What to buy - 5500 or 5600

[arnoldmm]

I want to buy a Zaurus and have read the specs a few times but it doesn\'t really help me decide what I really want or which is the better buy. I\'d like to know what you guys would recommend, the 5600 seems to be about $80 -$90 more  but the spces look  better. Is it true that with the 5600 you can only run the Sharp ROM and not OZ etc. I have been using Linux since 1994 and figured it\'s about  time I got a Zaurus.

[spaul]

Some people have said the 5500 because of the greater choice of ROMs.  But with the current low price, speaker, larger battery and faster processor  the 5600 is a better value IMHO.  Both great choices.

[Anonymous]

Are there in fact many roms that work on sl-5500 BUT NOT on sl-5600. I would think the reverse, that the newer technology would support more

[VeeDubb]

Here is what I would say.  If you can find a 5600 that you are SURE has a pxa255 and NOT a pxa250  AND you only plan on using th sharp rom, then the 5600 is better.

If you can\'t find one with the newer version of the Xscale or if you want to use OZ, then get the 5500.


sfgreg, more work on the 5500 for a couple reasons.
1.  IT\'s been out longer so devs have had more time to figure it out.
2.  The 5600 doesn\'t sync with linux out of the box. (virtualy all developers use linux on the desktop)

[arnoldmm]

I was thinking that because of the speaker, larger battery and faster processor the 5600 would be a better buy, the specs do look better. On the other hand the fact that it doesn\'t sync with Linux would be a negative factor. I am wondering if that is not something that will be developed in ther near future. I understand that out of the box it doesn\'t sync, is there anyway of setting it up so that it does? I am also not sure I understand the differences bewteen the two processors. How can I tell if I buy it from eBay or one of the online stores what processor I am getting? Do the older models of the 5600 come with pxa250 and the newer ones with pxa255?

OK, I did some research and from what I could find the pxa255 has lower power consumption and a faster bus, is there that much difference in the user experience between the pxa250 and pxa255. Wouldn\'t the 5600 with a pxa250 still be faster than a 5500?

I am still not sure how I can make sure what processor I am getting on the 5600 if I order online, any suggestions?

[tsackett]

There is a long thread about the processors in the 5600. I\'m too lazy to link it for you, but it\'s not hard to find; just search the forums for \"pxa255\". Here the main points:
- The pxa250 chips have a bug which requires a workaround in the kernel that causes the to run slower than they need to.
- Sharp has switched to the pxa255 chips, but there are still a lot of pxa250 models being sold. If you buy a 5600 for $300 from Amazon, you don\'t get to choose; you get what\'s on the shelf.
- The packaging says what kind of chip is inside.
- There is a replacement kernel available for download that does not include the workaround. It runs faster, and doesn\'t seem to cause any problems.
- Performance may not be the most important criteria in choosing a PDA.

As far as the ROM and syncing issues are concerned, the only alternative ROM I\'ve found that is stable on the 5600 is the Zynergy5600 ROM. It\'s a modified version of the stock Sharp ROM. The OpenZaurus folks are working on the 5600 version right now. While it\'s true that the 5600s don\'t sync with Linux yet, I believe that this applies to all new 5500s as well. The new Sharp ROMs have changed the format of the PIM files, and no longer include an FTP server.

[lardman]

I\'d say the 5500 because it has more RAM.

Actually I\'d recommend you get one of the CXXX machines (but not a c700).

Si

[Anonymous]

Personally, I don\'t care about syncing with Linux.  I installed ssh and just communicate with the 5600 through wifi.

[VeeDubb]

To answer about the 250 vs 255 more simply.

The 400mhz 250 is SLOWER than a 206mhz StrongARM.  It\'s not a \"bug\" it\'s a bad design.  THe F.S.B. is too slow.  I say it\'s not a \"bug\" because intel was fully aware when they released it and didn\'t care because they were ceaper that way and thought nobody would figure it out.  It took about 10 minutes for everyone in the whole damn world to know of course tht it was a sucky CPU.

Also, as already mentioned, the 5500 has more ram.  NOw, if you stick with the sharp ROMs, they end up having the same available storage and available memory, but the 5600 deals with it better.  If you use OZ, you can install a ROM that let\'s you use all of the ram for memory and then the 5500 has more.

Same goes for the speaker.  The speaker will be off 99% of  your time because it\'s low quality and annoying.  If you want low quality and annoying, use OZ and let it turnt
he buzzer into a speaker.  Then you have a speaker on the 5500, not a great one, but it\'s there.

ANd last but not least, the battery.  THe bigger battery on the 5600 is great for use, but it\'s ugly and sticks out.  So like everything else, it\'s a trade off.  The butt-end of the 5600 is about 60% thicker than the 5500 because of that tumorous growth

[arnoldmm]

Thanks guys for all the responses ..

lardman I am \"employment challenged\" as are so many techies in Silicon Valley, so a CXXX is out of the question, though I do take note of your thumbs up for the 5500.

VeeDub, interesting info about  Intel  \'crippling\' the pxa250, not he first time they\'ve done that to a chip. Thanks for the great comparison between the 5500 and 5600.

My inclination right now is to go with the SL-5500 ...

[VeeDubb]

I have a 5500 and I\'ve never thought, \"Gee, I wish I had a 5600...\"

I also understand the \"employment chalange.\"  I\'m employment chalenged myself right now.  If I wasn\'t I WOULD ditch my 5500 for a c860  .