Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 44 of 44
  1. #41  
    Quote Originally Posted by solar_plexus View Post
    I think no one really knows the operating structure of Palm unless they read the by-laws. There are many companies that give CEOs the real power and there are others who give more power to the board...and then some, over which, the chairman would have great power.
    This is all public information and freely available. Ed Colligan is the man in charge of running Palm no matter how much you try to warp your reality to fit your fanboy desires.

    Quote Originally Posted by solar_plexus View Post
    Elavation, being a VC (sort of...well in the same kinda vein) likely brought in Rubinstein to turn the company around. He probably has some pretty strong powers compared to what the former chair had. I would guess that it is to the point where Colligan doesn't make a move unless he gets Rubinstein's blessing.
    Also, managing directors (like Jon and Ed) really are only on the board because there needs to be somebody at the board meetings that can explain what the company's doing to the real power brokers. The real power on the board are those independent directors that represent the largest blocks of voting shares and that's not Jon (who probably controls far less of Palm than any other board member, including Ed). Managing directors are simply employees that get to sit at the grown-ups table.

    Jon can be fired at any time. It would be easy for Jon to be ousted from Palm because, aside from a $1.4 grant, he doesn't control much of the company (none of his 2,000,000 options are exercisable at this time). Jon does have a powerful ally in Elevation Partners which control 3 board seats (4 if you count Jon himself). Because of this he probably won't be fired and probably gets a free hand to make all of the design, engineering, and technical decisions but very likely has very little input on business decisions.

    On the other hand, Ed has lots of stock already owned, nearly 1,800,000 currently exercisable options and enough support from the other members of the board that he still has his job. He's the guy that runs the company and makes the business decisions and will be barring a huge drawn out power struggle (which could happen in the future but nobody at Palm wants right now). Whether you like it or not, he's still in charge.
  2.    #42  
    Quote Originally Posted by crogs571 View Post
    is it worth rehashing the same arguments again in yet another capacity thread?
    Heh heh...I hear you, but I didn't actually intend this to be a capacity thread in which folks might discuss again why they needed 8GB or 16GB...It was instead meant to be a thread asking whether anyone had any reason to believe that Palm might pull a quick storage upgrade, especially in light of the expected new iPhone capacities...and by quick, I meant something on the scale of 2 months (hence the iPhone history relevance), not 6 months to a year....

    ...basically something that might incite the feeling of being "screwed" as an early adopter.

    And by "any reason", I meant inside info, rumor, knowledge of Rubinstein or other ex-Apple Palm folks' leanings/historical leanings, etc.

    This is the kind of issue I was going after:
    Quote Originally Posted by showson1 View Post
    I was one of those very early iPhone adopters and there definitely was a 4GB and 8GB version, although the 4GB didn't last very long.

    I was pissed when the dropped the price like a month or two later.
    They gave Apple store credit, which softened the blow a little, so I used that to get insurance for the thing.

    I payed someone $50 to wait in line for me 'cause I had to work that day.. haha.. it's was about 100 degrees that day too.

    Anyway, that's part of the reason I'm waiting on the pre (even if I decide to get it).
    I'm pretty sure they'll have to come out with larger capacity to stay competitive..
    ...Also, of course, I don't mind hearing that others share my sudden concern or think that it might have even gut-level validity.
  3.    #43  
    ...or...

    ...maybe starting this thread is an elaborate ruse to distract and put off folks from wanting to buy the Pre on launch day so as to reduce the number of competitors for my spot in line...

    :P

    (no, seriously, I'm a little concerned...but I thought the "elaborate ruse" angle was too funny to leave unsuggested...)
    Last edited by Shadowhawk; 06/03/2009 at 07:07 PM.
  4. #44  
    You have to remember the heritage of the iPhone. It evolved from a music player...the iPod. So memory was important. The more the better right? So if the iPhone was going to be a phone + music player, more memory makes sense. the iPhone was born from a media centric device.

    But the Pre is a phone centric device. I wouldn't really hold it against the Pre, but admit more memory would've been better because of its sealed design.

    I think the Pre's design flaw is the lack of memory expansion, which can easily be corrected. I think the next gen Pre (when? who knows) will have memory expansion and 4G. Maybe by 1Q 2010.
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions