Palm. It’s that big clunky part of your hand that doesn’t get any of the attention – the fingers, the thumb especially, get all the glory. Just think, however, what your hands would be like if you didn’t have palms, and your fingers just grew straight out of your wrist. Doesn’t look so hot now, does it? Well, Palm is supposedly about to go under, if you were to believe the reports. Update: Palm has just announced that the Pre Plus and Pixi Plus will become available on AT&T in the coming months.
The present
In the media, you have to be very careful with predicting the downfall of companies or technologies. Apart form the obligatory “BSD is dying!”, Apple has been declared dead as well, and, of course, after Vista, lots of people were claiming Microsoft was dying. The opposite is possible too; we’re still waiting for this mythical “Linux on the desktop” thing, and we were supposed to have thin clients.
Now it’s Palm’s turn to get the “dying” label. The company hasn’t been doing very well lately, and this has pushed several respected people to declare the company dead. Both Jean-Louis Gassée and Ars Technica’s Jon Stokes are pretty clear in their assessment: Palm is dead.
“I’m afraid Palm will be twisting in the wind for a short while and then call it a day,” JLG concludes, “A sad ending for the company that once led the Personal Digital Assistant (PDA) world and then made substantial inroads into the nascent smartphone industry with its Treo.”
Stokes concludes something similar. “For all of its software advantages, developer support remains tepid, and the PDK launch at this past GDC – as exciting as the resulting games look – is too little, too late. Then there’s the Pre and the Pixi hardware—neither of these phones are really able to do webOS justice. The company simply doesn’t have the time or the cash to recover from the mistakes outlined above by doing a round of fresh hardware launches and launching a major new marketing push,” Stokes writes, “So stick a fork in Palm – it’s done, the dream is over. It’s only a matter of time before the company is acquired or goes belly up.”
Those are pretty harsh conclusions, but looking at the figures, it’s not a crazy conclusion to draw. I still believe that there is a danger of this being premature, but at the same time, the future is looking very bleak indeed.
The past
Where did it go wrong? The Pre and the webOS were unveiled to raving enthusiasm early 2009, and Palm looked poised to re-storm the smartphone market as a credible competitor to the iPhone. Android was still a mess back then, and the iPhone 3GS wasn’t out yet. Somewhere between January 2009 and now, things went wrong. Both JLG and Stokes offer their insights – let’s look at some of them (you can read the rest on your own).
JLG obviously looks at the executive, company side of things, and he concludes that Palm has made a number of mistakes. For instance, he thinks Jon Rubinstein, Palm’s CEO, didn’t want to give in t Verizon’s demands, leading him to Sprint – a rather disastrous choice. Verizon would’ve been a much better carrier partner than Sprint.
JLG finds Rubinstein’s latest excuse – that the launch of the Droid on Verizon two months before the Pre Plus hit – embarrassing. “Jon always knew Verizon to be a better channel than Sprint, 91 million subscribers for Verizon vs. 48 million for Sprint,” JLG argues, “What very probably happened is this: initially believing his own propaganda, Ruby didn’t want to yield to Verizon’s demands. Palm’s CEO bet a successful launch with Sprint would cause the bigger carrier to come around – only to take a less advantageous deal later and too late. By then, everyone knew about the Pre’s tepid reception at Sprint, taking any leverage away from Palm in discussions with other carriers.”
Furthermore, Palm engaged in “stuffing the channel”, a practice which reeks of desperation. Stuffing the channels refers to pushing a lot of products into the channel, basically shipping more than is needed. This can turn into a disaster – which is exactly what happened.
“One analyst […] pegs the total unsold inventory at 1.15 million units. That’s half a year of sales – if things go well,” JLG writes, “If sales tank because consumers lose faith, or because competitors do a good job, or if you need to introduce a new model that obsoletes the aging inventory, the channels backfires.” In this context, backfiring refers to the clause in many distribution agreements which allows distributors to return surplus stock at discounts.
Ars’ Jon Stokes looks at the consumer side of the story, and there, the situation isn’t much better. Palm’s App Catalog still hasn’t taken off, and while you can argue that most of the 100000+ applications in Apple’s App Store are pure and utter junk (and they are, dear lord, they are), this “long tail” ensures that there’s always something in there for someone – much like the situation on Windows, really. Linux and Mac OS X suffer from this every day: many Windows users have this one tiny minuscule application that they want, which isn’t available on any other platform.
Then there’s the alleged hardware issues. It’s still unclear as to how bad the hardware problems with the Pre really are, but Stokes’ own anecdotal evidence isn’t very positive. “Even if I happen to inhabit some vortex of Pre malfunction, and my experience is totally atypical, it’s still the case that only a slightly elevated return rate is bad news for a fledgling smartphone like Pre,” he argues, “The one thing people don’t want with a phone is trouble. A glitchy phone is a terrible thing, and given the kinds of situations that people use their phone in (driving, cooking, running, secretly during a meeting, in an emergency, etc.), the average person’s tolerance for phone gremlins is zero.”
Marketing wasn’t Palm’s strong point either. They tried to market the Pre to women, which led to an interesting exchange between Kara Swisher and Roger McNamee, the over-confident Elevation Partners figure. Palm also pushed ads with a lady who was universally deemed “creepy“.
We haven’t yet touched on what I think has been the biggest mistake: Palm acted as if it was Apple (which isn’t strange considering Rubinstein’s history). They thought carriers would line up to sign exclusive contracts with Palm for the Pre, but this turned out to, well, not be the case. What’s worse is that the rest of the world – a considerably larger market than the US – had to wait incredibly long for the Pre to arrive, and to this day, it’s only available in a small number of countries.
I already made it clear in the run-up to my iPhone 3GS review: I would’ve bought a Pre if it weren’t for the fact I couldn’t, and still can’t. My only option then would’ve been to buy an unlocked Pre from Germany, but that one has the wrong keyboard (Germans use QWERTZ instead of QWERTY), which isn’t ideal. On top of that, I want a properly supported phone, including warranty and such, and while I love Germany, going down there to have my phone serviced seemed a bit, well, ridiculous.
It was dumb of Palm to act as if it were Apple. Especially here in Europe, the Palm brand doesn’t carry a whole load of weight, and you’ll receive mostly blank stares from people when you mention the company. In Europe, they should’ve offered it as if it were any other phone from day one, allowing carriers here to market the device the way they deemed fit. Sales would’ve been considerably better.
It seems that what is bringing Palm down is a combination of bad business decisions, shoddy hardware quality, bad marketing, and an unhealthy dose of ὕβÏις.
The future
This leaves us with what the future will hold for Palm. It will come as no surprise to anyone that I like Palm. It has always been an innovative company; first with PDAs, later with their Treo smartphones, and recently with webOS. The company is willing to take a different route, willing to come up with something before anyone else does.
I’ve owned several PDAs (and still do, although I’m not sure any of them even work), and I sure had the fondest memories of my Palm Tungsten E2. The cruelty here is that back in those days, Palm had the hardware, but the PalmOS operating system was horribly outdated and crash-prone. Now, they have what some consider to be the most advanced smartphone operating system, but the hardware just isn’t up to par – both in a narrow sense (the Pre itself) as well as in a broad sense (battery hardware isn’t powerful enough to handle the webOS’ multitasking).
The future for Palm is either the company will fold, or someone else will snatch it up at bargain price. Many contestants have been mentioned, but recently, a lot of people seem to suggest something that makes a lot of sense. If there is one company who would benefit greatly from acquiring Palm – it’s Google.
Now that Google is indirectly involved in a massive patent lawsuit with Android competitor Apple, Palm is looking like a very attractive acquisition. Not only would it give Google access to the webOS and its features (which could possibly be integrated into Android), but the search giant would also gain access to a whole bunch of former Apple engineers, as well as an enormous patent portfolio Palm has accumulated by being an innovator in both the PDA and smartphone space.
In other words, it wouldn’t only benefit Google’s own products, but it would also be another provocation towards Apple.
All I ask of is that the Palm brand continues to exist. The name may not mean a whole lot to most ordinary people, but as a geek, Palm holds a special place in my heart, alongside companies like Be and Amiga. Can you imagine top-notch Palm hardware powered by a hybrid between Android and webOS?
I think my inner-geek just fainted.
Palm has been teetering on the brink for years, yet is still here.
It certainly would be a shame to see them go under now, when they have a compelling product for the first time in nearly a decade.
Great theory, but you forgot the other possibility: Apple buys Palm and all the patents go to Apple.
Apple buys back a company full of disgruntled ex-Apple employees?
If Apple did this, it would probably be just for the patents… and then they’d bury the rest of the company I suspect (or split it up and sell it off).
In Google’s case, they’d own a company that can start building/selling phones directly with relatively good tech. The patents are a large bonus.
Exactly.
WebOS’ ideas and technologies could be integrated into Android, and Google could develop the Nexus One II (euh) in-house. And get a boatload of incredibly valuable patents.
Makes a lot of sense.
Yeah, but Google doesn’t want to support smartphone hardware, or pretty much anything for that matter, hardware-wise at least. We’ve already seen that with complaints and support for the Nexus One being bounced back-and-forth between Google and HTC.
