I have a Dell Axim. I am trying to surf the net. I don't see how you
can make it possible to do so because the screen is so small and what
you can view is so little. What am I missing? Thanks.

you need a 3rd party app. Something like nyditot is good. It allows you to
change the orientation and virtual sizes of the screen. Go to
www.nyditot.com
"fl" <fzl20@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:3E43DA6F.59915893@yahoo.com...
> I have a Dell Axim. I am trying to surf the net. I don't see how you
> can make it possible to do so because the screen is so small and what
> you can view is so little. What am I missing? Thanks.
>

You also might want to try to confine your surfing to sites/pages that are
optimized for the PDA display. Here's one that I use as my home page that
has links to useful sites that have PDA-friendly pages:

http://home.earthlink.net/~ag3/pocketpc/

Good luck!

"Matt" <matt@numark.star.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3e43d64a$1@news.star.co.uk...
> you need a 3rd party app. Something like nyditot is good. It allows you to
> change the orientation and virtual sizes of the screen. Go to
> www.nyditot.com
> "fl" <fzl20@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3E43DA6F.59915893@yahoo.com...
> > I have a Dell Axim. I am trying to surf the net. I don't see how you
> > can make it possible to do so because the screen is so small and what
> > you can view is so little. What am I missing? Thanks.
> >
>
>

You're not missing anything. Don't forget your viewing pages generally
optimized for 800X600 on a 320X240 piece of real estate. There are programs
that can change the orientation of your screen, instead of viewing in
"portrait" mode, you can switch to "landscape", but still its not great.

You'll either have to get used to cramped space, or find sites designed for
PDAs.

Rob


"fl" <fzl20@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:3E43DA6F.59915893@yahoo.com...
> I have a Dell Axim. I am trying to surf the net. I don't see how you
> can make it possible to do so because the screen is so small and what
> you can view is so little. What am I missing? Thanks.
>

You'll get used to it, and you'll get pretty good at navigating around
pages. Someone here compared it to reading a newspaper through a cardboard
tube.

I suggest you download the free trial of NetFront browser from handango.com
.. It is far better at displaying pages and is more full-featured than PIE.
It's wrap content feature works well on most pages to keep the text on your
PPC screen width. If you're going to surf much, it's worth the $25.

Google.com is easy to use on a small screen (and the best search engine
anyways).

I've found the screen orientation programs more trouble than I care to deal
with. They require soft resets after each change.

hth
Jim


"fl" <fzl20@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:3E43DA6F.59915893@yahoo.com...
> I have a Dell Axim. I am trying to surf the net. I don't see how you
> can make it possible to do so because the screen is so small and what
> you can view is so little. What am I missing? Thanks.
>

The Pocket PC is not the ideal platform for "surfing" the net. It is
extremely useful for visiting specific web sites to get information
while on the road. For example, looking up a FedEx tracking number, or
viewing the current Los Angeles freeway traffic map. As others have
indicated, there are a number of sites that are easy to view on the
small screen, while others, while not formatted for the Pocket PC, are
still useful because the information they provide on a timely basis is
worth the extra effort to view them.

David Shier
www.shier.com
www.BluetoothNews.com

On Fri, 07 Feb 2003 10:10:23 -0600, fl <fzl20@yahoo.com> wrote:

>I have a Dell Axim. I am trying to surf the net. I don't see how you
>can make it possible to do so because the screen is so small and what
>you can view is so little. What am I missing? Thanks.

Jim,

I have been looking for a PIE replacement for my IPAQ 3835 for a
long time, so I tried the trial of Netfront 3.0 at handango tonight.
I never could get it to connect (gave me a DNS error on every site)
even though I was connected and PIE could get to the same sites with
no trouble. Also, when I tried to uninstall it from my desktop, it
could not find its install files and I had to manually edit the
Windows XP registry.

I decided to try again with a clean install. So I cleaned the
registry, restarted my desktop machine and did a soft reset on my
IPAQ. The result was the same as before -- and the software
refused to uninstall again.

Have you gotten Netfront 3.0 to work on a Strong Arm device?

Thanks. I was very hopeful and would still like to make it work,
but at this point I would caution folks who don't want to manually
clean their windows registries.

Utah
"Jim Zambenini" <jimzamNOSPAM@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:OFK7xRwzCHA.2868@TK2MSFTNGP12...
> You'll get used to it, and you'll get pretty good at navigating
around
> pages. Someone here compared it to reading a newspaper through a
cardboard
> tube.
>
> I suggest you download the free trial of NetFront browser from
handango.com
> . It is far better at displaying pages and is more full-featured
than PIE.
> It's wrap content feature works well on most pages to keep the
text on your
> PPC screen width. If you're going to surf much, it's worth the
$25.
>
> Google.com is easy to use on a small screen (and the best search
engine
> anyways).
>
> I've found the screen orientation programs more trouble than I
care to deal
> with. They require soft resets after each change.
>
> hth
> Jim
>
>
> "fl" <fzl20@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3E43DA6F.59915893@yahoo.com...
> > I have a Dell Axim. I am trying to surf the net. I don't see
how you
> > can make it possible to do so because the screen is so small and
what
> > you can view is so little. What am I missing? Thanks.
> >
>
>

Thunderhawk by Bitstream is a browser and service that does a
considerably better job at net surfing on a Pocket PC than other
solutions. It uses landscape mode. The URL request goes to
Bitstream, who processes the pages on its servers and sends them back
in a format optimized for a Pocket PC.

It works quite well and many people, myself included, swear by it.

One downside is that it is a service, so it's not a one-time purchase.
Current rates are $49.95 per year. I just look at it as $4 per month,
then it doesn't seem like so much.

http://www.bitstream.com/wireless/

On Fri, 07 Feb 2003 10:10:23 -0600, fl <fzl20@yahoo.com> wrote:

>I have a Dell Axim. I am trying to surf the net. I don't see how you
>can make it possible to do so because the screen is so small and what
>you can view is so little. What am I missing? Thanks.

Utah,
That's the first I've heard of a report like that. My PPC, also an iPaq
3835, install was flawless and connections are no problem. Be sure you have
proxy settings correct within NetFront's tools>options>network. I have
never uninstalled it but have reinstalled after a hard reset , again, no
problems. I assume that when you say "uninstall from the desktop", you are
using the desktop ActiveSync add/remove program function.

It almost sounds like you might have gotten the download file corrupted,
kill it and download again. If it persists, drop Access a line and see if
they can help.

hth
Jim Z


"Utah" <reply@group.please> wrote in message
news:3e447184_3@spamkiller.newsgroups.com...
> Jim,
>
> I have been looking for a PIE replacement for my IPAQ 3835 for a
> long time, so I tried the trial of Netfront 3.0 at handango tonight.
> I never could get it to connect (gave me a DNS error on every site)
> even though I was connected and PIE could get to the same sites with
> no trouble. Also, when I tried to uninstall it from my desktop, it
> could not find its install files and I had to manually edit the
> Windows XP registry.
>
> I decided to try again with a clean install. So I cleaned the
> registry, restarted my desktop machine and did a soft reset on my
> IPAQ. The result was the same as before -- and the software
> refused to uninstall again.
>
> Have you gotten Netfront 3.0 to work on a Strong Arm device?
>
> Thanks. I was very hopeful and would still like to make it work,
> but at this point I would caution folks who don't want to manually
> clean their windows registries.
>
> Utah
> "Jim Zambenini" <jimzamNOSPAM@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:OFK7xRwzCHA.2868@TK2MSFTNGP12...
> > You'll get used to it, and you'll get pretty good at navigating
> around
> > pages. Someone here compared it to reading a newspaper through a
> cardboard
> > tube.
> >
> > I suggest you download the free trial of NetFront browser from
> handango.com
> > . It is far better at displaying pages and is more full-featured
> than PIE.
> > It's wrap content feature works well on most pages to keep the
> text on your
> > PPC screen width. If you're going to surf much, it's worth the
> $25.
> >
> > Google.com is easy to use on a small screen (and the best search
> engine
> > anyways).
> >
> > I've found the screen orientation programs more trouble than I
> care to deal
> > with. They require soft resets after each change.
> >
> > hth
> > Jim
> >
> >
> > "fl" <fzl20@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:3E43DA6F.59915893@yahoo.com...
> > > I have a Dell Axim. I am trying to surf the net. I don't see
> how you
> > > can make it possible to do so because the screen is so small and
> what
> > > you can view is so little. What am I missing? Thanks.
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

I saw Bitsreams site, How does it look for something like the New York
Times?


On Sat, 08 Feb 2003 13:12:00 GMT, Talon95 <doug@pocketnow.com> wrote:

>Thunderhawk by Bitstream is a browser and service that does a
>considerably better job at net surfing on a Pocket PC than other
>solutions. It uses landscape mode. The URL request goes to
>Bitstream, who processes the pages on its servers and sends them back
>in a format optimized for a Pocket PC.
>
>It works quite well and many people, myself included, swear by it.
>
>One downside is that it is a service, so it's not a one-time purchase.
>Current rates are $49.95 per year. I just look at it as $4 per month,
>then it doesn't seem like so much.
>
>http://www.bitstream.com/wireless/
>
>On Fri, 07 Feb 2003 10:10:23 -0600, fl <fzl20@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>I have a Dell Axim. I am trying to surf the net. I don't see how you
>>can make it possible to do so because the screen is so small and what
>>you can view is so little. What am I missing? Thanks.

The NY Times looks reasonably good on Thunderhawk from Bitstream.
The small screen on an IPAQ will never give the same surfing
experience as a large desktop monitor, but Bitstream is the best
solution I've found. The graphics are also re-rendered by Bitstream
for the color palette and size of the IPAQ screen, and the text size
can be adjusted to taste. The difference between Bitstream and PIE
is really noticeable.

I'm still using the 30-day trial, but I think I'll probably shell
out the $50 per year to buy the Bitstream service when my trial
period expires. I've tried NetFront and other PIE replacements, and
I've tried NYDITOT to use PIE in landscape. But Thunderhawk is
better by far than any of those alternatives in my opinion.

Good luck.

Utah

<bebe@@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:j0cd4v8lubfumeut0nbnpr7edccsp3jk9n@4ax.com...
> I saw Bitsreams site, How does it look for something like the New
York
> Times?
>
>
> On Sat, 08 Feb 2003 13:12:00 GMT, Talon95 <doug@pocketnow.com>
wrote:
>
> >Thunderhawk by Bitstream is a browser and service that does a
> >considerably better job at net surfing on a Pocket PC than other
> >solutions. It uses landscape mode. The URL request goes to
> >Bitstream, who processes the pages on its servers and sends them
back
> >in a format optimized for a Pocket PC.
> >
> >It works quite well and many people, myself included, swear by
it.
> >
> >One downside is that it is a service, so it's not a one-time
purchase.
> >Current rates are $49.95 per year. I just look at it as $4 per
month,
> >then it doesn't seem like so much.
> >
> >http://www.bitstream.com/wireless/
> >
> >On Fri, 07 Feb 2003 10:10:23 -0600, fl <fzl20@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >>I have a Dell Axim. I am trying to surf the net. I don't see
how you
> >>can make it possible to do so because the screen is so small and
what
> >>you can view is so little. What am I missing? Thanks.
>

Once I move to PocketPc, I'll have to give it a try.


On Sun, 9 Feb 2003 15:44:44 -0500, "Utah" <reply@group.please> wrote:

>The NY Times looks reasonably good on Thunderhawk from Bitstream.
>The small screen on an IPAQ will never give the same surfing
>experience as a large desktop monitor, but Bitstream is the best
>solution I've found. The graphics are also re-rendered by Bitstream
>for the color palette and size of the IPAQ screen, and the text size
>can be adjusted to taste. The difference between Bitstream and PIE
>is really noticeable.
>
>I'm still using the 30-day trial, but I think I'll probably shell
>out the $50 per year to buy the Bitstream service when my trial
>period expires. I've tried NetFront and other PIE replacements, and
>I've tried NYDITOT to use PIE in landscape. But Thunderhawk is
>better by far than any of those alternatives in my opinion.
>
>Good luck.
>
>Utah
>
><bebe@@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>news:j0cd4v8lubfumeut0nbnpr7edccsp3jk9n@4ax.com...
>> I saw Bitsreams site, How does it look for something like the New
>York
>> Times?
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 08 Feb 2003 13:12:00 GMT, Talon95 <doug@pocketnow.com>
>wrote:
>>
>> >Thunderhawk by Bitstream is a browser and service that does a
>> >considerably better job at net surfing on a Pocket PC than other
>> >solutions. It uses landscape mode. The URL request goes to
>> >Bitstream, who processes the pages on its servers and sends them
>back
>> >in a format optimized for a Pocket PC.
>> >
>> >It works quite well and many people, myself included, swear by
>it.
>> >
>> >One downside is that it is a service, so it's not a one-time
>purchase.
>> >Current rates are $49.95 per year. I just look at it as $4 per
>month,
>> >then it doesn't seem like so much.
>> >
>> >http://www.bitstream.com/wireless/
>> >
>> >On Fri, 07 Feb 2003 10:10:23 -0600, fl <fzl20@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>I have a Dell Axim. I am trying to surf the net. I don't see
>how you
>> >>can make it possible to do so because the screen is so small and
>what
>> >>you can view is so little. What am I missing? Thanks.
>>
>