Access Co Ltd, a mobile browser and content delivery developer that recently acquired PalmSource, has acknowledged that the unit's Palm operating system has a limited future. Access instead appears ready to focus on Linux-based offerings, suggesting that Linux development opportunities were the reason behind its purchase of PalmSource after all. Update: Apparently the marketing/PR department of PalmSource got worked up at the CBR article. Maybe Access is too truthful for their taste?
Post a Comment
Member since:
---
Member since:2005-06-28
Member since:2005-07-06
As the creator of a Palm application (I won't mention it here), this hits home. I am right now deciding whether or not to continue the development of my app on the Palm platform. Ever since Sony exited the market, I have felt the platform is dying. It really is a shame to me. I also used to develop for WinCE/PocketPC, which was very chaotic. You had to compile for ARM/SH3/?? for each app. I have always like the fact I could just compile my App once. And Palm apps were so much "lighter" due to the lack of the monstrous Windows framework that runs on CE devices. But technical merit has very little to do with the marketing world, so I guess I'll just have to adjust.
Member since:
2005-07-07
Member since:2005-06-28
PDAs? No one is putting their money on PDAs anymore. The future is smartphones. That's what Palm, MS and Nokia and Access are looking into.
The Nokia 770 is not a PDA either. It's a device to browse the net, either via local wifi or via pairing the device with a GPRS/EDGE bluetooth-enabled [nokia] phone! It exists so Nokia has an answer for people who want to browse the net in respectable resolutions via GPRS/EDGE. It's a companion to Nokia's phones, it's not a PDA, even if some of the PDA functionality might cram in eventually.
Member since:
---
Member since:
---
>Update: Apparently the marketing/PR department of
>PalmSource got worked up at the CBR article. Maybe
>Access is too truthful for their taste?
Or maybe the original article was wrong?
From http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=12339
>Five years ago analysts were predicting that
>cellphones and PDAs will eventually merge. Many
>laughed at these predictions (especially PalmOS users
>of that time)
Hmmm...maybe someone has an anti-PalmOS agenda?
Member since:2005-06-28
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:---
Member since:
2005-06-29
Or, you are just way too positive about the future of these so-called "smartphones" (I'd much rather prefer the term "bloatphones", but that's just personal 
).
But seriously now-- you may say that PDAs are dead, and that phones are taking over the role of PDAs by incorporating PDA features.
Why not look at it the other way 'round? Aren't these so-called "smart"phones (like those chubby SonyEricssons) just PDAs that happen to have cellphone technology?
The PDA never *really* got on in the way cellphones and computers have because PDAs try/tried to solve a problem that does/did not exist: 99% of the world is just fine with using normal paper diaries. Other than that, PDAs are complex, very hard to use, chubby, and too vulnerable (the larger a screen, the more likely it will break during carrying/using/etc-- especially touch-screens).
Cellphones, on the other hand, got on because they *did* solve a problem: the problem of not being able to talk to your loved ones while not in the fecinity of a fixed phone/phonebooth. Cellphones played on one of the most defining needs that makes us human: the need to communicate, to convey messages.
PDAs added nothing to that, neither do smartphones. That is why I believe that the smartphone (or PDA with cellphone capabilities) will never take off and take over the' normal' cellphone: they do not solve a clear problem, nor do they work on basic human needs.
We are not all geeks.
Member since:2005-07-06
Why not look at it the other way 'round? Aren't these so-called "smart"phones (like those chubby SonyEricssons) just PDAs that happen to have cellphone technology?
No, if you look at the original Nokia communicators they were PDAs which happened to be phones, they looked and acted like PDAs.
The Smart phones did it the other way around, they are first and foremost a phone with PDA features secondary. The form factor is that of a phone.
The modern Smart phones and PDAs are really a fusion of both but you can still tell which originated as which.
Cellphones, on the other hand, got on because they *did* solve a problem: the problem of not being able to talk to your loved ones while not in the fecinity of a fixed phone/phonebooth. Cellphones played on one of the most defining needs that makes us human: the need to communicate, to convey messages.
So do smart phones - they give you email, web access, IEC etc, they provide more forms of communication. Instead of saying how good / bad your holiday is you can now send a photo.
We are not all geeks.
...erm, you're the editor of OSNews ;-)
Member since:2005-06-29
...erm, you're the editor of OSNews ;-)
Yeah, but somehow I'm less of a geek than Eugenia in these sorts of things. I once named myself the James May of OSNews-- people that watch or read BBC's TopGear know what I'm talking about 
.
Instead of saying how good / bad your holiday is you can now send a photo.
Most normal phones can do that too.
Member since:
2005-06-29
Member since:
---
Smartphones just don't cut it for many people. It's interesting to note that colleagues who have so-called smartphones have either switched back to separate phones and PDAs or are looking to switch.
As for the future of PalmOS, it's been looking pretty bleak the last few years. It is/was fantastic, with a clean, usable UI and a system that was a joy to use. Unfortunately, things started to stagnate and now the clumsy, inelegant Windows solutions have started to take over. The PDA market is becoming very unappealing,
Member since:
2005-07-06
Member since:
---
bad luck for that beos code but this one is yet another management mistake.
Palm should have gone for a transition to linux long ago and they never ever should have purchased beos. Palm and beos both learned the same painful lession; no one wants another proprietary OS and its damn hard for a small company to compete with giants (MS and symbian in this case).
Management screwed up yet again. I sure am happy haiku is open source.
Member since:
---
Well... I Linux is not really designed for embedded devices so switching to linux is really just an idea to lay off employees and feed off a volunteer base. Hell, I'd figure netbsd would work better.
now, linux might be better for watches and things since a couple years ago when i used to compare those things... but the kernel has some problems with it that im sure are not gone yet.
Member since:2005-08-10
"Well... I Linux is not really designed for embedded devices"
I'm not exactly the biggest fan of Linux, but it seems to work well enough in any of the devices I've seen it embedded in, so I can't agree with that statement. Progress is definately being made to get Linux into all maner of small devices.
"so switching to linux is really just an idea to lay off employees and feed off a volunteer base."
Maybee, but more efficient processes are always going to be favoured over less efficient ones. You get a bigger return on investment that way.
"Hell, I'd figure netbsd would work better."
I'd have to agree with this statement, but who knows how long that such would be considdered "true." While currently NetBSD can be cut down to a smaller size, and has less redundant code, there are quite alot of people working on Linux, and quite frankly, it tends to suck less over time.
"but the kernel has some problems with it that im sure are not gone yet."
All software has problems, so unless you have specific requirements that are not being met by something in particular, that is far too vague to base anything on.
Member since:
---
Member since:
2005-07-06
