Results 1 to 10 of 10
Like Tree2Likes
  • 1 Post By milominderbinde
  • 1 Post By samab
  1.    #1  
    Reuters: HP's PC unit review to be done in 8 to 12 weeks'

    This is the Personal Systems Group that controls webOS so that may be when we will know more about webOS. There are a lot of tea leaves to look at and probably after the final decisions are announced, they will make more sense.

    It was webOS GBU VP Stephen DeWitt who said, “We are not walking away from webOS.” It was Dewitt's boss, PSG VP Todd Bradley who said that webOS is designed to work on a single Qualcomm CPU.


    Putting together what we know about PSG Group VP Todd Bradley:
    Todd Bradley And Jon Rubinstein Didn't Find Out About HP's Plan Until Sunday Night

    But while the HP VP's were saying that HP was not walking away, yesterday BGR reported Exclusive: HP EVP Todd Bradley looking to jump ship for CEO role elsewhere

    One other thing to note is that Todd Bradley was thought to be the replacement for CEO Mark Hurd but Leo Apotheker was recruited from SAP instead.

    So if Leo asks you to meet him for dinner some Sunday night, say no.
    Last edited by milominderbinder; 08/23/2011 at 10:21 AM.
    chalx likes this.
  2.    #2  
    I love how in the photo Todd Bradley looks like he has an arrow through his head like the old Steve Martin routine.
  3. #3  
    I'd just like to point something out here, if I may:

    The Pre and Pixi were designed for the TI OMAP processors. Even the Pre 2 has that same chip in it.

    Then, they "re-wrote" WebOS for Enyo, supposedly.

    Is this when they optimized it for Qualcomm's chip set?

    Either way, they could theoretically swing future devices both ways.. the TI OMAP code is likely very much alive and safe somewhere, and just waiting for Samsung to release it from its closet again.

    "The more I learn, the more I realize just how little I really do know!" -Albert Einstein

  4. samab's Avatar
    Posts
    743 Posts
    Global Posts
    2,060 Global Posts
    #4  
    You can do almost anything theoretically.

    On a practical level, Honeycomb was Tegra 2 only and Windows Mobile 7 was and 7.5 Mango will be Qualcomm only.
    LCGuy likes this.
  5.    #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by LCGuy View Post
    ...Either way, they could theoretically swing future devices both ways...
    Yes theoretically, webOS could run on almost any Android, BlackBerry, or Apple phone.

    The statement from Todd Bradley at the all hands meeting, We are not walking away from webOS:

    "In response to a direct question about licensing to HTC or Samsung, HP VP Todd Bradley pointed out that, to date, webOS is designed to work on a single set of silicon Qualcomm and that many potential licensees would likely want to see webOS support other chipsets."

    He is saying HP had considered HTC and Samsung before. As you know, different Qualcomm chipsets are not interchangeable.

    As we have been discussing in another thread, a pretty credible source in hardware engineering said:

    "...During the all-hands meeting yesterday they were very vague about the future of Web OS, other than the fact that they will continue developing it as a platform. Most people don't realize that Web OS is far from ready to run on Samsung phones. They use a completely different chip set that requires major rework of the OS..."

    "...This is just my limited knowledge of it (i'm actually meeting witha firmware guy next week so I should be able to get a better answer). written to run on something similar to a virtual machine. So when you want to put the OS on a different chipset you only have to write a small amount of code that emulates that virtual machine on that specific chipset. Web OS wasn't written that way, it was hardcoded to run on Qualcom chipsets."

    I am an engineer too. I understand that they had an early version running on a different chipset and that webOS 3.0 could be re-written to run on other chipsets again.

    Are you thinking that now HP will dedicate resources to developing webOS for other chipsets?
  6. #6  
    "Are you thinking that now HP will dedicate resources to developing webOS for other chipsets? "

    Nope, not yet, but that they do have the resources for at least Qualcomm and TI OMAP's chipsets already written.

    It all depends on the deal struck.

    I don think it wil be a sale of WebOS, but, rather, a joint venture: a partnership beween HP and a hardware manufacturer, where the hardware mfr will design the hardware and build it, and HP will modify the OS and support it for the manufacturer to put on the device, and then the manufacturer will market and sell the device to carriers and consumers, giving HP an agreed upon cut of the profits.

    This is the safest and most logical scenario I can think of, given HP's actions of late.

    It could work out very very well, for WebOS fans, and HP as a company, but, the downside is, the partnership could be just for one device, or a defined type of device, and then end, after that, to assure the Mfr doesnt commit to a larger loss, if it fails.



    Oh, and I think the first device from any such joint venture will be a smartphone, for sure - that's where the market demand for WebOS is, right now - the TP's currently making their way around should keep WebOS consumers placated for a year or so.
    "The more I learn, the more I realize just how little I really do know!" -Albert Einstein

  7.    #7  
    At this point, I hope that HP has nothing else to do with webOS. Their heart is not in it. HP said that they want out of consumer sales except for printers. They see themselves as a software company like Leo's old SAP.

    I hope that HP sells webOS outright to someone like Samsung. Samsung is already developing their own competing OS, Bada. Samsung needs the patents to defend themselves against Apple.

    If Samsung were to buy out webOS today and were committed to using it instead of Bada, Samsung could have their first webOS devices out by early 2013.

    If HP was helping, it would be 5 years at best.
  8. samab's Avatar
    Posts
    743 Posts
    Global Posts
    2,060 Global Posts
    #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by LCGuy View Post
    "Are you thinking that now HP will dedicate resources to developing webOS for other chipsets? "

    Nope, not yet, but that they do have the resources for at least Qualcomm and TI OMAP's chipsets already written.
    What makes you think that it's so easy to do?

    This is your argument. Windows Mobile 6 worked on other chips before, and Windows Mobile 7 works on Qualcomm only. So it should be super easy to backport WM7 back to other chipsets. Microsoft has put a million times more manpower on Windows Mobile than HP/Palm. If Microsoft can't do it with that much resources, what makes you think that HP/Palm would be --- first of all willing --- and able to do it.

    Same thing for Android. Android 2.3 works on multiple chipsets before and Android 3.0 works on Tegra 2 only. So it should be super easy for Google to backport Android 3.0 to other chipsets. So why are we not seeing it happening in real life --- when Google has a million times more manpower put in it than HP/Palm.
  9. #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by samab View Post
    What makes you think that it's so easy to do?

    This is your argument. Windows Mobile 6 worked on other chips before, and Windows Mobile 7 works on Qualcomm only. So it should be super easy to backport WM7 back to other chipsets. Microsoft has put a million times more manpower on Windows Mobile than HP/Palm. If Microsoft can't do it with that much resources, what makes you think that HP/Palm would be --- first of all willing --- and able to do it.

    Same thing for Android. Android 2.3 works on multiple chipsets before and Android 3.0 works on Tegra 2 only. So it should be super easy for Google to backport Android 3.0 to other chipsets. So why are we not seeing it happening in real life --- when Google has a million times more manpower put in it than HP/Palm.
    Please, don't put words in my mouth.

    I said that they have them written already. I didn't say it would be "easy", but, perhaps, the implication is that it would be "easier" than starting from scratch, which is a good thing, any time.

    Thanks, in advance, for being a bit more careful with interpretting my posts.
    "The more I learn, the more I realize just how little I really do know!" -Albert Einstein

  10. samab's Avatar
    Posts
    743 Posts
    Global Posts
    2,060 Global Posts
    #10  
    No, the implication is that it is very hard to do it --- even for Google and Microsoft running full speed on their mobile strategy.

    Having legacy codes don't mean much --- when the whole industry is moving at light speed. In a few months, we are going to see LTE quad-core tablets. WebOS' legacy codes on TI armv5/6 platforms don't mean anything. It would be easier to start from scratch.

Posting Permissions