Palm now happy to take your $549 for a Treo Pro preorder
By Chris Ziegler 
posted Sep 9th 2008 3:12PM
posted Sep 9th 2008 3:12PM
[Thanks to everyone who sent this in]
posted Sep 9th 2008 3:12PM
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
I'll tell you what isn't sexy, and that is a $550 price tag. Are they out of their frickin minds?!
Something isn't going right when you release a phone like this and its not being sold through a phone company of any kind. I think times are as dark as they have been thought, or something is going on. I mean, if I was running Verizon Wireless or AT&T, I'd jump on that phone right away.
As loyal as I am to Palm...I would never pay that kind of money for a phone like that. Never.
yeah but at least this way, you don't get a bastardized/Verizonized version that has locked features... This is the whole phone and nothing but the phone.
Its $550 because there are no carrier subsidies. $500 - $600 is generally what most smartphones go for before any sort of carrier discounts that are applied for signing a new contract. The price is actually pretty reasonable though for an unlocked phone. Go to expansys.com and see what a smartphone with specs similar to the Treo Pro goes for. Compared to those prices, the Treo Pro is a relative bargain.
That's a riot! The unlocked Treo 750 i purchased almost 2 years ago, upon its release, was only $350. You're a descendant of PT Barnum, I presume?
'Bargain'? Compared to the $350 I spent on the unlocked Treo 750 at the time of its release almost 2 years ago?
Wow, with comments like that, its no wonder Backbeat has been banned from multiple smartphone sites.
^ Little Johnny sounds awfully defensive about the Treo Pro's insane pricing. I wasn't aware that buying a newly released Treo at a low, but reasonable price could get one expelled from smartphone forums. Sounds like you would know better than I, so I'll defer to your wisdom on the matter.
Backbeat, I could care less what Palm charges for their Treo Pro or what you think of their price, makes no difference to me. However, my simple point was that from your overall negative tone in your posted comments to the other posters in this thread, its no surprise why you've been banned from multiple smartphone websites. You seem to be unable to get along with both the people in this thread and at other forums and I for one am glad that the folks over at PPH and other sites banned you a long time ago, the sites are far more pleasant without your negative posts. Sorry to see you still have not changed your ways.
^ Firstly, Johnny, you stand as the judge to no one. Clear? Yet, your arrogance reeks of a rotted, bitter soul. I have no idea who/what you are, nor do I care as there is certainly no cause. You simply exist as a self-created virtual-character on the intertubes to please yourself and make a mockery of basic human dignity. Next time when you recreate yourself, don't forget the special-sauce ingredients (spine, integrity, dignity) which have been missing from your past 'characters'. Cheers!
Wow, all this coming from the same guy who told another poster to go "Back to your piss-filled sandbox" when the guy wasn't even addressing you. With posts like that and your latest one, no wonder so many sites have banned you. Have a nice day backbeat.
When a record of insulting the intelligence of readers proves to be a pattern of self-interest and self-serving economics, one can either 'hope' they see the error of their way or one can take action to assist their lack of self-awareness. The error of your way appears to be that you believe you can freely, and without responsibility, play judge/god. 'Tis not the case, Johnny. It is this concept of cause-and-effect which continues to mysteriously elude your gray-matter. Playing apologist for the genesis, root cause is worn on you like a fine-tailored suit. Cheers!
I'm having a _great_ day!
"Palm now happy to take your $549 for a Treo Pro preorder"
Goddamn, that's funny!
(Oh ... You were serious?)
"...no matter how ancient the platform might be"
WM6.1 is "ancient" already? Yikes. I didn't get the memo.
No, ever since the Earth-Is-Not-Flat Memo, you've proven time and time again that you do not handle reality with an ounce of dignity. Back to your piss-filled sandbox.
Hmm, 550 for a fancier Centro or spending 20 dollars more for a Touch Pro? Is this suppose to be a hard decision?
It's certainly not just a fancier Centro and anyone that knows anything about either of the phones could easily see that, so I won't even touch that anymore.
But you raise a good point, if this device is really just $20 cheaper, I think they need to redo their sales model.
And WHY would I pay $550 for this instead of $250 for a Moto Q at AT&T?
Because this is WinMo Pro not Standard. If you're an aficionado you already know the advantages. If you're not then get the Q...
dude do some research before you buy a Q seriously. i have a Q9c from Verizon (from Verizon is a big part of the problem right there) and it sucks ass. it has a VERY sluggish processor and is just generally unstable. and the lack of a touch screen is annoying almost immediately. you may not want to pay $550 (which is understandable) but dont act like its not $550 for a reason. going on specs and early hands-on reviews, the Q isnt even fit to clean this phone's toilet.
