Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 69
  1. #41  
    Quote Originally Posted by playboy View Post
    Kupe, you're going off script. I posed my questions b/c you were quoted as saying that the Pre is 2 years old. And all that I asked was when did the device go on sale. You finally answered that question. Thank you.
    And you're not going to answer my questions? Typical.
  2. #42  
    Quote Originally Posted by Kupe View Post
    And you're not going to answer my questions? Typical.
    The general format of these tyoe of things is that someone poses a question, then the other user provides an answer and then is able to pose their own question. When the user fails to answer the question then the format tends to break down.

    Lets try this format with a simple yes/no answer.
    Will the pre be 2 years old, according to it first becoming public knowledge, by the end of 2010?
  3. #43  
    Quote Originally Posted by rlopin View Post
    I have a contact who used to work for Palm that has given me some info in the past that has turned out to be fairly accurate. Sometimes my contact's timing has been off, but otherwise reliable fact-wise.

    My contact informed me a few days ago that WebOS 2.0 would be available for the Pre and Pixi, and that there should be a new hardware anouncement in late September/ early October for a November launch.
    The WebOS 2.0 is a given, it's the new hardware that a lot of us Sprint Premier users are waiting for. I'm normally very frugal, but I know I'm going to jump & grab the device the first day it's available on Sprint. I feel like I've already been patient since 6/2010, because that's when I could have gotten a new device.

    Unfortunately, I also see no reason for people to pay extra per month for 4G when 4G isn't available in their area. So I guess I need to find out from Sprint when 4G will be here. I know I'm going to cave. I guess I'll start a thread to see who's caving with me. Launch day Pre user and I'll be an Launch day new WebOS 2.0 device user.
  4. #44  
    Okay, look, we can argue how old the Pre actually is until we're blue in the face. The cold hard fact is that in the world of smartphones, the Pre is ready for senior citizen discounts.

    A new OS and new hardware and a new tablet are on the horizon. Everyone at Palm has said so over and over again. And I truly understand the doubting Thomases poking at the wounds of a bleeding Palm, but I can't help but get excited about the possibilities.

    The thing that makes me most excited, actually is the possibility of better performance on my Pre. The original release of WebOS was rushed, and not optimized for the hardware. It didn't even use the GPU until a later patch. They just slapped Linux on a phone with a web browser. The hardware is very close to an iPhone, but it didn't have the iPhone's performance.

    I'm excited about the possiblity of getting iPhone performance on my launch Pre. It's nothing they've ever talked about, it's not anything they've ever said, but it's possible.

    Apparently this has happened with Android. I don't own an android but that's what I've heard.

    But as we have seen with the iPhone, the new OS has made older phones sluggish or unusable.

    Colour me glass half full, but I'm optimistic. But as long as I can still Homebrew my Pre, and overclock it, I'll be happy. And as far as I'm concerned, that's the best thing about the release of the 2.0 sdk. Patchers will have a chance to see how they can work on the OS before it even hits our phones. I like that.
  5. #45  
    Why is this even a discussion? What could possibly hold WebOS 2.0 from being on the Pre? The hardware can obviously handle it, therefore it would be dumb not to have it on the Pre.

    Now, with that said, I'm sure Palm would rather introduce it on a new device first to increase their non-existant mindshare, but the Pre would get get it shortly after. Hard to say for the Pixi though.
  6. #46  
    Verizon could hold it from going to the Pre+ just as they are doing with 1.4.5.
  7. #47  
    Man there's a lot of hot air in this thread.
  8. #48  
    I can't imagine HPalm not making it available to current Pre owners. They are already on thin ice with Sprint Pre users as it is. Taking yet another dump on us would definitely be last straw for many of us.
    The Saint
  9. #49  
    Rahul Sood posted on Facebook that he's been showing his Palm Pre with WEbOS 2.0 to people.

    Case solved.

  10. #50  
    Per Rahul tonite via Twitter:
    ...Many of you don't realize the development time it takes to create new devices.. Wish it was like snapping fingers though
  11. #51  
    There is nothing with this update that current Pre's couldn't handle.
  12. #52  
    Quote Originally Posted by HelloNNNewman View Post
    Per Rahul tonite via Twitter:

    ...Many of you don't realize the development time it takes to create new devices.. Wish it was like snapping fingers though
    and my response to him was the "famous" Mark Hurd quote:

    not easy? “… building a smartphone or a phone of any type is not a particularly complicated engineering feat…" Mark Hurd quote
  13. #53  
    Quote Originally Posted by Cantaffordit View Post
    and my response to him was the "famous" Mark Hurd quote:

    not easy? “… building a smartphone or a phone of any type is not a particularly complicated engineering feat…" Mark Hurd quote
    Which was a fairly ridiculous thing for Hurd to have said.
    Palm III-->Handspring Visor-->Sony Clie PEG-NR70-->no PDA -->Palm Treo 755p-->Palm Pre-->HP Veer
  14. #54  
    Quote Originally Posted by jbg7474 View Post
    Which was a fairly ridiculous thing for Hurd to have said.
    Hurd is something else. Perhaps he actually thought building a smartphone is like assembling a PC.
  15. #55  
    I sure as hell hope so.

    I don't want my developing device running an older version of the OS.
  16. #56  
    Quote Originally Posted by jbg7474 View Post
    Which was a fairly ridiculous thing for Hurd to have said.
    Actually, I disagree. This was an absolutely true statement for a company like HP that makes far more complex products. You think it's harder to make a smartphone than a datacenter in a box? Or a telecom router? Or, heck, even a high-end server? Nope, sorry: making a smartphone is relatively trivial for HP. I guarantee that engineering a smartphone is much easier for HP than engineering a datacenter would be for the likes of HTC.

    What he was saying, once again taken in context, was that engineering a smartphone isn't what's hard. What's hard is creating the ecosystem around that smartphone that makes it compelling.

    Also note that "not hard" doesn't translate to "quick." Engineering a smartphone is only part of it. The parts have to be sourced and integrated, kernels written, software optimized, then the thing has to be prototyped, tested internally, field tested, and then tested with the carrier and approved. Those things take time, and no amount of money can make things happen much faster than they do--although money can certainly make the outcome better.
    Treo 600 > Treo 650 > HTC Mogul (*****!) > HTC Touch Pro (***** squared!) > PRE! > Epic
  17. #57  
    Quote Originally Posted by wynand32 View Post
    Actually, I disagree. This was an absolutely true statement for a company like HP that makes far more complex products. You think it's harder to make a smartphone than a datacenter in a box? Or a telecom router? Or, heck, even a high-end server? Nope, sorry: making a smartphone is relatively trivial for HP. I guarantee that engineering a smartphone is much easier for HP than engineering a datacenter would be for the likes of HTC.

    What he was saying, once again taken in context, was that engineering a smartphone isn't what's hard. What's hard is creating the ecosystem around that smartphone that makes it compelling.

    Also note that "not hard" doesn't translate to "quick." Engineering a smartphone is only part of it. The parts have to be sourced and integrated, kernels written, software optimized, then the thing has to be prototyped, tested internally, field tested, and then tested with the carrier and approved. Those things take time, and no amount of money can make things happen much faster than they do--although money can certainly make the outcome better.
    Well, you certainly make a good point: compared to other things that HP does, engineering a smartphone is not a substantially more difficult challenge. And one could focus on Hurd's use of the word "particularly," as evidence that he meant that it wasn't difficult in comparison to other things they do.

    Note, however, that engineering includes all of the other tasks you mentioned as taking a good deal of time--this is all evidence of the complexity of the task. One might also consider the engineering that goes into some of the underlying parts, such as the SoC that runs most of the phone, or the multiple radios integrated. It is done routinely, and there are other things that are more complicated, but every phone is a complex engineering feat.

    But I'm an engineer, so I'm a little biased.
    Palm III-->Handspring Visor-->Sony Clie PEG-NR70-->no PDA -->Palm Treo 755p-->Palm Pre-->HP Veer
  18. #58  
    Quote Originally Posted by jbg7474 View Post
    Well, you certainly make a good point: compared to other things that HP does, engineering a smartphone is not a substantially more difficult challenge. And one could focus on Hurd's use of the word "particularly," as evidence that he meant that it wasn't difficult in comparison to other things they do.

    Note, however, that engineering includes all of the other tasks you mentioned as taking a good deal of time--this is all evidence of the complexity of the task. One might also consider the engineering that goes into some of the underlying parts, such as the SoC that runs most of the phone, or the multiple radios integrated. It is done routinely, and there are other things that are more complicated, but every phone is a complex engineering feat.

    But I'm an engineer, so I'm a little biased.
    Then I think we're agreed (except I still think it's actually less difficult than much of what HP already does). It wasn't a ridiculous statement for Hurd to make, in the context that he made it.

    Incidentally, I also found it a little funny, and a subtle jab at HP's competitors. Remember that HP sees themselves (rightly, I believe) as uniquely positioned to do very well in the mobile space. And again, the engineering of the smartphone hardware isn't what's going to be difficult in order for HP to be successful. It's building out an ecosystem that's attractive and compelling.

    Oh: it should also be added that HP already makes smartphone hardware. It's not like they're delving into something completely new here.
    Treo 600 > Treo 650 > HTC Mogul (*****!) > HTC Touch Pro (***** squared!) > PRE! > Epic
  19. #59  
    Quote Originally Posted by wynand32 View Post
    Then I think we're agreed (except I still think it's actually less difficult than much of what HP already does). It wasn't a ridiculous statement for Hurd to make, in the context that he made it.

    Incidentally, I also found it a little funny, and a subtle jab at HP's competitors. Remember that HP sees themselves (rightly, I believe) as uniquely positioned to do very well in the mobile space. And again, the engineering of the smartphone hardware isn't what's going to be difficult in order for HP to be successful. It's building out an ecosystem that's attractive and compelling.

    Oh: it should also be added that HP already makes smartphone hardware. It's not like they're delving into something completely new here.
    Agreed. Probably the least difficult part of building a successful smartphone business is engineering the device. When you consider all the other factors that go into a truly successful smartphone, the engineering is the easiest to get your mind around.
  20. #60  
    Quote Originally Posted by wynand32 View Post
    Then I think we're agreed (except I still think it's actually less difficult than much of what HP already does). It wasn't a ridiculous statement for Hurd to make, in the context that he made it.

    Incidentally, I also found it a little funny, and a subtle jab at HP's competitors. Remember that HP sees themselves (rightly, I believe) as uniquely positioned to do very well in the mobile space. And again, the engineering of the smartphone hardware isn't what's going to be difficult in order for HP to be successful. It's building out an ecosystem that's attractive and compelling.

    Oh: it should also be added that HP already makes smartphone hardware. It's not like they're delving into something completely new here.
    Yes, agreed. In fact I especially agree with your second paragraph--it was most definitely a jab at HP's competitors, so in that light, I have to admit that it wasn't ridiculous.

    So now the open question is whether Palm will provide a handset worthy of the statement.

    And to take us back on track, I'm really looking forward to webOS 2.0 on my Pre! Unlike the changes in iOS 4 that made it incompatible with the original iPhone and partially incompatible with the iPhone 3G, I haven't seen or heard about anything in the new version that would tax my processor substantially more than webOS 1.4.5.
    Last edited by jbg7474; 09/11/2010 at 07:16 PM. Reason: Taking the conversation back on track
    Palm III-->Handspring Visor-->Sony Clie PEG-NR70-->no PDA -->Palm Treo 755p-->Palm Pre-->HP Veer
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions