Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 41
  1. #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by mikec
    Do you really think P1 has the execution ability for that?
    Though I certainly am sympathetic with the rest of your post (...), the plain fact is that PalmOne outsources EVERYTHING w.r.t. their devices - from design (yes, even design) through programming through warehousing through manufacturing.

    As such, they could just outsource their uSoft or Linux programming needs.

    So - yes - they could quite likely execute this.

    NOTE - they lose a major "marketing" feature if they do so - PalmOS. I think they're probably still kicking and screaming about that, BTW - and i think they're really POed at PalmSource for Cobalt's (purported) unusability - some of the comments out of PalmOne execs has been...interesting...
  2. #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by mikec
    Silver,

    How long does it take to make/test that. If those sorry employees would cut out their 4 daily Starbucks breaks and actually get some work done, then maybe we should see some action.

    You take that to India ot China, and you are done in 6 months, tops.
    Actually, you have to "take it" (in a different sense) to MANY more places than India and China. The GSM unit has to be tested the world over for compatibilty with most implementations of the GSM standard. The conversation conquorer talks about also mentioned that. It's just a question of PalmOne as a company having already done that hard work. Why would they be obliged to change just because it's a new version?! Why should they invest the resources in redoing what they already did? It's a smart business decision IMO for them to hold off.

    As for PS, it's their job to try to find implementers of their new product. I am sure that eventually they will and I don't see a doom and gloom picture.

    I think the split of the two companies was good and it is working.
  3.    #23  
    Silverado,

    Believe me, I WANT to see PSRC succeed. I don't think that hiding the truth is going to help anyone. Skillman told the truth and I think that's healthy. I disagree that all is well. If it takes months more for PSRC to get a Cobalt device to market, the platform suffers. Marketshare is KEY in software. Why will developers write apps that take full advantage of Cobalt if there are so few devices out there that can use it? They won't (just ask Sharp); they'll write to PocketPC/Smartphone/Symbian. We're already starting to see that with things like Skype. I hope PSRC redoubles its efforts to get Cobalt ready and achieves a major miracle in getting a FINISHED version out the door long before Skillman expects.
  4. #24  
    Skype
    Watch this one...VERRRRRRRY interesting!
  5. #25  
    Quote Originally Posted by SeldomVisitor
    Though I certainly am sympathetic with the rest of your post (...), the plain fact is that PalmOne outsources EVERYTHING w.r.t. their devices - from design (yes, even design) through programming through warehousing through manufacturing.

    As such, they could just outsource their uSoft or Linux programming needs.

    So - yes - they could quite likely execute this.

    NOTE - they lose a major "marketing" feature if they do so - PalmOS. I think they're probably still kicking and screaming about that, BTW - and i think they're really POed at PalmSource for Cobalt's (purported) unusability - some of the comments out of PalmOne execs has been...interesting...

    I tend to disagree, but only because execution and outsourcing have very little to do with each other. It's about management and motivation.

    But that's okay; I understand your point.

    I guess time will tell.

    (as for ignoring your post; never. And miss all the fun?) :-)
  6. icewing's Avatar
    Posts
    77 Posts
    Global Posts
    78 Global Posts
    #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by mikec
    Silver,

    How long does it take to make/test that. If those sorry employees would cut out their 4 daily Starbucks breaks and actually get some work done, then maybe we should see some action.

    You take that to India ot China, and you are done in 6 months, tops.
    Mike,
    as you said to DrDoom, GMAFB. Not trying to start a flamewar, but every experience I've had with outsourcing has proven to me that it takes longer, results in more bugs, and in the end costs more... Here we go, guess I've started an outsourcing flamewar....

    Seriously, the last company I worked for had a project that was estimated to take two years, done by in-house employees. They decided to oursouce to India - it's now almost 3 years later, and a few months ago the Indian company said that they were half-done, but that if they were paid the same as what has already been spent again, they would be able to get it done in another year. Several years ago they did an outsourcing project with a Canadian company - after 2 years, the completed software was delivered...and the US company was surprised to find that what they got did not match the design documents....and was full of bugs. I'm not riding down India or Canada, but the lack of control, communication problems, time-zone issues, etc can make outsourcing very challenging. Sure, from an accounting standpoint it looks good, because you don't have the in-house head-count, salaries, benefits, etc - but, at what price quality? Would you rather have them move to the Micro$oft model, of delivering something soon that doesn't work, or wait for something that's more stable?

    /Soapbox off

    Sorry, not trying to start a war, but as I said, I've had some very negative experiences with outsourcing - I could go on and on...

    Flame away, folks!
  7. #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by silverado
    Actually, you have to "take it" (in a different sense) to MANY more places than India and China. The GSM unit has to be tested the world over for compatibilty with most implementations of the GSM standard. The conversation conquorer talks about also mentioned that. It's just a question of PalmOne as a company having already done that hard work. Why would they be obliged to change just because it's a new version?! Why should they invest the resources in redoing what they already did? It's a smart business decision IMO for them to hold off.

    As for PS, it's their job to try to find implementers of their new product. I am sure that eventually they will and I don't see a doom and gloom picture.

    I think the split of the two companies was good and it is working.

    Yea, it's good....good for nothing.

    Instead of one company that cannot execute, you get two.

    If this was really the way to go, Apple would have done it long ago. They didn't, for obvious reasons, and their story mirrors Palms, although Palm self destructed worse that Apple (although on a relative scale, I'd say it's a wash).

    As for India and China - I'm taking the telephony stack coding; you do not need to be in Europe to test GSM. You set up your own phone network (small scale), and build it. There are not that many different implementations of phone standard to test). Then you field test it, and refine it. But JFC, they are taking a long time.

    They are obliged to change (or the market will push them), because finally Palm will have multi-tasking, which is a HUGE deal. This would be like a company writing a network driver for Win98, but not W2K or XP, because "Win98 was really hard and we don't see a need to move to the new platform".

    Sure, you can do that, but then you are out of business. (the path Palm is following).

    Gloom and doom is all that I see from the Palm brothers...not in the next year, or the year after, but when someone comes out with the "Windows/Linux Treo" (and not Palm1), it is game over.
  8. #28  
    I think its highly likely that future Treos will have an alternate OS, and I would think MS is the most likely. I think that may be unfortunate, especially for mac users, but probably a reality anyway.
  9. #29  
    Quote Originally Posted by Conqueror
    Silverado,

    Believe me, I WANT to see PSRC succeed. I don't think that hiding the truth is going to help anyone. Skillman told the truth and I think that's healthy. I disagree that all is well. If it takes months more for PSRC to get a Cobalt device to market, the platform suffers. Marketshare is KEY in software. Why will developers write apps that take full advantage of Cobalt if there are so few devices out there that can use it? They won't (just ask Sharp); they'll write to PocketPC/Smartphone/Symbian. We're already starting to see that with things like Skype. I hope PSRC redoubles its efforts to get Cobalt ready and achieves a major miracle in getting a FINISHED version out the door long before Skillman expects.
    I wasn't suggesting that you hide the truth, just possibly be more careful with completely revealing your sources.

    Secondly, I guess I disagree about the amount the platform would "suffer" due to delays. If you notice, PalmOne continues to succeed with their new offerings despite the fact that we, the extreme gadget enthusiasts, think that they are behind the times in technology in some aspects. PalmOne is the platform in the eyes of the vast majority of users. They have proven time and time again that their "slow" pace as we see it works. Their focus on functionality, ease of use and elegant simplicity for the masses is working. Because of that, I think that things are fine for the Palm OS and that it will live long and prosper

    All the talk about P1 creating a windows mobile-based phone does NOT mean that they are abandoning the palm OS. The cost they face in adopting Cobalt is a lot smaller IMO than that of switching to an MS-based solution. Cobalt has a lot more than telephony, and its other features will bring it into P1 devices. You can imagine a Treo-type device running Cobalt which uses parts of the existing telephony code. At a later step, I think its telephony functions will be used.
  10. #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by icewing
    Mike,
    as you said to DrDoom, GMAFB. Not trying to start a flamewar, but every experience I've had with outsourcing has proven to me that it takes longer, results in more bugs, and in the end costs more... Here we go, guess I've started an outsourcing flamewar....

    Seriously, the last company I worked for had a project that was estimated to take two years, done by in-house employees. They decided to oursouce to India - it's now almost 3 years later, and a few months ago the Indian company said that they were half-done, but that if they were paid the same as what has already been spent again, they would be able to get it done in another year. Several years ago they did an outsourcing project with a Canadian company - after 2 years, the completed software was delivered...and the US company was surprised to find that what they got did not match the design documents....and was full of bugs. I'm not riding down India or Canada, but the lack of control, communication problems, time-zone issues, etc can make outsourcing very challenging. Sure, from an accounting standpoint it looks good, because you don't have the in-house head-count, salaries, benefits, etc - but, at what price quality? Would you rather have them move to the Micro$oft model, of delivering something soon that doesn't work, or wait for something that's more stable?

    /Soapbox off

    Sorry, not trying to start a war, but as I said, I've had some very negative experiences with outsourcing - I could go on and on...

    Flame away, folks!
    I wasn't trying to say outsourcing was the etopian answer....just that there are skills all over the planet. If you local guys can;t cut it, look somewhere else.


    I'm sorry you have had bad outsourcing experiences. I have gone through good ones, and bad ones. It all depends on management and motivation, as I have said in another post. All the "problems" you note above can be addressed, if you have any sense of common sense, and experience.

    Bad outsourcing occurs because you CEO, CIO, etc are effing tardanic morons who didn't know what they are doing. You think you can turn you business over to another company and expect magic. It doesn't work that way.

    You have to manage the relationship, and pull the plug if needed. AND you need a contingency plan.

    Sounds like your management rides the special little school bus to work....
  11. #31  
    The November issue of the Communications of the ACM (Association for Computing Machinery) has an article/analysis of offshoring versus simply bringing the talented workers here as H-1s - offshoring turns out to be not as cost-effective due to lack of productivity and oversight.
  12. #32  
    BTW, note that the Treo line is quite late as a high-end device to be brought up to OS 5. I think Cobalt is likely to be seen in non-Treo high-end offerings first. The Treo devices are much more complex. The same reason that kept OS 5 from the Treo for a while is what will keep Cobalt from it, for a while.
  13. icewing's Avatar
    Posts
    77 Posts
    Global Posts
    78 Global Posts
    #33  
    Quote Originally Posted by mikec

    You have to manage the relationship, and pull the plug if needed. AND you need a contingency plan.

    Sounds like your management rides the special little school bus to work....
    Thanks for not being offended

    Yeah, you're right - it's all about staying on top of things....when I was with Kodak, we outsourced some computer operations to IBM, and they were actually in the building next door. You'd think that of all companies, IBM should have been able to do a good job... Not only were we not able to get rid of the 2 computer operators we had, we experienced a reduction in service, and MORE time was taken up by a manager and an analyst that had to have weekly, sometimes daily meetings w/IBM to talk about the problems that weren't being resolved!! They didn't know when to pull the plug either....
  14. #34  
    Quote Originally Posted by SeldomVisitor
    The November issue of the Communications of the ACM (Association for Computing Machinery) has an article/analysis of offshoring versus simply bringing the talented workers here as H-1s - offshoring turns out to be not as cost-effective due to lack of productivity and oversight.
    Can you link me to where I can get that issue? Funny...in College I was president of my local ACM.
    ELR
    >> Drop by! <<

    Avatar courtesy of ButtUglyJeff!
  15. #35  
    -- http://www.acm.org/pubs/cacm/

    or

    -- http://portal.acm.org/toc.cfm?id=102...TOKEN=36268342

    However the latter requires "Digital Library" access to actually read (the URL is to an extensive Table Of Contents)
  16. #36  
    Quote Originally Posted by Conqueror
    Silverado,

    Believe me, I WANT to see PSRC succeed. I don't think that hiding the truth is going to help anyone. Skillman told the truth and I think that's healthy. I disagree that all is well. If it takes months more for PSRC to get a Cobalt device to market, the platform suffers. Marketshare is KEY in software. Why will developers write apps that take full advantage of Cobalt if there are so few devices out there that can use it? They won't (just ask Sharp); they'll write to PocketPC/Smartphone/Symbian. We're already starting to see that with things like Skype. I hope PSRC redoubles its efforts to get Cobalt ready and achieves a major miracle in getting a FINISHED version out the door long before Skillman expects.
    Any large software developers (like Skype) develop their software in such a way that it minimizes the headaches to port the software to another OS. It's well known that Palm is a popular OS and will continue that way for at least the next two years with the Treo. That said, developers will still develop for the PalmOS and while they may not use Cobalt specific stuff, it will be relatively easy to port from Palm OS 5 to Cobalt. Thus when Cobalt is ready there should be a great number of applications ready or close to ready. The key will be getting device makers to adopt Cobalt. If the hardware is there, people will port the software.

    As for the Cobalt difficulties, I think they are probably greatly exaggerated. If things were as bad as it appears from this posting, they'd have just paid PalmOne some amount of money for their telephony code. PalmOne isn't in the source code business, so I'm sure that they'd license or sell it to PalmSource in order to get a better Treo 700 and/or a break on the price of future OSes.
  17. Iceman6's Avatar
    Posts
    463 Posts
    Global Posts
    500 Global Posts
    #37  
    Quote Originally Posted by mikec
    Do you really think P1 has the execution ability for that?

    This is a complete pipe dream (albeit a nice one).

    If this happens in a year from today (released, buyable), I'll send two Treos to you.

    If it happens two years from today, I'll send you a new Treo.

    If it happens in 3 years, it won't matter.

    If another vendor comes out with a Treo-like device, all bets are off (which is what I think will happen).
    Ah-hahaha. You will win the first bet, because I don't think they can do two new OS's in the same year. I will win the second bet though, and I want a top-of-the-line Treo. Don't be sending me your old Treo600!

    Running Pocket PC on a phone with an Intel CPU ought to be a slam dunk. M$ and Intel have been working together for a looong time. Also, if P1 were interested, Microsoft would provide the prototype implementation (probably already has!), and would "loan" them some staff to make it happen, if that were really necessary. I think a Treo650 PPC could be announced immediately (!) for delivery in 2Q 2005, and it would sell like hotcakes to the business community.

    It would be a train wreck for PalmSource though. I guesstimate that half the people who would ordinarily buy the Palm version of the 650 would instead go for the PPC version. That cuts PalmSource's revenue in half, for the only handheld market that's growing (communicators). I say, too bad, that's business, choice is good!, but P1's CEO and Board might not have the stomach for a decision that has such severe consequences to their business partner.

    Linux would probably take longer. Moto has the only Linux-based phones that I'm aware of, and they have different hardware.

    If I were running P1, I'd rush the PPC option and begin work on the Linux option. And frankly, I'd do what I could to help make Cobalt a success.
  18. #38  
    Quote Originally Posted by PWC Realtor
    I have to agree with you on that. I just bought a loaded Tecra 9100 in May specifically because it had Windows 2000 in stead of XP.


    Umm, why?

    .
    No, my avatar is NOT a picture of me! If you don't recognize her then you are not nerdy enough to be in here.

    "I didn't think it was possible, but this actually sucks and blows."
    - Bart Simpson
  19. #39  
    Very interesting input from a lot of different perspectives. However, everytime I hear theories on the demise of the Palm OS (now PalmSource), I am reminded of every other thread I've read on the same topic since owning my PIII. In the meantime, the Treo 600 has surpassed all Microsoft-based smartphones in sales in the United States. While it trails far-behind Symbian OS internationally, the US is a pretty decent market.

    If I recall the words of the Sprint rep I spoke with today when I called and said I wanted to order a Treo 650 (just wanted to see if they had 'em ;-) it was something like, "Yeah, you and everybody else in the United States." He said he'd been around Sprint PCS for quite awhile and has never seem this kind of demand for a phone. If the Treo 650 does only "as well" as the Treo 600 (though my guess is that it will do even better), I think the message to P1 is that the Palm OS is something customers want. The Treo is obviously a great hardware design, but without the OS, it's just another Microsoft-based smartphone device.
  20. KKenna's Avatar
    Posts
    418 Posts
    Global Posts
    419 Global Posts
    #40  
    I think the other very important hedge will be the emergence of VoIP in the next 12 months. I mean, if we get EvDo and something like Skype, who cares about the telephony stack in Cobalt ?

    There are so many things going on the handheld / converged-PDA market right now. The only thing for certain is that the problems facing PSRC today will not be the ones facing them tomorrow.
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions