Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 65
  1. #21  
    I have said since my days in the PPR awaititng the 700p that the 900p would determine if Palm lives or dies. . . . but I thought it would be this December not next.

    Anyway, with my library of third party apps and habits developed over 10 years. . . . I will wait.

    But if they make my library obsolete or come to market with a behind the times unit. . . . even I will lose patience with them.

    Cheers, Perry
  2. #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by taroliw View Post
    So, while on the surface this most-recent about-face that Palm did by axing the Foleo and publicly stating their renewed efforts to complete their "new platform," just remember that the "new platform" has been in the works for several YEARS (one apparently failed attempt after another, though Palm has never actually shared the details of why any of these never resulted in a real product).
    Perhaps you're thinking of PalmSource's failed Cobalt. I don't know why Palm(One) and others didn't license it and develop products with it. As for Palm Inc's OS development, they didn't license the rights to modify Garnet until December 2006 - less than a year ago. An end-of-2008 launch would make that a 2-year development cycle, which I understand is typical.
  3. #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by Perry Holden View Post
    I Anyway, with my library of third party apps and habits developed over 10 years. . . . I will wait.
    This statement right here is why I believe that Palm has been forced to stay pretty much the way they are. Think about it. What would we all be crying about if they came out with a new product, but we couldn't get the same programs that we are used to? Did anyone badmouth Microsoft when Vista came out and made their old hardware and software obsolete? There's got to be a reason Palm hasn't used Linux yet. If they could, I'm sure they would, or someone would've offered a hack. Palm now has to compete with the Windows Mobile Operating System with Microsofts deep pockets. Look what Microsoft did to Apple. Apple has not been profitable with their computers in who knows how long. I, for one, can't take Apple as a company, as I think they are a true monopolistic company. Try and get a 3rd party program to put on your iphone. Hack into your iphone and they ruin the hack on your own phone with an update to block it (see the news this week). I would bet that if Palm goes under, it's because they cannot financially compete with the flashy phones that are out there, not because their phones are not as good or better than the ones out there. If that happens I think that the Windows smartphones, or Blackberrys will become the new leaders in the market with people like us, because they offer most of what we have already. The iphone might be flashy and good, but it isn't an all around smartphone that is needed by the majority of business people.
    Kyocera 6035 > Kyocera 7135 > Treo 600 > Treo 650. All Verizon. Sprint Treo 755p, HTC Mogul & Centro
    Unlocked Treo 680 for trips outside Sprint's areas
  4. #24  
    Oh wow, we must have some really smart people at TC. I am quite surprised that so many of you are in the speculation industry and that you get paid millions of dollars to speculate that Palm is good or bad. Oh wait, most likely you aren. More than likely your not well informed, someone who thinks that by posting on this board your speculations that anyone of us is really going to give a darn. Well you're wrong. You have neither been hired nor has your comment been warranted by us in any way. So why don't you just not say anything, please and go buy someone elses phone and leave us the heck alone. We like our devices and we are here to stay.

    Or even better, since you think you are so omniscient go build your own device and sell it to the massese especially since you think you have the whole market figured out and you know who's going to buy what phone and what business is going down.

    Better yet, go invest your money in the company you KNOW will win and that way you can make millions of dollars. Maybe then you will have enough money so that you wont care about phones anymore and then you can leave us alone.

    For the rest of us that like Palm and that are invested in Palm we don't want to hear what you have to say. I must say that I'm mystified by your statements.

    Have a nice day!
    Last edited by Bill Gamble; 10/03/2007 at 09:46 PM. Reason: Edited to soften its abusive nature.
  5. #25  
    I think people may overreact to this news. Palm still has a good product, albeit old, that has capabilities (with third-party programs) no other single smartphone has. Sure we would all like a new, updated Palm OS, but we won't for a while. Hopefully, Palm can put out some updated and innovative devices. The Centro is a good first step.

    People will just have to live with the Palm OS or go find something that better fits their needs (or wants). For me, I can live with my 700P for a while. If something better for me comes along, I will switch and be sorry that Palm couldn't meet my needs.
  6. #26  
    WOW Heimlich, that was fairly caustic.

    BTW, I believe the Treo General Chat forum is for just that -- general Treo chat, which leads to conversations as are being had in this thread. Nature of the beast. I, for one, enjoying reading what other's are thinking.

    Cheers, Perry.
    Last edited by Bill Gamble; 10/03/2007 at 06:52 PM.
  7. #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by samkim View Post
    Perhaps you're thinking of PalmSource's failed Cobalt. I don't know why Palm(One) and others didn't license it and develop products with it. As for Palm Inc's OS development, they didn't license the rights to modify Garnet until December 2006 - less than a year ago. An end-of-2008 launch would make that a 2-year development cycle, which I understand is typical.
    Hi Samkim,

    I agree, but Cobalt was considered stillborn by Palm way before December of 2006 . . . I would have hoped that they began working on it's successor at that point not in December of 2006.

    When the 700P was finally announced, Ed intimated that it was just a stepping stone device for the PalmOS crowd. . . . . 18 to 24 months from then would be December 2007 thru June 2008 . . . . . not late 2008. My hope is that they do not let the market race by them and that the "my 900p" hits the home run that they will certainly need by then.

    Cheers, Perry.
    Last edited by gtwo; 10/03/2007 at 05:34 PM.
  8. #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by Perry Holden View Post
    Hi Samkim,

    I agree, but Cobalt was considered stillborn by Palm way before December of 2006 . . . I would have hoped that they began working on it's successor at that point not in December of 2006.

    When the 700P was finally announced, Ed intimated that it was just a stepping stone device for the PalmOS crowd. . . . . 18 to 24 months from then would be December 2007 thru June 2008 . . . . . not late 2008. My hope is that they do not let the market race by them and that the "my 900p" hits the home run that they will certainly need by then.

    Cheers, Perry.
    Hi Perry,
    I agree that they should have begun working on it earlier, if they could, but remember that they needed permission from ACCESS. ACCESS owned the OS. Colligan talked about the desire to strike a deal to be able to modify the OS in mid 2006, but it didn't happen until the end of the year. Anyway, my point was that there's nothing to indicate that they've been working on this OS for very long.

    I think as soon as they realized that Cobalt wasn't going to happen, they started talking with Microsoft about Windows Mobile. Their talks with Microsoft began at the beginning of 2004, which is also around when Cobalt was revealed.
  9. #29  
    Ed also specifically said devices. Why all of you assume this quote refers to the OS going gold (which must happen before devices are released) is rather telling.
  10. #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by Perry Holden View Post
    I have said since my days in the PPR awaititng the 700p that the 900p would determine if Palm lives or dies. . . . but I thought it would be this December not next.

    Anyway, with my library of third party apps and habits developed over 10 years. . . . I will wait.

    But if they make my library obsolete or come to market with a behind the times unit. . . . even I will lose patience with them.

    Cheers, Perry
    Thanks for posting; I did not know if you had fallen off the edge of the world. glad you are still on line Perry.
  11. #31  
    Quote Originally Posted by samkim View Post
    Hi Perry,
    I agree that they should have begun working on it earlier, if they could, but remember that they needed permission from ACCESS. ACCESS owned the OS. Colligan talked about the desire to strike a deal to be able to modify the OS in mid 2006, but it didn't happen until the end of the year. Anyway, my point was that there's nothing to indicate that they've been working on this OS for very long.

    I think as soon as they realized that Cobalt wasn't going to happen, they started talking with Microsoft about Windows Mobile. Their talks with Microsoft began at the beginning of 2004, which is also around when Cobalt was revealed.
    Very good points, but my hunger for a rock solid (as the Palm Pilot), multi-tasking, multi-media, Palm Treo still burns!!
  12. #32  
    Quote Originally Posted by Perry Holden View Post
    Very good points, but my hunger for a rock solid (as the Palm Pilot), multi-tasking, multi-media, Palm Treo still burns!!
    Oh, I'll second AND third that motion. What still stuns me (and probably shouldn't by now) is how Palm has gotten away with neglecting this for so long. Well, I'll hold some small smidgen of hope that they'll pull it off this time....
  13. #33  
    Quote Originally Posted by heimlich View Post
    Have a nice day!


    Surur
  14. #34  
    Quote Originally Posted by Perry Holden View Post
    Very good points, but my hunger for a rock solid (as the Palm Pilot), multi-tasking, multi-media, Palm Treo still burns!!
    Just 15 more months... (until the next disappointment).
  15. #35  
    Quote Originally Posted by samkim View Post
    Just 15 more months... (until the next disappointment).

    Hi Sam,

    I hear ya, but as I believed in the 700p after the 700w announce. . . I believe in the 900p . . . . . we shall see.

  16. fishera's Avatar
    Posts
    494 Posts
    Global Posts
    495 Global Posts
    #36  
    Sad to say but I have a feeling my Treo 680 will be my last Palm and Palm OS device. I will keep it as long as I can, it is GSM afterall and with all those new Win. Mobile and Symbian phones out there, I still have no reason to upgrade or the cash.

    Im saving for a new car, will have it near the end of summer '08, but I don't see getting rid of my Treo anytime in the near or distant future. It does what I want just fine... im glad I got rid of my 650 because this 680 will be in my pocket for at least 3-4 years...

    I declare it also... jumpin the ship to declare Palm dead.

    R.I.P. Palm, you screwed yourself. Once great and Treo's in everyones hands. "Is that a Treo!?" was asked to me too much, now I get "Is that a Blackberry!??"

    Tis sad Palm... I believed in you... :'(
    Aaron M. Fisher
    CEO of Sonicfish Consulting
    www.SonicfishConsulting.com

    PDA/ Smartphones:
    Handspring Visor> Sony Clie SL10> Nokia N-Gage> Nokia 3300b> Treo 600> Treo 650> Treo 680> Nokia e71> Apple iPhone 3G> Palm Pre+
  17. fishera's Avatar
    Posts
    494 Posts
    Global Posts
    495 Global Posts
    #37  
    ps: Palm OS Cobalt was exactly what they needed! Too bad it didn't happen. Take a Treo 755p, turn it GSM, and pop Cobalt on it... they would be in the loop again!
    Aaron M. Fisher
    CEO of Sonicfish Consulting
    www.SonicfishConsulting.com

    PDA/ Smartphones:
    Handspring Visor> Sony Clie SL10> Nokia N-Gage> Nokia 3300b> Treo 600> Treo 650> Treo 680> Nokia e71> Apple iPhone 3G> Palm Pre+
  18. #38  
    Quote Originally Posted by samkim View Post
    Hi Perry,
    I agree that they should have begun working on it earlier, if they could, but remember that they needed permission from ACCESS. ACCESS owned the OS. Colligan talked about the desire to strike a deal to be able to modify the OS in mid 2006, but it didn't happen until the end of the year. Anyway, my point was that there's nothing to indicate that they've been working on this OS for very long.
    I'm sorry but that's just a bunch of hoo-ey, standard Palm excuse-making, and revisionist history. Palm/PalmSource was working on Linux way, way before 2006, way before Access had anything to do with PalmSource. For example:

    http://www.infoworld.com/article/04/...msource_1.html

    shows in 2004 they had acquired CMS and had very strong Linux plans. A bit more search I'm sure will refresh my memory that Palm had been considering Linux even earlier than that. So they've had at least 3-4 years to work on an alternative to Cobalt, and not from scratch either. Linux is a very well developed OS already, and CMS had already been placing Linux in cell phones. So a huge headstart, 3-4 years and yet... they need another 1.5 years... I'm sorry but that's pretty pitiful.

    And remember that Palm acquired BeOS in 2001! So Palm has had *forever* to ponder and work on a decent successor to PalmOS...

    And there are a number of nearly canned Linux offerings out there, including... ALP... but I gather that Palm has severe NIH syndrome (not invented here). It would seem they should strongly consider swallowing their pride, adopt a nearly ready Linux/phone solution like ALP or one of the others, and deliver product ASAP...

    When I hear that Palm had decided to abandon ALP and roll their own, a year ago, I groaned because I knew they were going to be late, late, late to market. ALP seems to be pretty good, what's the problem ? NIH ? bad blood ?
    Last edited by neurocutie; 10/03/2007 at 08:42 PM.
  19. #39  
    Please do not confuse PalmSource with Palm, Inc.

    All the OS people went with PalmSource. PalmSource failed with Cobalt and a Linux successor, and were then acquired by Access, which in turn set them to work on ALP. PalmSource is the company that bought CMS.

    Palm, Inc. has only really (legally) been able to work on a new OS since they purchased a perpetual license to Garnet last year, without it they would have no way to have backward compatibility to the PIMs and third-party applications.
  20. #40  
    Quote Originally Posted by detective View Post
    Please do not confuse PalmSource with Palm, Inc.

    All the OS people went with PalmSource. PalmSource failed with Cobalt and a Linux successor, and were then acquired by Access, which in turn set them to work on ALP. PalmSource is the company that bought CMS.

    Palm, Inc. has only really (legally) been able to work on a new OS since they purchased a perpetual license to Garnet last year, without it they would have no way to have backward compatibility to the PIMs and third-party applications.
    I am fully aware of the difference and history behind Palm, PalmSource, PalmOne, etc. The point is that it was all one company, these *were* the software/OS paths and solutions created and worked on by this one company. That it split into two, lost their way, got bought by the wrong folks, etc, etc. are all MISTAKES that Palm made. Palm was ultra-stupid for ever losing control of PalmOS in the first place -- the only truly unique and valuable thing they ever had. Yeah Palm Inc only got the rights to Garnet in 2006, but they *created* that situation by their previous mistakes and stupidity. Access is not to blame here, Palm, or old Palm, *is*.

    Time will tell, but I'd say its a fair bet that it is also a big mistake that Palm is deciding to roll their own POSII and take so long to do it, instead of continuing to support and work with PalmSource/Access on ALP. You can say all those old mistakes were back then and this is now, but deciding not to use ALP is a "now" mistake, and a continuing one. I sure hope whatever reasons they have for not using ALP were good reasons (not just bad blood) and are worth losing 2+ years of development and market time...
    Last edited by neurocutie; 10/03/2007 at 09:39 PM.
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions