Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 LastLast
Results 141 to 160 of 213
Like Tree126Likes
  1. #141  
    Quote Originally Posted by k4ever View Post
    Our only saving grace right now is that Android users are notoriously cheap and webOS users for the most point aren't.
    Putting aside that this is an opinion of yours ... even if Android users are cheap, there are so many of them that it is more than made up for in volume. Whereas less than 2% of the mobile market belongs to webOS, and that number can only get smaller, so what's it matter how generous webOS users are? There will eventually be close to none left in the coming years.
  2. #142  
    Quote Originally Posted by jrstinkfish View Post
    Putting aside that this is an opinion of yours ... even if Android users are cheap, there are so many of them that it is more than made up for in volume. Whereas less than 2% of the mobile market belongs to webOS, and that number can only get smaller, so what's it matter how generous webOS users are? There will eventually be close to none left in the coming years.
    Not just an opinion, look at these stories:

    iOS Apps Generate 6 Times the Revenue of Android Apps | Gadget Lab | Wired.com

    iOnApple: Why Eric Schmidt's prediction about Android vs. iOS development is dead wrong

    Android reigns supreme, but app developers still prefer iPhone - CSMonitor.com

    Bottom line: Developers prefer to develop for iOS because iOS users actually pay for apps. Here is another story for you:

    Finland focus: 10tons' Vice CEO Sampo Töyssy on gaining 'relatively good' sales from webOS, feature, 10tons news, PocketGamer.biz

    TouchPad users tend to buy games more often than many other platforms.

    I also remember having a discussion with an admitted Android user who bought a TouchPad and complained about having to pay for some apps, which I find kind of funny because I had to pay for some apps on Android to get close to webOS' functionality.

    My bottom line for this is that if we continue to pay for apps, developers will continue to develop for the platform. Developers go where the money is and right now the money is not in Android.

    On another related subject, I have used desktop Linux for 15 years. Most desktop Linux users are notoriously cheap also. I remember arguing with a few of them in a couple of forums because they had the attitude that all software, including high end games should be offered to everyone for free. I was willing to pay for a port of my favorite Windows games to Linux. When I mentioned this in a thread, these folks lit into me. I told them that Linux will never be as popular as we all wanted it to be if we didn't compensate programmers for their time and effort. Android will never get as many apps of as high quality apps as iOS if Android users don't pay developers for their time and effort. Fortunately, most of us webOS users appreciate any support our platform gets.
    Last edited by k4ever; 12/28/2011 at 07:29 PM.
  3. #143  
    Quote Originally Posted by synthos View Post
    snip...So ultimately- without Android, devs, and hardware- I have to let go of my HP TouchPad. It is what they say.

    A beautiful dead end. I'll try my best to go back to life without a tablet. But it will be hard. ...
    Did you return this already?

    Quote Originally Posted by synthos View Post
    snip...
    And that's why I bought an iPad 2 today. I will not wait. ...
    You seem to be going in circles.
  4. #144  
    Quote Originally Posted by CGK View Post
    Indeed, I have spent double on apps for my my firesale tablet (had for 4 months) as I have on android (12 months) - $4 vs $2.
    We already know from your own admission that you are notoriously cheap!
  5. #145  
    We have drifted away from the OP, which is usual around here. I think we can sum the reason why hp shut down webOS hardware after only two months of TouchPad sales and no Pre 3 sales as:

    1) Pure stupidity
    2) They were looking for an excuse to become a software and services company
    3) They needed to divert investors attention away from them blowing $10 billion on Autonomy
    4) See #1
    johncc and Rnp like this.
  6. #146  
    Quote Originally Posted by k4ever View Post
    We have drifted away from the OP, which is usual around here. I think we can sum the reason why hp shut down webOS hardware after only two months of TouchPad sales and no Pre 3 sales as:

    1) Pure stupidity
    2) They were looking for an excuse to become a software and services company
    3) They needed to divert investors attention away from them blowing $10 billion on Autonomy
    4) See #1
    Well that's one man's point of view, not the only one, just one mans'.
  7. #147  
    This is a nice opportunity to vent, but, if you ever have the chance to go to business school, don't ever propose this kind of naive response in a case study. You will get an F and be asked if you want to continue in the program.

    HP, of course, is a multi-billion dollar company so you can't seriously dismiss its actions with this sort of thinking. The margins on their PC business are eroding to something like 6% so they have a strategy to eventually get out of it like IBM did. They had bought Palm to get into the differentiated tablet market but found themselves too far behind to make further investments in webOS justifiable. Supposed synergies between mobile devices and PC hardware and printers never materialized - it was mostly just a talking point.

    Part of the problem was that Palm hardware and it's operations, which they inherited, just wasn't as good as the current competition. It has been a step or two behind since 2009 while the competition simply has accelerated.

    What??? If their plan was so great their CEO got fired why?

    Your post reminds me of a conversation I was having with a friend of mine. It was on executive pay. More to the point it was on how an executive, who has an MBA, can makes some stupid decisions and cost a company millions of dollars. Then turn around and fire a bunch of workers to make ends meet. Thousands of workers are out of a job because of his/her stupidity and, to add insult to injury, he/she gets a bonus. Yet if a blue collar worker makes a mistake with a machine or some paperwork that may cost the company a few thousand dollars, he or she gets fired. How does that make sense to anyone?

    I told my friend that if I were to run a company and I hire a bunch of MBAs to run my business as executive; if a division of my company is not doing well the first people I'm firing are the MBAs. Obviously I didn't get my money's worth out of them.

    What business sense does it make to waste $1.2 billion on the purchase of Palm only to stop producing hardware after 2 months on the market? How did they know whether or not they were penetrating the market in just two months? That's not enough time to see if there is a return on what was a year long investment. They didn't even launch all of their new hardware line (TouchPad GO, Pre 3).

    The two months on the market were July and August. It was back to school time. Parents and college students were saving up for essential school items. HP didn't even run the TouchPad in any back to school promotionals or bundle the product with other back to school items (namely printers). They could have at least held out until November when folks were getting ready to spend money on Christmas.

    ..and you make up excuses for their stupidity, why? Do you think it was right to make such a deep investment like this (webOS) and not have a solid long term plan? If they couldn't even get this right what makes you think that they have the sense to pull off their IBM lite strategy? What business sense was it to overpay for the acquisition of Autonomy burning up almost all of their cash reserves?

    Back to my original question, if their plan was so great why did the CEO get fired and why did the company lose 1/4 of its value after the strategy was announced? Based on all that has happened and looking at you half baked attempt to defend their strategy, I believe that you deserve the F.


    ---Sent from my HP TouchPad using Communities (a great webOS app!)
    Rnp likes this.
  8. #148  
    ? Did you listen to the audio?
  9. #149  
    Quote Originally Posted by inertia1 View Post
    While it can take a year to get a product developed and brought to market, it simply doesn't take very long to tell whether it will be competitive or not. These devices do not get more popular as they sit on the shelves week after week. They are like movies - there is a launch window and things either take off in the beginning or they don't. They usually don't suddenly become more popular with time.

    Perhaps HP could have let the TP fester in the market for months like the Playbook - only to end up discounting anyway as lower-cost Kindle Fire-type devices show up. I think HP was thinking about preserving its brand image, though, and didn't want a failed product to taint its larger portfolio of devices. They also correctly did not see much potential return for further investments in the platform. They don't have the hardware margins of Apple, the ad ecosystem of Google, nor the retail ecosystem of Amazon. What HP has is commodity PC and printer products with 6% margins and they didn't even integrate them that much.

    And, while they may have enterprise customers, webOS isn't really especially suited for enterprise - HP will have better opportunities to do that.
    Ok, I'm going to bounce all around here so bear with me.

    Fester? You mean like the Xoom, Galaxy Tab, Transformer, Evo View, and the ton of other Android tablets on the market that have been out longer than the TouchPad, haven't caught on, and still sit on shelves today? None of other manufacturers pulled their tablets after being on the market longer, so are they wrong and HP is right? Did HP expect people to line up around store corners for the TouchPad? A generation one tablet? In the middle of the year during some pretty poor retail months? No one lined up around the corner for Samsung's Galaxy S phones and, after a greater number of months than HP would have given them, the Galaxy S phones manage to outsell the beloved iPhone. What did HP use to gauge success or failure? A weegie board?

    So you think two months is the shelf life on a tablet computer? So what do you think about my sentence in bold above? Two months is not a long time for anything to sit, other then milk or bread.

    The Kindle Fire was discounted after Amazon learned a lesson from HP's fire sale. I don't think the Fire would be in the market at the price it is today if Amazon had not learned from HP's mistake (Jon Rubinstein is on Amazon's board, btw). It also seems to be alright for Amazon to sell Fires at a loss, but not alright for HP to do the same. Before anyone mentions them as a portal to Amazon's services, I bought over $300 worth of stuff from Amazon the first week of December alone. I did that from my TouchPad. So what is the Fire good for again?

    For your last paragraph, good lord! Everyone seems to come in after the fact and say the reason why one company did better and one failed is because of X. Most of the time X has no real value in the grand scheme of things. Most companies can get X if they have the cash for acquisitions and a solid plan. Let's play the game.. Apple gets good hardware margins because they make great hardware (nothing was stopping HP, a hardware company, from doing that), they have an excellent marketing team (again nothing stopping HP in that category), and they squeeze their suppliers to get a lower price on parts (big company like HP could have done the same). What services does Amazon have that are exclusive to the Fire? I don't need it to continue to be an Amazon shopper. What was stopping HP from buying a movie service to compete with Amazon Prime's movie service? Or just contracting it out from Amazon? There is already a Kindle App on the TouchPad and HP could have signed up for Amazon's MP3 services (we had an Amazon MP3 app for the Pre).

    Last but not least HP's brand image is in the toilet right now because the cancelled the TouchPad and Pre 3. They ****ed off suppliers, retailers, cellular providers, and potential customers with what was considered erratic behavior. The only folks I know that even remotely think that HP reacted rationally are the naysayers here. The brand image couldn't have gotten any worst if they had kept the webOS hardware and let them "fester" on shelves past their ridiculous two month shelf life.
  10. #150  
    HP was not in the WebOS business long enough to matter. The failure was buying Palm. Anything after buying Palm is just the icing on an existing dud.

    Why is it so difficult to realize the enormous impact of Best Buy jumping ship on the Touchpad?

    It's like some people have zero grasp of business.
  11. #151  
    HP was not in the WebOS business long enough to matter. The failure was buying Palm. Anything after buying Palm is just the icing on an existing dud.

    Why is it so difficult to realize the enormous impact of Best Buy jumping ship on the Touchpad?

    It's like some people have zero grasp of business.

    I think it is because Best Buy caused their own problems with the TouchPad. They sold 25,000 of them in less than two months, if you believe the same story that says they were sitting on 250,000 of them. Yet they were being outsold by other retailers because they REFUSED TO OFFER HP's DISCOUNTS on the TouchPad while OTHER RETAILERS OFFERED THE DISCOUNTS. This was pointed out at the time in these forums and has been mentioned countless times since. Staples was and Amazon were selling the TouchPad for up to $100 less than Best Buy. If Best Buy had HONORED THE REBATES they wouldn't have been in that mess.

    Edit: Forgot to mention that the TouchPad wasn't the only tablet that Best Buy was sitting on large supplies of and they refused to offer the fire sale price at first. I think someone at HP ****ed Best Buy off causing them to single out the product.



    ---Send from my HP TouchPad using Communities (a great webOS app!)
    geekpeter likes this.
  12. #152  
    They don't have the hardware margins of Apple, the ad ecosystem of Google, nor the retail ecosystem of Amazon. What HP has is commodity PC and printer products with 6% margins and they didn't even integrate them that much.
    Well, remembering that 6% over the BIGGER seller of computers of the world...

    The failure was buying Palm.
    Putz... I cannot believe that I saw this...

    The problem was not the Palm or webOS, but only the HP's CEO...

    Let's gonna be serious: all this threads go to same place: members that live to try kill the webOS with his posts, other members trying to clear the information...


    Best Regards...
    "If A Man Isn't Willing To Take Some Risk For His Opinions, Either His Opinions Are No Good Or He's No Good!" - Ezra Pound (Poet & Critic)
    (Happy A Lot, As A Good Carioca!)
    geekpeter likes this.
  13. cgk
    cgk is offline
    cgk's Avatar
    Posts
    3,868 Posts
    Global Posts
    9,556 Global Posts
    #153  
    Well, remembering that 6% over the BIGGER seller of computers of the world...
    Sure but it works out at about $500 million actual profit, the return is absolutely terrible on the amount of revenue generated - it's buttons for an organisation the size of HP and part of the reason they wanted to ditch the PSG to start with.
  14. #154  
    Sure but it works out at about $500 million actual profit, the return is absolutely terrible on the amount of revenue generated - it's buttons for an organisation the size of HP and part of the reason they wanted to ditch the PSG to start with.




    True, but there is a reason for the low profits. It's called being just a Windows hardware vendor. HP has to sell their hardware in an already crowded market. Buyers are less concerned with the brand name and more concerned with the features and price. In order to compete HP has to keep producing and offering hardware at much lower prices, which equals less profit.

    The thing that gets me is that after making such a stink about this they actually tried to convince us all that the way forward was to produce Windows or Android related hardware. If they did that they would move from one low margin crowded market to another.

    Mark Hurd's webOS strategy actually made sense. It would have turned HP into a clone of Apple. HP would have been able to control the entire market for webOS devices; hardware sales, software sales, and services. They would have enjoyed revenue from all sectors of this new market. They could have pushed forward and penetrated other sectors of the computing industry with their new OS and services.

    Of course this would have required a considerable investment from HP BEYOND the $1.2 billion they paid for Palm and the 2 months they gave the hardware to penetrate the market.

    I remember when Apple was in trouble. They lost their lead in the personal computing market to Windows based clones. Their share had dropped to just 4% of the market. They were considered a niche player. Only graphics designers and musicians bought Macs. They were over priced for the market. Analysis stated that Apple should start making plain vanilla boxes to cut cost or to keep the high end hardware but put Windows on it, totally abandoning Mac OS. When Apple bought NeXT they only had $4 billion in the bank, 1/3 of what HP had before the Autonomy deal. They used that purchase to jump start development on OS-X, which was panned heavily by analysts. Then Apple developed a portable music player to compete with Sony. Again analyst panned them. Apple spent time, money, and effort developing software to easily transfer files to their music player. They then used the software to open up a store front to sell the music directly to owners of their portable music device, unheard of at the time. Apple did not and does not own any of this content. They contracted deals with the music labels to sell this content. They then added video viewing to their music playing device and contracted out video content in their store. Then they update their portable media players to touch-screens and added game content, contracting the games from developers. Then they added phone capabilities to the portable media players. Then they made them bigger, moving from 4 inch screens to 10 inch screens. All of the time they were doing this they were tying everything in to to their computers, creating a simular user experience across the board. Now everyone wants those same over priced beautiful made Apple computers that were once niche. Apple thumbed their noses at analysts the whole time. Their initial strategy for making and selling Macs did not change one bit. They forced the market to change.

    Not bad for only having $4 billion in the bank and a solid plan. I think Apple made over $100 billion and rising off of that initial investment. Along they way they spent more money and innovated, pushing their products into more markets. There was nothing but stupidity and backwards "MBA style" thinking that kept HP from doing the same.


    ---Sent from my HP TouchPad using Communities (a great webOS app!)
    Last edited by k4ever; 12/29/2011 at 10:12 AM.
    geekpeter likes this.
  15. #155  
    Quote Originally Posted by k4ever View Post
    True, but there is a reason for the low profits. It's called being just a Windows hardware vendor. HP has to sell their hardware in an already crowded market. Buyers are less concerned with the brand name and more concerned with the features and price. In order to compete HP has to keep producing and offering hardware at much lower prices, which equals less profit.

    The thing that gets me is that after making such a stink about this they actually tried to convince us all that the way forward was to produce Windows or Android related hardware. If they did that they would move from one low margin crowded market to another.

    Mark Hurd's webOS strategy actually made sense. It would have turned HP into a clone of Apple. HP would have been able to control the entire market for webOS devices; hardware sales, software sales, and services. They would have enjoyed revenue from all sectors of this new market. They could have pushed forward and penetrated other sectors of the computing industry with their new OS and services.

    Of course this would have required a considerable investment from HP BEYOND the $1.2 billion they paid for Palm and the 2 months they gave the hardware to penetrate the market.

    I remember when Apple was in trouble. They lost their lead in the personal computing market to Windows based clones. Their share had dropped to just 4% of the market. They were considered a niche player. Only graphics designers and musicians bought Macs. They were over priced for the market. Analysis stated that Apple should start making plain vanilla boxes to cut cost or to keep the high end hardware but put Windows on it, totally abandoning Mac OS. When Apple bought NeXT they only had $4 billion in the bank, 1/3 of what HP had before the Autonomy deal. They used that purchase to jump start development on OS-X, which was panned heavily by analysts. Then Apple developed a portable music player to compete with Sony. Again analyst panned them. Apple spent time, money, and effort developing software to easily transfer files to their music player. They then used the software to open up a store front to sell the music directly to owners of their portable music device, unheard of at the time. Apple did not and does not own any of this content. They contracted deals with the music labels to sell this content. They then added video viewing to their music playing device and contracted out video content in their store. Then they update their portable media players to touch-screens and added game content, contracting the games from developers. Then they added phone capabilities to the portable media players. Then they made them bigger, moving from 4 inch screens to 10 inch screens. All of the time they were doing this they were tying everything in to to their computers, creating a simular user experience across the board. Now everyone wants those same over priced beautiful made Apple computers that were once niche. Apple thumbed their noses at analysts the whole time. Their initial strategy for making and selling Macs did not change one bit. They forced the market to change.

    Not bad for only having $4 billion in the bank and a solid plan. I think Apple made over $100 billion and rising off of that initial investment. Along they way they spent more money and innovated, pushing their products into more markets. There was nothing but stupidity and backwards "MBA style" thinking that kept HP from doing the same.


    ---Sent from my HP TouchPad using Communities (a great webOS app!)
    That means you need a whole new class of users, webosheeple.

    To emulate Apple, and get the kind of deals they get, certain aspects of what makes webos "popular" to the geek population would need to be locked down. Just curious, why can Apple lock down deals just days before a release, yet Google took over a year to get some movie/music deals. At one point negotiations broke off with Google.
  16. #156  
    Quote Originally Posted by Rnp View Post

    Putz... I cannot believe that I saw this...
    You have resorted to name calling?
  17. #157  
    Quote Originally Posted by rnld View Post
    You have resorted to name calling?
    Seems to be a new habit. Just ignore those posts.
  18. canguy247's Avatar
    Posts
    1 Posts
    Global Posts
    3 Global Posts
    #158  
    Quote Originally Posted by inertia1 View Post
    I'm sure there is someone that was capable of executing the mobile strategy better than HP did. I just don't think you will find them here on this forum.
    Lol! That is true.

    The simple fact remains that someone COULD have really benefitted from WebOS's innovation and beautiful design. If they had built a full-fledged ecosystem which included a full cloud, strong, reliable, and innovative hardware, and proper OS support. The real problem did not start when HP took over and dropped the ball (in every possible way). It started when Palm had financial trouble and released unreliable hardware. The original Pre rocked in every way except reliability. But nothing followed which continued the innovation, or fixed the faults. Once you are behind the curve, you can forget about catching up without a HUGE investment. The future is definitely mobile/cloud computing. HP needed to be there quick. They likely have already missed the boat.

    Why would HP's Snapfish not be integrated into its OS? Why would HP's huge support of cloud computing not be supported on WebOS? The questions go on. HP is a giant company that is lacking visionary leadership to force its entities to work towards a common goal (not just making money in the short-term). What mistake did they make? All of the ones mentioned in all of the above posts. They could not have done much worse.

    ALSO! Someone needs to fix the stutter. All WebOS devices have an annoying habit of ignoring everything and freezing for several seconds. This has been around since the Pre, and continues on my Touchpad (even overclocked) and Pre3. This will not be fixed with faster hardware. It is an OS bug. Whether it is doing garbage collection or just losing its mind, it needs to be fixed to ensure wide-spread adoption.
    C-Note likes this.
  19. #159  
    Quote Originally Posted by sinsin07 View Post
    That means you need a whole new class of users, webosheeple.

    To emulate Apple, and get the kind of deals they get, certain aspects of what makes webos "popular" to the geek population would need to be locked down. Just curious, why can Apple lock down deals just days before a release, yet Google took over a year to get some movie/music deals. At one point negotiations broke off with Google.
    Well according to some of the folks here we already have webosheeple.

    The second part of your post requires such an extensive response that I broke out the wireless keyboard for my TouchPad to keep up with the amount of typing I'm about to do:

    Apple locks down deals because they know when to negotiate from a position of weakness and when to negotiate from a position of strength. The old bait and switch. When Apple first negotiate the deal with the music industry, I believe that they took whatever deal was given to them. Once the iPod became popular and the music industry was raking in the money from mp3s sold on it, Apple renegotiated the deal. They first asked that the price be dropped to .99 cents. Then they got DRM free content added.

    Apple used the success of their mp3 store to dive into the movie and TV content business. Again negotiating deals that benefited the industry first, then renegotiating once they gained power in the market. Same thing with apps and other content. Apple did not demand 30% of content sales until they became unstoppable in the market.

    Google or HP can't approach this asking for the same price as Apple. Android's market does not make nearly as much money on the sale of content. Mainly because most of the stuff is free and Android users are cheap. HP is too new and unproven in the market to demand the same level of compensation as Apple. You can't get people to switch from their cash cow to your milk if it taste the same of is bitter. It has to taste better.
  20. #160  
    The iPod was released in Oct 2001.

    The iTunes Store debuted April 2003.
Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 LastLast

Posting Permissions