The HP iPAQ 210 -- an in-depth review - Page 2

Closed Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26
  1. #11
    Mobile Deity
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,585

    Default Re: The HP iPAQ 210 -- an in-depth review

    Quote Originally Posted by KFulton View Post
    This might depend on which battery pack was attached to the x51v...
    The default. BTW, I can too feel the difference (I own both). The hx4700 feels MUCh thinner (and also much better in hand, mostly because of the metal casing).
    Microsoft MVP - Mobile Devices, 2006, 2007. Also see my articles in the PPC & SP Mag Expert blog HERE.

  2. #12
    Mobile Deity
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,585

    Default Re: The HP iPAQ 210 -- an in-depth review

    Quote Originally Posted by Adama D. Brown View Post
    Shrug. All I know is that I've never noticed many people complaining about the screen in landscape, nor have I had any real reason to complain myself.
    You're lucky to be NOT belonging to the folks sensitive to this stuff I get very bad headache if I use screens with polarization problems for more than a few minutes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Adama D. Brown View Post
    I just re-measured my X51v myself; it's almost exactly 16mm thick. Perhaps someone was measuring it with the rubber feet included?
    I'll measure this myself too. In the meantime, I've quickly made a comparative shot (the rubber feet are long ago lost from my x51v):



    IMHO, the difference is clearly more than 1.1 mm.
    Microsoft MVP - Mobile Devices, 2006, 2007. Also see my articles in the PPC & SP Mag Expert blog HERE.

  3. #13
    Mobile Deity
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,585

    Default Re: The HP iPAQ 210 -- an in-depth review

    UPDATE (05/05/2008):

    1. Thereíre some additional speed comparisons HERE stating the 210 is faster than the hx4700 in everyday situations.

    2. I also need to emphasize the 210 has 128Mbytes of RAM, unlike the hx4700. If youíre a power user, this may be advantageous Ė you can keep many apps open at the same time without having to close any of them (or let the system shut down some arbitrarily).

    3. To see how usable a connection to an external cellular phone is, Iíve made some long-time HSDPA tests with the v21 Nokia N95. It worked just great; after downloading 300 Mbytes (and uploading about 40), the charge meter still showed about 4 bars on the Nokia, meaning it still retained about 20-40% of its charge. This means you can download about 500 Mbytes with one charge over HSDPA if you use the 210 with the Nokia N95 with its latest firmware. (Note that the figures may wildly vary with UMTS or, even worse, GPRS / EDGE only. With them, you will most probably encounter far worse battery life Ė after all, UMTS and HSDPA streaming / download consumes approximately the same power but the net throughput of HSDPA is, of course, much higher Ė even over a non-EDR Bluetooth modem connection, where itís restricted to 72 kbytes/s, while the N95, at least in Vodafoneís network, is currently capable of downloading at about 250 kbytes/s over HSDPA.) The network conditions through this were excellent, with strong signal and, at most, walking speeds (some of the tests have been conducted while taking a walk).

    4. Iíve continued making some serious power usage tests to find out both the power consumption of the wireless units and the PXA310 CPU. (After all, the major selling point of the new PXA310 architecture is the allegedly much lower power consumption.)

    The results are acceptable but in no way stellar. All the tests have been measured under exactly the same circumstances: no CF / SD cards; minimal backlight WITHOUT enabling auto-brightness (which would have further decreased the backlight) etc. and are, consequently, usable for at least relative ratio computation. Iíve tried to make at least two tests of all tests, each lasting at least one hour long (with some tests, Iíve waited for three hours). All percentages are given in the voltage level decrease in an hour.

    ~0% CPU usage, no wireless activity: 8% / hour
    100% CPU usage (Orions), no speaker, just idling (but still consuming 100% CPU time): 18% / hour
    100% CPU usage (Orions), A2DP sound & actively playing: 24% / hour
    YouTube & CorePlayer, HSDPA via non-EDR BT: 18 (with A2DP)Ö22% (with headphones at 50% volume) / hour
    YouTube, Wi-Fi (with built-in speaker at max volume): 28 % / hour

    The latter figure, incidentally, is pretty much in correspondence with the 3:28 total runtime with the Wi-Fi multimedia streaming test in Adama D. Brownís review (see section ďHigh Drain TestĒ HERE)

    The Wi-Fi-less (Bluetooth only) YouTube figures are somewhat lower than the Orions figures. The reason for this is simple: when playing back YouTube, the CPU usage generally isnít at 100%, unlike with Orions, but at 80%. This is even lower when YouTube is buffering (but NOT during every single buffering!); see the low valleys in the following acbTaskMan shot (look for the red line!):



    All in all, efficiency- and power saving-wise, Iíve expected far-far more of the new PXA310 platform. (This is in no way HPís fault!) Remember my previous power usage tests: there, Iíve measured (see section 1.3.2 Stream formats HERE) about 70% more net power usage with high CPU usage. These tests clearly show the PXA310 still consumes way more power with high CPU loads than running under light load. In this respect, even the old and otherwise heavily outdated Samsung SC32442 architecture is far better (again, see my power measurement results HERE, in the second part of UPDATE (01/03/2008) at the bottom).

    5. Finally, Iíve made some serious recharging measurements too (making several tests with radically different starting charge level to be absolutely sure the results arenít dependent on the initial charge level). The main reason for this was my wanting to see how different USB rechargers compare to the 2A wall charger coming with the 210. Iíve tested two USB rechargers: a 0.5A (coming with the BlackBerry 8800) and a 1A one (coming with the HTC Wizard).

    USB recharging:

    Fast:


    1A Wizard charger: 24% / hour
    0.5A BB: 24% / hour

    As can be seen, thereís absolutely no difference between the 0.5A BB and the 1A Wizard charger. Given that recharging a 2200 mAh battery takes definitely more than 0.5A (but in no way close to 1A) to be finished in 4.16 hours, this shows the BB charger is able to provide more than 0.5 Ampers. The results, on the other hand, also show that there isnít much point in using USB chargers capable of providing more than 1A because it simply wonít be made advantage of.

    Slow:

    0.5A BB: 4% / hour

    Yes, the slow recharging rate is indeed very slow: one-sixth of the fast charging. Assuming the latter uses (up to) 600 mA, this means slow recharging restricts the current to around 100 mA. This will, on the other hand, surely be compatible with every USB port out there Ė even those of other PDAís like the Pocket Loox 720

    Wall charger test

    Finally, the 2A wall charger test, ~38% / hour, clearly shows the factory iPAQ charger will always be 60% faster than any USB wall charger. This is really-really useful to know. Now, I only hope HP does release a cinch -> 24-pin synch slot power converter to greatly speed up the recharging with traditional 2A iPAQ chargers. These came as a factory accessory with all past models (or, at least, the iPAQ h2210 and the hx4700) Ė itís probably because of the lack of the cradle that HP has left it out from the factory pack.
    Microsoft MVP - Mobile Devices, 2006, 2007. Also see my articles in the PPC & SP Mag Expert blog HERE.

  4. #14
    Mobile Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Romania
    Posts
    59

    Default Re: The HP iPAQ 210 -- an in-depth review

    I've measured charging current with both charging metods and the results are very clear in my opinion:
    - 24 pin charging - maximum current 1.2 A
    - mini USB charging - maximum current 0.47A, lower than 0.5 A as an USB port can provide, maybe the avoid USB port autoprotection
    - mini USB charging, slow charge, 0.1 A.
    Asus A620 -> FSC Loox 420 -> HP iPAQ 214

  5. #15
    Mobile Deity
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    1,678

    Default Re: The HP iPAQ 210 -- an in-depth review

    Quote Originally Posted by emilb View Post
    I've measured charging current with both charging metods and the results are very clear in my opinion:
    - 24 pin charging - maximum current 1.2 A
    - mini USB charging - maximum current 0.47A, lower than 0.5 A as an USB port can provide, maybe the avoid USB port autoprotection
    - mini USB charging, slow charge, 0.1 A.
    This would be consistent with what I have observed, that the miniUSB port is current limited and can not supply enough current to fully power the two hundred series, let only power and charge the two hundred series under full load conditions. Have you obtain these values by powering the miniUSB port with a source capable of supplying 2 amps or more? It has been suggested that if the miniUSB port is supply from a source capable of supplying 2 amps a second level of current may click in. Something I've never observed. Thanks for your observations and informations..

  6. #16
    Mobile Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    94

    Default Re: The HP iPAQ 210 -- an in-depth review

    What I find strange is the "yellow" tint you find present in your HP 210... mine has absolutely none to speak of, in fact, it has a bit of a bluish tint if anything. Try setting your camera to a fixed, calibrated white balance and retaking the photos. You also might have a different LCD in your unit than I do... who knows.

  7. #17
    Mobile Deity
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,585

    Default Re: The HP iPAQ 210 -- an in-depth review

    Quote Originally Posted by MD1032 View Post
    What I find strange is the "yellow" tint you find present in your HP 210... mine has absolutely none to speak of, in fact, it has a bit of a bluish tint if anything. Try setting your camera to a fixed, calibrated white balance and retaking the photos. You also might have a different LCD in your unit than I do... who knows.
    The usual variation and differences between the instances of the same model. This heterogenity was exactly the same with past VGA models like the hx4700 and Pocket Loox 720. That is, it's pretty normal to run into for example 210's with a yellow or, for that matter, bluish screen.
    Microsoft MVP - Mobile Devices, 2006, 2007. Also see my articles in the PPC & SP Mag Expert blog HERE.

  8. #18
    Mobile Deity
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,585

    Default Re: The HP iPAQ 210 -- an in-depth review

    Quote Originally Posted by emilb View Post
    I've measured charging current with both charging metods and the results are very clear in my opinion:
    - 24 pin charging - maximum current 1.2 A
    - mini USB charging - maximum current 0.47A, lower than 0.5 A as an USB port can provide, maybe the avoid USB port autoprotection
    - mini USB charging, slow charge, 0.1 A.

    Great, thanks for chiming in - these figures are pretty consistent with mine measured without having / gaining access to the direct Amperage.
    Microsoft MVP - Mobile Devices, 2006, 2007. Also see my articles in the PPC & SP Mag Expert blog HERE.

  9. #19
    Mobile Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Romania
    Posts
    59

    Default Re: The HP iPAQ 210 -- an in-depth review

    Quote Originally Posted by David Hettel View Post
    Have you obtain these values by powering the miniUSB port with a source capable of supplying 2 amps or more? It has been suggested that if the miniUSB port is supply from a source capable of supplying 2 amps a second level of current may click in. Something I've never observed. Thanks for your observations and informations..
    Yes, I've measured that value with power source capable to supply more than 0.5 A. I've tested first with one that can supply 0.6 A, an then thinkind there is a supply limitation I've tested with a power supply adapter that provides 1.2 A. There was no change in current measurement.
    Asus A620 -> FSC Loox 420 -> HP iPAQ 214

  10. #20
    ~3rdPrty 4ehvur!~
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    The land of the CheeseSteak
    Posts
    2,068

    Default Re: The HP iPAQ 210 -- an in-depth review

    Quote Originally Posted by Adama D. Brown View Post
    Shrug. All I know is that I've never noticed many people complaining about the screen in landscape, nor have I had any real reason to complain myself.
    I was tight lipped only because it still was the best I was going to get PPC wise.
    Pretty much took it on the chin.

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:27 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2
Copyright © 2014 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1