which is a good image. You can run about 4-5 hours before the battery goes dead...after which you can pop in a spare battery. This is a lot more convenient and portable than one of those portable DVD players...and you still have all the other capabilities and wireless Inet at the airport between flights. You can figure about 1 GB per 2 hour movie when saved as a portable device resolution.
OK...pros/cons.
PROS
Screen, SD/CF dual card ability at same time, Multi-Media.
CONS
The big one for me is WHY did they eliminate the IR receiver/transmitter ability. While you can use wireless or Bluetooth...IR is really a much more convenient way to swap files with friends..especially since many of their units only have IR.
This next is more of a wish list than negatives...only way to record sound through the built in mono microphone. While it gives good sound for notetaking...they could have made a killer portable high quality sound recorder by incorporating a stereo-in miniplug in which you could plug a high quality small stereo mike. And a simple applet that provides a equalizer (bass, treble, balance adjustment) would be useful too. The last 2 items alone would have made this a very popular item for music afficiandos. My old IPAQ had the equalizer so don't know why they left it off of the new model.
The market for these PDAs is somewhat replaced by the all-in-on camera,phone,organizers but I have found the programs I need and features aren't available yet on these phones. When you have a specialized third party program like my two astronomy programs...this is the only way to go. In fact I bought the IPAQ solely based on its ability to run the two programs.
Bob
Name: JDillon
Location:
Date: 2008-10-06
Customer Rating: -
Summary: iPAQ 211 Review
Comment: All in all I'm pleased with the product. It has the best "video/screen" resolution I've seen, battery life is pretty good when you aren't running a boatload of wireless connections, and synching with Exchange is improved over my Palm T|X. All in all the online experience (browsing, mail, synching) is superior to Palm.
Nits and irritants:
1. When connected via USB, I cannot seem to find a way to configure the device to not come on every few minutes (maybe with every change in schedule/mail/contacts, etc.) and it is almost impossible to survive without saving your password as a result. You can't just turn it off it seems, it will pop back on within minutes. Half the time my goal is not to have it sync, simply to let it charge, so this is a major annoyance. If there's a better way, it isn't obvious and that leads to irritant number 2.
2. Documentation, especially configuration assistance is abysmal. What's new about that anymore? The art of good technical writing simply seems lost on us as a society anymore.
3. On occasion you have to wait on some update in the device to finish, just like on PCs. One of the main reasons I spent more on this than I would have on a micro-PC is I wanted instant on for schedule purposes and a usable web interface. It's truly annoying to be delayed. Easiest way to avoid delays seems to be to leave the wireless off as might be expected. The concept of throttling down background tasks seems less advanced.
4. Like a lot of folks I dislike the "up" position on the directional rocker - too small for my fat fingers to use accurately.
5. Text recognition is far inferior to early Palm Graffiti in my estimation. I could really input almost as fast as I could stroke characters on early Palm. None of the input methods on this device are as trustworthy, accurate, or fast, in fact I tend to hunt and peck the keyboard.
6. Oh yeah, really stupid thing - you can adjust the backlight down to 0, that is can't see a thing. Pretty hard to find the slider to adjust it back once you do if you happen to take your stylus off the screen. I don't know what they were thinking.
7. App interface is a bit vertical, that is seems to stack a little too much. Don't like all the drill downs, Palm was quite a bit simpler, and for general purpose more usable in my mind. It can be difficult to figure out why something is "grayed" out or why some button isn't working on iPAQ, and drilling down often requires too many levels in book. Hides/Obfuscates functionality meaninglessly.
Value/Cost: Give the price of micro PCs, 2*s.
Interface/Visuals: 4*s. Font scalability is remarkable.
Browsing: 4*s. Nice to be able to see a whole page when you need to. Not all pages reproduce accurately tho.
Wireless: 3*s: Somehow it's just more difficult to configure correctly than it should be.
Synching: 3*s: Especially bad with the auto turn on/alert features. No amount of work seems to get that configured in a likable way. Otherwise pretty good. Blame ActiveSync and the Device here.
Apps: Powerpoint I like, does what I'd want it to in this format. Word seems to not manage graphical content well at all. Haven't tried Excel much or the Media Tools yet.
Palm vs. iPAQ? For usability, simple schedule/contact management I prefer my Palm T|X, cept it's dead. For Web/Browsing and Exchange Integration the iPAQ get's my vote. For input, the old Palm Graffiti with all its proprietary quirks remains the most functional in my estimation.
Name: J. Morgenstein
Location:
Date: 2008-09-03
Customer Rating: -
Summary: USB Host - lose the laptop!
Comment: The iPaq 211 is quite a bit bigger than than the 2200 that I have had for 3 or 4 years now and does seem a bit clumsier to hold. BUT it has a larger screen with twice the resolution so that it is a joy to look at and it does seem a bit more responsive. I bought mine refurbished and it's perfect. It did have a few spots of something sticky on it but they were easily cleaned off and there are now no signs that it was anything other than brand new.
The good:
It has USB host capabilities so I can transfer photos directly from SD or CF cards to a powered hard drive without a PC or Laptop. You need a special cable which costs another $50 but it is well worth it for me. The hard drive must have a separate power supply, as all 3.5" ones do. The smaller 2.5" drives are usually powered from the USB port and the iPaq has not got enough power for that. However, my Buffalo 320GB ministation is capable of being powered from the mains (my TomTom mains charger fits and supplies the 5v with the correct polarity). File transfer is SLOW (about an hour for 1GB) but that is no problem if you can get through the day and download while you have dinner or something. The reason I value this capability so highly is the ever increasing restrictions on baggage that the airlines are imposing. Hand baggage allowances within Europe are so measly now that a DSLR camera with 2 lenses, a hard drive, a PDA and a silver flute + piccolo is as much as I am allowed leaving no room for a laptop as well. And no, I would not want to pack any of that into the checked luggage.
It has both SD and CF card slots so you can have your cake and eat it. That covers both my point-and-shoot and my DSLR camera so I am very happy. It also means that you can get 64 GB of storage if you invest in 32GB cards in both slots. Yes, it does support SDHC.
It has full VGA resolution so that your photos actually look good. And you can rotate the screen with a long press of a button.
It can run movies (with added software) without significant glitches and the screen does a good job.
The wireless just works. It picks up a new connection without fuss and there is an icon to disable it (to save power) right on the Today screen.
I haven't tried the Bluetooth yet but I see no reason to suppose it works any less well than the 2200 which was fine. Apparently it does support the protocol that allows for stereo bluetooth headphones.
And Skype (free download) works almost as well as on my laptop (without the webcam of course). There is a tiny speaker on the front and a microphone to bottom left so that when you hold the iPaq up to your left ear it works just like a large cellphone.
Some people seem to hate the fact that the headphone jack is at the bottom instead of the top. However, I love that. It means that all the cables come from the same edge. It also means that you can put it in your pocket top down so you can easily reach the control dial and the headphone wire comes straight out from the exposed edge.
The not so good:
It takes a second or two to turn on when you press the button. The 2200 turned on almost instantly. Not a deal breaker but disconcerting. Also, the buttons for contacts and calendar do not turn the unit on as they did on 2200. It has to be on already for the buttons to launch the programs.
I read all the reviews of the weakness of the main speaker (at the rear) and decided that for me this wasn't so important. They are right, the speakers are very very quiet. But you can hear it very well if you hold the unit up to your ear and a pair of headphones solves the problem completely. Now I need to invest in a stereo bluetooth pair!
Also you do need to press a bit harder on the screen than on the 2200 but you get used to that very quickly. I found the bare screen rather sticky so that my letters had breaks in them and were therefore mis-recognised. (This could have been because I was afraid of scratching the screen before the screen protector arrived.) Anyway, I forked out for the official HP screen protectors (you get 3 and they last for ages) and after that, writing on the screen was a joy. If choosing off-brand protectors go for the crystal-clear ones rather than the glare-reducing. I think that will get you the smoothest writing experience.
HP has not provided the backup software that saved my bacon a couple of times on the 2200. I believe there are free downloads and I will have to get one (you never know when you'll forget about it long enough for it to run down completely). However, I have now learned to install all new software to a card or to the iPaq store rather than to the default location so that at least I won't lose the programs if the power goes.
Talking of which, the unit does seem to need charging at least every other day. I believe that while in use, the power lasts longer than the 2200, but when in standby, the 2200 would go for the best part of a week without significant discharge. The 211, however, seems to lose 10% of its power just overnight even with bluetooth and wireless turned off. I haven't been able to find out why this is. Some say that it is better if you stop all running programs (and maybe pop the CF card out) and so I have found, but it still isn't as carefree as the 2200 was.
All in all, this is a pretty good PDA and the only one on the market running Windows Mobile that has USB Host capabilities, dual card slots and a big VGA screen. I don't need a keyboard so I am not prepared to pay almost twice as much for a umPC. In spite of its drawbacks, I love the 211 and really enjoy using it.
|
Larger image or other views