Page 12 of 18 FirstFirst ... 27891011121314151617 ... LastLast
Results 221 to 240 of 359
  1. #221  
    Quote Originally Posted by Odd-Ball View Post
    Yeah, you're an evangelist and evangelists make me laugh. If I really truly cared I'd go back and point out that glaring, obvious factoid.
    ....
    Seriously, you come to a Palm Pre website, and "laugh" because you find "evangelists".

    Wow.
  2. #222  
    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?
    What HP Smartphone devices are you talking about?

    HP definitely had some other devices that were, and are, a success.
  3. #223  
    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 Don't look at the iPaq as the outdated PDA and smartphone that it is today - look at the iPaq as it was when HP acquired Compaq.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.
    I couldn't disagree more, except about the part that HP isnt' "looking to become a smartphone company." I do agree about that.
    What type of company is HP? A printer company? - among many, that's what they are best known for. A computer company? - same thing there, with some, that's what they're known for. They are neither of those, they are a technology company, and they are excelling at that.

    So, what did HP get with Palm? A portfolio of patents (including the original "smartphone" patent), a portfolio of projects in the works, a brand name, and the WebOS operating system.

    They've already kept the brand name. They've already indicated they plan on keeping the OS. The smartphone patent is very compelling, and that's what Palm is currently known for.

    Why keep the brand name and abandon smartphones?

    Don't think it's going to happen.

    Assuming it does, HP will still be known as a technology company, and Palm will still be known for smartphones.
  4. #224  
    Quote Originally Posted by SoFly View Post
    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.

    Palm denies it's up for sale • reghardware Forums

    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.
    Sorry, the end result does not indicate that Rubenstein lied. Not only that, your assessment was incorrect. I challenge you to point out the interview where Rubinstein said that "Palm will remain an independent company". I do recall him saying that was their goal.

    About a year and half ago, I told my boss that it was my intention to stay with my company (at our annual review). 3 months later, I took another job. I didn't lie to him or mislead him. Someone sought me out, and made a better offer. Moral of the story - things change, it doesn't mean someone lied.
  5. #225  
    Quote Originally Posted by Odd-Ball View Post
    You obviously know very little about HP and their acquisition tactics. They consume, devour, and change EVERY company they acquire and they're not exclusive to this.

    Remember a company called Digital Equipment Corporation? I do and my company had 4000+ of their DEC Alpha's which I was entrusted with and when Compaq acquired them...then HP they were never the same. They've devolved in many ways. HP wants parity among their myriad product lines and a RISC based, expensive and proprietary hardware platform kills their bottom line. Ditto with HP-UX though they still dabble in them but their main line is the HP Proliant series for high density computing.


    If you think for a second they will leave Palm as is you are really nothing more than a blind evangelist.

    Really, in order to make your point in the future, you might want to avoid using "imo" constantly. Predicating your arguments on "imo" is arguing without facts or hard evidence to back it up.

    As I said before take those words from HP with a chunk of salt. Investors don't look any further than what can the company do THAT quarter.

    No one is grasping at anything here other than you.
    It's funny. While you do use one (valid) example, you also use another term that is the exception to your argument.

    Proliant servers, that was part of Compaq, another HP acquisition. They kept (most) of the best from that line, and made it profitable.

    Ironically, the one area where I think HP messed up in that situation was not keeping the brand name. Compaq was known for high-quality servers (like the Proliant series) and low quality desktops. HP servers weren't so well thought of. If they had kept the Compaq name for servers, I think we'd see a lot fewer Dell servers around these days.

    Looks like maybe they learned something from that. Last I heard, they're keeping the Palm name.
  6. #226  
    Quote Originally Posted by Odd-Ball View Post
    Ok, you seem to think I am insulting you. Since there is no convincing you I am not calling you names you can continue through life believing that I did. It doesn't matter to me....
    Again, you're hopeless and I won't debate this with you any longer.
    And yet:
    Quote Originally Posted by Odd-Ball View Post
    Insult? Man up Nancy, its a tough world out there and when you can't handle a differing opinion based upon a track record you come back with this?

    Gotcha
    Gotcha back.
  7.    #227  
    Quote Originally Posted by Odd-Ball View Post
    Huh? You're threatening me now...got it.

    Ok there internet tough guy, have it your way

    Buhbye.

    Subway... have it your way ;-)
  8. #228  
    Quote Originally Posted by UntidyGuy View Post
    I'm pretty sure he is referring to the HP iPaq. Probably the second most popular PDA/smartphone brand before HP acquired Compaq. Currently residing in zombie-land over the past few years. Now, a part of the Palm division portfolio. I'm sure the iPaq division at Compaq had a roadmap going forward, also, but it just didn't happen for some reason.
    I knew of the iPaq PDAs, but never knew they migrated into smartphones. Do you have a model number? I never heard of them as smartphones.
  9. #229  
    Quote Originally Posted by hparsons View Post
    Seriously, you come to a Palm Pre website, and "laugh" because you find "evangelists".

    Wow.
    You're another one of them too. I can at least debate an issue with you because your argue from a different standpoint.

    Wow, indeed.
  10. #230  
    Quote Originally Posted by hparsons View Post
    It's funny. While you do use one (valid) example, you also use another term that is the exception to your argument.

    Proliant servers, that was part of Compaq, another HP acquisition. They kept (most) of the best from that line, and made it profitable.

    Ironically, the one area where I think HP messed up in that situation was not keeping the brand name. Compaq was known for high-quality servers (like the Proliant series) and low quality desktops. HP servers weren't so well thought of. If they had kept the Compaq name for servers, I think we'd see a lot fewer Dell servers around these days.

    Looks like maybe they learned something from that. Last I heard, they're keeping the Palm name.
    Which HP servers? The HP-UX enterprise class servers were and still are worlds above the Proliant series.

    Dell servers are just a big joke, all of them.

    You're track record precedes you. You're another one of those evangelists.
  11. #231  
    Quote Originally Posted by hparsons View Post
    "had the money"? Seriously, you think that the amount of money invested by EP was even close to the amount of money Apple and RIM has, or had at the time?
    We are talking a world of difference.
    Palm knew what their product was, they presumably had a development/manufacturing plan/schedule, they knew how much money they had, they had been an established fixture in the smartphone marketplace (they helped to define) since 2003, they had ongoing relationships with all 4 US carriers and a lot of international ones.

    ...and still they fell flat on their faces.

    So regardless of what the amount of money was, Palm persisted in a campaign that either didn't fit the amount of money they had or was somehow torpedoed by market/financial forces they had no way of understanding. There is a third theory, but it involves a personal attack on the skills of the Palm managers, most of who made the HP switch. The really good ones already got hired away to other places.

    Quote Originally Posted by hparsons View Post
    Now they have the money, if the parent company chooses for them to.
    Well, HP certainly has some money. And so far they've invested something north of $1.2B just to sell Palm phones off their web page ... for free. Industry estimates suggest that HP will need to up their annual investment in Palm's R&D, sales, and marketing to over $750 million annually (some estimate $1 billion).

    To begin hacking at this $2.0 billion first year investment and to keep from negatively impacting HP's EPS, Palm needs to triple it's sales and double their profit margins - now! Sounds like the 850 or so folks who managed to keep their jobs with Palm are going to be putting in a lot of extra hours over the next 12 months. I have no idea how Palm's remaining management staff is suddenly going to learn microeconomics and turn this around.
  12. #232  
    Quote Originally Posted by Odd-Ball View Post
    You're another one of them too. I can at least debate an issue with you because your argue from a different standpoint.

    Wow, indeed.
    Another one of what?

    I'm very serious here. What did you expect to find on a Palm Pre website? The whole website is geared around helping those that have the Pre, and discussing it. It's evangelical in nature.

    You sir, are the outsider. It should be we that are laughing at you (and some of us are....).
  13. #233  
    Quote Originally Posted by Odd-Ball View Post
    Which HP servers? The HP-UX enterprise class servers were and still are worlds above the Proliant series.

    Dell servers are just a big joke, all of them.

    You're track record precedes you. You're another one of those evangelists.
    My discussion had nothing to do with the HP-UX servers. When discussin the relative merits of the HP servers vs Compaqs, I was talking about Intel based system. My experience was with Novell, Microsoft, and later with Linux.

    Your opinion of whether or not I'm (or anyone else) is an "evangelist" (for the Pre, on a Pre website) has nothing to do with the discussion. Why do you keep referring to it?

    It's a rhetorical question. We really know the answer....

    And, are you still debating this issue? I thought you gave it up...
  14. #234  
    Quote Originally Posted by Kupe View Post
    ...
    I have no idea how Palm's remaining management staff is suddenly going to learn microeconomics and turn this around.
    So, maybe one of the most successful techonolgy companies in the world knows something about what it's doing that you don't... that's a definite possibility.

    By the way, HP isn't selling "Palm phones off their web page ... for free", and they most certainly did not invest $1.2b "just" to do so. This is a classic example of spin, but it's incorrect on at least two fronts:

    1. HP isn't selling their phones "for free" on their web page. Clicking the Palm link on their web page actually takes you to another company's web site. They are selling carrier services for a profit, and giving the phone away in order for folks to get folks to buy the service.
    2. It wasn't "just" for that purpose. That is not the only reason HP made the investment, they've made it pretty clear there are lot of things they plan on doing.

    I understand they've owned Palm for a whole week now, but you gotta give them more time.
    Last edited by hparsons; 07/09/2010 at 02:46 PM.
  15. #235  
    Quote Originally Posted by UntidyGuy View Post


    HP iPAQ Glisten, AT&T

    AT&T certified 3G world phone
    Touch display and Windows Mobile touch gesture interface
    ...
    Thanks, after reading your description, I don't feel quite so ignorant for not knowing about them.

    Here's a difference I see between HP's acquisition of the iPaq, and their acqisition of Palm (and please note, I'm doing this from memory, I could be off on some of the details).

    At the time of HP's acquisition/merger of/with Compaq, HP had the Jornada and Compaq had the iPaq. The iPaq was well thought of in the tech world, but the Jornada not so much.

    Then the acquisition/merger came along. This was a merger of computer companies, and (in my opinion), the PDAs were pretty much an afterthought, especially on HP's part (as I said, the Jornada was not doing very well). I suspect that HP looked at what they had, and said "Meh, the iPaq is better, let's stick with that" and then put it on the back burner.

    This time, they acquired a company who doesn't have a smartphone as just another piece in its portfolio, the smartphone is the major part of what it has to offer.

    Because of this, I suspect they'll handle Palm's pieces much differently than the iPaq.
  16.    #236  
    Quote Originally Posted by UntidyGuy View Post
    [IMG]

    HP iPAQ Glisten, AT&T

    AT&T certified 3G world phone
    Touch display and Windows Mobile touch gesture interface

    [url= Computers and Smartphones | HP Handheld Computer[/url]

    It's amazing that these phones have been in existence ever since the Compaq acquisition, however, practically nobody knows about them. Microsoft gave the Kin a whopping six weeks to prove itself and then pulled the plug. HP lets the their iPaq smartphone line fester year after year in obscurity and then decides to buy another failing smartphone company. I'm starting to think that HP is the Sanford and Son of the technology hardware industry.

    When people say that HP wouldn't acquire Palm and not emphasize smartphones, I just point to the iPaq and ask why they wouldn't do the same thing to the Pre and Pixi for a reason that I simply don't comprehend. Someone must be buying these, though.

    My best guess is that a smartphone and PDA are just part of a all-inclusive package of mobile technology offered to enterprise customers but not worth marketing to consumers on an individual basis. That's what I hear in their smartphone strategy lately. Smartphones are part of a package of enterprise mobile products but you probably won't see them competing in the consumer space against Apple and Google. They probably know that it would cost too much and would be a losing battle, in the end. I'm sure they plan to offer smartphones, though, for whoever wants them, like the one above.
    The point you have made is that HP has had a difficult time trying to break into the smartphone market. Branding ipaq with HP didn't resonate well. I don't think you can argue
    against the importance of branding in the mobile market. Apple and Google, two of the best in the biz at it... Are experiencing great success with it. HP acquiring Palm solves this problem for them. They have confidence in palms brand, so they decided to keep it. From what they are saying_ with the acquisition of Palm, they finally have the play they have been looking for and failing at in the smartphone market. Looks like they are backing up what they are saying with their wallet. Only time will tell how well they will execute . If they play it right, they can do well in both consumer and enterprise markets. They certainly have the resources to do so.
  17. #237  
    I don't think they were that interested in the iPaq when they acquired Compaq. I think the bought Compaq for their computer business.

    This time they bought a mobile phone company with the idea of pushing into the mobile market, and using the OS for other devices.

    IMO
  18. #238  
    Quote Originally Posted by hparsons View Post
    My discussion had nothing to do with the HP-UX servers. When discussin the relative merits of the HP servers vs Compaqs, I was talking about Intel based system. My experience was with Novell, Microsoft, and later with Linux.

    Your opinion of whether or not I'm (or anyone else) is an "evangelist" (for the Pre, on a Pre website) has nothing to do with the discussion. Why do you keep referring to it?

    It's a rhetorical question. We really know the answer....

    And, are you still debating this issue? I thought you gave it up...
    Ok, you didn't make any distinction of which line of hardware you were referring to.

    Right, but you ARE an evangelist and the only difference between you and clutch is you argue with something other than feeling...more veiled angst in your words than he has though. And it is entirely relevant to this discussion since you and clutch can't seem to find fault with anything Palm does.

    Yeah, I stopped debating it with him. You stuck your nose in the discussion so I am batting it around with you.

    Please, pay attention.
  19. #239  
    I will still be very surprised if HP makes a play in the consumer market. I may be wrong, and they have been very careful with their words as to be encouraging, but I am still waiting for them to come outright and say to consumers, "we're going to be coming out with a new smart phone."

    It's always "mobile devices," and "WebOS across smart phones and other devices," and "mobile computing" and "WebOS connecting many devices."

    If they do something non-enterprise with WebOS, aside from maintain the current line of phones (ala iPaq) I will eat crow.

    I am happy to be wrong - I just don't read as much encouragement in their soundbites as others who are more invested do.
  20.    #240  
    http://www.palminfocenter.com/news/6...phil-mckinney/

    here , in this article / video... You have the cto of mobile computing for HP clarifying HP interest in the smartphone biz. This was posted on the main threads of precentral. This my 3rd time posting it in the forums... Mckinney clarifies that HP has a big interest in smartphones. He goes on to give the reasons why...social networking, browsing etc on smartphones is rapidly increasing. Studies show people are using smartphones at an increasing rate for mobile computing. They are leaving palm "as is". What more do the doubters have to hear.and who else do they need to hear it from?
    this video is not opinion...it is the CTO of HP mobile stating exactly why they bought palm... WATCH THE VIDEO.
    anyone claiming HP is going to do anything else is biased and choosing to believe their own opinions. To debate that we should listen to their opinions over Phil Mckinney giving us HP thoughts on palms future is delusional... Hating, bashing and it's obvious. This does not apply to those who have respectfully voiced a different opinion... It applies to those who have disrespectfully insist that their opinion is more factual and less ubsurd. I think the video speaks for itself. Those who choose to not believe him because of negative past experiences... Or HP conspiracy to destroy acquired companies... Is not a respected opinion. Those who want to see it before they believe it... Completely respectable. The MT of this post is encouraging speculation. I have given my take on this thread... If I am wrong...i will be the first to admit it and will eat crow... With a lil hotsauce and a beer.

Posting Permissions