I'm in for about $200. Two years with AT&T is fair to ask. Okay make it three years and $99. Make with the incentives! Hurry! This phone is going to be out of date in about 9 months! Just ask my three 650s and two 750s! Take my old Treos, Puh-leeze.
But, seriously, I do want this one. And the next one.
Thanks.
"And WHY would I pay $550 for this instead of $250 for a Moto Q at AT&T?"
What part of 'unsubsidized cost' is hard to understand? Try buying a Moto Q from AT&T WITHOUT signing a 2 year contract, and let me know what your cost is.
I'm not playing "judge/god" here, I am simply stating a fact. And the fact is that you have been banned from at least two of the largest smartphone communities on the internet (and who knows how many others) for not being able to get along with the other members. For anyone that is interested, simply go to treocentral.com and/or pdaphonehome.com, do a username search for "backbeat", then take a minute or two to read his posts (and notice the "banned" header under his username). Now read his posts here on engadget and judge for yourself: Is John a "rotten, bitter soul" as backbeat suggests or is backbeat simply continuing on with the same behavior that got him banned from those websites?
I'm not playing "judge/god" here, I am simply stating a fact. And the fact is that you have been banned from at least two of the largest smartphone communities on the internet (and who knows how many others) for not being able to get along with the other members. For anyone that is interested, simply go to treocentral.com and/or pdaphonehome.com, do a username search for "backbeat", then take a minute or two to read his posts (and notice the "banned" header under his username). Now read his posts here on engadget and judge for yourself: Is John a "rotten, bitter soul" as backbeat suggests or is backbeat simply continuing on with the same behavior that got him banned from those websites?
So ... You're only purpose and point being made is character assassination. OK. Got it. Thanks for clarifying. What also continues to elude your gram of gray-matter is that, just like you and your sockpuppets, I can fill the 'name' field with whatever I like. If such a rabble-rouser was so universally, infamously known throughout the internet(s), why would anyone choose that name? You don't like to think (for yourself) terribly hard, do you?
So ... You're only purpose and point being made is character assassination. OK. Got it. Thanks for clarifying. What also continues to elude your gram of gray-matter is that, just like you and your sockpuppets, I can fill the 'name' field with whatever I like. If such a rabble-rouser was so universally, infamously known throughout the internet(s), why would anyone choose that name? You don't like to think (for yourself) terribly hard, do you?
"So ... You're only purpose and point being made is character assassination."
When a person continues to behave poorly on the internet and continues to post rude remarks and I happen to come across them, then I will make sure others who may be reading their comments are aware of that person's background so that the comments can be interpreted in the appropriate context of that person's history.
"If such a rabble-rouser was so universally, infamously known throughout the internet(s), why would anyone choose that name?"
You tell me, you are the one that chose it and continues to use it despit the fact that you are obviously aware of your own history of being banned on those websites. Seems not only have you not changed your rude/condescending/negative posting style, but changing your username is apparently something you don't care to do either despite your history on those smartphone websites.
And _still_ the genesis, root-cause of all your frustration continues to elude you, JohnnyBoy. Or, is it the other way around? Could it be that you simply cannot bring yourself to face that Nightmare On East Thomas Street? That demon simply too much for you to bear? You're spinning in circles, kid. Nascar fan are you? Repeating your allegations, ad nauseum, amounts to what? You enjoy swallowing your own regurgitations? Proving you hold the title of the Internets' Biggest Dysfunctional Phallus? Go for the gold, little Johnny. Go for it! Then ... Grow up.
Frustration? More like disappointment at the fact that since you've been banned from those websites over a year ago, you still continue with your childish/pathetic ways of acting like a jerk on the internet. Ever notice how you seem to be frequently involved in situationss like these? Wonder why that is? Perhaps you should take your own advice and "grow up."
^ Don't let the door hit ya where Jebuz split ya, genius. You're so off-base your Sprint a-GPS can't save your sorry ass.
Hint: I'm not in _any_ situation. However, since your involvement here is of a purely personal-vendetta nature, I can assure you that on more than one level, you're in violation of Engadget's TOS, plain and simple. Own it.
I'm in violation of Engadget's TOS?! I've made no such defamatory statements. In fact, here are just a few of your choice statements:
"Back to your piss-filled sandbox."
"Proving you hold the title of the Internets' Biggest Dysfunctional Phallus?"
I've taken the liberty of reporting your comments to the site admin. I hope he follows the lead of PPH and TC because it is clearly you who are in violation of the TOS (as you were on the other websites as well).
^ Too late. This has already gone well above your pay-grade. Your irresponsibly hate-inspired tirade against someone you mistake for another you obvious obsess over is an endangerment to the entire site. 'John/Marty/et al' will no longer have a home to hunt for their invented-enemies. Got it, Mal?
Ya bitchboy!*
*Yes, that applies to both of you, John/Marty.