Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 53 of 53
  1. #41  
    Read this and tell me...is it good or bad

    http://www.palmsource.com/opensource/letter.html
  2. #42  
  3. #43  
    this just in...japanese surrender!
  4. #44  
    Quote Originally Posted by dutchtrumpet
    this just in...japanese surrender!
    they did! I had no idea - that's great!
    da Gimp

    Please note: My spelling sucks and I'm to lazy to check it.
  5. #45  
    Quote Originally Posted by dstrauss
    I'm not dissing Microsoft. They are not the omnipotent evil empire you think I see. In fact, given time (as they always do) they'll get to a stable OS. furthermore, without some level of standardization (in fact, that's where Apple shines in controlling the entire experience) we'd be in sixteen different flavors of Unix/CPM/DOS/Windows?OS2. My disappointment is with Palm. Let's agree to disagree, and we'll check back this time next year to see who is closer to right. Hopefully (in all sincerity) I will be the "wrong" party, and we'll have companion Palm and Windoze OS on Treos. I'm afraid, however, that we wont.
    okay, I've marked my calendar for 9/28/06 to tell you, "I told you so."
  6. #46  
    Quote Originally Posted by samkim
    okay, I've marked my calendar for 9/28/06 to tell you, "I told you so."
    Hope you're right, and we party

    but I'm afraid I'll be the gloating party with nothing to celebrate

    I am going to stop the crybaby routine, however, in that it (WM version) will still be a decent smartphone, and since there are other manufacturers, maybe they'll innovate on the hardware side a little. Just like at one time I couldn't function without my Palm (my daughter says it's my pocket memory),I can't do without my converged device anymore (as I learned while struggling with a Moto v551 and Dell x50v while waiting for my Cingular 650).

    PS - I marked my OUTLOOK calendar for 9/28/06 as well, so my then newly released Treo 750W (the one with built in WiFI and 128mb ram) can remind me.
    Last edited by dstrauss; 09/28/2005 at 07:34 AM.
    Remember, the "P" in PDA stands for personal.
    If it works for you, it is "P"erfect.
  7. #47  
    Granted, we're all just making our best guesses here and some are insanely loyal to one OS, or the other (more aptly some really, really like MS and some really, really hate MS). That said, the 650 is selling like crazy. Palm is making money hand over fist with the curren Palm OS Treo. Since the WM and Palm OS units would use virtually identical hardware, the business case for Palm to support only one OS becomes pretty weak. The actual cost for Palm to support multiple OS's would just be the marginal cost to produce 1 more hardware unit and any development team to tweak the OS offerings and put the entire package together. All in all, that's a pretty minimal cost basis for the size of the revenue stream the Palm OS line will bring in to Palm.

    That said, we will have to wait and see what Access/Palm Source does with the Palm OS. Best guess, they continue with the plan to move the Palm OS to a Linux flavor (noting that I did not see Colligan's comments as indicating Palm planned to dump Palm OS if/when if did move to a Linux kernal, just that, at this time, they did not plan on supporting 3 OS's). There will probably be some transitional releases with thicker middleware to ensure backward compatibility with legacy applications, but ultimately a pretty clean transition to a linux core with a Palm OS shell on top. If Access/Palm Source puts out a product that meets the demands for mobile users, particularly in terms of handling voice and multi-media, I would be very, very surprised to see Palm dump them. Why would Palm hand over hundreds of thousands, likely even millions, of sales to someone else?

    JMHO

    Gargoyle
  8. #48  
    Quote Originally Posted by gargoylejps
    ...Best guess, they continue with the plan to move the Palm OS to a Linux flavor (noting that I did not see Colligan's comments as indicating Palm planned to dump Palm OS if/when if did move to a Linux kernal, just that, at this time, they did not plan on supporting 3 OS's). There will probably be some transitional releases with thicker middleware to ensure backward compatibility with legacy applications, but ultimately a pretty clean transition to a linux core with a Palm OS shell on top. If Access/Palm Source puts out a product that meets the demands for mobile users, particularly in terms of handling voice and multi-media, I would be very, very surprised to see Palm dump them. Why would Palm hand over hundreds of thousands, likely even millions, of sales to someone else?

    JMHO

    Gargoyle
    I see the Access deal as cornering the Asian (read Chinese) flavor market. As for domestic (or even "worldphone" sales) why can't they capture the same market with the WM phone? Why does there have to be a Palm phone (other than to appease the Windoze haters among us). You heard Cooligan, WM5 can do things Palm just cannot. So unless ONLY a Palm unit could capture those marginal sales (which I doubt) Palm can safely transition ALL new customers to WM5 or later, and skip the very costly software work on two platforms. It's not jsut a matter of "tweaking" the latest OS release to work with the smartphone. Look how far behind (OS wise) Treo, and even Samsung, phones have been from the PDA universe. Add in the carrier lead time, and even if PalmLinux were available tomorrow, it wouldn't see the light of cellular day until 2007.
    Remember, the "P" in PDA stands for personal.
    If it works for you, it is "P"erfect.
  9. Wink40's Avatar
    Posts
    104 Posts
    Global Posts
    105 Global Posts
    #49  
    Forbes is reporting:

    "Now, by partnering with Microsoft, Palm may have received a new lease on life. The Palm operating system, meanwhile, is likely doomed."

    Even if it is not doomed, would any responsible corporate IT group buy non-windows Treos? I suspect that this really means that Blackberry will take over.
    ...can prevent unnecessary threads.
  10. #50  
    Quote Originally Posted by shadowmite
    He also specifically said if they can't make it work with just Windows mobile, then they deserve what they get. Palm OS is not being pursued.
    That's not what Colligan said. He said that if Palm couldn't innovate on top of Windows Mobile, then they deserved to be commoditized. It has nothing to do with the choice of OS.

    In a later presentation, Ken Wirt re-affirmed Palm's multi-OS strategy.
  11. #51  
    Quote Originally Posted by dstrauss
    I see the Access deal as cornering the Asian (read Chinese) flavor market. As for domestic (or even "worldphone" sales) why can't they capture the same market with the WM phone? Why does there have to be a Palm phone (other than to appease the Windoze haters among us). You heard Cooligan, WM5 can do things Palm just cannot. So unless ONLY a Palm unit could capture those marginal sales (which I doubt) Palm can safely transition ALL new customers to WM5 or later, and skip the very costly software work on two platforms. It's not jsut a matter of "tweaking" the latest OS release to work with the smartphone. Look how far behind (OS wise) Treo, and even Samsung, phones have been from the PDA universe. Add in the carrier lead time, and even if PalmLinux were available tomorrow, it wouldn't see the light of cellular day until 2007.
    If PalmOS users have a PalmOS upgrade path, Palm can keep most of them since they're just about the only game in town. If the users are forced to move to Windows, then Palm has to split them with the other WM smartphone makers. It's in Palm's interest to keep PalmOS alive.

    Btw, I agreed with you 100% on the Brighthand board about the (lack of a)need for a Windows Mobile PDA, but apparently Ed deleted my post. First time that's ever happened to me. I cited the shrinking PDA market, and Palm's declining PDA sales.
  12. #52  
    I think of it this way...

    I hope the sales of the 700w is enought to take Palm to another level and maybe in the next 2 years we will see a Treo XXX Palm OS that will blow away the 700w. They better suck up all the Fortune500 companies on the Windows transition then Palm can step up there game on the Palm OS. I don't give a damn it it takes 3 years for a Palm OS i'm not going to Windows OS on my Treo
    Last edited by michaand; 09/29/2005 at 12:11 AM. Reason: wording
  13. #53  
    Quote Originally Posted by dstrauss
    I see the Access deal as cornering the Asian (read Chinese) flavor market. As for domestic (or even "worldphone" sales) why can't they capture the same market with the WM phone? Why does there have to be a Palm phone (other than to appease the Windoze haters among us). You heard Cooligan, WM5 can do things Palm just cannot. So unless ONLY a Palm unit could capture those marginal sales (which I doubt) Palm can safely transition ALL new customers to WM5 or later, and skip the very costly software work on two platforms. It's not jsut a matter of "tweaking" the latest OS release to work with the smartphone. Look how far behind (OS wise) Treo, and even Samsung, phones have been from the PDA universe. Add in the carrier lead time, and even if PalmLinux were available tomorrow, it wouldn't see the light of cellular day until 2007.
    Linux is undoubtedly more popular in Asia than here; although, it is a growing movement in the US and causing much frustration at MS. That said, the reason for more than one OS platform is that people want choice. Obviously, given the many posts here, many, many people want an alternative to Windows on their handheld/smartphone. Maybe they don't like the WM UI, maybe they don't like the bloat common in MS products, maybe they just don't like MS. Whatever the reason, there is a significant market for something other than a WM device and it would be silly, and an incredibly bad business decision, for Palm to just hand that market over to someone else, especially since Palm's marginal cost to retain them is, all things considered, pretty minimal. They will be making the basic hardware for whatever device they make and the core of the OS is being written and enhanced by someeone else. Device specific modifications will be more than "tweaking", yes. Still, it's not like they aer building a new OS from scratch, or even truly developing the OS further. Moreover, it is not in Palm's best interest to become solely dependent on one OS at this point. By keeping two OS's in house they keep MS and whomever, Access/PalmSource at this point, on their toes improving their respective platforms. If they become dependent on MS, then they really don't have any leverage to push MS to improve the platform.

    JMHO

    Gargoyle
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions