Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 40 of 40
  1. #21  
    as quality goes, WebOS is really the best, I feel more sure about it after own galaxy tab for more than a week. The shortcomings are still apps and hardware. sadly Pre 2 is no better in terms of both.

    The other unique OS is WP7, which is completely different and is very attractive.

    iOS is strong on the base of the apps, the OS itself is ancient in both function, and how it operates.

    android is the same as iOS, maybe slightly better with army of google apps.

    Purely based on OS quality, I would say WebOS and WP7 will be most attractive. But there are millions of apple and google ******* out there.
  2. #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by rexalbel View Post
    to answer the OP's question which I completely understand, is yes. I do think webos can be the best.apps are important and so is hardware. But at the core is the os. Delete apps and devices and look at the OS

    iOS
    - look and feel
    + glossy bulky
    + clean look (color scheme is simple but attractive
    + design elements are smooth and apps look fluint, utilizing different looks for catered designs.
    + mix of tap and gesture based navigation
    ++ biggest issue is the bulk of the design. While it was probably meant for easy touching it would not have been bad to minimize sme of the navigation. Also it can be bland at times. Also sometimes things take too many taps

    basic functinality
    - multitasking is a bit old school and switching apps is a bit more annoying then it should be.
    -push notifications are awesome!!
    -notificatin system is horrid, there isn't one! It's jst a pop up and that's it
    -folders make organizing a bit better but can be frustrating when trying to move an app between pages
    -most of os relies on 3rd party apps to do everything (messaging, tasks, uploading pictures)
    -very losed system
    - smooth with little if any lag.
    - sometimes apps just close. Happens most with browser.

    android
    -more open though still requires rooting to really dig into and is not supported by every manufacturer
    -deisgn is not at all atractive compared to even some dumbphone designs. (feels like featurephone os at times)
    -fragmentation not just os version wise, but usage wise. For example a some devices support multitouch, some don't. Some have haptic feedback, some don't.
    -not all apps work on all phones.
    - good notifications system and customization of it.
    - not so great messaging
    -lack of intuitivity (most innovations are due to manufacturer ui skins)
    -bad organization of apps
    - marketplace is nice due to refund policy BIG plus!
    - camera app has lots of functions! But layout is ugly and obtrusive.
    - widgets are awesome for easy at a glance info!
    -not so great as far as music app and photo viewng but does support sharing easier.
    has good features such at syncing certain accounts including facebook.
    -navigations seems stagnant not kinetic.

    webos
    - elegant multitasking but no way to hide apps being used meaning no background support except for native apps
    - no widgets but exhibition in 2.0 will help with that
    - stacks make it easier to navigate through related apps.
    - most open (no root required and easy to be for no coders to add new functionalit
    - awesome intigration with services such as accounts with email and social services, and messaging
    - inttive navigation through gestures. easy access to launcher and fav apps.
    great notification system but needs more customization.
    - needs fvisual voicemail baked in.
    - works similar to ios as far as updates
    - clean and unabtrusive design
    - apps need to be more design friendly
    - lag is a bit agitating
    - slow boot
    - apps take long to open

    looking at this it could seem as if ios has the least issues, however looking at it smartly, webos has the most potential. almost all of it's ssues are fixable. including having more apps and beter hardware. android would need to overhaul their os alot to really beat either. most people don't buy androids for the os. they buy them for the same reasons most teans buy blackberries, for a specific function. (blackberry is the keyboard, android is for a touchscreen, udually would prefer an iphone. that is the general public. most peple who have seen my phone os love it. so yet again I do believe webos could be the best. and I am not biased as I do have an itouch and did originally want an android before webos was announced.
    Awesome post. This really is the crux of the situation at right now. Who know what gingerbread brings to the table for android at this point.
    There is a very, very... very valid (can I say very enough?) that HP paid 1.2 BILLION for a stack of software that sits atop a debian arm OS. That stack is webOS, and it's revolutionary and awesome and completely why we are all here. Why would HP pay 1.2 billion for something when android was freely available? Well, android is a horrible mess for one, and it also offers no differentiation. WebOS is cohesive, it works in enterprise environments, and it happens to offer a really good user experience unlike android and iOS. We can't thank iOS enough for paving the road to better OS's, but webOS is currently the pinnacle of good experiences. Everyone is going to copy webOS. Take a look at the blackberry roadmap as well as iOS second-thoughts, it's purely webOS. The hope for us now is that we continue to innovate beyond copycats. WebOS is so far beyond what anyone else has to offer at this point it's embarrassing. They need to be us, now, and they have needed to be for a long time. WebOS needs innovation because it has to stay ahead of the curve. It's there now, and it has been since launch. Strangely it hasn't received a lot of recognition or respect despite now being copied. Be a zealot, that's the only advice I can offer. Tell people about it now, and explain why we are so beyond the rest of the world.
    .,;-#$^***^$#-;,.

  3. #23  
    webOS has a lot of elegant infrastructure that Android lacks. I know less about iOS. I think Android and iOS appeal to different types of people. If you value aesthetics a whole lot, you'll think iOS is better. If you value ability to customize and control your own experience, you'll think Android is better. webOS has the POTENTIAL to appeal to both crowds, but that means it also has a lock on neither. So ironically, its strength is its weakness--it is all things to all people.

    To me, this means that it has so far been a failure primarily in marketing. That's the kind of thing that could be turned around. However, it also suffered with poor quality hardware and slowness. Fix marketing, hardware, and speed, and webOS would definitely have the greatest potential.
    Palm III-->Handspring Visor-->Sony Clie PEG-NR70-->no PDA -->Palm Treo 755p-->Palm Pre-->HP Veer
  4. #24  
    Quote Originally Posted by jbg7474 View Post
    webOS has a lot of elegant infrastructure that Android lacks. I know less about iOS. I think Android and iOS appeal to different types of people. If you value aesthetics a whole lot, you'll think iOS is better. If you value ability to customize and control your own experience, you'll think Android is better. webOS has the POTENTIAL to appeal to both crowds, but that means it also has a lock on neither. So ironically, its strength is its weakness--it is all things to all people.

    To me, this means that it has so far been a failure primarily in marketing. That's the kind of thing that could be turned around. However, it also suffered with poor quality hardware and slowness. Fix marketing, hardware, and speed, and webOS would definitely have the greatest potential.
    Also very true. The webOS experience has yet to offer cutting edge hardware and is second place when it comes to iOS in regards to experience (that has been experienced?). One thing I will say, and be flamed for... is that android is subpar to webOS and you can put as many hdmi connectors, gorilla glass, and quantum CPUs underneath it and still have a bad experience because it really is just lipstick on a pig. I mean to say that the one thing we have going for us webOS users is that the software is so much better and the hardware has a nice baseline of functionality and usabiltity.
    .,;-#$^***^$#-;,.

  5. #25  
    It all boils down to what the OS can do and what it will be able to do in the future. Android beats webos in both of these categories. Let me explain.

    WebOS has a much better user experience, I don't think anyone would argue with that. The problem it has is that there are so few apps. The OS needs a lot of changes (hopefully 2.0 solves some). I have only been using my pre plus for about a month (came from android) and have it working exactly the way I want it. The problem is, I had to patch the hell out of it to get it that way. The average user isn't going to do that. They may download apps, but apps dont make these changes. All of the features that are missing from WebOS are listed in rexabels post.

    One of the things Android has that webos will not have is voice services. On android you can hold down the search button and say any number of commands. Obviously this isn't amazing on the handset, but it uses the cloud to limit what the phone has to do and therefore increases capabilities. HP is simply not going to invest in enough servers to offer this functionality like google does. Why? Well, google is an advertising/search company. Their OS is just one big data mining project. Their servers are an investment. The only way HP would make money on the servers would be to sell a lot of handsets...which would require more servers.

    Google gives their OS to OEMs for free for this same reason. The more handsets they sell, the more ad revenue they get even if they don't make a dime off of the OS (or in their case, lose money). HP cannot compete with every other OEM on the planet. As for the OEMs, why would they not choose android? It's free. No need to try and create a competing OS that might violate copyrights and cost millions. Why would customers choose webos and it's 2 or even 5 form factors when they can choose between a dozen android handsets on each carrier and have more capabilities natively?

    In the end, WebOS will become just an HP thing in the sense that iphone is for Apple. If you own HP products, you will buy WebOS because you're familiar with it. That's what HP is banking on. The problem for us is that going that route doesn't mean HP needs to stand out from the other smartphone operating systems. iOS does not offer anything groundbreaking compared to the other major operating systems for this same reason.

    Once iphone is on enough carriers or android/meego/wp7/BBOS has the flow of webos, it will die. I'm enjoying it now and hope to get another year or two out of it, but I have no delusions about the future.
  6. #26  
    It truly doesn't matter to the average consumer how open the OS is. They feel plenty smart just to have a phone that you can use gps and also play games on. The average consumer will never know that you can make apps and others for your phone
  7. #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by wodin6 View Post
    One of the things Android has that webos will not have is voice services. On android you can hold down the search button and say any number of commands. Obviously this isn't amazing on the handset, but it uses the cloud to limit what the phone has to do and therefore increases capabilities. HP is simply not going to invest in enough servers to offer this functionality like google does. Why? Well, google is an advertising/search company. Their OS is just one big data mining project. Their servers are an investment. The only way HP would make money on the servers would be to sell a lot of handsets...which would require more servers.

    Google gives their OS to OEMs for free for this same reason. The more handsets they sell, the more ad revenue they get even if they don't make a dime off of the OS (or in their case, lose money). HP cannot compete with every other OEM on the planet. As for the OEMs, why would they not choose android? It's free. No need to try and create a competing OS that might violate copyrights and cost millions. Why would customers choose webos and it's 2 or even 5 form factors when they can choose between a dozen android handsets on each carrier and have more capabilities natively?
    Actually, I think this operating mode of Google's is one reason why we will eventually see these kinds of features on webOS if we get the webOS side APIs to handle it. Google cares about ad revenue. I don't believe they actually care one whit whether the phone is an Android phone or whether it's a webOS or iOS phone. If it runs a Google ad, it's money in Google's pocket. Google developed Android to be sure that they would always have a hook into the mobile space, so no one could ever block them out completely. I don't believe Google will ever truly make services exclusive to Android.

    Right now, I think we're not seeing much love from Google partly because webOS isn't big enough and partly because webOS hasn't had some of what is necessary. But you put a compass on a webOS device and open up the camera API, and there is no reason why Google wouldn't want Google Goggles to be operating on it.

    Translation: HP doesn't need to reproduce these Google capabilities, just cooperate with them.
    Palm III-->Handspring Visor-->Sony Clie PEG-NR70-->no PDA -->Palm Treo 755p-->Palm Pre-->HP Veer
  8. #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by wodin6 View Post
    It all boils down to what the OS can do and what it will be able to do in the future. Android beats webos in both of these categories. Let me explain.

    WebOS has a much better user experience, I don't think anyone would argue with that. The problem it has is that there are so few apps. The OS needs a lot of changes (hopefully 2.0 solves some). I have only been using my pre plus for about a month (came from android) and have it working exactly the way I want it. The problem is, I had to patch the hell out of it to get it that way. The average user isn't going to do that. They may download apps, but apps dont make these changes. All of the features that are missing from WebOS are listed in rexabels post.

    One of the things Android has that webos will not have is voice services. On android you can hold down the search button and say any number of commands. Obviously this isn't amazing on the handset, but it uses the cloud to limit what the phone has to do and therefore increases capabilities. HP is simply not going to invest in enough servers to offer this functionality like google does. Why? Well, google is an advertising/search company. Their OS is just one big data mining project. Their servers are an investment. The only way HP would make money on the servers would be to sell a lot of handsets...which would require more servers.

    Google gives their OS to OEMs for free for this same reason. The more handsets they sell, the more ad revenue they get even if they don't make a dime off of the OS (or in their case, lose money). HP cannot compete with every other OEM on the planet. As for the OEMs, why would they not choose android? It's free. No need to try and create a competing OS that might violate copyrights and cost millions. Why would customers choose webos and it's 2 or even 5 form factors when they can choose between a dozen android handsets on each carrier and have more capabilities natively?

    In the end, WebOS will become just an HP thing in the sense that iphone is for Apple. If you own HP products, you will buy WebOS because you're familiar with it. That's what HP is banking on. The problem for us is that going that route doesn't mean HP needs to stand out from the other smartphone operating systems. iOS does not offer anything groundbreaking compared to the other major operating systems for this same reason.

    Once iphone is on enough carriers or android/meego/wp7/BBOS has the flow of webos, it will die. I'm enjoying it now and hope to get another year or two out of it, but I have no delusions about the future.
    I understand some of your points and can agree that as of now android does have a more functional os, but the reason apples os is popular is not only because it's popular. If they made the instinct it would probably still suck in peoples eyes. Point is it's what they did to make smartphones big. They added intuitive features so innovating will be important. I am totally understanding if you favor android or maybe you don't but believe it's the better choice. Everyone has their right to their own opinion but I did want to point out that it's a bit too early to say webos won't be able to so voice commends and such when api's to the mic are coming. As far as multiple forms, I think honestly, that wp7 will take that spot. I do not even have much of an interest in it, but dothink they may be able overcome google as the os is more specific about hardware in order to avoid fragmentation and a device becoming obsolete too early which is googles problem and why I do not see it being the ultimate winner. There's many other issues it has but preference can determine their importance. Fragmentation is something that is not a preference to anyone. I frequent all 3 os forums so I know devs of android are frustrated with the issues of screen sizes, performance ect. If HP shows an awesome device I am very sure many devs will try it out. Webos, as I've said before, has the best situation. All of it's biggest issues aren't deep core issues. The ui is awesome, the functionality is awesome, the Pim is great because it incorperates multiple services and yes there's much missing. Vvm, voice activated features, push notifications, better music, maps, email, notes and calendar app, there's PLENTY I can go on about but as someone who's studied each os in order to conclude which one will end up on top for some time, I say webos has the most potential. Androids whole ui is lacking anything really intriguing. It's bland, and not fun to use at all. It has great apps but apps are not what makes the os core, they help promote it yes but any os can eventually have lots of apps so if all 3 had the same apps we would be forced to look deeper. Point is anyway, sorry tired and rambling , that looking at what's easily fixable and what would require a major overhaul, webos is the one which looks like a winner. iOS is stuck in it's ways which will work for it and it will never die, android won't die either. Android is an excellent Solution to a mid/low teir touchscreen alternative to replace all the instincts, and featurephone touchscreens who wish they were smart. It gives users a beter choice and more functionality and from what I've seen is most people with an android don't care about the os or high functionality, they simply are replacing instinct type phones that do more. Androids like Evo won't die, instead they will become lower in price as wp7 takes androids high priced device arena. Wp7 will cator to those who want more creative smartphone os's and multiple form factors and for windows fans. HP will actor to those looking for something intuitive and on the edge of technology, balancing work and play in a smaller but more intuitive selection of hardware. None of the os's will go away they all do have a purpose.
  9. #29  
    Quote Originally Posted by rexalbel View Post
    I understand some of your points...
    I don't think you really understood my points and I do not favor android.

    Android has voice recognition that works well, not because of APIs for the mic, but because it doesn't have the cloud backing voice commands. As far as I'm aware, Android phones do not actually do the voice translation. They record your voice, send it to their servers in the cloud, hundreds of servers each decide what they think you said, and then the most common answer is what olis sent back to your phone. You cannot do this without those servers. Sure you can try having voice recognition be powered by the handset, but it would almost never work since we all speak differently. Anyone that remembers the old Dragon Speak software knows what I'm talking about.

    It makes sense that Google invests 100's of millions of dollars in these types of servers because they then collect data on what you generally search for and can cater their ad service to your habits. It does not make sense for HP to do the same because they would not get a return on their money.

    Beyond voice recognition, many of their other apps do this same thing. Gmail tracks what you do to pull info out, maps/longitude follow your location, goggles sees buildings/things you're interested in, shopper sees what you like to buy, etc. Seeing the trend? Data mining ad company.

    Apple is starting their own ad services for this same exact reason. Microsoft doesn't need to because buying their phone locks you into buying their other software. Do you think companies make much money on hardware sales? Think the ipod/iphone are worth it to apple without itunes purchases?

    jbg7474 actually made a good point. If google has a way to get into WebOS to add their software, then WebOS stands a chance. If HP doesn't offer them a compelling way to enter WebOS, then they better figure out something else or it will fade even more.

    Once again, people are not going to buy many phones if they don't see options. Apps, form factors, and carriers are options. Having the "best" core os means nothing.
  10.    #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by wodin6 View Post
    I don't think you really understood my points and I do not favor android.

    Android has voice recognition that works well, not because of APIs for the mic, but because it doesn't have the cloud backing voice commands. As far as I'm aware, Android phones do not actually do the voice translation. They record your voice, send it to their servers in the cloud, hundreds of servers each decide what they think you said, and then the most common answer is what olis sent back to your phone. You cannot do this without those servers. Sure you can try having voice recognition be powered by the handset, but it would almost never work since we all speak differently. Anyone that remembers the old Dragon Speak software knows what I'm talking about.

    It makes sense that Google invests 100's of millions of dollars in these types of servers because they then collect data on what you generally search for and can cater their ad service to your habits. It does not make sense for HP to do the same because they would not get a return on their money.

    Beyond voice recognition, many of their other apps do this same thing. Gmail tracks what you do to pull info out, maps/longitude follow your location, goggles sees buildings/things you're interested in, shopper sees what you like to buy, etc. Seeing the trend? Data mining ad company.

    Apple is starting their own ad services for this same exact reason. Microsoft doesn't need to because buying their phone locks you into buying their other software. Do you think companies make much money on hardware sales? Think the ipod/iphone are worth it to apple without itunes purchases?

    jbg7474 actually made a good point. If google has a way to get into WebOS to add their software, then WebOS stands a chance. If HP doesn't offer them a compelling way to enter WebOS, then they better figure out something else or it will fade even more.

    Once again, people are not going to buy many phones if they don't see options. Apps, form factors, and carriers are options. Having the "best" core os means nothing.
    very very good and valid points.
  11. cgk
    cgk is offline
    cgk's Avatar
    Posts
    3,868 Posts
    Global Posts
    9,556 Global Posts
    #31  
    Quote Originally Posted by wodin6 View Post
    I don't think you really understood my points and I do not favor android.


    Apple is starting their own ad services for this same exact reason. Microsoft doesn't need to because buying their phone locks you into buying their other software. Do you think companies make much money on hardware sales? Think the ipod/iphone are worth it to apple without itunes purchases?
    Apple, yes they are, look at the revenue figures, apple aren't grey box shifters so their actual margins on revenues are much higher than HP or Dell or whoever else is in a race to the bottom (which is also why they aren't interested in getting into such a race either).

  12. #32  
    Quote Originally Posted by CGK View Post
    Apple, yes they are, look at the revenue figures, apple aren't grey box shifters so their actual margins on revenues are much higher than HP or Dell or whoever else is in a race to the bottom (which is also why they aren't interested in getting into such a race either).

    Is that Gross or Net revenue?
  13. #33  
    Quote Originally Posted by wodin6 View Post
    Is that Gross or Net revenue?
    It's closer to gross.
  14. #34  
    Quote Originally Posted by wodin6 View Post
    I don't think you really understood my points and I do not favor android.

    Android has voice recognition that works well, not because of APIs for the mic, but because it doesn't have the cloud backing voice commands. As far as I'm aware, Android phones do not actually do the voice translation. They record your voice, send it to their servers in the cloud, hundreds of servers each decide what they think you said, and then the most common answer is what olis sent back to your phone. You cannot do this without those servers. Sure you can try having voice recognition be powered by the handset, but it would almost never work since we all speak differently. Anyone that remembers the old Dragon Speak software knows what I'm talking about.

    It makes sense that Google invests 100's of millions of dollars in these types of servers because they then collect data on what you generally search for and can cater their ad service to your habits. It does not make sense for HP to do the same because they would not get a return on their money.

    Beyond voice recognition, many of their other apps do this same thing. Gmail tracks what you do to pull info out, maps/longitude follow your location, goggles sees buildings/things you're interested in, shopper sees what you like to buy, etc. Seeing the trend? Data mining ad company.

    Apple is starting their own ad services for this same exact reason. Microsoft doesn't need to because buying their phone locks you into buying their other software. Do you think companies make much money on hardware sales? Think the ipod/iphone are worth it to apple without itunes purchases?

    jbg7474 actually made a good point. If google has a way to get into WebOS to add their software, then WebOS stands a chance. If HP doesn't offer them a compelling way to enter WebOS, then they better figure out something else or it will fade even more.

    Once again, people are not going to buy many phones if they don't see options. Apps, form factors, and carriers are options. Having the "best" core os means nothing.
    Ah ok I get where you are going at a bit better. And I do agree webos does need a more deeper integration with googles services. However I am merely trying to answer and relate to the op so just pointing out that to the average normal or tech person, excluding certain tangents which are hardware and apps, os wise webos appears to win comparing each core os. This in reality does make it have the potential to be the best overall, HOWEVER doesn't mean It will. Form factor is EXTREMELY Important and is the primary reason the average consumer buys android. It also has a great ecosystem of cloud based services which HP can also have and palm has started, but I think HP's strategy is not creating another service to have in the clouds, but to use and synce existing ones, thus using googles services, dacebooks services, ect. I would not be surprised if the video calling app will be a synergy of current video calling services and messengers that support video calling. This is where webos will show to be a great investment because other services can connect to it, thus allowing most of the same types of advantages such as geolacation and user product interests. Like u said which I agree with, googles os isnt what they are primarily focused on, it's the services. The difference is this more relates to the financial end not user appeal. Google goggles, voice commands, and many of googles other little things are not huge factors in purchasing an android device. In reality little about the os is the factor in buying the os aside from fans, people who do use those services and people who see google as the superior os. Financially however, to be succesfully they need to leverage more outside services like google. As far as their use of servers and voice command go I'll just agree as I don't know as much about the way android works as I do about the user end. That would be for a whole different post this is merely a post about which os would be better in terms of functioning ect excluding apps and hardware. In my opinion webos can only become a top dog if they get better and more popular and functional apps, and more hardware. I agree that unfortunatly a superior core os means nothing to the public eye.
  15. #35  
    Note to all, I believe the op is looking for a simple answer as far as the os itself not it's financial standings or including apps ect. There are many things that are the best that don't last so it's possible for webos to be the best os even if it maybe doesn't last. Thus there will be a lot of debating going on because of the confusion between what HP needs to do to be the most successful vs what the os itself has that makes it great. it's nice to sometimes Eliminate money and business from something and look at it at it's core, makes it easier to determine which product is even worth putting alot of effort into.
  16. #36  
    Quote Originally Posted by wellwellwell11 View Post
    "so the gloves are off the love is gone" Jay-z superugly

    let me start off by saying, lets get down to the beef, the whole freaking cow. So Webos got off to a fast start and slow fast, while android got off to a slow start and is soaring. Though looking at the two OS's, IMO I believe Webos has more potential then Android does. Stated that, as well as the reason Webos slowed, is because of lack of funds and capital to keep the train moving. Lets start this discussion with the pro's and cons (yes Im looking for alot of feedback from android supporters and theres alot here)

    First as even Rod pointed out at the DEVO conference Android is not based off of a true linux kernel. Android is based upon a modified version of the Linux kernel. As Webos is: HP webOS is Palm's proprietary mobile operating system running on the Linux kernel.[3] Also as stated can Google even really call their OS open source:

    "Google is in an interesting position here. On the one hand, they have worked hard to make sure that above the kernel layer Android is not GPL licensed. This serves to calm worried manufacturers threatened by the idea of having to release source. It seems, sadly, like a necessary step in order for Android to receive the kind of market prominence that Google wants for it.

    On the other hand, it seems hypocritical for Google to tout Android’s “open source” credentials when it seems so clear that most companies profiting from it are completely oblivious, maybe even antagonistic, to open source.


    Project Gus» Blog Archive » The Sad State of Open Source in Android tablets

    really with the basic complaints even with developing for webos is the availablity of the functionality (API etc) within the OS. We all know they were always playing catch up with limited resources. Though even as one editor will note developing for all three (IOS, WEBOS, and Android) actully the IOS was the harder out of the 3, and he like most anaylist, and developers I've come across in the past 12 months still prefer webos over android:

    Breaking Down the Signal – The Android, iOS, and WebOS Comparison | Stay N' Alive


    so to me my question is......is it safe to say, with a true linux OS in webos, and as long as HP allows Palms intial vision to blossom, with their resources can Webos be the greatest OS in history? Or do you think one of the other competitors will be ala Android, IOS, or WP7?
    I think WebOS 2.0 will grow with features in every x.1, x.2, x.3 release. We will see improved features and new features, and next year we will see a 3.0 with even more features. I think this because the new people from HP and the new hires will now be able to add their input into WebOS, where as WebOS 2.0 was purely Palm (for the most part, at least).

    I think adding newer features throughout 2011, as well as releasing 5-6 devices (plus printers) will really turn things around for Palm. Flooding the market with high quality devices -- both large and small, tablet and smart phone -- will help push HP WebOS into the lime light. People love WebOS, techies want more, and as long as HP pushes the devices and continue adding new features to the all ready huge list of features -- WebOS will shine. Will it ever beat Android? You can never know, but there is room for Palm and HP to make a lot of money even with little market share.
  17. #37  
    In all fairness, webOS is the
  18. #38  
    Quote Originally Posted by nappy View Post
    Google's been fuzzing up the definition of open for a while now but why does it matter?



    If people really cared about having an open, recompileable kernel, they'd be flocking to Linux on their desktops and notebooks. That's not happening because it really doesn't matter how open source an operating system is.
    Yes, it's true open source is not a mainstream thing however it can lead to a better product. But it also means less control, and Google seems to want more control over their OS then what a true open source OS should be. THats not bad for the mainstream but people who loved open source are propbably up in their arms.

    Quote Originally Posted by huso81 View Post
    WebOS is the best OS for Phones, but that is not so important for the success of an OS.
    For example Windows was not the best System for Computers, but it had most success.

    Marketing is important, Sales are important.
    Android has the Power of Google. Its improving really fast. All the world is looking to Google and what they do.

    When you look at Palm: They did an amazing Job with webos. But the Hardware is not amazing. Updates are too slow. Ok messaging with the pre is perfekt. SMS, GTalk, Live Messenger are all in One. Contacts are really good. But whats with Google Maps. Or an Navigation Software. Or Flash. WebOS Apps are behind Android Apps.

    Google Maps with turn by turn Navigation would be cool on a Pre.

    Another thing is that we still have no flash. And we wait for a long time.
    Even with HP we still have to wait for comming Months.
    If i would have the choise now, i would by an Android Phone.

    Also the Advantages of WebOS will be copied by the other OS.
    Blackberry Playbook is using same Multitasking for example.

    I would not be surprised if Android 3.0 would be with all the goods of WebOS.
    Thats whats great about HP being behind Palm now. They have the money top market the new road map next year and they have the resources to make better hardware. THe OS is good enough to stand up against the others and will only get better with time. And frankly, the way WebOS 2.0 handles Flash is probably the best way a mobile phone can.

    Quote Originally Posted by deihmos View Post
    Why wasn't Windows the best for computers? Are you suggesting everyone spend a couple $1000 for a computer running Mac OS? That's exactly what would have happened if Apple had its way. I know you cannot be suggesting a Linux distro which has barely improved over the years.

    There is no Live messenger for webos that works well imo. There are many things I don't like about Webos and the way it handles open programs is one of them. For eg. the messenger programs are all terrible and none are free. To remain connected you must keep a card open. On Android I can stay connected by having the program in the background with a little icon in the corner and they don't cost anything.
    This is off topic, but Windows XP was not a great OS and Vista was worse. XP, although loved by many, was ancient compared to Mac OS X Tiger. Even Ubunut Linux -- which is free -- was (and still is) a better choice then XP and Vista. However, Windows 7 Microsoft finally got it right. I do know it's 6.5 (still Vista under the hood) but it's more refined and a great UI. Works fast and smooth. Sure, it needs RAM, but what modern OS doesn't?
  19. #39  
    Quote Originally Posted by taharka View Post
    I have a couple apps that I wrote that do it (not in the app catalog). There are tricks that can be used (alarms, power, etc). I thought there were some in the catalog that do it (I haven't checked in a while since I no longer use or develop for webOS daily). Doesn't GeoStrings do it?
    GeoStrings runs periodically in the background by setting alarms to wake itself up. But it doesn't run continuously in the background. Apps can only run for 60 seconds in headless mode before being closed by the OS.

    However in webOS 2.0 apps will have the ability to create Javascript services which can run continuously in the background in their own thread. This feature was described in detail at the Palm Dev conference ( ). Incidentally, that's me at the end of the video asking about retrieving GPS position within a service. My motivation behind that question is being able to run GeoStrings in the background periodically and retrieve an accurate GPS position (which is sometimes not possible within the current 60-second limit).
    Quick Post: The quick way to post messages and photos to Twitter & Facebook (video link)
    Music Player (Remix): The next generation music listening experience on webOS (video link)
    GeoStrings: Set location-based reminders and never forget another task (video link)

    Twitter: @Hedami
  20. #40  
    I think that the companies that use Android on their phones absolutely hate the idea of open-source, and do their best to discourage it. I think the fragmentation of Android might lead to some major problems for it in the future. If HP will let webOS blossom (and not license it out, thus not creating any fragmentation problems), that this could really be something special.


    My Themes:CLICK HERE
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions