The OQO and 770 are not competitors. The OQO is a desktop replacement - the 770 is an inexpensive device optimized mostly for browsing. The same comparison can be made with this new franken-xp-phone. Aside from form-factor and a few similar use paterns, they aren't all that similar.

The only thing I really don't like about the OQO is that it was outdated before it was released because of slips and delays. [which were much, much worse than those for the 770 release.] I can't take the OQO seriously as a desktop replacement given it's lack of usb 2.0 and inability to drive an external display at 1600x1200 at 16bpp or better. If I'm going to pay for a desktop replacement, I expect to get one. Also, the OQO touch screen is supposed to be pretty awful wrt precision - at least that's what I've read. There's a who bunch of info about handtop pcs at handtops.com if anyone is interested.

You're behind the curve -- USB 2.0 is in the new OQO 01+.

The reality is that handhelds that are full WinXP devices are devices that are in the laptop category in terms of pricing. They cannot be compared to specialized (and limited use) devices like PDAs and the 770. The prices will never be comparable. I will say that 2006 will be the year of the full function handheld at more reasonable prices.

The reality is that not only they are in the same category in terms of pricing, they are also in the same category in the terms of battery life, etc...

If you put WinXP (or OSX, or even full-fledged Linux) on a machine, you get the same constraints as to computing power, disk size and interface than on a desktop. No surprise.

The idea behind a handheld is to redesign the system so that you DO the same things using less power, footprint and money. What do I do: I type text, do spreadsheets, run a calendar... all things which were done on a PC-XT running at 8 MHz. I also need network connectivity, web, mp3, maybe the odd animation. Why wouldn't that work on a palmtop?

Unless your web connectivity implies 3-D games and bloated web pages, it should work. What do you use your WinXP machine for?

But, that can't be done cheaper than a laptop. Miniaturization is by nature expensive. The two goals are mutually exclusive, unfortunately.

Anyone who understands that the 770 is a handheld remote X terminal and who understands the power of the 'X Server - X Client Application' paradigm is never going to agree that the 770 is a limited use device. On the contrary, it's the first mobile device ever manufactured for the mass market that was NOT a limited use device. The magic of the 770 is that when used as an X terminal it is thinner than a thin client and its GUI can empower the user simultaneously to multiple remote apps and services running on remote computers and remote supercomputing clusters. A 770 user using X has access to far more CPU power and storage than does a user of any XP machine of any size.
Reality is far too complex for this to be true. The 770 itself is evidence of that. When miniaturization involves integration of multiple discrete hardware components the price of the integrated component typically is less than the price of the formerly discrete components. When current is reduced, the need for (and cost of) heat dissipation components is reduced, or eliminated. When BlueTooth or Wireless USB are added, the need for cables is eliminated. When the touchscreen firmware is moved into the CPU the need for a discrete controller is eliminated. When miniaturization makes a product more in demand the cost of manufacturing each unit decreases.

There are many problems with building small XP machines that work well, any many of these are the same problems that are encountered with building big XP machines that work well.

Thin clients can never replace devices that must be fully functional when a network is unavailable, on a flight for instance. While WiFi is more readily available now than in the past there are still many places and times when it is not. It requires a full computer to provide the connectivity options many mobile users need to get connected.

Small devices are expensive to design, engineer, and manufacture than larger ones such as laptops. This is why we haven't seen such handhelds for less than around $2,000. As processes become more prevalent we will see them come down like everything else. I believe this will happen in 2006.

The 770 isn't a thin client. It's an X terminal. You have never seen a wireless touchscreen X terminal in mass production before, have you? If you aren't sure what an X terminal is nobody here is going to ridicule you if you say so. Many Linux people don't actually know, either.
What do you mean? All these 770 users are getting connected easily to the Internet without 'a full computer'.
The selling price of the 770 is $350. What are you talking about, exactly?

The 770 isn't a thin client. It's an X terminal.
I would say that people use 770 in different manners, for some it MIGHT be a thin client. (It sure is for me, most apps I use on big computer would not fit small screen anyway) So you should not try to persuade them about your subjective truth.

Remote User, I hear you preaching. And there is one thing that resonates with me: Stuff for the expert market can be prohibitively expensive. As soon as mass market jumps in and prices drop, new worlds of opportunities open up. Examples taken from my "former life": 20 years ago: graphic caards for scientific visualizations (cheap due to gamers). AD-converters (cheap now due to music lovers). Mechanical devices: ultra-high-precision spray devices (hairspray).

Long story short: now the cheap X-terminal is here. "We" did not expect it like that, and if I interpret you correctly, even those that have a 770 don't see what it is (by the way, off-topic again: that's what Alchemists say about the philosophers' stone, too).
For us, uninitiated, little crowd: where is the (free, easily accessible) X-server to play around and tinker, even if only to say or listen to "hello world"? Where is the beef?