Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 29
Like Tree5Likes
  1.    #1  
    Given the total lack of webos news, the forums, once an active and happening place, have hit a huge lull. *This has given me time to think, and maybe its a good idea for a discussion or two.

    Would Palm, as a standalone company, have lasted longer than HP did with webos?

    I think the answer is probably yes.

    Hear me out. *I think its obvious the pre2, veer, and pre3 were already on palm's roadmap before the acquisition. *The touchpad and touchpad go, on the other hand, were hp products. *Given the touchpad was on the market for 48 days, and the touchpad go never saw the light of day...hp didn't really accomplish anything, atleast from a hardware standpoint. *The veer was released, but there was no effective marketing muscle behind that...basically, they did what palm did with the pre and pre plus, in terms of marketing. I'm sure palm would have done an equally less effective marketing campaign with the veer. *

    Instead of focusing on tablets, which is basically an ipad market, palm with its limited resources could have continued to focus on smartphones...namely the veer, pre2, and pre3, along with webos 2.x (multi-wave launcher anyone? *See yesterday's precentral patent article.) , and developer support. *Look how blackberry has been sputtering lately...a prime market for the pre3. *I think Palm could have grown more marketshare for webos than hp did with webos, phones vs tablets basically. Arguing that hp sold more touchpads than palm would have is faulty, because they only sold them after discontinuing the product with firesale prices.

    Granted, with these smartphones, palm would still be far outpaced by android and apple, maybe even microsoft. No doubt. *And they may have continued to*fail in the market- but atleast they would have gone down trying. *Say what you want, no matter how "technically inferior" the tech pundits claimed the pre and pixi phones were, Palm still managed to make it to the three biggest US carriers, in fact the pre/pixi plus made it out to the market (on att) almost 1 year after they were released. *And, they managed to get the pre2 onto the biggest US carrier, verizon. *If you look at that webosinternals graph of webos device activations, there has been a slow but steady rise in webos activations since day one.

    Of course also, who knows how dire palm really was when they were sold...maybe they would not have gotten as far as the veer...but I get the feeling if they had played the market right they would have gotten it to market too. *Jon Rubinstein himself suggested palm could have continued a little longer as they had some cash reserves...no reason for him to lie as a ceo of a publicly traded company.

    Alas, hp came aboard, infiltrated webos, and has left it out to die.
    I would much rather see webos go down in palm's hands than hp's. *

    Any thoughts?
  2. #2  
    Quote Originally Posted by MDsmartphone View Post

    Any thoughts?
    My thoughts are that I think you are wrong. HP would last longer. Palm was small, not profitable and webos phones did not sell well. HP, is large and profitable, and webos phones did not sell well. If the question is who would last longer in a war of attrition with an unpopular product line. HP had much more money to burn. I believe HP has a profit of just over $9 billion dollars per year. By contrast Palm had a yearly loss. It eventually cause them to be sold. It was not possible for Palm to continue. Either way HP has much more money to throw into the pit. Had HP chosen to just keep losing money they could do so for a long time. It'd mean they eat up the rest of the companies profits but they could do it. If it's a war of attrition, HP has plenty of food, ammo, warm coats. Palm would be huddled in a t-shirt by burning trash can.
    You come at the king. You best not miss.
  3. #3  
    Quote Originally Posted by SnotBoogie View Post
    My thoughts are that I think you are wrong. HP would last longer. Palm was small, not profitable and webos phones did not sell well. HP, is large and profitable, and webos phones did not sell well. If the question is who would last longer in a war of attrition with an unpopular product line. HP had much more money to burn. I believe HP has a profit of just over $9 billion dollars per year. By contrast Palm had a yearly loss. It eventually cause them to be sold. Either way HP has much more money to throw into the pit. Had HP chosen to just keep losing money they could do so for a long time. It'd mean they eat up the rest of the companies profits but they could do it. If it's a war of attrition, HP has plenty of food, ammo, warm coats. Palm would be huddled in a t-shirt by burning trash can.
    Since this all just assumptions anyway, let's frame the issue correctly. Would Palm with the same amount of resources spent by HP (the purported 3 billion plus) have lasted as long as HP did?

    I think so, but it's certainly not a slam dunk. Jon Rube seems to have been stuck in an Apple fixation and he didn't seem to have an awareness of what Android was doing in the market. The world was a-changin' while he was going with the Apple model of a single phone a year.

    Also, he needed one of his lieutenants to take him behind the woodshed and knock some sense into him about form factors. I love the slider but I'm in a minority and they need to make the second phone a slab and not a Pixi.

    While Palm could have done things better, they get some slack for being cash strapped. Not that it gives them a free pass - the market always sees to that - but a lack of money in a start-up always leads to a need to comprise. Palm just compromised in the wrong areas.

    HP, however, has very little excuse for how they mangled the whole webOS situation. By the way the goal is to fix the things that are wrong so that you can make money, not to just sit and burn off assets. Palm never fixed their initial mistakes (maybe through stubbornness, maybe because of cash flow). HP didn't either, but they can't blame the problem on a lack of cash.
    "Sometimes I feel like an OS-less child..."
    (with apologies to Billie Holiday )
  4.    #4  
    well, I'm not arguing that hp isn't a bigger company. Had they stuck it out with webos, there would be no comparison

    but they killed the product in a little over a year after they acquired it...

    would palm have lasted the year too?

    there's no right or wrong answer. Just opening this up for discussion.
  5.    #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by bojangles21 View Post
    Not a chance. Palm would have filed chapter 11.
    possibly...but when? Before Aug 18th?
  6. #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by MDsmartphone View Post
    well, I'm not arguing that hp isn't a bigger company. Had they stuck it out with webos, there would be no comparison

    but they killed the product in a little over a year after they acquired it...

    would palm have lasted the year too?

    there's no right or wrong answer. Just opening this up for discussion.
    You asked who would last longer. HP easy. They can afford to. Palm couldn't. Palm had only $590 million dollars right before it was sold. Rubenstien said. Palm was not a sustainable business. Not to mention if as you say the Pre 2, pre 3, and veer were all Palm's doing they were destined for the same lack luster sales had they even survived so it's not like they'd have been profitable.

    regardless you asked who'd last longer and Bottom line is HP could afford to keep losing money on HP if it wants to because it's got a 9 billion dollar cushion every year. Palm could not because it has no profits. I don't think Palm was going to last through 2010.
    You come at the king. You best not miss.
    Vistaus likes this.
  7. #7  
    Jon said that Palm could of kept going but just smaller and probably slower.

    Probably wouldnt of seen the tablet for another 2 years. But i would of been happy with that pre 3. Lol.
  8. #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by C-Note View Post
    Since this all just assumptions anyway, let's frame the issue correctly. Would Palm with the same amount of resources spent by HP (the purported 3 billion plus) have lasted as long as HP did?
    to be fair to myself, i don't think that is what hte OP asked. I was just answering what was asked. That being said. i don't think it would change the outcome because the devices would have been the same. According to the original post, additionally, these pres and veers are all Palm's phones. None of them sold well. And i don't think the Pre 3 would have sold one bit different then the other pres sold.

    And in an interview with rubenstien he seems to indicate that had he had an extra billion dollars laying around he'd have spent it on marketing and advertising. Ruby said, "I mean, would I rather have a spare billion dollars to go spend on brand advertising around the world? Of course I would. But that's not the reality. " http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/04/...-on-the-table/ That was before the sale to HP. Well they sold to HP, he was still in charge and they got their billion. They bought ads with pacquio and glee people i've never heard of. So considering ruby was at HP and it's basically the same people that were at palm (it's not like HP fired everyone at palm). The Palm division under HP was still tons of Palm people, including the guy in charge when Palm was a solo company. So if the extra billion they got with hp would have just gone to advertising and marketing i'd bet you'd get the exact same manny pacquio glee people ads we actually got. I don't think it would have been different. same ads same devices same result. And the bigger thing for me is with more money Ruby doesn't say they'd make different devices. Just more advertising. And the average consumer didn't like Palm Pre's and Pixis. Precentral people did yeah, but the problem is that's not nearly enough. Precentral is not representative of the larger smartphone buying public in the world. People here would love the Pre, pre +, pixi but the rest of the world did not. That's an issue. More of the same would not have changed that. The devices needed to be much much better and different for a different result and had Palm stayed in control that wouldn't have happened. Really i think Palm was still in control just now with HP's deep pockets and it didn't happen.
    You come at the king. You best not miss.
  9. #9  
    HP most probably did not invest anything other than the initial purchase price. If they had, most of the products we have heard of but have never seen would have been out on the market long ago... Also, who in the name of god kills a product without even trying to sell it... HP arrogantly thought the TouchPad would sell itself so late in the tablet game...

    Had they created enough awareness, and actually tried to sell the webOS ecosystem, it could have been a success, but our dear friend Leo did not understand any of the hardware stuff. Mark Hurd before him was only good at milking the cow into oblivion... He did certainly not intend to spend a penny on webOS.

    I'm convinced palm would have fared much better and longer on their own. Besides they would have found a way to survive and probably find some other means of financing the longer term activities.

    In any and all cases I hope webOS will survive this ordeal and finds a nice home with good hardware to thrive again.
    HP Touchpad, Palm Pre2.

    If you like the help I am providing
    Support my work:

  10. #10  
    Rubinstein also admitted that they missed a product cycle during Palm's twilight, so I'm guessing the company would have gone bust sooner than August 18.
  11.    #11  
    "I'm convinced palm would have fared much better and longer on their own. Besides they would have found a way to survive and probably find some other means of financing the longer term activities."

    this I would agree with.
    despite ruby not wanting to license webos initially, he did say that towards the end they were exploring all their options. Palm has had htc make their hardware before on some of the Treos, I think the treo pro was the last one- released in 2008.
    I certainly think ruby chose hp over company a,b,c etc because it was the only one who he thought would continue with the innovative operating system and not use it solely for its patent portfolio such as google and apple would have done. I think he, like the rest of us webos faithful, thought hp was serious about making webos successful. I do think he would have pushed for another company or explored other options had he known hp would only half *** their attempt to make webos a success.
  12. #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by SnotBoogie View Post
    to be fair to myself, i don't think that is what hte OP asked. I was just answering what was asked. That being said. i don't think it would change the outcome because the devices would have been the same. ...

    And in an interview with rubenstien he seems to indicate that had he had an extra billion dollars laying around he'd have spent it on marketing and advertising. Ruby said, "I mean, would I rather have a spare billion dollars to go spend on brand advertising around the world? Of course I would. But that's not the reality. " Palm CEO puts his cards on the table - Fortune Tech That was before the sale to HP. Well they sold to HP, he was still in charge and they got their billion....

    They bought ads with pacquio and glee people i've never heard of. So considering ruby was at HP and it's basically the same people that were at palm (it's not like HP fired everyone at palm). The Palm division under HP was still tons of Palm people, including the guy in charge when Palm was a solo company. So if the extra billion they got with hp would have just gone to advertising and marketing i'd bet you'd get the exact same manny pacquio glee people ads we actually got. I don't think it would have been different. ...

    The devices needed to be much much better and different for a different result and had Palm stayed in control that wouldn't have happened. Really i think Palm was still in control just now with HP's deep pockets and it didn't happen.
    #1 - I agree with you about the original question, and I wasn't trying to pick on you at all. But I feel that is is a not as interesting a question. If a company is near broke, there is no way they last an extra 13 months. The idea of how things might have been if they had the money is more interesting and question all webOS fans are asking themselves.

    #2- If you believe Rubenstein, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you. You have to have something to advertise. Do you remember how sparse the Palm ads were toward the end of Palm's run. Maybe he could have borrowed the money from loan sharks, but he didn't have it on hand. (Just like he wasn't considering selling Palm and he never picked up an iPhone )

    #3 - Don't believe for a second that HP just forked over one billion dollars to the old Palm team with no input or strings attached. If you remember the defections of key personnel started coming quickly after the takeover closed. That does not happen when a company has a hands-off, "I'll just write the checks to keep things running" policy. This is the first time I've heard that seriously posited. Just after the deal closed, most of the naysayers talked about how HP 'commodity' mindset would doom webOS.

    #4 - I by no means think that extra money was automatically going to insure success, and I never have. I believe my original post said success was not a "slam dunk", BECAUSE of the myopia of people like Rubenstein. (he was looking in only one direction (-at Apple-) while crossing a two-way street, didn't account for Google)


    So this is more of jumping off point for more discussion. I don't think failure was assured, but like I said earlier things needed to change and they didn't. (Form factors, quality control, product deliverables, developer relations, and partner relationships come to mind)

    C
    "Sometimes I feel like an OS-less child..."
    (with apologies to Billie Holiday )
  13. #13  
    A resource-depleted Palm would have filed Chapter 11...

    ...the day after HP quit the fight

    Edit:
    Or, since there is no wrong answer...

    A broke and desperate Rube walked all the way to 1 Infinite Loop w/ a scheme. There, he presented the Smartphone patent to none other than the Cupertino tyrant. At an asking price of $8 billion, it initially elicited great fury... for which Rube was promptly taken to reality distortion chamber #5 (RDC5) and was endlessly pimp-slapped by a foaming Steve and a couple gimps fanb0ys. Poor Jon didnt understand that when he left Apple, he was never to set foot there again. And so, he had it coming, for Steve does not take kindly to his fallen angels.

    Luckily, his iPhone pee'd and Steve stopped to dry his leg and take the call (I did say they were in the RDC, right? Strange sh!t happens in there). After what seemed like 2 minutes of PERFECT reception (happens only in RDC4, 5, and 8. Oh, and 101 on Tuesdays), he ended the call, and he wept (they say he does that a lot). Suddenly, remembering that J Rube was watching, he dried his eyes and the grimacing gangsta face returned.

    To his credit - and in retrospect, this was probably his saving grace - the Rube employed a trick he had learned from the old farts at Palm, Inc... Colligan I believe. It was the incremental update. He applied this measly update to his original scheme and repackaged it Treo style. And as the right hand of god... I mean Steve - but seriously, he may as well be called god, right? As that mighty right hand (for a geek anyway) was about to layeth down the final pimp slap; as the angels sang; and as the Virgin Siri sang too; as the thunder rolled and iPhone LEDs flashed (lightning dont work in the chamber) - even as all that was happening, Rube, the eternally dammed, found some strength. He barely raised his head and whispered, "but this will makest thou the quintessential patent troll"

    And just like that the commotion stopped. No 'lightning', no thunder, no darkness, no singing (Siri wanted to continue as the spirit had gotten into her, but a sick side glance from the tyrant sent the spirits running). Armageddon, my friends, was averted by the utterance of 9 simple words.

    So he re-presented his Treo-fied scheme and Steve loved it. W/ this, he would wield absolute power and force royalties from every smartphone maker. And a year later, when he himself updated that patent in the RDC - 'iPatent S' they would call it - he would terrorize even dumb phone and feature phone makers. He offered him $5 billion, but Rube took a chance and mentioned the pending $7 billion deal w/ Samsung. Surprisingly, Steve accepted. At that point he was just too drained to continue.

    And so began the true downfall of palm. Yes, my fellow palmers, it was a sad day indeed. For Rube, in his myopia, chose the path of righteousness and not patent-trollingness. An engineer to the core, he foolishly sold the cow and decided to buy milk, proving yet again that engineers never make good accountants. He ran like a bat outta hell from1 Infinite Loop, frequently looking back over his shoulders. He rejoiced and sang praises because palm would live to fight yet again (seriously, whats w/ all the singing?). Ironically, poetically even, this deal would come back to haunt him. He had barely hitched a ride back to Sunnyvale when the car radio - all car radios, in fact; and house radios too - received interference from a reality distortion field. The message was brief, the message was clear. A jubilant Steve, flanked by mindless, raving fanb0ys, simply declared: "device makers of earth, it was generally understood, but as of today it is fact. You're all my b!tche$"

    Rube wept!
    Last edited by p41m3r; 11/30/2011 at 04:57 AM. Reason: an alternate ending...
  14. #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by C-Note View Post
    #1 - I agree with you about the original question, and I wasn't trying to pick on you at all. But I feel that is is a not as interesting a question. If a company is near broke, there is no way they last an extra 13 months. The idea of how things might have been if they had the money is more interesting and question all webOS fans are asking themselves.

    #2- If you believe Rubenstein, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you. You have to have something to advertise. Do you remember how sparse the Palm ads were toward the end of Palm's run. Maybe he could have borrowed the money from loan sharks, but he didn't have it on hand. (Just like he wasn't considering selling Palm and he never picked up an iPhone )

    #3 - Don't believe for a second that HP just forked over one billion dollars to the old Palm team with no input or strings attached. If you remember the defections of key personnel started coming quickly after the takeover closed. That does not happen when a company has a hands-off, "I'll just write the checks to keep things running" policy. This is the first time I've heard that seriously posited. Just after the deal closed, most of the naysayers talked about how HP 'commodity' mindset would doom webOS.

    #4 - I by no means think that extra money was automatically going to insure success, and I never have. I believe my original post said success was not a "slam dunk", BECAUSE of the myopia of people like Rubenstein. (he was looking in only one direction (-at Apple-) while crossing a two-way street, didn't account for Google)


    So this is more of jumping off point for more discussion. I don't think failure was assured, but like I said earlier things needed to change and they didn't. (Form factors, quality control, product deliverables, developer relations, and partner relationships come to mind)

    C
    i understand. i just think, if it's true that the veer and pre 3 were all Palm devices then those are their idea of the future. If you want to know what they would do in the future well we got it. That's the sort of things Palm thought would win over consumers. I am inclined to believe they thought that stuff is great. Thus i just think we got what they wanted, hp input or not. And i don't think there was any chance the Pre 3 would sell well. I think the few, relative to the global market, here on precentral would have loved it and that's largely it. Similar to the Touchpad where when it launched everyone hear liked it but it didn't sell well outside the palm faithful. I don't think very highly of Palm either. I thought they failed too and sucked just like HP.
    You come at the king. You best not miss.
  15. #15  
    I would just really like to know what it was that HP spent half a billion on. If you consider that 1.5B was purchasing Palm, and then another nearly 1B writing off their value . . .
    Author:
    Remove Messaging Beeps patch for webOS 3.0.5, Left/Right bezel gestures in LunaCE,
    Whazaa! Messenger and node-wa, SynerGV 1 and 2 - Google Voice integration, XO - Subsonic Commander media streamer, AB:S Launcher
    (1:39:33 PM) halfhalo: Android multitasking is like sticking your fingers into a blender
    GO OPEN WEBOS!
    People asked me for a donate link for my non-catalog work, so here you are:
  16.    #16  
    good points from all above.

    hp wasted their money making tablets for webos- they didn't really have their hearts in it.

    palm would have atleast kept trying or found a creative way out of their hole.

    the end is getting closer it seems- december is right around the
    corner, hp is talking up windows 8, and rumors are swirling. This feels like the lebron james fiasco. A joke to others, very painful for the webos faithful.
    C-Note and palmlover123 like this.
  17. #17  
    one of my computer engineer/programmer friends that has been in the business a long long time (he has a few patents for computer shieeeeeet), told me the other night after several too many Marguarita's that it is his firm belief Meg will keep the WebOs developement going in some form or another, one can only wish....

    bummer on the rest of the line, many parts are warehoused and paid for, waiting their fate....

    dumb de dumb

    laterzzzzz....
    32g and playing
  18. #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by SnotBoogie View Post
    i understand. i just think, if it's true that the veer and pre 3 were all Palm devices then those are their idea of the future. If you want to know what they would do in the future well we got it. That's the sort of things Palm thought would win over consumers. I am inclined to believe they thought that stuff is great. Thus i just think we got what they wanted, hp input or not. And i don't think there was any chance the Pre 3 would sell well. I think the few, relative to the global market, here on precentral would have loved it and that's largely it. Similar to the Touchpad where when it launched everyone hear liked it but it didn't sell well outside the palm faithful. I don't think very highly of Palm either. I thought they failed too and sucked just like HP.
    Could be, but we know there was a slab type phone at least in pre-production models. Seems like HP was happy using what was on the shelf. Maybe the Palm people were too, or maybe they were just so happy to still be alive they didn't dare push back against HP management and figured they could make a go of it with the stuff already in the can.

    Problem was that they lost too much time. What was 'OK plus' (to bend a phrase) when it should have been released was second rate by the time it was released. (See the Pre3 versus phones in the summer of 2010 THEN the phones when it was finally available, or the Touchpad vs the iPad and THEN the iPad2).

    But we don't know if the old Palm guard wanted to use the HP money to make stuff they couldn't afford to produce before the buyout. But it doesn't look like that was the HP plan. It certainly wasn't with the tablet design they recycled... or at best chose to be a imitator rather than innovator.

    C
    "Sometimes I feel like an OS-less child..."
    (with apologies to Billie Holiday )
  19. #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by MDsmartphone View Post
    good points from all above.

    hp wasted their money making tablets for webos- they didn't really have their hearts in it.

    palm would have atleast kept trying or found a creative way out of their hole.
    Palm? Lol. Their market was America. They'd had to spend billions to make something there. And then they'd only would've been popular in America. HP on the other hand tried to sell webOS-devices in Europe. While not the most profitable, at least they did unlike Palm who never sold anything here in Europe after the 2006 Treo.

    HP could've made it with the Pre 3. Yes, hardware and screen size is not that high-end, but it's running smooth. And all the naysayers here need to readdress this. I mean, the iPhone has also a small screen size, WP7 also has low specs. Yet, both of them are selling damn well. So it doesn't matter who has the highest specs and biggest screens, else Apple and MS would make tons of losses on their mobile industry.

    And yes, the TP was late in the tablet-game, but so was Android with their tabletversion. The TP launched a few months after Android had brought out the first 3.0-device. So anyone outside Apple was late. That doesn't mean the outsiders could let Apple standing their on it's ow without trying to catch up.
  20. cgk
    cgk is offline
    cgk's Avatar
    Posts
    3,868 Posts
    Global Posts
    9,555 Global Posts
    #20  
    HP could've made it with the Pre 3. Yes, hardware and screen size is not that high-end, but it's running smooth. And all the naysayers here need to readdress this.
    Consumers (and carriers) rejected the Pre Plus and the Pre 2 - the Pre 3 was just an evolution of a design that didn't get any critical mass. Mentioning the iphone is a red herring, people actually purchased that phone.
    SnotBoogie likes this.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions