Page 10 of 18 FirstFirst ... 56789101112131415 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 200 of 359
  1. #181  
    Not my argument at all. What I am saying is that more money thrown at Palm would have been bad money given their stupid decisions.

    Take their ads, for example. They created ads that only hurt their branding and mindshare. The ads were not limited by money as they had hundreds of monks doing formations off in the greenlands or whatever. More money simply would have allowed them to run these bad ads MORE, thereby inflicting more self-harm.

    Maybe they could have paid for better build quality, but the devices would still be too slow, have a badly placed charging port, too small a screen, etc.
  2. urkel's Avatar
    Posts
    944 Posts
    Global Posts
    946 Global Posts
    #182  
    Quote Originally Posted by mikah912 View Post
    Palm absolutely had enough money to launch a competitive product. Twice, in fact. Their blunders were at the design stage.

    These were all BAD design decisions that absolutely had nothing to do with the amount of money on hand.
    Exactly. This idea that money was the reason for failure is ridiculous. When WebOS was revealed at CES in Feb09 they weren't late on concept, but at launch they were late on execution. Releasing unfinished software is now the norm for smartphones because software can always be remedied. But their cost-cutting decisions in hardware resulted in a launch device that was outdated in several key features and those choices hurt the end user and WebOS name more than any commercial ever could.

    Just because you're smaller than Apple and Google doesn't make you a garage start-up. And to use $$$ as a crutch completely demeans the amount of work and talent that Palm housed. In 2009 this team of talent COULD have created a competing device that could challenge any competitor, but the fact that they didn't indicates that they were misdirected by their leaders and unfocused on ANY goal. And to think that some suit at HP is going to have a fresher perspective than Rubenstein and all the talent they already lost is crazy.

    I'm not saying Palm is doomed. Despite the Pre destroying relationships with the major carriers, HP has the distribution channels to be a commodity product like WinMo6.5 or a Dell Optiplex. But with HP at the wheel then the next WebOS devices will likely be more "Functional" than "Revolutionary" because that's basically what HPs success is built off of.
  3.    #183  
    I disagree with your opinions based on what I have already stated. For both of you to look back and criticize palms failures on marketing and execution is very easy to do.
    to launch a new mobile os on a phone that was arguably the best phone @ time of launch , against a 3g iphone.... Was a sucees in my eyes. If palm was a subsidiary of HP at that time.... I think it would have made a HUGE difference.
    after spending $$$ on failed marketing , they could have scrapped it , relaunch a new strategy with a new ad agency....and the rest would be history... But they didn't..because that takes $$$.
    they struggled to get pre launched... They struggled to refocus marketing after launch , hardware quality issues etc.

    with hp scale_ carrrier relationships, hp labs, $$$$$$$$, and their keep palm as a separate subsidiary of HP... It will make all of the difference.
  4. #184  
    Quote Originally Posted by clutch1222 View Post
    I disagree with your opinions based on what I have already stated. For both of you to look back and criticize palms failures on marketing and execution is very easy to do.
    to launch a new mobile os on a phone that was arguably the best phone @ time of launch , against a 3g iphone.... Was a sucees in my eyes. If palm was a subsidiary of HP at that time.... I think it would have made a HUGE difference.
    after spending $$$ on failed marketing , they could have scrapped it , relaunch a new strategy with a new ad agency....and the rest would be history... But they didn't..because that takes $$$.
    they struggled to get pre launched... They struggled to refocus marketing after launch , hardware quality issues etc.

    with hp scale_ carrrier relationships, hp labs, $$$$$$$$, and their keep palm as a separate subsidiary of HP... It will make all of the difference.
    Dude, that's just your opinion. The Pre wasn't the best phone at time of launch. Heck, that's when the crap started and we realized why Palm wasn't letting people hold a Pre in hand before launch. 5 exchanges in the first 30 days for me alone. Even when i got one i could sort of live with, it still felt cheap and plastic...usb door on the side, creaky kb, mushy buttons, bad oreo, splotches, stuck pixels.... It still dropped half the calls. Reception problems meaning i couldn't use it in the same area i used a Centro in. Apps sucked.

