On 5/8/06, Paul Curtis <MicroSSG@comcast.net> wrote:
> If you put a 2000 and a
> 130 in front of me and said choose, it would be the 130 every time. The only
> caveat is that the 130 won't do Ethernet..... But the 2000 isn't going to
> handle it very gracefully (as compared to the 2100) either. Come to think of
I hate doing "me too" posts, but I agree whole-heartedly with Paul on
this. I just got a 2000, and after a few minutes with it, I ended up
tearing it apart, and transplanting its screen to my cracked-screen
2100, I couldn't take the lack of heap! The 2000 actually has a _lot_
less heap than the 130, and so loses all its potential
benefits--ethernet, web, speed, etc. I used 130s for a long time, and
kept it over a 2000 because I was aware of the heap issue on the 2000,
but I finally experienced it last week first hand. Either a 2100 or
130 is what I recommend, or, as Paul said, both!
-- -Jon Glass Krakow, Poland <jonglass@usa.net> -- This is the NewtonTalk list - http://www.newtontalk.net/ for all inquiries Official Newton FAQ: http://www.chuma.org/newton/faq/ WikiWikiNewt for all kinds of articles: http://tools.unna.org/wikiwikinewt/Received on Mon May 8 10:29:08 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon May 08 2006 - 13:30:00 EDT