Excuse my ignorance, but what’s this about Palm being staffed by disgruntled Apple employees?
(My knowledge of Palm is fairly light)
Rubinstein himself left Apple after falling-outs with Steve Jobs (presumably over the development direction of the iPhone), and several other people left Apple for Palm as well. Considering His Steveness’ capability to carry grudges, I don’t think it’s likely Apple will buy Palm.
No. Jon made tens of millions in stock options at Apple and your assumptions are all wrong. He left to find an opportunity to run another company again.
Most of those “disgruntled” engineers were all fat on stock options that matured and wanted to work in a start up and see if they could hit it big again in another IPO. That’s Silicon Valley.
http://www.cio.de/news/cio_worldnews/2220456/
“buys back a company full of ex-Apple employees”
NeXT
NeXT came with Jobs. Totally different ballpark.
Mr Jobs is a pretty big “ex-Apple” employee though. The one-liner has outlived it’s humor value though.
NeXT didn’t come with Steve Jobs.
I know. I was there.
Steve was asked [as CEO of PIXAR] if he was willing to come on as an advisor. The deal was done. Tevanian and several others making the deal asked Steve to take on this role.
They hoped it would mature into something long term and it did.
Tyrione post
Huh? Jobs came with NeXT if anything.
Palm practically started the PDA gig, their asests are no doubt valuable, but who’d want to buy a company that’s haemorrhaging cash, and that has competing products that you’d have to uphold. If Google or Apple bought Plam, they’d discontinue Palm’s products because they don’t fit with what else the purchaser is doing in that space (which would raise an eyebrow in the EU); and then the developers would just walk out of Palm anyway.
The difficulty is that if someone buys palm, they have to have a use for WebOS—Google or Apple don’t fit that bill.
If they do go under, their best hope is to house up in a holdings company and licence the patent portfolio to others to pay for the liquidation.
Don’t Palm own the rights to BeOS these days? (Or has BeOS begun to earn it’s own complicated history like that of Commodore / Amiga and RISC OS?)
BeOS is rotting in Access cellar AFAIK.
Yup.
Which is a very good thing. Access has already given Haiku it’s blessing including releasing certain docs into the open domain.
Amiga is a mess because ownership of it’s IP was bouncing all over the place, with no clear control over the rights to said IP.
What Amiga development that has occurred has been delayed 10-15 years compared to where it could have been without that infighting.
…. other than an unlikely Hail Mary that saves the marque is Nokia swallowing Palm for webOS. This would have the potential to save both Nokia and webOS. Before you start talking about Symbian and whatever Moblin-linux-thing that Maemo turned into, just stop right there. Neither is going to interest people in an iPhone/Android world.
Nokia could give webOS the shot it deserves. The only other possibility is Blackberry, but a RIM takeover would surprise me almost as much as Palm rising from the ashes would.
Whatever happens, I hope webOS can hang in there. It is so much nicer than Android. It would be a real shame if it died.
Well Nokia or Motorola might be the most likely buyers. WebOS could work well on some mid-range devices, and then MeeGo would be on tablets and high-end smartphones.
Why would it raise an eyebrow in the EU?
You mean a patent troll who’ll be suing people over trivial software patents?
Actually I think if either Apple or Google will try to acquire Palm it will come to a bidding war between those two companies. We’ve seen that recently with some online advertisement companies which Apple looked into and Google bought at much more than they were worth in order to prevent Apple from buying. If Apple or Google would try to buy Palm the other will become mighty uncomfortable. With the current animosity between those two it’ll be ugly.
Yeah, more likely. Google is not a hardware company and just buying Palm for some SW patents seems silly. (But all patents are utterly silly in the greater scheme of things.)
Apple has even more cash than Google, but I don’t think they really will buy them unless Palm gets really cheap. Apple wants to buy someone, but I guess they want to buy an internet company or Adobe or something and not Palm.
IMHO Palm will go bankrupt and then the real fight for the good parts will start.
Edit: a -> an .. Thoms recent post made me a spelling nazi.
Edited 2010-03-22 14:55 UTC
What about HTC?
Or maybe Motorola or Nokia?
Heck, even Samsung arguably has incentive
Or MS. Microsoft already is a hardware company, but I think they still think selling software licenses has a great future.
I can’t see it personally.
MS is already out-playing Palm so I can’t really see them having any interest in the company
I could be wrong, but MS tend to only buy their way out of trouble rather than buy out companies in trouble.
Palm has been slowly, painfully dying since before they acquired Be, Inc.
