The HP iPAQ 210 – the black review - Isn't worth the effort??
This post contains things you may not want to know. It could be seen as a spoiler. I am sure it will upset the HP loyalist. In no way should it be consider in depth, as the two hundred series has not been around long enough to reveal all it's many weaknesses or short comings. And like HP it probably just isn't worth the effort...
Still here?
Okay you have been warned.
Going to ActiveSync, something important to a device of this nature, we should I believe, see a screen something like this,
Notice the bottom options here to "Connect via IR" and "Connect via Bluetooth" you will not see them on your two hundred series device, because well HP appearers to have thought it was just too much of a hassle to enable in the case of Bluetooth. Instead you may need to to tap | Start (menu) | Settings | Connections (tab) | Bluetooth (icon) | "Bluetooth Manager" | and then at last your Bluetooth ActiveSync (icon)! Yes there are other options, but they involve either adding a shortcut to one of the just seven slots in the Start menu, or adding a line to the today screen. I believe this suggest that HP does not value the owners of the two hundred series time. Hp has turn what could be two taps into perhaps as much as six.
You come here to this site, and interact I'll assume you are some what social. Perhaps you would like to share a **theme** with a friend or colleague Windows Mobile 6 includes the ability to do this, within the Today application. How ever as a series two hundred owner you will find that when you tap | Start (menu) | Settings | Today (icon) and select a theme and then tap "Beam" that nothing much happens. Were you aware that the series two hundred devices don't have an IR port? Just another little option that HP decided you didn't need. No problem you say we can always use Bluetooth right? Wrong in the case of the two hundred series it appears that again HP couldn't be bother to enable the ability to "beam" themes. Again I believe we should see something like this;
What you will see is this, however;
as it has only been configured to work with IR that the iPAQ series two hundred simply doesn't have. It appears the HP thought it wasn't worth the effort to enable Bluetooth to work here. :rolling:
WiFiFoFum is a program I have found to be useful and enjoyable in the past. Normally it gives a screen much like this,
Where Channels are displayed correctly. Compare this to the same screen from the iPAQ two hundred series where channels are displayed incorrectly. With a totally meaningless Channel number of 858512.
Wasted space perhaps you have noticed this icon, it is suppose to take us to HP's Enterprise Mobility Agent
HP Enterprise Mobility Agent, is the application that is suppose to configure, download, and install different applications from the Internet on your HP iPAQ. This application requires WLAN connection with access to Internet. Again the only problem is HP once again decided it just apparently isn't worth the effort. Tap on it an it will attempt to connect to HP's web site, where instead of downloading the Enterprise Mobility Agent it will be redirected to HP front door. No software for us that is suppose to help us configure and manage our iPAQ.
It lots of ways HP has shown us that they apparently haven't found the two hundred series worth the effort, they feel it isn't worth the effort of providing OS upgrades and have announced there will be no 6.1 OS upgrade for the two hundred series. Hp has kindly provided us with a list of The Solution section contains a list of tested WiFi Access points that are compatible with the HP iPAQ 210 Enterprise Handheld Series. It just seems that one need look no further than the first item on the list, the Belkin Pre-N to find that apparently HP didn't bother to actually test the series two hundred with this compatible router list because well it simply isn't compatible. Talk to Belkin and they state it's HP fault, talk to HP and they may refer you to the above page where it is listed as compatible. What they are unwilling to do is give direction on how to connect their compatible device to the router they claim they are compatible with.
HP has told us what they think the series two hundred is worth with their actions. Are you willing to hear?
I'm iPAQ user from 2 years and 214 is my third Pocket PC manufactured by HP. So I see some things in different way
1. Shortcuts in Bluetooth Manager was in iPAQs since many years, that's nothing new in 200 series. Does it take more taps than connection via AS? Open iPAQ Wireless from Today screen (1), Bluetooth tab (if needed, sometimes this tab is active) (2), Bluetooth connections (3) - bluetooth turns on automatically in this moment, finally shortcut (4).
Your method needs to turn on bluetooth first, then open ActiveSync, then tap menu and choose Connect via bluetooth. Is it really easier way?
2. It was always strange for me why another Pocket PCs use beam option to send files via bluetooth because this an option only for IR. iPAQs with IR never did it. Why beam option is present in 200 series I don't know, it's HP mystery
I think this post should also include a mention to the all-pissing problems with touchscreen derangement and CF speed/power, just because, being a "black review", you expect to find in it every reason for NOT buying the device (which I wished I knew back then when I actually decided it was worth my 350 euro )
2. It was always strange for me why another Pocket PCs use beam option to send files via bluetooth because this an option only for IR. iPAQs with IR never did it.
They have never did as they use the Widcomm BT stack, and not that of MS (btw, this has also been explained in my Multiplatform Bluetooth File Sending Bible). All Widcomm-based PPC's (not just iPAQ's) work the same way as the 210. That is, this is a difference on the BT stack level - not a particular iPAQ-only problem.
It would be helpful if you identify the other Pocket PC (and its OS) you are using to compare against the IPAQ 210. Both my windows mobile 2003se IPAQ and my WM5.0 IPAQ do not have a Connect via Bluetooth option within the ActiveSync menus. I sync my IPAQs via Bluetooth and I have always done this through a shortcut set up within Bluetooth Manager. Also what bluetooth stack are both devices using? I think the Microsoft stack uses the beaming option when transferring files via Bluetooth, while the Broadcom stack uses a separate menu item (send via Bluetooth or something like that).
I was a little surprised to see that IR was removed from the WM6.0 IPAQs. I attribute this more to the pervasiveness of Bluetooth these days and not because HP doesn't care about their customers. When I bought my first pocket pc, I owned a computer that had IR and found IR to be very useful for syncing. When I replaced that computer, finding one with IR was practically impossible, but Bluetooth was fairly standard, so i don't miss IR as much as I thought I would.
Reviewing the specs for the IPAQ 210 it is quite obvious there is no IR port and I think the documentation is pretty clear that the IPAQ 210 does not include IR, so if this were an important feature to you, how did you miss it when you were researching this device?... It only takes a few more key taps, but it really is not so hard to share files between devices via Bluetooth connection...maybe not so convenient as IR, but is it a show stopper?
I'd say the bigger, disappointing issues for the IPAQ 210, and one of the reasons I haven't bought one, have been discussed in other threads and I question the purpose for this one. Do you really see it as some kind of spoiler?
__________________ Julie | Microsoft MVP Mobile Devices | Mobility Site Moderator | Judge, Smartphone & Pocket PC Best Software Awards 2007 & 2008 | visit my blog: To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. | To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
I LOVE my Ipaq 211 & did my research, in depth, before I purchased two of them. I realize that everyone is entitled to their review/opinion but would encourage research, research & more research in making a decision on your needs.
someone wrote a great and thorough review of the 211. i'm having many problems navigating aximsite these days and can't find it. can someone send me a link? thanks!
someone wrote a great and thorough review of the 211. i'm having many problems navigating aximsite these days and can't find it. can someone send me a link? thanks!
IR is used for quickie
but I see some new devices are without IR (nokia 6263/6267, SE S500/W580)
without IR doesn't ruin the device, you can use bt instead (though you have to go through pairing process)
I think the point David was trying to make is that HP didn't spend much time getting this device right. They obviously threw it together, didn't test, didn't customize. As a result, it's much less than it could be. There are battery problems, CF Card problems, wireless problems, no IR, the operating system isn't tuned to the hardware, and in general, the lack of attention by HP shows.
So, yes, you can use BT, but if that's what they wanted, why not set it up? Why have the IR interface but no IR hardware?
I'm on my third 21x because the previous 2 failed. I'm not bitter, I'm just done with HP. Compared to the other 7 PDAs I have owned, this is the worst. Not bitter, just fact. HP didn't take any time with this one.
I think the point David was trying to make is that HP didn't spend much time getting this device right. They obviously threw it together, didn't test, didn't customize. As a result, it's much less than it could be. There are battery problems, CF Card problems, wireless problems, no IR, the operating system isn't tuned to the hardware, and in general, the lack of attention by HP shows.
So, yes, you can use BT, but if that's what they wanted, why not set it up? Why have the IR interface but no IR hardware?
I'm on my third 21x because the previous 2 failed. I'm not bitter, I'm just done with HP. Compared to the other 7 PDAs I have owned, this is the worst. Not bitter, just fact. HP didn't take any time with this one.
The amount of time spent in development is speculative here.
Unless you are part of HP or know someone on the inside, you are guessing on this part.
If they had taken more time for development, they would still get raked over the coals for not getting the device out.
I remember at least one thread going here on this topic being quite confused.
The device has issues and I guess venting here makes one feel better but does it help solve the issues?
Better to take it to the manufacturer than to vent here for better results.
The first post just comes off as bitterness and buyers remorse.
I am not downplaying the issues with this pda but the OP does not go about trying to solve as much as they just bi**h and moan about them.
Jake, your post, quoted here, is what should have been posted and would have been looked at differently and taken better.
Well, in my line of work (testing radio devices; aka phones, PDAs, remotes, etc) you see a great number of devices that are submitted for testing and yet make it to market. And oddly enough, the original version of the Ipaq 210 was one of them.
This device has an odder history than the Ipaq 5550, a PDA with a non-working mobile simm socket behind the battery... Unfortunately I'm legally bound by a non-disclosure agreement so I can't say much, however would it susprise you folks much to know that the original 210 wasn't made my HP?
Follow Us
RSS Feed
Follow on Twitter
Facebook
YouTube
The HP iPAQ 210 – the black review - Isn't worth the effort??
No problem you say we can always use Bluetooth right? Wrong in the case of the two hundred series it appears that again HP couldn't be bother to enable the ability to "beam" themes. 
Again I believe we should see something like this;
it is suppose to take us to HP's Enterprise Mobility Agent 
)
