Ridiculous is a great description for this characterization. Someone started a thread about the Gingerbread release on a PALM forum. It's "anti-Palm" to, then, compare the two releases? Uh, no...that's what this forum is for.
Originally Posted by MDsmartphone
It's not about specific brands. You specifically said "It's all about the hardware these days that sell phones. Android wouldn't be popular if it wasn't on 10 devices on every carrier." It's demonstrably false. Verizon's Droid was a success when there were two Android devices on Verizon. Sprint's Hero was a success when there were two Android devices on Sprint. WebOS failed on every carrier in the longterm when there were two devices on each carrier. Stop making excuses that can't be substantiated.
I'm not comparing palm to apple, nor am I comparing apple to android, or to blackberry, or whatever. You can't compare any of these phones to apple. That brand and the iphone are in a league of their own.
It's so odd that so many here still believe this backwards Bizarro ideal. Just rearrange it, man. Because of the killer features of the OS (and the highest end hardware), Android is successful and everywhere. Handset makers get behind a viable platform. Customers respond to the variety. They buy the devices. More handset makers jump onboard with more models. Rinse and repeat. The success and quality feeds the ubiquity. Not the other way around.
but the success of android is because it's everywhere, not because of some killer feature of the OS.
What a strange hypothesis. Isn't this like asking that if WebOS came out in 2006 before the iPhone was announced and had a 3.5-inch screen slab, hardware-accelerated GUI and the same content ecosystem of iTunes, wouldn't it be as successful as the iPhone? The answer is...it would be the iPhone! WebOS wasn't made to be licensed, and wasn't put on Android-like hardware and wasn't marketed as effectively. That was all by Palm's design. They made those deliberate decisions that produced a very different result.
If palm decided to open source webOS to all the same manufacturers that google has, with htc, samsung, lg, motorola, etc etc webOS devices, and bombarded the market like android is doing, do you still think webOS would be a failure or atleast as successful as android?
Even Jon Rubinstein doesn't position WebOS as being an Android competitor except when it comes to silly Monday morning quarterbacking like when he complained that the Pre could've had the Droid's success if it came first.
Windows phone 7 will also be more successful than palm is currently, not so much because of the OS, but because it will be everywhere. Once you get the device everywhere, and have enough customers, the devs will follow. Unlike apple, all other OS companies need to release multiple devices in multiple form factors and have each appeal to a certain market. Lets say google kept the OS to itself and only released the G1, then the Nexus one, and then the nexus S. Would their market share be skyrocketing? I don't think so. Palm would still be behind google, but not by much. Palm was small,thought small, and acted small...so they failed. Hp ideally would think bigger and broader, and if they release devices they have a great shot at competing with blackberry and microsoft and even android.
But that aside, I would LOVE for HP Palm to think bigger and broader. That's the reason I am taking them to task in this thread. Google is clearly thinking that was with the precision, scope, and scale of this 2.3/Nexus S launch. HP Palm is clearly NOT thinking that with the comparatively sloppy and half-baked launch of WebOS 2.0. Gingerbread's launch is an event because Google is making it one. WebOS 2.0 and the Palm Pre 2 were irrelevant non-events because that's how HP treated them.
And that's why it's going to take more than a "me too" hardware portfolio of tablet/slate/keyboard slider/etc. for HP Palm to stand on the same stage as the big boys of the smartphone world. They don't even have the basics down thus far.