Yes, it’s been that long.
Remember when their CTO said that a mobile OS didn’t need an MMU?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/07/08/palm_mulled_linux_for_nextg…
Edited 2010-03-22 14:51 UTC
…with phones that cost over $500? If you want to buy these things outright without a contract that’s how much they cost. My netbook cost $300. People complained that the iPad cost $500 or whatever and yet these phones cost the same.
For twice the price of the Google Nexus One I built my Mac Pro clone with all grade A components.
Yeah, I know, not portable.
Yes, not portable. When you can build a Mac Pro clone that can fit in your pocket and make cell phone calls, I’m in!
Apparently miniaturisation cost money, who knew?
LOL! Yeah yeah.
And you COULD make a mac pro clone portable with a little ingenuity, and a strong back.
there is a lot of stuff they are working on right now that will start showing up within the next 2-3 months. They are far from being out of the game, they just hit a snag that they were well aware was a possible outcome of having Sprint as a launch partner. I am very confident that they will turn things around, though this does allow for a great opportunity to buy Palm shares (stock) at a real low point
One of their big mistakes was their “iTunes” compatibility…
Lets use an unlicensed hack to got the phone to work with iTunes. Yes Apple will never fix it. Our customers won’t mind having iTunes break every version until we stop. Then try to make Apple the Bad Guy for not allowing a competing company to access one of their key Benefits, in the process letting other people know about the problems with iTunes compatibility.
… for all intents and purposes.
Palm’s value proposition against android, iPhone, and Windows phone… is not differentiated enough as to provide an unique reason to exist. And that is something very very very hard to overcome, esp. when you are a company in life support. Going against players which are orders of magnitude and are flushed with cash, with a similar product is simply suicidal.
There is nothing that Palm’s products offers that is not matched by its competing platforms. Other than multitasking, which is an answer to a question that the market did not really ask.
Palm’s operational costs are higher too: since they have to develop both their HW and SW with a smaller user base to finance it. Palm has to cope with a smaller revenue due to smaller market penetration, coupled with smaller margins, while having higher operational costs. Not a good position to be in at all. Thus, It is not a mater of if, but when will palm close.
What about openness? (no app catalogue lock in, the device is user hackable, etc)
What about the lower barrier for app development? (Javascript as opposed to ObjectC)
What about the fact that unlike Android and WM/WP, Palm control the whole process – hardware to software?
Let’s also not forget the power of negative branding:
* Many people are pushed away from Apple because they’re heavy handed control borders on despotism
* Many people are turned away from Microsoft because WM has an appalling UI and MS have a bad public image
* and many people are scared of Google because of privacy concerns
Palm could have / should have played up to the fact that they’re just as experienced in the mobile market as the big boys (HTC, Apple, MS, etc) while still being a small enough that they’re not branded with the same “evil brush” as the industry giants.
So Palm and webOS did / does have a lot going for it despite they’re obvious shortcomings.
Openness: funny, oddly enough, that’s precisely why Apple’s iPhone platform is doing so well: it isn’t too open for the majority of customers. This is also, apparently, not a show-stopper for professional (or would-be professional) developers. based on the number of readily available apps that everyone can find, if they have the patience to sort through the mountains of stuff, admittedly most of it of limited functionality, but hey, it’s the customers that decide that thing. Sure, Apple gets 30% of gross for their part in the transaction, but have you seriously looked at what it takes to run your own purchase site? Have you looked at what other online stores charge? What about the PR needed to direct people to your intended site?
Second: seriously, Objective-C (only someone that’s not a serious legit developer would call it ObjectC) is not nearly the “Barrier to entry” you think it is: the language itself isn’t all that hard to learn, unless you can’t learn other C-based (and, admittedly, a bit of SmallTalkish syntax) languages (of which JavaScript is a scripting castrated language with ducktyping) where for Objective-C, for the native frameworks, sure, you need to learn the native GUI frameworks, but how is this really any different than the frameworks in JavaScript you need to learn to do WebOS apps? Not only that, but unlike JavaScript which is interpreted, Objective-C is compiled and runs at native speeds: sure, it may not be as fast as old ANSI C or C++, but it blows JavaScript out of the water for speed. Oh, and you can also fully use C/C++ libraries that are well-tested and FAST with little trouble: what can you do that is comparable in JavaScript? Now, to cover the other angle of Microsoft in the similar vein, you can also move those C/C++ libs you can use for the iPhone between the WM 6.x and before and reuse most of that, while you need to reinvent things if you want to use JavaScript and WebOS, and if you’re talking about the upcoming Windows Mobile 7 (or whatever Microsoft renames things to, as they’re good at that!) that uses C#, which… Mono C# is available for the iPhone, and people right now are developing and selling iPhone apps that use it, so, there will be a huge amount of cross-pollination of code possible between those platforms, leaving JavaScript… a red-headed bastard son stepchild mutation of indeterminate value for aiming at, all coupled with the factor that unless Palm manages to make many more connections with carriers, makes it an expensive proposition to develop for anyone that does it for profit.
Now, you can point at all the negative publicity Microsoft has and Apple has, but really: what percentage of the non-tech geek crowd gives a rat’s rear on average? Very few people make any solid efforts to do serious research before they buy a phone: they go to their nearby store, find one that somehow looks attractive to them, perhaps has the checklist of features on it they want, they maybe check the sound quality, and usually purchase something with less than an hour’s thought into it: this is a large portion of the market, where they also often choose purely on price. Sure, a number actually research things out that aren’t truly technogeek people: often they’ll go for the prettier system that they can understand readily, and doesn’t cost a fortune. Really, us techheads are the minority of the market, and both Apple and Microsoft know that. Now, despite all the negative publicity both Apple and Microsoft get amongst tech people, most non-tech people know little or nothing of all that, and Microsoft has logically decided, based on the iPhone’s success, to borrow the same proven concepts: a simple-to-use-and-find AppStore with a simple-to-use GUI on a system that purposely doesn’t (at least now) throw in the complication of having (or being able to) manage multiple third-party applications. Sure, a lot of tech people won’t care for that, but, again, they’re a small portion of the buying public: they aren’t vitally important for sales.
While you’re surely right on that, you might want to remember who Apple owes it to that they’re doing so well now. Hint: it wasn’t the average public.
Geeks stuck with Apple through the dark ages. Geeks promoted the “new” Apple (by lack of a better term) to non-geeks. If geeks start to discourage their social circle from buying Apple gear, then the effect may very well turn around.
Not saying that that’s happening – just pointing out that just because geeks are a small group, that doesn’t mean they aren’t influential.
Edited 2010-03-22 21:24 UTC
Very true.
I remember the outcry from Apples customers when Apple announced the iPod.
Apple fans were claiming that Apple had lost sight of technology and were trying to flog gimmicks.
Funny how much can change in only 10 years
Geels are a very small market. And so are their recommendations.
There is no reason to ponder “what ifs” the reality is that palm is not getting much traction. So there is no point in wonder what influence geeks have. Since the Palm was touted as the more “geek approved” phone vs. the iPhone for example. Yet the iPhone sales are yet to be hurt by Palm, while Palm is struggling to capture significant market share.
More common sense, and less pies in the sky .
As someone pointed out: Android took 2 years before Apple took notice. webOS hasn’t been out that long.
I think people are being a little quick to dismiss Palm. The show isn’t over yet.
Palm doesn’t have the cash reserves that google does. Also android is not Google’s only product, or its main product/platform for that matter.
So using google’s example is counter productive since it is a false analogy. For Palm does not have cash reserves, and thus can not afford to wait. And WebOS phones are palm’s main product.
Also android had quite the momentum from the get go. Pretending that android sat for a couple of years without anyone noticing it, is a rather disingenuous claim to make.
I don’t recall Android having that much more momentum than webOS does. But maybe I’m wrong.
You do make some good points though
Nope. The iPhone is doing so well because it appears to be an open platform (ie it’s sold as having all of the stuff people want).
The fact that it’s actually closed or open in the true sense is completely irrelevant for most people
Tell that to the number professional developers that have had their previously approved apps pulled, updates randomly rejected and even whole new apps rejected based on double standards.
There’s plenty of disgruntled iPhone developers making a lot of noise about how Apple’s closed ecosystem is a deal breaker for them.
However I don’t really want to get into a detailed discussion about the iPhone as it inevitably ends up a religious war rather than a civilised conversation (plus this topic is about Palm and webOS, NOT Apple/iPhone)
Thank you for the correction but please don’t be an asshole about it. Mistakes happen – even from “serious legit developers”
All I said was Javascript is a lower barrier to entry – which it is.
I’m not trying to argue anything more than that.
I’m pretty sure I read somewhere that Javascript is compiled on webOS (much like it is on some desktop browsers). So while it isn’t C++ fast, it’s still a huge step up from interpreted execution
Hence my point that Palm could have promoted the “underdog” act more.
I guess a bit like how the “I’m a Mac” commercials were promoting all the negative aspects of Windows that most of the “non-tech geek crowd” wouldn’t have given a rat’s arse about otherwise.
The rest of your post is pretty much just echoing comments I’ve made in the past – which leads me to believe that you’ve read my comments expecting it to be some kind of pro-Palm fanboy BS and then formed a disproportionate retort.
Don’t worry, I won’t go and call you an asshole or anything like it: your responses paint whatever picture quite appropriately, and it isn’t exactly painting a pretty picture
And no, I didn’t go through your other posts to derive the view of your statements outside of the ones I replied to: I took those immediate posts and merely picked them apart methodically, because, frankly, the reeked of technical ignorance and yes, a bit of irrational fanboyism, compared to what history seems to demonstrate, that regardless of your ideals and your thoughts about certain things, your views don’t hold a lot of water from the commercial aspect of things, as geeks aren’t the major buyers of most phones, even the supposedly easier-to-develop-for-and-sell-anything-for Palm, and users go for that whatever-is-cheaper-and-easier-for-them-to-use products with the most software variety of what the users (read: non-techies, not so much the technogeeks) want available that’s easy to find (a very important point in this whole discussion, including getting down to why Palm is having such a bad time for hardware sales and adoption) while sane developers with business sense, even if the terms are a bit onerous, follow the money, which means, of course, not allowing their development priorities to fall towards a very small in-market platform where absolutely none of their code can be used on a different platform (Palm WebOS via the limitations of JavaScript) versus at least some reuse of their own codebase on multiple platforms (Android, iPhoneOS, Windows Mobile, etc. even going to straight Java phones) where, even if the GUI code and some of it is unique to each platform, each of those major languages used (Java, C/C++/Objective-C/Objective-C++) can use already tested and proven libraries for complex and powerful functionality that… does not exist in JavaScript, and regardless of JIT compilers that run on any phone browser (of which the iPhone also uses WebKit, so such apps could, if users didn’t mind their slowness and limitations compared to going native code) will still have very poor performance with various injected delays. Yes, I’ve read Palm’s documentation, admittedly, not 1.4, for the WebOS and programming for it: it explicitly mentions such delays related to garbage collection, etc. and that’s something that needs to be taken into account. If all you’re doing is purely low-end text-like stuff where quick reaction times and predictable response times aren’t so critical, it’s not such a problem: the bad thing is, many apps are left out of that equation.
If WebOS advances WebKit or uses something else to make truly precompiled JavaScript apps that don’t need to be recompiled every time you start them up, that’ll be a huge step, though JavaScript is still likely to be quite limited in performance compared to even Java, unless something is done to compile it to Java VM bytecode and then run the optimizer on that, but with the very dynamic nature of typing in JavaScript, there will be quite a few limitations there for optimizations. Oh well, if Palm lasts long enough, perhaps they will: either that, or, much like the iPhone’s path, they’ll migrate most software developers over to C/C++ or Java, where JavaScript applications are phased out as the main applications.
I’m not about to get drawn into a long and drawn out “penis waving” constest with a troll. Sorry mate, but some of us have day jobs
I didn’t say you should. Quite the opposite in fact. Are you actually going to read my posts properly or keep skimming through and then troll?
I’ve never owned a Palm product in my life. So I go back to my earlier point that you’re just picking a fight for the sake of picking a fight.
This part is odd as Apple has made a good business on image branding (which was one of my points) and then you go on to argue the commercial relevence of choosing the right programming languages (which was another one of my points).
I’m not about to say that the points I raised would rocket webOS ahead of Symbian. I just raised those points to prove that webOS does have some raw uniqueness to it.
I didn’t say they were.
I said Javascript was lower barrier for entry than Objective-C, nothing more.
I have no idea how Palms app store compares to Apples nor what Palms SDK is like. I just know that Javascript is easier then Objective-C.
so once again you’ve massively overstated what was a very basic point.
Exactly. I never argued otherwise.
Actually I don’t think non-geeks even care that much about software variety (after all, RIM and Symbian hugely outsell the iPhone despite Apple’s frequent adverts about the size of their app catalogue).
Sorry for the bad block quoted there, but you’re point’s are very poorly laid out with needlessly long sentences.
Anyhow:
* I never argued that Javascript was the same speed as C/C++. Having been a developer in around a dozen languages and their variants – including C and C++ – I’m well aware of how different languages perform. I’ve already stated this point, however you were too blind sighted by your own ranting to even notice what I actually said.
* While compiled Javascript isn’t as speedy as *C*, most smart phone apps are basically just web front ends to web sites anyway. So while webOS apps may lack the speed of Objective-C/C++, most peoples smart phone needs are catered for
* You claim Javascript isn’t portable as every other platform uses a C varient or Java, then you go on to state that the iPhone has a JIT compiler. Make your mind up.
Besides, with the massive amount of online applications, Javascript is arguably MORE portable as it’ll run on any Javascript enabled webbrowser.
However, whether you want to argue for or against Javascript’s portability, I do agree that it would be nice if webOS did support C++ (or one if it’s genus).
* and finally you keep ranting on about what USERS want and not geeks like us, then you rant on for half your post about the specific languages different mobile platforms support – something users wouldn’t understand let alone care about. So your being somewhat hypocritical by moving the goal posts of what points can be argued depending on your argument.
Personally I see Palm using Javascript to try and encourage developers that were a little intimidated by the iPhone (yeah, I know it’s a small niche – I didn’t say the decision makes sense).
If this is the case, they had better be working on a C++ (or one if it’s brothers) SDK currently or massively drop the price of their devices so it appeals to people are after a less “sophisticated” smart phone.
Even Google knew that Java alone wasn’t enough to keep Android competitive.
However, and not taking anything away from the points I’ve raised about the short comings of Javascript, to say that Palm’s choice of language is the reason Palm are struggling is wrong given users couldn’t give a toss what language apps are coded in. Thus Palm problems lie elsewhere.
Edited 2010-03-23 13:02 UTC
All of those value propositions are geared towards the extremely idealistic nerd contingent. And that is a veeeeeery tiny sector of the market.
Trying to compete with giants, to develop products which require a lot of monetary investment, to target to a market segment which is like less than 1% of the market on a good day… is just a recipe for disaster.
As I said, the main problem for Palm is that none of their offerings can answer the simple question of “why should they exist.”
But then by that logic Google should never have built Android.
Or Apple should never have built the iPhone.
And let’s not forget that the 3 biggest names in this discussion (Apple, Microsoft and Google) are still at least 3rd from the top stop (behind Nokia and RIM).
And let’s also not forget that phones are not like computers in that someone will be expected to hold on to their device for several years. It’s pretty common for mobile handsets to change every 18 months.
So I think there is definitely still room for competition
Strawmen arguments are not considered to be part of “logic” in fact they are all the contrary.
As I said, the main problem Palm has is that none of their products has a clear reason to exist.
Google has an answer because android is at the end of the day a mobile interface for their cloud. And Apple positioned their iPhone at the center of their content/app ecosystem. Blackberry has their corporate services network to justify their devices’ placement among business folk. And even Windows Phone has a the end of the day their integration with Office’s app/mail ecosystem.
Yet Palm can’t answer that very basic question: why does their WebOS platform exist?
Note, I am not disparaging technically the platform. I actually quite like it. It is just that “geek” creed a market builds not. And at the end of the day, it is customers who purchase the product and provide revenue. But the problem seems that Palm is offering an answer to a question nobody asked.
Edited 2010-03-23 18:20 UTC
So what about the largest mobile platform of them all, Symbian?
That doesn’t have a reason to exist yet it still outsells every other platform.
Consumers don’t care about office integration, Googles cloud or any of the other reasons you stated. Consumers just want something that’s pretty and works.
Because its pretty and it works plus it has good office integration, and it has muscles behind it.
what, Symbian?!
That doesn’t even make sense
Palm spent five years reinventing the wheel. If PalmOne hadn’t turned its nose up at PalmOS 6.x (Cobalt), would things have turned out differently?
No one knows about Cobalt. There were rumours and speculations about why they didn’t use it. They probably should have, at any cost, to stem the tide of defections. It is my belief that Palm has failed for three reasons:
1. Palm OS stagnated for years offering little improvements. No one saw any future, so people left.
2. Palm offered mediocre hardware. Wifi was frequently absent. Their PDA line languished and, finally, left to rot. Their user base got disgusted with the lack of updates, and realizing there was no future, started to move on. Ironically, that market was the one that put Palm on the map in the first place. Some users went on to “smartphones” while others went on to other devices like the Nokia N800, but most notably the iTouch. What would have happened if Palm offered a phoneless Pre? Would those 20+ million iTouch buyers have looked at that Pre?
3. Palm entered the much more competitive phone market. Now their competitors were no longer just the lone-standing PDA maker Microsoft/HP, but now the likes of RIMM, Apple, Nokia, Sony, HTC, Motorola, etc, where the users are more fickle and tend to chase either the best hardware or software. The magic of Palm OS was over.
Edited 2010-03-22 19:28 UTC
They need to release FLASH and HW accelerated DOOM / unreal engine asap…
And update their kiosks to mention those great features versus the iphone.
For me, the T5 was the peak of Palm’s production. Virtual input area, full suite of PalmOS features.. They actually removed features in the later Tungsten and Lifedrive devices. All they had to do at the time was add a wifi radio to the T5. I sat on my PDA upgrade until it was long past due simply because nothing could top the T5 until the N800 (for my needs anyhow).
People forget that Android was out for a *long time* before it really “caught on”. Before the Droid was released, most people had never heard of it. Meanwhile in that time it was able to collect a large app catalogue and lots of OS tweaks so that when it finally did gain recognition, it was ready for it.
I think Palm is nearing a similar point right now. Once they do a global release, revamp their advertising and take care of the software and hardware issues they will be good to go, and I think you’ll see many of these pundits have to eat their words.
Edited 2010-03-22 20:05 UTC
Android has been out for a couple of years. And it has gotten traction for the better part of the past year and a half. I wouldn’t call less than one year “a very long time.”
Besides, google are in a position to build momentum with the immense cash reserves they have. Palm on the other hand does not have that luxury.
They had to execute a perfect product, on a perfect platform, with a perfect marketing strategy. It was an impossible situation, so it is no surprise they fell sort of the 3 requirements. They are right now burning through their investor’s cash, throwing stuff at the wall and see what it sticks.
Sorry, that looks exactly like the MO of a company circling the drain, not a company on the verge of a turn around.
Nice try, but Android has only really caught on in the past four months, which is the time since the Droid came out. Meanwhile the release of the first Android handset, the G1, happened about a year and a half ago. There was over a year of gap time before most people ever heard the word “Android”.
Meanwhile, the Pre was released less than half a year ago.
I’m not going to try to argue with anyone whether or not Palm “is dying”, as it’s pointless. We will find out Palm’s fate soon enough.
Edited 2010-03-23 16:43 UTC
I am not trying anything. If you think that android sat there for 2 years waiting for anyone to notice. And that a whole ecosystem of android devices from different providers/manufacturers just sprung out of the blue a few months ago. I am afraid you have little experience with the reality of how tech companies operate.
A lot of people in this forum seem to equate their very very very distant perspective from their parent’s basement, with the reality of the tech sector.
Android had momentum, iphone had momentum, webos does not. And you are right, there is no reason to ponder Palm’s fate, their market position and share price already tell the story.
It sucks, because it is a decent platform from a technical point of view. But such is the market; “technically brilliant” solutions don’t really matter if they are an answer to a question nobody asked. Geeks tend to offer mistake their technological bias with the realities of purchasing patterns by consumers.
Yep, that pretty much sums it up.
Care to list your credentials?
WTF??????
… by choosing Sprint as their carrier. Had them released on Verizon their CDMA models, and had them released GSM versions in a timely manner (including an unlocked, carrier-unadulterated model) their present would’ve been different.
And here I was, still considering getting a Pixi Plus when (and if) they become available for AT&T or T-Mobile, but the thought of Google acquiring Palm is enough for me to want to forget Palm and WebOS ever existed. Thanks but no thanks!
Google is not acquiring Palm, don’t worry. It’s just random bloggers’ wishful thinking.
As if we didn’t know this, i mean seriously, what other reason did they hack the iTunes USB? it was only for a buzz and to stretch the freedoms they had before they became obsolete or bought out.
However, i have to say they make a nice device, but the market is becoming oversaturated. There will eventually be 3 smartphone heavy weights, and Palm aint one of them.
Thanks for reading,
OSNews is my SH##!
Why is it becoming over saturated?
There have been dozens of phone manufacturers for years before smart phones were around.
At the end of the day, smart phones are still just gadgets so it’s not like the desktop market where people expect their applications to look the same from one PC to the next.
… and ask yourself why you wrote “there have been” and not “there are” and you’ll understand why the smart phone is saturated.
The companies which were still are, so your argument doesn’t work.
Plus market saturation isn’t as big an issue with phones as you make out:
1/ phones are, in some sense, consumables. Most people change their phone every 18months(ish). So there’s a high turn around. Much much higher than with most other forms of electronic gadgets, computers or entertainment devices.
2/ aside communications (GSM et al) phones don’t need to be inter-compatible in the same way PCs do.
so long as they support a few media codecs like MP3 and a few web standards like HTML.
3/ these days phones are more essential to every day life than most other forms of gadget / “leisure tech”. So the potential market is 99% of the developed world.
So I think there’s plenty of room for competition.
Besides, your attitude is almost as if you want to see Palm fail.
I hope not, I just a Pre not to long ago, because I fell in love with WebOS. The hardware is ok, but the OS is just awesome!
http://www.betanews.com/joewilcox/article/Palms-not-dead-so-why-wri…