Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1.    #1  
    When you go to palm.com/webos-info and check your device for 2.0 update, for Verizon it says "Your device cannot support the features of webOS 2.0" (I have a Pre Plus). But for the Pre Plus on SFR it says that it CAN support the features of webOS 2.0 and they are working with SFR to push an update. Why do they think we are idiots? Obviously the Pre Plus here and the Pre Plus in Europe are exactly the same (besides GSM) so why are they doing this? Ugh if anyone should have bought Palm it shouldNT have been HP.
  2. #2  
    I think it is obvious that we are facing a lack of comittment to customer support: There are users who managed to install WebOS 2.0 on pre- phones. And it works fine.

    Palm/HP decided to play in the iPhone league - in terms of pricing. But they do not value their customers (who tolerated MANY quality issues) by continuing the development for those first movers who paid most for the phones because they believed in Palm.

    Loyalty is not a one-way-street, but not every company understands that. Throwing more money into an ecosystem whose managers show the wrong attitude is not meaninful. Bye, bye Palm and HP. I'll have to familiarize myself with another system. I'm sad.
  3.    #3  
    Ugh I just find it sad that now instead of being excited about a 2.0 OTA, I'm excited about having to follow some instructions to put an update that should already be OTA on my phone via my usb chord. It makes it so much more difficult I just wish webOS wasn't so good because it wouldn't be so hard to leave. It's like meth.
  4.    #4  
    Quote Originally Posted by GuyFromNam View Post
    That's why...
    I forgot a comma, sorry. That's not what I meant, you didn't have to be so rude.
  5. #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by ursula View Post
    I just wish webOS wasn't so good because it wouldn't be so hard to leave. It's like meth.
    Except webOS doesn't destroy your life & Dog the Bounty Hunter doesn't come tracking down the local Palm Pre dealers Let's not get melodramtic over this.....enough drama queens already
    Due to the cancellation of the penny, I no longer give 2 about anything. I may however, give a nickel
  6. j_benj's Avatar
    Posts
    224 Posts
    Global Posts
    465 Global Posts
    #6  
    Back at the NYC dev day last year, I asked McKinney what his opinion was on whether or not US carriers would take the time to test the 2.0 updates for EOL devices (Pre/Pre Plus). His reaction was "well we hope they will". I have a feeling that the carriers are the ones saying forget it. There's a bit of manpower needed on the parts of the carriers to fully test the 2.0 update before they can certify it for release and I doubt VZ/ATT/Sprint are too keen on paying the techs to do the work for what they consider very little return.

    If that's the case, it puts HP in a very difficult place between the community and the carriers. I know it sucks, it's a tough pill to swallow having been promised for months now.. but I have a feeling if we hold tight, HP will come up with some way to make things right for us.
  7. dec
    dec is offline
    dec's Avatar
    Posts
    247 Posts
    Global Posts
    255 Global Posts
    #7  
    could the mixed message be so there is more 'buzz' created? Don't think so, but it certainly has caused a lot of buzz which is good for HP as long as it doesnt turn out to be true and cause more dissension from the Palm Nation.
  8. #8  
    I think Palm is still having an internal debate, and probably a debate with a few carriers. Remember, even if they delivered 2.x only via WOS Doctor, the carriers still have to test/approve/train/document/support it. I'm guessing that's not an exciting prospect for carriers.

    We've heard several stories from people at Palm"

    1. the 2.x code just can't be made to run well on original hardware. (I don't really believe this, and if they'd include Uberkernel... 'nuff said)

    2. It can't be delivered OTA because it's just too hard to migrate a legacy device that way. This seemed to fuel the idea of providing WOS Doctor instead.

    3. It is too difficult to safely migrate an existing profile to the "new backend". I think this is especially silly because this method would have all the "migration" happening on Palm's side between two systems that they created...

    4. Providing 2.x to legacy devices would require compromises or cause problems as they add features to 2.x and ultimately move to 3.x This fuels the idea of thinking Palm should deliver a 1.5 version to fix issues and add easy stuff while still operating on the 1.x profile architecture.

    Has anyone heard more than those 4?

    Regardless of which one(s) are correct, I think Palm wasn't thinking clearly about the implications.

    For the life of me I can't figure out why they thought it was a good idea to talk about this on the same day as the product launch. It generated confusion and totally wiped out the significant buzz that had been created before and during the event. Who didn't realize it would wipe out what they had worked so hard to achieve? Doh!

    I refuse to believe that they didn't realize that this would leave many users stranded because they don't have details on which carriers will get new devices - or when. Is it possible that Palm didn't realize the massive pounding this would cause for the carriers as users flood them with emails, calls, facebook flames, twitter storms and letters to CEOs. After having to endure so many hardware and support issues with the Pre, the carriers must be REALLY peeved that webOS users are causing a disproportionate amount of pain.

    The more webOS users become "high maintenance" for the carriers, the less likely they are to pick up new phones or allocate resources to provide webOS updates for their users. Every time something happens, poor Sprint gets pounded by the webOS nation. That's not always bad, but at some point they have to see benefit in "containing" webOS rather than letting it expand to new users or devices...

    I just can't imagine that Palm wouldn't have realized this, discussed it with carriers ahead of time, and had a plan ready to go along with the news...

    I am positive that the "decision" was very recent, so one could argue that Palm was trying to be open and honest by telling us right away. People go even crazier when they think information has been kept secret. But this isn't Palm's first rodeo - nor is it Sprints... and I'll bet that somewhere inside Sprint and/or Palm some heads are going to roll for creating such an unnecessary crisis.
  9. #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by GuyFromNam View Post
    No, if you want to create buzz, you push the 2.x update to a few devices first...
    It worked in the past LOL
    Did we ever confirm that they really pushed 2.x to any devices a month or two back? And was that done on purpose? I always thought it was either a mistake or simply a fluke that happened to people that had doctored with a pirated beta. Did we ever get confirmation about what that was about?
  10. #10  
    Haha.... forums......


    My Themes:CLICK HERE

Posting Permissions