webOS Nation Forums >  webOS Discussion >  Open webOS General Discussion > so, who is in charge now on Open WebOS??
so, who is in charge now on Open WebOS??
  Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04/26/2012, 01:37 AM   #1 (permalink)
Member
 
Posts: 123
I know that Sam Greenblatt has moved on. Sam was providing regular, encouraging, and informative updates to all of us. I suspected that he was pushing the team to stay on schedule and they were saying they couldn't. We will see, but since he left we have received no updates on progress on the roadmap.
I read today an interview with the head of marketing for Intel's Medfield smartphone platform. He was asked if Intel would support WebOS with the Medfield platform. He said the he came from Palm but they still decided to go with Android. He said that HP needs to tell Intel their plans with WebOS.
WIll someone in charge of WebOS (whoever that is?) please call Intel and tell them the plans? Because Intel is basically selling a reference phone to all comers and allowing co-branding with Intel. It would be simple to sell a WebOS Intel reference phone if they would support WebOS. Really. See the India phone that Intel has just co-branded and is selling unlocked?
millertime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04/26/2012, 02:35 AM   #2 (permalink)
Member
 
johncc's Avatar
 
Posts: 4,192
I can't answer your question, but HP continues to meet the targets of its open sourcing timeline.
johncc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04/26/2012, 04:01 AM   #3 (permalink)
Member
 
Posts: 205
btw the Intel platform is x86, webOS in its current closed for is arm. Therefore the platform would have to be rewritten for the new architecture (although the recent article about webOS for windows in progress could be part of the rewrite)
jetz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04/26/2012, 12:10 PM   #4 (permalink)
Member
 
Grabber5.0's Avatar
 
Posts: 5,203
That isn't entirely correct. There are pieces that care whether it is ARM or x86, but not the platform as a whole. The emulator runs on an x86 virtual machine just fine, with the proper libraries substituted (talking as installed, not some kind of hack). There is not much that does not work correctly in the emulator. Sound used to not work, but now works in the 3.x emulators.

-- Sent from my TouchPad using Communities
__________________
Matt Williams
Grabber Software
*How to install .patch files on your device*

Grabber5.0 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04/26/2012, 01:20 PM   #5 (permalink)
Member
 
Posts: 123
I assume that Intel did most of the heavy lifting getting Android to work on the Atom chips, and since Android and WebOS are linux based I don't think there is that much work that really has to be done. Medfield has a binary translator that can run all apps for Android. They also claim that they baked in x86 optimizations just for Ice Cream Sandwich.
I bet that WebOS would run much faster on Medfield. The early test show that Medfield is much faster than any ARM chip on Javascript, which has been a slow point for WebOS. Much of the increase in performance comes from increases in speed running Google's V8, which WebOS uses (but I think that open WebOS is ditching V8 if I'm not mistaken).
Here is a link to the interview:
Interview: Intel To Compete On Performance in Smartphones | Gaming Business Review

Here is the opportunity with Intel. The Director of Product Marketing for Medfield at Intel worked at Palm. The VP of Intel Ultra Mobility worked at Palm.
By 2015, the mobile processor race is probably going to look very different. Intel says that by 2014 they are going to have Atom as the first processor produced on the 14nm mode. Intel is always ahead on process tech, and now they say they are going to put their mobile products on their cutting edge process. I personally think that they are going to really make it very hard on the SoC producers in the smartphone market. Qualcomm and NVIDIA - any fabless company - is going to have hard time against Intel.

Here is a relevant section of the interview, but everyone should read all of it:

GBR: Why did you decide to go with Android? You had a bet on MeeGo before and there were other choices such as WebOS that would have enabled Intel to potentially build its own ecosystem.

Sumeet Syal: It was the sheer market momentum. The momentum had shifted to Android: We needed a partner fast and joined hands with Google at IDF. If you look at the market, there are two dominant mobile operating systems one is closed and one is a little more open. Android made a lot of sense to us.

GBR: There is no interest in WebOS?

Sumeet Syal: I will say this: I came from Palm and we still decided to go with Google. As far as WebOS is concerned, HP has to tell us what the plans with WebOS are.
millertime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04/26/2012, 03:29 PM   #6 (permalink)
Member
 
Posts: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grabber5.0 View Post
That isn't entirely correct. There are pieces that care whether it is ARM or x86, but not the platform as a whole. The emulator runs on an x86 virtual machine just fine, with the proper libraries substituted (talking as installed, not some kind of hack). There is not much that does not work correctly in the emulator. Sound used to not work, but now works in the 3.x emulators.

-- Sent from my TouchPad using Communities
sorry, my bad
jetz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04/27/2012, 08:38 AM   #7 (permalink)
gbp
Member
 
gbp's Avatar
 
Posts: 2,506
Quote:
Originally Posted by millertime View Post

GBR: There is no interest in WebOS?

Sumeet Syal: I will say this: I came from Palm and we still decided to go with Google. As far as WebOS is concerned, HP has to tell us what the plans with WebOS are.
He is telling us webOS is dead pretty much. I am curious to know if webOS failed on technical reasons , i.e. just a souped up UI with browser support. ?
gbp is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

 

Thread Tools
Display Modes



 


Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0