    It multitasked. It did synergy well. The browser was great. But it had a boatload of other problems. If not for Sprint's cheaper plans, i wouldn't even had stuck around as long as i did with it.

    As for your marketing, they did scrap it and start over. That sucked too. Palm just didn't get it or failed to understand what good marketing is.

    The only thing we can agree on is that they didn't have enough money to make idiotic mistakes one after another after another after another and expect to have enough over for a lame second or third attempt.
  5. #185  
    Quote Originally Posted by clutch1222 View Post
    I disagree with your opinions based on what I have already stated. For both of you to look back and criticize palms failures on marketing and execution is very easy to do.
    to launch a new mobile os on a phone that was arguably the best phone @ time of launch , against a 3g iphone.... Was a sucees in my eyes. If palm was a subsidiary of HP at that time.... I think it would have made a HUGE difference.

    after spending $$$ on failed marketing , they could have scrapped it , relaunch a new strategy with a new ad agency....and the rest would be history... But they didn't..because that takes $$$.
    What? Palm had several campaigns, all of which failed. Remember the chipmunk voice Pixi ad? Remember the hot chick walking down the street swiping and tapping at air? Good. Because you're one of the few that do. Palm had the money to advertise, and none of their campaigns worked.

    HP labs..."scale"...whatever. it would have made no difference if Palm was allowed to make the same decisions. If you think HP can will a smartphone to succeed by sheer will of force and resources, please tell me which carrier is counting all of those iPaq dollars right now.
  6. #186  
    Quote Originally Posted by UntidyGuy View Post
    I think that the debacle with the Kin is going to give HP some reason to pause and think about how much they are willing to invest in the phone business. Microsoft's disaster shows that just because you make a new phone, put all of the hot social media features in, and market it to a particular phone-using demographic, and do lots of advertising does not mean you can sell more than 10,000 units even using the most popular carrier in the country.

    The post-mortem analysis is that the Kins were too expensive, had no apps, and there were too many other good smartphone options out there. Sound familiar?

    Microsoft has proven that you can throw hundreds of millions of dollars down the drain by thinking "Hey, it's a growing market. There's plenty of room for another smartphone."
    Well, I'd say that's a little unfair comparison. It wasn't marketed as a smartphone, had no apps by design whereas the Pre was made to run apps, and had a horrible browser whereas the Pre browser is kinda nice.

    The concept of WebOS is still sound whereas the concept of Kin was stupid and doomed from the start.
  7. #187  
    Quote Originally Posted by UntidyGuy View Post
    I think that the debacle with the Kin is going to give HP some reason to pause and think about how much they are willing to invest in the phone business. Microsoft's disaster shows that just because you make a new phone, put all of the hot social media features in, and market it to a particular phone-using demographic, and do lots of advertising does not mean you can sell more than 10,000 units even using the most popular carrier in the country.

    The post-mortem analysis is that the Kins were too expensive, had no apps, and there were too many other good smartphone options out there. Sound familiar?

    Microsoft has proven that you can throw hundreds of millions of dollars down the drain by thinking "Hey, it's a growing market. There's plenty of room for another smartphone."
    The Kin was a modified smartphone - an attempt to provide some, but not all smartphone features, and, it was meant to be a text messaging phone, mainly.

    An experiment and huge mistake. 500 phones sold.

    HP will certainly not do anything like that.. and the Pre, despite its less than 3m sales in the last year, isnt even close to that type of failure.. it just didnt save PALM's life.. they needed a huge success, and it didnt happen.

    Build quality, build quality, build quality...

    THAT is what HP and their PALM division are chanting right now, - Id bet my last dollar on it.

    "The more I learn, the more I realize just how little I really do know!" -Albert Einstein

  8.    #188  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardfan View Post
    Dude, that's just your opinion. The Pre wasn't the best phone at time of launch. Heck, that's when the crap started and we realized why Palm wasn't letting people hold a Pre in hand before launch. 5 exchanges in the first 30 days for me alone. Even when i got one i could sort of live with, it still felt cheap and plastic...usb door on the side, creaky kb, mushy buttons, bad oreo, splotches, stuck pixels.... It still dropped half the calls. Reception problems meaning i couldn't use it in the same area i used a Centro in. Apps sucked.

    It multitasked. It did synergy well. The browser was great. But it had a boatload of other problems. If not for Sprint's cheaper plans, i wouldn't even had stuck around as long as i did with it.

    As for your marketing, they did scrap it and start over. That sucked too. Palm just didn't get it or failed to understand what good marketing is.

    The only thing we can agree on is that they didn't have enough money to make idiotic mistakes one after another after another after another and expect to have enough over for a lame second or third attempt.
    dude...your right. It is my opinion. I did not have significant problems with my pre launch...they were all minor and most fixed with updates.
    so... If you did not buy pre...what woukd you have bought instead on june 2009? A blackberry? Iphone? Samsung instinct? Please...let us know?

    as far as marketing goes.. $$$ gets you $$$ ads. They screwed up the launch ads...then kept putting out cheaper... garbage ads. Big $$ would bring better marketing agencys...my opinion. They had a hard time marketing what makes pre webos better than / different than ios. With time...it became clearer what they should have focused on.
    more $$$ =
    better build quality
    faster launch ( not months after)
    better R. And D. , more polished os
    better execution
    imo.
  9. #189  
    Quote Originally Posted by clutch1222 View Post
    dude...your right. It is my opinion. I did not have significant problems with my pre launch...they were all minor and most fixed with updates.
    so... If you did not buy pre...what woukd you have bought instead on june 2009? A blackberry? Iphone? Samsung instinct? Please...let us know?

    as far as marketing goes.. $$$ gets you $$$ ads. They screwed up the launch ads...then kept putting out cheaper... garbage ads. Big $$ would bring better marketing agencys...my opinion. They had a hard time marketing what makes pre webos better than / different than ios. With time...it became clearer what they should have focused on.
    more $$$ =
    better build quality
    faster launch ( not months after)
    better R. And D. , more polished os
    better execution
    imo.
    Palm approved every ad. Don't blame the agencies or carriers.

    You're a tad bit late to the conversations in the forums. We've been down those roads already a year ago as each blunder was pretty clear at the time. I think after all these months, you're about as clear as mud on things.
  10. #190  
    Quote Originally Posted by clutch1222 View Post
    Well.. im glad i made you laugh. as far as name calling goes... i have a few of them for you... but i wont go there.

    your quotes:
    "the phone wasn't great, it was fair at best. A nice O/S with tons of potential doesn't make it anymore."
    "Was it the best at the time? Perhaps".
    you admit, after all of the negativity towards palm pre, that at launch it was possibly the best smartphone available. was it smacked to the sidelines after?... really, what is your point?
    once again, you obviously didn't watch the video. If you did, you would have answered all of your own questions. CTO explains how big mobile computing has become, and how HP needs a lay in that market. He explains how big of a space that mobile computing occupies... and how they want to be a BIG player in it.
    "Palm will become the seat of innovation for global mobile platforms. Our intent is to leave Palm as is. [...] Don't mangle up Palm kind of philsophy." Palm will be an "autonomous unit" within HP but able to take advantage of the resources at HP. CTO
    your post stands... as an example to evryone of what not to do. Call names, no research... even when you are pointed to the research. take some time and read the recent statements made by HP CTO Phil Mckinney and CTO of HP gaming Rahul Sood. Your argument is dated.
    http://www.precentral.net/rahul-sood...ed-about-webos

    I am a big fan of webOS... call me what you will.
    I can see you're pretty new to this internet discussion thing. Thats ok. I fail to see where I insulted you directly but if you want to believe it, so be it. Hey, call me names, it will only serve to further prove my point you are arguing from a position of emotion.

    Seriously, you're hopeless. You've twisted and writhed and wriggled your way into a frothy lather over what is arguably one of the biggest mis-steps in the history of any smart phone. And yes, you are an evangelist. You can call it what you will but your argument is predicated upon emotions and thats a hopelessly inept argument style.

    I wanted Palm to succeed with the Pre. Afterall, paying for now 5 phones and an air card each and every month I naively expected certain things to work, like, oh my phone.

    You're still reading way too much into what the CTO said. None of what you posted is research at all. It's commentary and opinion from the CTO of a mega-conglomerate. You'd do yourself a favor and take those words with giant chunk of salt.

    Unlike you I am more of a realist in this regard. HP talks a good game, lets see if they deliver. Even if I never own another Palm designed device if they succeed they will push the market along to bigger and better things.

    My argument is only dated because you say it is. That doesn't make it so.
    Last edited by Odd-Ball; 07/07/2010 at 06:54 PM.
  11.    #191  
    well.. What I do find interesting is after all of the points I made.. You grasp on to the one point that most agree was a huge failure on palms behalf. They screwed that up bad. My only defense is that if they had better agencies which equal more $$$$, maybe things would be differrent.
    it takes big money to play with the big boys. If palm, with the money they had, executed everything perfectly...then yes... They could have done better. Really?
    my opinion_ they did very well with what they had. They were able to deliver a web OS to consumers to try ... And they did deliver an amazing os. That may have been ultimate goal. It may have taken most of their resources to focus on webos.
    I have been on this site for almost a year now. Iread many opiinions on palm marketing. Bottom line, they failed marketing pre. That is the easiest target imo, of all that I debated... Way to go.
    if they had apple/google/ HP $$$ and scale.... They would have crushed it. Now thet do...and they will deliver the goods for years to come. My opinion.
  12. #192  
    I'm curious...if you think HP's money, development resources and "scale" is all of that in the smartphone world, then why haven't they used that to make their own devices a success?
  13.    #193  
    Quote Originally Posted by mikah912 View Post
    I'm curious...if you think HP's money, development resources and "scale" is all of that in the smartphone world, then why haven't they used that to make their own devices a success?
    it was not all of that... It is now ?
    did you watch the video? It explains that they want a play in mobile market.
    I think them buying palm was genius and a much better plan then tying to brand hp in smartphone market.
    would you buy an HP phone if you were avg user?
    brilliant imo...
  14. #194  
    Quote Originally Posted by mikah912 View Post
    I'm curious...if you think HP's money, development resources and "scale" is all of that in the smartphone world, then why haven't they used that to make their own devices a success?
    The smartphone industry is still in it's infancy in terms of market penetration. A company like HP has had little incentive until recently to put a big investment into the mobile space. The iPhone, as well as android have proven that mobile computing is where the moneys at, and is where the majority of "computer" usage in general will be done in the not too distant future.

    I'm sure the success of the iPad had a considerable influence on hp's decision to acquire palm. Hp probably took one look at their slate after hearing initial sales figures for the iPad and realized it just wasn't a competitive product. Thats why their purchase of palm made so much sense. Hp has never been a big name in innovation, which is something that is needed to be successful in the highly competitive smartphone industry. By buying palm they get their foot in the door quickly, and acquire a whole team of innovators. Sounds like a good deal to me.
  15.    #195  
    Quote Originally Posted by UntidyGuy View Post
    Why HP didn't do anything with the iPaq is a good question. Don't look at the iPaq as the outdated PDA and smartphone that it is today - look at the iPaq as it was when HP acquired Compaq. It was probably the 2nd most popular platform behind Palm.

    I don't think HP is really looking to become a smartphone company with Palm. They are going to have smartphones as part of their overall mobile strategy. That means that their phones are likely not going to be competing on the cutting edge of features. Rather, they are going to have the features that all generic smartphones do.
    wow. If you are going to take the precious time out of your day to post in these forums...then do us all a favor and watch the video. It clearly states that hp intent is to leave palm to do what it does.... The difference being palm will have access to hp labs, resources etc. Mckinney explians how huge the mobile market is and how important it is for hp to have a play in it. I don't know what more you need then a cto stating this ...openly in an interview.
    I respect opinions...but lets try to keep them current.
  16.    #196  
    ipaq... Good question for HP. I have no idea . Maybe the HP brand on a sartphone didn't test well with consumers.
    I do know their intentions with palm...because I am listening to them.
  17. urkel's Avatar
    Posts
    944 Posts
    Global Posts
    946 Global Posts
    #197  
    Quote Originally Posted by clutch1222 View Post
    ipaq... Good question for HP. I have no idea . Maybe the HP brand on a sartphone didn't test well with consumers.
    I do know their intentions with palm...because I am listening to them.
    When people are "listening to Steve Jobs" then they are called sheep or lemmings because they blindly follow the words of a heartless corporation. But when someone is "listening to HP" then they are somehow more enlightened than the skeptics?

    Palm was a company I believed in since the Pilot because they were pioneers and that's why jumping to the Pre was easy. When they say they believe in homebrew and being open I believe it. But HP? They've said a lot of things over the years but when it comes time to roll out products then they have proven to be more willing to shut down a product than take a big risk. So you don't necessarily "know" any more than anyone else, you're just more willing to believe what you hear.
  18.    #198  
    Quote Originally Posted by Urkel View Post
    When people are "listening to Steve Jobs" then they are called sheep or lemmings because they blindly follow the words of a heartless corporation. But when someone is "listening to HP" then they are somehow more enlightened than the skeptics?

    Palm was a company I believed in since the Pilot because they were pioneers and that's why jumping to the Pre was easy. When they say they believe in homebrew and being open I believe it. But HP? They've said a lot of things over the years but when it comes time to roll out products then they have proven to be more willing to shut down a product than take a big risk. So you don't necessarily "know" any more than anyone else, you're just more willing to believe what you hear.
    the first line of your post I agree with. The rest is you trying desperately to make a point.
    why do sheep believe steve jobs blindly..donno? When it's obvious that there is a hardware flaw on iphone 4, there is proof they were hiring antenna engineers before launch, and he lies to his consumers and denies there is a problem at all... All the while they are on P|C defending apple... Puzzling.
    comparing that to me believing the enthusiasm /support hp cto / execs are announcing.. Their tweets egging us on to vote for pre plus on laptopmag contest... Mckinneys explanation of why hp wants to be a major player in the mobile space... The fact they made Palm a subsidiary of HP and have stated it will operate independently of HP but be able to access hp lab/ resourses.. Yes all of their motivation for supporting palm I believe.
    you are grasping here to make some kind of point. My main point is apple should be concerned with HP acquiring palm.. For all of the reasons I have mentioned/ links posted in this thread.
    I believe HP until they prove me wrong.. Apple sheep believe Jobs time and time again... veven when he disrespectfully discredits / ignores their concerns.... Amazing
  19. #199  
    Quote Originally Posted by clutch1222 View Post
    wow. If you are going to take the precious time out of your day to post in these forums...then do us all a favor and watch the video. It clearly states that hp intent is to leave palm to do what it does.... The difference being palm will have access to hp labs, resources etc. Mckinney explians how huge the mobile market is and how important it is for hp to have a play in it. I don't know what more you need then a cto stating this ...openly in an interview.
    I respect opinions...but lets try to keep them current.
    And I remember Rubinstein telling reporters that Palm will remain an independent company and they had a plan to work thru their difficult situation...

    About a week later, it was announced Palm was being acquired by HP.

    http://forums.reghardware.com/forum/...palm_for_sale/

    Lesson: Don't believe anything anyone says unless it's a signed contract. Especially from an executive of a public company who's main job is to please shareholders at all costs.
  20. #200  
    speaking of the Apple app store, here is a reason why HP should fear Apple. Sorry if this is the wrong place to post. I just think it's sooooo funny that I have to share it...

    New Apple Friend Bar Gives Customers Someone To Talk At About Mac Products | The Onion - America's Finest News Source | Onion News Network
    Run your ad here... reach thousands daily...



    ...Now accepting orders for my upcoming iHandle™.
    Reserve yours today!
Page 10 of 18 FirstFirst ... 56789101112131415 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions